UNCLOS and regional action for protection of the marine environment : perspectives of the South Asian Seas region

In very clear language the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) calls upon the parties to initiate regional action for protection of marine environment. Although the UNCLOS gives special recognition in various ways to developing countries, the South Asian developing countries continue to encounter some bottlenecks in complying with the provisions of the Convention relating to marine environment. Against this backdrop, this paper tends to examine the need for a regional approach towards conservation of marine environment. Moreover, the paper aims to explore possible ways to establish a regional legal framework for conservation of marine environment in South Asian region. In doing so, the paper critically examines existing mechanisms already in place including the South Asian Seas Programme and South Asian Seas Action Plan

Women, peace and security as an ASEAN priority

The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Secretariat and its member states have repeatedly professed their commitment to the protection and advancement of women’s economic and human rights. Such commitments have included the Declaration on the Advancement of Women in ASEAN in 1988, the ASEAN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women in 2004, and the ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights in 2012, as well as the establishment of the ASEAN Committee on Women in 2002 and the ASEAN Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Women and Children in 2009. However, none of these regional commitments or institutions expressly take up the core concern of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda set out in United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1325 in 2000. ASEAN has no 1325 regional action plan and amongst the ASEAN membership, the Philippines is the only state that has adopted a 1325 National Action Plan (NAP). We explore the possible reasons for lack of ASEAN institutional engagement with 1325, outline the case for regional engagement, and suggest specific roles for ASEAN Secretariat, donor governments and individual member states to commit to UNSCR 1325 as a regional priority.

The use of the Index for Inclusion in a regional educational learning community

This project utilised the materials of the Index for Inclusion (Booth & Ainscow, 2002) to enhance the development of a learning community of educators in Education Queensland in 2009. The values, dimensions and indicators of the Index for Inclusion, were incorporated into the professional development package, On the Same Page (Education Queensland, 2008), to enhance its wider purpose to improve inclusive education practices explicit within the P-12 Curriculum Framework (Education Queensland, 2008). The incorporation of the values, dimensions and indicators of the Index enabled deeper reflection by participants about their expectations of students and their resulting teaching practices. The subsequent development of action plans assisted participants to develop “a curriculum for all” (Education Queensland, 2008, p. 9). Deeper reflection, action planning and ‘distance travelled’ in understanding of inclusive education were apparent in the comments by participants and their evaluation of the professional development package.

Community voices, votes and action

The diversity of community voices in the SEQ ‘bellwether region’ has grown from a muted murmur in the mid twentieth century supporting provision of urban services, rural conservation and green belts, to the current clamour against over-development, and in favour of protecting local and regional open space, wetlands and natural habitats. This in turn has often resulted in vigorous campaigns against unpopular roads, dams, dumps and tall buildings. In the last twenty years community issues have played a major part in local government elections throughout the region and have even helped unseat (in 1995-1996) a state government which discounted their authenticity and community resolve.

Improving Indigenous women’s wellness through action research

Today in Australia, 75% of all Indigenous Australians reside in urban and peri-urban areas. In Brisbane, Indigenous Australians now number just over 45,000, and this number is rapidly increasing. Undertaking research with urban based Indigenous Australians is a relatively new phenomenon. Most past research with Indigenous people has been carried out in remote and regional areas. This paper focuses on a Participation Action Research project undertaken with Indigenous women in the highly urbanised area of North Brisbane. The project takes on the challenge of undertaking urban based Indigenous research. It opts not to centre on poor Indigenous women’s health statistics but instead centres on Indigenous women’s wellness and ways to talk about and work towards wellness. Through the cycles of dialogue with Indigenous women these concepts were teased out and manifested in two highly successful Women’s Wellness Summits. This paper will outline aspects of this project.

A living laboratory proposition for revitalising regional Australia

A strong Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) sector is said to underpin a competitive advantage of the Australian regions that are struggling to grow the economy, distribute the growth fairly, and in the process not degrade the environment. The concept of Regional Innovation Systems that draws on industrial cluster theory has gained currency as an umbrella framework for enabling the SMEs sector. However, there are significant gaps between research and innovation of such ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach. This paper responds to this gap and proposes a Living Laboratory – an open multidisciplinary and multi-stakeholder action research platform where innovations can be co-created, tested, and evaluated in the every-day environment of SME – as a way to strengthen the SMEs sector in regional Australia.

The innovation potential of living-labs to strengthen small and medium enterprises in regional Australia

The small and medium enterprise (SME) sector has been the major source of well-being and employment opportunities in regional Australia. Consequently, fostering the innovative capacity of SMEs in regions that are struggling to grow their economies and distribute the growth fairly while not degrading the environment has never been more important. While SMEs generally face more uncertainties in relation to resources (e.g. financial, human and social capital) when compared to larger businesses, collaborative, cuttingedge mechanisms to enhance innovation capabilities of regional SMEs are lacking. This paper responds to this gap and proposes a Living Laboratory – an open, multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder action research platform where innovations can be co-created, tested and evaluated in the every-day environment of SMEs – as a way to strengthen the SME sector in regional Australia.

Analysis of the needs of the East Coast cluster regional natural resource management bodies in relation to planning for climate change adaptation

The Climate Change Adaptation for Natural Resource Management (NRM) in East Coast Australia Project aims to foster and support an effective “community of practice” for climate change adaptation within the East Coast Cluster NRM regions that will increase the capacity for adaptation to climate change through enhancements in knowledge and skills and through the establishment of long‐term collaborations. It is being delivered by six consortium research partners: * The University of Queensland (project lead) * Griffith University * University of the Sunshine Coast * CSIRO * New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage * Queensland Department of Science, IT, Innovation and the Arts (Queensland Herbarium). The project relates to the East Coast Cluster, comprising the six coastal NRM regions and regional bodies between Rockhampton and Sydney: * Fitzroy Basin Association (FBA) * Burnett‐Mary Regional Group (BMRG) * SEQ Catchments (SEQC) * Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority (CMA) (NRCMA) * Hunter‐Central Rivers CMA (HCRCMA) * Hawkesbury Nepean CMA (HNCMA). The aims of this report are to summarise the needs of the regional bodies in relation to NRM planning for climate change adaptation, and provide a basis for developing the detailed work plan for the research consortium. Two primary methods were used to identify the needs of the regional bodies: (1) document analysis of the existing NRM/ Catchment Action Plans (CAPs) and applications by the regional bodies for funding under Stream 1 of the Regional NRM Planning for Climate Change Fund, and; (2) a needs analysis workshop, held in May 2013 involving representatives from the research consortium partners and the regional bodies. The East Coast Cluster includes five of the ten largest significant urban areas in Australia, world heritage listed natural environments, significant agriculture, mining and extensive grazing. The three NSW CMAs have recently completed strategic level CAPs, with implementation plans to be finalised in 2014/2015. SEQC and FBA are beginning a review of their existing NRM Plans, to be completed in 2014 and 2015 respectively; while BMRG is aiming to produce a NRM and Climate Variability Action Strategy. The regional bodies will receive funding from the Australian Government through the Regional NRM Planning for Climate Change Fund (NRM Fund) to improve regional planning for climate change and help guide the location of carbon and biodiversity activities, including wildlife corridors. The bulk of the funding will be available for activities in 2013/2014, with smaller amounts available in subsequent years. Most regional bodies aim to have a large proportion of the planning work complete by the end of 2014. In addition, NSW CMAs are undergoing major structural change and will be incorporated into semi‐autonomous statutory Local Land Services bodies from 2014. Boundaries will align with local government boundaries and there will be significant change in staff and structures. The regional bodies in the cluster have a varying degree of climate knowledge. All plans recognise climate change as a key driver of change, but there are few specific actions or targets addressing climate change. Regional bodies also have varying capacity to analyse large volumes of spatial or modelling data. Due to the complex nature of natural resource management, all regional bodies work with key stakeholders (e.g. local government, industry groups, and community groups) to deliver NRM outcomes. Regional bodies therefore require project outputs that can be used directly in stakeholder engagement activities, and are likely to require some form of capacity building associated with each of the outputs to maximise uptake. Some of the immediate needs of the regional bodies are a summary of information or tools that are able to be used immediately; and a summary of the key outputs and milestone dates for the project, to facilitate alignment of planning activities with research outputs. A project framework is useful to show the linkages between research elements and the relevance of the research to the adaptive management cycle for NRM planning in which the regional bodies are engaged. A draft framework is proposed to stimulate and promote discussion on research elements and linkages; this will be refined during and following the development of the detailed project work plan. The regional bodies strongly emphasised the need to incorporate a shift to a systems based resilience approach to NRM planning, and that approach is included in the framework. The regional bodies identified that information on climate projections would be most useful at regional and subregional scale, to feed into scenario planning and impact analysis. Outputs should be ‘engagement ready’ and there is a need for capacity building to enable regional bodies to understand and use the projections in stakeholder engagement. There was interest in understanding the impacts of climate change projections on ecosystems (e.g. ecosystem shift), and the consequent impacts on the production of ecosystem services. It was emphasised that any modelling should be able to be used by the regional bodies with their stakeholders to allow for community input (i.e. no black box models). The online regrowth benefits tool was of great interest to the regional bodies, as spatial mapping of carbon farming opportunities would be relevant to their funding requirements. The NSW CMAs identified an interest in development of the tool for NSW vegetation types. Needs relating to socio‐economic information included understanding the socio‐economic determinants of carbon farming uptake and managing community expectations. A need was also identified to understand the vulnerability of industry groups as well as community to climate change impacts, and in particular understanding how changes in the flow of ecosystem services would interact with the vulnerability of these groups to impact on the linked ecologicalsocio‐economic system. Responses to disasters (particularly flooding and storm surge) and recovery responses were also identified as being of interest. An ecosystem services framework was highlighted as a useful approach to synthesising biophysical and socioeconomic information in the context of a systems based, resilience approach to NRM planning. A need was identified to develop processes to move towards such an approach to NRM planning from the current asset management approach. Examples of best practice in incorporating climate science into planning, using scenarios for stakeholder engagement in planning and processes for institutionalising learning were also identified as cross‐cutting needs. The over‐arching theme identified was the need for capacity building for the NRM bodies to best use the information available at any point in time. To this end a planners working group has been established to support the building of a network of informed and articulate NRM agents with knowledge of current climate science and capacity to use current tools to engage stakeholders in NRM planning for climate change adaptation. The planners working group would form the core group of the community of practice, with the broader group of stakeholders participating when activities aligned with their interests. In this way, it is anticipated that the Project will contribute to building capacity within the wider community to effectively plan for climate change adaptation.

Conceptualising, evaluating and reporting social resilience in vulnerable regional and remote communities facing climate change in tropical Queensland : marine and tropical sciences research facility transition project final report

Regional and remote communities in tropical Queensland are among Australia’s most vulnerable in the face of climate change. At the same time, these socially and economically vulnerable regions house some of Australia’s most significant biodiversity values. Past approaches to terrestrial biodiversity management have focused on tackling biophysical interventions through the use of biophysical knowledge. An equally important focus should be placed on building regional-scale community resilience if some of the worst biodiversity impacts of climate change are to be avoided or mitigated. Despite its critical need, more systemic or holistic approaches to natural resource management have been rarely trialed and tested in a structured way. Currently, most strategic interventions in improving regional community resilience are ad hoc, not theory-based and short term. Past planning approaches have not been durable, nor have they been well informed by clear indicators. Research into indicators for community resilience has been poorly integrated within adaptive planning and management cycles. This project has aimed to resolve this problem by: * Reviewing the community and social resilience and adaptive planning literature to reconceptualise an improved framework for applying community resilience concepts; * Harvesting and extending work undertaken in MTSRF Phase 1 to identifying the learnings emerging from past MTSRF research; * Distilling these findings to identify new theoretical and practical approaches to the application of community resilience in natural resource use and management; * Reconsidering the potential interplay between a region’s biophysical and social planning processes, with a focus on exploring spatial tools to communicate climate change risk and its consequent environmental, economic and social impacts, and; * Trialling new approaches to indicator development and adaptive planning to improve community resilience, using a sub-regional pilot in the Wet Tropics. In doing so, we also looked at ways to improve the use and application of relevant spatial information. Our theoretical review drew upon the community development, psychology and emergency management literature to better frame the concept of community resilience relative to aligned concepts of social resilience, vulnerability and adaptive capacity. Firstly, we consider community resilience as a concept that can be considered at a range of scales (e.g. regional, locality, communities of interest, etc.). We also consider that overall resilience at higher scales will be influenced by resilience levels at lesser scales (inclusive of the resilience of constituent institutions, families and individuals). We illustrate that, at any scale, resilience and vulnerability are not necessarily polar opposites, and that some understanding of vulnerability is important in determining resilience. We position social resilience (a concept focused on the social characteristics of communities and individuals) as an important attribute of community resilience, but one that needs to be considered alongside economic, natural resource, capacity-based and governance attributes. The findings from the review of theory and MTSRF Phase 1 projects were synthesized and refined by the wider project team. Five predominant themes were distilled from this literature, research review and an expert analysis. They include the findings that: 1. Indicators have most value within an integrated and adaptive planning context, requiring an active co-research relationship between community resilience planners, managers and researchers if real change is to be secured; 2. Indicators of community resilience form the basis for planning for social assets and the resilience of social assets is directly related the longer term resilience of natural assets. This encourages and indeed requires the explicit development and integration of social planning within a broader natural resource planning and management framework; 3. Past indicator research and application has not provided a broad picture of the key attributes of community resilience and there have been many attempts to elicit lists of “perfect” indicators that may never be useful within the time and resource limitations of real world regional planning and management. We consider that modeling resilience for proactive planning and prediction purposes requires the consideration of simple but integrated clusters of attributes; 4. Depending on time and resources available for planning and management, the combined use of well suited indicators and/or other lesser “lines of evidence” is more flexible than the pursuit of perfect indicators, and that; 5. Index-based, collaborative and participatory approaches need to be applied to the development, refinement and reporting of indicators over longer time frames. We trialed the practical application of these concepts via the establishment of a collaborative regional alliance of planners and managers involved in the development of climate change adaptation strategies across tropical Queensland (the Gulf, Wet Tropics, Cape York and Torres Strait sub-regions). A focus on the Wet Tropics as a pilot sub-region enabled other Far North Queensland sub-region’s to participate and explore the potential extension of this approach. The pilot activities included: * Further exploring ways to innovatively communicate the region’s likely climate change scenarios and possible environmental, economic and social impacts. We particularly looked at using spatial tools to overlay climate change risks to geographic communities and social vulnerabilities within those communities; * Developing a cohesive first pass of a State of the Region-style approach to reporting community resilience, inclusive of regional economic viability, community vitality, capacitybased and governance attributes. This framework integrated a literature review, expert (academic and community) and alliance-based contributions; and * Early consideration of critical strategies that need to be included in unfolding regional planning activities with Far North Queensland. The pilot assessment finds that rural, indigenous and some urban populations in the Wet Tropics are highly vulnerable and sensitive to climate change and may require substantial support to adapt and become more resilient. This assessment finds that under current conditions (i.e. if significant adaptation actions are not taken) the Wet Tropics as a whole may be seriously impacted by the most significant features of climate change and extreme climatic events. Without early and substantive action, this could result in declining social and economic wellbeing and natural resource health. Of the four attributes we consider important to understanding community resilience, the Wet Tropics region is particularly vulnerable in two areas; specifically its economic vitality and knowledge, aspirations and capacity. The third and fourth attributes, community vitality and institutional governance are relatively resilient but are vulnerable in some key respects. In regard to all four of these attributes, however, there is some emerging capacity to manage the possible shocks that may be associated with the impacts of climate change and extreme climatic events. This capacity needs to be carefully fostered and further developed to achieve broader community resilience outcomes. There is an immediate need to build individual, household, community and sectoral resilience across all four attribute groups to enable populations and communities in the Wet Tropics region to adapt in the face of climate change. Preliminary strategies of importance to improve regional community resilience have been identified. These emerging strategies also have been integrated into the emerging Regional Development Australia Roadmap, and this will ensure that effective implementation will be progressed and coordinated. They will also inform emerging strategy development to secure implementation of the FNQ 2031 Regional Plan. Of most significance in our view, this project has taken a co-research approach from the outset with explicit and direct importance and influence within the region’s formal planning and management arrangements. As such, the research: * Now forms the foundations of the first attempt at “Social Asset” planning within the Wet Tropics Regional NRM Plan review; * Is assisting Local government at regional scale to consider aspects of climate change adaptation in emerging planning scheme/community planning processes; * Has partnered the State government (via the Department of Infrastructure and Planning and Regional Managers Coordination Network Chair) in progressing the Climate Change adaptation agenda set down within the FNQ 2031 Regional Plan; * Is informing new approaches to report on community resilience within the GBRMPA Outlook reporting framework; and * Now forms the foundation for the region’s wider climate change adaptation priorities in the Regional Roadmap developed by Regional Development Australia. Through the auspices of Regional Development Australia, the outcomes of the research will now inform emerging negotiations concerning a wider package of climate change adaptation priorities with State and Federal governments. Next stage research priorities are also being developed to enable an ongoing alliance between researchers and the region’s climate change response.

The 1989 Comprehensive Plan of Action (CPA) and refugee policy in Southeast Asia : twenty years forward what has changed?

In 2012, the only South East Asian countries that have ratified the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereafter referred to as the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol) is Philippines (signed 1954), Cambodia (signed 1995) and Timor Leste (signed 2001). Countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand have annual asylum seeking populations from Myanmar, South Asia and Middle East, that are estimated to be at 15 000-20 000 per country (UNHCR 2012). The lack of a permanent and formal asylum processing process in these countries means that that asylum-seeking populations in the region are reliant on the local offices of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees based in the region to process their claims. These offices rely upon the good will of these governments to have a presence near detection camps and in capital cities to process claims of those who manage to reach the UNHCR representative office. The only burden sharing mechanism within the region primarily exists under the Bali Process on People Smuggling, Trafficking in Persons and Related Transnational Crime (the Bali Process), introduced in 2002. The Bali Process refers to an informal cooperative agreement amongst the states from the Asia-Pacific region, with Australia and Indonesia as the co-chairs, which discusses its namesake: primarily anti-people smuggling activities and migration protocols. There is no provision within this process to discuss the development of national asylum seeking legislation, processes for domestic processing of asylum claims or burden sharing in contrast to other regions such as Africa and South America (i.e. 2009 African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of the Internally Displaced, 1969 African Union Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa and 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees [Americas]) (PEF 2010: 19).

Urban informatics beyond data: Media architecture, placemaking, and citizen action

Since 2006, we have been conducting urban informatics research that we define as “the study, design, and practice of urban experiences across different urban contexts that are created by new opportunities of real-time, ubiquitous technology and the augmentation that mediates the physical and digital layers of people networks and urban infrastructures” [1]. Various new research initiatives under the label “urban informatics” have been started since then by universities (e.g., NYU’s Center for Urban Science and Progress) and industry (e.g., Arup, McKinsey) worldwide. Yet, many of these new initiatives are limited to what Townsend calls, “data-driven approaches to urban improvement” [2]. One of the key challenges is that any quantity of aggregated data does not easily translate directly into quality insights to better understand cities. In this talk, I will raise questions about the purpose of urban informatics research beyond data, and show examples of media architecture, participatory city making, and citizen activism. I argue for (1) broadening the disciplinary foundations that urban science approaches draw on; (2) maintaining a hybrid perspective that considers both the bird’s eye view as well as the citizen’s view, and; (3) employing design research to not be limited to just understanding, but to bring about actionable knowledge that will drive change for good.

Developing the ASEAN regional road safety strategy

In 2011, more than 75,000 people died in road crashes in the ten member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and many times this number sustained long term injuries. Improving road safety outcomes in ASEAN is not only important for the welfare and economic benefit of these countries, but given that a significant proportion of the world’s population lives in ASEAN, it will strongly influence whether the aims of the United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety and the Sustainable Development Goals are reached. For this reason, the Asian Development Bank, funded by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, has funded a package of action to improve road safety in ASEAN, including the development of a regional road safety strategy. The diversity of the member nations of ASEAN poses significant challenges for the development of the strategy. For example, the road fatality rates per 100,000 population in Malaysia and Thailand are about 5 times greater than in Singapore. In addition, the importance of particular road safety issues varies across the ASEAN countries and for countries which are undergoing rapid motorization, the order of importance may change over the life of the strategy. The development of the ASEAN Regional Road Safety Strategy has adopted the five pillars of road safety of the UN Decade of Action but focused on those aspects which are most relevant at the regional level and where a regional approach will support and facilitate actions taken by individual countries.

Challenges in developing a new regional road safety strategy for ASEAN

In 2011, more than 75,000 people died in road crashes in the ten member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and many times this number sustained long term injuries. Improving road safety outcomes in ASEAN is not only important for the welfare and economic benefit of these countries, but given that a significant proportion of the world's population lives in ASEAN, it will strongly influence whether the aims of the United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety and the Sustainable Development Goals are reached. Following the ASEAN Senior Transport Officials Meeting in May 2011, the Secretariat requested the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to provide assistance to improve road safety in ASEAN. In response, ADB, funded by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, has funded a package of action to improve road safety in ASEAN, including the development of a new regional road safety strategy. The diversity of the member nations of ASEAN poses significant challenges for the development of the strategy. For example, the road fatality rates per 100,000 population in Malaysia and Thailand are about 5 times greater than in Singapore. In addition, the importance of particular road safety issues varies across the ASEAN countries and for countries which are undergoing rapid motorization, the order of importance may change over the life of the strategy. The development of the ASEAN Regional Road Safety Strategy has adopted the five pillars of road safety of the UN Decade of Action but focused on those aspects which are most relevant at the regional level and where a regional approach will support and facilitate actions taken by individual countries. A draft ASEAN Regional Road Safety Strategy document has been prepared and consultation will further refine its directions and contents. The paper will describe the processes undertaken to identify issues and solutions, the measurement of road safety maturity and behavioural risk factors, and the overall structure and themes of the strategy.