Development of the rural statistical sustainability framework tool

It is important to promote a sustainable development approach to ensure that economic, environmental and social developments are maintained in balance. Sustainable development and its implications are not just a global concern, it also affects Australia. In particular, rural Australian communities are facing various economic, environmental and social challenges. Thus, the need for sustainable development in rural regions is becoming increasingly important. To promote sustainable development, proper frameworks along with the associated tools optimised for the specific regions, need to be developed. This will ensure that the decisions made for sustainable development are evidence based, instead of subjective opinions. To address these issues, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), through an Australian Research Council (ARC) linkage grant, has initiated research into the development of a Rural Statistical Sustainability Framework (RSSF) to aid sustainable decision making in rural Queensland. This particular branch of the research developed a decision support tool that will become the integrating component of the RSSF. This tool is developed on the web-based platform to allow easy dissemination, quick maintenance and to minimise compatibility issues. The tool is developed based on MapGuide Open Source and it follows the three-tier architecture: Client tier, Web tier and the Server tier. The developed tool is interactive and behaves similar to a familiar desktop-based application. It has the capability to handle and display vector-based spatial data and can give further visual outputs using charts and tables. The data used in this tool is obtained from the QUT research team. Overall the tool implements four tasks to help in the decision-making process. These are the Locality Classification, Trend Display, Impact Assessment and Data Entry and Update. The developed tool utilises open source and freely available software and accounts for easy extensibility and long-term sustainability.

A qualitative investigation into the different health experiences of people living with type II diabetes, in the rural environments

Study Rationale The objective of the study was to explore if and how rural culture influences type II diabetes management and to better understand the social processes that rural people construct in coping with diabetes and its complications. In particular, the study aimed to analyse the interface and interactions between rural people with type II diabetes and the Australian health care system. Theoretical framework and methods The research applied constructivist grounded theory methods within an interpretive interactionist framework. Data from 39 semi-structured interviews with rural and urban people with type II diabetes plus a mix of rural health care providers were analysed to develop a theoretical understanding of the social processes that define diabetes management in that context. Results The analysis suggests that although type II diabetes imposes limitations that require adjustment and adaptation these processes are actively negotiated by rural people within the environmental context to fit the salient social understandings of autonomy and self-reliance. Thus people normalised self-reliant diabetes management behaviours because this was congruent with the rural culture. Factors that informed the actions of normalisation were the relationships between participants and health care professions, support and access to individual resources. Conclusions The findings point to ways in which rural self-reliance is conceived as the primary strategy of diabetic management. People face the paradox of engaging with a health care system that at the same time maximises individual responsibility for health and minimises the social support by which individuals manage the condition. The emphasis on self-reliance gives some legitimacy to a lack of prevention and chronic care services. Success of diabetic management behaviours is contingent on relative resources. Where there is good primary care there develop a number of downstream effects including a sense of empowerment to manage difficult rural environmental circumstances. This has particular bearing on health outcomes for people with fewer resources.

Rural self-reliance: the impact on health experiences of people living with type II diabetes in rural Queensland, Australia

Objective: The objective of the study was to explore whether and how rural culture influences type II diabetes management and to better understand the social processes that rural people construct in coping with diabetes and its complications. In particular, the study aimed to analyse the interface and interactions between rural people with type II diabetes and the Australian health care system, and to develop a theoretical understanding that reflects constructs that may be more broadly applicable. Methods: The study applied constructivist grounded theory methods within an interpretive interactionist framework. Data from 39 semi-structured interviews with rural and urban type II diabetes patients and a mix of rural health care providers were analysed to develop a theoretical understanding of the social processes that define diabetes management in that context. Results: The analysis suggests that although type II diabetes imposes limitations that require adjustment and adaptation, these processes are actively negotiated by rural people within the environmental context to fit the salient social understandings of autonomy and self-reliance. Thus, people normalized self-reliant diabetes management behaviours because this was congruent with the rural culture. Factors that informed the actions of normalization were relationships between participants and health care professionals, support, and access to individual resources. Conclusions: The findings point to ways in which rural self-reliance is conceived as the primary strategy of diabetes management. People face the paradox of engaging with a health care system that at the same time maximizes individual responsibility for health and minimizes the social support by which individuals manage the condition. The emphasis on self-reliance gives some legitimacy to a lack of prevention and chronic care services. Success of diabetes management behaviours is, however, contingent on relative resources. Where there is good primary care, there develops a number of downstream effects including a sense of empowerment to manage difficult rural environmental circumstances. This has particular bearing on health outcomes for people with fewer resources.