Data grid for the management, reconstruction, analysis and visualisation of archaeological data

In 2007 Associate Professor Jay Hall retires from the University of Queensland after more than 30 years of service to the Australian archaeological community. Celebrated as a gifted teacher and a pioneer of Queensland archaeology, Jay leaves a rich legacy of scholarship and achievement across a wide range of archaeological endeavours. An Archæological Life brings together past and present students, colleagues and friends to celebrate Jay’s contributions, influences and interests.

An Economic Analysis of the Legal Concept of Trustees' Power of Investment

Authorised trustee status is a legal concept which has economic implications; one of the major implications is that it assists in the direction of investment funds into particular securities and areas of the economy. The concept of authorised trustee status, while attempting to achieve specific outcomes for the beneficiaries of trusts cannot be relied upon to secure these results. Economic analysis of the role of the trustee maintains that this role is one of portfolio manager; a role which is complex but which is explicable in terms of definable procedures and practices. The role of trustee as portfolio manager is one which requires greater financial knowledge than can be assumed is possessed by all trustees. The trustee as portfolio manager is required to maintain a review of decisions make under powers to invest trust assets. A solution to the problem of authorised trustee status is proposed. The solution takes two parts: the first is the adoption of the prudent person approach but with the codification of duties of the trustee and the explicit listing of the factors that a trustee should consider in using the investment powers. The second part of the proposed solution is to link the investment powers of trustees to the best practice features of securities advisers who are now licensed by a regulatory body, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission.

Bioeconomic analysis of aquaculture's impact on wild stocks and biodiversity

Anderson theorizes that development of the aquaculture of a species of fish (also captured in an open-access fishery) favours the conservation of its wild stocks, if competitive market conditions prevail. However, this theory is shown to be subject to significant limitations. While this is less so within his model, it is particularly so in an extended one outlined here. The extended model allows for the possibility that aquaculture development can impact negatively on wild stocks thereby shifting the supply curve of the capture fishery, or raise the demand for the fish species subject both to aquaculture and capture. Such development can threaten wild stocks and their biodiversity. While aquaculture development could in principle have no impact on the biodiversity of wild stocks or even raise aquatic biodiversity overall, its impact in the long-term probably will be one of reducing aquatic diversity both in the wild and overall.