Understanding and enhancing research-policy linkages in Australian housing: A discussion paper

This project aimed to develop a systematic framework for understanding the relationship between social science research and public policy, and to build more effective linkages between social researchers and policy practitioners in the Australian housing system, particularly through AHURI. The project is explicitly applied and solution-focused. It was undertaken in close collaboration with AHURI and has contributed to AHURI's overall mission and strategy to enhancing research-based housing policy. It provided an opportunity for the AHURI policy community to engage in a process of action-oriented, self-reflection around its core business of applied housing policy research.

Enhancing research-policy linkages in Australian housing: an options paper

A key ingredient in the successful delivery of a policy relevant research program is a process of engagement between the research and policy communities, centred on the conduct, dissemination and use of research. The research recommends that AHURI continue to build and extend its 'engagement strategy' to further realise the benefits of a research program relevant to policy.

A typology of community opportunity and vulnerability in metropolitan Australia

A multivariate model using hierarchical clustering and discriminant analysis is used to identify clusters of community opportunity and community vulnerability across Australia's mega metropolitan regions, Variables used in the model measure aspects of structural economic change, occupational change, human capital, income, unemployment, family/household disadvantage, and housing stress. A nine-cluster solution is used to categorise communities across metropolitan space. Significant between-city variations in the incidence of these clusters of opportunity and vulnerability are apparent, suggesting the emergence of marked differentiation between Australia's mega metropolitan regions in their adjustments to changing economic and social conditions. JEL classification: C49, R11, R12.

Evaluation of short dietary questions from the 1995 National Nutrition Survey

Six of the short dietary questions used in the 1995 National Nutrition Survey (see box below) were evaluated for relative validity both directly and indirectly and for consistency, by documenting the differences in mean intakes of foods and nutrients as measured on the 24-hour recall, between groups with different responses to the short questions. 1. Including snacks, how many times do you usually have something to eat in a day including evenings? 2. How many days per week do you usually have something to eat for breakfast? 3. In the last 12 months, were there any times that you ran out of food and couldn’t afford to buy more? 4. What type of milk do you usually consume? 5. How many serves of vegetables do you usually eat each day? (a serve = 1/2 cup cooked vegetables or 1 cup of salad vegetables) 6. How many serves of fruit do you usually eat each day? (a serve = 1 medium piece or 2 small pieces of fruit or 1 cup of diced pieces) These comparisons were made for males and females overall and for population sub-groups of interest including: age, socio-economic disadvantage, region of residence, country of birth, and BMI category. Several limitations to this evaluation of the short questions, as discussed in the report, need to be kept in mind including: · The method for comparison available (24-hour recall) was not ideal (gold standard); as it measures yesterday’s intake. This limitation was overcome by examining only mean differences between groups of respondents, since mean intake for a group can provide a reasonable approximation for ‘usual’ intake. · The need to define and identify, post-hoc, from the 24-hour recall the number of eating occasions, and occasions identified by the respondents as breakfast. · Predetermined response categories for some of the questions effectively limited the number of categories available for evaluation. · Other foods and nutrients, not selected for this evaluation, may have an indirect relationship with the question, and might have shown stronger and more consistent responses. · The number of responses in some categories of the short questions eg for food security may have been too small to detect significant differences between population sub-groups. · No information was available to examine the validity of these questions for detecting differences over time (establishing trends) in food habits and indicators of selected nutrient intakes. By contrast, the strength of this evaluation was its very large sample size, (atypical of most validation studies of dietary assessment) and thus, the opportunity to investigate question performance in a range of broad population sub-groups compared with a well-conducted, quantified survey of intakes. The results of the evaluation are summarised below for each of the questions and specific recommendations for future testing, modifications and use provided for each question. The report concludes with some general recommendations for the further development and evaluation of short dietary questions.

Categories of indigenous 'homelessness' people and good practice responses to their needs

Mainstream concepts of homelessness do not serve Indigenous people well. Those designing policies or programs for Indigenous homeless people may need to re-think or change their concepts of homeless in order to adequately understand and respond to the needs of this group of people.

The net benefit of saving the Asian Elephant: A policy and contingent valuation Study

Reports results from a contingent valuation survey of willingness to pay for the conservation of the Asian elephant of a sample of urban residents living in three selected housing schemes in Colombo, the capital of Sri Lanka. Face–to–face surveys were conducted using an interview schedule. A non-linear logit regression model is used to analyse the respondents’ responses for the payment principle questions and to identify the factors that influence their responses. We investigate whether urban residents’ willingness to pay for the conservation of elephants is sufficient to compensate farmers for the damage caused by elephants. We find that the beneficiaries (the urban residents) could compensate losers (the farmers in the areas affected by human–elephant conflict) and be better off than in the absence of elephants in Sri Lanka. Therefore, there is a strong economic case for the conservation of the wild elephant population in Sri Lanka. However, we have insufficient data to determine the optimal level of this elephant population in the Kaldor-Hicks sense. Nevertheless, the current population of elephant in Sri Lanka is Kaldor-Hicks preferable to having none.