Inclusion and accountability: communications research with consumers with disabilities

Over the past two decades there has been an increasing focus on doing research with and for consumers rather than on consumers. Research that is collaborative and inclusive has been called for by people with disabilities. People with disabilities are a group of telecommunications consumers who are disadvantaged because of social barriers and access issues with equipment, services and information. In this paper, the benefits and challenges of collaborative (e.g. participatory, participatory action, emancipatory) research with these consumers and the processes that can facilitate inclusive and accountable research outcomes are addressed. Throughout the paper, four questions will be explored: Who determines which research issues are explored and the methods that are used? What is the level of consumer involvement in the research process? How can academics and government ensure that consumer-focused research is inclusive and participatory? How, and to whom, should research results be made available?

In the first part of the paper, the perspectives on consumer research by people with disabilities are presented. Respect for and appreciation of consumers' views underpins the philosophical stance needed by researchers and funding bodies before serious engagement in empowering, person-centred research can be successful.

In the second part of the paper, there is a focus on defining the features of collaborative research approaches. Participatory research, participatory action research, and emancipatory research are variations that incorporate differing levels of consumer involvement. Each of these, however, embrace shifts in philosophy and methods away from more traditional 'scientific' research. Such changes result in a greater sense of inclusion and project ownership by consumers.

The third part of the paper addresses some of the issues associated with collaborative research for consumers with disabilities, for academic researchers, and for government funding bodies. Differing understandings of the social nature of disablement influence attitudes toward consumer involvement and are demonstrated in the choice of research questions, project aims, and the methodologies used. Differing agendas are reflected in reactions to the traditional project requirements and processes of government, the preferred research methodologies of researchers, and the perceived accountability of researchers or government for the dissemination and sharing of research results. The challenges to successful engagement with consumers in collaborative research have been identified in the literature and a number of strategies recommended (Barnes, 2003; Clear, 1999; Mercer, 2002; Oliver, 1992, 1997; Zarb, 1997). Application of inclusive strategies by researchers and funding bodies is essential for positive change and inclusive, empowering outcomes.

The paper concludes with a case study of a DCITA-funded research project. The project is evaluated using participatory/emancipatory research criteria modified from Zarb (1992) and addresses consumer, researcher, and funding body participation. The four questions used in the discussion of the paper are applied to this particular project. In addition, the benefits and learnings from the project will be compared with the outcomes desired by consumers who espouse collaborative research approaches.

The Australian auditing and assurance standards board after the implementation of CLERP 9

This paper traces the establishment of the reconstituted Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AUASB) as a result of the CLERP (Audit Reform and Corporate Disclosure) Act 2004, and its progress in developing auditing standards that are "in the public interest". The paper canvasses the composition of the AUASB, its transparency and due process, its relationship with the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board and the Financial Reporting Council, and its resourcing and attitude to researching issues of importance in auditing. The paper discusses methods that might be used to provide evidence of the efficacy of the reforms to auditing standard-setting.

Theory and accountability : the case of government consolidated financial reporting

The objective in this study is to examine the existing literature regarding the antecedents to public sector accountability performance by including a new variable: preparer-commanders’ beliefs about the usefulness of whole-of-government consolidated financial reporting. Goldberg’s (1965) Commander Theory was used as a relevant theoretical framework. Survey results provided insights into the beliefs of preparer-commanders as to the usefulness of whole-of-government consolidated financial reports for the discharge of accountability. While there appears to be a view that such reports may be useful for decision-making purposes, there is relatively less evidence to suggest that this type of information is suitable for the purposes of government resource allocation decisions.

Waste auditing and its applications in improving the dyeing industry environment

A case study on the application of cleaner production opportunities for waste minimization in dyeing industry is discussed in this paper which was conduced by Carl Duisberg Gesellschaft (CDG) South East Asia Program Office in collaboration with several Thai institutions. A waste audit was conducted as a first step in a dyeing factory, which leads to propose water reuse and waste segregation in order to implement cleaner production for waste minimization. Further more lab-scale experiments were conducted to find optimum treatment methods for the waste streams.

Trust/worthiness and accountability

Based on recent research with Indigenous people in south eastern Australia and non-Indigenous supporters of their struggles, this paper explores the question of trust: something that recurred in non-Indigenous people's thinking about their work. It looks at different approaches to working in a context in which distrust is well-founded. The paper suggests a revisiting of key works on accountability as a possible resource for transformative relationships.

Preserving transparency and accountability in optimistic fair exchange of digital signatures

Optimistic fair exchange (OFE) protocols are useful tools for two participants to fairly exchange items with the aid of a third party who is only involved if needed. A widely accepted requirement is that the third party's involvement in the exchange must be transparent, to protect privacy and avoid bad publicity. At the same time, a dishonest third party would compromise the fairness of the exchange and the third party thus must be responsible for its behaviors. This is achieved in OFE protocols with another property called accountability. It is unfortunate that the accountability has never been formally studied in OFE since its introduction ten years ago. In this paper, we fill these gaps by giving the first complete definition of accountability in OFE where one of the exchanged items is a digital signature and a generic (also the first) design of OFE where transparency and accountability coexist.