Conservation and economic benefits of wildlife-based marine tourism: Sea turtles and whales as case studies

Tourism development can have positive and/or negative impacts on wildlife. However, if tourism is developed in accordance with the basic tenets of wildlife tourism such an activity can be sustainable and can aid the conservation of species. Based on two case studies in Queensland, Australia, this article outlines the various economic and conservation benefits arising from wildlife-based tourism. Some of the benefits are direct, such as tangible economic benefits, others are less tangible, such as increased visitors’ willingness to pay in principle for the conservation of species. Wildlife-based tourism is shown to foster political support for the conservation of species utilized for such tourism by various mechanisms. Non-consumptive uses of wildlife are not only sustainable, but may provide a viable alternative to consumptive uses.

Ecotourism/Wildlife-based tourism as contributor to nature conservation with reference to Vanni, Sri Lanka

After discussing definitions of ecotourism, outlines possible economic and conservational benefits from developing ecotourism or wildlife-based tourism. Identifies possible economic benefits for local communities but also outlines possible economic costs to such communities. Observations are made on the potential of developing ecotourism in the Giant’s Tank/Mannar area. A sufficient market does not always exist for wildlife-based tourism to make it economically viable. Therefore, market analysis should be undertaken before promoting the development of wildlife-based tourism in a locality. A checklist is provided to give some guidance in market appraisal. It is observed that even non-consumptive wildlife-based tourism can have adverse environmental consequences and these are listed. Care is needed to avoid these negative consequences and to ensure that local communities do in fact obtain adequate economic benefits from the development of wildlife-based tourism.

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.

Physical Properties and Interfacial Adaptation of Three Epoxy Resin-based Sealers

Introduction: The aim of the study was to evaluate the radiopacity, solubility, flow, film thickness, setting time, and adaptation to the root canal walls of 3 epoxy resin based sealers: AH Plus, Acroseal, and Adseal. Methods: Physical tests were performed following American National Standards Institute/American Dental Association`s requirements. For interfacial adaptation analysis, 30 maxillary canines were shaped by using Pro Taper instruments. The specimens were divided into 3 groups (n = 10): group 1, AH Plus; group 2, Acroseal; and group 3, Adseal. The sealers were mixed with rhodamine B dye, and the canals were filled by using the lateral compaction technique. The percentage of gaps and voids area was calculated at 2, 4, and 6 mm levels from the apex. Statistical evaluation was performed by using analysis of variance for physical analysis and nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests for interfacial adaptation (P<.05). Results: No statistical differences were found for adaptation, percentage of voids, solubility, flow, and film thickness among the sealers (P>.05). AH Plus was significantly more radiopaque (P<.05). For the setting time, there were statistical differences among all the studied sealers (P<.05). Conclusions: AH Plus, Acroseal, and Adseal presented similar root canal adaptation, solubility, flow, and film thickness. Statistical differences were found for radiopacity and setting time (P<.05). (J Endod 2011;37:1417-1421)