Developing enterprise curriculum: Building on rock, not sand

Entrepreneurial education is the process of providing individuals with the ability to recognise commercial opportunities and the insight, self-esteem, knowledge and skills to act on them. It includes instruction in opportunity recognition, commercialising a concept, marshalling resources in the face of risk, and initiating a business venture. It also includes instruction in traditional business disciplines such as management, marketing, information systems and finance. The purpose of this paper is to describe the design and introduction of a new program in Entrepreneurship at the University of Tasmania. Rather than adopt a traditional business school (passive learning) approach, within this program the method and responsibility of learning has largely been reversed through the process of student centred learning. This method of learning represents a challenging departure from the traditional mainstream teaching practices. In considering the benefits achievable from this teaching method, this paper also considers the difficulties in transferring increased responsibility to students to manage their futures.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Poses a Grave Threat to Sustainable Development

This month’s long-awaited release of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) text was the result of years of negotiations on trade ties between nations around the Pacific Rim. Some six weeks earlier, another set of deliberations came to an end as the United Nations unveiled its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which aim to eradicate poverty and reduce inequality by addressing critical issues such as food security, health care, access to education, clean and affordable water, clean energy, and climate action. Unfortunately, the two documents are incompatible. Several chapters of the TPP impinge upon the SDGs, potentially undermining the UN’s efforts to promote sustainable development and equality throughout the Pacific region. Moreover, many developing countries, least-developed countries, and small island states in the Pacific region are excluded from the preferential trade deal.

Developing an evolutionary/ecological approach in enterprise education

This paper presents an ecological/evolutionary approach to enterprise education. Ecological approaches are used at the University of Tasmania to heighten the awareness of students to a raft of difficult to observe environmental factors associated with developing enterprising ideas. At Sheffield University, the discovery and exploitation of entrepreneurial opportunities is viewed as a co-evolving system of emerging business ideas, and routines/heuristics respectively. It is argued that using both approaches enables students to develop a greater awareness of their situated environment, and ultimately the degree of fit between their learning process and a changing external world. The authors argue that in order to improve the chances of longer-term survival what is needed is a new level of organisation where the individual is capable of developing a representation of the external world that he or she can use to sense the appropriateness of local decisions. This reinterpretation of events allows individuals to step back and examine the broader consequences of their actions through the interpretation and anticipation of feedback from the environment. These approaches thus seek to develop practice-based heuristics which individuals can use to make sense of their lived experiences, as they learn to evolve in an increasingly complex world.

Online learning an effective means for developing small business owner-managers’ capabilities?

Purpose If owner-managers engage in management development activities then chances of success may be improved for small businesses. But small business owner-managers (SBOMs) are a difficult group to engage in management development activities. While practitioners worry about timing, content and location of development activities, the purpose of this paper is to examine what drives SBOMs to participate in an online discussion forum (ODF) as a form of management development. An ODF was run with SBOMs and the factors affecting their participation are reported from this exploratory study. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative methodology was used where data gathered from three sources, the ODF posts, in-depth interviews with participants and a focus group with non-participants. These were analysed to evaluate factors affecting participation of SBOMs in an ODF. Findings The findings point to the importance of owner-managers’ attitudes. Attitudes that positively affected SBOMs participation in the ODF included; appreciating that learning leads to business success; positive self-efficacy developed through prior online experience; and an occupational identity as a business manager. Research limitations/implications Few SBOMs participated in the ODF, which is consistent with research finding that they are a difficult group to engage in management development learning activities. Three forms of data were analysed to strengthen results. Practical implications Caution should be exercised when considering investment in e-learning to develop the managerial capabilities of SBOMs. Originality/value Evidence of the factors important for participation in an informal voluntary ODF. The findings suggest greater emphasis should be placed on changing attitudes if SBOMs are to be encouraged to participate in management development activities.

Developing effective fumigation protocols to manage strongly phosphine-resistant Cryptolestes ferrugineus (Stephens) (Coleoptera: Laemophloeidae)

BACKGROUND The emergence of high levels of resistance in Cryptolestes ferrugineus (Stephens) in recent years threatens the sustainability of phosphine, a key fumigant used worldwide to disinfest stored grain. We aimed at developing robust fumigation protocols that could be used in a range of practical situations to control this resistant pest. RESULTS Values of the lethal time to kill 99.9% (LT99.9, in days) of mixed-age populations, containing all life stages, of a susceptible and a strongly resistant C. ferrugineus population were established at three phosphine concentrations (1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 mg L−1) and three temperatures (25, 30 and 35 °C). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that phosphine concentration and temperature both contributed significantly to the LT99.9 of a population (P < 0.003, R2 = 0.92), with concentration being the dominant variable, accounting for 75.9% of the variation. Across all concentrations, LT99.9 of the strongly resistant C. ferrugineus population was longest at the lowest temperature and shortest at the highest temperature. For example, 1.0 mg L−1 of phosphine is required for 20, 15 and 15 days, 1.5 mg L−1 for 12, 11 and 9 days and 2.0 mg L−1 for 10, 7 and 6 days at 25, 30 and 35 °C, respectively, to achieve 99.9% mortality of the strongly resistant C. ferrugineus population. We also observed that phosphine concentration is inversely proportional to fumigation period in regard to the population extinction of this pest. CONCLUSION The fumigation protocols developed in this study will be used in recommending changes to the currently registered rates of phosphine in Australia towards management of strongly resistant C. ferrugineus populations, and can be repeated in any country where this type of resistance appears. © 2014 Commonwealth of Australia. Pest Management Science © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry

Climate savvy grazing (Developing improved grazing and related practices to assist beef production enterprises across northern Australia to adapt to a changing and more variable climate)

There is uncertainty over the potential changes to rainfall across northern Australia under climate change. Since rainfall is a key driver of pasture growth, cattle numbers and the resulting animal productivity and beef business profitability, the ability to anticipate possible management strategies within such uncertainty is crucial. The Climate Savvy Grazing project used existing research, expert knowledge and computer modelling to explore the best-bet management strategies within best, median and worse-case future climate scenarios. All three scenarios indicated changes to the environment and resources upon which the grazing industry of northern Australia depends. Well-adapted management strategies under a changing climate are very similar to best practice within current climatic conditions. Maintaining good land condition builds resource resilience, maximises opportunities under higher rainfall years and reduces the risk of degradation during drought and failed wet seasons. Matching stocking rate to the safe long-term carrying capacity of the land is essential; reducing stock numbers in response to poor seasons and conservatively increasing stock numbers in response to better seasons generally improves profitability and maintains land in good condition. Spelling over the summer growing season will improve land condition under a changing climate as it does under current conditions. Six regions were included within the project. Of these, the Victoria River District in the Northern Territory, Gulf country of Queensland and the Kimberley region of Western Australia had projections of similar or higher than current rainfall and the potential for carrying capacity to increase. The Alice Springs, Maranoa-Balonne and Fitzroy regions had projections of generally drying conditions and the greatest risk of reduced pasture growth and carrying capacity. Encouraging producers to consider and act on the risks, opportunities and management options inherent in climate change was a key goal of the project. More than 60,000 beef producers, advisors and stakeholders are now more aware of the management strategies which build resource resilience, and that resilience helps buffer against the effects of variable and changing climatic conditions. Over 700 producers have stated they have improved confidence, skills and knowledge to attempt new practices to build resilience. During the course of the project, more than 165 beef producers reported they have implemented changes to build resource and business resilience.

Developing Jungle Perch Fingerling Production to Improve Fishing Opportunities

This project has for the first time demonstrated the feasibility of hatchery production of jungle perch fingerlings. The research on jungle perch production has enabled a hatchery production manual with accompanying videos to be produced. This has given private commercial hatcheries the information needed to produce jungle perch fingerlings. Several hatcheries have already indicated an interest in producing jungle perch and will be assisted to do so in 2016. Currently jungle perch are not a permitted stocking species, so cannot be sold to fish stocking groups. However, hatcheries will be able to sell fingerlings to the aquarium trade or supply grow out facilities that could produce jungle perch for human consumption. Should jungle perch become a permitted species for stocking, this will provide hatcheries with a major new product option to sell to fish stocking groups. It would also benefit anglers by providing another iconic species for impoundment stocking programs. This could have flow-on benefits to regional economies through angler tourism. Should the pilot reintroductions of jungle perch into streams result in self-sustaining jungle perch populations, then there will be three restored jungle perch populations close to major population centres. This will create a new opportunity for anglers not normally able to target jungle perch. Since the majority of anglers who target jungle perch are catch and release fishers, angling is expected to have minimal impact on recovery of the populations. This project led to the development of a hatchery manual for jungle perch production and to a summary brochure. In late 2014 and in 2015 researchers were able to make the first ever releases of jungle perch fingerlings back into rivers and streams within their historical range.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

Developing standardized methods to assess cost of healthy and unhealthy (current) diets in Australia

Unhealthy diets contribute at least 14% to Australia's disease burden and are driven by ‘obesogenic’ food environments. Compliance with dietary recommendations is particularly poor amongst disadvantaged populations including low socioeconomic groups, those living in rural/remote areas and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. The perception that healthy foods are expensive is a key barrier to healthy choices and a major determinant of diet-related health inequities. Available state/regional/local data (limited and non-comparable) suggests that, despite basic healthy foods not incurring GST, the cost of healthy food is higher and has increased more rapidly than unhealthy food over the last 15 years in Australia. However, there were no nationally standardised tools or protocols to benchmark, compare or monitor food prices and affordability in Australia. Globally, we are leading work to develop and test approaches to assess the price differential of healthy and less-healthy (current) diets under the food price module of the International Network for Food and Obesity/non-communicable diseases (NCDs) Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS). This presentation describes contextualization of the INFORMAS approach to develop standardised Australian tools, survey protocols and data collection and analysis systems. The ‘healthy diet basket’ was based on the Australian Foundation Diet, 1 The ‘current diet basket’ and specific items included in each basket, were based on recent national dietary survey data.2 Data collection methods were piloted. The final tools and protocols were then applied to measure the price and affordability of healthy and less healthy (current) diets of different household groups in diverse communities across the nation. We have compared results for different geographical locations/population subgroups in Australia and assessed these against international INFORMAS benchmarks. The results inform the development of policy and practice, including those relevant to mooted changes to the GST base, to promote nutrition and healthy weight and prevent chronic disease in Australia.

Developing a moderation community of practice

This paper reports on a study to evaluate technology-based processes for assessment moderation. The aim was to evaluate standard features found in an institutional Learning Management System, and their compatibility with the values and practices of a large teaching team. The process used an online discussion board forum for tutors, the paring of more experienced tutors with those new to the process, and further meetings conducted in both face-to-face and web conferencing environments. Online rubrics were used for assessing student work and the provision of feedback. A focus group conducted after marking was concluded and the analysis of the discussion board forum demonstrated a strong community of practice with a shared understanding of assessment requirements.

Portals and platforms: Does the technology matter when developing an online community?

Many education providers grapple with “where” to host their online education community. While many have invested significant funding and time into developing a user specific solution, others are using alternative open source software solutions that provide a just in time response. This research paper reports on the importance of the engagement of an online community within an open source learning management system, presents the key aspects of communication occurring and romanticizes the notion that a user specific solution is not a necessary consideration.

Complimentary collaborations: Teachers and researchers co-developing best practices in art education

Australia is currently experiencing a huge cultural shift as it moves from a State-based curriculum, to a national education system. The Australian State-based bodies that currently manage teacher registration, teacher education course accreditation, curriculum frameworks and syllabi are often complex organisations that hold conflicting ideologies about education and teaching. The development of a centralised system, complete with a single accreditation body and a national curriculum can be seen as a reaction to this complexity. At the time of writing, the Australian Curriculum is being rolled out in staggered phases across the states and territories of Australia. Phase one has been implemented, introducing English, Mathematics, History and Science. Subsequent phases (Humanities and Social Sciences, the Arts, Technologies, Health and Physical Education, Languages, and year 9-10 work studies) are intended to follow. Forcing an educational shift of this magnitude is no simple task; not least because the States and Territories have and continue to demonstrate varying levels of resistance to winding down their own curricula in favour of new content with its unfamiliar expectations and organisations. The full implementation process is currently far from over, and far from being fully resolved. The Federal Government has initiated a number of strategies to progress the implementation, such as the development of the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) to aid professional educators to implement the new curriculum. AITSL worked with professional and peak specialist bodies to develop Illustrations of Practice (hereafter IoP) for teachers to access and utilise. This paper tells of the building of one IoP, where a graduate teacher and a university lecturer collaborated to construct ideas and strategies to deliver visual arts lessons to early childhood students in a low Socio- Economic Status [SES] regional setting and discusses the experience in terms of its potential for professional learning in art education.