The shifting influence of drought and heat stress for crops in Northeast Australia

Characterization of drought environment types (ETs) has proven useful for breeding crops for drought-prone regions. Here we consider how changes in climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations will affect drought ET frequencies in sorghum and wheat systems of Northeast Australia. We also modify APSIM (the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator) to incorporate extreme heat effects on grain number and weight, and then evaluate changes in the occurrence of heat-induced yield losses of more than 10%, as well as the co-occurrence of drought and heat. More than six million simulations spanning representative locations, soil types, management systems, and 33 climate projections led to three key findings. First, the projected frequency of drought decreased slightly for most climate projections for both sorghum and wheat, but for different reasons. In sorghum, warming exacerbated drought stresses by raising the atmospheric vapor pressure deficit and reducing transpiration efficiency (TE), but an increase in TE due to elevated CO2 more than offset these effects. In wheat, warming reduced drought stress during spring by hastening development through winter and reducing exposure to terminal drought. Elevated CO2 increased TE but also raised radiation use efficiency and overall growth rates and water use, thereby offsetting much of the drought reduction from warming. Second, adding explicit effects of heat on grain number and grain size often switched projected yield impacts from positive to negative. Finally, although average yield losses associated with drought will remain generally higher than for heat stress for the next half century, the relative importance of heat is steadily growing. This trend, as well as the likely high degree of genetic variability in heat tolerance, suggests that more emphasis on heat tolerance is warranted in breeding programs. At the same time, work on drought tolerance should continue with an emphasis on drought that co-occurs with extreme heat. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Agronomic benefits and risks associated with the irrigated peanut–maize production system under a changing climate in northern Australia

With the aim of increasing peanut production in Australia, the Australian peanut industry has recently considered growing peanuts in rotation with maize at Katherine in the Northern Territory—a location with a semi-arid tropical climate and surplus irrigation capacity. We used the well-validated APSIM model to examine potential agronomic benefits and long-term risks of this strategy under the current and warmer climates of the new region. Yield of the two crops, irrigation requirement, total soil organic carbon (SOC), nitrogen (N) losses and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were simulated. Sixteen climate stressors were used; these were generated by using global climate models ECHAM5, GFDL2.1, GFDL2.0 and MRIGCM232 with a median sensitivity under two Special Report of Emissions Scenarios over the 2030 and 2050 timeframes plus current climate (baseline) for Katherine. Effects were compared at three levels of irrigation and three levels of N fertiliser applied to maize grown in rotations of wet-season peanut and dry-season maize (WPDM), and wet-season maize and dry-season peanut (WMDP). The climate stressors projected average temperature increases of 1°C to 2.8°C in the dry (baseline 24.4°C) and wet (baseline 29.5°C) seasons for the 2030 and 2050 timeframes, respectively. Increased temperature caused a reduction in yield of both crops in both rotations. However, the overall yield advantage of WPDM increased from 41% to up to 53% compared with the industry-preferred sequence of WMDP under the worst climate projection. Increased temperature increased the irrigation requirement by up to 11% in WPDM, but caused a smaller reduction in total SOC accumulation and smaller increases in N losses and GHG emission compared with WMDP. We conclude that although increased temperature will reduce productivity and total SOC accumulation, and increase N losses and GHG emissions in Katherine or similar northern Australian environments, the WPDM sequence should be preferable over the industry-preferred sequence because of its overall yield and sustainability advantages in warmer climates. Any limitations of irrigation resulting from climate change could, however, limit these advantages.

Chemical containment and eradication of screw− worm incursions in Australia

Screwworms are obligate, invasive parasites of warm-blooded animals. The female flies lay batches of eggs at the edge of wounds or other lesions. These eggs hatch to larvae or screw-worms which feed on affected animals for 6-7 days, burrowing deeply into subcutaneous tissues and causing severe trauma to animals, production loss and potentially death. Susceptible sites include wounds resulting from management practices such as castration, de-horning and ear tagging and lesions caused by the activities of other parasites such as buffalo flies and ticks. The navels of the new born and the vulval region of their mothers following parturition are highly susceptible and body orifices such as nose and ears are also frequent targets for ovipositing screwworm flies. The Old World screw-worm, Chrysomya bezziana (OWS) is considered one of the most serious exotic insect pest threatening Australia's livestock industries and is endemic in a number of our closest neighbouring countries. New World screwworm (NWS), Cochliomyia hominivorax, endemic to South America, has also entered Australia on at least 2 occasions. Many tropical and subtropical areas of Australia are suitable for the establishment of OWS and the potential range is expected to increase with climate change. The Australian screwworm preparedness strategy indicates a program of containment with chemical treatments followed by eradication of OWS using sterile male release and parasiticides. However, there is no longer an operational OWS sterile insect screw-worm facility anywhere in the world and establishing a large scale production facility would most optimistically take at least 2 years. In the interim, containment would be almost totally dependent on the availability of effective chemical controls. A review of chemical formulations available for potential use against OWS in Australia found that currently only one chemical, ivermectin administered by subcutaneous injection (s.c.) is registered for use against OWS and that many of the chemicals previously shown to be effective against OWS were no longer registered for animal use in Australia.18 From this review a number of Australian-registered chemicals were recommended as a priority for testing against OWS. The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) can issue an emergency use permit for use of pesticides if they are registered in Australia for other animal uses and shown to be effective against OWS. This project tested the therapeutic and prophylactic efficacy of chemicals with potential for use in the treatment and control of OWS.

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.

On the contribution of information and communication technology to productivity growth in Australia

This paper revisits the so-called ‘ICT-productivity paradox’ from a long-run perspective by using annual Australian data for 1965–2013. It provides estimates of long-run and short-run elasticities of labour productivity with respect to ICT capital deepening, and explores the nature of long-run causality among productivity growth and ICT and non-ICT capital deepening. The estimates of long-run elasticities are derived by employing both time-series and panel data econometric techniques. The empirical results provide strong confirmatory evidence of the long-run impact of ICT capital deepening on labour productivity in Australia.

Decomposition of energy-related CO2 emissions in Australia: Challenges and policy implications

Changes in energy-related CO2 emissions aggregate intensity, total CO2 emissions and per-capita CO2 emissions in Australia are decomposed by using a Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index (LMDI) method for the period 1978-2010. Results indicate improvements in energy efficiency played a dominant role in the measured 17% reduction in CO2 emissions aggregate intensity in Australia over the period. Structural changes in the economy, such as changes in the relative importance of the services sector vis-à-vis manufacturing, have also played a major role in achieving this outcome. Results also suggest that, without these mitigating factors, income per capita and population effects could well have produced an increase in total emissions of more than 50% higher than actually occurred over the period. Perhaps most starkly, the results indicate that, without these mitigating factors, the growth in CO2 emissions per capita could have been over 150% higher than actually observed. Notwithstanding this, the study suggests that, for Australia to meet its Copenhagen commitment, the relative average per annum effectiveness of these mitigating factors during 2010-2020 probably needs to be almost three times what it was in the 2005-2010 period-a very daunting challenge indeed for Australia's policymakers.

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.

Change to costs and lengths of stay in the emergency department and the Brisbane protocol: An observational study

- Objective To compare health service cost and length of stay between a traditional and an accelerated diagnostic approach to assess acute coronary syndromes (ACS) among patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) of a large tertiary hospital in Australia. - Design, setting and participants This historically controlled study analysed data collected from two independent patient cohorts presenting to the ED with potential ACS. The first cohort of 938 patients was recruited in 2008–2010, and these patients were assessed using the traditional diagnostic approach detailed in the national guideline. The second cohort of 921 patients was recruited in 2011–2013 and was assessed with the accelerated diagnostic approach named the Brisbane protocol. The Brisbane protocol applied early serial troponin testing for patients at 0 and 2 h after presentation to ED, in comparison with 0 and 6 h testing in traditional assessment process. The Brisbane protocol also defined a low-risk group of patients in whom no objective testing was performed. A decision tree model was used to compare the expected cost and length of stay in hospital between two approaches. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to account for model uncertainty. - Results Compared with the traditional diagnostic approach, the Brisbane protocol was associated with reduced expected cost of $1229 (95% CI −$1266 to $5122) and reduced expected length of stay of 26 h (95% CI −14 to 136 h). The Brisbane protocol allowed physicians to discharge a higher proportion of low-risk and intermediate-risk patients from ED within 4 h (72% vs 51%). Results from sensitivity analysis suggested the Brisbane protocol had a high chance of being cost-saving and time-saving. - Conclusions This study provides some evidence of cost savings from a decision to adopt the Brisbane protocol. Benefits would arise for the hospital and for patients and their families.

Child abuse and neglect: A socio-legal study of mandatory reporting in Australia - Report for the Australian Government

This report presents the results of a national study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses depending on the jurisdiction, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours, depending on the jurisdiction), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the ACT Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in the Australian Capital Territory. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses depending on the jurisdiction, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours, depending on the jurisdiction), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the New South Wales Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in New South Wales. Government administrative data were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Northern Territory Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in the Northern Territory. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses, vs family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Queensland Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in Queensland. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., teachers, doctors, nurses, and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the South Australian Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in South Australia. Government administrative data over a decade (2003-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses; and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.

Child Abuse and Neglect: A Socio-legal Study of Mandatory Reporting in Australia - Report for the Tasmanian Government

This report presents the results of a study exploring the law and practice of mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect in Tasmania. Government administrative data over a nine year period (2004-2012) were accessed and analysed to map trends in reporting of different types of child abuse and neglect (physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect) by different reporter groups (both mandated reporters e.g., police, teachers, doctors, nurses; and non-mandated reporters e.g., family members, neighbours), and the outcomes of these reports (whether investigated, and whether substantiated or not). The study was funded by the Australian Government and administered through the Government of Victoria.