The dawn of the age of the drones:An Australian privacy law perspective

Suppose a homeowner habitually enjoys sunbathing in his or her backyard, protected by a high fence from prying eyes, including those of an adolescent neighbour. In times past such homeowners could be assured that they might go about their activities without a threat to their privacy. However, recent years have seen technological advances in the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (‘UAVs’), also known colloquially as drones, that have allowed them to become more reduced in size, complexity and price. UAVs today include models retailing to the public for less than $350 and with an ease of operation that enables them to serve as mobile platforms for miniature cameras. These machines now mean that for individuals like the posited homeowner’s adolescent neighbour, barriers such as high fences no longer constitute insuperable obstacles to their voyeuristic endeavours. Moreover, ease of access to the internet and video sharing websites provides a ready means of sharing any recordings made with such cameras with a wide audience. Persons in the homeowner’s position might understandably seek some form of redress for such egregious invasions of their privacy. Other than some kind of self-help, what alternative measures may be available?

Corporate-cooperative management of fisheries: A potential alternative governance structure for low value small fisheries?

While the economic and environmental benefits of fisheries management are well accepted, the costs of effective management in low value fisheries, including the research necessary to underpin such management, may be considerable relative to the total economic benefits they may generate. Co-management is often seen as a panacea in low value fisheries. Increasing fisher participation increases legitimacy of management decision in the absence of detailed scientific input. However, where only a small number of operators exist, the potential benefits of co-management are negated by the high transaction cost to the individual fishers engaging in the management process. From an economic perspective, sole ownership has been identified as the management structure which can best achieve biological and economic sustainability. Moving low value fisheries with a small number of participants to a corporate-cooperative management model may come close to achieving these sole ownership benefits, with lower transaction costs. In this paper we look at the applicability of different management models with industry involvement to low value fisheries with a small number of participants. We provide an illustration as to how a fishery could be transitioned to a corporate-cooperative management model that captures the key benefits of sole management at a low cost and is consistent with societal objectives.

Pedagogical relations in the age of big data [Commentary]

Introduction A pedagogical relationship - the relationship produced through teaching and learning - is, according to phenomenologist Max van Maanen, ‘the most profound relationship an adult can have with a child’ (van Maanen 1982). But what does it mean for a teacher to have a ‘profound’ relationship with a student in digital times? What, indeed, is an optimal pedagogical relationship at a time when the exponential proliferation and transformation of information across the globe is making for unprecedented social and cultural change? Does it involve both parties in a Facebook friendship? Being snappy with Snapchat? Tumbling around on Tumblr? There is now ample evidence of a growing trend to displace face-to-face interaction by virtual connections. One effect of these technologically mediated relationships is that a growing number of young people experience relationships as ‘mile-wide, inch-deep’ phenomena. It is timely, in this context, to explore how pedagogical relationships are being transmuted by Big Data, and to ask about the implications this has for current and future generations of professional educators.

Unlearning leadership in the conceptual age

"We live in times in which unlearning has become as important as learning. Dan Pink has called these times the Conceptual Age,i to distinguish them from the Knowledge/Information Age in which many of us were born and educated. Before the current Conceptual Age, the core business of learning was the routine accessing of information to solve routine problems, so there was real value in retaining and reusing the templates taught to us at schools and universities. What is different about the Conceptual Age is that it is characterised by new cultural forms and modes of consumption that require us to unlearn our Knowledge/Information Age habits to live well in our less predictable social world. The ‘correct’ way to write, for example, is no longer ‘correct’ if communicating by hypertext rather than by essay or letter. And who would bother with an essay or a letter or indeed a pen these days? Whether or not we agree that the Conceptual Age, amounts to the first real generation gap since rock and roll, as Ken Robinson claims,ii it certainly makes unique demands of educators, just as it makes unique demands of the systems, strategies and sustainability of organisations. Foremost among these demands, according to innovation analyst Charlie Leadbeater,iii is to unlearn the idea that we are becoming a more knowledgeable society with each new generation. If knowing means being intimately familiar with the knowledge embedded in the technologies we use in our daily lives, then, Leadbeater says, we have never been more ignorant.iv He reminds us that our great grandparents had an intimate knowledge of the technologies around them, and had no problem with getting the butter churn to work or preventing the lamp from smoking. Few of us would know what to do if our mobile phones stopped functioning, just as few of us know what is ‘underneath’ or ‘behind’ the keys of our laptops. Nor, indeed, do many of us want to know. But this means that we are all very quickly reduced to the quill and the lamp if we lose our power sources or if our machines cease to function. This makes us much more vulnerable – as well as much more ignorant in relative terms – than our predecessors."

The future for genetic studies in reproduction

Genetic factors contribute to risk of many common diseases affecting reproduction and fertility. In recent years, methods for genome-wide association studies(GWAS) have revolutionized gene discovery forcommontraits and diseases. Results of GWAS are documented in the Catalog of Published Genome-Wide Association Studies at the National Human Genome Research Institute and report over 70 publications for 32 traits and diseases associated with reproduction. These include endometriosis, uterine fibroids, age at menarche and age at menopause. Results that pass appropriate stringent levels of significance are generally well replicated in independent studies. Examples of genetic variation affecting twinning rate, infertility, endometriosis and age at menarche demonstrate that the spectrum of disease-related variants for reproductive traits is similar to most other common diseases.GWAS 'hits' provide novel insights into biological pathways and the translational value of these studies lies in discovery of novel gene targets for biomarkers, drug development and greater understanding of environmental factors contributing to disease risk. Results also show that genetic data can help define sub-types of disease and co-morbidity with other traits and diseases. To date, many studies on reproductive traits have used relatively small samples. Future genetic marker studies in large samples with detailed phenotypic and clinical information will yield new insights into disease risk, disease classification and co-morbidity for many diseases associated with reproduction and infertility.