Evolution of the docklands food hub : a design-led innovation approach to food sovereignty through local food systems

Access to nutritious, safe and culturally appropriate food is a basic human right (Mechlem, 2004). Food sovereignty defines this right through the empowerment of the people to redefine food and agricultural systems, and through ecologically sustainable production methods. At the heart of the food sovereignty movement are the interests of producers, distributors and consumers, rather than the interests of markets and corporations, which dominate the current globalized food system (Hinrichs, 2003). Food sovereignty challenges designers to enable people to innovate the food system. We are yet to develop economically viable solutions for scaling projects and providing citizens, governments and business with tools to develop and promote projects to innovate food systems and promote food sovereignty (Meroni, 2011; Murray, Caulier-Grice and Mulgan, 2010). This article examines how a design-led approach to innovation can assist in the development of new business models and ventures for local food systems: this is presented through an emerging field of research ‘Design-Led Food Communities’. Design-Led Food Communities enables citizens, governments and business to innovate local food projects through the application of design. This article reports on the case study of the Docklands Food Hub Project in Melbourne, Australia. Preliminary findings demonstrate valued outcomes, but also a deficiency in the design process to generate food solutions collaboratively between government, business and citizens.

From certificate chasing to genuine engagement : the contribution of curriculum design to students' career intent in a subfield

Many students enter business degrees without a defined career goal beyond working in the business world and adopt a scattergun approach to employability by accumulating certifications accessed through individual subjects. Yet, space and time limitations commonly prevent extended exposure to rewarding and interesting career subfields within main specialisations. This case study draws on student feedback collected over three years exploring students’ career interest following an elective human resource development subject in the final stage of a human resources major. Project-based curriculum provided students with scaffolded learning while undertaking key multiphase human resource development tasks. Subsequently, students reported human resource development career interest and intent, attributed to more realistic appreciation of human resource development’s activities, scope, and values. The paper makes an important contribution illustrating how curriculum design can transform instrumentalism into logically, emotionally, and intuitively based career engagement. Further, human resource development is a study and career area little mentioned in higher education or careers literature.

Developing health literacy through school based health education : can reality match rhetoric

Recently in Australia, the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission (2009) and National Preventative Health Taskforce (2009) recommended that one way to strengthen consumer engagement within a health system is to ensure health literacy comprise a core element of the National Curriculum for primary and secondary schooling. However, whilst nationally and internationally schools are mandated to teach health education, there is considerable disjuncture between societies' broad expectations and schools' capacities to deliver programs that promote healthy Jiving (Marks, 2010; Basch, 2010). Given the centrality of literacy education in contemporary schooling (Snyder, 2008), 'health literacy' has been identified as a construct that offers the potential to close this perceived gap (McCuaig, Coore & Hay, 2012; Kickbusch, 2001). To date, there has been limited research asto what a health literacy focused, school based health education curriculum could look like.

Powering innovation through tax concessions: The changing research & development tax incentives

The changes to the R&D tax concession in 2011 were touted as the biggest reform to business innovation policy in over a decade. Three years later, as part of the 2014 Federal Budget, a reduction in the concession rates was announced. While the most recent of the pro-posed changes are designed to align with the reduction in company tax rate, the Australian Federal Government also indicated that the gain to revenue from the reduction in the incentive scheme will be redirected by the Government to repair the Budget and fund policy priori-ties. The consequence is that the R&D concessions, while designed to encourage innovation, are clearly linked with the tax system. As such, the first part of this article considers whether the R&D concession is a changing tax for changing times. Leading on from part one, this article also addresses a second question of ‘what’s tax got to do with it’? To answer this question, the article argues that, rather than ever being substantive tax reform, the constantly changing measures simply alter the criteria and means by which companies become eligible for a Federal Government subsidy for qualifying R&D activity, whatever that amount is. It further argues that when considered as part of the broader innovation agenda, all R&D tax concessions should be evaluated as a government spending program in the same way as any direct spending on innovation. When this is done, the tax regime is arguably merely the administrative policy instrument by which the subsidy is delivered. However, this may not be best practice to distribute those funds fairly, efficiently, and without distortion, while at the same time maintaining adequate government control and accountability. Finally, in answering the question of ‘what’s tax got to do with it?’ the article concludes that the answer is: very little.