The development of social and environmental accounting research 1995-2000

This paper reviews five years of social and environmental accounting literature (from 1995-2000) in an attempt to evaluate the current position. The methodology used follows that employed in Mathews (1997a) which covered a period of 25 years in three time periods: 1971-1980; 1981-1990; and 1991- 1995. The literature was classified into several sub-groups including empirical studies, normative statements, philosophical discussion, non-accounting literature, teaching programmes and text books, regulatory frameworks, and other reviews. In this review a number of new sub-categories have been employed as appropriate. The author is able to conclude on an optimistic note. The additions to the literature during the period 1995-2000 are encouraging. Researchers in this area are perhaps less naïve and more experienced than previously, and this, when added to their enthusiasm should lead to penetrating observations and commentaries over the next five years

Secure tenure for home ownership and economic development on land subject to native title

The public policy debate on land rights, the struggle of Indigenous peoples to have their pre-colonial possession of land recognised and interests in how land rights might be exercised to fulfil Indigenous peoples’ hopes for economic development and home ownership.Those people who have had their native title rights and interests in land legally recognised are contemplating the implications for their future prosperity. They are pondering the types of investments they can make to develop their land for social and economic purposes, the use and development rights they might temporarily exchange for income, or, as a last resort, the rights and interests they are prepared to relinquish in return for compensation. Western Australia (WA) presents a unique case in the Australian context because, unlike other states and the Northern Territory, WA does not have a statutory Aboriginal land rights system despite its large and remote Aboriginal population. What is termed ‘Aboriginal land’ in Western Australia covers approximately 12 per cent of the state but has generally been granted at the discretion of the Minister for Lands, or else is held in trust as a reserve for the ‘use and benefit of Aboriginal inhabitants’.1 This estate has not been transferred to Aboriginal ownership under state legislation on the basis of statutory rights conferred on Aboriginal people as the result of a formal claim based on their cultural connections to the land or waters. According to the former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner Tom Calma (AHRC 2005), this reflects ‘protection’ style legislation from the 19th century, which has been the basis of calls for reform of the system since the early 1980s (Seaman 1984; Bonner 1996; Casey 2007)

Project alliancing at National Museum of Australia: Collaborative process

Project alliancing is a new alternative to traditional project delivery systems, especially in the commercial building sector. The Collaborative Process is a theoretical model of people and systems characteristics that are required to reduce the adversarial nature of most construction projects. Although developed separately, both are responses to the same pressures. Project alliancing was just used successfully to complete the National Museum of Australia. This project was analyzed as a case study to determine the extent to which it could be classified as a “collaborative project”. Five key elements of The Collaborative Process were reviewed and numerous examples from the management of this project were cited that support the theoretical recommendations of this model. In the case of this project, significant added value was delivered to the client and many innovations resulted from the collective work of the parties to the contract. It was concluded that project alliances for commercial buildings offer many advantages over traditional project delivery systems, which are related to increasing the levels of collaboration among a project management team

Climate change adaptation in the boardroom

Abstract Climate adaptation is recognised by many of the world’s largest businesses as a global risk and one that requires critical attention. The World Economic Forum’s 2013 Global Risks Perception Survey, identified the ‘failure of climate change adaptation and rising greenhouse gas emissions as among those global risks considered to be the most likely to materialize within a decade’ (p.16). Yet despite action by many transnationals and international firms, it seems evident that most Australian companies appear to be struggling to move forward in responding to climate change impacts, apparently paralysed by short-term profit-first thinking, uncertain political risks and a corporate culture unused to volatility and disruption. Research approach This project set out to communicate adaptation to climate change to the “big end of town” and to gather soft data, acquire information and present issues back to the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF), the funder of this research. Our approach to the research challenge differed from a traditional technical, analytical or academic method. We used action-learning principles to engage a community in which we, as advisors to corporate Australia and as co-researchers, have social capital and standing. Through trusted information sharing networks, private closed-door meetings and one on one conversation with executives and senior management from over 100 companies we shared ideas, gathered, researched and refined information and tested our findings. Findings Our findings from the boardroom engagement include the following:   The Australian Government expects the private sector to adapt, yet little or no incentives exist to promote this behaviour. Autonomous adaptation as practiced may only benefit the lead actor while creating disbenefit for others (including other corporations, society and the environment). Market practices on current paradigms cannot be expected to meet greater societal adaptation needs. Further adaptation research is required in some areas to help guide shape and monitor adaptation for the private sector. A multiplicity of policy reform may be necessary, but crafting and implementing it is likely to remain beyond the capability of the Australian Public Service (APS) or individual Governments. Highly sophisticated mining, gas and some Asian owned technology companies are leading the way with many opportunities missed by Australian companies. Adaptation for the corporate sector is a key strategic issue, unlike mitigation and corporate social responsibility (CSR), as it benefits the corporate primarily. Insurance dependency may only be a short-term risk transfer mechanism as, in its current paradigm, it can mask risk, create a false sense of security and may impede adaptation.   Conclusion We hope that this report is of benefit to Australian organisations, policy makers, regulators and to researchers in adaptation science. This project shows that, on a whole, the Australian private sector is giving little consideration about the impacts climate change. This project has identified that considerable research gaps exist, but has also provided direction for organisations and researchers. Individual corporations and private sector peak bodies urgently need to explore the risks and opportunities that climate change and associated responses bring. This is especially so for the ICT, aviation, energy, insurance and finance sectors. Please cite this report as: Johnston, GS, Burton, DL, Baker-Jones, M, 2013 Climate Change Adaptation in the Boardroom National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast. pp. 81

Performance assessment of urban precinct design: a scoping study

Executive Summary: Significant advances have been made over the past decade in the development of scientifically and industry accepted tools for the performance assessment of buildings in terms of energy, carbon, water, indoor environment quality etc. For resilient, sustainable low carbon urban development to be realised in the 21st century, however, will require several radical transitions in design performance beyond the scale of individual buildings. One of these involves the creation and application of leading edge tools (not widely available to built environment professions and practitioners) capable of being applied to an assessment of performance across all stages of development at a precinct scale (neighbourhood, community and district) in either greenfield, brownfield or greyfield settings. A core aspect here is the development of a new way of modelling precincts, referred to as Precinct Information Modelling (PIM) that provides for transparent sharing and linking of precinct object information across the development life cycle together with consistent, accurate and reliable access to reference data, including that associated with the urban context of the precinct. Neighbourhoods are the ‘building blocks’ of our cities and represent the scale at which urban design needs to make its contribution to city performance: as productive, liveable, environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive places (COAG 2009). Neighbourhood design constitutes a major area for innovation as part of an urban design protocol established by the federal government (Department of Infrastructure and Transport 2011, see Figure 1). The ability to efficiently and effectively assess urban design performance at a neighbourhood level is in its infancy. This study was undertaken by Swinburne University of Technology, University of New South Wales, CSIRO and buildingSMART Australasia on behalf of the CRC for Low Carbon Living

Interbasin Water Transfers and Water Scarcity in a Changing World: A Solution or a Pipedream?

The world is increasingly forced to face the challenge of how to ensure access to adequate water resources for expanding populations and economies, whilst maintaining healthy freshwater ecosystems and the vital services they provide. Now the growing impacts of climate change are exacerbating the problem of water scarcity in key regions of the world. One popular way for governments to distribute water more evenly across the landscape is to transfer it from areas with perceived surpluses, to those with shortages.While there is a long history of water transfers from ancient times, as many societies reach the limits of locally renewable water supplies increasingly large quantities of water are being moved over long distances, from one river basin to another. Since the beginning of dam building that marked the last half of the 1900s more that 364 large-scale interbasin water transfer schemes (IBTs) have been established that transfer around 400 km³ of water per year (Shiklomanov 1999). IBTs are now widely touted as the quick fix solution to meeting escalating water demands. One estimate suggests that the total number of largescale water transfer schemes may rise to between 760 and 1 240 by 2020 to transfer up to 800 km³ of water per year (Shiklomanov 1999).The wide range of IBT projects in place, or proposed, has provoked the preparation of this review, including seven case studies from around the globe. It builds on previous assessments and examines the costs and benefits of large scale IBTs. This report assesses related, emerging issues in sustaining water resources and ecosystems, namely the virtual water trade, expanding use of desalination, and climate change adaptation. It is based on WWF's 2007 publication "Pipedreams? Interbasin water transfers and water shortages".The report concludes that while IBTs can potentially solve water supply issues in regions of water shortage - they come with significant costs. Large scale IBTs are typically very high cost, and thus economically risky, and they usually also come with significant social and environmental costs; usually for both the river basin providing and the river basin receiving the water