Monitoring the Indigenous heritage within the Reef 2050 Integrated Monitoring and Reporting Program: final report of the Indigenous Heritage Expert Group

An accessible copy of this report is not yet available from this repository, please contact [email protected] for more information

Monitoring Indigenous heritage within the Reef 20150 Integrated Monitoring and Reporting Program: final report of the Indigenous Heritage Expert Group

The Indigenous Heritage Expert Group (IHEG) was created to advise on the design of the Indigenous heritage theme of the Reef Integrated Monitoring and Reporting Program (RIMReP) in a context where it has been recognised that the most striking gap in socio-economic monitoring was the absence of monitoring pertaining to Traditional Owner (TO) use, dependency and wellbeing. The IHEG reviewed a series of Traditional Owner-driven monitoring frameworks implemented throughout Australia. The review is summarised in this report. Many of these frameworks applied an inclusive definition of wellbeing, or the personal, physical, social, economic, and environmental factors of human life, as the focus of monitoring. However, the IHEG determined that the most successful frameworks were biocultural—connecting Indigenous community wellbeing with country wellbeing through stories and statistics. For example, the methodology used to inform the Mackay-Whitsunday Healthy Rivers to Reef Partnership (MWHR2RP) Report Card for 2015 was useful, empowered the Traditional Owner communities and contributed to their knowledge of cultural heritage sites and landscape. It also provided a group of Traditional Owners with training and the ability to return to their country – building the capacity of the Traditional Owners on country. Through analysis of existing frameworks and monitoring methods such as the one developed for the Healthy Rivers to Reef Partnership, the IHEG developed a unique framework, Strong Peoples – Strong Country, for Traditional Owners to monitor the Great Barrier Reef (GBR), and its catchments (GBR region); and thereby track Traditional Owners’ perceptions of the status of Indigenous heritage, and progress on the Traditional Owner objectives, targets and actions in the Reef 2050 Long-term Sustainability Plan (Reef 2050 Plan). The framework and indicators provide a structure for monitoring the condition of the Indigenous heritage asset, and for monitoring progress on achieving the Reef 2050 Traditional Owner objectives, targets and actions. The IHEG identified six key hubs relevant to Strong Peoples – Strong Country: Country health; People’s Health; Heritage and Knowledge; Culture and Community; Education; and Empowerment and Economics (Figure 1). Together these hubs encompass Traditional Owners’ understandings of the connections between the people and their Country across, and underpinned by, the GBR region. While there is no particular order of where to begin with the hubs, Traditional Owners’ connection to land and sea country is viewed as being primary to their heritage information. Everything else flows from the important consideration of the Country being healthy, including all other influences on Traditional Owner well-being. Forty-five factors that influence each of these six hubs were uniquely described using the worldviews of Indigenous peoples in the GBR region. For example, education is learning from Elders, training, and a passion to learn; and health includes spirituality, access to traditional medicines, and access to medical services

A atuação do Fed antes e depois do estouro da bolha imobiliária: discricionariedade e mandato de bancos centrais em contexto de desregulamentação financeira The Fed's actions before and after the housing bubble burst: discretion and mandate of central banks in an environment of financial deregulation

A atuação do Federal Reserve System - Fed - durante a formação e estouro da bolha imobiliária mostra as dificuldades de um banco central em processos financeiros de grande magnitude. O Fed foi leniente com o desenvolvimento da bolha, por considerar que a alta do preço dos imóveis ajudava a reduzir os riscos de instabilidade financeira gerados pelas crises de 2000-2002. Quando a crise do mercado subprime se tornou aguda, em setembro de 2008, o Fed atuou agressivamente como emprestador de última instância, expandindo a base monetária para conter os riscos de inadimplência generalizada no mercado interbancário. Nos dois momentos, o Fed agiu com pragmatismo e discricionariedade, contrariando as teses dominantes do "Novo Consenso", mas foi "prisioneiro" dessas teses e dos interesses do mercado financeiro: a tese de que a desregulamentação dos mercados favorece a sociedade inibiu iniciativas intervencionistas para restringir as inovações financeiras no mercado imobiliário; a tese de que o mandato da Autoridade Monetária deve ser a estabilidade de preços contribuiu para a leniência com os riscos crescentes nos mercados financeiros.<br>The Fed's actions during the development and burst of the US real estate bubble highlight a Central Bank's dilemma when facing a financial process of great magnitude. During the bubble's development and growth, the Fed was lenient since it considered that the increase in real estate prices helped reduce the risk of financial instability brought on by the financial crisis from 2000 to 2002. When the subprime crisis surfaced, the Fed started to act vigorously as a lender of last resort, with a vigorous expansion of the monetary basis in order to defend the system from the risk of a widespread default in the interbank market. In both cases the Fed was pragmatic and discretionary, and did not follow the mainstream thesis in economics analysis, the so called "New Monetary Consensus". However, at the same time, the US Central Bank is a "prisoner" of these thesis and of the financial interests that help it sustain them: the thesis that the financial market's deregulation benefits the entire society inhibited interventionist actions that would have restrained the new financial instruments in the housing market and the thesis that the main goal of the Monetary Authority should be price stability contributed to the leniency with the increasing risks in the financial markets

An update of treatment modalities in children and adolescents with teeth affected by molar incisor hypomineralisation (MIH): a systematic review

Abstract Purpose To systematically review the treatment modalities for molar-incisor hypomineralisation for children under the age of 18 years. The research question was, ‘What are the treatment options for teeth in children affected by molar incisor hypomineralisation?’ Methods An electronic search of the following electronic databases was completed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS, Google Scholar and Open Grey identifying studies from 1980 to 2020. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. The studies were screened, data extracted and calibration was completed by two independent reviewers. Results Of 6220 potential articles, 34 studies were included. Twenty studies investigated management of molars with fissure sealants, glass ionomer cement, polyacid modified resin composite, composite resin, amalgam, preformed metal crowns, laboratory-manufactured crowns and extractions. In four articles management of incisors with microabrasion, resin-infiltration and a combination of approaches was reported. Eight studies looked at strategies to mineralise MIH-affected teeth and/or reduce hypersensitivity. Two studies investigated patient-centred outcomes following treatment. Due to the heterogeneity between the studies, meta-analysis was not performed. Conclusion The use of resin-based fissure sealants, preformed metal crowns, direct composite resin restorations and laboratory-made restorations can be recommended for MIH-affected molars. There is insufficient evidence to support specific approaches for the management of affected incisors. Products containing CPP-ACP may be beneficial for MIH-affected teeth. </jats:sec