Towards Sustainable Environmental Quality : Priority Research Questions for the Australasian Region of Oceania

Environmental challenges persist across the world, including the Australasian region of Oceania, where biodiversity hotspots and unique ecosystems such as the Great Barrier Reef are common. These systems are routinely affected by multiple stressors from anthropogenic activities, and increasingly influenced by global megatrends (e.g., the food-energy-water nexus, demographic transitions to cities) and climate change. Here we report priority research questions from the Global Horizon Scanning Project, which aimed to identify, prioritize, and advance environmental quality research needs from an Australasian perspective, within a global context. We employed a transparent and inclusive process of soliciting key questions from Australasian members of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Following submission of 78 questions, 20 priority research questions were identified during an expert workshop in Nelson, New Zealand. These research questions covered a range of issues of global relevance, including research needed to more closely integrate ecotoxicology and ecology for the protection of ecosystems, increase flexibility for prioritizing chemical substances currently in commerce, understand the impacts of complex mixtures and multiple stressors, and define environmental quality and ecosystem integrity of temporary waters. Some questions have specific relevance to Australasia, particularly the uncertainties associated with using toxicity data from exotic species to protect unique indigenous species. Several related priority questions deal with the theme of how widely international ecotoxicological data and databases can be applied to regional ecosystems. Other timely questions, which focus on improving predictive chemistry and toxicology tools and techniques, will be important to answer several of the priority questions identified here. Another important question raised was how to protect local cultural and social values and maintain indigenous engagement during problem formulation and identification of ecosystem protection goals. Addressing these questions will be challenging, but doing so promises to advance environmental sustainability in Oceania and globally

Connecting practice: a practitioner centred model of supervision

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to analyse existing clinical supervision frameworks to develop a supervision meta-model. Design/methodology/approach: This research involved a thematic analysis of existing supervision frameworks used to support allied health practitioners working in rural or remote settings in Australia to identify key domains of supervision which could form the basis of supervision framework in this context. A three-tiered sampling approach of the selection of supervision frameworks ensured the direct relevance of the final domains identified to Australian rural allied health practitioners, allied health practitioners generally and to the wider area of health supervision. Thematic analysis was undertaken by Framework analysis methodology using Mindmapping software. The results were organised into a new conceptual model which places the practitioner at the centre of supervision. Findings: The review included 17 supervision frameworks, encompassing 13 domains of supervision: definitions; purpose and function; supervision models; contexts; content; Modes of engagement; Supervisor attributes; supervisory relationships; supervisor responsibilities; supervisee responsibilities; structures/process for supervision and support; facilitators and barriers; outcomes. The authors developed a reflective, supervision and support framework “Connecting Practice” that is practitioner centred, recognises the tacit and explicit knowledge that staff bring to the relationship, and enables them to identify their own goals and support networks within the context in which they work. Research limitations/implications: This is a thematic analysis of the literature which was argely based on an analysis of grey literature. Social implications: The resulting core domains of supervision provide an evidence-based foundation for the development of clinical supervision models which can be adapted to a range of contexts. Originality/value: Connecting Practice replaces traditional, more hierarchical models of supervision to put the practitioner at the centre of a personalised supervision and support network. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse existing clinical supervision frameworks to develop a supervision meta-model. Design/methodology/approach – This research involved a thematic analysis of existing supervision frameworks used to support allied health practitioners working in rural or remote settings in Australia to identify key domains of supervision which could form the basis of supervision framework in this context. A three-tiered sampling approach of the selection of supervision frameworks ensured the direct relevance of the final domains identified to Australian rural allied health practitioners, allied health practitioners generally and to the wider area of health supervision. Thematic analysis was undertaken by Framework analysis methodology using Mindmapping software. The results were organised into a new conceptual model which places the practitioner at the centre of supervision. Findings – The review included 17 supervision frameworks, encompassing 13 domains of supervision: definitions; purpose and function; supervision models; contexts; content; Modes of engagement; Supervisor attributes; supervisory relationships; supervisor responsibilities; supervisee responsibilities; structures/process for supervision and support; facilitators and barriers; outcomes. The authors developed a reflective, supervision and support framework “Connecting Practice” that is practitioner centred, recognises the tacit and explicit knowledge that staff bring to the relationship, and enables them to identify their own goals and support networks within the context in which they work. Research limitations/implications – This is a thematic analysis of the literature which was argely based on an analysis of grey literature. Practical implications – The resulting core domains of supervision provide an evidence-based foundation for the development of clinical supervision models which can be adapted to a range of contexts. Social implications – An outcome of this paper is a framework called Connecting Practice which organises the domains of supervision in a temporal way, separating those domains that can be modified to improve the supervision framework, from those which are less easily modifiable. This approach is important to help embed the implementation of supervision and support into organisational practice. This paper adds to the existing growing body of work around supervision by helping understand the domains or components that make up the supervisory experience. Originality/value – Connecting Practice replaces traditional, more hierarchical models of supervision to put the practitioner at the centre of a personalised supervision and support network

Culture and self: are there within-culture differences in self between metropolitan areas and regional cities?

Although differences in self-conception across cultures have been well researched, regional differences within a culture have escaped attention. The present study examined individual, relational, and collective selves, which capture people's conceptions of themselves in-relation to their goals, significant others, and ingroups, comparing Australians and Japanese participants living in regional cities and metropolitan areas. Culture, gender, and urbanism were found to be related to individual, relational, and collective selves, respectively. Australians emphasized individual self more than Japanese, women stressed relational self more than men, and residents in regional cities regarded collective self as more important than their counterparts in metropolitan areas. These findings provide support for the tripartite division of the self and suggest a need to construct a culture theory that links self and societal processes

Connecting practice: A practitioner centred model of supervision

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse existing clinical supervision frameworks to develop a supervision meta-model. Design/methodology/approach - This research involved a thematic analysis of existing supervision frameworks used to support allied health practitioners working in rural or remote settings in Australia to identify key domains of supervision which could form the basis of supervision framework in this context. A three-tiered sampling approach of the selection of supervision frameworks ensured the direct relevance of the final domains identified to Australian rural allied health practitioners, allied health practitioners generally and to the wider area of health supervision. Thematic analysis was undertaken by Framework analysis methodology using Mindmapping software. The results were organised into a new conceptual model which places the practitioner at the centre of supervision. Findings - The review included 17 supervision frameworks, encompassing 13 domains of supervision: definitions; purpose and function; supervision models; contexts; content; Modes of engagement; Supervisor attributes; supervisory relationships; supervisor responsibilities; supervisee responsibilities; structures/process for supervision and support; facilitators and barriers; outcomes. The authors developed a reflective, supervision and support framework Connecting Practice that is practitioner centred, recognises the tacit and explicit knowledge that staff bring to the relationship, and enables them to identify their own goals and support networks within the context in which they work. Research limitations/implications - This is a thematic analysis of the literature which was argely based on an analysis of grey literature. Practical implications - The resulting core domains of supervision provide an evidence-based foundation for the development of clinical supervision models which can be adapted to a range of contexts. Social implications - An outcome of this paper is a framework called Connecting Practice which organises the domains of supervision in a temporal way, separating those domains that can be modified to improve the supervision framework, from those which are less easily modifiable. This approach is important to help embed the implementation of supervision and support into organisational practice. This paper adds to the existing growing body of work around supervision by helping understand the domains or components that make up the supervisory experience. Originality/value - Connecting Practice replaces traditional, more hierarchical models of supervision to put the practitioner at the centre of a personalised supervision and support network

Supervision, support and mentoring interventions for health practitioners in rural and remote contexts: an integrative review and thematic synthesis of the literature to identify mechanisms for successful outcomes

Objective: To identify mechanisms for the successful implementation of support strategies for health-care practitioners in rural and remote contexts. Design: This is an integrative review and thematic synthesis of the empirical literature that examines support interventions for health-care practitioners in rural and remote contexts. Results: This review includes 43 papers that evaluated support strategies for the rural and remote health workforce. Interventions were predominantly training and education programmes with limited evaluations of supervision and mentoring interventions. The mechanisms associated with successful outcomes included: access to appropriate and adequate training, skills and knowledge for the support intervention; accessible and adequate resources; active involvement of stakeholders in programme design, implementation and evaluation; a needs analysis prior to the intervention; external support, organisation, facilitation and/or coordination of the programme; marketing of the programme; organisational commitment; appropriate mode of delivery; leadership; and regular feedback and evaluation of the programme. Conclusion: Through a synthesis of the literature, this research has identified a number of mechanisms that are associated with successful support interventions for health-care practitioners in rural and remote contexts. This research utilised a methodology developed for studying complex interventions in response to the perceived limitations of traditional systematic reviews. This synthesis of the evidence will provide decision-makers at all levels with a collection of mechanisms that can assist the development and implementation of support strategies for staff in rural and remote contexts