DEVELOPMENT AND FEDERAL GRAZING POLICY IMPACTS ON TWO COLORADO COUNTIES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

Ranchers have concern over how federal policies such as the Endangers Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and other laws and regulations will affect the status of their ranching operations. The objectives of this study were to compare impacts of public forage losses on ranches in areas experiencing rapid growth (Routt County) and minimal growth (Moffat County) in Colorado. Thirty-five personal interviews obtained detailed cost-and-return information on public, leased, and private land. Enterprise budgets for seven distinct ranch averages were entered into a linear programming (LP) model to calculate impacts on ranches of public forage reductions of 25%, 50%, and 100%. Changes in net ranch returns and livestock production reflect the economic impact of policy changes. Grazing alternatives to hypothetical reductions in public grazing chosen by the ranchers were applied in the program to mimic rancher decisions. The study found, as would be expected, that larger ranches with more public forage dependency would be the most affected by public forage losses. Those with fewer sources of alternative forage, and ranches with low costs and high returns, experienced more difficulty in coping with the grazing reductions on public land. Routt County, with its higher dependence on public forage and minimal alternative forage sources, would be more affected by federal forage reduction than Moffat County.Agricultural and Food Policy, Community/Rural/Urban Development, Land Economics/Use,

Providing aid and foreseeing harm

Should we be blamed for the negative consequences of otherwise wholly good acts? Tom Rowe considers the moral risks faced by aid givers

Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? public debate about transgenic crops

In the realm of risk management, and policy-making more generally, “public engagement” is often advocated as an antidote to pathologies associated with traditional methods of policy-making, and associated deficit-model-driven communication strategies. The actual benefits of public engagement are, however, difficult to establish without thorough evaluation of specific engagement processes. Unfortunately, rigorous evaluation is difficult, and, perhaps for this reason, it has rarely been undertaken. In this paper we highlight a number of these difficulties in the light of our experiences in evaluating a major engagement initiative, namely the GM Nation? publice debate on the possible commercialization of transgenic crops, which took place in Britain in 2003. The difficulties we identify seem likely to be relevant to many, if not most, engagement evaluations. They are concerned with both theoretical/normative (how one should evaluate) and practical (how one does evaluate) issues. We suggest a number of possible solutions to these evaluation difficulties

Analysis of a normative framework for evaluating public engagement exercises: reliability, validity and limitations

Over recent years, many policy-makers and academics have come to the view that involving the public in policy setting and decision-making (or “public engagement”) is desirable. The theorized benefits of engagement (over traditional approaches) include the attainment of more satisfactory and easier decisions, greater trust in decision-makers, and the enhancement of public and organizational knowledge. Empirical support for these advantages is, however, scant. Engagement processes are rarely evaluated, and when they are, the quality of evidence is generally poor. The absence of standard effectiveness criteria, and instruments to measure performance against these, hinders evaluation, comparison, generalization and the accumulation of knowledge. In this paper one normative framework for evaluating engagement processes is considered. This framework was operationalized and used as part of the evaluation of a recent major UK public engagement initiative: the 2003 GM Nation? debate. The evaluation criteria and processes are described, and their validity and limitations are analyzed. Results suggest the chosen evaluation criteria have some validity, though they do not exhaustively cover all appropriate criteria by which engagement exercises ought to be evaluated. The paper concludes with suggestions on how to improve the framework

Strategically using public housing assets could transform our middle suburbs

‘Greyfields’ in the Australian context have been defined as those ageing but occupied tracts of inner and middle ring suburbia that are physically, technologically and environmentally failing. The research sought to test the potential of an innovative design based approach to create coordinated precincts in these suburbs involving the coordinated redevelopment of multiple, non-contiguous public housing lots (rather than relying on the ‘default’ option of incremental market based development of in-fill housing and piecemeal selling off of public housing properties). Recent public housing investments (under the Social Housing Initiative) were typically planned with job creation in mind rather than innovative housing outcomes, but innovations were still apparent. Innovations were generally simple such as improvements to parking arrangements and interfaces of private dwellings with common areas and public spaces and arrangements for tenancy mix and social diversity. Innovations were often more apparent when governments partnered with Community Housing Organisations who could access alternative land and funding sources, offer design and delivery expertise and facilitate mixed tenancy outcomes. Innovation also was more likely when there was a ‘champion’ for design quality, relaxation of selected planning controls, and project alignment with existing urban renewal strategies. The Department of Human Services (Victorian Government) was found to have existing housing assets in sufficient number (more than 6500 DHS properties) in well-located areas of Melbourne’s middle suburbs that were clustered in ways broadly suitable for coordinated precinct redevelopment. Preliminary investigations suggest the same in Sydney and Brisbane. The coordinated precinct approach could offer an effective model for redeveloping dispersed public housing assets. Integrated redevelopment can achieve substantial increases in dwelling yield—design scenarios developed in this study delivered two to four times the number of dwellings when compared to business-as-usual dual occupancy outcomes. A precinct design approach is potentially more efficient because it allows for non-uniform, flexible siting of higher density buildings, effective program mixes, efficient parking arrangements and a variety of households and tenure types to be accommodated across a neighbourhood. Preliminary discussions with key stakeholders—municipal authorities, community housing organisations and local community members—showed real interest in the benefits of a coordinated precinct-based development approach. - See more at: http://www.ahuri.edu.au/publications/projects/p52012#sthash.wTtz4itu.dpu

Access to Justice in Post-RAMSI Solomon Islands Part I: Common Conflicts and Disputes

Solomon Islands’ law and justice sector has received substantial donor support in the two decades since the end of the civil unrest known as the Tensions. Building capacity and coordination across key agencies was an integral part of the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI). International development partners acknowledge the importance of access to justice for successful peacebuilding. The Australian government views its commitment to the Solomon Islands justice sector as a ‘30-year plus engagement’. Since RAMSI’s departure in June 2017, there has been considerable interest in evaluating progress and addressing ongoing challenges in this area. This is the first in a series of three In Briefs drawing on findings from the Solomon Islands Access to Justice Survey commissioned by the Solomon Islands government and supported by the Australian government and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 2019a). The findings presented in this series are from the national survey reported in the Survey Summary Report (UNDP 2019b). The survey was designed around closed-response questions with preset response options — including a free-text response — that were developed, tested and validated in Solomon Islands prior to their application. Interested readers should consult the main study reports. This In Brief examines the types of disputes commonly reported, who experienced them and their impacts. The following In Briefs in this series examine perceptions of access to justice and pathways to dispute resolution.Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trad

Access to Justice in Post-RAMSI Solomon Islands Part 2: Perceptions of Access to Justice

This is the second part in a series of three In Briefs highlighting findings from the Solomon Islands Access to Justice Survey commissioned by the Solomon Islands government and supported by the Australian government and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 2019a). The findings are drawn from the Survey Summary Report (UNDP 2019b). The survey assessed justice needs and barriers to effective dispute resolution, particularly among groups recognised as having unmet justice needs, including women and people with disabilities. This In Brief highlights key survey findings concerning perceptions of access to justice. Interested readers should consult the main study reports.Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trad