In Australia, e-government is continuously re-defining service boundaries. While this may be good in the case of transactional interactions, for example the online submission of tax returns, it is less clear that interpersonal services, such as working closely with the long-term unemployed, are best delivered digitally. We consider the impact of social services digitisation on vulnerable communities drawing on an analysis of remote Aboriginal communities. Digital uptake affords great opportunities, but it also carries risks. Some communities have no digital infrastructure and in certain cases traditional face-to-face services have been curtailed, leaving those not online with reduced assistance. We find that concerns about the 'digital divide' are well founded. Problems generated by e-government flow across boundaries and appear left to the third sector to resolve with the state playing an even more diminished role in the lives of disadvantaged citizens.
Lying behind the recent Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 is the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters which has sparked international and national attention. The 2015 Act deals with many facets of counter terrorism legislation, but its two principal measures are singled out for analysis and critique in this paper. Thus, Part I of the Act seeks to interdict foreign terrorist fighters by preventing suspects from travelling and dealing decisively with those already in the UK who pose a risk. Part V of the Act implements the second, broader aspect, of legislative policy, reflecting the UN emphasis on 'Countering Violent Extremism', through the statutory elaboration and enforcement of the 'Prevent' element of the long-established Countering International Terrorism strategy, which aims to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting violent extremism. These measures are explained in their policy contexts and set against criteria of effectiveness, personal freedom, and accountability.
This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer via the DOI in this record ; The Experimental Lakes Area in Northwestern Ontario, Canada, is a globally prominent freshwater research facility, conducting impactful whole-of-lake experiments on so-called 'pristine' lakes and watersheds. These lakes are located in traditional Anishinaabe (Indigenous) territory and the home of 28 Treaty #3 Nations, something rarely acknowledged until now. Indeed, Indigenous peoples in the area have historically been excluded from the research facility's governance and research. Shortly after it changed hands in 2014—from the federal government to the not-for-profit International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD)—the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of Canada released its Calls to Action to all Canadians. The newly named International Institute of Sustainable Development-Experimental Lakes Area (IISD-ELA) began to respond with a number of initiatives aimed to develop relationships with local Indigenous peoples and communities. In this paper, from the perspectives of IISD-ELA staff members, we share findings from an exploratory study into the relationships beginning to develop between IISD-ELA and Treaty #3 Nations. We used semi-structured interviews (n = 10) to identify how staff perceived their initial efforts and contextualize those with the current literature on meaningfully engagement in reconciliation. Our analysis highlights perceived barriers, including time, resources, and funding constraints, as well as an acknowledged lack of cultural awareness and sensitivity training. Participants also recognized the need to engage Indigenous knowledge holders and embrace their ways of knowing at the research station. While the study is small in scale, as an international leader in freshwater science, transparency in the IISD-ELA's journey in reconciliation has the potential to inform, influence, and 'unsettle' settler-colonial scientists, field stations, and institutions across the country and beyond. ; Canada Research Chairs Program
In: Ecotoxicology and environmental safety: EES ; official journal of the International Society of Ecotoxicology and Environmental safety, Band 60, Heft 3, S. 295-300