Suchergebnisse

AbstractDespite Australia's increasing economic ties with Asia, little is known about how it is perceived by the typical citizen in the region. This paper seeks to contribute to the Australian discussion on 'Asian engagement', as well as to a general understanding of the structure of foreign policy beliefs, by examining perceptions of Australia's influence among the mass publics of 14 Asian polities. Despite some anxiety in Australia on national op-ed pages and among political leaders over how the country is perceived, we find that the average person in Asia probably does not have a strong or meaningful opinion about Australia's foreign policy. Using survey data covering the years 2006 through 2008 from the AsiaBarometer project, we find that, on average, far more people view Australia's influence on their country favorably (40.5%) than view it unfavorably (6.1%). A similar percentage (41.5%), however, have neutral views of Australia's influence, and 12% of people in Asian nations express no opinion on the topic. We suggest these high frequencies of neutral perceptions and non-response are evidence of considerable indifference towards Australia. Furthermore, we investigate the correlates of perceptions of Australia's influence and find that in almost all cases citizens' views about US and Chinese influence on their country are much better predictors of their views of Australia's influence than core values, identity, information, and demographic characteristics. We posit that opinions about Australia, even those that are favorable, may have less to do with perceptions of Australia specifically, and more to do with respondents' general internationalist sentiment or perceptions of major powers.

The most disturbing aspect of the debate is the impact it is having on Chinese Australians who want to successfully integrate into Australian society.

Notes on America's influence on Australian politics used as the basis for a talk given at the Gaelic Club in Sydney on 22 October 2004 exhibit mixed feelings about whether America's increasing influence on Australian politics should be lessened. Matters considered include the long relationship between Australia & the US; the historical importance of the US to Australian trade/enterprise; Australia's desperation to form close defense links with America in the early 20th century; & the American view of Australia as a "social laboratory" during President Theodore Roosevelt's administration. Attention is also given to Australia's historical fear of Asia; the inadequacy of Australia's return for a treaty with Japan; the disastrous Free Trade Treaty; Australia's failure to become an important broker in the world; domination of Australia's political culture by American technology; & the resilience of capitalism. Audience questions following the talk indicated an understanding of the many nuances in the America-Australian relationship as well as a fear that Australian political parties are being stolen by American media capitalists. J. Lindroth

AbstractLimited or incomplete achievement of societal aspirations, such as the realisation of sustainable development, can lead to distrust in government and the public sector. This paper takes an empirical approach to uncover (1) what factors influence public decision‐makers, (2) if such factors apply equally irrespective of the decision, and (3) which are most important. Thirty‐five interviews of public servants within the subnational State of Victoria, Australia, yield 40 common influences upon decision‐makers. Collectively, these influences result in an unmanageably complex operating environment. Statistical and network mapping analyses further demonstrate decision context and decision‐maker self‐efficacy impact influence importance.Points for practitioners
Forty different influences make the public sector operating environment incredibly complex; they explain why public outcomes can deviate from stated objectives.
These influences vary in impact (barriers, enablers), scale, and importance, pending the decision context and the self‐efficacy of the decision‐makers involved.
While distinct factors, the 40 influences often operate in concert, with some masking others; decision‐makers themselves may not recognise the most important factors upon their work without deep reflection.
Far from being at the mercy of the influences, decision‐makers can shape public outcomes by recognising the influences on their decisions and seeking to engage them as enablers of optimal decisions.
Applying systems thinking may enable widespread public decision‐making improvements, through the identification of high‐value leverage points.