This thesis interrogates the relationship of archaeological models and indigenous understandings of origins in the East Kimberley region of Northern Australia and the Aru Islands of Eastern Indonesia. Archaeological models of prehistoric migration construct these places as part of the same landmass in the recent human period and at times of lower sea levels. Yet, the indigenous groups who currently inhabit these places assert and rely upon their localised understandings of autochthony and mythological creationism. The existence of these competing models has led me to examine the degree to which the practice of archaeology in these locations constructs human prehistory in a way that necessarily disempowers the indigenous cosmology there. Below I examine the construction and content of these different stories about the same place to show how it is that they are essentially competing, conflicting and contradictory claims to truth. I show how each of these asserted cosmological positions emerge from the various cultural systems that sponsor and perpetuate them and I pay special attention to the role of institutionally authorised experts within each of the cosmological positions described. I also seek to demonstrate the ways in which the distribution of expert knowledge plays a core role in a naturalised social order and the ongoing construction of cultural identity in their respective communities. I then interrogate the relationships that these differing forms of knowledge have with each other - paying close attention to the specifics of context in which they are evoked. I conclude that the examination of how these competing claims to truth are distributed in space reveals their influence in the ongoing construction of identity in their respective communities.

Dissertazione--Facultà di scienze sociali--Pontificia università Gregoriana, 2007.

För att få lov att vara medlem i Sveriges kommunikationsbyråer är det ett krav att bli ARU-certifierad. Ansvarig reklamutgivare (ARU) är en certifiering som bland annat innebär en utbildning inom svensk marknadsföringsjuridik och en kvalitetsstämpel. De personer som gått ARU-utbildningen känner till de lagar och etiska riktlinjer som styr Sveriges marknadskommunikationer och får den rätta kompetensen för att fatta juridiska beslut i det dagliga arbetet på en reklambyrå. I Malmö finns det cirka 50-70 reklambyråer som arbetar med reklam på ett professionellt sätt. Ändå är det endast tio av dem som är ARU-certifierade.Frågeställningarna som ligger till grund för arbetet är: på vilket sätt kan ARU-certifieringen gynna en reklambyrå i Malmö? Varför är inte fler reklambyråer ARU-certifierade i Malmö? Huvudsyftet med arbetet var att undersöka varför det är endast tio reklambyråer som är ARU-certifierade i Malmö och undersöka om det är bättre att ha ett ARU-certifikat.För att besvara frågeställningarna har en kvalitativ metod genomförts. Genom att intervjua nyckelpersoner från fem olika reklambyråer i Malmö samt två mindre intervjuer från Reklamombudsmannen respektive Sveriges Kommunikationsbyråer har en slutsats kunnat dras. Reklambyråerna valdes ut på grund av dess verksamhetsstorlek så att de skulle vara så lika som möjligt. Det gjordes tre intervjuer med reklambyråer som idag har ett ARU-certifikat samt två intervjuer med reklambyråer som inte är ARU-certifierade. Reklambyråerna som intervjuades har valts av författaren att göras anonyma genom hela arbetet.Arbetet visar att ARU-certifikatet inte är välkänt inom branschen, en del av respondenterna tror till och med att det är ett utdöende koncept. ARU-certifikatet är inte ett kundkrav men resultatet visar att reklambranschen är i ett föränderligt skede och kunder börjar ställa högre krav. Därför finns det flera fördelar med att ha ett ARU-certifikat som kan gynna reklambyråns verksamhet på olika sätt. I och med att ARU-certifikatet ger ett intyg på professionalitet och kompetens kan det bidra till kundnöjdhet och kundlojalitet. Det stora problemet med ARU-certifikatet är att det inte är tillräckligt kommunicerat för både kunder och potentiella medlemmar. / To be a member of Sveriges Kommunikationsbyråer is it a requirement to be ARU-certified. Responsible advertising publisher (ARU) is a certification, which includes an education in Swedish marketing law and a quality assurance. The people who have completed the training know the laws and ethical guidelines that decide the Swedish marketing communication. In Malmö there are 50-70 advertising agencies that works with advertising in a professional way, but only ten are ARU-certified.The thesis is based on the following questions: how can ARU-certification benefit an advertising agency in Malmö? Why are not more advertising agencies ARU-certified in Malmö? The main purpose of the thesis was to examine why it is only ten advertising agencies that are ARU-certified in Malmö and examine if it is better to have an ARU-certification or not in Malmö.To answer the questions a qualitative method has been done. By interviewing key individuals from five different advertising agencies in Malmö and two smaller interviews with Reklamombudsmannen and Sveriges Kommunikationsbyråer, a conclusion could be made. The advertising agencies were selected of its business size so that they would be as equal as possible. There were three interviews with certified agency’s, and two interviews with agencies that were not ARU-certified. The interviewed advertising agencies are anonymous throughout the study.The study shows that the ARU-certificate is not well known in the industry, some of the interviewees even think that it is a dying concept. ARU-certificate is not a requirement of the customer, but the result shows that the advertising industry is in a time of change and customers are beginning to be more demanding. Therefore, there are several advantages of having an ARU-certificate that can benefit the advertising agency in different ways. Because the ARU-certificate provides a certificate of professionalism and expertise, it can contribute to customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. The biggest issue with the ARU-certificate is that it has not got enough attention to both customers and potential members.

This research investigated several aspects of passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) which were previously unexplored or understudied. A comparison of autonomous recording units (ARUs) for use with BirdNET for the purpose of bird monitoring was conducted. Four ARUs were compared, including AudioMoth, SM4, SMMicro, and SwiftOne. We found that, of the performance metrics for which ARU choice made a statistically significant difference (P>0.01), which included sensitivity, specificity, F1 harmonic mean, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient, (but not precision: P = 0.94), AudioMoth had the best performance for all statistically significant performance metrics except for specificity, for which SMMicro had the highest. The same audio was then processed using 18 combinations of Overlap and Sensitivity, including default settings. We found that Overlap and Sensitivity values were highly significant (P>0.001) for all performance metrics: precision, sensitivity, specificity, F1 harmonic mean, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient. No individual Overlap-Sensitivity setting combination performed outperformed others in most of the performance metrics; however, in general, as Overlap or Sensitivity increased, the number of true and false positive species reports increased while the number of false negatives decreased. Four confidence-based threshold types were then used to filter BirdNET output to compare threshold performances, comparing two arbitrary thresholds and two species-specific thresholds which were calculated using manual validation data. Of the thresholds tested, one of the arbitrary threshold types and one of the species-specific threshold types achieved a precision ≥ 0.95. We hope this research will help guide PAM decisions regarding ARU choice, BirdNET settings, and threshold type choice.

No description available.