In much of Australia and the United States, the almost universal right to have a house on rural allotments has resulted in rural living settlement in areas intended, by land use planning policy, to be used for agriculture. Such ‘unplanned’ rural living has a range of potential adverse impacts, including, among other things, loss of agricultural production, land use conflicts with agriculture, land value constraints on farm restructuring, and changes to the rural landscape character. Given the strongly held community perception of a house as a development right, this research was motivated by the need to understand the effects of that right, in order to assess the potential value of any change in policy. An integral consideration was the influence of the size of allotments with any such right. The research was also driven by an interest in explaining the pattern of unplanned rural living settlement, i.e. why are particular allotments converted and others not? Largely in the absence of previous studies of unplanned rural living as a distinct phenomenon, there was scope for this thesis to make a contribution to knowledge in these respects. The research involved three stages of empirical analysis. Firstly, a Queensland-wide survey of land use conversion from sugarcane production supported the choice of the Bundaberg region as the study area. Contingency table analyses were then conducted into the current land use and other attributes of land in the study area that, in 1980, was used for sugarcane. Those analyses identified distinguishing attributes of the different land use sub-sets of allotments, and informed the selection of observation units for the third stage. The third stage provided the principal basis for fulfilling the research objectives. It focused on logit models of the choice, at the time of sale, between using a particular allotment for unplanned rural living or sugarcane production. Those analyses provided an indication of the role of individual land attributes while controlling for the effects of other attributes. It was found there had been limited conversion of suitable, productive sugarcane land to unplanned rural living. Compared to those allotments that remained in sugarcane production, allotments converted to rural living were, on average, much smaller, of less value, had lower agricultural production potential, and were situated in more undulating and forested landscapes further from Bundaberg. These clear distinctions between rural living and sugarcane allotments contributed to logit models with high explanatory power. The expected productive income of allotments had overwhelming weight and was highly statistically significant in explaining the land use choice between unplanned rural living and sugarcane. This is a notable finding, because some other studies have not shown such a strong relationship between land use and measures such as soil productivity. There was a degree of natural coincidence between more undulating and forested landscapes and lower productive potential. Notably, landscape attributes appeared to be of secondary importance in determining land use. The presence of a house at the time of sale was not a statistically significant explanatory factor for land use. This finding, together with that of limited conversion of suitable, productive land to unplanned rural living, meant there was a lack of evidence to support a change to the right to have a house on rural allotments. The findings did indicate that the allotment area required to avoid conversion to unplanned rural living was different to the area required for agricultural viability. In the circumstances of this study area and period, 20 ha would have been an acceptable minimum to retain suitable cropping land in productive use. This is compared to the 60 ha suggested as necessary for farm viability. However, the potential for changed economic conditions to reduce the productive value of agricultural land, and increase demand for rural living, makes it appropriate to be cautious about permitted allotment sizes. A detailed conceptual framework informed the selection of observation units and variables for the third stage of analyses. The framework helped to confirm allotment sales as the observation units, and provided the rationale for excluding the difficult to measure influences of a landowner’s attachment to the land, and inertia, as explanatory variables. The high explanatory power of the logit models provides support for the approach, which may be useful in future studies.

No description available.

In much of Australia and the United States, the almost universal right to have a house on rural allotments has resulted in rural living settlement in areas intended, by land use planning policy, to be used for agriculture. Such ‘unplanned’ rural living has a range of potential adverse impacts, including, among other things, loss of agricultural production, land use conflicts with agriculture, land value constraints on farm restructuring, and changes to the rural landscape character. Given the strongly held community perception of a house as a development right, this research was motivated by the need to understand the effects of that right, in order to assess the potential value of any change in policy. An integral consideration was the influence of the size of allotments with any such right. The research was also driven by an interest in explaining the pattern of unplanned rural living settlement, i.e. why are particular allotments converted and others not? Largely in the absence of previous studies of unplanned rural living as a distinct phenomenon, there was scope for this thesis to make a contribution to knowledge in these respects. The research involved three stages of empirical analysis. Firstly, a Queensland-wide survey of land use conversion from sugarcane production supported the choice of the Bundaberg region as the study area. Contingency table analyses were then conducted into the current land use and other attributes of land in the study area that, in 1980, was used for sugarcane. Those analyses identified distinguishing attributes of the different land use sub-sets of allotments, and informed the selection of observation units for the third stage. The third stage provided the principal basis for fulfilling the research objectives. It focused on logit models of the choice, at the time of sale, between using a particular allotment for unplanned rural living or sugarcane production. Those analyses provided an indication of the role of individual land attributes while controlling for the effects of other attributes. It was found there had been limited conversion of suitable, productive sugarcane land to unplanned rural living. Compared to those allotments that remained in sugarcane production, allotments converted to rural living were, on average, much smaller, of less value, had lower agricultural production potential, and were situated in more undulating and forested landscapes further from Bundaberg. These clear distinctions between rural living and sugarcane allotments contributed to logit models with high explanatory power. The expected productive income of allotments had overwhelming weight and was highly statistically significant in explaining the land use choice between unplanned rural living and sugarcane. This is a notable finding, because some other studies have not shown such a strong relationship between land use and measures such as soil productivity. There was a degree of natural coincidence between more undulating and forested landscapes and lower productive potential. Notably, landscape attributes appeared to be of secondary importance in determining land use. The presence of a house at the time of sale was not a statistically significant explanatory factor for land use. This finding, together with that of limited conversion of suitable, productive land to unplanned rural living, meant there was a lack of evidence to support a change to the right to have a house on rural allotments. The findings did indicate that the allotment area required to avoid conversion to unplanned rural living was different to the area required for agricultural viability. In the circumstances of this study area and period, 20 ha would have been an acceptable minimum to retain suitable cropping land in productive use. This is compared to the 60 ha suggested as necessary for farm viability. However, the potential for changed economic conditions to reduce the productive value of agricultural land, and increase demand for rural living, makes it appropriate to be cautious about permitted allotment sizes. A detailed conceptual framework informed the selection of observation units and variables for the third stage of analyses. The framework helped to confirm allotment sales as the observation units, and provided the rationale for excluding the difficult to measure influences of a landowner’s attachment to the land, and inertia, as explanatory variables. The high explanatory power of the logit models provides support for the approach, which may be useful in future studies.

Indigenous Australians make up a mere 2.4% of the population of whom around a quarter live in remote and very remote parts of Australia. The poor state of Indigenous housing in remote areas is generally acknowledged as one of Australia’s most intractable housing problems. The thesis examines why the remote Indigenous housing system does not meet the housing needs of Indigenous people in remote areas and discusses an alternative system. The aim of the thesis is to understand why the remote Indigenous housing system is not meeting people’s needs, despite policy statements that emphasise empowerment and partnerships. This understanding of the current remote Indigenous housing system involved placing it in historical, policy and international contexts and examining the current attempts to rationalise and streamline the system. The service-delivery concepts of supply-driven (externally prescribed) and demand-responsive (community determined) are applied to remote Indigenous housing. The characteristics of successful remote Indigenous housing, namely Indigenous control and self-determination, an enabling environment and a culturally responsive system, are developed and found to be characteristic of a demand-responsive system. The research hypothesises that the remote Indigenous housing system’s supply-driven focus is largely responsible for the housing needs of Indigenous people in remote areas not being met. This was tested using the new methodology of a Systems Social Assessment which is developed by combining Social Assessment and Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology. This methodology illustrated that the current remote Indigenous housing system has a supply-driven focus where the housing ‘solutions’ are controlled and largely provided from an external source, in this case the Commonwealth and State governments and their agents. The thesis discusses an alternative demand-responsive focus where remote communities have more control over the nature and delivery of their housing that may prove more successful.

Lic.-avh. (sammanfattning) Uppsala : Sveriges lantbruksuniv., 2007. / Härtill 2 uppsatser.

Diss. (sammanfattning) Uppsala : Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, 2005. / Härtill 4 uppsatser.

Lic.-avh. (sammanfattning) Stockholm : Kungliga Tekniska högskolan., 2007. / Härtill 2 uppsatser.

Biodiversity offsetting mechanisms are increasingly applied worldwide as a new solution to the current biodiversity crisis. The offsetting approach is idealised as a means to achieve no net loss of biodiversity. Offsetting mechanisms aim to quantify residual biodiversity losses and enable developers to account for residual impacts off-site. Despite rising global application, the effectiveness of offsetting is by no means assured. The question of whether and how offsetting can be operationalised to achieve no net loss has become a key focal point in debates surrounding their effectiveness. Environmental Impact Assessment, or EIA, has been portrayed as an obvious 'vehicle' for integrating offsetting into existing corporate management systems and planning systems, and therefore a key factor over how offsetting mechanisms operate. This research critically investigated the nature of integration and interactions between EIA and offsetting using a three phase qualitative research design, which brought together analysis of emerging policy, expert interviews and in-depth case studies.

No description available.

There is an increasing number of international migrants worldwide and in Canada. The majority of migrants arrive with a health status higher than the average of their host country. This advantage is often lost within ten years of migration due to various reasons, most notably through the social determinants of health. These determinants are the conditions in which individuals live and work and the most relevant to migrant health include racialization, education, employment, housing, social capital, and gender. Health impact assessment (HIA) is a process with the capacity to address changes in health due to the social determinants of health by assessing the intended and unintended impacts on health that a policy, program, or project might have and recommend ways to promote positive and mitigate negative impacts. For this reason, HIA has the potential to address the observed decrease in health experienced by migrants. Various frameworks have been developed to guide the undertaking of HIA including frameworks explicitly aiming at addressing health inequities by considering particular socially disadvantaged population groups. One such example is the Health Equity Impact Assessment (HEIA) tool developed by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Although there have been a few studies addressing the inclusion of inequities in HIA in general, there has been no previous assessment of the inclusion of migrants in HIA. This doctoral thesis sought to assess the degree and way in which migrants are included in HIAs globally and across various types of HIAs and contexts. It also sought to assess the degree to which migrants were considered in local initiatives through an examination of the implementation of the Ontario HEIA tool in public health units. A scoping review of the international literature including 117 HIAs and two HIA evaluations found that only 14% of hand-searched HIAs mentioned migrants, 5% analysed migrants and only 2% included them in their recommendations. Although migrant groups were sometimes included in the process, this was seldom the case for citizens. The main reported barriers to considering migrants were a lack of available data and the significant additional resources needed. In order to undertake an evaluation throughout the province, it was first necessary to assess the way in which the Ontario HEIA had been implemented and used by public health units across the province. The scan found that nearly half of public health units had used the HEIA tool either in its original form or modified to the needs of the unit. The use of the tool was found to be influenced by the following factors: the available inputs or resources, the nature of the HIA tool, the actors and stakeholders involved, the decision-making processes within the unit or team involved, the context of the social, economic, and political environments, the nature of the project, program, or policy being assessed, and lastly, the various outputs of completing the HEIA process. Lastly, a Process and Impact evaluation assessed the way in which PHUs with a high proportion of migrants considered these migrants in their HEIAs. This study found that although migrants had been included in HEIAs, this tended to be done when the impact on migrants was anticipated. Additionally, there remains an incoherent terminology accompanied by a confounding of the concepts of migration, racialization, and ethnicity, which are reflected in the type of recommendations developed. These recommendations often focused on translation of documents into various languages and the acquiring of greater information through community partnerships. The process and capacity to include migrants in HEIAs were influenced by the availability of resources and evidence, the prioritisation of recommendations relating to migrants, and the overall impressions the staff had on the HEIA process. Nonetheless, the HEIA process was beneficial in that it strengthened relationships with migrant community organisations. This thesis work also resulted in the development of a HIA-specific theoretical framework based on the literature and empirical findings of this work. This framework is conducive to adopting a tactical approach to HIA by considering the various contextual factors influencing the completion of an HIA and implementation of its recommendations. In conclusion, although migrants are understood to be an important group often facing circumstances of disadvantage, they are only sometimes considered in HIAs. Several procedural and contextual barriers are encountered which influence their consideration. Significant guidance is still required to facilitate their adequate consideration and ensure the development of optimal recommendations. HIA frameworks should explicitly mention migrants as a potentially disadvantaged group and guidance documents could be developed to address the current gaps in understanding migrant issues.