Search

This article examines the results of the world's largest ever survey of international relations (IR) scholars with an eye to establishing the particularities of the discipline in Australia and New Zealand. The survey covered the areas of teaching, research, the structure of the profession and scholars' views on foreign policy. From these results, this paper compares IR in New Zealand and Australia, and discusses the extent to which the discipline in these two countries is distinctive from its overseas counterparts, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom. The particular areas of focus include the degree to which the field in Australasia conforms to or differs from US or Commonwealth identities; epistemological and gender divides; the distinctive foci of what IR scholars in both countries teach and research; which publications are favoured and disfavoured; and the contrasting linkages between academia and the world of government and policy. We conclude with some suggestions about how the field in both countries might be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper assesses the evolution of the relationship between tourism and indigenous peoples. Based on published work on indigenous tourism in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States, a six-stage model of evolution has been proposed. The model begins with (1) pre-European in situ control, characterised by high local control and indigenous theme; (2) in situ exposure occurs in the early stages of colonialism and is followed by (3) ex situ exhibitionism and exploitation as native artefacts are displayed in museums and exhibitions. The opening of remnant indigenous space to tourist visits marks (4) in situ exhibitionism and exploitation, which represents the nadir of indigenous control but fosters strategies of resistance. Reassertions of indigenous control give rise to (5) in situ quasi-empowerment, while the extension of this control to previously occupied territory characterises (6) ex situ quasi-empowerment and the presence of “shadow indigenous tourism”. The empowerment and sustainability implications of the model have also been discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The present paper aims to: (i) describe how the Mental Health Commission in New Zealand works and has contributed to the substantial enhancement of mental health resources and services; (ii) determine whether mental health reform policies will ever be implemented properly without an independent monitor with official influence at the highest levels of government; and (iii) demonstrate how variants on this model work in other Western countries and how it can be adapted to the Federated system in Australia.Conclusions: It is recommended that the Australian National Mental Health Plan 2003-2008 should be complemented by a long-standing national mental health commission (or similarly constituted body), which is also able to report independently from and to the government, with direct access to the Prime Minister, Premiers and Australian Health Ministers. Its aims would be to monitor service effectiveness and identify gaps in service provision, training and performance of the work force, management and government. It would be informed by consumer, carer and provider experience, and by reviews of evidence-based research regarding health needs and cost-effective services. It should accurately cost such service gaps, and advise government on a strategy for implementing them. It could also promote and advise formally on enhancing community awareness, decreasing stigma and discrimination and improving workforce recruitment and retention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper utilises a bilateral bargaining approach as an explanatory framework for understanding how New Zealand and Australia have conducted their trade policy towards the United States and the European Union. Though alternatives like neo realism and liberal institutionalism have some value for explaining bilateral outcomes between the strong and the weak, the bilateral bargaining approach takes us further by showing how and why the negotiation process can potentially adjust outcomes in favour of weaker states. New Zealand and Australia have sought to exploit such opportunities through the application of three important bilateral strategies: informing tactics; coalition-building; and the execution of formal agreements. Differences in their bilateral bargaining approaches are informed by reference to their commercial history and respective interests, as well as cognitive factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]