Search

The global trend in offsetting for no‐net‐loss (NNL) is increasing, focusing on protecting high‐condition habitats and restoring degraded ones. Australia's New South Wales (NSW) Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS) promotes active restoration (AR; reconstruction of missing ecosystem properties, AR) on offset sites. We examined (1) the adoption of AR under the BOS, and (2) practical constraints and attitudes toward AR. Records of management actions on 138 proposed offset sites revealed that AR was proposed for 19.3% (12,180 ha) of the total offset area (67,310 ha). For areas with a low‐moderate condition score (26,528 ha), AR was proposed for only 27.3% (7248 ha), despite these being the areas where it would be most likely to be necessary. A survey of 111 individuals involved in offsetting policy and restoration revealed that while 76% agreed AR was necessary for NNL, financial constraints were seen as a major barrier. A structural equation model indicated that positive attitudes toward AR rules and AR as a social imperative were strongly linked to agreement on the necessity of AR for NNL outcomes. Our results indicate that attitudes could influence the adoption of AR on offset sites, even in cases where policies are explicitly designed to provide financial incentives for AR, as exemplified in the context of NSW. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article responds to the drive for research partnerships between academics and practitioners, arguing that while potential benefits are clear, these are frequently not actualized resulting in partnerships that are ineffectual or worse, exacerbate damaging or inequitable assumptions and practices. In order to understand/improve partnerships, a systematic analysis of the interrelationship between what counts as evidence and dynamics of participation is proposed. Drawing on data from a seminar series and iterative analysis of seven case studies of partnerships between Higher Education Institutions and International Non‐Governmental Organisations, the article concludes by suggesting substantial shifts in the theory and practice of partnerships. © 2019 The Authors Journal of International Development Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With renewed investment of the UK's official development assistance (ODA) commitment into research, there is a need to rethink traditional understandings of 'research impact'. In this article, we argue that impact in ODA-funded research should go beyond translating research findings into practice and policy or implementing research in partnership with research mediators/users. Instead, development agendas of those living and working in the global South, including academics and practitioners, and those working in international non-governmental organisations should influence the research agendas, approaches, and schemes that allocate funding. These stakeholders have profound knowledge of what real-world impact looks like, the types of impact needed, local and national realities, and how complex processes of development impact unfold. Drawing on a programme of research conducted by the Rethinking Research Collaborative, we examine eight principles for 'fair and equitable research partnerships' using insights from our individual experiences to offer new thinking on ODA-funded research impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Anantanand Rambachan, a Hindu theologian speaking in a Christian ceremony, and words anew as pertaining not only to marriage but also to relationships between people across religious traditions. It mentions Hindu theologian who offers his tradition's wisdom to a Christian couple enfleshes a possibility that we cannot help but hear in Rambachan's words. It also mentions commitment to multiple understandings of divinity and collective interreligious friendship.

There has been widespread concern over the lack of preparedness of students making the transition from school to university mathematics and the changing profile of entrants to mathematical subjects in higher education has been well documented. In this paper, using documentary analysis and data from an informal case study, we locate the antecedents of this changed profile in the general shift across all subjects to a more utilitarian higher education, alongside the more specific changes in A-level mathematics provision which have been largely market driven. Our conclusions suggest that, ironically, changes put in place to make mathematics more widely useful may result in it losing just those features that make it marketable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]