Search

I argue the instrumental, paternalistic strategic culture often adopted in Australian foreign policy circles is counter-productive, preventing Australia from having productive and sustainable relationships with Pacific states. If Australian officials want to follow through on rhetorical commitments to enhance Australia's relationships in the Pacific, Australia must actively recognise the agency Pacific states have and place itself within this community of actors. Australia often positions itself as part of the 'Pacific family,' but to be a collaborative member of this family it must go beyond headline commitments and fundamentally reconsider the evolving agency of small Pacific states and how this shapes Australia's interactions with them. We can understand this through the lens of normative communities. Revisiting constructivist International Relations theory, I reexamine who is included and excluded in the communities of actors that norms apply to. This has particularly significant implications around norms of climate change action and mitigation. Australia has historically tried to water down agreements and slow-role actions in this space. The ongoing bid to host COP31 perhaps offers an opportunity to both show leadership on climate-related issues and to reconfigure assumptions around Pacific agency and address the effects this has on Australia's relationships in the Pacific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public opinion on climate change is complex, comprising aspects such as belief, support for policies, and issue salience. This multidimensional nature of climate opinion can be accounted for by identifying "publics," each comprising people with similar climate attitudes. Climate opinion has also been found to relate strongly to political worldviews, with people holding conservative attitudes tending to have low levels of engagement with climate change. However, few studies have investigated how political worldviews relate to membership of climate publics. The current study therefore identifies climate publics in New Zealand and Australia and investigates how they relate to economic and social aspects of conservative worldviews. Using an original online survey, I find no clear link between economic conservatism and membership of climate publics. Social conservatives, however, are more likely to be members of publics with low levels of climate engagement and of "middle" publics, which accept the science of climate change but are "lukewarm" on climate action. Climate opinion appears to be more polarized in Australia than New Zealand. These results provide insight into the worldviews of people in the "mainstream" of climate opinion and suggest that only a minority of the public are demanding ambitious climate action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South eastern Australia is a global warming hotspot, and is also home to ~70% of Australia's population and one of Australia's largest fisheries—the South East Scalefish and Shark Fishery. This fishery spans shelf to deep waters, subtropical to temperate waters, employs many gears, and interacts with over 100 species. Despite following best practice fisheries management principles, including taking an ecosystem perspective to overall fisheries interactions, management interventions have failed to arrest or recover the decline of some focal species. Using an Atlantis ecosystem model developed for the fishery over the past 20 years, this paper presents simulations that suggest climate change may be a major contributor to the trajectories seen for a number of species—such as jackass morwong (Nemadactylus macropterus), blue warehou (Seriolella brama), and gemfish (Rexea solandri). This kind of climate influence poses many challenges for fisheries management into the future, raising questions about what to do when climate change undermines or overrides fisheries management actions and objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This perspective paper provides industry leaders, researchers and policy developers strategic approaches to ensure that the welfare of dairy cattle is protected at the same time as the industry increases its resilience to climate change. Farm systems and practices will evolve in response to the direct impacts of climate change and/or from responses to climate change, such as mitigation strategies to reduce dairy's greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. The five domains framework (nutrition, physical environment, health, behaviour, mental state) was used to assess the potential impacts on animal welfare and strategies to minimise these impacts are outlined. Given that the future climate cannot be certain these approaches can be applied under a range of emissions pathways to (1) ensure that the effects of GHG mitigations on animal welfare are considered during their development, (2) engage with end users and the public to ensure solutions to the effects of climate change and weather variability are accepted by consumers and communities, (3) identify and measure the areas where improved animal health can contribute to reducing GHG emissions from dairy production, (4) ensure those supporting farmers to develop and manage their farm systems understand what constitutes a good quality of life for dairy cattle, (5) ensure effective surveillance of animal disease and monitoring of welfare outcomes and farm-system performance in response to climate change and GHG mitigations. Overall, these strategies require a multidisciplinary co-development approach to ensure that the welfare of dairy cattle is protected at the same time as the industry increases its resilience to the wider impacts of a changing climate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]