Australia and China to contribute $9 million for science projects.
http://bit.ly/iqihKn
Australia and China commit to joint science fund
Reply
Author Archives: Susan Kirk
Julian Cribb’s Coming Famine Spearheads AIFST Convention
An action-provoking keynote address by well-known visionary and science communications specialist Julian Cribb headlines the 44th annual Australian Institute of Food Science & Technology convention, to be held 10 – 13 July 2011 in Sydney.
In keeping with the convention’s theme ‘Tackling Tomorrow Today’, Cribb will speak about the major risks to global food security over the coming half century, the implications for food, science, technology and society, and of the effects of a 30 year lack of local investment in agricultural and food science and technology.
Cribb believes the world faces the probability of extreme regional food insecurity by the mid-century unless we take action now on land, water, nutrients, energy, fish, technology and climate instability. One of the challenges he will put to the industry is to help reinvent our cities and food systems so they recycle water, energy and nutrients, to help head off the ‘coming famine’.
He returns to the stage later to present a proposal for a national nutrient plan’, prompting the design of systems that recapture the current phenomenal waste of nutrients by agriculture, processing, retail, foodservice and consumers. He will also speak on the need to totally redesign the Australian diet.
Other speakers at the Food Production Security session include David Barling (City University, London, UK) addressing ‘impact of food policy on food security’, and Alison Bowman (Industry & Investment NSW, Wagga Wagga, NSW) on ‘The value of investing in R&D to secure the food supply’.
The AIFST Convention is co-located with FoodPro at the Sydney Convention & Exhibition Centre, Darling Harbour, Sydney NSW Australia.
It opens on Sunday 10 July and concludes Tuesday 12 July, with additional workshops Wednesday 13 July 2011.
For registration details visit www.aifst.com.au. Bookings made before 3 June attract an earlybird rate.
BIOGRAPHICAL DETAIL:
Julian Cribb is the principal of Julian Cribb & Associates, specialists in science communication. He is a fellow of the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering.
From 1996-2002 he was Director, National Awareness, for Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO where he oversaw a 150 per cent growth in the organisation’s media profile.
A journalist since 1969, he was editor of the “National Farmer” and “Sunday Independent” newspapers, editor-in-chief of the Australian Rural Times, and chief of the Australian Agricultural News Bureau. For ten years he was agriculture correspondent, science and technology correspondent and scientific editor for The Australian and still writes a regular column for the national daily. He edits Australian R&D Review and ScienceAlert.com.au, the nation’s leading scientific news site.
He has received 32 awards for journalism including the Order of Australia Association Media Prize, the inaugural Eureka Prize for environmental journalism, the inaugural AUSTRADE award for international business journalism, the Dalgety Award for rural journalism, two MBF Awards for medical journalism and five Michael Daley Awards for science journalism.
He was national foundation president of the Australian Science Communicators (ASC), president of the National Rural and Resources Press Club, a member of CSIRO advisory committees for agriculture, fisheries and entomology. He has served as a Director of the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), the Crawford Fund, the Secretariat for International Landcare, CSIRO Publishing, the Australian Minerals and Energy Environment Foundation, the National Science and Technology Centre (Questacon) and the Council of the Academy of technological Sciences & Engineering.
His published work includes more than 8,000 print articles, 1000 broadcasts, 3000 media releases and 400 speeches as well as “The Forgotten Country”, six editions of “Australian Agriculture”, “The White Death”, “Dry Times” and “Open Science”. His most recent book is “The Coming Famine: the global food crisis and what we can do to avoid it”, which explores the issues around food security and the actions by nations and individuals necessary to assure it.
Medical Research Rally
For those who missed the Australian Science Media Centre’s (AusSMC) online briefing yesterday. Here tis
Gentlemen’s rules are out, scientists: it’s time to unleash the beast
by Rod Lamberts and Will J. Grant
War has been declared, and those who recognise the fundamental role science plays in everyday life need to decide where they stand.
Building on the budgetary and rhetorical slights of recent months, rumours are now afield that the Gillard government is looking at cutting the National Health and Medical Research Council budget by $400 million.
Let’s hear that again. Four. Hundred. Million. Dollars. This is not blue sky research, not theoretical explorations at the edges of science, but health and medical research. Could any science be more obviously in the public interest?
The more politically aware of our colleagues have already suggested that this could be an ambit claim, the government threatening lots before taking only a little. This is one of the oldest tricks in the politics of budgeting, and it should be called as it is: simply appalling.
But here’s the thing: rather than whine about how unfair this is, bang our fists on our lab benches in outrage – and then dutifully accept the crumbs we’re given – how about we act?
Science is political. The science we do is inherently shaped by the funding landscape of government and the problems and issues of society. This means that to have any influence on how science is organised and funded in Australia, we as scientists and science communicators must act in ways that matter in the arena of politics.
But our scientists and science communicators are a remarkably polite species, playing – and self-limited – by the rules and niceties of science.
The Inspiring Australia Conference held in Melbourne last week was yet another in a long line of science communication conferences that exemplified this trait.
We are well-meaning and passionate people, but hamstrung by an inability to force our political and industrial leaders to support the strong role for science in Australia that mainstream Australians want.
Our scientists and science communicators need to play on the political stage. But you can’t expect to get traction playing only by the “gentlemanly” rules of science. Others don’t. So what can we do?
1) Get involved in opinion writing, and support those who do. Get your stories and arguments out there in The Conversation, The Drum or Crikey, or in any newspaper in Australia. Don’t aim for just the stuff you read, aim for the stuff read by voters in key marginals. Tailor what you’re writing for that audience.
2) Get out there on radio and TV. And again, don’t just go to the ABC, go to as many different outlets as possible. You might despise the stance of any particular shock jock on any number of issues, but if you can get to their listeners then that is a win. You never know – on your particular issue, the shock jock might agree with you.
3) Use stories. One image of a sick child suffering is a very powerful tool, but a more positive version is to play on success stories, “I had X, but research into it improved my life”. People love stories, and we communicators know this very well, as do those who communicate against us.
4) Write letters to government departments, questioning the implications of any funding decision. Follow Bernard Keane’s advice and be creative in your questions. For example, you might write to the Minister for School Education and ask them how a decline in medical research might affect childhood obesity and schooling policies.
5) PhD students should be trained in a culture that recognises that alongside scholarly communication with peers, their work belongs in a discourse with society. Supervisors should make it clear to students that they must know not only what is happening in the Advanced Journal of X, they must also pay some attention to each and every media outlet.
Of course we recognise that not all scientists and science communicators are able, motivated or in even allowed to do this. Many are located in organisations that dictate the extent and manner in which they can express personal opinion in the public sphere.
So it is time to draw on colleagues and supporters in other areas to use the freedoms they have. Academics, use your pulpits! We’re probably best placed to begin making more noise. In fact, it’s our job.
Political communication is not beneath us. It is what we as scientists and science communicators must do.
Send in the Scientists
A story that highlights: the apparent lack of scientific input into government policy. The effectiveness of anonymous dissident websites…
A proposal to amend the Federal Criminal Code Act could see a number of plants species become outlawed.
The proposed schedule reads as follows:
- Any plant containing mescaline including any plant of the genus Lophophora.
- Any plant containing DMT including any plant of the species Piptadenia peregrine
- Salvia divinorum EPL. & Jativa (Diviners Sage)
- Mitragyna speciosa Korth (Krantom)
- Catha edulis Forsk (Khat)
- Any species of the genus Ephedra which contains ephedrine
- Any species of the genus Brugmansia Pers.
- Any species of the genus Datura L.
The government (Attorney General’s department) sought consultation on the proposed schedule via its website. Industry was not offered input into the consultation paper.
Somehow the consultation paper was found and a concerned grower notified the peak industry body Nursery Garden Industry Australia (NGIA)
An anonymous dissident website was set up here www.gardenfreedom.com. This group consisted of concerned academics, gardeners and the nursery industry.
Through social media [and some press] this website captured 2,510 submissions.
The concern regarding the proposed drug schedule were ‘the blanket ban’ approach and the seemingly lack of scientific data, including plant taxa, to classify the precursors or drugs.
Also there was community and industry consensus that Brugmansia and Datura should be excluded.
Dr Anthony Kachenko (NGIA) was also concerned about the lack of scientific data and input from industry.
No comment was received from the Attorney General’s department regarding any of these concerns and no success in determining who was involved in the committee that put together the schedule, apart from the fact that it has been disbanded.
This committee put together a document called ‘Code of Practice for supply diversion into illicit drug manufacture.” The parties involved appear on the back page of that document and include Science Industry Australia. However, they have denied any input into the proposed drug schedule.
This schedule also has a potential impact on the Native Food Industry who use wattleseed from Acacia sp. Some Acacia sp contain DMT. Australian Native Food Industry Limited (ANFIL) has invested lots of $s in projects with RIRDC on the toxicological data of some Acacia sp. Was this data taken into consideration? ANFIL also raises its concern at a ‘blanket ban.’
Repeated requests [ongoing] to the Minister’s department via email and phone have failed to answer any of the concerns raised in submissions or who was involved in the committee that put together the proposed schedule. Maybe its time to initiate a FOI request?
Science more complex with bureaucracy?
First we have the complexities and uncertainties of science and then we introduce a bureaucratic process that can be inefficient and sometimes, incompetent.
I give you a prime example in the case of the Asian honey bee eradication program. Full story continues……
SENATE COMMITTEE ORDERS RECONVENING OF CCEPP TO CONTINUE ERADICATION PROGRAM FOR ASIAN HONEY BEE
Bureaucratic bungling and arguments about funding could possibly put us behind the eight ball in the eradication program for the Asian honey bee.
An interim report from the Senate Rural Affairs and Transport reference committee called Science underpinning the inability to eradicate the Asian Bee has made recommendations that could ensure an eradication program is
continued.
The matter of eradication of the Asian honey bee was referred to the senate to determine the scientific assumption that: Apis cerana could not be eradicated in Australia; that it would not spread, and, its impact on biodiversity, pollination and the European honey bee and the cost benefit of eradication.
The senate enquiry’s main concern was how, based on scientific involvement, a decision was reached to stop the honey bee eradication process, at the end of January 11. (Hansard 24 March p9)
There was a split between the advice coming from the Consultative Committee on Emergency Plant Pests (CCEPP) on behalf of New South Wales, Victoria, the ACT, Tasmania, Western Australia and, the Australian government, who were saying that it was not eradicable. And the view of South Australia, the Northern Territory and Queensland, and of the industry sector, AHBIC, who were saying that further work, if it were done, might allow them to make that call with more certainty.
This further work was not done and subsequently the people on the ground involved in the eradication program were made redundant. The senate committee has asked for a reconvening of the CCEPP.
The Hon Senator Heffernan, chair of the senate committee said, “This is a foreign invasion and it happens to be a bee.
“If it happened to be soldiers and tanks you would not be sitting around and having the argument you have had with the bees; you would get in and do something about it.
“You would say ‘Maybe we’re not going to be able to beat them,’ but at least you would have a bloody good go at trying.
He made an analogy to a fire in the Brindabella Ranges that raged out of control because of “bureaucratic garbage.” “This is the same sort of stuff.”
” ….[it] this has taken 18 months of prancing around.”
He also asked the committee to provide documentation about the physical events over the past 18 months when, “you were trying to eradicate this thing.'”
Of concern to the senate was the dropping of Dr Denis Anderson’s email address for inclusion at meetings of the committee. Dr Anderson is the most recognised Asian honey bee authority and his exclusion has meant that his input was not taken into consideration at the meeting in January where it was deemed that the bee was not eradicable even though Dr Anderson believed that that was yet to be determined and further data would enable a conclusion to that hypothesis.
That sentiment was also echoed by Dr Evan Sergeant, who recommended—and put in his report—that eradication be continued for another six months to collect data.
It is not quite clear from the senate hearing how a final consensus was reached for shutting down the eradication program when their was a call for collecting more data.
Senator Heffernan pointed out his concern that this collecting of data had not occurred and raised the question as to why.
“It appears to be a matter of money,” said chair Senator Heffernan
“For God’s sake—$5 million, is it, Senator Colbeck?
“They spend that on bloody fireworks on New Year’s Eve, for God’s sake.
“This is about the future of the plant world and the food supply in Australia.
“It is a disgrace – a bureaucratic blubber.”
This view was supported by Dr Whitten, Chairman of The Wheen Foundation, a not-for-profit Company which supports research and development to improve profitability of beekeepers and pollination-dependent industries, who commented that:
“…the European honey bee has probably been the most valuable insect ever imported to Australia, and by contrast the Asian bee I would regard as perhaps the worst exotic insect ever to establish in Australia…I believe no stone should be left unturned in our effort to eradicate it.”
The Asian honey bee incursion at Cairns has had, and will continue to have if not eradicated, serious consequences for Australia.
He went on further to say that the presence of the bee at Cairns has already led to the suspension of trade in live bees between the US and Australia, valued at some $5 million annually. Canada is currently reviewing its trade in live bees with Australia and has indicated that it will be urging Australia to continue the eradication effort otherwise it too will suspend trade in live bees.
Other countries are also likely to follow suit. If the bee is not eradicated it is likely that it will spread to most parts of the country that the European honey bee has inhabited. The subsequent wide spread of Asian honey bees is likely to have a number of impacts on Australia, such as, in order of the most to least importance: the environment and biodiversity, the beekeeping industry, human health and society, pollination and trade.
Dr Colin Grant, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry who was at the hearing said, “Let me make it very clear: we approached all the industry sectors that are dependent on pollination, and not one of them was prepared to provide assistive funding to this exercise—not one.”
Professor Bob Williamson secretary for science policy at the Australian Academy of Science, said that the report was welcoming particularly the view that further information be obtained to determine whether the Asian honey bee is eradicable. He reiterated that evidence-based policy is important for policy development.
He has asked for the appointment of an independent senior scientific advisor to all major government departments, which would, ….”remove the need to have these sorts of matters referred to Parliament.”
Professor Ben Oldroyd who is a professor of behavioural genetics in the social insects lab at the University of Sydney, welcomed the delay.
“There has not been enough time to be confident about the direction of trends that is, we do not know with confidence if the number of new finds is increasing or decreasing per unit effort,” he said.
He also said there are technologies which might prove superior to ‘bee lining’ for locating or destroying nests, which is the method used to date. For example, it’s possible to attach a transponder to a worker. The flying worker can then be followed by radar, leading the eradication team to the nest. Pheromone lures can be used to attract and catch drones.”
An odour-detecting dog in Cairns has now been validated as another way of detecting the Asian bee.
(some material courtesy of AusSMC)
Bacteria spits out arsenic and scavenges P
OK well all is good. Jessie Shore assures me this is the place to communicate. So lets get started.
There has been much said this week about the arsenic eating bacteria that apparently means we are inhabiting the earth with extra-terrestrials. There¹s a whole # devoted to it over at twitter. My question to the whole debacle was, ³If the controls were flawed WHY was the experiment published?²
Here¹s a pretty good timeline of the event http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/12/10/arsenic-bacter ia-a-post-mortem-a-review-and-some-navel-gazing/
S
Susan Kirk Bcomm Journalist MEAA ASC HMAQ QWC
39 Shamley Heath Rd, KUREELPA Q 4560 P: +61 7 5478 6761 M:+ 61 0414 645 953 skirk@lingo.net.au www.lingo.net.au www.lingo.net.au/blog www.lingo.net.au/discuss
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This message may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance on it is prohibited and unlawful.
_______________________________________________ ASC-list mailing list list@asc.asn.au http://www.asc.asn.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=115
ASC-list Digest, Vol 73, Issue 14
Hi All,
I’m not sure what this list is for anymore? I would like to see some ‘communication’ between ‘communicators’ about ‘communication’ instead it seems to be a manifesto of PR happenings. Can we use it to talk about science communication or not? This is the third time I’ve tried to communicate something on this list. Let’s see if it gets through??
Susan Kirk
On 9/12/10 9:00 PM, “asc-list-request@lists.asc.asn.au” wrote:
> Send ASC-list mailing list submissions to > asc-list@lists.asc.asn.au > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.asc.asn.au/mailman/listinfo/asc-list > or, via email, send a message with subject or body ‘help’ to > asc-list-request@lists.asc.asn.au > > You can reach the person managing the list at > asc-list-owner@lists.asc.asn.au > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than “Re: Contents of ASC-list digest…” > > > Today’s Topics: > > 1. 2010 Health Journalist of the Year goes to COSMOS editor > (Wilson da Silva) > 2. Register for our new Planning Science Communication workshops > in late Jan/early Feb – good for science communicators AND > scientists! (Jenni Metcalfe) > > > ———————————————————————- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 10:20:53 +1100 > From: Wilson da Silva > To: asc-list@lists.asc.asn.au > Subject: [ASC-list] 2010 Health Journalist of the Year goes to COSMOS > editor > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”windows-1252″ > > Media release > > *2010 Health Journalist of the Year to COSMOS editor* > > Emma Young, a contributing editor of COSMOS Magazine, has won the > prestigious Health Journalist of the Year Award, for her feature article on > manipulating memories. > > Emma attended the annual Excellence in Health Journalism Awards, hosted by > the National Press Club of Australia in Canberra on Wednesday 8 December. > She was named as one of four category winners, for Best News Feature, > Article or Presentation, and as the overall winner for ?the most outstanding > entry among the winners of the previous four categories?. > > Emma, who has been covering health for 16 years, wins a study tour to the > United States with a focus on the health industry. > > ?I’m thrilled to win this prestigious award,? says Emma. ?I still get > excited at finding out about discoveries that have such an impact on > people’s lives. Our memories are such a fundamental part of ourselves that > it’s impossible not to be fascinated by work aimed at tinkering with them – > and perhaps even deleting them.? > > In the award-winning article, ?Learning to forget?, published in October > 2009, Young details investigations into how memories are stored, created and > retrieved to understand why one third of people who experience a traumatic > event, such as a physical attack or a nasty car accident, go on to develop > post-traumatic disorder. > > In her in-depth article, Emma looks at new research into memory manipulation > that may be used to treat the disorder, which affects 6% of Australians. > > The four category winners were: > > ? Best News Feature Article or Presentation, covering Health, Health > Sciences or Innovation: Emma Young, COSMOS Magazine for ?Learning To Forget? > > ? Best Documentary or Documentary Series, covering Health, Health Science or > Innovation: Rebecca Le Tourneau and Rahni Sadler, Seven Network for ?The > Vanishing? > > ? Best Feature Article or Presentation, covering health policy, economics, > business: Mary Gearin, 7.30 Report ABC TV for ?e-health? > > ? Best News Feature Article or Presentation, directed to medical > professionals: Stephen Pinnock ? Australian Doctor for “Jumping Through > Hoops” > > This is the 42nd award COSMOS has picked up since it launched in 2005. In > November 2010, the British Institute of Physics awarded Cosmos Online as the > People’s Choice award for Best Online Magazine, calling the website a ?real > treasure trove of science news, opinion, reviews and more.? > ————– next part ————– > An HTML attachment was scrubbed… > URL: > http://lists.asc.asn.au/pipermail/asc-list/attachments/20101209/64191d2d/atta > chment-0001.html> > > —————————— > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 16:03:30 +1000 > From: “Jenni Metcalfe” > To: > Subject: [ASC-list] Register for our new Planning Science > Communication workshops in late Jan/early Feb – good for science > communicators AND scientists! > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”us-ascii” > > Dear Colleagues, > > > > In my previous email, I forgot to include that we always give ASC > members a 10% discount on our open workshops. See information below. > > > > Numbers are limited for the workshops in Sydney (Jan 31), Perth (Feb 3) > and Adelaide (Feb 10). So send your registration details to me as soon > as possible. > > > > Register now for our NEW workshop, Planning Science Communication. > > > > Good research deserves a good communication plan, and good communication > takes careful planning. > > > > This practical and lively one-day workshop will take participants > through a seven-step process of planning a communication campaign. > > > > What do you want to say about the research and why do you want to say > it? What is the best method of providing information to the audiences > you want to reach? > > > > The first workshops will be in Sydney on Monday January 31, Perth on > Thursday February 3 and Adelaide on Thursday February 10 (other cities > will follow). > > > > Designed for science communicators (and scientists!), the workshop > program includes case studies, discussion, presentations and planning > exercises. By the end of the day, each participant will have an outline > communication plan for their project. > > > > “Very practical & useful – we’ll be able to use the material presented > in our everyday project work. Very engaging and good level of active > participation.” Kelly Bryant, Qld Dept of Environment and Resources > Management > > > > Cost per participant is $680+GST (total $748). ASC Members receive a 10% > discount. > > > > To register or get more information, contact Jenni Metcalfe – > jenni@econnect.com.au; 0408 551 866, 07 3846 7111 > > > > For details on all our science communication skills workshops: > www.econnect.com.au/workshops > > > > Regards > > > > > > Jenni Metcalfe > > Director Econnect Communication > > PO Box 734 > > South Brisbane Q 4101 > > Australia > > www.econnect.com.au > > jenni@econnect.com.au > > phone: + 61 7 3846 7111, +0408 551 866 > > skype: jenni.metcalfe > > > > ————– next part ————– > An HTML attachment was scrubbed… > URL: > http://lists.asc.asn.au/pipermail/asc-list/attachments/20101209/19f35858/atta > chment-0001.html> > > —————————— > > _______________________________________________ > ASC-list mailing list > list@asc.asn.au > http://www.asc.asn.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=115 > > End of ASC-list Digest, Vol 73, Issue 14 > ****************************************
Susan Kirk Bcomm Journalist MEAA ASC HMAQ QWC
39 Shamley Heath Rd, KUREELPA Q 4560 P: +61 7 5478 6761 M:+ 61 0414 645 953 skirk@lingo.net.au www.lingo.net.au www.lingo.net.au/blog www.lingo.net.au/discuss
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This message may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance on it is prohibited and unlawful.
_______________________________________________ ASC-list mailing list list@asc.asn.au http://www.asc.asn.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=115