Derechos Culturales

Inspiring Australia Expert Working Group on Science Engagement into and for Australia’s Tropical Region (DIISRTE, 2012b). This EWG report was focussed on ‘science engagement into and for the tropical region of Australia…a significant section of Australia’s remote landscape’ (p. 1). The EWG report stated that it will deliver initiatives that will assist in rectifying the disadvantage that tropic Australia has in the

quality and impact of science engagement, weakening its ability to make genuine economic, social and environmental progress as the same rate as other parts of the nation…[that] directly impacts on the daily lives of all tropical Australians (p. 33).

This report builds on the recommendations of the IA report, in particular recommendation 8 – engaging Australian communities, recommendation 9 – building partnerships – using networks, and recommendation 12 – unlocking Australia’s full potential. The authors outline a strategy that addresses the distinctly different challenges for tropical Australia including: its

vulnerability to climate change; the nation’s dependency on tropical Australia for the economy – resources, energy, agriculture, tourism; and urban development. The authors discussed how tropical Australia differs to southern Australia, commenting on the disproportionate activity in that the majority of science resources and effort is focussed in southern Australia, so that ‘southern science concepts tend to drive northern agendas, at times leading to perverse

outcomes’ (p. 3). Features emphasised by the authors is that tropical Australia is an Indigenous domain in that the Traditional Owners have control of, and/or interest in, the landscape. In

addition to this the importance of local knowledge was identified as being essential to this relationship and the ‘most significant engagement issues for the Tropical EWG’ (p. 17). Another area the authors focussed extensively on was scientific literacy, as tropical Australians generally have a lower level of scientific literacy than southern Australians, and have poorer access to the ‘digital economy’. This in turn effects their ability for ‘robust participatory democracy’ (p. 4).

Like its parent report the language is reflective of the current science communication practices, as it described a ‘shift in the language from science communication to science engagement’ (p.5), and the desire to shift ‘from a centralised information dissemination model to a participatory science engagement approach’ (p. 4). However, the authors did not define the term engagement throughout the report, typically using it as a catch-all description for science communication, with a particular focus on enhancing the public’s scientific literacy, for example the authors stated ‘these strategies relate to the scientific literacy of tropical

Australians, the collaborative institutional frameworks for effective science engagement’ (p. vii). The authors discussed the need to establish a ‘basis for sound community wide messaging on key scientific issues of importance to Australia’s tropics’ (p. 30), and identified the mass media as being essential to achieving their communication aims.

Paralleling IA, the authors identified students as a key communication audience, with the particular aim of encouraging them into ‘careers in science and science teaching’ (p.32). The authors called for increased investment by governments and changes to research funding systems to redirect resources into the tropical Australia initiatives. The notion of involving research funding agencies with the desire to have science communication initiatives recognised as part of the funding system parallels the view of the original IA report. As part of this discussion on the funding systems the authors recommended the establishment of a multi- disciplinary Journal of Tropical Australia with the objective that this will enable an integrated science framework across tropical Australia. As part of the implementation of these

recommendations the authors identified the need for additional investment and policy change to aid in reaching these outcomes (p. 32).

Differing from the IA report the authors called for the decentralisation of government programs, stating that ‘a more devolved approach to government decision making based on targeted investment in long-term strategic plans could build a more stable investment foundations for building scientific literacy’ (p. 9). The authors add to this discussion stating how

‘[s]takeholders in the tropics, and often the science community itself, demonstrably favour more devolved, strategic and collaborative frameworks for science management at scales that make

sense to them’ (p. 14) including bespoke regional initiatives, in contradiction to the ‘national coordination – local action’ framework established in the IA strategy.

The authors identified ‘seven broad, context-driven…themes of science engagement that need to be addressed for tropical Australia’ (p. vii).

1. Building science literacy for all tropical Australians

2. Shifting science engagement cultures at the project and publication level

3. Building durable and trusted regional science brokerage and partnership arrangements 4. Forging effective science engagement in the Indigenous domain

5. Building science partnerships at industry/sectoral level to turbo-charge innovation 6. Ensuring science messages from the tropics engage southern Australia

7. Engaging tropical Australia in national science messages (p. vii).

These themes establish the context of what the authors identified as the topical areas with respect to science engagement issues and solutions in the tropics. From this, 20

recommendations were developed to deliver these themes, and from this emerged three primary strategies that underpin the recommendations and themes:

1. a pan-tropical narrative and alliance for science engagement 2. strong engagement frameworks in the tropics

3. community-wide foundations in science literacy (p. x).

The authors identified that these strategies are in ‘need of more substantive scoping, analysis and refinement in the future’ (p. x).

Overall this report is very broad, detailing numerous desired communication themes and directions over short to medium term time frames, with an equally broad remit of desired outcomes. The EWG report describes an aspirational and overarching vision for science communication in and about tropical Australia. The authors identified the high-level science messaging that relates to tropical Australia of ‘climate change, food and water security, energy and the health agenda’ (p. 26), however fail to identify any priorities or specific areas for future action. The exception to this was the report’s strong focus on increasing the scientific literacy of those in tropic Australia, a motivation of the PUS era of communication. This report begins to outline the areas of importance in tropical Australia, however does not translate this into assisting to realise the goal of creating a SEA.

Report 10: Inspiring Australia Expert Working Group on Marine science: a story for