Department of Human Geography, Planning and International Development Studies

The field research experience described in this article arose from an involvement in a safe drinking water programme in rural Bangladesh since 2005. The projects set out to establish water supplies in several marginalised and arsenic-affected communities – a matter of grave urgency since the discovery of arsenic in the groundwater more than a decade ago. Millions of users are exposed and the implementation of solutions is generally inadequate. The research objectives were (1) to better understand the situation, and (2) to search for more adequate approaches. The research was predominantly informed by project activities on the ground and, in turn, this learning experience was fed back into the programme to help guide new activities. Essentially, the researcher acted both as an observer and practitioner. To fulfil this double role, Participatory Action Research (PAR) provides a potentially useful methodology. This paper presents the experiences with PAR in the field, and reflects on its participative, qualitative and cyclic characteristics. It discusses implications of PAR for governance, as well as for academic research.

Growth in the bioenergy sector has been largely driven by the desire to reduce dependency on non-renewable and emission-intensive fossil fuels. At the same time, many regions such as the Central Tablelands are experiencing land degradation, declining viability of traditional farming and forestry activities, and increased threats from climate change. Opportunities exist for new industries to support the development of bioenergy from native agroforestry, while also generating a range of economic, social and environmental benefits at a variety of scales. Achieving successful conservation outcomes in protected areas is also increasingly dependent upon a landscape-scale approach that recognises the need for coordinating the creation of buffers around protected areas. Regional studies are essential for the future development of a bioenergy industry in Australia, but a transferable model for undertaking such regional studies is currently lacking.

Shallow tube-wells are the primary source of drinking water in Bangladesh. Over a decade ago it was discovered that two-thirds are severely contaminated with arsenic. The Arsenic Mitigation {\&} Research Foundation (AMRF) started a programme initially focussing on the installation of deep tube-wells and on the formation of community-based organisations responsible for operation and maintenance. Early experiences show that communities are participating and that this approach seems successful. The main research questions are: Does it provide a viable basis for sustainable solutions? And what are the risk factors involved? The complexity of the issue calls for an interdisciplinary and adaptive approach. AMRF provides practical support to undertake research in direct dialogue with local participants. In accordance with local priorities, researchers will bring valuable technical or social insights back into the projects, thus stimulating AMRF as a learning organisation that will take the results further into practice.

In an era in which the average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is between 40 and 50 years, according to de Geus (1997), Shell has exceptional longevity, for a company its size. Shell's history can be traced back to the 1890s, when it sold oil for lamps in the Far East (Shell was named after the fact that seashells were used as money in the Far East), while the Dutch founders imported kerosene from Sumatra. From the moment they merged, in 1906, Shell's primary business was the worldwide production and marketing of oil and petroleum. In 1907, British Shell Transport and Trading Company merged with the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company to form the Royal Dutch Shell Group. It grew to become the main supplier of fuel and TNT for the British Army during World War I. The post-war depression forced Shell to reduce its staff, and World War II led to the destruction of a lot of its properties. The return of peace, however, brought a renewed demand for oil products (Royal Dutch Shell, 2009). Shell became one of the ‘seven sisters' (Sampson 1975).

Twenty-four students from different faculties of Delft University of Technology spent a whole week discussing a range of topics as they sailed through the Randstad region of the Netherlands. What use is that? Well, this is the best way of stimulating students to think beyond their own subject. The ‘Boat Week' is part of the TiDO specializa- tion (Technology in Sustainable Development), which is run by the TPM project group, Educa- tion in Sustainable Develop- ment.

In general engineers are educated in a quite mono-disciplinary way. Sustainable development (SD) explicitly needs multidisciplinarity, so a paradox seems to be present when speaking of ‘sustainable engineers'. Educating broad specialists challenges especially technical universities for they have to get those specialists into multidisciplinary teams to enable them to use their knowledge to contribute to sustainable development. The challenge for technical universities is twofold: first of all these engineers need to see the value of their own disciplinary knowledge to get towards SD, the second and maybe hardest is to make them communicate with (all) other disciplines, even non- technical.

Academic research is often justified to governments and the general public on the basis that it contributes to the solution of major problems and helps create a better life for all. But most of the academic research at Australian universities is disciplinary based, while the biggest problems faced by human society fall into the broad categories of environmental destruction, resource depletion, poverty, war, disease, injustice, inequity and exploitation, none of which fits into a single academic discipline. These are inherently complex, ‘wicked' problems that not only require inputs from several disciplines, but also require new forms of knowledge and research that have not been classified as disciplines.

This RIRDC report describes how bioenergy feedstocks could be generated using agroforestry in the Central Tablelands region of New South Wales based upon information from engagement with stakeholders, a survey of landholder attitudes and Geographic Information System analysis. The report also includes recommendations for future planning, as well as details of how the work undertaken in this case study area can be applied to other regions. Regional and state land management agencies could use the findings of this study to develop programs that harness economic potential of bioenergy to deliver better regional Natural Resource Management and development outcomes.The report will also be of use to stakeholders in existing local industries such as saw-milling, electricity generation, furniture-making and other value-adding forestry-based enterprises. These stakeholders are critical to understanding the feasibility of bioenergy options and implementing them.

This documentary is the result of a collaboration between the Arsenic Mitigation {\&} Research Foundation and the Environmental Policy {\&} Management program at the University of New South Wales. It provides an introduction to the arsenic calamity in Bangladesh and to some of the efforts to address it.

Many of us still don't know the difference between charity and development. While the total amount of foreign aid to Bangladesh since its independence is nearing {\$}50 billion, the income gap has continued to increase. The inequalities persist in a range of human living conditions, not just in a financial sense. This film is concerned with some of those living conditions, starting with health, access to nutritious food and to safe and reliable drinking water. These are matters of grave urgency since the discovery of arsenic in the water almost two decades ago. The film explores the many failures to reach marginalised people and communities as a whole. However, the observation that the inequalities have not been effectively addressed despite the efforts should not be used as an excuse to stop; it should be used as an argument to start doing things differently. The most important inequality that will need to be reduced is in the power to decide over one's living conditions. It is one thing to reach out to the poor with water supplies and medicine, but if nothing is done to the circumstances that created the inequalities in the first place, then we haven't managed to move beyond the mere provision of charity. The process of social mobilisation that the Arsenic Mitigation and Research Foundation is facilitating has started to empower those that are normally marginalised from decision making processes. Already there are several positive signals that this is strengthening the communities' sense of control over their own lives.