ORCID Profile
0000-0002-7559-0143
Current Organisation
CSIRO
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
In Research Link Australia (RLA), "Research Topics" refer to ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes. These topics are either sourced from ANZSRC FOR and SEO codes listed in researchers' related grants or generated by a large language model (LLM) based on their publications.
Microbial Genetics | Medical biotechnology diagnostics (incl. biosensors) | Quantum technologies | Biochemistry and Cell Biology | Biocatalysis and enzyme technology | Quantum physics | Synthetic Biology | Biological physics |
Human Pharmaceutical Treatments (e.g. Antibiotics) | Organic Industrial Chemicals (excl. Resins, Rubber and Plastics) | Expanding Knowledge in the Biological Sciences |
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-01-2023
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2011
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 24-09-2014
DOI: 10.1007/S11948-013-9474-Z
Abstract: The risk posed by anthropogenic climate change is generally accepted, and the challenge we face to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to a tolerable limit cannot be underestimated. Reducing GHG emissions can be achieved either by producing less GHG to begin with or by emitting less GHG into the atmosphere. One carbon mitigation technology with large potential for capturing carbon dioxide at the point source of emissions is carbon capture and storage (CCS). However, the merits of CCS have been questioned, both on practical and ethical grounds. While the practical concerns have already received substantial attention, the ethical concerns still demand further consideration. This article aims to respond to this deficit by reviewing the critical ethical challenges raised by CCS as a possible tool in a climate mitigation strategy and argues that the urgency stemming from climate change underpins many of the concerns raised by CCS.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 11-2016
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 15-06-2020
DOI: 10.1002/9781444367072.WBIEE101.PUB2
Abstract: A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genetic characteristics have been changed by laboratory methods through the insertion of a modified gene or a gene from another organism in order to create sequences that would not otherwise be found in the genome. GMOs tend to be developed in order to serve an identified human purpose. There are a range of potential benefits of GMO applications in agriculture, pharmaceutical development, and other medical research. For ex le, GMOs have been developed to provide herbicide and insecticide resistant crops rice with increased vitamin content for addressing malnutrition bananas that produce human vaccines against diseases such as hepatitis B and fish species that mature more quickly. New technologies for creating GMOs are also being explored for managing pest species, the spread of mosquito‐borne diseases such as dengue fever and malaria, and for pre‐hatch sex selection of layer chickens to reduce culling. However, alongside these potential benefits, there are also a range of ethical concerns that need to be addressed. These ethical concerns include both intrinsic objections to the use of GMOs, and a range of extrinsic concerns that broadly include impacts on human health and the environment, concerns about ownership and intellectual property, and risks associated with social contestation associated with the widespread use of GMOs.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 03-2016
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2015
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2014
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2016
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2018
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 07-03-2022
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 11-01-2023
DOI: 10.1038/S41431-022-01273-W
Abstract: There are inherent complexities and tensions in achieving a responsible balance between safeguarding patients’ privacy and sharing genomic data for advancing health and medical science. A growing body of literature suggests establishing patient genomic data ownership, enabled by blockchain technology, as one approach for managing these priorities. We conducted an online survey, applying a mixed methods approach to collect quantitative (using scale questions) and qualitative data (using open-ended questions). We explored the views of 117 genomic professionals (clinical geneticists, genetic counsellors, bioinformaticians, and researchers) towards patient data ownership in Australia. Data analysis revealed most professionals agreed that patients have rights to data ownership. However, there is a need for a clearer understanding of the nature and implications of data ownership in this context as genomic data often is subject to collective ownership (e.g., with family members and laboratories). This research finds that while the majority of genomic professionals acknowledge the desire for patient data ownership, bioinformaticians and researchers expressed more favourable views than clinical geneticists and genetic counsellors, suggesting that their views on this issue may be shaped by how closely they interact with patients as part of their professional duties. This research also confirms that stronger health system infrastructure is a prerequisite for enabling patient data ownership, which needs to be underpinned by appropriate digital infrastructure (e.g., central vs. decentralised data storage), patient identity ownership (e.g., limited vs. self-sovereign identity), and policy at both federal and state levels.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 04-2022
DOI: 10.1111/SORU.12370
Abstract: This article analyses digital agricultural technologies (agtech) innovation in two public research organisations in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand through the lens of responsible innovation (RI), and how corresponding activities were realised in practice. Four virtual workshops explored the operationalisation of RI and its efficacy in digital agtech development. Thematic analysis of workshop materials provided scope to assess the recognised and realised value of RI in both digital agtech programmes, which we found lagging behind RI's full, perhaps idealised, potential. The value proposition of RI can, therefore, not be taken for granted without support for its operationalisation and institutionalisation. Given growing demands on public research organisations to responsibly develop transformational research and innovation, the article outlines recommendations for turning RI aspirations into situated research practices. We conclude that the next phase of agtech innovation should align with the co‐evolution of rural social research and its contribution to more responsible digital agtech innovation.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 09-2016
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-2008
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2017
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 02-03-2023
DOI: 10.3390/RS15051407
Abstract: The growth of citizen science presents a valuable potential source of calibration and validation data for environmental remote sensing at greater spatial and temporal scales, and with greater cost efficiency than is achievable by professional in situ reference-data collection alone. However, the frequent mismatch between in situ data-quality requirements for remote-sensing-product development and current data quality assurance in citizen science presents a significant challenge if widespread use of these complementary data sources is to be achieved. To evaluate the scope of this challenge, we conducted a targeted literature review into the nature of data-quality issues faced by citizen-science projects for routine incorporation into terrestrial environmental-monitoring systems. From the literature, we identify the challenges and trade-offs to inform best-practice implementation of data quality assurance in citizen-science projects. To assist practitioners in implementing our findings, we grouped these themes by stage of citizen-science project: (1) program planning and design (2) participant engagement (3) data collection and (4) data processing. As a final step, we used our findings as the basis to formulate guiding questions that can be used to inform decision making when choosing optimal data-quality-improvement and assurance strategies for use of citizen science in remote-sensing calibration and/or validation. Our aim is to enhance future development of citizen-science projects for use with remote sensing in environmental monitoring.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 18-12-2017
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 25-09-2023
DOI: 10.1111/RISA.14229
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 11-01-2022
DOI: 10.1057/S41599-021-01028-W
Abstract: Incorporating perspectives of multiple stakeholders concerning the appropriate balance of risks and benefits of new and potentially disruptive technologies is thought to be a way of enhancing the societal relevance and positive impacts of those technologies. A risk governance approach can be instrumental in achieving balance among erse stakeholders, as it enables decision-making processes informed by multiple dimensions of risk. This paper applies a risk governance approach to retrospectively examine the development of nanotechnology research and development (R& D) in Australia to identify how risk governance is reflected in the practices of a range of stakeholders. We identify ten risk-related challenges specific to nanotechnology R& D based on a review of the international literature, which provided the foundation for documenting how those working in the Australian nanotechnology sector responded to these global risk-related challenges. This case study research draws on a range of sources including literature review, semi-structured interviews, and a combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches for data analysis to identify key themes and generate visualisations of the interconnections that exist between risk governance practices. The ability to visualise these interconnections from the qualitative data is a key contribution of this research. Our findings show how the qualitative insights and professional experiences of nanotechnologists provide evidence of how risk governance approaches have been operationalised in the Australian nanotechnology R& D sector. The findings generate three important insights. First, the risk research undertaken by Australian nanotechnologists is interdisciplinary and involves multiple stakeholders from various disciplines and sectors. Unlike traditional risk governance approaches, our findings document efforts to assess, not only physical risks, but also social and ethical risks. Second, nanotechnology risk governance is a non-linear process and practices undertaken to address specific challenges occurred concurrently with and contributed to addressing other challenges. Third, our findings indicate that applying a risk governance approach enables greater intersection and collaboration, potentially bridging any disconnect between scientists, policymakers, and the public to realise transdisciplinary outcomes. This research highlights opportunities for developing systematic methodologies to enable more robust risk governance of other new and emerging technologies.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2019
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 08-2008
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 23-04-2019
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 04-2018
Publisher: Resilience Alliance, Inc.
Date: 2018
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 09-08-2016
Publisher: Mary Ann Liebert Inc
Date: 05-2020
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2020
Publisher: University of California Press
Date: 2018
Abstract: In 2012, a large scale wind energy project was proposed for development in King Island, Tasmania, Australia. The project proponents adopted what they described as a ‘best practice’ approach to community engagement an approach expected to achieve positive outcomes for developer and community by maximising community involvement in decision-making, limiting social conflict, and enhancing the potential of achieving the social licence to operate. Despite this, the community experience during the time of the proposal was one of conflict and distress, and the proposal was eventually cancelled due to exogenous economic factors. This case study explores a key element of the engagement process—holding a community vote—that caused significant problems for people and process. The vote appeared to be a democratic means to facilitate community empowerment in the decision-making process. However, in this study, we show that the vote resulted in an increase in conflict and polarisation, challenged the legitimacy of the consultative process and credibility of the proponents, and ultimately led to legal actions taken by opponents against the proponent. Factors including voter eligibility, the benchmark for success of the vote, c aigning, and responses to the outcome of the vote are examined to demonstrate the complexity of decision-making for renewable energy and land use change more generally.
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2014
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2017
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2015
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2014
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2017
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2019
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 2015
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 22-11-2015
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Date: 2023
Publisher: IOP Publishing
Date: 15-02-2021
Abstract: Livestock grazing covers half of Australia and vast areas of global terrestrial ecosystems. The sustainability of the beef cattle industries are being scrutinised amid ongoing environmental concerns. In response, industry discourse has identified public trust as critical to avoiding reactive environmental regulation. However, public perceptions of the cattle industry’s sustainability performance and trust are largely unknown and speculative. We present the first model of public attitudes toward the Australian cattle industry ( n = 2913). Our results reveal that societal perceptions of the industry’s environmental performance strongly predict trust in the industry. However, trust only weakly predicts a perceived right for societal oversight and has only an indirect relationship on need for environmental regulation. Environmental values influence perceptions of industry performance and the perceived right for societal oversight. We conclude that effective industry governance must be values literate and recognise that strong environmental performance is critical for public trust. Public trust is high but does not translate to support for a relaxed regulatory environment.
Publisher: Oekom Publishers GmbH
Date: 08-2015
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2019
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 06-08-2020
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2015
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 12-01-2018
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2018
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2021
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 31-07-2014
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2012
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 27-01-2020
DOI: 10.1002/EET.1879
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 20-01-2021
DOI: 10.1007/S43681-020-00034-Z
Abstract: Computational design systems (such as those using evolutionary algorithms) can create designs for a variety of physical products. Introducing these systems into the design process risks creating a ‘responsibility gap’ for flaws in the products they are used to create, as human designers may no longer believe that they are wholly responsible for them. We respond to this problem by distinguishing between causal responsibility and capacity responsibility (the ability to be morally responsible for actions) for creating product designs to argue that while the computational design systems and human designers are both casually responsible for creating product designs, the human designers who use these systems and the developers who create them have capacity responsibility for such designs. We show that there is no responsibility gap for products designed using computational design systems by comparing different accounts of moral responsibility for robots and AI (instrumentalism, machine ethics, and hybrid responsibility). We argue that all three of these accounts of moral responsibility for AI systems support the conclusion that the product designers who use computational design systems and the developers of these systems are morally responsible for any flaws or faults in the products designed by these systems. We conclude by showing how the responsibilities of accountability and blameworthiness should be attributed between the product designers, the developers of the computational design systems.
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2021
DOI: 10.25919/1CV0-PA77
Publisher: IGI Global
Date: 2010
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-775-6.CH013
Abstract: Providing water infrastructure in times of accelerating climate change presents interesting new problems. Expanding demands must be met or managed in contexts of increasingly constrained sources of supply, raising ethical questions of equity and participation. Loss of agricultural land and natural habitats, the coastal impacts of desalination plants and concerns over re-use of waste water must be weighed with demand management issues of water rationing, pricing mechanisms and inducing behavior change. This case study examines how these factors impact on infrastructure planning in South East Queensland, Australia: a region with one of the developed world’s most rapidly growing populations, which has recently experienced the most severe drought in its recorded history. Proposals to match forecast demands and potential supplies for water over a 20 year period are reviewed by applying ethical principles to evaluate practical plans to meet the water needs of the region’s activities and settlements.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2020
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 20-09-2022
DOI: 10.1007/S43681-022-00219-8
Abstract: An emerging use of machine learning (ML) is creating products optimised using computational design for in idual users and produced using 3D printing. One potential application is bespoke surgical tools optimised for specific patients. While optimised tool designs benefit patients and surgeons, there is the risk that computational design may also create unexpected designs that are unsuitable for use with potentially harmful consequences. We interviewed potential stakeholders to identify both established and unique technical risks associated with the use of computational design for surgical tool design and applied ethical risk analysis (eRA) to identify how stakeholders might be exposed to ethical risk within this process. The main findings of this research are twofold. First, distinguishing between unique and established risks for new medical technologies helps identify where existing methods of risk mitigation may be applicable to a surgical innovation, and where new means of mitigating risks may be needed. Second, the value of distinguishing between technical and ethical risks in such a system is that it identifies the key responsibilities for managing these risks and allows for any potential interdependencies between stakeholders in managing these risks to be made explicit. The approach demonstrated in this paper may be applied to understanding the implications of new AI and ML applications in healthcare and other high consequence domains.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 09-2015
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 02-2013
DOI: 10.1002/9781444367072.WBIEE101
Abstract: A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genetic characteristics have been changed through the insertion of a modified gene or of a gene from another organism, or through the elimination of a gene. These genetic engineering techniques, also known as “recombinant DNA [deoxyribonucleic acid] technology,” aim to introduce a new property into an existing organism's genome for some human purpose ( see Biotechnology). The genes inserted to create GMOs may include modified gene sequences from within the same species or from sexually compatible species (intragenic GMOs), or they may be sourced from distinct species (transgenic GMOs). Some ex les of GMOs include transgenic microbes used to produce insulin for treatment of diabetes, transgenic plants created in order to resist pests or to provide greater nutritional value, and genetically modified viruses that deliver disease‐curing genes into human cells. Genetic engineering has also produced transgenic fish with growth‐enhancing properties, and even ornamental transgenic fish with fluorescent color.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2014
Publisher: CSIRO
Date: 2020
Publisher: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Date: 06-2023
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 23-02-2022
DOI: 10.1007/S10676-022-09641-2
Abstract: Computational design uses artificial intelligence (AI) to optimise designs towards user-determined goals. When combined with 3D printing, it is possible to develop and construct physical products in a wide range of geometries and materials and encapsulating a range of functionality, with minimal input from human designers. One potential application is the development of bespoke surgical tools, whereby computational design optimises a tool’s morphology for a specific patient’s anatomy and the requirements of the surgical procedure to improve surgical outcomes. This emerging application of AI and 3D printing provides an opportunity to examine whether new technologies affect the ethical responsibilities of those operating in high-consequence domains such as healthcare. This research draws on stakeholder interviews to identify how a range of different professions involved in the design, production, and adoption of computationally designed surgical tools, identify and attribute responsibility within the different stages of a computationally designed tool’s development and deployment. Those interviewed included surgeons and radiologists, fabricators experienced with 3D printing, computational designers, healthcare regulators, bioethicists, and patient advocates. Based on our findings, we identify additional responsibilities that surround the process of creating and using these tools. Additionally, the responsibilities of most professional stakeholders are not limited to in idual stages of the tool design and deployment process, and the close collaboration between stakeholders at various stages of the process suggests that collective ethical responsibility may be appropriate in these cases. The role responsibilities of the stakeholders involved in developing the process to create computationally designed tools also change as the technology moves from research and development (R& D) to approved use.
Location: Australia
Start Date: 11-2020
End Date: 11-2027
Amount: $35,000,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded ActivityStart Date: 12-2023
End Date: 12-2030
Amount: $35,000,000.00
Funder: Australian Research Council
View Funded Activity