 Thanks so much. Welcome to the afternoon session of Asia Pacific Week. Warm thanks to our organisers and conveners for the invitation to REGNET, the regulatory institutions network, to come today and share with you some of what we think is the most interesting research being done here at ANU at the moment. I'm Veronica Taylor. I'm director of the School of Regulation, Justice and Diplomacy and also its core unit which is REGNET, the regulatory institutions network. REGNET's mission is to produce regionally informed research that is grounded in evidence and that contributes to good governance both locally and internationally. We're an interdisciplinary research and teaching program. All of our teaching is research based. We have both MFIL and PhD programs and both of those programs are interdisciplinary. What we're going to show you today is a sample of the range of topics that we deal with and also model for you in a very explicit way the methodologies that we use to tackle complex problems ranging from climate change to child welfare from peacekeeping to policing and security. You have a full profile for each of our speakers today in your Asia-Pacific week booklet but let me introduce them to you briefly in the order in which they'll speak and thank them too for being here and sharing their research. We'll start with a presentation from Dr Miranda Forsyth who is internationally recognised as an expert on legal pluralism with particular expertise in the Pacific and most particularly in the complex legal systems of Vanuatu. Should be followed by Dr Lennon Chang who has last year completed an outstanding PhD dissertation on cybercrime and is now working as a researcher with the Australian Centre of Excellence on Policing and Security. Then we will have a presentation from Dr Judith Healy who is recognised as an expert in the regulation of health systems nationally and internationally and has done a great deal of policy work on global health issues within Asia. Our final speaker will be Dr Yeroen Van Der Heiden who has joined us this year from a long association with Delft University of Technology. Dr Van Der Heiden is an expert in the regulatory challenges of water, sustainability and the built environment and he'll be talking today about the role of volunteerism in tackling those complex issues. Once we have the presentations we'll then break for questions and comments and then there'll be an opportunity for you to meet individually with the speakers afterwards if you'd like to do so and we promise to have you finished in plenty of time for the all important afternoon tea. Please join me in welcoming our speakers. Good afternoon everyone and thank you for the opportunity to talk to you today. My work for the past eight years has been the regulation in South Pacific Island countries in particular in the area of criminal law although more recently I've branched out into intellectual property law. I've done a lot of work looking at the relationship between state and non-state legal systems in the region and that has required me to work in a cross-disciplinary manner for example working in the fields of anthropology and criminology as well as law. And the overall theoretical framework that has allowed me to take such a broad approach has been the framework of legal pluralism. One of the examples that I thought I'd talk to you today about that shows that interaction between legal and between state and non-state legal systems is the issue of sorcery in the region in general and in Vanuatu in particular. First of all where is Vanuatu? I understand that there is one Pacific Island student in the room today but I thought that I might provide a map for the rest of you so you can see it there. Sorcery is a major social problem in Vanuatu and indeed across most of Melanesia. It's also called Black Magic or Witchcraft. For example in this newspaper article in 2011 Chief Jacob Kaeperi said does sorcery exist? Whether one is a simple gardener in their village or a highly educated individual with their masters in a white collar job each in Vanuatu cannot deny it is very much part of their cultural heritage. A means of social control with dimensions of good and bad sorcery. Normally this is supposed to happen within a network, an agreement between the Nakamals which are like the chiefly communities. But today it has shot out of control. There are two general law and order consequences of a belief in sorcery. The first is that people are dying or being hurt and no one knows why but they suspect malevolent intent. In other words every time there is an unexplained death and autopsy is really not very widely practised at all then people are thinking this has been caused by somebody who has died. And that as you can imagine has led to a great deal of social unrest. There were riots in Port Vila in 2007 that were caused by people pointing fingers at other people and also people living in a great deal of fear. The second law and order consequence is that people attack and sometimes kill alleged sorcerers. And this has happened regularly in the region. These are just some headlines from newspaper articles Yeah. Adopting a legal pluralist approach to regulation means looking at how all of the legal orders in a particular country regulate a particular issue. So in Vanuatu the three main legal orders are the state, the customary system and the churches. I'm not going to talk about the churches, just concentrate on the customary legal system and the state legal system. So the customary legal system is based on the idea of having public meetings that are chaired by chiefs of a particular community and they discuss issues in a wide ranging way. So the concept of relevance that we so love in criminal law is absent. Proof is dealt with by issues of dreams, diviners sometimes are brought in sometimes there are magical objects such as magical stones there's no presumption of innocence so again a difference to the state legal system and the aim of the overall meeting is to restore peace and harmony in the community as a whole. So the focus is not on achieving individual justice as it is in the western system. In the Pacific Island countries it's very important to look at customary legal systems because that is where about 80% of conflict resolution is actually done. The state often has very limited reach outside of the capital cities because for example in Vanuatu there are 83 different islands so it's just physically very difficult for state authorities to get out to all of those islands. However the customary legal systems are themselves under a great deal of pressure as a result of changes forced by globalization. The state legal approach to dealing with the issue of crime is embedded in the Vanuatu Penal Code section 151 of which provides no person shall practice witchcraft. When the penal code was drafted at independence the idea was to indigenize it and so they made provision for custom crime such as sorcery. But the problem is that they didn't take into account the fact that customary norms make sense within a customary procedural framework and within the aims of the system being in other words to bring back peace and harmony into the community. So having such a law doesn't actually work in the state legal system because of the problem of proof. As you can see from that provision it requires proof beyond reasonable doubt that somebody practiced witchcraft. This case, well this issue actually went to court in the case of Melsa Clay and Public Prosecutor and in that case at first instance the trial judge who was an Indigenous in Vanuatu tried to do everything he could to adapt the Western laws to try to fit the situation. So he used the doctrine of judicial notice to take into account the fact that witchcraft had occurred. However this was appeal to the court of appeal and the court of appeal that was largely made up of expatriate judges struck down the conviction and said that it was not appropriate to use the doctrine of judicial notice in that way and also made a number of other comments about the judge's reasoning. Since this case perhaps unsurprisingly no further prosecutions have been brought and so it's been back to the customary system to deal with the problems of sorcery. So directions for research or for legal developments, the work that I've been doing is trying to develop a regulatory system where both state and non-state systems operate within their own procedural frameworks. So the idea is that we want state and non-state to support each other to do the work that they're best adapted to. For example the state system could be in charge of prosecution for law and order problems and the custom system for maintaining peace in the community. In terms of trying to think about the sorts of reforms that need to be done, one of the things that I've considered is how to redraft that section 151 of the penal code to make better provision for the fact that you can't actually prove that somebody has committed sorcery. However I've argued that if you concentrate instead on the intention of the defendant to do harm through sorcery then you can overcome that problem. I've also worked on altering the law of defences to make them to take a belief of sorcery into account to make the law in the state courts more legitimate and more in accordance with people's own beliefs of what is right and what is wrong. I've also advocated the need to have a joint approach of using both the state and the non-state system to work together to tackle these problems. And in fact these issues are now being taken up and the Law Reform Commission in Papua New Guinea is currently looking at how to improve the law regarding sorcery and just recently in Vanuatu as well there's been a mandate given to the Department of Justice to look at how to improve the sorcery laws. So these are pretty current events in the Pacific Island region so watch this space I guess to see how things go from here. Thank you. Good afternoon everyone. I hope you all enjoy the lovely way to hear. I'm Lenan Chan and I'm now a Research Officer at REGNET I'm now working on a project involving cyber crime and organized crime. As Veronica just said I completed my PhD at REGNET last year and based on my experience I should say if you are interested in doing research in regulatory science, REGNET is the best place you have to do your research. Today my presentation is based on my PhD and my field work experience. There will be two parts of today's presentation. I'll start with a breathing on my research and I would like to spend some time telling you about my experience doing research in China. My PhD research entitled subcrime across the Taiwan Strait Regulatory Responses and Crime Prevention involved comparative criminology research based on qualitative research in the greater China region. It aimed to identify and assess the viability of regulatory and other responses that government agencies and private companies can undertake to combat cyber crime. Under a special political situation between Taiwan and China where a former mutual assistant might not be feasible and workable between the two governments, it considered how to establish a feasible pre-warning system and how to encourage the public and private sectors to cooperate in strengthening their capacity against cyber crime. This begins with an account of extend the nature of cyber crime between Taiwan and China, especially under the prevalence of REGNET in Taiwan and China. Following the structure of routine activity theory and given the existence of motivated groups, it analysis Chinese and Chinese legal responses to cyber crime, mutual assistance between the two countries and cooperation through a third party to determine if there are alternative capabilities. Inspired by the concept of a risk common wealth, that is the proper assessment and management of risk is now common wealth that the state and its citizens should seek to promote and defend. It not only suggested the deserability of a pre-warning system between the government agencies and private companies to build up resilience and make targets less vulnerable and fruitful. It also examined concerns and incentives to attract organizations to participate and share information on security incidents. For research purpose, my thesis denies conventional crime facilitated by computers and Internet, such as like online drug dealing, disseminating child pornography, online gambling. The narrative of cyber crime discussed in my thesis mainly focus on topic related to new types of crime, such as hacking. I should show you the photo first. The hacking. Understand? And this is the website of a Taiwanese government website which has been hacked by the Chinese hacker. And there was a time when the city in Taiwan called Kaohsiung invited both Dalai Lama and Libya to Taiwan to do a speech. So they just put on a photo like this and the words on the two sides is not, is some big comment so I think I don't need to explain it. You know, you know. After examining the computer malicious activities, legal responses and law enforcement measures against cyber crime in Taiwan and China, my thesis argues that there is an urgent need to establish a feasible pre-warning system and to make potential targets less vulnerable. Because many people, including government agencies and companies, use proprietary software like what we are using in Microsoft or Word or Windows. Malicious activity in cyber space, in cyber world has the characteristic of an infectious disease pandemic. When it happens, the consequences can be widespread and damaging because it spreads so quickly. It is important to establish measures to prevent malicious activities from disseminating and thereby minimise the damage and loss to society. In my thesis, I propose a weak approach. I think a weak approach is essential and a feasible pre-warning system is needed for effective cyber crime prevention. That is, cyber crime prevention needs to involve all users in cooperative efforts with warnings and information on counter-measures sent out to prevent the disease from spreading when users encounter an attack. Of course, the issue on how to improve the reporting system, such as eliminating the reputational concerns, hydro-headed reporting system, are discussed in my thesis. And based on the regulatory pyramid which we would like to use in Ragnet and the strength-based pyramid as you can see on the PowerPoint, the thesis also discuss the pros and cons of using compulsory or voluntarily reporting schemes and learning from the US aviation safety reporting system. This thesis argues that a non-coercive approach, such as giving praise and providing technical support, can help to make the system or the scheme more effective. The methodology of this thesis included qualitative interviews, secondary data analysis and the study of comparative law. As can be seen on the PowerPoint, 38 interviews with 44 interviewees including police officers, prosecutors, cyber crime experts, and loads in charge of information security problems in both government agencies and private companies were conducted in Taiwan, China and Hong Kong. Based on the sensitivity of the topic as well as the sensitivity of my identity, my nationality, it is very difficult actually for me to do my field work in China on this topic. When I first went to China, no one was willing to talk to me on this topic. And actually without trust and Guanxi, which is similar concept to social capital relation, it would be difficult for everyone to do research in China. Apart from that, I feel that people in China are not comfortable to be interviewed. However, as mentioned earlier, the research ends up having 15 interviews with 18 interviewees in China. It was more than actually what I expected. Here I would like to show you some experience about my field work experience and how it ended up with 18 people that are willing to be interviewed. If you plan to do field work in China, try to stay longer, like what Ross did, and try to build up Guanxi with some potential interviewees. This can be done through heavy meals or drinks or coffee together. Don't laugh, let's serious. Giving small presents when you visit them or just try to visit them as many times as possible. Of course, you can also go through your friends and ask them to introduce his friends to you. However, this kind of Guanxi or social capital won't be able to just because someone introduced you to someone, you still need to devote yourself talking to him, do what I just said, and you have to maintain and improve the relationship yourself. Although it's important for you to divide your field work into several times, if you've got enough grounds to go, you will find the change of the attitude of your potential interviewees every time when you visit them, because they come acquainted to you every time the relationship improves every time when you visit them. For my experience they become more friendlier and more willing to talk to me than the previous time I visited. I think I'm running out of time, I'll leave it here. If you are interested in my topic, actually there will be another presentation on this topic on the China Study Association of Australia on 14th July. Good afternoon everyone, I'm Judith Healy and I'm going to talk about who gets good health care in Southeast Asian countries. Now I probably don't need to point out to people here that this is a very diverse region. Many of you are visiting from these countries and the region's seen rapid change in the last few decades. There's been a demographic transition, people are living longer, women are having fewer children, there's been a socio-economic transition, rapid economic growth with less poverty but increasing inequity in many countries as the gap between the rich and the poor has been widening. And rapid urbanisation as people move from rural to urban areas. It's also undergoing an ecological transition. The burden of disease has been shifting from infectious to chronic diseases like heart disease stroke, cancers but infectious disease we've realised in the last few years is also of big concern because the region is a hotspot for new and emerging diseases and we only have to think of SARS and avian flu and the potential for pandemics to spread around the world. So countries like Asia and Europe have got a lot more interested in healthcare systems in Asian countries and their ability to set up good surveillance. So for quite selfish reasons there's a lot of interest by the rich countries in healthcare systems of the poorer countries apart from humane and development aid considerations. Seeing a transition in healthcare systems governments in the region have begun to accept that they are the stewards for the health of the populations in their countries. They might not deliver healthcare services themselves but it's a responsibility of government to try and make sure that people have access to good healthcare. Also there's rising public expectations. People have greater expectations that they should be able to get to healthcare when they need it. So I'm going to mainly confine my comments to the ASEAN region and here's another map that covers the 10 Asian countries which are Australia's northern neighbours. I don't think ASEAN has let Australia into the club yet but despite our foreign affairs minister trying from time to time to get in saying that we're all Asian. So it's a diverse region. It ranges from very rich countries like Singapore through Malaysia and Cambodia and I've just picked up three examples here taking the World Bank classification of a high income country like Singapore, an upper middle and income country like Malaysia which has seen very rapid economic growth one of the so called Asian tiger economies and a low income country like Cambodia. And you can see when you look at life expectancy that we're talking about a 20 year gap in life expectancy between the rich and the poor countries in the ASEAN region. Some countries are increasingly urbanised and industrialised like Singapore but then look at Cambodia where only 15, you know it's mainly a poor and rural population with just a small proportion so far living in cities but there is quite a lot of migration going on in the area. And some of that reflected in infant mortality and you can see that deaths per thousand life births among infants is very small in Singapore as it is in Australia and other OECD countries but look at Cambodia with 50 deaths per thousand life births so a major problem still with infant mortality. How much to these countries spend on healthcare? Well Singapore can afford to spend a lot per capita. Malaysia and Cambodia are spending much less. A big issue is to what extent governments are funding their healthcare systems or whether it's all coming from private health expenditure. So in all of these countries over half to three quarters of the funds for healthcare are coming from private sources and if you compare that to Australia we're about a third where government funds about two thirds of healthcare services in these countries which is also the case in most OECD countries except the United States which is an outlier as we know with a very expensive private healthcare system. It is a major problem if a lot of the private healthcare is coming out of people's pockets. If individuals themselves are having to make out of pocket payments for healthcare and as you can imagine that can be catastrophic for poor families if they've got to pay for hospital visits in patient stays or a lot of visits to a doctor. So the amount that comes out of pocket from people is a major equity issue for healthcare policy. And also human resources. You know how many doctors and nurses have got to deliver healthcare to the population and as you can see only about 1.1 per thousand doctors and nurses in Cambodia not many. So for reasons of equity and diversity just last month an Asia Pacific Observatory on health systems and policies established and the idea is to provide information to policy, information and evidence to policy makers in the region who are all in different ways looking to reform and improve their healthcare systems. So this is one of these partnership organisations made up from the World Health Organization, World Bank, Asian Development Bank AusAIDS, several governments and a couple of universities. So the idea is to do reports and analyses, research what's happening with healthcare in the countries in the region and to get going, a better dialogue between researchers and the people who make health policy. So I've emphasised the diversity in the region but really there are common issues and here are some of the questions that researchers in health policy and health systems are interested in. Firstly, well how best to fund healthcare systems should they be funded out of general revenue, taxation out of social health insurance like out of payroll tax private health insurance should it be mainly out of pocket as it is in many of these poorer countries or aid from donors. And every country varies a bit in how they fund their healthcare and a lot of factors enter into it like how easy it is to collect taxes. Many of these countries have a very large informal sector. It's difficult to collect taxes from privately employed people. It also depends a bit on the culture of taxation compliance in a country. This isn't a problem just in Asia, think of Greece. There are decades of making a tax evasion a national sport there. Another big issue is how to manage the public-private mix because in all of these countries the private healthcare sector is growing. And how do you staff healthcare? We have shortages of health professionals in many countries of the world now. And what we're seeing is a brain drain in the ASEAN region countries as doctors and nurses move from poorer to richer countries which is not surprising if richer countries can pay you a better salary and provide you with a more satisfying workplace. We're seeing a shift of healthcare staff from public to private services and the growth of medical tourism. So for example Thailand and Malaysia are positioning themselves as providers of private healthcare to other people in the region and their top end hospital are employing a lot of doctors from other countries who can provide healthcare to richer tourists. Context is really crucial so in looking at health policies and programs what works in one country might not work in another. It depends very much on its history, culture, politics, the sort of healthcare system that it has. So you can't necessarily pick up a good idea from one country and translate it to another. People within each country have to look at what can be adapted. It's important to learn from each other to learn from other countries but also be able to adapt. An increasingly important question now is how to regulate for good and safe healthcare. That question becomes a lot more important also with the growth of private healthcare so although financing who pays for healthcare is a perennial and important topic, more attention in the region is now moving to well okay, is it good quality healthcare? Are we getting quality for our money? And this is extremely important. If you don't have much money to spread around you have to make sure that you get the best from it. So I want to move now and talk about regulation in relation to patient safety because this is an area I've been working on for the last five years. So for example medical areas which we now call adverse events. How safe is healthcare? Now there's been a lot of research done on healthcare in modern hospitals in high income countries and if any of you are unlucky enough to be admitted to a hospital you have a more than one in ten chance of something going wrong that shouldn't. Which is a bit of a shock because we assume that doctors are these wonderful beings who never make mistakes. Well they do and in busy hospitals a lot of things can go wrong. So I've just put up a slide giving you examples of the sorts of adverse events that can occur in hospitals, medication areas, surgical areas. But I want to draw your attention to just one in particular now. And that is hospital caused infections. Hospital associated infections. And that's an increasing problem as we have more antibiotic resistance around the world. You admitted to hospital there's a lot of other sick people with infectious diseases going on and you're more likely to catch things. Plus a lot of diseases now are resistant to antibiotics because they've been such profligate use of antibiotics. So in modern hospitals in high income countries, well nearly 10% of patients are at risk of getting a hospital acquired infection. It's much higher, much much higher in developing countries there's been a small number of studies recently that show that between 15 to 25% of patients will get an infection in hospital. They're okay when they went in but they get another infection on top of it. Now that's a big problem. So the World Health Organization is making this a number one campaign. And that's sensible because this is an issue for developing countries as well as high income countries. All hospitals can do something about it. So they've got a campaign about clean care as safer care. Now that means really basic stuff like making sure that doctors and nurses wash their hands before examining patients. You would think that would be standard and we've known about that for a very long time but it's easy for very busy people to forget about this. So they're really pushing this very basic message. Wash your hands before examining a patient. There have been a few studies that show healthcare staff often wash their hands after examining a patient. No, no, before. You know, worry about the patient, not about yourself. So what types of regulation will improve patient safety? And this is all around the world, not just in Asia Pacific region. Well, first of all, strengthening governance. And this is what the group in the regulatory institutions network are really interested in. So governments in many countries are strengthening their regulation of healthcare performance by passing legislation by requiring hospitals to publish their success rates, you know, like what proportion of medical errors going on your hospital, how good are you in successful surgery by establishing regulatory agencies who collect information and publishes more transparent performance assessments and making the health professions and the health industry more accountable. It's also important to design safe systems. Hospitals and equipment procedures have been really slow to design for safety. And healthcare can be a risky business as I think I've now persuaded you. Unlike other high risk industries, health sector has been slow to reduce risks because it assumes that doctors and nurses are these super men and super women who don't make errors against all evidence and, you know, against human nature. It's also important to promote a patient safety culture to encourage the medical culture to promote patient centered healthcare. So put patients first, not staff first. So regulation can range from persuasion at the bottom of a regulatory pyramid right up to passing legislation and command and control sort of regulation at the stop So this is an example of one of these regulatory pyramids that we rather like in Regnet. We all do pyramids. Occasionally I do circles as well just for a bit of variety but I'm sticking to pyramids today. So right at the top you can have command and control sort of regulatory action you pass legislation, you find people if they don't do the right thing so it's enforcement by government or it's agents coming down you have meta regulation you might set up an external regulator who will publish performance indicators on hospitals. So you can go to a website and see which is the hospital that will give me the best and safest healthcare. You might have a partnership between external and internal regulators and that's extremely important in the healthcare area where professional associations are very strong and after all there are very strong ethical standards in nursing and medical associations and all of the other associations of healthcare professionals and you want to build on those strengths. There's also self regulation where you would leave it to an association of hospitals for example to try and regulate their members. Market mechanisms are important you could maybe refuse to pay for unsafe healthcare which is what some of the insurance funds in the United States are doing. Or volunteerism, an individual voluntarily undertakes to do the right thing and that is particularly important in all areas of regulation and I think particularly in the healthcare sector and it's a pyramid because you want to drive down regulation to the base, you want most of the regulation to go on at the cheapest and most respectful end of the pyramid. That's where we want to see most of the activity but we want to have the ability to move up the pyramid if people aren't doing the right thing. So one of the strategies at the top of the pyramid of course would be to sue your doctor or hospital if they don't do the right thing. So my question is do lawyers get safer healthcare? The cartoon asks wait this one's a lawyer we'd better wash our hands. And here's a couple of references. Thanks for that. My name is Sharon van de Heider. I'm going to talk here through a part of my research at RACnet which is about volunteerism at the bottom of the latest pyramid so thanks for covering that ground for me. And my question here is what is your role for volunteerism in ecological sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific? If we look at the 20th century we see a growth of basically everything. I mean this is the 20th century. Population growth, industrialization urbanization but at the same time we see a lot of problems, a lot of growth in problems and especially in sustainability. More waste is being produced, more pollution, more energy is being consumed and we all know that this is one of the major social risks we are currently facing and we recognize this at RACnet and we study these things. At the same time we see that policymakers NGOs and industries have big dreams and I refer to these as utopian visions. In China there are major utopian decisions on building enormous eco cities. Cities in which millions of people can live together in a very environmental sustainable way so that they can work and live together in harmony with nature not polluting the world too much as we are supposed to do. Other people and most of the time these are NGOs have smaller dreams but still these are utopias. This is a utopia a small dream in Bangladesh in which a local NGO dreams about a more sustainable approach to water management to ensure that the local people in Bangladesh have a very high quality of water within their area. What we question and not only we at RACnet but what policymakers, industry stakeholders and NGOs questions is how can we realize these utopias? How can we realize these dreams? If you look at regulatory literature you find that environmental issues are very difficult to tackle with regulations only. So where we use to look at regulation as what has already been taught command and control systems, systems in which the state sets up regulations and enforces these, we tend to see that environmental issues are too wicked. They are wicked problems. The problems in the environmental area are hard to solve and pretty often it is because there are so many people involved there are so many interests involved but one of the major issues is that every problem comes with or every solution comes with more problems. So as soon as you tackle a part of the problem you find that there are more problems to solve, wicked problems. And the problem with wicked problems is that the traditional approaches don't really work. So where we use to think of regulation and governance as a thing being done by the state or by governments and setting up regulations which non-state actors had to follow, we see that in environmental issues there is a tendency to look at collaboration between the two. We hope that if the state and non-state actors, if governments, industry stakeholders and NGOs work together, that they can come up with better governance systems. Systems that can really address these environmental issues. And one of the governance arrangements I like to look at and one of the governance arrangements that a lot of policy makers and industry stakeholders like to look at is volunteerism. Volunteerism here may be understood as a way to increase the environmental performance of people, industries but also of state stakeholders without any legislation, without any deterrence coercion by legislation. Of course when we look at a phenomenon such as volunteerism, we tend to define these in different aspects or different categories. And within the studies on volunteerism you could distinguish between the factor of volunteerism, governance and agreements and pure volunteerism or self-regulation. And they all have their own way of addressing environmental problems. The first one, the factor of volunteerism, may be understood as an approach in which the government still sets up regulations but doesn't really enforce these. And we see a lot of examples of these. We see examples of regulations being in place organizations having to follow these regulations but they are being enforced and still these organizations do comply with these regulations. Why should they? And why do they? This is a very intriguing question. Why do people comply with regulations without being enforced? The factor of volunteerism. Another example are governance and agreements. And in this example or in this type of governance and agreements we see that state and non-state actors come together, they come to agreements on how to address certain environmental risks. And over here in Australia we have the national packaging governance and in the national packaging governance state and non-state stakeholders came to an agreement on how to reduce the impact of packaging. There aren't really formal regulations on this. There isn't formal legislation on it but still industry stakeholders see that they have to address the environmental impact of packaging and they came to an agreement with governments. The most intriguing one is pure volunteerism or self-regulation or whatever you want to name it. And this is where industry stakeholders without any help, without any support, without any pressure from governments set up their own regulations and force these amongst their own group and by so truly address the environmental issues we face, the environmental problems we face. And what is interesting about this area is that we see various examples of pure volunteerism pop up everywhere, all over the world and also over here in Asia and the Pacific. And these are a number of green building certification schemes and a green building certification scheme basically sets regulations on the environmental performance of buildings. People build the building, apply for a certain rating. The building is being assessed and depending on how sustainable the building is you get a certain rating. The first green star environmental development are Australian examples, the other ones are examples throughout Asia. And what is interesting about this is that these programs have developed all independently. So it's the same period of time within the last 10 years we see these programs pop up everywhere. We don't know yet whether or not they really work. And that is one of the major issues in the studies on volunteerism. Does volunteerism really work? A part of the literature tells it does, another part of the literature tells it doesn't. So the question therefore is under what circumstances and where does volunteerism work? Another major issue with volunteerism at the moment and the studies on volunteerism is that the current theory is very western oriented. Basically all examples, basically all theorizing is built on Anglo-Saxon or other western examples, northern European examples. So for you as future scholars in Asia in the Pacific I would like to raise two questions. I really hope you would like to take up the questions in volunteerism and strive to find what works and where, which we would call empirical generalization. What type of voluntary programs work and where in Asia in the Pacific? I think more interestingly is the theoretical generalization. Given that so much of the current theorizing is based on western examples, we could question whether or not volunteerism also may provide a solution to many of the environmental issues Asia and the Pacific faces. So therefore do these western based theories also apply in Asia and the Pacific? And if we can find answers to these questions, I hope that when somebody in the next century gives this presentation that he or she can show this graph and could tell that in the 21st century we've seen a lot of growth but we've also seen a decline of the environmental impact people pose on the natural environment. Thank you for your attention. Thanks so much. We've gone from sorcery to wicked problems. We have time for questions and comments. If you'd like to raise a question identify yourself and tell us who you'd like to direct the question to. We'll take a couple of questions to let the panellists think about the responses I'll cluster them and then I'll ask the panel to respond. Over here. My first question today is to Dr. Hillary and I was in relation to in relation to a meta-regulation. In South East Asia a lot of the countries is required to apply for. So if we're using meta-regulation I'm wondering how this would be distributed in a practical sense to the general population. But also with the usual research around healthcare. Is there a practical way we could actually get some of these medical issues dealt with such as you see innocence projects used in law and internships where you put students in and helping them. I'm thinking along that line. The other quick question is just to Lenin. You talk about going into country and it's very important if you do research in the country to get a feel of what's going on. And the importance of relationship. I was wondering some of the issues you had in China is the fact that you were an outsider or a lowly as the Chinese would say or is it more the fact that there's this tension across the Taiwan strait. Thanks. Over here. First of all thank you for all the very fantastic presentations and I learned a lot. My questions and comments are just for Dr. Lenin Chow in particular right into the second part of your presentation. First you addressed that relationship or關係 is very important for researchers in China or doing research on China. I totally agree with that. But also thinking about on the other hand would be approach a bit risky because sometimes as a social scientist you have to be not only value free but you choose your cases when you choose interviewees. You have to follow certain kinds of rules there. So could you give some suggestions on how to balance the practical consideration and the academic requirement there. Especially on selecting interviewees because apparently if you select all interviewees among your friends there are very likely you will have some bias there. But of course it's relevant on your question. As you mentioned at the beginning some people talk to you they might say it's unseen and as time goes by your relation should be stronger. They may say other things. I had this experience as well. But I'm thinking about whether or not this itself is kind of interesting research itself because how people the people's discourse may be different from their actual consideration and why it's different, how it's different and how it changes is also interesting with the questions. Thanks. We'll take one more question for the panel. We'll take two more. We'll take over here and in the middle over there. Hi, my name is Scott Gellin. I'm from Vancouver. Dr Chang, my question is for you on the role of state sanctioned cyberprime in China. There's reports of prison guards in China and prisoners for online gold mining. If you're asking the Chinese government to regulate cyber crime what role does that play in terms of corruption and so on. Any other thoughts you have on the broader implications of cyber security? My name is Brooke Novelin. I'm from University of Western Australia. My question is for Miranda. I work in Indonesia where there are hundreds of different types of real black magic systems going on, none of which have been incorporated into the legal system and so I wanted to ask you something about the history behind how and when sorcery was incorporated into the legal system and was it a top-down approach? Was it sort of imposed from politicians or was there something that people in Banoatu wished to have incorporated into the legal system? Also, is sorcery what sort of diversity do you find in sorcery and black magic systems in the country and how is the legal code sort of deal with diversity and what issues of power and class are going on in terms of the sorcery that you mentioned? Thank you. These are terrific questions. They're also fairly complex so I'm going to invite our panel to respond but respond succinctly so that we have time for another round. Judith. Okay, the first question. How does the European country with not much money and shortages of professional stuff regulate the healthcare system? Well of course they've got to look for feasible and cheaper ways of doing it. They're not going to be able to do it through sophisticated, you know, computer monitoring systems as we do for some extent in Australia and other European countries because they often don't have computers for one thing. So, meta-regulation is about an external regulator making the internal regulator more accountable so what you'd be interested in is promoting strong professional associations. Now that's what always goes down-side because there's training to use of course but you know you want them to take more responsibility for regulating their own members so you'd be looking to encourage a voluntary industry association to take more responsibility for making sure any of the hospitals or member doctors clinics took more responsibility for monitoring what goes on. So to give you an example of actually an interesting example, they've got a visitating program where the different professional groups go around and visit each of the hospitals so the orthopedic surgeons go around and visit a small room orthopedic surgeon who visit the orthopedic sections of the hospitals and write a report on how well they're doing. So a lot of peer pressure and that works really well with doctors. Also, you might look at encouraging patients to, you know, patients can be regulatory actors. Now we're beginning to try that in many countries. So for example there's a survey in the UK that says okay if a doctor or nurse came into the exam review is it important for a patient to remind them to clean their hands? Everyone said yes, yes, oh yes it's important, yes. And then the question was well would you remind them oh no you know I wouldn't like to challenge or criticize a doctor or nurse. So it's all about trying to make encourage patients to empower patients really, to give them more information and to empower them. You know if it's okay to ask a question with that girl in the healthcare, you are a partner in their healthcare that you're getting. So there's a lot of different strategies that have been working into healthcare as well as our high income strategies. How do you go about doing research in this area while there's lots of different avenues? You might come out of a legal area or health economics or you know it doesn't just have to be at any school. So there's lots of sociology, lots of different areas. Ethical clearances are always a bit of a problem. It was more translating the theory into practice as opposed to how you go about the theory. The theory into practice. Well there's certainly lots of opportunities as you work in the healthcare area and again it's about empowering individuals within the healthcare system. So for example there's a patient identification protocol before surgery that the protocol says okay before you cut into the patient stop and ask have I got the correct patient? Am I not doing a procedure on the correct side? Is this the correct procedure? And they're trying to empower nurses to say oops excuse me Mr. So-and-so surgeon this is, we don't have the correct, this is our own patient or if this is strictly on the left side not the right side medical culture you know it has to change to accept that healthcare is a team business these days. It's not just about one professional different service. It's about a team and a new team should have a say in what goes on. Super. Thank you. I'm going to ask you to pass to Lenin. Thank you for the questions. I was quite surprised they were getting a lot of questions. Okay I'll kind of find the first question and then I'll ask the question. I think, yes, I'll start this question not only to Tony, but what happens to me as my topic is real sensitive and when I was there I was actually I think I sort of being recognised side. So every time when I go to China I get some check and customs. This is not only to the question of my personality and the sensitivity of the whole question and for the lack of interviewees and your own friends in terms of time. I think it differs from I was giving the same topic I was talking about the same topic last year and it was in occasion of an anthropologist's section. So the chair told me that just talk to someone who wants to talk to you. Because you can't get, it would be good if you can talk to the ones you want to talk to, but let's not sustain especially for this kind of topic. So what I do is I approach the ones I want to talk to and I try to build up the relationship with the topic that I want to talk to. I'm not saying my friends are my interviewees, but I might talk to someone that I want to talk to who goes to my friends. So that might minimise the risk, but you just mentioned that there might be some issues. And another question is that for interviews you can only talk to someone who voluntarily talks to you. I tried to go through the formal process. I was going to interview a prosecutor and he agreed to be interviewed, but he told me that I had to send out a formal letter to his folks and once his folks approved he talked to me. But what happened to me is that yes, I get it, but what he told me, what you can read and the unpublished papers. But there's always a limitation you can do. If you can't approach the one you want to talk to or if you are thinking of interviews you might just put it in the research limitation. And for qualitative interviews there's always an exploring topic. You can't use it to generalise the whole situation. So maybe you can follow up the research you've done this time to establish another research to fill out the risk or the leg that happens. And for the goal following, that's a very interesting topic. I think what I'm proposing my thesis is that nowadays it's quite difficult for us to really find out who is the criminal. When we read these papers, we can see a lot of western countries criticising China supporting the Southern Prime, Southern World War, Southern Terrorism or whatever. But I've mentioned briefly about the ball nets. That's kind of an organised crime that people can use other people's computer to assist people to protect some of their computer. And according to my research I think you might all know that there are a lot of vault infected computers in China. They might be controlled by the US, might be controlled by electronics, might be controlled by Australia. Who knows. Then in this case, of course China can say no I'm not supporting them. You have to give me the real evidence showing that I am the one who's supporting that. So in my thesis I think there's no capable guardians in Southern space. It would be difficult for us to really find out who is the criminal. That's the reason why I drove back to propose the idea of the crime prevention. I think it's important to build up the state of Southern space. Although criticizing the criminal is important, but what I talk in my thesis, what I discuss in my thesis is more on how we secure it. I don't want to talk about the criminal and can't find it. Terrific, thanks very much. I'm going to exercise a little bit of command and control here. Miranda you were asked a really interesting but complex question and in the interests of time I'm going to ask you to give a really succinct response. Thanks. So yes, the introduction of sorcery as a crime that I want to report is very much top down as a project independence, but a lot of legislation has to be drafted. However since then there has been a popular movement and particularly the chiefs have been wholly for assistance in dealing with this as a problem. So that's why I have recently said to the Justice Minister or the ex-Justice Minister has been taking the change of government in the last couple of months saying we want to have more legislation about this. There's many different sorts of magic, good, bad, love and finding things, very useful finding things. And it is related to power and fast. It used to be a control, a form of social control exercised by community leaders and nowadays it's just spread throughout. So it's broken out of its boundaries which is related to some of the projects. I have written an article about the set of projects in the Royal Asia, I'm sort of interested in looking at that and I'm also planning to do a comparative study using other countries in the region so if you do anything, you know, any information, then please get in touch with me and see how we can go from there. Super. Thank you very much.