Search

Novel combinations of global conditions, issues under investigation and research alliances require constant reassessment of how to conduct cross‐cultural research. Here we recount an exploratory investigation considering cross‐cultural research between Australian and Indonesian researchers. This paper sets out a range of considerations for practitioners of cross‐cultural research between our two countries. This investigation supports intentions to develop trans‐disciplinary climate change adaptation research but is applicable across multiple research topics and disciplines. We engaged a small multi‐disciplinary mix of researchers, from both countries, conducted two initial focus groups, and subsequently involved participants in drafting of this paper as an exploration of how being cross cultural could manifest. We highlight that cross‐cultural collaborations occur in environments of both cultural differences and power differences. Four main strategies emerged for dealing with the challenges (or opportunities): working respectfully, being reflective of cross‐cultural research practice, being flexible, and learning about culture. Overarching these strategies, we found cross‐cultural research requires considerable extra (long term) effort to tackle and that this is sustained by researchers' intrinsic motives to care for people and place, making this type of research a distinctive labour of love. Finally, we found similarities between cross‐cultural research and climate change adaptation research (even when conducted within one country) where both endeavours call for boundaries of places, cultures and disciplines to be crossed in order to effectively engage with complex topics and environments. Negotiating the liminalities here often defies set formulas and requires a willingness to engage with and 'muddle through' the messiness. Our findings will be of value to those undertaking cross‐cultural research across a wide range of issues. This paper addresses research collaboration between Australia and Indonesia and considers challenges and strategies for working at the intersection of cross cultural research collaboration and climate chance adaptation science. Analysis of focus group data from a multi‐disciplinary mix of researchers from these two countries highlighted four strategies for dealing with challenges: working respectfully, being reflective of cross‐cultural research practice, being flexible, and learning about culture. Overarching these strategies, we found cross‐cultural research requires extra effort and that this is sustained by a researcher's intrinsic motivations of care for people and place – a labour of love. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This article reports on an evaluation of a community-controlled peer education project led by a drug user organization (DUO) that aimed to contribute to hepatitis C prevention. This article also examines broader contextual issues, particularly the funding and governance arrangements affecting the conduct of peer education. Method: This project was evaluated in three sites in New South Wales, Australia. Monthly activity reports were completed by peer educators. Interviews were conducted with five groups of stakeholders: peer educators, peers, staff of the DUO, staff of non-government and government organizations that were partners in this project. Findings: Of the 3373 events categorized, 37% (n = 1154) were categorized by peer educators as being about hepatitis C, 39% (n = 1234) about safer injecting techniques and 24% (n = 760) about other issues. Peer educators described strategies they used particularly when their peers did not want to discuss hepatitis C or had other priorities. Conclusions: This project was successful in disseminating harm reduction information to the targeted community through the recruitment, training and support of peer educators. The results suggest the importance of broadening programme funding parameters to enable services to tailor their work to specific needs, while working towards the shared goal of hepatitis C prevention.

This article examines findings from a qualitative study exploring the experiences of young adults with disabilities regarding their perceptions of interpersonal discrimination on public transport in two Australian states. Interpersonal discrimination by members of the public included contests for accessible seating, receiving unwanted physical assistance, bullying and intimidation. Participants reported that transport staff engaged in verbal abuse and hostile interactions including questioning the young person's disability. These experiences appeared to be influenced by narrow perceptions of disability, visibility or otherwise of the young person's impairment, limited understanding of the needs of young people with disabilities, and the age and gender of the person behaving in a discriminatory way. The discriminatory experiences were reported to have had a negative impact on the social and economic participation of these young adults in their communities. The participants of the study disclosed diverse experiences of interpersonal discrimination by the travelling public and transport officials. Interpersonal discrimination impacted on some of the young adults' capacity to move about freely, as they sought to avoid exposure to prejudicial attitudes and verbal abuse. Heightened concerns about getting to and from activities safely affected the young adults' willingness to use public transport for their daily activities. Eliminating day-to-day interpersonal discrimination that young adults with disabilities experience on public transport requires legislative, policy and societal change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Australia, sterile needles and syringes are distributed to people who inject drugs (PWID) through formal services for the purposes of preventing blood borne viruses (BBV). Peer distribution involves people acquiring needles from formal services and redistributing them to others. This paper investigates the dynamics of the distribution of sterile injecting equipment among networks of people who inject drugs in four sites in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.Methods: Qualitative data exploring the practice of peer distribution were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews and participatory social network mapping. These interviews explored injecting equipment demand, access to services, relationship pathways through which peer distribution occurred, an estimate of the size of the different peer distribution roles and participants' understanding of the illegality of peer distribution in NSW.Results: Data were collected from 32 participants, and 31 (98%) reported participating in peer distribution in the months prior to interview. Of those 31 participants, five reported large-scale formal distribution, with an estimated volume of 34,970 needles and syringes annually. Twenty-two participated in reciprocal exchange, where equipment was distributed and received on an informal basis that appeared dependent on context and circumstance and four participants reported recipient peer distribution as their only access to sterile injecting equipment. Most (n=27) were unaware that it was illegal to distribute injecting equipment to their peers.Conclusion: Peer distribution was almost ubiquitous amongst the PWID participating in the study, and although five participants reported taking part in the highly organised, large-scale distribution of injecting equipment for altruistic reasons, peer distribution was more commonly reported to take place in small networks of friends and/or partners for reasons of convenience. The law regarding the illegality of peer distribution needs to change so that NSPs can capitalise on peer distribution to increase the options available to PWID and to acknowledge PWID as essential harm reduction agents in the prevention of BBVs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatitis C (HCV) is a stigmatised disease due, in part, to an association with injecting drug use. Aboriginal Australians, a stigmatised group, are over-represented in patterns of HCV infections. We examined the experience of Aboriginal Australians living with HCV using qualitative in-depth interviews, paying particular attention to instances where multiple stigma mechanisms (relating to HCV, injecting drug use and Aboriginal identity) overlapped. Stigma held a central role in the experience of most of the 39 participants with reports of exclusion and alienation from families and communities. HCV-related stigma was accompanied by the notion of 'shame' which holds deep cultural significance for Aboriginal people. Participants' accounts revealed overlapping stigma in their perception that others 'automatically' expect Aboriginal people to have a stigmatised disease such as HCV. HCV as a contemporary expression of colonisation was also woven into accounts of HCV-related stigma. Interventions to reduce HCV stigma should be specifically designed for minority populations to account for multiple, overlapping sources of stigma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemic is a significant public health challenge in Australia. Current initiatives to expand access to HCV treatment focus on opiate substitution therapy (OST) settings where the prevalence of hepatitis C among clients is high. In Australia, the provision of OST for many clients is via large clinics, with an estimated median of 150 clients per service. Conceptually informed by the work of Michel Foucault, our analysis of the proposed integrated treatment model focuses on the critical but overlooked question of organisational culture and power operating within OST. We argue that the specific context of OST not merely reflects but actively participates in the political economy of social exclusion via which the socio-spatial segregation and stigmatisation of the service user as 'drug user' is enacted. This paper analyses data collected from two samples during 2008/9: OST clients living in New South Wales, Australia and a range of OST health professionals working in Australian settings. In total, 27 interviews were conducted with current OST clients; 19 by phone and 8 face-to-face. One focus group and 16 telephone interviews were conducted with OST health professionals. Our analysis of key themes emerging from the interview data suggests that the successful introduction of HCV treatment within the OST clinic is not a given. We are concerned that particular areas of tension, if not explicit contradiction, have been overlooked in current research and debates informing the proposed combination treatment model. We question the appropriateness of co-locating a notoriously arduous, exacting treatment (HCV) within the highly surveillant and regulatory environment of OST. While applauding the intention to improve access to HCV care and treatment for people who inject drugs we caution against a treatment model that risks further entrenching (socio-spatial) stigmatisation amongst those already experiencing significant marginalisation., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)