Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Katherine Witt is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Katherine Witt.


Ecology and Society | 2016

The study of human values in understanding and managing social-ecological systems

Natalie A. Jones; Sylvie Shaw; Helen Ross; Katherine Witt; Breanna Pinner

The study of cognition can provide key insights into the social dimension of coupled social-ecological systems. Values are a fundamental aspect of cognition, which have largely been neglected within the social-ecological systems literature. Values represent the deeply held, emotional aspects of people’s cognition and can complement the use of other cognitive constructs, such as knowledge and mental models, which have so far been better represented in this area of study. We provide a review of the different conceptualizations of values that are relevant to the study of human-environment interactions: held, assigned, and relational values. We discuss the important contribution values research can make toward understanding how social-ecological systems function and to improving the management of these systems in a practical sense. In recognizing that values are often poorly defined within the social-ecological systems literature, as in other fields, we aim to guide researchers and practitioners in ensuring clarity when using the term in their research. This can support constructive dialogue and collaboration among researchers who engage in values research to build knowledge of the role and function of values, and hence cognition more broadly, within a social-ecological systems context.


Environmental Modelling and Software | 2017

Challenges of integrated modelling in mining regions to address social, environmental and economic impacts

Alex M. Lechner; Neil McIntyre; Katherine Witt; Christopher M. Raymond; Sven Arnold; Margaretha Scott; Will Rifkin

Planning in mining regions needs to accommodate the extraction of minerals/energy resources in co-existence with established land uses, such as agriculture and ecological conservation. Here, we first identify six critical aspects of planning in mining regions: i) the temporal nature of mining operations; ii) spatial dimensions of mining operations; iii) irreversible changes that create post-mining landscapes; iv) social dimensions of mining impacts and corporate responsibility; v) cumulative dimensions of impacts; and vi) a need to integrate methods from a range of disciplines. We then illustrate the potential to address these challenges using integrative modelling nested within a participatory approach to allow for clear, transparent, and stakeholder-inclusive decision-making. We describe a 5-step framework that supports a broadening of strategic assessments and offers mining companies forewarning about potential environmental and social conflicts. Case studies are needed to assess and refine the proposed framework and develop guidance for its use. Display Omitted Planning for mining regions needs to accommodate multiple established land uses.Five aspects of mining affect the application of integrated regional modelling.We describe an integrated, multi-disciplinary modelling approach for mining regions.Such modelling and decision making need to be participatory in order to reduce conflict.This framework supports a broadening of strategic assessments for mining.


Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal | 2018

Evolution or revolution: where next for impact assessment?

Zsuzsa Banhalmi-Zakar; Claire Gronow; Lachlan Wilkinson; Bryan Jenkins; Jenny Pope; Geraldine Squires; Katherine Witt; Galina Williams; Jon Womersley

ABSTRACT Impact assessment (IA) has become one of the most prevalent environmental policy instruments today. Its introduction under the National Environmental Policy Act (US) in 1969 was revolutionary. Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that such a widely used tool has received its share of criticism, including that it fails to meet some of its fundamental goals. Over the last fifty years, IA has broadened in scope and application and embraced new techniques. It has followed evolved, but has not changed fundamentally. We believe that IA must continue to change to meet the societal and environmental challenges of the 21st century. But will it be enough for IA to progress through incremental change (evolution), or is a complete overhaul of impact assessment (revolution) needed? We provide some ideas as to what ‘evolution’ and ‘revolution’ may look like, but rather then offering a definitive way forward now, we invite stakeholders to present their thoughts and suggestions at the IAIA19 Annual Conference in Brisbane, which carries the same theme as the title of this article.


Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering | 2016

An overview of the coal seam gas developments in Queensland

Brian F. Towler; Mahshid Firouzi; Jim Underschultz; Will Rifkin; Andrew Garnett; Helen Schultz; Joan Esterle; Stephen Tyson; Katherine Witt


Australasian Journal of Environmental Management | 2009

Exploring the ‘city-bush divide’: what do urban people really think of farmers and rural land management?

G. B. Witt; Katherine Witt; R. W. Carter; A. Gordon


Marine Policy | 2016

Values towards waterways in south east Queensland: Why people care

Natalie A. Jones; Helen Ross; Sylvie Shaw; Katherine Witt; Breanna Pinner; David Rissik


The Extractive Industries and Society | 2018

Is the gas industry a good neighbour? A comparison of UK and Australia experiences in terms of procedural fairness and distributive justice

Katherine Witt; John Whitton; Will Rifkin


The Extractive Industries and Society | 2018

Industry and government responses to unconventional gas development in Australia

Katherine Witt; Stephen Kelemen; Helen Schultz; Vlado Vivoda


Archive | 2018

A framework for Social Impact Assessment of shale gas development in the Northern Territory

Katherine Witt; Vlado Vivoda; Jo-Anne Everingham; Nicholas A. Bainton


IAIA17 Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment | 2017

Cumulative Impact Assessment is not so SIMPle

Katherine Witt; Will Rifkin; Lara Mottee; Jo-Anne Everingham

Collaboration


Dive into the Katherine Witt's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Will Rifkin

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Vikki Uhlmann

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Helen Ross

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Helen Schultz

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

R. W. Carter

University of the Sunshine Coast

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Sylvie Shaw

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Vlado Vivoda

University of South Australia

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Andrew Garnett

University of Queensland

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge