Heidegger regards movement not as a transition between states, but as a basic mode of being, and as such it plays an important role in his ontology (GA18:304; GA65:194). In this respect, Heidegger is following Aristotle’s lead – the significance of movement for Heidegger can be traced back to Aristotle’s observation that all natural entities (phusei onta) are characterized by movement in one way or another (GA19:103).

Introduction

This chapter develops a comparison of two projects based in the West End of Newcastle, both of which involved university–third sector collaborations focused on place-based action. Both of the projects began in 2015 and before the general election of that year, in a policy environment that combined severe cuts (from a relatively high base in terms of urban policy) with a multifaceted emphasis on public service innovation. One was the Fenham Pocket Park and the other was the Reclaim the Lanes project. The authors are David Webb, Armelle Tardiveau and Daniel Mallo (university researchers), and Caroline Emmerson (former Youth and Community Manager at the CHAT [Churches Acting Together] Trust), Marion Talbot (Newcastle City Councillor) and Mark Pardoe (Friends of Fenham Pocket Park Secretary). The projects took place at a time when the government was reforming public services amid a rhetoric of ‘localism’, which was perceived by many commentators as a way of focusing public attention on alleged top-down control under the earlier New Labour government and away from the real causes of austerity (Kisby, 2010; Levitas, 2012), while driving a broadly conceived privatisation agenda (Myers, 2017; Findlay-King et al, 2018). Nevertheless, in this chapter, we offer some empirical reflections on our efforts to take localism at its word and, by working within the envelope of this policy agenda, to extend democracy to communities and to everyday life.

Our core argument here relates to the tensions that arise from the simultaneous pursuit of localism and austerity. These tensions are also contextualised by the marketisation of the third sector and by the concentration of decision-making power within council structures. These conditions, we will argue, have important implications for the form of democratic innovation we were able to achieve, as well as, ultimately, the outcomes arising from the projects. In combination, their effect was to undermine and contain efforts at democratic innovation that might otherwise have come closer to the populist policy rhetoric of achieving ‘a radical shift of power from the centralised state to local communities’ (HM Government, 2010: 2). Through the two projects, we explore the limits that austerity places on social innovation and the implications these may have for the civic university agenda in a future that is likely to be defined by a postpandemic economic agenda.

Written by Lucretius in the first century BCE, De Rerum Natura is an elaboration of Epicurean atomism that ranges over the origin of the universe, the formation of worlds, weather systems, the emergence of life and of social order, morality, and much else besides. It can be picked over for interesting anticipations of modern atomism and of evolutionary theory. Yet, as a materialist account of the emergence of order, it depends on an account of causality and law which has some surprises, and it is on these that I want to focus here. The familiar image of atoms moving and combining may lead one to expect that order in the universe depends ultimately on fixed laws governing the movement of atoms. Although there are some grounds for such a reading, they are not compelling, and Lucretius is otherwise quite clear that order consists of regularities that arise locally, varying from time to time and from place to place. That this theory of local regularities has been eclipsed by the assumption that laws are fixed says more about our own views than those of Lucretius. From the standpoint of contemporary approaches to causality, Lucretius’ account can be described as a regularity theory, where the regularities in question are a feature of the world (and not just of our perception of it). But it is distinctive in that cause and effect do not always and everywhere proceed according to the same invariable laws. Instead, causality precedes laws, which, as regularities, emerge locally and evolve along with the phenomena they determine. The causal structure of the universe is therefore real, but radically contingent. This idea sets Lucretius’ account apart from almost all existing theories of causality and law. Notable exceptions can be found in the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, to some extent in that of Émile Boutroux, and in certain quarters of contemporary cosmology. For example, Peirce writes that “there is room for serious doubt whether the fundamental laws of mechanics hold good for single atoms,” and advises that science turn its attention to “a natural history of laws of nature.” On his part, Boutroux declares that “it is chance, or destiny, or an ensemble of capricious wills, that presides in the universe.”

Written by Lucretius in the first century BCE, De Rerum Natura is an elaboration of Epicurean atomism that ranges over the origin of the universe, the formation of worlds, weather systems, the emergence of life and of social order, morality, and much else besides. It can be picked over for interesting anticipations of modern atomism and of evolutionary theory. Yet, as a materialist account of the emergence of order, it depends on an account of causality and law which has some surprises, and it is on these that I want to focus here. The familiar image of atoms moving and combining may lead one to expect that order in the universe depends ultimately on fixed laws governing the movement of atoms. Although there are some grounds for such a reading, they are not compelling, and Lucretius is otherwise quite clear that order consists of regularities that arise locally, varying from time to time and from place to place. That this theory of local regularities has been eclipsed by the assumption that laws are fixed says more about our own views than those of Lucretius. From the standpoint of contemporary approaches to causality, Lucretius’ account can be described as a regularity theory, where the regularities in question are a feature of the world (and not just of our perception of it). But it is distinctive in that cause and effect do not always and everywhere proceed according to the same invariable laws. Instead, causality precedes laws, which, as regularities, emerge locally and evolve along with the phenomena they determine. The causal structure of the universe is therefore real, but radically contingent. This idea sets Lucretius’ account apart from almost all existing theories of causality and law. Notable exceptions can be found in the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, to some extent in that of Émile Boutroux, and in certain quarters of contemporary cosmology. For example, Peirce writes that “there is room for serious doubt whether the fundamental laws of mechanics hold good for single atoms,” and advises that science turn its attention to “a natural history of laws of nature.” On his part, Boutroux declares that “it is chance, or destiny, or an ensemble of capricious wills, that presides in the universe.”

(December 2013)

HS: Can you tell us about when you first came across the social model of disability? What impact did it have on you, as a psychiatric system survivor?

DW: Very briefly, it begins with what I now call my four years of madness in the late 1990s. It was not until after this time that I found out about and began to get involved in (mental health) consumer advocacy, activism and politics. I also started my PhD on suicide around this time. All this led to my first contact with the World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry (WNUSP), and organisations like MindFreedom in the US, which opened my eyes to the global movement for radical change in how we think about and respond to madness (madness is my preferred alternative – not everyone's choice – to the harmful pseudoscience label of ‘mental illness’). We had nothing like these organisations in Australia. The ‘consumer’ organisations that we had here at that time were pretty locked into the medical model of madness and focused on service delivery, not human rights. Which remains the situation today, sadly. I know because I made the mistake of chairing one of these organisations for a while. WNUSP also introduced me to the work being done at that time on the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which further opened my eyes to what was needed and what was possible. It's been a breathtaking, exhilarating and incredibly rewarding journey for me, but also a demanding, frustrating and infuriating journey at times, which has contributed to the illness and disability (aka burn-out) that has led to my premature and unofficial ‘retirement’ from activism. Perhaps the most inspirational part of this wild journey has been to meet and work with some extraordinary people with disabilities who have taught me so much about what it is to be human – and even more about what human rights really means. I’d like to especially honour Lesley Hall who was not only a great leader of the disability movement here in Australia (and globally) but also great fun to be with – her sudden passing away just a few months ago was a great shock and a great loss. Vale, Lesley.

Summary

Australia has a spectacular and diverse reptile fauna approaching 1000 species, 93% of which are endemic to the continent. Despite this, there is a paucity of information on the biology of Australian reptiles compared with mammals and birds. The single greatest threat to Australian reptiles is the removal of native vegetation, most of which has occurred in the state of Queensland during the past few decades. Since European settlement in Australia, land clearing for stock grazing and other agricultural activities has reduced the extent of native vegetation, and resulted in extensive habitat fragmentation. Ultimately, habitat fragmentation leads to species loss and local extinctions. Other threats to Australian reptiles include livestock grazing, which occurs on 55% of the continent, coupled with changing fire regimes and predation by exotic predators, especially foxes and feral cats. Currently, we know little about the long-term impacts of pastoralism, fire and introduced predators on reptile communities. The conservation of Australian reptiles requires urgent changes in government policy to reduce rates of vegetation clearing. A critical challenge is the conservation of reptiles in the vast arid and semi-arid regions, where reptile diversity is remarkably high. This will require coordinated management of threatening processes across multiple land tenures, including pastoral leases, crown lands, Aboriginal lands and conservation reserves. In southern Australia, the conservation of reptiles in fragmented landscapes will require strategic tree planting to increase the sizes of habitat remnants and their connectivity, in addition to retaining important structural habitat features such as rock outcrops, old growth trees and fallen timber. In addition to in situ conservation practices, breeding programmes are being employed to prevent the extinction of imperilled species.