Animesh Gain

Sustaining agricultural systems in tropical regions with complex topography is essential for enhancing productivity, resilience, and biodiversity conservation. This study applies the Healthy Farm Index (HFI) to evaluate farm-level sustainability across four dimensions production, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and quality of life in moderate-altitude agricultural landscapes of Penebel Sub-district, Tabanan District, Bali, Indonesia. Two villages with contrasting topographic conditions, Babahan and Senganan, were selected for comparative analysis. A total of 60 farming households and their associated farmlands were purposively sampled. Data collection included soil properties (pH and moisture), hardscape conditions, crop and livestock diversity, and farmer socio-economic characteristics. Biodiversity was assessed using the Shannon-Wiener Index, while relationships between HFI and other key indicators were analysed using linear regression and Pearson correlations in R. The results reveal that Babahan Village exhibited a higher median HFI (0.63) compared to Senganan Village (0.39), indicating more favorable agro-ecosystem conditions in relatively flatter terrain. A strong negative correlation was observed between soil pH and soil moisture (r = -0.98, p <0.001). Furthermore, species diversity (H′) showed a significant inverse relationship with HFI (R² = 0.76, p<0.001), suggesting a tradeoff whereby higher agricultural health scores are associated with the dominance of specific functional species rather than greater overall species richness. These findings highlight the influence of topography on farm-scale sustainability and underscore the critical role of land management practices. The study emphasises the need for site-specific strategies, including agroforestry and integrated water management, to optimise agricultural health in heterogeneous tropical landscapes.

The Australasian Journal of Environmental Management (AJEM) continues to grow as a recognised platform for environmental management research. The release of the 2025 Journal Citation Reports and CiteScore metrics marks an important achievement for the journal. AJEM’s impact factor increased from 1.5 to 2.4 and its ranking improved from 151st out of 193 journals to 128th out of 202 journals in the Environmental Studies category. As a result, the journal moved from Quartile 4 (Q4) to Quartile 3 (Q3). The Journal Citation Indicator also increased from 0.32 to 0.49, indicating greater recognition and influence of research published in AJEM...

Water diplomacy has emerged as a critical approach for promoting cooperation, preventing conflict, and ensuring equitable and sustainable water management across various scales, including community, subnational, and transboundary levels. However, the presence of uncertainty poses significant challenges to the effectiveness of water diplomacy efforts. This chapter investigates the scientific uncertainties in water diplomacy that pervade transboundary water management and negotiations. While the water diplomacy framework is applicable across multiple scales, the specific focus of this chapter is on the transboundary level. A comprehensive review is conducted to assess the extent to which existing global transboundary cooperation treaties account for uncertainty. Subsequently, various sources of uncertainty, including both variability (aleatory) and epistemic uncertainties in transboundary water resource assessment and management, are investigated. To illustrate the impact of uncertainties on diplomatic endeavors and decision-making processes, a case study of the Ganges River Basin is presented. The findings highlight the intricate relationship between scientific uncertainties and water diplomacy, emphasizing the need for robust approaches to address and navigate uncertainties in transboundary water negotiations.

To assess how scientific contributions reflect trends in environmental management in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand and meet the needs of the environmental profession, we reviewed peer-reviewed articles published in the Australasian Journal of Environmental Management from 2004 to 2024. The 449 publications demonstrate a strong interdisciplinary focus on governance, policy and social dimensions as well as balanced attention to land and water issues across a wide set of contemporary and continuing environmental concerns, including climate change and conservation. We found the journal makes a sound contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals. Much of the research by the 1,044 authors is multi-sectoral, with growing collaboration among government, industry and not-for-profit organisations. The journal’s knowledge base aligns well with the needs of the environmental profession as identified in a recent report. Topics warranting greater representation in future publications include climate change, disaster and resilience, political influence on policy, environmental education as well as Indigenous resource use. Although performing well on equity criteria, the Australasian Journal of Environmental Management encourages more contribution from Indigenous and female authors from both New Zealand and Australia.

Rising seas, scorching heatwaves and intensifying storms are no longer distant threats; they are reshaping where and how people live. Faced with these pressures, individuals and communities must navigate a fundamental question: should they move, or should they stay and adapt? To what extent do they have a choice? Much of the climate change–mobility literature frames this as a simple dichotomy: migration versus non-migration1, voluntary versus involuntary2. These distinctions emphasize the external drivers of mobility, often neglecting that the decision to migrate or stay is not merely a reactive response to external pressures, but is often a proactive, context-specific negotiation of opportunities, aspirations and identities in which people negotiate their futures (Box 1). Thus, migration and staying are not opposites; they can coexist as complementary strategies within broader ‘future-making’3. Future-making encompasses the choices and practices through which people pursue life aspirations shaped by cultural and personal imaginaries of success, security and a fulfilling life3. Recent research has begun to move beyond rigid binaries, exploring translocal livelihoods4, the thresholds of habitability5 and the importance of supporting stayers6. But it seldom investigates how these mobility decisions are inextricable from broader future-making aspirations and strategies and how migration and staying can be complementary practices embedded therein (Box 1). To address this gap, we propose a new concept of ‘tethered resilience’ that captures the simultaneous rootedness and mobility through which people negotiate risk and shape their futures.

This study compares two community-based forest management approaches in Bangladesh using Elinor Ostrom’s Social-Ecological Systems (SES) framework and design principles. It evaluates the co-management system in Chunati Wildlife Sanctuary (CWS), which is led by government and donor agencies, and the community-led model in Komolchori Village Common Forest (VCF), which is based on Indigenous knowledge and local rules. The study employs a comparative case study methodology, integrating document analysis, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions to evaluate governance effectiveness across different periods. Using a mixed-method approach by reviewing qualitative and quantitative data, the study examines how these two models affect forest health and the lives of people who depend on the forest. The SES framework, along with Ostrom’s eight design principles, is used to critically assess the effectiveness of both CWS and VCF over three periods: before 1990, 1990–2010, and 2010– present. The findings show that the top-down management in CWS limits community involvement, weakens key principles like clear boundaries and local decision-making, and ignores local rights. In contrast, the Komolchori VCF supports stronger community participation, fair benefit-sharing, and effective monitoring, despite lacking formal legal recognition. The comparative analysis highlights that governance outcomes depend not on the type of model used, but on the extent to which institutional arrangements align with local socio-ecological contexts. The study concludes that the effectiveness of community-based forest management is mainly shaped by local context. To improve forest management, it recommends empowering communities, recognising Indigenous knowledge, resolving land issues, and designing policies that fit local needs, with particular attention to institutional legitimacy, adaptive governance, and multi-level coordination.