Exploring for the Future (EFTF) is a four-year (2016-20) geoscience data and information acquisition program that aims to better understand on a regional scale the potential mineral, energy and groundwater resources concealed under cover in northern Australia and parts of South Australia. Hydrogeochemical surveys utilise groundwater as a passive sampling medium to reveal the chemistry of the underlying geology including hidden mineralisation. These surveys also potentially provide input into regional baseline groundwater datasets that can inform environmental monitoring and decision making. Geoscience Australia, as part of the Australian Government’s EFTF program, undertook an extensive groundwater sampling survey in collaboration with the Northern Territory Geological Survey and the Geological Survey of Queensland. During the 2017, 2018 and 2019 dry season, 224 groundwater samples (including field duplicate samples) were collected from 203 pastoral and water supply bores in the Tennant Creek-Mt Isa EFTF focus area of the Northern Territory and Queensland. An additional 38 groundwater samples collected during the 2013 dry season in the Lake Woods region from 35 bores are included in this release as they originate from within the focus area. The area was targeted to evaluate its mineral potential with respect to iron oxide copper-gold, sediment-hosted lead-zinc-silver and Cu-Co, and/or lithium-boron-potash mineral systems, among others. The 2017-2019 surveys were conducted across 21 weeks of fieldwork and sampled groundwater for a comprehensive suite of hydrogeochemical parameters, including isotopes, analysed over subsequent months. The present data release includes information and atlas maps of: 1) sampling sites; 2) physicochemical parameters (EC, pH, Eh, DO and T) of groundwater measured in the field; 3) field measurements of total alkalinity (HCO3-), dissolved sulfide (S2-), and ferrous iron (Fe2+); 4) major cation and anion results; 5) trace element concentrations; 6) isotopic results of water (δ18O and δ2H), DIC (δ13C), dissolved sulfate (δ34S and δ18O), dissolved strontium (87Sr/86Sr), and dissolved lead (204Pb, 206Pb, 207Pb, and 208Pb) isotopes; 7) dissolved hydrocarbon VFAs, BTEX, and methane concentrations, as well as methane isotopes (δ13C and δ2H); and 8) atlas of hydrogeochemical maps representing the spatial distribution of these parameters. Pending analyses include: CFCs and SF6; tritium; Cu isotopes; and noble gas concentrations (Ar, Kr, Xe, Ne, and 4He) and 3He/4He ratio. This data release (current as of July 2021) is the second in a series of staged releases and interpretations from the Northern Australia Hydrogeochemical Survey. It augments and revises the first data release, which it therefore supersedes. Relevant data, information and images are available through the GA website (https://pid.geoscience.gov.au/dataset/ga/133388) and GA’s EFTF portal (https://portal.ga.gov.au/).

The Foundation Spatial Data Framework (FSDF) is a framework of ten national authoritative geographic data themes that supports evidence-based social-economic decision making across multiple levels of Australian and New Zealand government agencies, industry, research and the community. The AAA data management principles (Authoritative, Accurate and Accessible), articulated for FSDF, are easily translatable to the FAIR Principles and applied to ensure: - Ability to Find data through rich and consistently implemented metadata; - Access to metadata and data by humans and machines while practicing federated data management within trusted data repositories; - Interoperability of metadata and data through adoption of common standards and application of best practices; and - Reusability of data by capturing licencing constraints and information about its quality and provenance. The Location Information Knowledge Platform (LINK) was developed in 2016 as a digital catalogue of FSDF content. This governed, online, dynamic, analysis and discovery tool was designed to enhance the discovery of FSDF datasets, support work planning and indicate the legal frameworks, agency priorities and use case associated with FSDF data. More than 73 Australian government agencies and commercial organisations use this Platform. Current work includes: - Building common high-level and individual lower-level information models (ontologies) for the FSDF and each dataset; - Development of a new architecture for persistent identifiers and identifier incorporation in the datasets; - The ISO 19115-1-based Australian and New Zealand Metadata profile and best practices user guides; and - Testing new workflows for metadata and data governance and integration utilising a set of common cloud-based infrastructure. On realisation, the FSDF will become a necessary component of spatial socio-economic decision making across Australian and New Zealand government agencies and the private sector. FSDF will encourage cross-sector partnerships and enable seamless access to authoritative spatial data across organisational and jurisdictional boundaries, thus contributing to economic growth, improved public safety, meeting legal and policy obligations and sustaining business needs.

The UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (Ocean Decade) challenges the ocean research community to map and understand the changing ocean to inform and stimulate social and economic development, while conserving marine ecosystems. To achieve these objectives, the methodologies that generate data and information about the ocean need to interoperate with unprecedented depth and scale. For this, we must expand global participation in ocean science through a new and coherent approach to best practice development, supporting capacity development and sharing across a dramatically expanded range of communities. Here, we present perspectives on this issue gleaned from the ongoing development of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) Ocean Best Practices System (OBPS). The OBPS is collaborating with individuals and programs around the world to transform the way ocean methodologies are managed, in strong alignment with the Outcomes envisioned by the Ocean Decade. However, significant challenges remain. These include the haphazard management of methodologies across their life cycle, the ambiguous endorsement of what is “best” and when/where, and the inconsistent access to best practices across disciplines and cultures. To help address these challenges, this Perspective recommends how we - as a global marine science community - can ensure our methodological know-how supports the Ocean Decade outcomes through: promoting convergence of methodologies into context-dependent best practices; incorporating contextualized best practices into Ocean Decade Actions; clarifying who endorses which method and why; creating a global network of complementary ocean practices systems; and ensuring broader consistency and flexibility in international capacity development. <b>Citation:</b> Pearlman J, Buttigieg PL, Bushnell M, Delgado C, Hermes J, Heslop E, Hörstmann C, Isensee K, Karstensen J, Lambert A, Lara-Lopez A, Muller-Karger F, Munoz Mas C, Pearlman F, Pissierssens P, Przeslawski R, Simpson P, van Stavel J and Venkatesan R (2021) Evolving and Sustaining Ocean Best Practices to Enable Interoperability in the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. Front. Mar. Sci. 8:619685. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2021.619685

This dataset provides geospatial representation of the Australian wind regions defined in AS/NZS 1170.2 (2021) Structural Design Actions Part 2: wind actions (hereafter “Standard”). The dataset is intended to assist in delineating areas for referencing the Standard – for example in assigning building vulnerability models across the country. The dataset represents Geoscience Australia's interpretation of the definitions set out in the Standard and is intended for internal use only. This dataset is not suitable for design purposes: professional designers should refer to the Standard for assessing the wind region for their projects. In the event of any inconsistency between this dataset and Figure 3.1 in the Standard, the Standard will take precedence. This product has not been formally endorsed by Standards Australia or the relevant Working Groups and subcommittees. References to localities are indicative and use the best available information at the time of production. For further information on this dataset, please contact hazards@ga.gov.au.

Australia has one of the world’s largest marine estates, but without some common and agreed standards, information collected may not be comparable with other areas or sectors. Due to the large geographic area, diverse flora and fauna, and range of environmental conditions represented by the Australian Marine estate, a single method of sampling is neither practical nor desirable (Bouchet et al. 2018, Przeslawski et al. 2018). For this reason, we present a standard approach for each of seven key marine benthic sampling platforms that were identified based on frequency of use in previous open water sampling and monitoring programs: Multibeam sonar (MBES), Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs), benthic Baited Remote Underwater Video (BRUVs), towed video, grabs and box cores, sleds and trawls, and remotely operated vehicles (ROVs). n addition, we provide a field manual for pelagic BRUVs as a concept sampling method in pelagic ecosystems due to its similarity to benthic BRUVs. This field manual package aims to provide a standardised national methodology for the acquisition of marine data from a prioritised set of frequently-used sampling platforms (below diver depths) so that data are directly comparable in time and through space. This will then facilitate national monitoring programs in Australian open waters and contribute to the design of an ongoing monitoring program for AMPs. The long-term goal is to produce a set of manuals that is applicable to a broad range of users and to be prescriptive enough that all data are collected without unnecessary technical variation. Using an inclusive and collaborative approach, over 115 individuals from 50 organisations contributed to versions 1 and 2 of the field manual package, Version 1 of the field manual package was released in February 2018, and Version 2 was released two years later in June 2020. All original chapters were updated in Version 2 with stakeholder feedback, corrections, and updates where applicable. The chapter ‘Seafloor Mapping Field Manual for Multibeam Sonar’ was substantially changed in Version 2 to amalgamate it with the Australian Multibeam Guidelines which were released in June 2018 by AusSeabed, a nationally seabed mapping coordination program. The unified multibeam manual in Version 2 addresses stakeholder concerns about maintaining two separate SOPs for multibeam sonar. In addition, a new manual on ROVs was developed for the Version 2 package. The ROV was chosen based on findings from a report titled Scoping of new field manuals for marine sampling in Australian waters. One of the most notable changes for Version 2 was the development of an online portal for the field manuals (https://marine-sampling-field-manual.github.io). While Version 1 was released as static pdfs through the NESP Marine Hub website, Version 2 was released through GitHub. <b>Citation:</b> Przeslawski R, Foster S [Eds.]. (2020). Field Manuals for Marine Sampling to Monitor Australian Waters, Version 2. Report to the National Environmental Science Program, Marine Biodiversity Hub. Geoscience Australia and CSIRO. http:dx.doi.org/10.11636/9781925848755

In 2017, the NESP Marine Biodiversity Hub committed to developing field manuals for selected marine sampling platforms to ensure that data collected at different times and places across Australia are directly comparable. Ultimately, 136 individuals from 53 organisations contributed to the Field Manuals for Marine Sampling in Australian Waters released in 2018 (Version 1) and 2020 (Version 2). These field manuals are underpinned by a highly collaborative and iterative process, involving extensive community consultation and review and can thus be considered best practices. In this report, we aim to compile the outcomes of these marine sampling best practices. These outcomes are then integrated into an impact assessment based on the CSIRO Impact Framework. Due to the short period in which the best practices have existed, impact cannot yet be fully assessed, but we lay the foundations to facilitate such an assessment in the future. Overall, the marine sampling best practices are spreading nationally and internationally, as evidenced by uptake and adoption, including by industry (e.g. Woodside) and developing countries (e.g. St Lucia). Australia and the Unites States represent countries with the most downloads, and highest uptake seems to be for the survey design, benthic BRUV, pelagic BRUV, and multibeam manuals. In addition, the best practices have received community endorsement, with recommendations from key national and international organisations (e.g. Parks Australia, Global Ocean Observing System (for the BRUV manual), National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority). We anticipate several social, economic, and environmental impacts of the best practices to be measurable in 5-10 years after the release of the best practices (i.e. after 2025). For any single survey, the impact of these best practices may be small, but there is much stronger impact when considering a national perspective, as combined multiple datasets from multiple surveys allow us to see the bigger spatial and temporal picture. In this case, standardised datasets can be combined without the fear of confounding between method-of-observation and ecological signal. Thus, a series of compatible surveys are needed before they can be usefully combined, and the true impact of these best practices will not be felt for years, or maybe even decades. Ultimately, the measures of outcome and impact described in this report will help strengthen the links between marine observing communities and policymaking communities by ensuring that timely and fit-for-purpose information is generated for evidence-based decisions. <b>Citation:</b> Przeslawski R, Foster S, Gibbons B, Langlois T, Monk J (2021). Impact and Outcomes of Marine Sampling Best Practices. Report to the National Environmental Science Program, Marine Biodiversity Hub. Geoscience Australia.

<div>Maps of seabed geomorphology derived from bathymetry data provide foundational information that is used to support the sustainable use of the marine environment across a range of activities that contribute to the Blue Economy. The global recognition of the value of the Blue Economy and several key global initiatives, notably the Seabed 2030 project to map the global ocean and the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, are driving the proliferation and open dissemination of these data and derived map products. To effectively support these global efforts, geomorphic characterisation of the seabed requires standardized multi-scalar and interjurisdictional approaches that can be applied locally, regionally and internationally. This document describes and illustrates a geomorphic lexicon for the full range of coastal to deep ocean geomorphic Settings and related Processes that drive the formation, modification and preservation of geomorphic units on the seabed. Terms and Settings/Processes have been selected from the literature and structured to balance established terminology with the need for consistency between the range of geomorphic Settings. This document also presents a glossary of the terms and identifies the insights that can be gained by mapping each unit type, from an applied perspective.</div> <b>Citation:</b> Nanson, Rachel, Arosio, Riccardo, Gafeira, Joana, McNeil, Mardi, Dove, Dayton, Bjarnadóttir, Lilja, Dolan, Margaret, Guinan, Janine, Post, Alix, Webb, John, & Nichol, Scott. (2023). <i>A two-part seabed geomorphology classification scheme; Part 2: Geomorphology classification framework and glossary (Version 1.0) (1.0).</i> Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7804019

Development of a data policy and ensuring its uptake is not a trivial task within any organisation. There are many surrounding factors that may help or hinder the acceptance and imbedding of policies. Preparation and development of Geoscience Australia’s (GA) Data Strategy and Data Stewardship Policy required a combined understanding and knowledge of political, stakeholder, geoinformatics and technological landscapes external to the organisation, and an internal understanding of a vast amount of multi-disciplinary data assets and their champions within GA. Externally, from an international perspective, any data policy needs to take into account: - Regulations and compliance requirements (FAIR Principles and Trusted repositories), - Supporting data interoperability geoinformatics developments (common ontological information models, vocabularies and content standards (ISO, OGC, W3C)); - Technology trends (semantic web, machine learning, block chain); and - How these may interrelate to each other. From an Australian perspective, any GA data policy must: - Maintain a high level awareness of changes in Government priorities and policies (Australian Government Data Policy, Digital Continuity 2020); - Similar developments within other Government organisations; - Understand GA stakeholders and their roles in supporting delivery of GA goals and outcomes: the influencers, partners and consumers and how GA can communicate its Data Policy to them. Internally, to ensure the Strategy implementation, GA needs to: - Build a strong support base from executives, managers and data champions to ensure adoption of the strategy and funding; - Develop an architecture to sustain the implementation; - Ensure technological support through expert geoinformatics and Multi-Disciplinary-Teams; - Educate staff to ensure they have adequate competencies to comply with the policy. The GA Data Strategy is accompanied by a three year roadmap, which includes developing methodologies and frameworks to: - Streamline data processes, systems and tools; - Embed best practice data management; - Encourage and reward data management; - Develop data capabilities; - Strengthen and embed Data Governance. Realisation of this work is essential for GA to achieve its main goal of maximising geoscientific data potential to serve Australia.

Earthquake design standards seek to ensure that structures are adequately resilient to local hazard. The probabilistic hazard that forms the basis of the design loadings used and the methods by which they are calculated typically reflect the best available information and practices at the time. This was the case with the earthquake loadings standard for the design of PNG buildings that was published in 1982. However, with the collaborative development of a better understanding of earthquake hazard across PNG the need to adjust the earthquake loadings for design through an Interim Amendment was highlighted. This key step would precede any more general and broader update of national building regulations. In this paper the process taken to translate the latest earthquake hazard assessment for PNG, PSHA19, to design practice is described. This included an assessment of the level of current under-design and the engagement with stakeholders in PNG to assess their needs through workshop activity. The central document to this process, “The Interim Amendment to PNGS 1001-1982: Part 4: Earthquake Design Actions”, is described and goes beyond the incorporation of the new design hazard to the introduction of new approaches for assessing earthquake loads that more closely align with those used in New Zealand and Australia. Preparation and delivery of seminars in-country to familiarise design professionals with its use are also described along with the series of professional development video products also developed for use in PNG. Finally, future needs in regulatory development in PNG are outlined. Presented at the 2023 Australian Earthquake Engineering Society (AEES) National Conference