ABSTRACT. Investigations into the taxonomy, phylogeny, biogeography and ecology of nudibranchs belonging to the family Phyllidiidae Rafinesque are reported. All prior research on thc Phyllidiidae is reviewed. There were 74 nominal species as of January, 1992. The literature revealed enormous confusion in the taxonomy of phyllidiids caused primarily from inadequate anatomical study (or none at all) and descriptions of single preserved specimens. Intraspecific variation, particularly its ontogenetic component, is identified as an additional cause of misidentification.Traditional sources of nudibranch taxonomic characters, such as jaws and radula, are lacking in the Phyllidiidae. Characters used in this study are: general shape and body profile; colour and pattern; morphology of notal tubercles, ridges, and the mantle margin; rhinophoral colour; number of lamellae on each rhinophoral clavus; gills; morphology of foot and foot sole; oral tentacles; anatomy of the alimentary system; anatomy of the reproductive system; penial spine morphology; and sperm ultrastructure.Six genera are recognised and each is redescribed. Features which clearly demarcate the genera occur principally in the digestive system, and also in the reproductive system and external morphology. A key to genera is provided. A total of 49 valid, Indo-Pacific species is recognised; a full synonymy is given for each species. Phyllidia Cuvier remains the largest genus with 15 (including 8 new) species. Fryeria Gray is considered a valid genus with six (including 3 new) species. Phyllidiella Bergh is reinstated and nine (including 4 new) species are recognised. Phyllidiop.sis Bergh, the second largest genus, contains 14 (including 6 new) species. Ceratc~phyllidia Eliot appears to contain three (including 2 new) species, however specimens are very rarely collected and further work remains to be done prior to their formal description. The recently described genus Reticulidia Brunckhorst contains two species. In all, 22 new species of phyllidiid nudibranchs are described.Study of anatomy has allowed a phylogenetic hypothesis to be proposed for the first time. Cerutophyllidiu is the sister group to the remaining genera. Phyllidia, Fryeria and Reticulidia are the most derived genera. The morphology and anatomy of phyllidiids indicates monophyly with dorids. However, the grouping of the Phyllidiidae and Dendrodorididae as Porostomata is Record5 of the Austral~an Museum (1993) Supplement 16 polyphyletic and rejected as homeoplaseous . Differences in foregut anatomy between the two groups support the view that suctorial feeding of sponges has arisen independently in both groups .Biogeographical distribution of species and ecological observations are reported . As a result of field observations. the sponge foods of several phyllidiid species are reported for the first time .The sponge food and chemical defence compounds of phyllidiid species may also be useful in taxonomic study . In situ observations of feeding and study of the functional anatomy of the forcgut e...

Summary The foundation for a sustainable future is the continuation of ecological processes and functions across landscapes dominated by human activity; whether hunter‐gathering, agriculture, pastoralism, suburban living, commercial and industrial centres or wilderness recreation. However, actions to sustain ecological systems, flows and functions must be integrated across the human dimensions of regional landscapes. Such regions encompass natural areas, human living places and a mosaic of other land uses. Institutional change is required to develop new organizational forms, adjust policies and develop adaptive capacity to demonstrate restoration and maintenance of all forms of social, economic and ecological capital. No matter where on the globe, future sustainability will depend on the system of resource governance that mediates the relationship between the society and the economy and, in contrast, the continuation of ecosystem functional processes. The present article examines the forms of capital, social and institutional change that need to be considered to make progress towards sustainable futures. The discussion further considers the spatial management context in which these interweaved social, ecological and economic processes take place. Key words ecological, forms of capital, governance, institutions, landscape, social.

An important institution for regional resource governance is civic engagement in local affairs, including resource use issues. Local civic engagement has traditionally been structured around local government and, more recently, to catchment-based decision-making bodies. If citizens are to participate in regional resource management in ways that are meaningful to them, it is important that both the landscape units being discussed and the jurisdictional boundaries are meaningful. We have been examining how boundaries for resource management regions might be identified. Three considerations are believed to be important if regional resource management is to be meaningful to the citizens involved. Firstly, that the regional boundaries maximise the areal proportion of the region that residents consider to be part of their 'community', which should lead to greater commitment to civic engagement in resource management. Secondly, that the character of the landscape units within the region possess a high degree of homogeneity, reflecting greater coincidence of interest among the inhabitants of the region. The third consideration is a hierarchical multi-scaling capacity to deal with externalities of resource use. The approach was tested through identification of a series of nested 'eco-civic' resource management regions for north-eastern New South Wales in Australia. The results delineate resource governance regions that nest at local to regional scales for integrated natural resource management. Such 'eco-civic' regions demonstrate a better spatial representation of social and ecological characteristics than existing regional frameworks. Crown

The need to implement innovative approaches to sustainability is now more critical than ever. This discussion draws on parts of the puzzle that must be assembled to achieve integrated, cross-tenure and jurisdictional management of whole regions and their peoples for a sustainable future. A regional, landscape ecology approach helps us to move on from theory and historical lessons to boldly design and adaptively develop novel on-ground models. To take an entirely different approach from conventional thinking, I draw from Common Property Resource (CPR) theory and experience, together with practical experience from the Bookmark Biosphere project. The characteristics of successful enduring Common Property regimes are identified and discussed in light of critical needs to maintain and restore social and ecological capital. I then highlight the concepts and logistical objectives behind the 30-year-old UNESCO Biosphere Reserve Program, which appears to have great potential as an operational framework within which these changes can be made. The Biosphere Reserve Program is maturing through integration of cultural needs and aspirations for quality of life, while conserving natural values and ecosystem processes. In particular, progress is being made through bioregional planning and management incorporating a variety of IUCN protected area types with novel, sustainable, resource-use diversification. The novel arrangements, experience and lessons from one developing model, Bookmark Biosphere Reserve in South Australia, are described as an example. I wish to encourage more models like the Bookmark experiment to evolve through even greater creativity and engagement with public and private partners. On-ground models that demonstrate innovative alternative land use management in the rangelands or integration across the coastal-marine interface are especially needed. KEY WORDS: Sustainability · Capital assets · UNESCO program · Biosphere reserveResale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher Editorial responsibility: Mike Archer,

River catchments have been the dominant form of regionalisation for natural-resource management in many countries since the 1980s. Local governments play a considerable role in planning with ever-increasing responsibilities for sustainable environmental management, planning and development controls. There has also been an increasing emphasis on community participation in resource management, which emphasises the need to re-examine the requirements for spatial definition of resource governance regions. This paper proposes three principles. First, the nature and reach of environmental externalities of resource use should determine the size and nesting of resource management regions. Second, the boundaries of resource governance regions should enclose areas of greatest interest and importance to local residents. Third, the biophysical characteristics of a resource governance region should be as homogenous as possible, which provides resource planning and management efficiencies. The paper describes a range of concepts and empirical techniques used to apply these principles to the derivation of a resource governance regionalisation of the State of New South Wales, Australia.

No abstract

SUMMARYCommunity based natural resource management (CBNRM) engages groups of citizens in collective action towards sustainable conservation and natural resource management (NRM) within and across various tenure regimes. Substantial differences exist between developing and developed countries in terms of conditions conducive to CBNRM. There are also contextual differences from national to local scales, across different ‘spaces’ and ‘places’ within each. This paper focuses on developed countries in deriving and synthesizing some concepts from systems theory and landscape ecology, with lessons from facilitating novel CBNRM arrangements. Understanding the landscape context of interacting levels and scales of social and ecological systems can inform institutional development of resilient CBNRM. Efforts to increase the scale and effectiveness of social-ecological sustainability can benefit from novel arrangements facilitating holistic integration of environmental conservation across levels of institutions of communities and government, including tenure regimes (type and ownership of resources as ‘property’). Property and policy, together with ‘place’ attachment of communities can be viewed within a landscape framework. Such a ‘landscape lens’ provides an interdisciplinary meld that is important to sustainable CBNRM, but sometimes forgotten (or avoided) in government planning, policy deliberation and action.

No abstract