What works in Brisbane
All catalogues · Australia profile
Quality scores are 0–100 rubric scores; “strong evidence” reflects study design; adoptions count documented replications elsewhere. Know more
Strengths & weaknesses vs peers
Strengths
Evaluation evidence +51 pts 100 here · 49 average
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced +39 pts 67 here · 28 average
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced +27 pts 33 here · 6 average
Evidence of impact / measured results +26 pts 83 here · 57 average
Documented learning +26 pts 100 here · 74 average
Demonstrated reach +24 pts 100 here · 76 average
Sustainability / continuity +22 pts 100 here · 78 average
Scalability +21 pts 83 here · 62 average
Evaluated outcomes +21 pts 100 here · 79 average
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced +18 pts 67 here · 48 average
Multi-stakeholder collaboration +15 pts 89 here · 74 average
Transparency, fairness & accountability +13 pts 67 here · 54 average
Gender-mainstreaming embedding +11 pts 100 here · 89 average
Weaknesses
Governance, certification & transferability -14 pts 50 here · 64 average
Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control -15 pts 33 here · 48 average
Efficiency -33 pts 0 here · 33 average
Inclusiveness / equity -43 pts 0 here · 43 average
Effectiveness -68 pts 0 here · 68 average
Impact on gender equality -71 pts 0 here · 71 average
Curator validation -73 pts 0 here · 73 average
Achievement / evidence -88 pts 0 here · 88 average
Score profile vs peers
Coloured bar: Brisbane. Grey bar: peer average across the corpus. Both on a common 0–100 scale.
Points compare this place's average on each dimension with the average across all evaluated places, on a common 0–100 scale. Know more
Top good practices here
Uniseed — Australia's National University Venture Fund · 81
UniQuest — University of Queensland's Commercialisation Company · 71
UniQuest — Technology Transfer Company of The University of Queensland · 62
Queensland Land Restoration Fund (Australia) · 53
Each number is the practice's overall 0–100 quality score against its catalogue's rubric. Know more
Recommended to adopt or replicate
Transferable practices from elsewhere that address this place's gaps.
Ciudad Mujer — El Salvador's Integrated Women's Services Programme · fit 100/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Already adopted in 3 other places
SASA! Community Mobilisation Programme against Intimate Partner Violence — Uganda · fit 100/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Already adopted in 4 other places
Rwanda's Land Tenure Regularization Programme — Titling Land in Women's Names · fit 90/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
- Rated highly transferable
- Backed by strong evidence
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Already adopted in 6 other places
Abolition of Chhaupadi — Ending Menstrual Exile Huts in Nepal's Far- and Mid-Western Districts · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Guyana's One-Third Gender Candidate Quota — Two Decades of Sustained Representation · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Serbia's 40% Electoral Gender Quota — From One-in-Three to Near-Parity Party Lists (2020-2025) · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Bogotá's Care Blocks (Manzanas del Cuidado) · fit 82/100
- Rated highly transferable
- Addresses this place's weak dimensions
Fit estimates how well a practice matches this place, 0 (poor) to 100 (excellent); the list is ordered to favour practices that address this place's gaps. Know more