The 2017 IFLA World Council meeting was held over two days in Montreal with a full agenda and heaps of discussion about issues which are of particular relevance to the NZILA or to our Asia-Pacific Region (APR). The president, Kathryn Moore, confirmed the role of IFLA as providing advocacy on global issues to international bodies such as UNESCO, to disseminate knowledge about the profession, and to undertake rigorous business planning to enable the successful implementation of the IFLA action plan.

She further noted four global actions as priority foci for IFLA over the next year:

1. Representation and action at a global level
2. Engaging with allied professionals and organisations
3. Advocacy and connections to enable progress with a global landscape convention
4. An internal focus on corporate sustainability

Finances
The treasurer, James Hayter (AILA), performed a difficult role well in bringing IFLA finances back to a balanced budget with his proposals covering the next three years, after a couple of years of losses and reserve drawdowns. It was noted that several member nations are under-reporting their numbers to save on IFLA fees; part of the problem is the weird step-based fees system currently used by IFLA. It was pointed out to the meeting that smaller nations were being charged more per head than larger nations under this formula (which seems to be there for historical reasons; I record that NZ voted against the motion to continue with the step system for another year, but the motion was carried...). It was also noted that using a relative wealth system such as the Purchasing Power Index might be one way to set differential fees, to avoid a greater relative fees burden for someone say in Nigeria compared with someone in Germany or Switzerland. 

James has agreed to look at how fees are charged and propose a more equitable system in time for discussion at the next World Council meeting in Singapore in 2018. This is in the context of a major shift by the World Council, to allow all regions to work towards the possibility of collecting fees from national members and passing a proportion on to IFLA world to manage the secretariat and Executive Director positions, rather than central collection as happens presently. This will be discussed in more detail at the IFLA Asia Pacific Region Council meeting in Bangkok next month, so I hope to be able to report a position on this idea at least at regional level in the next update. 

The IFLA Finance and Business Planning committee appears to have a renewed focus on increasing revenue through sponsorship, conferences or advertising rather than increasing fees, which is good news.

Honorary members
IFLA appointed four new honorary members at the meeting, including Hal Moggridge CBE from the UK who has given time and energy to IFLA for more than 50 years, and Hans Dorn of ICOMOS fame. I was lucky enough to have a chat with Hans after he received his lifetime IFLA membership award. He has been a leading light in IFLA since 1961, and was instrumental in bringing together areas of commonality between IFLA and ICOMOS (International Committee on Monuments and Sites). He is now 90 and still sharp as a tack.

APR programme accreditation
The meeting spend quite some time discussing aspects of capacity-building for better education outcomes on a global scale. The European approach to programme quality is through recognition, with a focus at a programme level via a paper-based exercise to review whether or not content meets the IFLA-UNESCO Charter for Landscape Architectural Education. The APR approach is through accreditation, with a focus on graduates and the potential for reciprocity. This approach is more rigorous and reflects the approach taken by the NZILA, where an accreditation panel undertakes a visit to the Institution to look at graduate outcomes, as well as reviewing resources and facilities. Interviews with students, graduates, contractors and employers are also undertaken. 

With this approach, employers and professional landscape organisations across the region can be confidant that a graduate from such an accredited programme will broadly possess a similar range of knowledge, skills and values as a graduate from their own national programmes.

The World Council meeting approved the APR to conduct a pilot study of a regional programme using an accreditation system based largely on the NZILA model. The outcomes of that study will be presented at the World Council meeting in Singapore in 2018, with the potential to be applied in our region in future as well as in the emerging regions of Middle East and Africa. This NZ support for better education outcomes to assist those countries without their own national systems was recognised and appreciated by the Council.