Banksia Environmental Foundation

Banksia Awards Judging

The Banksia Environmental Award entries go through a three part judging process by Banksia’s national team of judges. Banksia judges are experts in their field and this expertise is matched to the relevant category for assessment. Judges must absent themselves from judging any entry which may be a conflict of interest. Final decisions are made by review and audit by a senior panel of judges.  All judges sign and are bound by a confidentiality agreement.

The Banksia  judges volunteer their time and are a valuable and valued part of the Banksia Foundation's body of people who work towards Australia's recognition of environmental excellence.

Go to - The Banksia Judges
Go to - From a Judges Perspective - A helpful insight into entering the Banksia Awards

The Judging Process

Category Award Judging

The judging process for the Banksia Category Awards involves three levels:

Preliminary
The first panel of judges, led by a nominated judge, sit for each category and review all entries received for that category.  Out of that process they recommend and nominate finalists for each category.

Independent
The finalist entries are forwarded to a second set of judges around Australia, nominated judges from the preliminary judging panel are the main contact for independent judges needing further information on the decisions behind nominated finalists.  Out of this process nominated winners are recommended by each judge.

Audit Panel
All finalists' entries and scoring results are reviewed by an Audit panel of judges and a winner for each category chosen with consideration of independent judges suggestions. 

Gold Award

All category winners are then further reviewed and evaluated by the audit panel to decide the Origin Energy Gold Banksia Award Winner.

All finalists and winners are signed off by the Banksia Board.

Prime Minister's Environmentalist of the Year Award

Banksia Panel of Judges

All entries are reviewed and assessed by a panel of highly regarded expert judges whose experience collectively covers a broad spectrum of environmental issues.  From this review a list of recommended finalists and suggested winner are nominated and this list is forwarded to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts

Finalists are reviewed by the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and an assessment of each entry is then passed on to the Office of the Prime Minister for his final decision.

Environment Minister's Young Environmentalist of the Year Award

Banksia Panel of Judges

All entries are reviewed and assessed by a panel of highly regarded expert judges whose experience collectively covers a broad spectrum of environmental issues.  From this review a list of recommended finalists are nominated and this list is forwarded to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts

Finalists are reviewed by the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and an assessment of each entry is then passed on to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts for his final decision.

Mercedes-Benz Australian Environmental Research Award

All entries will be reviewed and assessed by a panel of qualified and experienced judges.  From this review each Judge will nominate a list of recommended finalists and the judging panel will provide Banksia Management and Mercedes-Benz with their final recommendation for a winner.

Banksia People's Choice Award

Those eligible Finalists of the Banksia Category Awards will be assessed by a panel of judges providing a list of applicants to be placed on the Banksia Website and open to public voting.   The voting scores will be tallied and the Winner ascertained from public voting.

The Banksia Judges

The role that judges undertake is a vital part in the Banksia Awards Program.  The processes are divided into multiple stages for each award:  Category Awards, Origin Gold Banksia Award, the Prime Minister’s Environmentalist of the Year Award, the Environment Minister’s Young Environmentalist of the Year, Mercedes Benz Australian Environmental Research Award and the Banksia Community Grant with separate panels judging each award. In addition, many of these judges assist in judging our associated awards.

Our judging processes incorporate preliminary judging in a group environment, independent individual judging, and ratification by an audit panel and sign off by our Board of Management.

The Banksia Environmental Awards has a national team of over 100 judges who are independent to the Banksia board and staff.  The judges are all experts in their field and the judging panels are organised for each award to match that expertise.  All potential conflicts of interest are investigated and results audited by a senior panel of judges.

Banksia would like to acknowledge our Chair of the Judging Panels, Mike Juleff, who was the original chair in 1989.  His commitment and support to board and staff is invaluable and ensures that we maintain and viable, efficient and integrated judging process.

On behalf of the Banksia Environmental Foundation, we would like to thank the following individuals for giving us their time and providing their expertise to the 2009 Banksia Awards Program.

2009 List of Judges

In alphabetical order by surname

From A Judges Perspective

A helpful insight into entering the Banksia Awards

ERM, Banksia’s Technical Advisor, provides a number of expert judges every year.  We asked  a couple of them - Fiona Baxter, Principal Consultant in ERM’s Sustainability, Energy & Climate Change Business & Geoff Byrne, ERM’s Global Mining Director - to provide a helpful insight into what they believe are the important aspects in creating a good entry for the Banksia Awards.

Key components of a good entry – what stands out?

“Using the criteria as obvious headings in the entry really helps, especially with scoring. It draws our attention to how the project/initiative/entrant really nailed what Banksia is looking for.” Fiona Baxter, ERM

“Highlighting at the start of the entry what is unique/innovative about it? As judges in a particular category, it is not unusual to receive a number of similar entries in a year. There may be a “flavour of the month” out there. So it really counts in your favour to spell out what makes yours the best out there, shout it from the rooftops. Provide context by telling us what makes your entry different at the start of your entry and remind us again at the end – leave us with your key message.” Geoff Byrne, ERM

What are the obviously poor things that you have found in an entry?

“Endless text with no headings to break it up, in particular no reference to the category criteria. This makes it difficult to read and a challenge for us judges to draw out the strengths of the entry.” Fiona Baxter, ERM

“Inclusion of lots of clearly valuable “extras”, such as videos, CDs, brochures, but with no cross-referencing from the entry. Our time as judges is limited, effectively with a certain amount of time allowed to review each entry. Hence, we can only look at “extras” if the entrant points us to the specific page number in the report or the specific time point in the video. We would love to have the time to look at it all, but in reality its not achievable.” Geoff Byrne, ERM

What surprised you in a good way?

Good visual presentation of an entry is always a pleasant surprise, drawing you in, as a judge. Photographs, charts, diagrams, anything to visually depict what the entry is all about is always a bonus. And remember that “a picture is as good as a thousand words”, so if you’re struggling to keep within the word limit….: Fiona Baxter, ERM

When a small organisation puts in a substantially better presented and written entry than a large corporate – that is always a nice surprise. That even with clearly limited resources, they have put the effort in and come up with something great.” Geoff Byrne, ERM

What are the recurring mistakes that you see?

“Ignoring the category criteria has to be the most regular obvious mistake – where an entry describes the project/intiative but without reference to what Banksia is looking for.” Fiona Baxter, ERM

“Missing out the good stuff – as judges, we are well connected and know a lot of the good work that is going on out there. We will often be reading an entry thinking – did they talk to all of the key people involved in this project in putting their entry together, because there are so many distinguishing points that they have missed out. Its disappointing to see them not putting their best foot forward.” Geoff Byrne, ERM