Search

What can we learn from the prodigious expansion of the non-government protected areas that now comprise 12% of terrestrial Australia? An increasingly professional, formal, and diverse non-government sector has developed since 1990, comprising private individuals, non-government organizations, and First Nations and having close ties to governments. We investigate the drivers, dynamics, and diversity of this sector through thematic analysis of 24 key informant interviews and associated gray literature. Changing environmental movements, science-led conservation, partial recognition of First Nations land rights, international agreements, and neoliberal reforms combined to formalize the sector during the 1990s. A bipartisan policy framework for incorporating non-government lands in the national conservation estate, diverse partnerships, transnational networks, and innovation in public and private funding helped grow the sector. The confluence of interests that has transformed the politics and practice of nature conservation in Australia is likely to inform those engaged with similar changes elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neoliberal thought has exerted significant influence over the crafting and delivery of environmental policy. This has manifested in enlisting non-state actors to advance environmental policy agendas in ways that were previously the responsibility of the state. The participation of these non-state actors is positioned as integral to solving intractable environmental challenges, such as the degradation of fish habitat. Drawing on responsibilisation as a technique of governance, this research adopts a case-based study of fisheries rehabilitation policy to explore how recreationists are being mobilized to address environmental problems. Deploying interpretive policy analysis to analyze key policy artifacts this research highlights how fishers as recreational users of aquatic areas are constituted as moral, political and authoritative actors who bear responsibility for ameliorating degraded fish habitats, despite the impacts of recreational fishing on these habitats being contested. We conclude by identifying the implications of this responsibilisation for the implementation of co-management and shared stewardship of fisheries resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regulatory failure occurs in diverse and complex circumstances, especially in environmental regulation. The response of policy-makers and regulators to regulatory failure often follows a predictable pattern, with the imposition of increased prescriptive regulatory approaches. This phenomenon has been described as regulatory pendulum swing. If the regulatory failure causes immediate and obvious harm to people or the environment such an approach may be appropriate. However, where the community loses trust in regulatory regimes where harm is less evident, a response of this nature may do little to restore trust. This research examined a case study of coal seam gas regulation in New South Wales, Australia, using a regulatory trust typology. The typology's dimensions of expertise, stewardship and transparency provided a useful framework to understand regulatory failure and regulatory trust, and for evaluating the responses of policy-makers and regulators to public concerns over coal seam gas development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prioritisation methods have been adopted for >20 years to inform resource allocation in species conservation. The academic literature on prioritisation focuses on technical matters, with little attention to the socio-political factors affecting the uptake of priorities. We investigated the policy instruments employed to promote uptake, and the structural factors affecting the uptake of priorities, using as our case study a species prioritisation method adopted by the Queensland Government (Australia). We interviewed 79 key informants and analysed policy documents and plans. The Queensland Government relied on 'information delivery' as a policy instrument to foster uptake. We identified communication channels to assist 'information delivery' between Government and intended users, but also found that several structural factors limited their use: fragmentation of policies, the relative strength of alternative priorities and centralisation of power in decision-making. We discuss the results in relation to other conservation planning initiatives and suggest how structural barriers can be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are gaps in the existing climate change adaptation literature concerning the design of spatial planning instruments and the relationship between policy instruments and the sociopolitical barriers to adaptation reform. To help address this gap, this article presents a typology of spatial planning instruments for adaptation and analyses the pattern of instrument choice in Australian planning processes in order to shed light on contextual factors that can impede adaptation. The analysis highlights how policy design can amplify the barriers to adaptation by arranging policy actors in ways inimical to reform and stripping decision makers of the instruments necessary to make and sustain desired policy changes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]