University of Tasmania
Browse

File(s) under permanent embargo

Authority, responsibility and process in Australian biodiversity policy

journal contribution
posted on 2023-05-18, 08:28 authored by Clement, S, Moore, SA, Michael LockwoodMichael Lockwood
Despite a raft of policies targeting biodiversity, Australia has yet to stem biodiversity decline. This study analyses biodiversity conservation policies in two contrasting Australian landscapes, with a specific emphasis on how authority and responsibility are determined and allocated, using a novel linguistic tool (the Institutional Grammar Tool) and interviews with policymakers. Analysis revealed concerns around the narrowness of authority and the dominance of normative statements rather than rules. Unclear roles and responsibilities further diluted the clarity and allocation of authority. Political and economic factors drive policy implementation and constrain authority in both of the studied regions. A heavy focus on procedures rather than outcomes was also evident. Implications for policy design and the associated authority include broadening the definition of biodiversity, ensuring policy language more clearly allocates responsibilities, paying increased attention to the distributive as well as procedural elements of biodiversity policy, and developing buffering mechanisms to better cope with political and economic drivers.

Funding

Department of Environment and Energy (Cwth)

History

Publication title

Environmental and Planning Law Journal

Volume

32

Pagination

93-114

ISSN

0813-300X

Department/School

School of Geography, Planning and Spatial Sciences

Publisher

Lawbook Co

Place of publication

Australia

Rights statement

Copyright 2015 Thomson Reuters

Repository Status

  • Restricted

Socio-economic Objectives

Environmental policy, legislation and standards not elsewhere classified

Usage metrics

    University Of Tasmania

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC