• Energy Research

Davidson J. and Lockwood M. Partnerships as instruments of good regional governance: innovation for sustainability in Tasmania?, Regional Studies. In Australia and elsewhere, partnerships among various levels of government, business/industry, non-government organizations and communities have become a key strategy in rejuvenating regional economies and improving environmental, social and community outcomes. In time, partnerships may prove to be a crucial innovation in regional governance. However, concerns have been raised that in practice, partnerships may do little to advance regional sustainability, particularly where economic success rather than sustainable development remains the dominant agenda. This paper reports on research into the partnership arrangements of a regional authority in the Australian state of Tasmania and evaluates their potential to foster good regional governance and thus regional sustainability by analysing qualitative research material against three criteria for good governance –...

Davidson J. and Lockwood M. Partnerships as instruments of good regional governance: innovation for sustainability in Tasmania?, Regional Studies. In Australia and elsewhere, partnerships among various levels of government, business/industry, non-government organizations and communities have become a key strategy in rejuvenating regional economies and improving environmental, social and community outcomes. In time, partnerships may prove to be a crucial innovation in regional governance. However, concerns have been raised that in practice, partnerships may do little to advance regional sustainability, particularly where economic success rather than sustainable development remains the dominant agenda. This paper reports on research into the partnership arrangements of a regional authority in the Australian state of Tasmania and evaluates their potential to foster good regional governance and thus regional sustainability by analysing qualitative research material against three criteria for good governance –...

This paper provides practical insight into what can be done to improve the adoption of community engagement (CE) in the corporate culture of two Australian forest plantation companies. Previous research has identified that CE can be limited by corporate cultures that promote a narrow range of CE benefits. However, no previous studies have detailed the relationship between corporate culture and CE adoption within forest companies. This research provides an empirical grounding for exploration of the relationship between corporate culture and CE adoption. We undertook case studies of two forest companies to understand how to enhance CE adoption. Interviews were conducted with 19 company staff including field staff, middle managers and senior managers. We found that both companies had some commitment to CE. Many employees believed CE was essential for the ongoing operations of their company. CE adoption, however, was constrained by issues such as a lack of resources and difficulties in discerning when CE was necessary. Based on our findings we provide strategies for enhancing adoption of CE in corporate culture. These strategies include (a) providing more incentives for individuals to engage with a broader range of stakeholders, (b) developing better tools to gather feedback from stakeholders and measure their social licence to operate, and (c) developing more effective stakeholder identification and engagement strategies.

This paper provides practical insight into what can be done to improve the adoption of community engagement (CE) in the corporate culture of two Australian forest plantation companies. Previous research has identified that CE can be limited by corporate cultures that promote a narrow range of CE benefits. However, no previous studies have detailed the relationship between corporate culture and CE adoption within forest companies. This research provides an empirical grounding for exploration of the relationship between corporate culture and CE adoption. We undertook case studies of two forest companies to understand how to enhance CE adoption. Interviews were conducted with 19 company staff including field staff, middle managers and senior managers. We found that both companies had some commitment to CE. Many employees believed CE was essential for the ongoing operations of their company. CE adoption, however, was constrained by issues such as a lack of resources and difficulties in discerning when CE was necessary. Based on our findings we provide strategies for enhancing adoption of CE in corporate culture. These strategies include (a) providing more incentives for individuals to engage with a broader range of stakeholders, (b) developing better tools to gather feedback from stakeholders and measure their social licence to operate, and (c) developing more effective stakeholder identification and engagement strategies.

Biodiversity conservation continues to be a challenging task for societies worldwide. We undertook a resilience assessment to address the following question: What are the ramifications of social-ecological system dynamics for biodiversity governance of a nationally significant landscape? Resilience assessment offers promise for guiding response strategies, potentially enabling consideration of ecological, social, economic, and governance influences on biodiversity-related activities. Most resilience assessments have, however, struggled to effectively incorporate governance influences. We applied a modified version of the Resilience Alliance workbook approach to explicitly address governance influences at each stage of an assessment of internationally significant biodiversity features in protected areas of the Australian Alps. The vulnerability of the Alps system to climate change suggests that it is moving into a release stage, with subsequent transformation hypothesized. Network governance is argued as enabling flexible, adaptive management and comprehensive engagement of stakeholders, both of which are critical to shaping how this transformation of the Alps as a valued focal system will occur. The Australian Alps Liaison Committee provides a promising governance structure for collaboration and comanagement across multiple jurisdictions. Our contribution was to demonstrate how a resilience assessment that explicitly embeds governance influences in social-ecological system dynamics can point to pathways for governance reform in the context of system transformation.

Biodiversity conservation continues to be a challenging task for societies worldwide. We undertook a resilience assessment to address the following question: What are the ramifications of social-ecological system dynamics for biodiversity governance of a nationally significant landscape? Resilience assessment offers promise for guiding response strategies, potentially enabling consideration of ecological, social, economic, and governance influences on biodiversity-related activities. Most resilience assessments have, however, struggled to effectively incorporate governance influences. We applied a modified version of the Resilience Alliance workbook approach to explicitly address governance influences at each stage of an assessment of internationally significant biodiversity features in protected areas of the Australian Alps. The vulnerability of the Alps system to climate change suggests that it is moving into a release stage, with subsequent transformation hypothesized. Network governance is argued as enabling flexible, adaptive management and comprehensive engagement of stakeholders, both of which are critical to shaping how this transformation of the Alps as a valued focal system will occur. The Australian Alps Liaison Committee provides a promising governance structure for collaboration and comanagement across multiple jurisdictions. Our contribution was to demonstrate how a resilience assessment that explicitly embeds governance influences in social-ecological system dynamics can point to pathways for governance reform in the context of system transformation.

Although the Australian forest plantation industry acknowledges that there is a role for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in forest management, there is confusion as to what this constitutes in practice. This paper describes the conflicts between internal and external stakeholder views on CSR in plantation forestry. We conducted in-depth interviews with key informants across three plantation management regions in Australia: Tasmania, the Green Triangle and south-west Western Australia. We interviewed a range of stakeholders including forest company employees, local councils, Indigenous representatives, and environmental non-government organisations. CSR-related initiatives that stakeholders believed were important for plantation management included the need for community engagement, accountability towards stakeholders, and contribution to community development and well-being. Although there was wide support for these initiatives, some stakeholders were not satisfied that forest companies were actively implementing them. Due to the perception that forest companies are not committed to CSR initiatives such as community engagement, some stakeholder expectations are not being satisfied.

Although the Australian forest plantation industry acknowledges that there is a role for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in forest management, there is confusion as to what this constitutes in practice. This paper describes the conflicts between internal and external stakeholder views on CSR in plantation forestry. We conducted in-depth interviews with key informants across three plantation management regions in Australia: Tasmania, the Green Triangle and south-west Western Australia. We interviewed a range of stakeholders including forest company employees, local councils, Indigenous representatives, and environmental non-government organisations. CSR-related initiatives that stakeholders believed were important for plantation management included the need for community engagement, accountability towards stakeholders, and contribution to community development and well-being. Although there was wide support for these initiatives, some stakeholders were not satisfied that forest companies were actively implementing them. Due to the perception that forest companies are not committed to CSR initiatives such as community engagement, some stakeholder expectations are not being satisfied.