Roles of Diverse Stakeholders in Natural Resources Management and Their Relationships with Regional Bodies in New South Wales, Australia

Jacobs, B; Brown, P

Roles of Diverse Stakeholders in Natural Resources Management and Their Relationships with Regional Bodies in New South Wales, Australia

Jacobs, B

Brown, P

Permalink

Publisher:: In-Tech
Publication Type:: Chapter
Citation:: Sustainable Natural Resources Management, 2012, 1, pp. 115 - 137
Issue Date:: 2012-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (353.11 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Jacobs, B https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3147-341X	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Brown, P	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Kaswamila, A	en_US
dc.date.issued	2012-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Sustainable Natural Resources Management, 2012, 1, pp. 115 - 137	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	978-953-307-670-6	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/32003
dc.description.abstract	Governments invest in natural resource management (NRM) because of a lack or failure of markets for ecosystem services and to encourage the adoption of NRM practices that reduce the externalities of resource use (Cary et al., 2002; Beare & Newby, 2005; Stanley et al., 2005). Major global trends in NRM include a greater emphasis on community participation, decentralised activity to the regional scale, a shift from government to governance and a narrowing of the framing of environment policy to a largely utilitarian concept of NRM (Lane et al., 2009). Successive state and national governments in Australia, in actively seeking to improve the condition of Australias natural resources, established a series of funding arrangements for their protection and enhancement (reviewed by Hajkowicz, 2009; Lockwood et al., 2009). In concert with this funding has been a greater emphasis on accountability for expenditure on public environmental programs because delivery of tangible impacts through recently established regional arrangements has proved difficult to quantify (eg. Australian National Audit Office, 2008).	en_US
dc.publisher	In-Tech	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Sustainable Natural Resources Management	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.5772/33019	en_US
dc.title	Roles of Diverse Stakeholders in Natural Resources Management and Their Relationships with Regional Bodies in New South Wales, Australia	en_US
dc.type	Chapter
utslib.location	Rijeka, Croatia	en_US
utslib.for	1205 Urban and Regional Planning	en_US
utslib.citation.edition	1	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Research)/Institute For Sustainable Futures
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - ISF - Institute for Sustainable Futures
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.consider-herdc	false	en_US
pubs.edition	1	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	Rijeka, Croatia	en_US

Abstract:

Governments invest in natural resource management (NRM) because of a lack or failure of markets for ecosystem services and to encourage the adoption of NRM practices that reduce the externalities of resource use (Cary et al., 2002; Beare & Newby, 2005; Stanley et al., 2005). Major global trends in NRM include a greater emphasis on community participation, decentralised activity to the regional scale, a shift from government to governance and a narrowing of the framing of environment policy to a largely utilitarian concept of NRM (Lane et al., 2009). Successive state and national governments in Australia, in actively seeking to improve the condition of Australias natural resources, established a series of funding arrangements for their protection and enhancement (reviewed by Hajkowicz, 2009; Lockwood et al., 2009). In concert with this funding has been a greater emphasis on accountability for expenditure on public environmental programs because delivery of tangible impacts through recently established regional arrangements has proved difficult to quantify (eg. Australian National Audit Office, 2008).

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/32003