IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v61y2018i10p1789-1804.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory trust and failure – a case study of coal seam gas in New South Wales, Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Ross M. Carter
  • Richard K. Morgan

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Ross M. Carter & Richard K. Morgan, 2018. "Regulatory trust and failure – a case study of coal seam gas in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(10), pages 1789-1804, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:61:y:2018:i:10:p:1789-1804
    DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2017.1372277
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09640568.2017.1372277
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640568.2017.1372277?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:61:y:2018:i:10:p:1789-1804. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.