IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Terms of Engagement: Consensus or Control in Remote Australian Resource Management?

Listed author(s):
  • Thomas G Measham
  • Carol Richards
  • Cathy Robinson
  • Silva Larson
  • Lynn Brake


    (CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Australia)

Community based natural resource management (NRM) has seen a shift in the discourse from participation to engagement, reflecting a focus on increasingly active citizen involvement in management and action. This paper considers this shift in relation to two contrasting theoretical perspectives. The first is deliberative democracy, drawing on Habermas, which emphasises the importance of discussing and rationalising values and actions. The second is governmentality, or ‘governing through community’ which draws on Foucault, emphasising neo-liberal management styles and ‘self-help’. In considering the empirical relevance of these theoretical perspectives, this paper draws on a case study of public engagement in NRM in the Lake Eyre Basin, a remote, inland region of Australia. This research yielded a practical set of “factors for success” for public engagement in remote areas. The findings support the view that, especially in remote regions, public engagement in NRM reflects contrasting goals. We make two conclusions. First, that these contrasting objectives emphasise the tension between deliberative and neo-liberal conceptualisations of engagement; and second, the evidence for neo-liberal interpretations of engagement are stronger than for deliberative interpretations of engagement in the case study region.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems in its series Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series with number 2009-10.

in new window

Length: 27 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2009
Handle: RePEc:cse:wpaper:2009-10
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Gungahlin Homestead, GPO Box 284, Canberra City, ACT 2601

Phone: (02) 6242 1600
Fax: (02) 6242 1555
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

in new window

  1. Leach, Melissa & Mearns, Robin & Scoones, Ian, 1999. "Environmental Entitlements: Dynamics and Institutions in Community-Based Natural Resource Management," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 225-247, February.
  2. Simon Niemeyer & Clive L Spash, 2001. "Environmental Valuation Analysis, Public Deliberation, and their Pragmatic Syntheses: A Critical Appraisal," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 567-585, August.
  3. Silva Larson & Thomas G Measham & Liana J Williams, 2009. "Remotely Engaged? A Framework for Monitoring the Success of Stakeholder Engagement in Remote Regions," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
  4. Thomas G Measham & Guy B Barnett, 2007. "Environmental Volunteering: Motivations, Modes and Outcomes," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2007-03, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
  5. Toni Darbas, 2008. "Reflexive governance of urban catchments: a case of deliberative truncation," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 40(6), pages 1454-1469, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cse:wpaper:2009-10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CSE-Webrequest)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.