Power, perspective, and privilege: The challenge of translating stakeholder theory from business management to environmental and natural resource management

Stakeholder analysis and engagement is a central tenet for understanding and solving sustainability challenges, and is applied widely in environmental and natural resource management (ENRM). The practice in ENRM follows translation of stakeholder theory from its origins in business management to the sustainability sector. In this analytical essay we explore key concepts in ENRM research and practice to examine complexities that have accompanied this translation to ENRM. In particular, we consider the centrality of stakeholders’ landscape perspectives in defining their stake in ENRM issues, and through this lens examine the limitations that are inherent in the classic ‘hub-and-spoke’ model of stakeholder analysis that is the theoretical underpinning for ENRM stakeholder analysis and engagement practice. We argue that unlike the traditional business context where both power and perspective are centred on the business entity that then defines other stakeholders in reference to itself, in ENRM, stakeholder relations are centred on an ENRM issue, typically a landscape or the implications of policy change on a landscape. As a consequence, decision-making power is decentred onto one of several stakeholders; often a government or other high power entity, implicitly conferring privilege to those powerful stakeholders’ landscape perspectives over those held by low power stakeholders. We conclude with priorities for foregrounding power and explicating landscape perspectives to identify privilege in ENRM. We direct these insights especially to those ENRM actors who have the dual roles of adjudicator and privileged stakeholder such that they do not inadvertently perpetuate power imbalances through the privilege of aligning their decision-making power with their landscape perspectives

Enhancing critical thinking skills in first year environmental management students: a tale of curriculum design, application and reflection

This paper chronicles the experience of academic staff in developing a course to enhance the critical thinking skills of environmental management undergraduates. We outline our considerations and process for course development, discuss insights from course evaluations, and reflect on the challenges encountered. We believe these perspectives will be useful for others who are developing critical thinking skills curricula, especially first year courses. Aspects of the course design which were considered particularly effective were the use of scaffolded assessment, the application of threshold concepts, and well-structured collaborative learning activities paired with quality tutors. The key learning for the authors from the evaluation of the course was that while the tools and strategies developed were very useful, interweaving these tools into year 2 and 3 courses would help students see the ongoing value of critical thinking in their work

How environmental values influence trust and beliefs about societal oversight and need for regulation of the Australian cattle industry

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd. Livestock grazing covers half of Australia and vast areas of global terrestrial ecosystems. The sustainability of the beef cattle industries are being scrutinised amid ongoing environmental concerns. In response, industry discourse has identified public trust as critical to avoiding reactive environmental regulation. However, public perceptions of the cattle industry's sustainability performance and trust are largely unknown and speculative. We present the first model of public attitudes toward the Australian cattle industry (n = 2913). Our results reveal that societal perceptions of the industry's environmental performance strongly predict trust in the industry. However, trust only weakly predicts a perceived right for societal oversight and has only an indirect relationship on need for environmental regulation. Environmental values influence perceptions of industry performance and the perceived right for societal oversight. We conclude that effective industry governance must be values literate and recognise that strong environmental performance is critical for public trust. Public trust is high but does not translate to support for a relaxed regulatory environment.This research was funded by the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland and CSIRO's Responsible Innovation Future Science Platform. The research was not funded by the Australian cattle industry, although TF has PhD scholarship funding from Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) for an unrelated research project

A Leap of Faith: Regenerative Agriculture as a Contested Worldview Rather Than as a Practice Change Issue

Regenerative agriculture (RA) is emerging as one alternative model for agricultural production. However, RA has not matured sufficiently for a clear definition to have emerged, or for claimed benefits to be rigorously tested. Thus, numerous competing discourses have emerged around what RA is, and its potential role in the future of farming, leading to a level of contention about is value. This research aimed to better understand RA as a social phenomenon by using Q methodology to explore and evaluate how common discourses around agricultural sustainability, the goals of farming, and RA resonated with different Australian beef farmers. Three perspectives emerged from the data, labelled as the regenerative, environmentally conscious, and productive perspectives and represented diverse views around the goals of agriculture, the role of RA in the future of Australian agriculture, and comfort level producers have with the term and approach to farming it represents. As RA continues to grow as a movement, worldview, and farming approach, understanding the differences in thinking and worldview of proponents will be important for better understanding the goals of RA, how to reach them and measure their impact, and improve communication around RA. This is important to avoid and resolve unnecessary or destructive tensions between the range of agricultural sustainability discourses

A quantitative systematic review of distributive environmental justice literature: a rich history and the need for an enterprising future

Environmental distributive justice contextually assesses social equities in relation to natural resources. While there is a rich literature on environmental distributive justice, there have been few assessments quantifying the biases and scopes of this literature. We conduct a systematic review of the literature. We find several key biases and summarize the breadth of subjects that have been studied or discussed. We find a very distinct overlap between authorship nationality and study location, which is concerning, as some of the world’s most polluted and inequitable societies are least represented in authorship. Additionally, we find a dominance of quantitative studies. These results are important for understanding both where future research efforts in this area could best be directed, and how the literature could be enriched by diversified approaches. Improving environmental justice studies is critical and important for many people across our global society, which is increasingly shaped by widespread natural resource depletion

A Leap of Faith: Regenerative Agriculture as a Contested Worldview Rather Than as a Practice Change Issue

Regenerative agriculture (RA) is emerging as one alternative model for agricultural production. However, RA has not matured sufficiently for a clear definition to have emerged, or for claimed benefits to be rigorously tested. Thus, numerous competing discourses have emerged around what RA is, and its potential role in the future of farming, leading to a level of contention about is value. This research aimed to better understand RA as a social phenomenon by using Q methodology to explore and evaluate how common discourses around agricultural sustainability, the goals of farming, and RA resonated with different Australian beef farmers. Three perspectives emerged from the data, labelled as the regenerative, environmentally conscious, and productive perspectives and represented diverse views around the goals of agriculture, the role of RA in the future of Australian agriculture, and comfort level producers have with the term and approach to farming it represents. As RA continues to grow as a movement, worldview, and farming approach, understanding the differences in thinking and worldview of proponents will be important for better understanding the goals of RA, how to reach them and measure their impact, and improve communication around RA. This is important to avoid and resolve unnecessary or destructive tensions between the range of agricultural sustainability discourses

Using a Community Vote for Wind Energy Development Decision-Making in King Island, Tasmania

In 2012, a large scale wind energy project was proposed for development in King Island, Tasmania, Australia. The project proponents adopted what they described as a ‘best practice’ approach to community engagement; an approach expected to achieve positive outcomes for developer and community by maximising community involvement in decision-making, limiting social conflict, and enhancing the potential of achieving the social licence to operate. Despite this, the community experience during the time of the proposal was one of conflict and distress, and the proposal was eventually cancelled due to exogenous economic factors. This case study explores a key element of the engagement process—holding a community vote—that caused significant problems for people and process. The vote appeared to be a democratic means to facilitate community empowerment in the decision-making process. However, in this study, we show that the vote resulted in an increase in conflict and polarisation, challenged the legitimacy of the consultative process and credibility of the proponents, and ultimately led to legal actions taken by opponents against the proponent. Factors including voter eligibility, the benchmark for success of the vote, campaigning, and responses to the outcome of the vote are examined to demonstrate the complexity of decision-making for renewable energy and land use change more generally

The community cost of consultation: Characterising the qualitative social impacts of a wind energy development that failed to proceed in Tasmania, Australia

Energy developments affect communities in a range of ways. Impacts on communities can be caused by changes to landscape amenity and access, disruptions to community cohesion, increased or decreased income streams, effects on property values, and population changes. These changes are ideally captured in the social impact assessment (SIA) process, where proponents outline in a formal statement the balance of benefits and burdens on local communities, and measures that will be taken to minimise negative outcomes for the community. In SIA practice there is a tendency toward quantitative socio-economic impacts, such as changes to demographics, income, and land values, with some qualitative assessment of amenity impacts. While the academic literature promotes inclusion of changes to the community itself, such as impacts on community cohesion and social capital, these qualitative changes are not consistently evident in SIA practice. Additionally, SIA practice assesses the impacts of the project, i.e. how the development of wind turbines or other energy infrastructure will affect the community. Because the consultation process around a proposed project typically commences prior to the characterisation and assessment of any associated social impacts and the finalisation of the SIA process, the potential impacts of this consultation are rarely, if ever, evaluated. Here, we examine a case study of an Australian wind energy project that did not proceed to implementation. Through this case study we are able to analyse the anticipatory impacts of the proposal; those stemming from the consultative process rather than the development of the project itself. We present these qualitative social changes, and outline the pathways through which the social changes manifest in two overarching social impacts: a divided community and future development capacity. We discuss the implications of this analysis in the context of good engagement practice and energy governance

A framework for disaster vulnerability in a small island in the Southwest Pacific: a case study of Emae Island, Vanuatu

The societal costs of disasters around the world are continuing to increase and Pacific Island countries are considered some of the most vulnerable. This is primarily due to a combination of high hazard exposure coupled with a range of social, economic, physical, and political vulnerabilities. This article contributes to the growing body of work that aims to understand the causal factors of disaster vulnerability, but with a specific focus on small island developing states. The article first develops a framework for understanding disaster vulnerability, drawing on extensive literature and the well-established Methods for the Improvement of Vulnerability in Europe (MOVE) framework, and second, applies this adapted framework using empirically-derived data from fieldwork on Emae Island, Vanuatu to provide a working understanding of the causal elements of disaster vulnerability. Drawn from a significant body of scholarship at the time, the MOVE framework was primarily developed as a heuristic tool in which disaster vulnerability is considered to be a function of exposure, susceptibility (socially, economically, physically, culturally, environmentally, institutionally), and a lack of resilience. We posit that this adapted framework for small islands should also include historical susceptibility, and we prefer livelihood resilience (as capabilities, social capital, knowledge, participation, and human rights) over lack of resilience. We maintain that understanding disaster vulnerability holistically, which is inclusive of both strengths and drawbacks, is crucial to ensure that limited resources can target the causal factors that produce vulnerability and help safeguard and improve livelihoods in both the short and long term

Conducive and hindering factors for effective disaster risk reduction in Emae Island, Vanuatu

Vanuatu is one of the most hazard prone nations in the world and frequently tops the World Risk Report as the nation with the highest overall disaster risk. The devastation wrought by category 5 cyclone Pam (2015), the El Niño drought (2015/16), and volcanic eruptions in Ambae (2018), are but a few recent examples of disasters which have disrupted livelihoods and curtailed development. The Vanuatu government, along with financial and other support from the international community, has over time developed and implemented a variety of disaster risk reduction strategies. Based on recommendations from the Hyogo Framework for Action (2005-2015) and the current Sendai Framework (2015-2030), these strategies have included: the decentralisation of disaster risk management; capacity building through enhanced collaboration with international non-governmental organisations; the formation of community disaster and climate change committees; and improved risk mapping, early warning and communications systems. This study evaluates the progress of some of these identified strategies implemented at the national, provincial and local levels based on the perspectives of government officials and drawing on an empirical case study from Emae Island. While on paper Vanuatu has made significant progress in developing a conducive environment for reducing disaster risk many issues remain. For example, some conducive factors include stakeholders from all levels being aware and accepting of both local and scientific knowledge and the importance of both top-down and bottom-up strategies. However, hindering factors include a lack of communication between levels and a preference for scientific knowledge at the expense of local “traditional” knowledge, among other examples. As such, this paper helps illuminate both conducive and hindering factors for developing local disaster risk reduction strategies in Vanuatu in a world of increasing disaster risk