No abstract

No abstract

A rational process for assessment of environmental policy options should be based on an appreciation of how humans value nature. Increased understanding of values will also contribute to the development of appropriate ways for us to relate to and manage natural areas. Over the past two decades, environmental philosophers have examined the notion that there is an intrinsic value in nature. Economists have attempted to define and measure the market and nonmarket economic values associated with decisions concerning natural areas. Psychologists have tried to assess the extent to which people believe in an intrinsic value in nature, and have also begun to work with economists to improve nonmarket valuation techniques. I briefly review the contributions made to our understanding of natural area value by environmental philosophy, psychology and economics, and develop a model that integrates insights from these disciplines. Components in the model include cognitions, held values, assigned values and various modes of value expression. I make recommendations for future validation, development and use of the model.

As the support of host communities is a precondition for a sustainable industry, regional social impact studies are a crucial input to tourism planning and decisionmaking. This study assessed the social impacts of tourism in a rural region of Australia where tourism is an important sector of the economy. As well as providing data to aid regional tourism planning, this study identifi es differences in personal and community-wide impacts; advances understanding of the factors that infl uence residents' perceptions of tourism impacts; and assesses the degree to which tourism activity associated with protected areas contributes to the identifi ed social impacts. across a range of sectors (Davidson and Lockwood, 2007), including tourism. Naturebased tourism is a key industry sector (De Lacy and Whitmore, 2006), and a signifi cant proportion of regional nature-based tourism is focused on protected areas. The work, as well as providing data to aid regional tourism planning and management, aimed to

ABSTRACT. Although previous studies have examined adaptive capacity using a range of self-assessment procedures, no objective self-report approaches have been used to identify the dimensions of adaptive capacity and their relative importance. We examine the content, structure, and relative importance of dimensions of adaptive capacity as perceived by rural landholders in an agricultural landscape in South-Eastern Australia. Our findings indicate that the most important dimensions influencing perceived landholder adaptive capacity are related to their management style, particularly their change orientation. Other important dimensions are individual financial capacity, labor availability, and the capacity of communities and local networks to support landholders' management practices. Trust and confidence in government with respect to native vegetation management was not found to be a significant dimension of perceived adaptive capacity. The scale items presented, particularly those with high factor loadings, provide a solid foundation for assessment of adaptive capacity in other study areas, as well as exploration of relationships between the individual dimensions of adaptive capacity and dependent variables such as perceived resilience. Further work is needed to refine the scale items and compare the findings from this case study with those from other contexts and population samples.

The region has become a significant scale of governance for the implementation of public policy, including natural resource management (NRM). A community-based regional NRM governance model has been adopted by the Australian government in partnership with Australian state and territory governments. There have been persuasive advocates of this approach both within community organisations and government. Proponents point to advantages such as the capacity to integrate across social, environmental and economic issues; improved investment efficiency; ability to establish appropriate power-sharing and partnership arrangements; better conversion of planning products into on-ground outcomes; and community learning and capacity building. However, concerns have also been raised in the academic literature regarding insufficient devolution of power, lack of downward accountability, exclusion of some stakeholders from decision making, and inadequate vertical and horizontal integration. We interviewed representatives from each of the governance levels (national, state, regional) to examine these concerns, and in doing so identify the strengths and challenges of the Australian experiment with devolved NRM governance. We synthesise the interview data with insights from the literature and make observations on the current state of Australian NRM governance. From this analysis, we identify lessons from the Australian experience to inform the development of multi-level environmental governance systems.

No abstract

No abstract