Transforming the Australian agricultural biosecurity framework: The role of institutional logics

Abstract

The Australian government has transformed the national biosecurity framework by shifting from a quarantine to a shared responsibility approach. This reflects a move from centralised to network‐based governance. While network governance enables the development of private and public networks needed to enact a shared responsibility approach, it can sit in tension with this approach, which requires the sharing of risk and legitimacy across an array of non‐government actors. Further, little is known about how the beliefs and values of individuals involved in biosecurity decision‐making influence whether or how a shared responsibility approach is enacted. We use an institutional logics framework to investigate these issues and found that despite risk‐shifting and scale and efficiency logics underpinning a shared responsibility approach, a bureaucracy logic has remained dominant. While a dominant bureaucracy logic can enable a shared responsibility approach by providing clear guidelines around biosecurity compliance, it can also create barriers by creating ambiguity, or increasing reliance of actors on government in the event of a biosecurity outbreak. It can also reflect shadows of hierarchy in which governments moving to network‐based governance are either not ready to share power or seek to retain authority over the direction of their policy intention.Points for practitioners Enacting a shared responsibility approach is subject to an array of challenges. However, little is known about how the beliefs and values of individuals involved in biosecurity decision‐making influence whether or how a shared responsibility approach is enacted. Problems can arise with implementation of a shared responsibility approach particularly related to the different and conflicting ways in which decision makers can interpret and understand a policy intention. Despite efforts from public and private partners to work together, a shared responsibility approach is dominated by a bureaucracy logic. This can provide clear guidelines for actors around compliance but can also create further dependence on government in the event of a biosecurity outbreak.