IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v85y2019icp476-484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How environmental storylines shaped regional planning policies in South East Queensland, Australia: A long-term analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Matthews, Tony
  • Marston, Gregory

Abstract

This paper examines how storylines shaped policy responses to environmental imperatives in an Australian regional planning system between 1991 and 2017. It builds upon existing literature that utilizes the ‘storylines’ conceptual model to distil and critically examine how discursive framing can shape environmental policy responses. This paper empirically establishes storylines within the regional planning system of South East Queensland, Australia that discursively shaped policy responses to three specific environmental imperatives: protecting regional biophysical features, sustainability, and climate change. It critically discusses how storylines associated with each imperative discursively framed and influenced planning policy responses at the regional scale. It reports how planning policies evolved as each environmental imperative was institutionally detected, discursively framed through storylines and responded to through regional-scale policy frameworks.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthews, Tony & Marston, Gregory, 2019. "How environmental storylines shaped regional planning policies in South East Queensland, Australia: A long-term analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 476-484.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:85:y:2019:i:c:p:476-484
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719301218
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.042?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kingston, Christopher & Caballero, Gonzalo, 2009. "Comparing theories of institutional change," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 151-180, August.
    2. Tony Matthews, 2013. "Institutional perspectives on operationalising climate adaptation through planning," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 198-210, June.
    3. Ton Buhrs & Graeme Aplin, 1999. "Pathways Towards Sustainability: The Australian Approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 315-340.
    4. Mike Hodson & Simon Marvin, 2009. "‘Urban Ecological Security’: A New Urban Paradigm?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 193-215, March.
    5. Ryan Plummer, 2006. "The evolution of sustainable development strategies in Canada: an assessment of three federal natural resource management agencies," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 16-32.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vanesa Castán Broto & Harriet Bulkeley, 2013. "Maintaining Climate Change Experiments: Urban Political Ecology and the Everyday Reconfiguration of Urban Infrastructure," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1934-1948, November.
    2. Ernest R. Alexander, 2015. "70 Years? Planning Theory: A Post-postmodernist Perspective," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(1), pages 5-18.
    3. Dirk Heinrichs & Kerstin Krellenberg & Michail Fragkias, 2013. "Urban Responses to Climate Change: Theories and Governance Practice in Cities of the Global South," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 1865-1878, November.
    4. Venkateswaran, Viswanathan & S Kumar, Deepak & Gupta, Deepak, 2021. "‘To Trust or Not’: Impact of camouflage strategies on trust in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 110-126.
    5. Lu, Yanhua & Yan, Lijuan & Li, Jie & Liang, Yunliang & Yang, Chuanjie & Li, Guang & Wu, Jiangqi & Xu, Hua, 2024. "Spatiotemporal evolution of county level ecological security based on an emergy ecological footprint model: The case of Dingxi, China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 490(C).
    6. Fischer, Beate & Klauer, Bernd & Schiller, Johannes, 2013. "Prospects for sustainable land-use policy in Germany: Experimenting with a sustainability heuristic," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 213-220.
    7. Heike Hanhörster & Isabel Ramos Lobato, 2021. "Migrants’ Access to the Rental Housing Market in Germany: Housing Providers and Allocation Policies," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 7-18.
    8. Yasir Khan & Attiya Yasmin Javid, 2015. "The Impact of Formal and Informal Institutions on Economic Performance: A Cross-Country Analysis," PIDE-Working Papers 2015:130, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
    9. Meijerink, Gerdien & Bulte, Erwin & Alemu, Dawit, 2014. "Formal institutions and social capital in value chains: The case of the Ethiopian Commodity Exchange," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 1-12.
    10. Anna Firsova & Roslyn Taplin, 2009. "Australia and Russia: How do their environmental policy processes differ?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 407-426, April.
    11. Hajdu, Anna & Daziano, Marcos F. & Visser, Oane, 2021. "Institutions and individual values motivating corporate social responsibility activities in large farms and agroholdings," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(4), April.
    12. Hong Ran & Yonggang Ma & Zhonglin Xu, 2022. "Evaluation and Prediction of Land Use Ecological Security in the Kashgar Region Based on Grid GIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Daron Acemoglu & Georgy Egorov & Konstantin Sonin, 2020. "Institutional Change and Institutional Persistence," Working Papers 2020-127, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    14. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Miroslava Rajcaniova, 2021. "Interdependencies between Mining Costs, Mining Rewards and Blockchain Security," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 22(1), pages 25-62, May.
    15. Joost Moor, 2022. "Prioritizing adaptation and mitigation in the climate movement: evidence from a cross-national protest survey of the Global Climate Strike, 2019," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Mark Whitehead, 2013. "Neoliberal Urban Environmentalism and the Adaptive City: Towards a Critical Urban Theory and Climate Change," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 50(7), pages 1348-1367, May.
    17. Koroso, Nesru H. & Zevenbergen, Jaap A. & Lengoiboni, Monica, 2019. "Land institutions’ credibility: Analyzing the role of complementary institutions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 553-564.
    18. Innocenti, Stefania & Cowan, Robin, 2016. "Mimetic behaviour and institutional persistence: A two-armed bandit experiment," MERIT Working Papers 2016-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    19. Pauline McGuirk & Robyn Dowling & Harriet Bulkeley, 2014. "Repositioning urban governments? Energy efficiency and Australia’s changing climate and energy governance regimes," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(13), pages 2717-2734, October.
    20. Ntuli, Herbert & Mukong, Alfred Kechia & Kimengsi, Jude Ndzifon, 2022. "Institutions and environmental resource extraction within local communities in Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).

    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:eee:lauspo:v:85:y:2019:i:c:p:476-484. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.