IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v44y2012i1p150-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing Biosecurity in a Neoliberal World: Comparative Perspectives from Australia and the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Damian Maye

    (Countryside and Community Research Institute, University of the West of England, Oxstalls Lane, Longlevens, Gloucester GL2 9HW, England)

  • Jacqui Dibden

    (School of Geography and Environmental Science, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia)

  • Vaughan Higgins

    (School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia)

  • Clive Potter

    (Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, England)

Abstract

International trade poses a serious and growing threat to biosecurity through the introduction of invasive pests and disease: these have adverse impacts on plant and animal health and public goods such as biodiversity, as well as food production capacity. While international governmental bodies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) recognise such threats, and permit governments to protect human, animal, and plant life or health, such measures must not be applied in a way that is restrictive to trade. This raises a fundamental (but little-examined) tension between effective biosecurity governance and the neoliberal priorities of international trade. In this paper we examine how such tensions play out in the different political and geographical contexts of Australia and the United Kingdom. A comparative approach enables close scrutiny of how trade liberalisation and biosecurity are coconstituted as compatible objectives as well as the tensions and contradictions involved in making these domains a single governable problem. The comparative analysis draws attention to the policy challenges facing Australia and the UK in governing national biosecurity in a neoliberal world. These challenges reveal a complex geopolitics in the ways in which biosecurity is practised, institutionalised, and debated in each country, with implications for which pests and diseases are defined as threats and, therefore, which commodities are permitted to move across national borders. Despite efforts by the WTO to govern biosecurity as a technical matter of risk assessment and management, and to harmonise national practices, we contend that actual biosecurity practices continue to diverge between states depending on perceptions of risk and hazard, both to agricultural production and to rural environments as a whole, as well as unresolved tensions between internationalised neoliberalism and domestic concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Damian Maye & Jacqui Dibden & Vaughan Higgins & Clive Potter, 2012. "Governing Biosecurity in a Neoliberal World: Comparative Perspectives from Australia and the United Kingdom," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(1), pages 150-168, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:44:y:2012:i:1:p:150-168
    DOI: 10.1068/a4426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a4426
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a4426?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Binder, Monika, 2002. "The Role of Risk and Cost-Benefit Analysis in Determining Quarantine Measures," Staff Research Papers 31911, Productivity Commission.
    2. Monika Binder, 2002. "The role of risk and cost-benefit analysis in determining quarantine measures," International Trade 0203002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marzano, Mariella & Dandy, Norman & Papazova-Anakieva, Irena & Avtzis, Dimitrios & Connolly, Tom & Eschen, René & Glavendekić, Milka & Hurley, Brett & Lindelöw, Åke & Matošević, Dinka & Tomov, Rumen &, 2016. "Assessing awareness of tree pests and pathogens amongst tree professionals: A pan-European perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 164-171.
    2. Kruger, Heleen, 2017. "Creating an enabling environment for industry-driven pest suppression: The case of suppressing Queensland fruit fly through area-wide management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 139-148.

    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. Tu, Anh Thuy & Beghin, John & Gozlan, Estelle, 2008. "Tariff escalation and invasive species damages," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 619-629, November.
    2. Anh Tu & John C. Beghin & Estelle Gozlan, 2005. "Tariff Escalation and Invasive Species Risk," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications (archive only) 05-wp407, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    3. David Adamson & David Cook, 2007. "Re-examining economic options for import risk assessments," Murray-Darling Program Working Papers WP3M07, Risk and Sustainable Management Group, University of Queensland.
    4. Leif Inge K. Sørskår & Eirik B. Abrahamsen, 2017. "On how to manage uncertainty when considering regulatory HSE interventions," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 5(1), pages 97-116, November.
    5. Chengyan Yue & John C. Beghin, 2017. "Tariff Equivalent And Forgone Trade Effects Of Prohibitive Technical Barriers To Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 8, pages 139-150, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Lindner, Robert K. & McLeod, Paul, 2009. "ACIAR’s 25 year investment in fruit-fly research," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 47617, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Abrahamsen, Håkon Bjorheim & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås, 2018. "Using the ALARP principle for safety management in the energy production sector of chemical industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 160-165.
    8. Annette Weier & Paul Loke, 2007. "Precaution and the Precautionary Principle: two Australian case studies," Staff Working Papers 0705, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia.
    9. Tu, Anh T. & Beghin, John, 2004. "Intra-Industry Trade, Imperfect Competition, Trade Integration and Invasive Species Risk," Conference papers 331239, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. Lofgren, Hans & Robinson, Sherman, 2004. "Public Spending, Growth, and Poverty Alleviation in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Dynamic General Equilibrium Analysis," Conference papers 331292, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    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:sae:envira:v:44:y:2012:i:1:p:150-168. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.