IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v41y2017i1p42-54.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding local community attitudes toward industrial development in the Great Barrier Reef region World Heritage Area: are environmental impacts perceived to overshadow economic benefits?

Author

Listed:
  • Claudia F. Benham

Abstract

Conflicts between industrial development and environmental conservation can be particularly acute when such development occurs in the vicinity of World Heritage sites. A key example is the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area (GBRWHA) in northeastern Australia, where a 2012 review by the World Heritage Council found that rapid port development inshore of the coral reef posed significant risks to local marine ecosystems. Such instances pose pressing challenges for decision‐makers seeking to manage World Heritage sites for multiple values and needs, including those of key stakeholder groups, such as local communities. There is increasingly a societal expectation that public decision‐making takes into account local views and priorities, and that companies seek a ‘social license to operate’. This research explored local community attitudes toward port development associated with the export of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and coal through the GBRWHA. Using data drawn from a survey and interviews, the research examined how a range of geographical factors, including proximity to gas infrastructure and the perceived impacts and risks of development to the local community, economy and environment shape community perceptions of the industry. Findings suggest that local attitudes toward gas and coal terminal development inshore of the GBRWHA are shaped predominantly by community perceptions of environmental impacts and risks associated with such infrastructure, in contrast to a broader public narrative that focuses largely on economic benefits. A complex combination of other factors, including social impacts, personal environmental values, community trust in industry, and equity in decision‐making and distribution of the risks and benefits of industrial development also contribute. Placed in a broader, global context, the findings have important implications for public decision‐making processes in Australia and elsewhere as they suggest that, for local communities, the perceived impacts of gas development on the environment may overshadow the benefits of industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudia F. Benham, 2017. "Understanding local community attitudes toward industrial development in the Great Barrier Reef region World Heritage Area: are environmental impacts perceived to overshadow economic benefits?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(1), pages 42-54, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:41:y:2017:i:1:p:42-54
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12112
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1477-8947.12112?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. Dorian, James P. & Franssen, Herman T. & Simbeck, Dale R., 2006. "Global challenges in energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 1984-1991, October.
    2. Hall, N. & Ashworth, P. & Devine-Wright, P., 2013. "Societal acceptance of wind farms: Analysis of four common themes across Australian case studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 200-208.
    3. Anne Shepherd & Christi Bowler, 1997. "Beyond the Requirements: Improving Public Participation in EIA," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(6), pages 725-738.
    4. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    5. Maikhuri, R. K. & Nautiyal, S. & Rao, K. S. & Saxena, K. G., 2001. "Conservation policy-people conflicts: a case study from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve (a World Heritage Site), India," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3-4), pages 355-365, July.
    6. Kumar, Satish & Kwon, Hyouk-Tae & Choi, Kwang-Ho & Hyun Cho, Jae & Lim, Wonsub & Moon, Il, 2011. "Current status and future projections of LNG demand and supplies: A global prospective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 4097-4104, July.
    7. Grech, A. & Coles, R. & Marsh, H., 2011. "A broad-scale assessment of the risk to coastal seagrasses from cumulative threats," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 560-567.
    8. Upreti, Bishnu Raj, 2004. "Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 785-800, April.
    9. Prno, Jason & Scott Slocombe, D., 2012. "Exploring the origins of ‘social license to operate’ in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 346-357.
    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. R. G. van der Vegt, 2018. "Risk Assessment and Risk Governance of Liquefied Natural Gas Development in Gladstone, Australia," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1830-1846, September.

    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. Adams, Michelle & Wheeler, David & Woolston, Genna, 2011. "A participatory approach to sustainable energy strategy development in a carbon-intensive jurisdiction: The case of Nova Scotia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2550-2559, May.
    2. Copena, Damián & Simón, Xavier, 2018. "Wind farms and payments to landowners: Opportunities for rural development for the case of Galicia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-47.
    3. Frate, Cláudio Albuquerque & Brannstrom, Christian & de Morais, Marcus Vinícius Girão & Caldeira-Pires, Armando de Azevedo, 2019. "Procedural and distributive justice inform subjectivity regarding wind power: A case from Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 185-195.
    4. Rogers, J.C. & Simmons, E.A. & Convery, I. & Weatherall, A., 2008. "Public perceptions of opportunities for community-based renewable energy projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4217-4226, November.
    5. Francisco Haces-Fernandez, 2022. "Assessment of the Financial Benefits from Wind Farms in US Rural Locations," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, September.
    6. Bauwens, Thomas & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2018. "Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 612-625.
    7. Walsh, Bríd & van der Plank, Sien & Behrens, Paul, 2017. "The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 163-171.
    8. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    9. Ólafsdóttir, Rannveig & Sæþórsdóttir, Anna Dóra, 2019. "Wind farms in the Icelandic highlands: Attitudes of local residents and tourism service providers," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Moffat, Kieren & Zhang, Airong, 2014. "The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 61-70.
    11. Susumu Ohnuma & Miki Yokoyama & Shogo Mizutori, 2022. "Procedural Fairness and Expected Outcome Evaluations in the Public Acceptance of Sustainability Policymaking: A Case Study of Multiple Stepwise Participatory Programs to Develop an Environmental Maste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-22, March.
    12. Stephens, Siân & Robinson, Bryan Michael Kenneth, 2021. "The social license to operate in the onshore wind energy industry: A comparative case study of Scotland and South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PB).
    13. Leer Jørgensen, Marie & Anker, Helle Tegner & Lassen, Jesper, 2020. "Distributive fairness and local acceptance of wind turbines: The role of compensation schemes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    14. Zerrahn, Alexander, 2017. "Wind Power and Externalities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 245-260.
    15. Grashof, Katherina, 2019. "Are auctions likely to deter community wind projects? And would this be problematic?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 20-32.
    16. Velten, Sarah & Schaal, Tamara & Leventon, Julia & Hanspach, Jan & Fischer, Joern & Newig, Jens, 2018. "Rethinking biodiversity governance in European agricultural landscapes: Acceptability of alternative governance scenarios," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 84-93.
    17. Guanghui Hou & Tong Chen & Ke Ma & Zhiming Liao & Hongmei Xia & Tianzeng Yao, 2019. "Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    18. Lacey, Justine & Carr-Cornish, Simone & Zhang, Airong & Eglinton, Kelvyn & Moffat, Kieren, 2017. "The art and science of community relations: Procedural fairness at Newmont's Waihi Gold operations, New Zealand," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 245-254.
    19. Busse, Maria & Siebert, Rosemarie, 2018. "Acceptance studies in the field of land use—A critical and systematic review to advance the conceptualization of acceptance and acceptability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 235-245.
    20. Windemer, Rebecca, 2023. "Acceptance should not be assumed. How the dynamics of social acceptance changes over time, impacting onshore wind repowering," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:natres:v:41:y:2017:i:1:p:42-54. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1477-8947 .

    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.