Adaptive management intentions with a reality of evaluation: Getting science back into policy

Lyndal Hasselman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)


In Australia's Murray-Darling Basin water reform has been contentious as government attempts to reconcile historical over allocation of water to irrigation with the use of water for environmental outcomes. However, in many aspects, scientific knowledge of the environment is either imperfect, incomplete or environmental responses are unpredictable, with this uncertainty preventing definitive policy and closure of political arguments. In response to uncertainty and knowledge gaps, adaptive management has been written into the legislation, along with provisions for periodic evaluation. This research ascertains how adaptive management is understood by policy makers, with this indicative of future implementation of adaptive management. The way in which adaptive management is constructed by policy makers is determined through legislation, public speeches, government reports and semi-structured interviews. The findings demonstrate that adaptive management has been subsumed by evaluation. The loss of adaptive management as a distinct concept is seen as a loss of science and discovery from the policy process, with the dominance of evaluation discussed as limiting innovation and reinforcing a ‘muddling through’ of policy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)9-17
Number of pages9
JournalEnvironmental Science and Policy
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2017


Dive into the research topics of 'Adaptive management intentions with a reality of evaluation: Getting science back into policy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this