The development of environmental administration in Queensland and Western Australia

Why are they different?

Aynsley Kellow, Simon Niemeyer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Western Australia and Queensland are often seen as the most developmentalist states in the Australian federation, largely because they remained less developed for longer and have seen much mineral and agricultural development in the latter part of the twentieth century. Developmentalism is usually seen as anathema to a commitment to environmental policy, which most states have taken on in response to environmentalism in the same period, yet these two developmentalist states exhibit markedly different trajectories in response to this environmentalist stimulus. This paper explores the reasons for these differences, finding a variety of causal factors including both socioeconomic influences (such as affluence and demographics), political structures, and personalities and the force of ideas. It suggests that we should be wary of monocausal explanations of such differences.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)205-222
Number of pages18
JournalAustralian Journal of Political Science
Volume34
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

affluence
political structure
agricultural development
federation
environmental policy
stimulus
personality
twentieth century
commitment

Cite this

@article{6d91368f2a2543468d01e5d960dd9af9,
title = "The development of environmental administration in Queensland and Western Australia: Why are they different?",
abstract = "Western Australia and Queensland are often seen as the most developmentalist states in the Australian federation, largely because they remained less developed for longer and have seen much mineral and agricultural development in the latter part of the twentieth century. Developmentalism is usually seen as anathema to a commitment to environmental policy, which most states have taken on in response to environmentalism in the same period, yet these two developmentalist states exhibit markedly different trajectories in response to this environmentalist stimulus. This paper explores the reasons for these differences, finding a variety of causal factors including both socioeconomic influences (such as affluence and demographics), political structures, and personalities and the force of ideas. It suggests that we should be wary of monocausal explanations of such differences.",
author = "Aynsley Kellow and Simon Niemeyer",
year = "1999",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10361149950371",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "205--222",
journal = "Australian Journal of Political Science",
issn = "1036-1146",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "2",

}

The development of environmental administration in Queensland and Western Australia : Why are they different? / Kellow, Aynsley; Niemeyer, Simon.

In: Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 34, No. 2, 01.01.1999, p. 205-222.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The development of environmental administration in Queensland and Western Australia

T2 - Why are they different?

AU - Kellow, Aynsley

AU - Niemeyer, Simon

PY - 1999/1/1

Y1 - 1999/1/1

N2 - Western Australia and Queensland are often seen as the most developmentalist states in the Australian federation, largely because they remained less developed for longer and have seen much mineral and agricultural development in the latter part of the twentieth century. Developmentalism is usually seen as anathema to a commitment to environmental policy, which most states have taken on in response to environmentalism in the same period, yet these two developmentalist states exhibit markedly different trajectories in response to this environmentalist stimulus. This paper explores the reasons for these differences, finding a variety of causal factors including both socioeconomic influences (such as affluence and demographics), political structures, and personalities and the force of ideas. It suggests that we should be wary of monocausal explanations of such differences.

AB - Western Australia and Queensland are often seen as the most developmentalist states in the Australian federation, largely because they remained less developed for longer and have seen much mineral and agricultural development in the latter part of the twentieth century. Developmentalism is usually seen as anathema to a commitment to environmental policy, which most states have taken on in response to environmentalism in the same period, yet these two developmentalist states exhibit markedly different trajectories in response to this environmentalist stimulus. This paper explores the reasons for these differences, finding a variety of causal factors including both socioeconomic influences (such as affluence and demographics), political structures, and personalities and the force of ideas. It suggests that we should be wary of monocausal explanations of such differences.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033243180&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10361149950371

DO - 10.1080/10361149950371

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 205

EP - 222

JO - Australian Journal of Political Science

JF - Australian Journal of Political Science

SN - 1036-1146

IS - 2

ER -