Abstract
Decision-making for major projects is often outside the legal remit of local governments in Australia. Nevertheless, local governments are the legitimate representatives of their communities and as such, can potentially make an important contribution to the decision-making process. However, little is known about how they may do so. This paper addresses that gap by analysing two case studies: Coal Seam Gas projects in northern New South Wales and the proposed East West Link tunnel in Melbourne. The research finds that local governments can contribute to good governance by increasing the quality and availability of information, community participation, and opportunities for local deliberation. However, this study also found a number of barriers to local governments making these contributions, which can disincentivise and limit local advocacy. The paper suggests there may be a range of benefits to be gained by reducing those barriers.
Highlights
It is generally agreed that governments strive towards good governance in their decision-making practices
This paper investigates the question: ‘how do local governments contribute to good governance for major project decision-making?’ In doing so, it considers how local governments contribute to good governance for major projects; identifies barriers to local governments fulfilling this role; and explores the implications of these findings for the future role of local governments
The case studies analysed here include two local governments (Yarra City Council in Melbourne, and Lismore City Council in Northern New South Wales (NSW)) which have been progressive in their commitment to community participation and inclusion
Summary
It is generally agreed that governments strive towards good governance in their decision-making practices. Governance is about how decisions are made – who is included and who is excluded from the process – and has a strong influence over the distribution of power in decision-making systems (Graham et al 2003). Pomeranz and Stedman’s (2020) recent review of this literature identifies eight: inclusivity, fairness, performance, transparency, legitimacy, accountability, direction and capability. These were used to inform the research reported here, but since each captures a vast body of work, a detailed review is beyond the scope of this paper.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
