Abstract
There is a growing need to develop and implement new forms of governance that respond to the increasing complexity of decision making and balance the roles of government and local citizens. Localism is (re)emerging as an alternative to traditional ‘top-down’ governance strategies which are criticised for their failure to adequately respond to the diversity of community needs. This article uses two case studies to explore how localism works in practice, the Tasmanian Drought Support Network and the Tasmanian Forest Agreement. Four dimensions of adaptive governance are used to critically identify the benefits and limitations of localism as a governance approach, exploring the approaches capacity for social and economic entrepreneurship, governance quality and the utilisation and enhancement of individual capacities. These empirical findings will help policy makers and community members better understand localism and guide the development of theory around localism and its future practice.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.