Power and participation: participatory resource management in south-west Queensland

Abstract

To develop a sustainable future for the rangelands, partnerships are needed — partnerships between scientists, policy makers, visitors, and most significantly, the various communities of people who live and work in the rangelands. The views of these people are as variable as the country about which they care; rangeland communities are not homogeneous. The power relations between these people are at the base of many conflicts. How we handle the relationships between these groups, and manage these conflicts, are crucial for success in land management. The first part of this thesis reviews the history of both community participation and power theory. While participatory approaches are part of the rhetoric in Australian land management, proponents are generally naive about the complexities of power and power relations. The philosophical literature highlights that power is a contested concept; and these divisions are epitomised by the works of Habermas and Foucault. Their writings are compared and contrasted to provide a rich understanding of power relations in community participation. Power relations influence whose voices are heard: those who exercise power, and the sets of rules that define what is seen as true or false at any given time in history. Power relations also determine whose knowledge is incorporated in land management policy and practice. The model proposed in this thesis demonstrates that power relations interact with every dimension of community participation: context, goals, scale, stage, who is involved, the capacity of those involved, and the methods used. Research was undertaken within agricultural and natural resource management programs and projects in south-west Queensland. A variety of participatory approaches are used by government agencies to encourage grazier participation and the adoption of more sustainable practices, such as Landcare, Bestprac and the regional groups, such as the South West Strategy. While government staff in south-west Queensland purport to share decision-making power with landholders, landholders tend to have different perspectives about the level of power that is being shared. One of the key findings of this research is that power is not static within any project. Rather, power is ultradynamic, fluid, and highly dependent on context. In terms of land management programs, the levels of power sharing fluctuate over time and between