The quality of resource condition targets in regional natural resource management in Australia

G. Park, A.M. Roberts, J.K. Alexander, L. Mcnamara, David Pannell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Natural resource management organisations in Australia routinely establish resource condition targets in their regional plans and catchment strategies. We reviewed biodiversity, water and community resource condition targets set by Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) over planning cycles since 1997 against criteria of being specific, measurable and time-bound (SMT). The overall quality of targets is poor, with less than 30 per cent of targets meeting the three criteria. Disturbingly, there are no SMT targets in the most recent NSW CMA catchment strategies. We identify three major reasons for poor target setting: a lack of appropriate standards and guidelines from governments to enable high quality target setting; a lack of realism about the budgetary and technical feasibility of ambitious environmental targets amongst those involved in natural resource management; and a lack of adequate focus on outcomes by both CMAs and governments. Improvements to target setting can be achieved through stronger signals and commitment by governments, including by rewarding performance of regional bodies practising outcome-focused accountability. © 2013 Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand Inc.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)285-301
JournalAustralasian Journal of Environmental Management
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

natural resources
resource management
natural resource
catchment
resource
management
resources
lack
accountability
realism
biodiversity
New Zealand
commitment
water
responsibility
planning
community
performance
target setting
time

Cite this

@article{b4464bf1aa93400a9efa4d6fdebc5d6f,
title = "The quality of resource condition targets in regional natural resource management in Australia",
abstract = "Natural resource management organisations in Australia routinely establish resource condition targets in their regional plans and catchment strategies. We reviewed biodiversity, water and community resource condition targets set by Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) over planning cycles since 1997 against criteria of being specific, measurable and time-bound (SMT). The overall quality of targets is poor, with less than 30 per cent of targets meeting the three criteria. Disturbingly, there are no SMT targets in the most recent NSW CMA catchment strategies. We identify three major reasons for poor target setting: a lack of appropriate standards and guidelines from governments to enable high quality target setting; a lack of realism about the budgetary and technical feasibility of ambitious environmental targets amongst those involved in natural resource management; and a lack of adequate focus on outcomes by both CMAs and governments. Improvements to target setting can be achieved through stronger signals and commitment by governments, including by rewarding performance of regional bodies practising outcome-focused accountability. {\circledC} 2013 Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand Inc.",
author = "G. Park and A.M. Roberts and J.K. Alexander and L. Mcnamara and David Pannell",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1080/14486563.2013.764591",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "285--301",
journal = "Australasian Journal of Environmental Management",
issn = "2159-5356",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "4",

}

The quality of resource condition targets in regional natural resource management in Australia. / Park, G.; Roberts, A.M.; Alexander, J.K.; Mcnamara, L.; Pannell, David.

In: Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 20, No. 4, 2013, p. 285-301.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The quality of resource condition targets in regional natural resource management in Australia

AU - Park, G.

AU - Roberts, A.M.

AU - Alexander, J.K.

AU - Mcnamara, L.

AU - Pannell, David

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Natural resource management organisations in Australia routinely establish resource condition targets in their regional plans and catchment strategies. We reviewed biodiversity, water and community resource condition targets set by Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) over planning cycles since 1997 against criteria of being specific, measurable and time-bound (SMT). The overall quality of targets is poor, with less than 30 per cent of targets meeting the three criteria. Disturbingly, there are no SMT targets in the most recent NSW CMA catchment strategies. We identify three major reasons for poor target setting: a lack of appropriate standards and guidelines from governments to enable high quality target setting; a lack of realism about the budgetary and technical feasibility of ambitious environmental targets amongst those involved in natural resource management; and a lack of adequate focus on outcomes by both CMAs and governments. Improvements to target setting can be achieved through stronger signals and commitment by governments, including by rewarding performance of regional bodies practising outcome-focused accountability. © 2013 Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand Inc.

AB - Natural resource management organisations in Australia routinely establish resource condition targets in their regional plans and catchment strategies. We reviewed biodiversity, water and community resource condition targets set by Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) over planning cycles since 1997 against criteria of being specific, measurable and time-bound (SMT). The overall quality of targets is poor, with less than 30 per cent of targets meeting the three criteria. Disturbingly, there are no SMT targets in the most recent NSW CMA catchment strategies. We identify three major reasons for poor target setting: a lack of appropriate standards and guidelines from governments to enable high quality target setting; a lack of realism about the budgetary and technical feasibility of ambitious environmental targets amongst those involved in natural resource management; and a lack of adequate focus on outcomes by both CMAs and governments. Improvements to target setting can be achieved through stronger signals and commitment by governments, including by rewarding performance of regional bodies practising outcome-focused accountability. © 2013 Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand Inc.

U2 - 10.1080/14486563.2013.764591

DO - 10.1080/14486563.2013.764591

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 285

EP - 301

JO - Australasian Journal of Environmental Management

JF - Australasian Journal of Environmental Management

SN - 2159-5356

IS - 4

ER -