Australia's Indicator‐Based Sustainability Assessments and Public Policy

Abstract

Operationalising sustainability has proven difficult because the concept is ambiguous and fraught with contradictions. In response, sustainability indicator systems to characterise and measure sustainable development have been developed globally. The focus of this article is on how indicators function as an instrument of policy to enhance achievement of environmental and sustainability policy in Australia at national scale. In theory, by integrating information from the environmental, social and economic domains and then feeding knowledge to a wide range of policy sectors, sustainability indicator systems may facilitate cross-agency and -portfolio connectivity. Key characteristics of the various sustainability indicator systems developed to inform policy at the national level are described, noting the diverse approaches to indicator development in Australia. The structural relevance of indicator systems to the mechanisms of policy and institutions in Australia is discussed, and corresponding issues of institutional fit are analysed.

Prioritising indicators of cumulative socio-economic impacts to characterise rapid development of onshore gas resources

“…It can bring substance to discussions of intangible perceptions and concepts; provide a basis for conversation and collaboration, knowledge sharing and social learning; inform governance, policy and planning; and provide a reference point to underpin monitoring and assess achievement of broader goals (of sustainability or well-being, for instance) (Hezri and Dovers, 2009;Holman, 2009;Booher and Innes, 2010;Bell and Morse, 2013;Rinne et al, 2013;Holden, 2006;Neylan, 2008;Garnå sjordet et al, 2012;Bray, 2001;Reed et al, 2006;Gasparatos et al, 2008;Roth, 2010;Boyko et al, 2012;Wong, 2003). Indicators can serve the purposes of different stakeholders: regulators, industry, and affected communities.…”

The Possible Experts: How Epistemic Communities Negotiate Barriers to Knowledge Use in Ecosystems Services Policy

“…Certainly, the NEA illustrates epistemic realism as it makes clear where the knowledge is incomplete -for example on microbial diversity in soil and water or in how changes in ecosystems affect human well-being (2011: 23, 31). Even where there is an adequate evidence base, we know that transforming evidential indicators into actual policy is complex (Herzi and Dovers, 2009) And so, the reflexive learning that underpins conceptual knowledge use aspires to the redistribution of expertise. Yet, the implementation of this ideal is often problematic on the ground.…”

Australia's Progress Undefined: A Critical Review of Measures of Australia's Progress (MAP)

“…R&D programs and metadata platforms referred to collectively by Campbell (2006:35) as a new ‘knowledge system’ of natural resource management. This knowledge system is associated with a broad agenda of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) that Hezri and Dovers (2009) indicate is expressed in national policy and in a suite of major international agreements. ESD seeks to integrate environmental with social and economic policy, and requires both an integrated and analytic capacity if it is to be useful for policy development and influencing change.…”

“…MAP has been updated every two years since 2002 (ABS 2010). The MAP report was originally intended to measure social, economic and environmental sustainability but the ABS decided to refer instead to the term ‘progress’ because there was little agreement among experts on what sustainable development meant (Trewin and Hall 2004; Hezri and Dovers 2009).…”

“…Yet such monitoring systems are favoured by social democratic, liberal and conservative governments alike as they offer a means of reporting to the public on the effect of public expenditure on social policy. In a recent study of the development of sustainability reporting systems in Australia, Hezri and Dovers (2009) suggest that by integrating information from the environmental, social and economic domains and then forwarding the learnings to a range of policy sectors, reporting systems might facilitate cross‐agency and departmental policy development. However, data availability and coordination remains a problem in Australia.…”