Tom Brewer (AIMS, CDU)

How does the work you are doing relate to governance?

My current work relates to natural resource governance in two different contexts. In the first, I study small-scale fisheries governance structures (often termed co-management), and how they relate to the sustainable use of fisheries. Key literature here is collective action (particularly the work of E. Ostrom on common property) and co-management theory.

The second context project is the colourful, eclectic, multi-tiered complexity that comprises governance of Darwin Harbour. As well as understanding the different rules governing use of Darwin Harbour I am trying to inspire increased participation in harbour governance across all levels of authority, from ethical stewardship to Territory and Federal regulation.

What interesting or different insight have you gained about governance in your recent research?

My insight is one of developing a personal definition for governance as I use it. I understand governance to be, compared to formal government, a slippery term that operates around very dynamic rules. The dynamic nature of the rules stems from their ‘embededness’ in place and reflexive nature that accounts for the coming and going of idiosyncrasies.

What theoretical or practical problem to do with governance are you engaging with at the moment?

See question 1.

TB – 1 pager (.doc)

Other relevant materials:

Presentation Notes (meeting 3): Brewer_Governance discussion_170614

Metcalfe and Dambacher et al. 2013. Identifying key dynamics and ideal governance structures for successful ecological management. Environmental Science and Policy, 37 . pp. 34-49.

Sen and Nielsen (1996) Fisheries comanagement: a comparative analysis in Marine Policy 20(5): 405-418 (Explores co-management typologies based on the Arnstein ladder of public participation)