Publications

Search:

Chapter 4 Current Coastal Zone Management - continued

4.5 Intergovernmental Coordination

4.5.1 In view of the involvement in coastal management in some form by each sphere of government, the Inquiry reviewed mechanisms to facilitate coordination among governments.

4.5.2 The Inquiry was told that fragmentation of coastal zone management responsibility is exacerbated by jurisdictional boundaries that do not reflect physical, geographical and ecological features and do not take account of natural processes that operate across boundaries. The Australian Nature Conservation Agency submitted that 'the fundamental failing of current management arrangements is that political boundaries and administrative jurisdictions do not allow for the integrated management of ecological units' (ANPWS, Submission 304, p. 74).

4.5.3 There are numerous examples of institutional arrangements that have been developed to achieve coordination and integration of policy making and administration among governments (see discussion in RAC 1993f). At the national level, attempts to achieve consistent approaches have been made through the Offshore Constitutional Settlement and, more recently, the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment.

4.5.4 The Offshore Constitutional Settlement is a regulatory and administrative approach to national cooperation. Under the Settlement, which was agreed at the Premiers Conference in June 1979 and took effect in 1983, the Commonwealth granted title and legislative power to the states for marine and seabed resources extending 3 nautical miles from the low-water mark. This agreement is supported by a suite of Commonwealth legislation, including the Coastal Waters (State Powers) Act 1980 and the Coastal Waters (State Title) Act 1980, that provides for shared Commonwealth and state jurisdiction over mineral, petroleum and fisheries resources. Elements of the agreement are incorporated in relevant state legislation.

4.5.5 Recent attempts to achieve national action on resource management and other matters have emphasised the development of cooperative partnerships between governments. This 'new federalism' is the culmination of many years of efforts to establish greater cooperation between the Commonwealth and state governments (Galligan & Fletcher 1993). Mechanisms driving 'cooperative federalism' include ministerial councils and intergovernmental agreements, including the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment, which was signed in May 1992 by the Commonwealth, state and territory governments and the president of the Australian Local Government Association (see Box 4.6).

4.5.6 Ministerial councils exist to deal with coordination between the Commonwealth and state governments and also assist in coordinating activities in the coastal zone; examples are the Great Barrier Reef Ministerial Council, the Australian Fisheries Council and the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council. Many local government authorities have combined to form regional representative groups; for example, the Seaside Councils Committee in South Australia, regional organisations of councils in New South Wales, and similar bodies in other states. These bodies are designed to improve communications between councils and with state and Commonwealth governments, particularly on specific issues of concern to them.

4.5.7 Within and between governments, interdepartmental committees, informal communication networks, departmental protocols, referral mechanisms, and the cabinet submission process are used to coordinate the views, functions and perspectives of various agencies with coastal zone management responsibilities. In many regional centres representatives of state and Commonwealth agencies participate in committees and other institutional arrangements, along with local government representatives, to provide a coordinating framework for dealing with matters of local and regional concern.

4.5.8 While these mechanisms are available, they have not been applied with any great effect to improve management of the coastal zone. A principal reason is that the state governments have not seen the value in coordinating their own activities and that the Commonwealth Government, which so frequently takes the initiative in creating national coordinating mechanisms, has not had extensive responsibilities in coastal management. A recent innovation is the establishment of a coastal committee as part of the ecologically sustainable development process. It has a very limited brief.

4.6 Conclusions

4.6.1 Regulatory responsibility for management of coastal zone resources lies primarily with state and local governments. Although state governments have attempted to consolidate and update legislation, there remains a plethora of Acts affecting coastal zone management, mostly reflecting the traditional sectoral approach to such management.

4.6.2 There have been recent improvements in the level of coordination among the large number of institutions involved in coastal zone management but coordination and integration between institutions remain inadequate.

4.6.3 There are major shortcomings in the systems of management of Australia's coastal zone:

• Different and usually uncoordinated approvals systems operate for public and private land.
• Management and use of resources spanning marine and terrestrial areas is particularly impeded by a lack of integration and coordination of management systems.
• Existing mechanisms do not provide for effective long-term management of coastal zone resources.
• Approvals procedures are complex, time consuming and often sequential rather than concurrent, making them costly for applicants and governments.
• Although some Commonwealth, state and local government agencies have developed policies to achieve coastal zone management objectives, the policies and objectives are not often implemented and they are rarely integrated with social, economic and environmental goals.

4.6.4 There are telling examples of past and present management failures in the coastal zone. Although governments have passed a considerable amount of legislation, use many regulatory mechanisms, and have reformed institutions and management mechanisms, current management arrangements do not adequately deal with the problems arising in the coastal zone.

4.6.5 The division of responsibilities among several agencies in each state is one of the systemic hindrances to more effective land management and therefore more effective management of the coastal zone. There is a strong need for state governments to integrate public and private land management systems.

4.6.6 State and local governments are responsible for 95 per cent of expenditure on coastal zone management and are under steady pressure to increase funding of coastal zone management. Pressures arising because of the imbalance between the taxing capacities and the expenditures of the three spheres of government are being exacerbated by the need to spend more on coastal zone management.

4.6.7 Governments rely principally on regulatory mechanisms to manage coastal zone activities. At present, economic instruments are insufficiently used by state or local governments for the management of coastal zone resources; there is considerable scope for their increased use to guide resource uses in the zone and to raise revenue for use in managing resources.