CRAFTING COOPERATION IN THE COMMONS An Economic Analysis of Prospects for Collaborative Environmental Governance Graham Roy Marshall B.Sc.Agr., Hons. (U.Syd.); M.Ec. (U.N.E.) School of Economics A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of New England, Armidale, Australia. May 2001. i DECLARATION I certify that the substance of this thesis has not already been submitted for any degree, and is not being submitted for any other degree. I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, any help received in preparing this thesis, and all sources used, have been acknowledged in this thesis. ………………………………… Graham Roy Marshall ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are especially due to my principal academic supervisor Professor Brian Dollery, and to my co-supervisors Dr Bruce Hooper, Dr Paul Winters and Assoc. Professor Chris Lloyd, for the encouragement they gave me, the ideas and experience they shared with me, and most importantly for the intellectual freedom without which this thesis would have foundered. I am very grateful also to Professor Geoff Harris, originally my principal supervisor, for his unstinting support. This thesis would not have happened without generous financial support from: the Australian Research Council, which awarded an APA(I) scholarship; the NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC), which provided funding and expertise as the industry partner for this scholarship; the River Basin Management Society, which awarded an Ernest Jackson Memorial Research Grant; and the University of New England, which awarded a Keith and Dorothy Mackay Postgraduate Traveling Scholarship. I am particularly indebted to Ron Cullen and Tony McGlynn from the DLWC for their dedication to their role as my ‘industry mentor’. I am thankful also for logistical support from the following parties: the Flood Hazard Research Centre at Middlesex University, which hosted me as a visiting scholar for a month in 1997; Murray Irrigation, which undertook the farmer-survey interviews associated with my quantitative research, provided me with office accommodation during my visits to Deniliquin, and produced the map shown in figure 6.1; and John and Vivian Naimo, who made my visits to Deniliquin so pleasant. Prof. Warren Musgrave richly deserves a mention here for his role in instigating the research project and for his encouragement and advice right through to its completion. I have also benefited tremendously from conversations with, and feedback from, the following people: David Anderton, Prof. Jeff Bennett, Prof. William Blomquist, Prof. Daniel Bromley, Dr. Ray Challen, Prof. Ray Cooksey, Dr. Lin Crase, Tim Cummins, Prof. John Dillon, Prof. John Gardiner, Dr. David Godden, Dr. Colin Green, Dr. Graydon Henning, Dr. Ian Hodge, Geoff Kaine, Dr. Lisa Lobry de Bruyn, Dr. Thilak Mallawaarachchi, Dr. Laura McCann, Geoff McLeod, Prof. Bruce Mitchell, Dr. Chris O’Donnell, Prof. Elinor Ostrom, Julian Prior, Dr. Ian Reeve, Charles Robinson, Jean Sandall, Assoc. Prof. Jack Sinden, Dr. Rebecca Spence, and Richard Stayner. Sincere apologies to anyone who has temporarily eluded my thesis- iii ravaged memory. I would also like to thank all the scholars whose writings have inspired me, as well as everyone who has given me feedback regarding my seminar and conference presentations. My gratitude goes also to the following groups who gave me valuable opportunities to present my research-in-progress to their members: the Agricultural and Resource Economics Group at the University of Western Australia; the Flood Hazard Research Centre at the University of Middlesex; and the NSW Branch of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society. This project would not have been possible without the generous cooperation of all the people who agreed to be interviewed for the case study. My thanks to you all. I am grateful also to the interviewers who undertook the survey of farmers so professionally. I would also like to thank Sue Devon for her excellent help in transcribing the in-depth interviews. My appreciation also goes to all the fellow students and faculty in the School of Economics at UNE who rode the rollercoaster with me. Thanks especially to Ian Patrick, Luz Centeno and Fleur Fallon for your humour, humanity and encouragement. I would also like to use this opportunity to thank each of the examiners of this thesis⎯Jennifer Bellamy, Dr Stephen Dovers and Professor Alan Randall⎯for their thoughtful and constructive reports. Lisa, the spirit of this thesis has grown with our love and dreams. We came together as it took root, married as it matured, and in three weeks or so we should become parents. Words cannot do justice to the gratitude I feel. I cannot let pass this opportunity to thank my parents⎯Trevor and Patricia⎯and my brother and sister⎯Simon and Alison⎯for their love and support these four years. I also owe a big hola! and gracias to Simon’s marvellous family in London: Loretta, Fabienne and Talitha. Thanks particularly for looking after Lisa and I so warmly that bleak Shepherd’s Bush autumn of ’97. I am very grateful as well to Lisa’s parents and sister⎯Alex, June and Nicole⎯and to Nicole’s partner Graham for their great company and hospitality in Perth and Fremantle when I was visiting the University of Western Australia. This thesis is dedicated to the memory of Mary Anne Elizabeth Ling 1957-1998. iv ABSTRACT A collaborative vision for agri-environmental governance⎯whereby collaboration among stakeholders in addressing problems supposedly leads them to cooperate more in implementing solutions⎯emerged in the 1980’s. This vision was prompted by mounting dissatisfaction with the progressive vision upon which such governance had been founded, a vision that had resulted in compartmentalised, paternalistic governance. It was based on a modern worldview regarding social behaviour as mechanistic and concerns about scientific progress as irrational. Accomplishments to date in pursuit of this collaborative vision through the favoured vehicle of integrated catchment management (ICM) have mostly been disappointing. While governments remain outwardly optimistic that administrative refinements to ICM programs will ultimately deliver success in this pursuit, others argue that systemic cultural changes are required. Prominent among the latter’s concerns is the complacency with which leaders have addressed the challenge of translating the vision into practice. There is an emerging consensus in Australia that the complexity of environmental governance requires learning through adaptive management⎯wherein policies are regarded as experiments to be learned from⎯rather than through the rational-comprehensive approach typically associated with the progressive vision. However, as yet the literature in respect of the collaborative vision is silent on how adaptive management’s experimentation might proceed according to science’s hypothetico-deductive method rather than in an ad hoc manner. In particular, no coherent theory of how collaboration increases cooperativeness in this setting⎯from which hypotheses motivating experimental design could initially be deduced⎯has been presented. Accordingly, the aim of this study is to propose, test and elaborate a framework of rational- choice theory upon which hypothetico-deductive pursuit of the collaborative vision for environmental governance might fruitfully be instigated. The focus empirically is on Australian agri-environmental governance. The first objective in attending to this aim is to place the collaborative vision in historical context by reviewing the Australian experience with agri-environmental governance, both preceding and succeeding the emergence of this vision. v The second objective is to propose a theoretical framework capable of serving as a starting- point for scientific pursuit of this vision. This framework was synthesised from developments in the rational-choice theory of collective action. It highlights the role that increasing-return, or positive-feedback, dynamics play in the emergence of spontaneous large-group cooperation, and thus the importance of the feedback upon which these dynamics depend. Collaboration’s contribution to cooperation thus is seen to arise from its feedback-facilitation role. The third objective was to explore empirically how the proposed theoretical framework applies to collaborative agri-environmental governance in Australia. To this end, a case study was undertaken of a program of Land and Water Management Planning that has been underway in the central-Murray region of NSW since 1991. This involved the application of both qualitative methods (content analysis of in-depth interviews) and quantitative methods (ordered-probit regression analysis). The proposed theoretical framework was found to be corroborated by the behaviour observed in the case-study setting. It appears therefore that the collaborative vision is no pipe dream, in so far as this framework suggests that it is possible for collaboration in solving a problem to enhance cooperation in implementing the solution. Nevertheless, the increasing-return dynamics that make large-group spontaneous cooperation possible also make it difficult to achieve. These dynamics can lead past patterns of uncooperative behaviour to ‘lock-in’. Hence widespread commitment to the collaborative vision cannot occur without systemically jettisoning aspects of our culture that are adapted to, and thus reinforce, the progressive vision. These aspects include beliefs, values and institutions. The prospects of achieving