Australia's Coal Seam Gas Debate: Perspectives across Time, Space, Law and Selected Professions by David James Turton Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the Australian National University January 2018 ii Candidate's Declaration This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university. To the best of the author’s knowledge, it contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference is made in the text. David James Turton Date: 18-01-2018 Australia's Coal Seam Gas Debate: Perspectives across Time, Space, Law and Selected Professions iii Thesis by Compilation Declaration As per the Australian National University policy procedure on ‘Higher degree by research – thesis by compilation and thesis by creative works’, I declare that this thesis is composed primarily of published papers, that the author of this thesis is the sole author of all of these publications, and that the assistance of my PhD supervisory panel members did not extend beyond the usual and expected duties of a PhD supervisor. I acknowledge their contributions to this thesis in terms of editing, suggestions and support in the Acknowledgements within this thesis and in the publications themselves. In all cases, I was responsible for the preparation of manuscripts, responses to referees, selection of journals, correspondence with editors and data collection. The publications that form the basis for this thesis are listed in the Appendices (with the exception of one submitted manuscript) and correspond to the relevant chapters as follows: Chapter Three - Turton, D.J., 2014. Codifying coexistence: Land access frameworks for Queensland mining and agriculture in 1982 and 2010. Journal of Australasian Mining History 12: 172-192. Chapter Four - Turton, D.J., 2015a. Unconventional gas in Australia: towards a legal geography. Geographical Research, 53(1): 53-67, DOI: 10.1111/1745-5871.12101. Chapter Five - Turton, D.J., 2015c. Lawyers in Australia’s coal seam gas debate: A study of participation in recorded community forums. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(4): 802- 812, <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2015.06.010>. Chapter Six - Turton, D.J., 2017. Legal determinations, geography and justice in Australia’s coal seam gas debate. In: A. Lukasiewicz, S. Dovers, L. Robin, J. McKay, S. Schilizzi and S. Graham (Eds.), Natural Resources and Environmental Justice: Australian Perspectives. CSIRO Publishing, Clayton South, Victoria, pp. 155-167. Chapter Seven - Turton, D.J., submitted manuscript. Fracturing planners: a scoping study of their role(s) in Australia’s coal seam gas debate. Submitted to Land Use Policy in August 2017. David James Turton Date: 18-01-2018 Australia's Coal Seam Gas Debate: Perspectives across Time, Space, Law and Selected Professions iv Acknowledgements Much of the research for this thesis was undertaken as a ‘fly-in-fly-out’ PhD student largely based in Cairns, with periodic visits to Canberra. First and foremost, I wish to thank my supervisory team: Professor Stephen Dovers, Dr Thomas Measham and Professor Karen Hussey. Karen provided initial guidance as my principal supervisor until her departure to the University of Queensland in Brisbane at the end of 2015, with Steve then stepping into this role. I am grateful for the support each has given me at various points, from editorial feedback on draft chapters, to encouraging me to present at international conferences and advice on journals and dealing with referee comments. In the Fenner School, I thank Amy Chen, Cathy Gray, John Boland and Steve Leahy, who put up with my IT and administration questions with boundless patience. Fellow students and friends at Fenner and James Cook University (Cairns Campus) also provided important moral support, advice and useful distractions. In particular, James Langston, Rebecca Riggs, Edison Salas Castelo, Mohammed Alamgir, John Doolan, Lokes Brooksbank, Anna Lukasiewicz, Tina Marton, Sonya Duus, Monique Retamal and Megan Evans all helped to ensure that I wasn’t completely caught up in my thesis as I rotated back and forth between two cities. Outside of ANU, Leonie Woodruff, Bec Fleming and Luke Drever deserve special mention for tolerating all my thesis-related conversations and correspondence over the years. They gave me endless encouragement, comments on draft papers, opportunities to explore Canberra’s culinary and bushwalking attractions, a place to stay on occasion, and a sympathetic ear for my thesis frustrations. I wish to particularly thank the interviewees for their candid remarks and time, their thoughtful responses to my questions often given under time-pressures. Their enthusiasm convinced me of the value of examining CSG through the eyes of key professions. Scott Riley and Manus Basson (Isaac Regional Council) were invaluable during fieldwork at Moranbah and I thank the Council for providing free accommodation during my week there. For access to documentation and photographs, I extend my thanks to the Queensland Local Government Association and the Logan City Council. I am also grateful to Dr Sharon Harwood (James Cook University, Cairns Campus) for improving my understanding of planners and for her ideas on how to reach potential interviewees. My former honours supervisor and friend, Dr Jan Wegner (James Cook University, Cairns Campus), gently reminded me of the dangers of thesis procrastination and happily listened to my progress over afternoon tea. I am most appreciative of financial assistance I received to conduct this research. The Australian Government supported this project through an Australian Postgraduate Award and the Fenner School of Environment and Society (ANU) generously granted me a Supplementary Scholarship. Australia's Coal Seam Gas Debate: Perspectives across Time, Space, Law and Selected Professions v Finally, I extend my heartfelt gratitude to my parents Steve and Wendy, and brothers, Geoffrey and William. My parents have endured the vast majority of my thesis angst with humour and no small amount of tolerance. Dad has also read and critiqued much of my thesis and acted as my ‘fourth supervisor’ in many ways – assisting with fieldwork, discussing research methods, suggesting conferences I should attend and much more. Likewise, Mum has listened to practice runs for conference presentations, proofread manuscripts and passed along helpful media coverage on CSG. Geoffrey and his partner James Woodbury have been strong supporters of my research and my ‘stories’, ensuring that I had fun during many research visits to Brisbane and Sydney. Australia's Coal Seam Gas Debate: Perspectives across Time, Space, Law and Selected Professions vi Abstract Coal seam gas (CSG) extraction is a source of ongoing controversy in the Australian States of New South Wales and Queensland. Primarily composed of methane, CSG has evolved from a gas extracted in the interests of coal miner safety, to a profitable concern, source of electricity generation and, arguably, a transition fuel in a carbon-constrained future. Efforts to develop Australia’s CSG industry since the early 2000s has brought the sector into increased geographical proximity with existing land uses. Arguments over CSG and its potential risks and benefits remain ongoing, yet the nation’s CSG debate often lacks historical context, geographical insights, justice research perspectives and viewpoints from key professionals associated with this resource. This thesis therefore poses the overarching question: how can environmental history, legal geography, procedural and distributive justice, and profession-specific insights from lawyers, judges and planners, shed light upon this controversial resource? Drawing on a typology of relevance for environmental history, current CSG land access conflicts in Queensland are contextualised within past efforts in that State to promote coexistence between grain growers and coal miners, comparing the State’s statutorily enshrined Land Access Code 2010 with a voluntary Explorer-Landholder Procedures Guide produced in 1982 by agricultural and mining stakeholders. Building on this temporal aspect of formal and informal land access agreements, a legal geography lens is taken to unconventional gas in Australia, highlighting its value as a tool for investigating CSG – particularly for investigating the involvement of lawyers and judges in land use disputes. Acknowledging that lawyers are multifaceted participants in Australia’s CSG discussion, an extended study of their participation in recorded community forums in Queensland and New South Wales demonstrates this profession’s significant role in informing community forum audiences about land access laws concerning CSG, while also critiquing these laws by referring to personal experiences with the legal process. Viewpoints from judges associated with CSG- related litigation were also sought out and framed by both legal geography and procedural and distributive justice. An examination of a selection of court judgments concerning CSG revealed that procedural and distributive justice issues have arisen in New South Wales and Queensland. These judgments attend to the place of Australian local governments in negotiations with CSG operators, the provision of accurate mapping information to landholders by CSG companies and the nature of effective engagement in community consultation. Judges were also shown to engage with geographical concepts in their rulings, namely