Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
Full metadata record
|dc.identifier.citation||Urban Policy and Research, 1995; 13(2):113-116||-|
|dc.description.abstract||The present system for approval of development in Australia and especially in South Australia has often been unsuccessful for a number of reasons1. The crux of the matter can be summarised as ‘inadequate public consultation at a stage when it can influence events’. Too much money is spent and too many commitments are made regarding a development before a community consultation process begins. At this stage, because of money spent, the developer does not want to accept change, delay or defeat, and the community sensing their potential impotence fights loud and hard. Both sides are immediately locked into an adversarial situation and legal actions often result. This situation is bad for the developer (no development, no profit, no jobs) the State (no development, no jobs, no tax income, poor image) and for the environment movement (image as spoilers instead of environmental protectionists) (Smith, 1991a,b; Smith and Allen, 1991).||-|
|dc.description.statementofresponsibility||David Shearman, Margaret Bolster, and Joseph Wayne Smith||-|
|dc.rights||Copyright status unknown||-|
|dc.title||The environment and development - how the twain can meet: A plan for community-supported development in South Australia||-|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest 7|
Geography, Environment and Population publications
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.