Office for Environmental Programs - Theses
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3
-
ItemConcentration and market power in the Australian wheat and dairy sectors: evidence of a corporate food regime?( 2013)Corporate concentration in the food system is recognised as having detrimental impacts on farmers, food production workers and consumers. More broadly, the power and influence of dominant agribusiness corporations is increasingly evident in public policy, giving rise to concerns regarding the ability for democratic decision making in food and agricultural systems. Charting the evolution of capitalism at a world-scale through the lens of food production and consumption, food regimes theory situates these trends as hallmarks of an emerging `corporate food regime'. This research examines concentration and market power through case study analysis of two major agricultural commodity sectors in Australia, wheat and dairy. Each case study provides empirical evidence of market concentration within the commodity's supply chain, before examining the political economy of market relations in the sector. Comparing these case studies, common elements of contemporary agri-food restructuring are observable, including: industry rationalisation and consolidation; information asymmetries; the failure of competition law in Australia to prevent abuses of market power; the presence of trans-national agribusiness; an ongoing, albeit complex, role for farmer co-operatives; and a trend of replacing government regulation with weaker forms of industry or market self-regulation. Interpreting these material restructuring trajectories through the lens of food regimes theory, this research supports the notion of an emerging corporate food regime in Australia, whereby increasing concentration and market power of oligopoly firms further integrates agriculture and food systems into globalised capital flows, and is strengthen by the state's commitment to neo-liberal practice.
-
ItemNo Preview Available
-
ItemRegulatory mechanisms and incentives for private protected areas in Chile: a comparative analysis with the Australian and South African experiences( 2015)The International Union for the Conservation of Nature has recognised that private protected areas (PPAs) are essential to expand biodiversity conservation and to achieve a global ecologically representative network of reserves. In Chile, since the 1990s PPAs have emerged as a spontaneous and voluntary movement with no government assistance. The current environmental legislation does not allow PPAs to be included in the National System of State Protected Wildlife Areas (SNASPE). As a consequence, PPAs in Chile are not subject to systematic regulation or formal definition. PPAs are concentrated in the southern regions where they have enhanced the ecological representativeness of existing reserves. However, ecosystems of the central and northern regions are still underrepresented in PPAs and the SNASPE. In this context, this research analyses what legal mechanisms would be suitable for implementation in Chile to progressively shift towards a representative system for PPAs. With this purpose, the research develops a comparative analysis with the South African and Australian experiences. Contract agreements in South Africa and conservation covenants in Australia have demonstrated to be cost-effective mechanisms to expand biodiversity protection into private lands. The analysis includes an evaluation of existing policies and legislation related to PPAs in these three countries. The findings indicate that Chile needs a more systematic and comprehensive regulatory framework for PPAs to guide and incentivise their creation in underrepresented areas. The enthusiasm of landowners towards biodiversity protection and the existing work of not for profit organisations as major drivers of conservation creates a favourable scenario for the implementation of mechanisms such as contract agreements or covenant programs. The analysis also indicates that the implementation of stewardship programs is essential to provide ongoing support to the management of PPAs and to maintain private landowners’ motivation.