Planning for Better ESD in Queensland: Definition and Scale Issues

Abstract

There are over 300 definitions of ecologically sustainable development, both nationally and internationally. The number of definitions range from general definitions such as the most recognized definition, being that contained in the Brundtland report, through to definitions that nominate many theoretical concepts associated with ecologically sustainable development. The choice of definition used in planning legislation can impact on the development assessment process, which in turn impacts on the land use planning outcomes that can be achieved. These planning outcomes may or may not be ecologically sustainable. This is caused by the variation in weight different definitions give to different aspects of ecologically sustainable development and the worldview that underpins the definition. Another important aspect is the scale of implementation at which ecologically sustainable development should be incorporated and used, and whether the regional scale or the local government scale is the most appropriate scale of implementation in Queensland. While regional planning has been considered internationally for a period of time, statutory regional planning is in its infancy in Queensland and its success at promoting and its aspirations of achieving ecologically sustainable outcomes has not yet been explored. Some commentators argue that there are too many definitions of ecologically sustainable development that the very broad scope renders the definitions meaningless, while other commentators argue that more specific definitions may be required for particular situations. This study picks up the latter recommendation. The purpose of this study was to explore the range of opinions held by a multi-disciplinary group of experts and to use these opinions to determine which definition of ecologically sustainable development is the most appropriate for the Queensland planning system, and at which scale it would be best implemented.