| dc.description.abstract |
Australia's rangelands are experiencing a rapid shift from dominantly commodity values towards a mix of commodity and (broadly defined) amenity values. The former hegemony of pastoralism is now being displaced by a diverse array of resource uses, strongly influenced by national aspirations concerning Aboriginal land rights, preservation of biodiversity and of valued semi-natural landscapes, sustainable management, tourism and recreation. This diversification in resource value is fostered by the highly differentiated value-orientations of influential interest-groups, including Aboriginals, welfarists, conservationists, pastoralists and a disparate array of tourists and recreationists. Simplistic modes of resource allocation are being replaced by complex, often contradictory modes of politicised decision-making, shaped by the demands of interest-groups, with decisions being focussed more on values than on facts. Accordingly, more effort needs to be spent in developing an understanding of value-orientations and their influence on the perceptions, needs and expectations of these various groups. A postal survey of 67 South Australian pastoralists reveals that they comprise a cohesive reference group with a strong sense of identity and self-worth. They closely identify with their distinctive way-of-life and its equally distinctive (and challenging) environment. They are very conscious of their role, not only as producers, but also as custodians of the rangelands, capable of making the pivotal decisions towards sustainable management. Their strong orientation towards intrinsic, expressive and social values provides partial compensation for continuing economic and social hardships. Above all they place high value on their independence, and they regard intervention by conservationists, urban interests, Aboriginal interests and governments as presenting a greater threat to their future than does prospective further economic decline. This distinctive value orientation has for long proved highly adaptive in ensuring survival in periods of economic and environmental stress, but may be less effective in meeting emerging challenges in which pastoralism has to adjust to a more complex decision context, in which other interest groups have values and goals markedly at variance with those held by pastoralists. |
|