Social sustainability in Australian local government: Commitment and accountability

In Australia, there have been limited formal government responses to social dimensions of sustainable development, evidenced by the increasing vulnerability of communities to adverse social impacts, such as socio-economic disadvantage; the weakening of community and democratic values; and public apathy and distrust of political processes. Social problems are compounded by lack of social services, social infrastructure and public transport. Legitimacy, accountability and participation as pivotal governance domains for transforming social processes towards sustainable development can be obscured in local governance. This research examines the extent of commitment to and accountability for social sustainability in Australian local government and factors that affect its incorporation in practice. Guidelines for improving social sustainability practice are also formulated. A mixed methods approach was employed, combining a survey of local councils across Australia with in-depth interviews. Survey and interview participants comprised the functional management personnel of Australian local councils, including directors, managers and officers working in various social, community, economic, environmental and policy roles. A conceptual framework for social sustainability, designed for empirical testing in the local government setting, was used as a definitional basis for the research. The framework comprises four components: engaged governance, social capital, social infrastructure, and social justice and equity. Phronetic organisational research (phronesis) provides an analytical perspective for the research and involved an examination of discourse in relation to rationality and power relations. The research employed descriptive statistical, thematic and phronetic interpretive methods of data analysis. The findings of the research reveal that social sustainability is part of a contested field of discursive governance in local government, in which a discourse of economic primacy and a discourse of elected representation are dominant. The nature of this discursive governance is identified as the main factor affecting social sustainability practice in local government. Deficits of engaged governance and accountability for social sustainability were revealed that are consistent with councils operating under efficiency models of local government. The dominant discourses seek to reduce local governance to technical decision making and obscure underlying value-based judgments. Where the will of council officers is to prioritise and incorporate social sustainability, it is constrained within the framework of discursive governance. The nature of the discursive governance identified is interrogated using the value-rational questions of phronesis in the context of relevant contemporary literature. A power nexus is said to exist comprising elected officials, council executives, developers and other stakeholders who are positioned in the economic and representation discourses. The discursive governance leads to gains for the power nexus and losses for other community stakeholders. Recommendations are proposed that council officers can use to resist and contest the field of discursive governance to improve social sustainability practice. This research offers an original contribution to sustainability, management and governance literature through its use of mixed methods and phronetic interpretive analysis in the local government context. Future research is suggested to deepen understandings of the nature of the discursive governance and the power nexus in local government, and ways for them to be challenged.