Search

Globally, centralised urban water systems are under pressure to respond to environmental and economic pressures. In Australia, high infrastructure costs and variable rainfall have prompted governments, end-users and property developers to begin investing in more decentralised systems that use alternative water sources (rainwater, stormwater and wastewater). This trend is based on a fit-for-purpose principle and is part of a global shift toward sustainable urban water management. These developments suggest that Australia's urban water sector may be in the early stages of transition and represent a multi-decadal shift from centralisation of water supply and sanitation to partial decentralisation based on local conditions. Much of the scholarship on decentralised systems focuses on drivers and barriers to adoption, which implies a static and mechanistic process of change, and overlooks the complex interplay between exogenous pressures, innovation, multiple actors and industry reform. This paper addresses this gap by analysing temporal processes of Australia's urban water sector, using a regionally based case study comprising an historical review and interview study that analyses the multi-level, -decadal and -actor developments at the nexus between water service provision and property development. The analysis revealed emerging tensions between incumbent water utilities, property developers and end-users, and an inherent conflict between neo-liberal and environmental policy agendas. Such tensions and conflicts are missing from urban water policy and research discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature has neglected to analyse employer associations as organizations facing potential environmental threats to their financial sustainability. We examine associations' responses to collective bargaining decentralization, a major, contemporary threat. Using a qualitative, comparative case approach, we examine eight associations - four each in Australia and Italy - to develop a model of response types. Stronger decentralization effects increase associations' exposure to new and heightened competition, which in turn produces stronger association responses. These include prioritizing commercial over associational objectives. We analyse responses using strategic choice and resource dependence theories, finding that associations use both. However, the decision how to combine them reflects environmental conditions as well as choices linking organizational purpose and financial sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]