This paper seeks to contribute to the theorization of belonging as a resource on which people draw in the local politics of place—especially in contestations over ecological space and decisions about land use that resonate at many scales and across many domains. The task is advanced with reference to a controversial development proposal to build a marina and residential subdivision on estuarine mudflats near a seaside dormitory suburb in the capital city of Hobart on the island state of Tasmania, Australia. Particular attention is paid to story lines generated in three discourse coalitions which have formed around the controversy over the proposal: a multimillion dollar mainland company known as the Walker Corporation, the Tasmanian state government, and a community action group known as Save Ralphs Bay Inc. Techniques of narrative and discourse analysis are used to read these story lines for evidence of belonging. In this analysis of ‘text, talk, and practice’, opportunities arise to consider the wider salience of the case to geographers, among them connection and attachment to place, and counterpoints of belonging such as social and ecological dispossession and displacement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllonF, 2000, “Nostalgia unbound: Illegibility and the synthetic excess of place”Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies14275–287
2.
Anonymous, 2006, “Ralphs Bay revived: Shock new marina bid sparks fury”The Mercury 7 July, page 1
3.
ArnsteinS R, 1969, “A ladder of citizen participation”Journal of the American Institute of Planners35(4) 216–224
4.
Australian Government, 2002An Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Tasmania for the Implementation of the Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (Australian Government Printers, Canberra)
Department of Foreign Affairs, 1981, “Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of Japan for the Protection of Migratory Birds in Danger of Extinction and their Environment, Tokyo, 6 February 1974”, Commonwealth of Australia, entry into force: 30 April 1981, Australian Treaty Series 1981 number 6, Commonwealth of Australia 1995, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1981/6.html
21.
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 1988, “Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People's Republic of China for the Protection of Migratory Birds and their Environment”, Commonwealth of Australia, entry into force: 1 September 1988, Australian Treaty Series 1988 number 22, Canberra, 20 October 1986, Commonwealth of Australia 1995, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1988/22.html
22.
DixonJDurrheimK, 2000, “Displacing place-identity: A discursive approach to locating self and other”British Journal of Social Psychology39(1) 27–44
FeldmanMSköldbergKBrownR NHornerD, 2004, “Making sense of stories: A rhetorical approach to narrative analysis”Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory14147
27.
GuattariF, 2000The Three Ecologies (Athlone Press, London)
28.
HajerM, 1995The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernisation and the Policy Process (Clarendon Press, Oxford)
29.
HajerM, 2005, “Setting the stage: A dramaturgy of policy deliberation”Administration and Society36624–647
30.
HajerMVersteegW, 2005, “A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges, perspectives”Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning7175–184
31.
HawardMLarmourP, 1993, “The Accord and Tasmania public policy”, in The Tasmanian Parliamentary Accord and Public Policy 1989–92: Accommodating the New Politics? Eds HawardMLarmourP (Federalism Research Centre, The Australian National University, Canberra) pp 1–12
MilllarR, 2005, “Boomtimes are sinking seaside lifestyle dreams”The Age 29 January, page 13
40.
MurdochJ, 2006, “Dis/Order space II: The case of planning”, in Post-structural Geographies (Sage, London) pp 131–159
41.
NealesS, 2006, “It's dark in the closed cabinet”The Mercury 7 July, page 4
42.
NealesSMartainT, 2005, “Premier all but pre-empts cabinet decision after Lib move: Ralph Bay ire builds”The Mercury 1 September, page 5
43.
NettlefoldJ, 2004, “Investors flock to Tasmania in search of waterfront homes”, Australian Broadcasting Commission Television Program Transcript for The 7.30 Report, 30 June, http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1144157.htm
44.
PaineM, 2007, “Ralphs Bay study begins”The Mercury 21 May, page 15
Parliament of Tasmania, 2006b, Ralphs Bay Conservation Area (Clarification) Act, number 14
52.
Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 1999, Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, number 91 (Australian Government, Canberra)
53.
PéronF, 2004, “The contemporary lure of the island”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie95326–339
54.
SandfordR, 1993, “The Salamanca Agreement”, in The Tasmanian Parliamentary Accord and Public Policy 1989–92: Accommodating the New Politics? Eds HawardMLarmourP (Federalism Research Centre, The Australian National University, Canberra) pages 127–137
55.
Save Ralphs Bay Action Group, 2004, “Canal estate proposed for Ralphs Bay”Environmental Defenders Office Bulletin187
56.
StratfordE, 2008, “Islandness and struggles over development: A Tasmanian case study”Political Geography27160–175
WalkerK J, 1999, “Statist development in Australia”, in Australian Environmental Policy 2: Studies in Decline and Devolution Eds CrowleyKWalkerK (University of New South Wales Press, Sydney) pp 22–44
