Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Law and the practices of ‘damming’

Tasmanian Dams Case as a turning point

Bibliographic Data

ID14971302
AuthorsLee Godden (0000-0001-9534-5148, The University of Melbourne, corresponding author)
Year2015
Volume24
Issue1
Pages127-146
Publication date2015-01-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueGriffith Law Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1038-3441 • E-ISSN: 1839-4205
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10383441.2015.1059002
OpenAlexW1706350666
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited10

Synopsis By contrast to many analyses of Commonwealth v Tasmania (Tasmanian Dam case), this article focuses on what the case reveals about the damming of rivers and the role of law in constituting institutions, technologies and practices for that purpose. Australia was colonised by a civilisation that had embedded a technical utilisation of rivers within its laws. Damming rivers, as a reified practice was fostered by modern, technical knowledge. That knowledge displaced other knowledges; including Aboriginal traditional knowledge of land and waters. In 1983, law held the promise of instantiating a new dynamic for human interaction with rivers, as the Tasmanian Dam’s case juxtaposed the international principles of environmental protection with the centralised control over water by large, bureaucratic state agencies that had developed in Australia over the twentieth century. The judgments of Chief Justice Gibbs and Justice Brennan are remarkable for the contrasting visions of dams that they reveal. Yet the dam, and even the river itself, have largely been occluded form legal memory; although the legacy of the case as a platform for later environmental legislation has been significant

Bureaucracy · Civilization · Common law · Commonwealth · Economic Justice · Environmental ethics · Environmental law · Legislation · Political science · Politics · Project commissioning · Publishing · Sociology · State (computer science · Vision · Anthropology · Environmental law and policy · Hydropower, Displacement, Environmental Impact · Law · Law in Society and Culture

  • Critical decision 1983

    Alessio Genovese, Ann Genovese•Griffith Law Review•2015

  • Expectations of water futures and hydrosocial change linked to irrigation development in Tasmania, Australia

    Open Access•Saideepa Kumar, Peat Leith et al.•Geoforum•2022

  • Do we really need a dam ? » Le conflit lié au barrage Gordon-below-Franklin (Tasmanie, Australie) ou la redéfinition d’un cycle hydrosocial

    Open Access•Silvia Flaminio•Développement durable et…•2017

  • Rule of Experts

    Timothy Mitchell•Rule of Experts: Egypt,…•2002

  • Human/Nature Interaction in the Anthropocene Potential of Social-Ecological Systems Analysis

    Marion Glaser, Gesche Krause et al.•GAIA - Ecological Perspectives…•2008

  • Maladaptation

    Open Access•Jon Barnett, Saffron O''Neill•Global Environmental Change•2009

  • A History of Water Rights at Common Law

    Open Access•Christian Witting•Modern Law Review•2005

  • River-basin planning and management

    Open Access•François Molle•Geoforum•2009

  • Using palaeoecology to date Aboriginal fishtraps at Lake Condah, Victoria

    Open Access•L Head•Archaeology in Oceania/Archæology…•1989

  • Enacting the social

    John Law, John Urry•Economy and Society•2004

Unique citing works3
Citations per year0,27
Citation span2015 - 2022 (8)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 3

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae