Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

A Comparative Analysis of Dam Safety Assurance Laws

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

What are ‘Appropriate’ Legislative Arrangements for Jurisdictions with Hazardous Private Dams?

image of European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance

A number of horrific failures of both public and privately owned dams in recent decades has triggered serious concern over the safety of dams throughout the world. However, in Australia, although much Government attention is being devoted to the medium- to large-scale dams, minimal attention is being paid to the serious potential cumulative, catchment-wide problems associated with smaller private dams. The paper determines how to consider addressing hazardous private dam safety issues generally through a comparative analysis of international dam safety policy/law systems. The analysis has identified elements of best and minimum practice that can and do exist successfully to provide deserved assurance to the community of the proper safety management of hazardous private dams at both the individual and cumulative, catchment-wide levels. These elements provide benchmarks that enable ‘appropriate’ legislative arrangements to be determined for different jurisdictional circumstances as illustrated with an Australian policy-deficient case study.

Affiliations: 1: BEng (Hons 1), PhD, LLB (Hons A), GDLP, Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of South Australia, Senior Research Fellow and Associate Director Centre for Accounting, Governance and Sustainability, School of Commerce Division of Business and Law, University of South Australia, Way Lee Building City West Campus, North Terrace, ADELAIDE SA 5000, John.Pisaniello@unisa.edu.au

10.1163/22134514-00101009
/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00101009
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00101009
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00101009
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22134514-00101009
2014-03-10
2018-10-16

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    European Journal of Comparative Law and Governance — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation