Prioritisation methods have been adopted for >20 years to inform resource allocation in species conservation. The academic literature on prioritisation focuses on technical matters, with little attention to the socio-political factors affecting the uptake of priorities. We investigated the policy instruments employed to promote uptake, and the structural factors affecting the uptake of priorities, using as our case study a species prioritisation method adopted by the Queensland Government (Australia). We interviewed 79 key informants and analysed policy documents and plans. The Queensland Government relied on ‘information delivery’ as a policy instrument to foster uptake. We identified communication channels to assist ‘information delivery’ between Government and intended users, but also found that several structural factors limited their use: fragmentation of policies, the relative strength of alternative priorities and centralisation of power in decision-making. We discuss the results in relation to other conservation planning initiatives and suggest how structural barriers can be addressed.
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management / Vol. Article in Press