Abstract
Previous research on institutional arrangements for coastal management [e.g. Imperial, 1999; Sproule-Jones, 1999] is usually carried out to assess institutional performance in terms of meeting formalised objectives. However, the author found a clear divide between the de jure (formalised) and de facto management arrangements for Australian estuaries. The deviation from de jure responsibilities and adoption of de facto responsibilities by some management groups can be partly explained by the theory of pressured management autonomy, that states that where there is significant external pressure for management, the management group to whom the pressure is applied responds by adopting a greater de facto responsibility for management. The theory also exposes flaws in traditional institutional analysis - focusing on the analysis of an organisation meeting its formalised objectives. Due to an organisation's creation of informal goals through the adoption of de facto responsibilities, a different logic of institutional inquiry is needed - one that firstly discovers the actual institutional and management arrangements when assessing the institutional environment and connectivities. The new logic of inquiry would enable analysis of the actual institutional environment, connectivities and performance to better understand and improve on the sustainable management of estuaries and other natural resources.