Forces and Description
Pessimistic Scenario
Likely Scenario
Political Forces
Change in Government Power/Change of Minister Fundamental change of strategies, policies and service delivery outcomes.
Vision and mission remain relatively intact. Some change to strategic priorities and service delivery outcomes.
Impact of Queensland Elections
Unable to implement any new initiatives/programs.
Delays in implementing contentious programs including recruitment freeze.
Political support for action on climate change and the environment
Limited public support for political action on environment initiatives such as climate change. Eg Green Backlash / Carbon Fatigue. Affects support for EPA goals Commonwealth government environmental policies in conflict with Queensland Government. Causing policy and service delivery paralysis.
Positive but moderated suppor for environmental initiatives including climate change.
The policies of the Australian Government
Policies are relatively consistent with some conflicts. Some delays in service deliver due to need to resolve conflicts
Economic Forces Changes to Government and Agency funding
Dramatic reduction to state government budget due to external factors such as financial crisis, introduction of ETS, ageing population. No investment partnerships established with private sector for research or service delivery outcomes Higher than expected Population Growth resulting in increased human impact on environment. Undermines carbon reduction strategies and increasing management costs of sensitive habitats.
Reduction of budget in real terms although maintenance o funding level as % of budget/GSP.
Investment partnerships
Strong Population Growth
Emerging partnership opportunities with private sector on Carbon Capture and Storage and natural gas initiatives. Population growth as per expected projections. Some impact on carbon reduction strategies.
Low unemployment/Competition for Skilled Labour (eg scientists)
Unable to attract and retain staff particularly specialists such as scientists
Significant competition for skilled professional staff such as scientists. Affects ability to deliver on strategic priorities. Reduces effectiveness and quality of outputs. Some corporate knowledge lost. Partially mitigated by deployment of better online tools.
Ageing Workforce - large loss of experience staff to retirement.
Significant loss of corporate knowledge which is not able to be replaced adequately from labour market.
Socio-Cultural Forces Community attitudes towards the environment and climate change
Limited public support for environment initiatives such as climate change. Eg Green Backlash / Carbon Fatigue. < 20% or no reduction in carbon emissions by 2020 Limited supply of science graduates
Incremental improvement of environmental consciousness resulting in greater take up of sustainable solutions. 30% carbon reduction by 2020 Continued decline of science graduate numbers.
Popularity of science degrees at University
Community attitudes towards the performance of the Government
Loss of confidence in overall performance of government results taints support for initiatives championed by the government including EPA strategies.
Some loss of confidence in government performance resulting in inability of EPA to market more radical strategies Support for "mainstream" strategies only partly unaffected.
Technological Forces Improving performance and reliability of technology
Minor improvements in performance and reliability of technology. No substantial improvements in efficiency of service delivery
Continued large improvements in performance and reliability o technology. Facilitates dramati improvements in efficiency of service delivery.
The availability and use of “green” technologies by industry and the community
Limited availability of effective technologies to reduce carbon footprint.
Widespread adoption of affordable green technologies by community and industry. Lack of adoption of more expensive technologies withou government assistance.
e-business interaction and selfservice through online and other technologies
No change to current use of technology, Continued use of paper forms within EPA divisions.
Improved utilisation of online environment within EPA. Greater use of soft forms and paperless initiatives. Improves operational efficiency and customer satisfaction.
Environmental Forces Impact of the natural environment and climate change Due to fires, drought, pests, weeds, weather conditions, changing sea levels, global warming etc affecting resources and strategies
Dramatic changes in climate increase the costs of management of sensitive habitats (eg Great Barrier Reef Marine Park) and reduce confidence in EPA to mitigate effects of climate change.
Changes to climate change whilst resulting in some undesirable impacts don’t materially increase management costs.
Visible impacts of climate change result in some increased endorsement of EPA strategies by community and industry.
30% carbon reduction by 2020 Human impact on the natural environment and climate - Including the effect on the availability and quality of natural resources due to introduced species, industry development and operations, tourism and visitation and population growth Increased detrimental human impact on environment. Undermines carbon reduction strategies and increasing management costs of sensitive habitats. Reduced Tourism due to damage of popular destinations.
Some increase in detrimental impact but within projected range. Poses some challenge to carbon reduction strategies.
Increased awareness of need to protect environment resultin in greater support for EPA strategies
Legislative Environment Changing legal climate in terms of the climate change agenda
Commonwealth legislation conflicts with State legislation resulting in impact on strategies, resources and capabilities
Commonwealth legislation is relatively consistent with state legislations with some conflicts Some delays in service deliver due to need to resolve conflicts
Wage restrictions
State government policy on restricting wages growth leads to industrial dispute and reduces intake of new staff. Governments introduce inflexible wages policy causing loss of experienced staff to private sector Environment policy and service delivery “nationalised” by Commonwealth Government. Service Delivery functions devolved to Local governments, NGO and private organisations. Research functions transferred devolved to CSIRO and/or private sector Large businesses interests and public unhappy with EPA decisions complain to minister too much resulting in intervention into service delivery outcomes and thus erosion of confidence in EPA EPA unable to manage conflicting demands (eg Conservation of park vs recreational use) resulting in erosion of confidence in EPA. EPA unable to keep pace with stakeholder demands. Significant reduction of supply of science graduates. Reduced environmental research investment. Governments alter policy priorities de-emphasising environmental focus.
State government policy on wages growth in keeping with government standard (eg 3-5% contributing in a small part to loss of staff to private sector.
Five Forces The threat of new entrants
Status Quo- EPA retains current policy and service delivery “monopoly”.
The power of buyers (stakeholders) -includes power of constituents and “product” includes ideas and consequently behavioural outcomes
EPA manages the majority of competing demands and interests effectively with some complaints to the minister resulting in changed outcomes in exceptional circumstances. Majority of stakeholders embrace “products” resulting in gradual shift in behaviour and respect for EPA. EPA keeps pace with majority community demands.
The power of suppliers (includes treasury, universities, and government)
Continued reduction in science graduates. Increase in environmental research initiatives. Government maintain policy environmental policy priorities
The threat of substitutes (includes substitute behavioural outcomes)
Stakeholders adopt lifestyles and impose demands, which are not consistent with EPA conservation and sustainability goals. Other government departments, agencies, local councils and private organisations funded by QLD government at the expense
Stakeholders continue to gradually improve sustainabilit & conservation value of lifestyles and commercial practices.
The level and nature of competitive rivalry
EPA continues to be funded at relatively similar level (i.e. ~1% of State Budget).
of EPA resulting in loss of staff and expertise.
O