A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare the asset management policies and practices of six Australian states – New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania – to improve understanding of the policy context to best shape policy focus and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mahmood, M., Dhakal, Subas P., Wiewiora, A., Brown, Kerry, Keast, R.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Emerald Group Publishing 2014
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JFM-03-2013-0017
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/12429
_version_ 1848748073781559296
author Mahmood, M.
Dhakal, Subas P.
Wiewiora, A.
Brown, Kerry
Keast, R.
author_facet Mahmood, M.
Dhakal, Subas P.
Wiewiora, A.
Brown, Kerry
Keast, R.
author_sort Mahmood, M.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare the asset management policies and practices of six Australian states – New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania – to improve understanding of the policy context to best shape policy focus and guidelines. Australian state-wide asset management policies and guidelines are an emergent policy domain, generating a substantial body of knowledge. However, these documents are spread across the layers of government and are therefore largely fragmented and lack coherency. Design/methodology/approach – The comparative study is based on the thematic mapping technique using the Leximancer software. Findings – Asset management policies and guidelines of New South Wales and Victoria have more interconnected themes as compared to other states in Australia. Moreover, based on the findings, New South Wales has covered most of the key concepts in relation to asset management; the remaining five states are yet to develop a comprehensive and integrated approach to asset management policies and guidelines. Research limitations/implications – This review and its findings have provided a number of directions on which government policies can now be better constructed and assessed. In doing so, the paper contributes to a coherent way forward to satisfy national emergent and ongoing asset management challenges. This paper outlines a rigorous analytical methodology to inform specific policy changes. Originality/value – This paper provides a basis for further research focused on analyzing the context and processes of asset management guidelines and policies.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T06:59:15Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-12429
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T06:59:15Z
publishDate 2014
publisher Emerald Group Publishing
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-124292019-02-19T04:27:23Z A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia Mahmood, M. Dhakal, Subas P. Wiewiora, A. Brown, Kerry Keast, R. Content analysis Community involvement Australia Policy analysis Leximancer Asset management Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare the asset management policies and practices of six Australian states – New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania – to improve understanding of the policy context to best shape policy focus and guidelines. Australian state-wide asset management policies and guidelines are an emergent policy domain, generating a substantial body of knowledge. However, these documents are spread across the layers of government and are therefore largely fragmented and lack coherency. Design/methodology/approach – The comparative study is based on the thematic mapping technique using the Leximancer software. Findings – Asset management policies and guidelines of New South Wales and Victoria have more interconnected themes as compared to other states in Australia. Moreover, based on the findings, New South Wales has covered most of the key concepts in relation to asset management; the remaining five states are yet to develop a comprehensive and integrated approach to asset management policies and guidelines. Research limitations/implications – This review and its findings have provided a number of directions on which government policies can now be better constructed and assessed. In doing so, the paper contributes to a coherent way forward to satisfy national emergent and ongoing asset management challenges. This paper outlines a rigorous analytical methodology to inform specific policy changes. Originality/value – This paper provides a basis for further research focused on analyzing the context and processes of asset management guidelines and policies. 2014 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/12429 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JFM-03-2013-0017 Emerald Group Publishing restricted
spellingShingle Content analysis
Community involvement
Australia
Policy analysis
Leximancer
Asset management
Mahmood, M.
Dhakal, Subas P.
Wiewiora, A.
Brown, Kerry
Keast, R.
A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia
title A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia
title_full A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia
title_fullStr A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia
title_short A Comparative Study on Asset Management Policies and Guidelines of Different States in Australia
title_sort comparative study on asset management policies and guidelines of different states in australia
topic Content analysis
Community involvement
Australia
Policy analysis
Leximancer
Asset management
url http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JFM-03-2013-0017
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/12429