Wave Two (Mid-2010s): Alliances, Learning and Social Licence Politics

Australian scholarship and practice from roughly 2013 to 2017 focused on how regional campaigns worked and what sustained them. Key findings include:

• Cross-class coalitions brought together farmers, environmentalists and townspeople as "strange bedfellows," stabilised by shared values of stewardship and fairness rather than shared ideology (Colvin et al., 2015).

• Campaigns functioned as sites of adult learning where "circumstantial activists" developed organisational, political and communication skills and a new political identity (Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015).

• First Nations leadership came into focus, with Traditional Owners on Gomeroi country leading campaigns against projects threatening sacred sites and water, anchoring coalitions in longer histories of dispossession and resistance (Norman, 2016).

• Local governments in Northern NSW used community polls, advocacy committees and legal challenges to co-lead campaigns alongside community groups (de Vries, 2020, 2021).

• Luke's (2017) social licence diamond model showed how perceptions of local benefits, sustainability concerns and organised resistance combined to move projects from tolerated to rejected.

International cases echo these dynamics. In Montenegro, locally rooted grassroots initiatives contested top-down spatial planning, building capacity over time and moving from reactive protest to active governance engagement (Dragović, 2021). In Minnesota, faith-based climate organising used relational models and peer mentorship to build distributed leadership across congregations (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). In England, the Community Organisers Programme (2011 to 2015) trained over 500 community organisers across localities, surfacing tensions between state-funded organising and the politically engaged work organisers themselves sought (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

Wave Three (Late 2010s to 2020s): Energy Justice, Just Transition and the Digital Terrain

From around 2018, Australian regional organising broadened into energy justice and just transition politics while grappling with a transformed and often hostile digital media environment.

In coal communities, just transition politics produced contested dynamics. In the Latrobe Valley, national just transition policy was framed in ways that excluded local voices and redirected benefits away from affected communities, producing resentment rather than buy-in (Weller, 2018). In coal communities more broadly, transition narratives triggered defensive identity mobilisation when they failed to address questions of pride, continuity and local economic reality (MacNeil & Beauman, 2022). The Australian Conservation Foundation's Gladstone campaign illustrated both the risk and the possibility: initially framed around abstract just transition rhetoric, it required substantial reworking toward locally grounded environmental justice after encountering community scepticism, a process Marshall and Pearse (2024) describe as "reading the room."

The Stop Adani Convoy showed what can go wrong when national campaign frames are imposed on regional contexts. Media framing and social identity dynamics produced a narrative of "city greenies versus coal towns" that was counterproductive for persuasion and left lasting relational damage (Colvin, 2020). On the digital front, Calibeo and Hindmarsh (2022) and Calibeo (2024) documented how experienced campaigners adapted to fake news, trolls and echo chambers, while Lubicz-Zaorski et al. (2023) mapped a coordinated climate denial infrastructure operating across multiple platforms around the Great Barrier Reef.

International evidence from this period extends the analysis into issue areas underrepresented in Australia. Minkler et al. (2019), drawing on approximately 140 community organisers across the United States, document a shift toward base-building and multi-issue agendas with explicit attention to leadership by women of colour and health equity framing. Apostolopoulou et al. (2022), synthesising twelve case studies across nine countries, show regional communities in rural and peripheral areas creating alternative, commons-oriented institutions around land, housing and energy, not simply resisting harmful developments but constructing alternative futures.

Part 2: Who Leads

Across all three waves and across both Australian and international contexts, the evidence consistently points to one organising principle: the most credible and durable leadership in regional progressive campaigns is local, embedded and experientially grounded.

Local Residents and Circumstantial Activists

The consistent core of Australian regional campaign leadership has been local people directly affected by the issue. Ollis (2020a, 2020b, 2021) documents "circumstantial activists", farmers, graziers and small-town residents in CSG regions including Central Gippsland and the Northern Rivers, who were drawn into politics by direct threats to their land and water, not by prior ideological commitment. Their effectiveness derived from embedded community relationships and local knowledge, not professional activist skills (Lloyd et al., 2013). This pattern holds across international cases: Bulgarian anti-fracking leaders were ordinary residents and civic activists (Mihaylov, 2020); the Wisconsin dispatch campaign was explicitly resident-led (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023); and rural LGBTQIA+ groups in the United States are founded and run by community members themselves (Timbers et al., 2024).

First Nations Custodians

In many Australian regional struggles, First Nations leadership is central rather than peripheral. Traditional Owners have led campaigns against extractive projects from a position of cultural and moral authority rooted in custodianship and resistance that non-Indigenous partners cannot replicate (Norman, 2016). Lobo and Hine (2022) show how First Nations and Adivasi struggles across Australia and India shaped narratives about decolonial energy futures with reach well beyond local campaigns.

City-Based NGOs and Professional Organisers

City-based organisations have played significant but best understood as supporting roles. Lock the Gate provided national coordination while maintaining local groups at the public front (Hutton, 2012; Baer & Singer, 2020). Friends of the Earth delivered mentoring and skill-building that turned local activists into durable organisers in Central Gippsland (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021). The consistent lesson: successful campaigns maintain local leadership publicly while external organisations provide infrastructure and strategic support from behind (Luke, 2017; Colvin et al., 2015). The COP case in England is a cautionary note on what happens when externally designed programmes displace organic leadership development (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

Local Governments and Unconventional Advocates

Local governments in Northern NSW became active co-leaders in some campaigns, using institutional tools and legal standing unavailable to informal community groups (de Vries, 2020, 2021). Colvin et al. (2025) identify "unconventional climate advocates", leaders with regional, conservative or resource-industry identities who are credible messengers for climate action among constituencies mainstream environmentalism has not reached. Their credibility depends precisely on their distance from city-based movement culture (Colvin, 2020; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022).

Part 3: Strategies That Work

Place-Based Relational Organising

The most consistently documented strategy across all cases is relational organising: building trust through one-on-one conversations, kitchen-table meetings and ongoing interpersonal work (Hutton, 2012; Luke, 2017; Ollis, 2020a). In Central Gippsland, sustained investment in mentoring and skill development by Friends of the Earth transformed circumstantial activists into durable organisers (Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). Interpersonal work also served to manage emotional tensions and sustain coalitions through long attrition periods (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018). International cases, from MNIPL's faith-based peer mentorship (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017) to rural LGBTQIA+ coalition-building (Timbers et al., 2024) to US health equity base-building (Minkler et al., 2019), all reinforce the centrality of this approach in non-metropolitan settings where relational density is high.

Cross-Class and Cross-Ideological Alliances

Regional campaigns achieve leverage by building coalitions that cross the lines typically structuring progressive politics. Australian anti-CSG alliances brought together farmers, environmentalists and townspeople around shared stewardship and fairness values, deliberately reframing conflicts away from the "jobs versus greenies" binary (Colvin et al., 2015; Lloyd et al., 2013). In coal and transition struggles, such alliances are harder to build but have at times brought workers, unions, First Nations organisations and NGOs together around justice claims (Norman, 2016; Marshall & Pearse, 2024).

Social Licence Withdrawal and Visible Contention

Australian CSG campaigns developed a distinctive cluster of strategies to make community opposition visible and legitimate: gasfield-free declarations, community polls, Lock the Gate signage and blockades like the Bentley blockade (Hutton, 2012; Kia & Ricketts, 2018; Luke, 2017). These tactics blended respectable local imagery, families, farmers, with assertive direct action calibrated to regional social norms (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018). The Bulgarian AFM used analogous logic, with horizontal prefigurative organising that embodied democratic values while engaging national policy processes (Mihaylov, 2020).

Multi-Scalar Institutional and Legal Strategies

Successful regional campaigns rarely rely on mobilisation alone. Australian campaigns combined local direct action with planning processes, environmental assessments, courts and policy advocacy, often facilitated by legal and strategic support from NGOs (Hindmarsh & Alidoust, 2019; de Vries, 2020, 2021). Montenegrin grassroots groups moved from reactive protest to developing counter-proposals in formal governance arenas, with some formalising their structures to gain institutional standing (Dragović, 2021). Rural LGBTQIA+ groups in the United States operate simultaneously at community, institutional and policy levels (Timbers et al., 2024). This multi-scalar repertoire allows small communities to punch above their weight.

Emotional Sustainability and Adult Learning

The Australian literature is distinctive in treating emotions and learning as deliberate strategic elements. Ransan-Cooper et al. (2018) argue that anger at injustice drives initial mobilisation in CSG campaigns, while joy, through gatherings, music and celebration, sustains long-term engagement. Ollis (2020a, 2020b, 2021) and Ollis and Hamel-Green (2015) frame campaigns as pedagogical spaces where critical consciousness, organisational skills and new political identities are forged through experience. These practices matter especially in small communities where burnout and social pressure can derail campaigns. International evidence reinforces the point: COP organisers in England called for training that addressed political analysis and organiser wellbeing, not only skills (Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

Hybrid Digital and Offline Mobilisation

Regional campaigns combine digital and offline tactics, but the evidence suggests the relationship between the two differs from large-scale urban digital campaigns. In Australian anti-fracking and logging campaigns, activists used social media to "become our own media," adapting content and moderation strategies to counter disinformation and trolling (Calibeo, 2024; Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022). In the Wisconsin dispatch campaign, a Facebook page managed by known local figures using concise push-style messages was sufficient to drive offline engagement without complex interactive infrastructure (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). In small communities, trusted local messengers carry different weight to anonymous posts in large networks. The Stop Adani Convoy is a standing warning that symbolic digital and media campaigns perceived as urban incursions can entrench rather than bridge city-country divides (Colvin, 2020).

Co-Designed Transition Strategies

In coal and industrial communities, the literature is as instructive about failure as success. Top-down just transition framing that sidelines local voices produces resentment (Weller, 2018). Transition narratives that ignore identity and community pride trigger defensive mobilisation (MacNeil & Beauman, 2022). The most promising approaches are co-designed, materially credible and identity-affirming, reframing goals in terms that resonate with local values rather than external agendas (Marshall & Pearse, 2024; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022)).

RQ1 Summary

Progressive organising in regional communities since approximately 2010 has not been marginal or reactive but a sustained, sophisticated and often successful set of practices led primarily by local people with deep community roots. The main lessons from the combined evidence are:

• Regional communities have established leadership and organising capacity that predates and often exceeds what city-based organisations bring. The starting point for any external organisation should be listening and resourcing, not designing and delivering.

• The most effective leadership is local, embedded and experientially grounded. This holds across issue domains, national contexts and organisational forms.

• Cross-class alliances built on shared values rather than shared ideology have been among the most powerful features of Australian regional organising, and are replicable where genuine common ground exists.

• Campaigns that impose national frames without local adaptation consistently encounter resistance. The Gladstone and Stop Adani cases are important cautionary examples for Australian practitioners.

• The strategic repertoire, which includes relational organising, social licence withdrawal, multi-scalar institutional engagement, emotional sustainability, hybrid digital mobilisation is understandable and transferable, but depends on deep listening to specific regional contexts in order to be effective.

RQ1 Summary

RQ2: What kinds of organising and campaigning in remote and regional communities have been most effective, both in terms of issues and working models?

Effectiveness in regional and remote organising is not only a question of policy wins. The literature consistently measures it across several dimensions: tangible changes to policy, governance or services; the development of durable local leadership and organisational infrastructure; and the enhanced agency and bargaining position of communities in relation to state and market power. Across both Australian and international evidence, the clearest and most consistent findings concern which issue domains generate strong regional mobilisation, and which working models sustain it.

Part 1: Issue Domains Where Regional Organising Has Been Most Effective

Extractive Industry Conflicts: Land, Water and Democratic Voice

The strongest evidence of effective regional organising in Australia comes from anti-CSG and coal campaigns across the Northern Rivers, Narrabri region, Surat Basin and Central Gippsland. Concrete outcomes include the withdrawal of social licence and project cancellations in the Northern Rivers, where broad community resistance contributed to state-level policy reversals (Luke, 2017; Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020; de Vries, 2020, 2021), and a permanent ban on fracking in Victoria linked directly to Central Gippsland organising supported by Lock the Gate and Friends of the Earth (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015).

These campaigns succeed because they anchor issues that are simultaneously material, procedural and identity-based. Communities are mobilised by immediate threats to land, water, health and livelihoods; by anger at opaque approvals, state-industry collusion and lack of meaningful consultation; and by strong place-based identities, whether "food bowl" regions, black-soil country or sacred lands on Gomeroi country (Greer et al., 2011; Lloyd et al., 2013; Norman, 2016; Arashiro, 2017; Hindmarsh & Alidoust, 2019). The presence of a clear external threat and identifiable "villain" provides a powerful anchor for mobilisation in small communities (Mercer et al., 2014).

The Bulgarian anti-fracking movement (AFM) offers a close international parallel. Beginning in local communities threatened by shale gas exploration, it scaled to a national campaign and achieved policy restrictions on fracking, all while maintaining a prefigurative, anti-hierarchical organising culture that resisted co-optation and professionalisation (Mihaylov, 2020). Like the Australian CSG campaigns, its effectiveness combined substantial policy wins with the preservation of internal democratic practices, a genuinely difficult balance for regional movements that gain national prominence.

Energy Transition and Just Transition: Mixed Effectiveness

Organising around coal and energy transition in industrial regional centres has produced more uneven results. In the Latrobe Valley, just transition policy under the Gillard government was framed and scaled in ways that sidelined directly affected communities, producing resentment rather than buy-in (Weller, 2018). In coal communities more broadly, transition narratives have triggered defensive identity mobilisation when perceived as externally imposed and misaligned with local economic reality (MacNeil & Beauman, 2022). The Australian Conservation Foundation's Gladstone campaign only began to gain local traction once it reframed away from abstract just transition rhetoric toward locally resonant environmental justice concerns (Marshall & Pearse, 2024).

The Stop Adani Convoy stands as the clearest cautionary case: a nationally branded, metro-led road convoy into regional Queensland that hardened the "city greenies versus coal towns" divide and reinforced antagonistic social identities, making persuasion harder rather than easier (Colvin, 2020). Energy transition campaigns are more effective in regional areas when they are grounded in specific local environmental and health impacts rather than generic climate frames, and when they work through locally trusted messengers rather than metropolitan environmentalist spokespeople (Marshall & Pearse, 2024; Colvin et al., 2015; Colvin et al., 2025).

Defence of Local Services and Democratic Institutions

Campaigns that defend concrete, locally salient public services show strong evidence of effectiveness, even where they are not explicitly framed as progressive. In small-town Wisconsin, residents organised to save their local 911 dispatch centre from consolidation, winning on all three counts: the centre was kept open, residents reported a significantly increased sense of civic efficacy, and public awareness of the value of locally controlled emergency services was substantially raised (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). This case points to a broader principle: in regional communities, concrete service-defence campaigns can both win immediate goals and build longer-term civic confidence that carries into future organising.

LGBTQIA+ Rights and Equity in Rural Settings

Rural LGBTQIA+ organising in the United States is one of the clearest examples of grassroots, self-organised campaigns achieving effectiveness across multiple dimensions simultaneously. Timbers et al. (2024) describe three LGBTQIA+ organisations in rural communities that work across peer support, community education and alliance-building with local institutions, and policy advocacy. They increase visibility and social recognition in conservative rural contexts, secure or improve local services, and constitute what the authors call a "foundational level of policy change" by building local power that underpins state and national legislative advances. While this issue domain is less documented in the Australian literature, the working model, self-organised, multi-level, embedded in community relationships, resonates strongly with what has proven effective in Australian regional campaigns.

Territorial Governance and Commons-Oriented Organising

Territorial and spatial governance struggles in peripheral regions show that regional communities can be effective not only in stopping particular projects but in changing the rules and forums of decision-making. In Montenegro, grassroots initiatives contesting top-down spatial planning evolved from ad hoc protest groups into recognised actors in governance processes, succeeding in forcing revisions to plans and establishing themselves as legitimate interlocutors in future decisions (Dragović, 2021). Apostolopoulou et al. (2022), synthesising twelve case studies across nine countries, show communities in rural and peripheral areas creating alternative, commons-oriented institutions around land, housing and energy, not simply resisting harmful developments but constructing enduring alternatives. Effectiveness here is measured by the ability to create lasting institutions and rescale local experiments into broader networks of resilience and resistance.

Part 2: Working Models That Have Been Most Effective

Place-Based Relational Organising with Circumstantial Activists

The working model with the strongest evidence base across both Australian and international contexts is place-based, relational organising anchored in people directly affected by the issue. In Australian CSG campaigns, this model features dense relational work through one-on-ones, kitchen-table meetings and small group conversations; structured but locally adaptable repertoires including gasfield-free declarations, community polls, public forums and visible but family-friendly blockades; and a multi-year horizon focused on building durable local groups rather than single-issue protest events (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018; Hutton, 2012; Kia & Ricketts, 2018; Luke, 2017). In Gippsland and the Northern Rivers, this model delivered both policy wins and sustained local capacity (Hutton, 2012; Luke, 2017; de Vries, 2020, 2021).

International evidence reinforces every element of this model. Minnesota Interfaith Power and Light's Movement Builder Program uses relational organising and peer mentorship to build distributed leadership across congregations, with early evaluation showing promise for multiplying organiser capacity and sustaining engagement beyond single campaigns (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). Rural LGBTQIA+ groups build relationships with schools, clinics and faith communities as the primary mechanism for shifting local practice and norms (Timbers et al., 2024). Minkler et al. (2019) report that organisers across US health equity, mass incarceration and immigrant rights campaigns identify base-building and deep relationships as foundational. In regional contexts where social networks are tight and organisers are highly visible, relational organising is especially effective because it leverages existing community ties, mitigates backlash by moving through trusted relationships, and builds layers of leadership that share risk and workload.

City-Based NGOs as Trainers and Scaffolds, Not Fronts

An effective division of labour, documented most clearly in Australian CSG campaigns, positions city-based NGOs as providers of training, legal support, research capacity and non-formal education, while local landholders and residents front the public campaign. Friends of the Earth and Lock the Gate provided workshops, campaign schools and organising mentorship while keeping local activists visible as the face of campaigns, protecting local credibility and defusing "outside agitator" narratives (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015; Hutton, 2012; Luke, 2017). Where this balance was disrupted, as in the Stop Adani Convoy, identity backlash and reduced effectiveness in regional communities followed (Colvin, 2020).

The Community Organisers Programme in England offers a more ambiguous international comparison. COP trained and paid over 500 organisers during the austerity period, and while co-optation risks were real and training content was often moderated, many organisers reported surprising autonomy and Fisher (2020) argues that state-funded organising can have progressive potential when organisers link their work to politicised, counter-hegemonic projects. The conditions for this are meaningful: organisers need to retain local autonomy, training needs to be politically robust, and connections to broader movements need to be actively maintained (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

Cross-Class and Cross-Identity Alliances with Unconventional Advocates

Effective regional campaigns consistently build coalitions that cross the class and ideological lines that structure mainstream progressive politics. Australian CSG alliances brought together farmers, environmentalists, townspeople and First Nations custodians, cohered by shared stewardship and fairness values rather than shared ideology (Colvin et al., 2015; Luke, 2017; Norman, 2016). Campaigns that foreground locally trusted, non-environmentalist spokespeople, farmers, local doctors, business owners, First Nations elders, build broader legitimacy and reduce culture-war framings (Luke, 2017; Marshall & Pearse, 2024). Colvin et al. (2025) identify "unconventional climate advocates" with conservative or resource-industry identities as structurally peripheral to mainstream environmental networks yet crucial for reaching hold-out constituencies in regional Australia.

Multi-Scalar Strategies Combining Protest with Institutional Levers

Effective campaigns rarely rely on mobilisation alone. In Northern NSW, local councils used community polls, advocacy committees, information provision and joint legal challenges to escalate and legitimise community opposition, contributing to state-level policy reversals while also producing mediatised public events that amplified campaign reach (de Vries, 2020, 2021). This hybrid model, grassroots organising combined with local government advocacy, legal strategies and media work, appears particularly powerful for major project fights in regional areas. Montenegrin grassroots initiatives demonstrate the same logic internationally, moving from protest to submitting alternative plans and monitoring implementation in formal governance processes (Dragović, 2021). Rural LGBTQIA+ groups in the United States similarly operate across peer support, institutional relationship-building and policy advocacy simultaneously (Timbers et al., 2024).

Hybrid Digital and Offline Mobilisation

The most effective digital strategy in regional settings uses online tools as extensions of existing offline networks rather than as stand-alone engagement platforms. The Oconomowoc case shows that a Facebook page run by trusted local organisers using concise, push-style information and clear calls to offline action was sufficient to drive substantial mobilisation, without elaborate online deliberation or sophisticated data analytics (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). In small communities, message clarity, timing and relational trust matter more than high-intensity digital engagement. Australian evidence from anti-fracking and logging campaigns shows campaigners using social media to extend reach beyond constrained local media while adapting content and moderation strategies in response to disinformation and trolling (Calibeo, 2024; Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022). The broader lesson is a hybrid model: digital tools for amplification and coordination, trusted local messengers and offline relationships for legitimacy (Luke, 2017; Marshall, 2023).

Emotional Sustainability and Adult Learning as Strategy

Australian research is particularly strong on the importance of treating emotional sustainability and adult learning as deliberate elements of campaign strategy rather than incidental by-products. Anger at injustice drives initial mobilisation in CSG campaigns, while joy, celebration and positive affect in group spaces sustain diverse alliances over time (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018). Participation in campaigns transforms activists' sense of efficacy, political understanding and environmental identity in ways that stabilise long-term commitment (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). These practices matter especially in small, highly visible communities where burnout and social pressure can derail campaigns. Internationally, COP organisers in England and US health equity organisers alike called for professional development that attends to political analysis and organiser wellbeing alongside tactical skills (Fisher & Champagne, 2024; Minkler et al., 2019).

RQ2 Summary

Across both Australian and international evidence, the most effective organising and campaigning in regional and remote communities shares a consistent cluster of features:

• It is anchored in concrete, locally salient issues, land, water, health, public services, rights or democratic voice, rather than abstract national or global frames (Luke, 2017; Timbers et al., 2024; Italiano & Ramirez, 2023).

• It relies on place-based, relational organising that develops local leadership from within communities, supported but not fronted by external organisations (Ollis, 2020a; Hutton, 2012; Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017).

• It builds cross-class and cross-identity alliances using locally trusted, often unconventional spokespeople as the public face of campaigns (Colvin et al., 2015; Colvin et al., 2025; Norman, 2016).

• It employs multi-scalar strategies that combine grassroots mobilisation with local government tools, legal channels and media work (de Vries, 2020, 2021; Dragović, 2021).

• It invests in emotional sustainability and adult learning cultures that maintain organiser capacity across long campaigns in small communities (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018; Ollis, 2021).

• It uses digital tools strategically as amplifiers of offline relationships, not replacements for them, while adapting proactively to disinformation (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023; Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022).

Conversely, symbolic metro-designed actions that enter regional communities without deep local anchoring, technocratic just transition packages that bypass community ownership, and campaigns that impose national frames on regional identities have generally proven less effective and sometimes actively damaging to progressive goals in regional settings (Colvin, 2020; Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022).

RQ3: What have been the outcomes for people based in those communities who are undertaking campaigns or organising? Eg community support, community backlash. What could support them in their roles?

The experience of community organising in regional settings is rarely straightforward. The literature across both Australian and international contexts documents a consistent pattern of mixed outcomes: genuine empowerment and skill development alongside emotional strain, social conflict and, in some cases, serious personal risk. What is largely missing from the research is direct, organiser-centred inquiry into burnout, mental health and long-term sustainability. This review synthesises what is known about outcomes and what the evidence implies about the kinds of support that would best sustain regional organisers in their roles.

Part 1: Outcomes for Regional Community Organisers

Empowerment, Skills and Expanded Political Agency

Across both Australian and international evidence, participation in regional campaigns is consistently described as transformative for local organisers. In Australian CSG campaigns, "circumstantial activists" report gaining critical environmental analysis, communication, facilitation, networking and lobbying skills, and the confidence to challenge powerful corporations and governments (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). Through non-formal workshops and on-the-job mentoring from Friends of the Earth and Lock the Gate, participants developed what the research describes as a durable disposition to see local issues through environmental justice and democratic lenses (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b). After tangible wins like the Victorian fracking ban and social licence withdrawal in the Northern Rivers, many activists reported a strong sense of collective efficacy (Luke, 2017; Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020; Ollis, 2020a, 2021). More broadly, CSG and coal mobilisations in regional NSW have been interpreted as communities "reclaiming voice" in Australian democracy, countering narratives of depoliticised rural apathy ( Arashiro, 2017; Mercer et al., 2014).

International cases show the same pattern. Resident organisers in the Wisconsin dispatch campaign learned that collective effort could change local government decisions, reporting increased civic confidence and political competence after their win (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). Bulgarian anti-fracking activists who initially mobilised around a local risk became national political actors participating in policy negotiations and media engagements (Mihaylov, 2020). Montenegrin grassroots activists gained competencies in reading spatial plans, formulating counter-proposals and advocating within planning bodies (Dragović, 2021). Drawing on approximately 140 US community organisers, Minkler et al. (2019) found that campaign involvement builds strategic analysis skills, strengthens public leadership identities particularly for women of colour, and fosters a sense of being part of a wider movement community.

Solidarity, Belonging and Positive Emotional Outcomes

Campaign participation can produce strong social bonds that are important outcomes in themselves. Emotional research on the Australian anti-CSG movement finds that while anger at injustice drives initial mobilisation, joy, celebration and shared pride become crucial for sustaining diverse alliances over years (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018). Community events, blockades and gatherings create spaces of mutual recognition and belonging. Cross-class alliances between farmers, environmentalists and townspeople, grounded in shared stewardship values, can reduce historic mistrust and create new social networks across occupational and ideological lines (Colvin et al., 2015; Luke, 2017; Norman, 2016). For many local organisers, campaigning brings new friendships, social support and identity resources that partly offset its strains (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b; Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018).

Community Support and Institutional Backing

Where organisers align with a broad local majority and secure institutional allies, the outcomes are substantially more positive. In the Northern Rivers, community surveys and council-run polls showing overwhelming opposition to CSG legitimised anti-industry organisers as genuine community representatives rather than a fringe minority, contributing to social licence withdrawal (Luke, 2017; de Vries, 2020, 2021). Local governments in Northern NSW used community polls, information campaigns and joint legal challenges to amplify and shield community organisers, giving them access to resources, venues and legal leverage that informal community groups cannot access alone (de Vries, 2020, 2021). Rural LGBTQIA+ organisers in the United States similarly build standing as trusted advocates and resource brokers within their communities as their organisations grow, gaining informal authority that carries into future local issues (Timbers et al., 2024).

Emotional Strain, Community Fracture and Conflict

Alongside these gains, the literature documents significant emotional and social costs. Australian research shows that anti-CSG organisers experience intense anger, anxiety and fear about threats to land and water, and must continually manage emotional tensions within diverse alliances (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018). In Narrabri, Marshall (2023) documents painful fractures in the town as coal and gas conflicts polarise civil society, with organisers navigating divided neighbours, business contacts and community groups. Energy-transition work in coal communities finds that local advocates for change can be positioned as outliers or even traitors to their community, with just transition narratives experienced as identity threats that increase the social cost of speaking publicly (MacNeil & Beauman, 2022; Weller, 2018).

US evidence from Minkler et al. (2019) reinforces this picture: organisers across the country describe chronic burnout due to high demand and low resources, fear and anxiety within their base communities, and a sense of responsibility for holding communities together under sustained pressure. While not always rural-specific, these pressures are plausibly more intense in small communities where organisers cannot easily separate their political roles from everyday social life.

Backlash, Stigma and Identity-Based Hostility

The literature also documents reputational and identity-based consequences, particularly when campaigns are seen as externally driven or misaligned with local norms. Colvin's (2020) analysis of the Stop Adani Convoy shows that regional communities often interpreted convoy participants as city outsiders imposing their values, solidifying an antagonistic boundary between "coal towns" and "greenie protesters" and likely increasing stigma for local climate advocates perceived as aligned with metropolitan groups. In coal communities, MacNeil and Beauman (2022) find that just transition ideas are framed as threats to community identity, positioning local advocates as outliers. Digital media adds further risk: activists in Australian fracking and logging campaigns report dealing with trolling, fake news and hostile online interactions, while coordinated climate denial networks shape the broader information environment in which regional organisers work (Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022; Lubicz-Zaorski et al., 2023).

For LGBTQIA+ organisers in conservative rural settings, backlash takes more direct forms. Timbers et al. (2024) document the implicit and explicit barriers LGBTQIA+ people face, including overt hostility from some residents and institutions, subtle exclusion when advocating for inclusive policies, and risks to personal safety and social standing. In international environmental and territorial campaigns, activists commonly confront attempts by local elites to discredit them as anti-development, foreign-influenced or unrepresentative of genuine community interests (Mihaylov, 2020; Dragović, 2021).

The combined picture across contexts is that organisers in regional settings typically navigate a three-layered social ecology: a supportive core of highly engaged allies, a wider sympathetic but cautious majority who may privately encourage while staying publicly quiet, and a mobilised opposition sometimes connected to state or economic power that can produce sustained backlash.

Internal Tensions and Co-optation Pressures

Several studies highlight strains arising not from external opposition but from within movements and programmes. Despite strong anti-hierarchical aspirations, the Bulgarian AFM reproduced some internal inequalities around who speaks to media or negotiates nationally, and faced ongoing tensions over how to balance grassroots democracy with coordinated action (Mihaylov, 2020). For organisers in the Community Organisers Programme in England, a persistent tension arose between their own political commitments and institutional constraints, with many critiquing training content they felt limited their ability to mount robust challenges to structural injustice (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). Such internal dynamics can produce frustration and disillusionment alongside the more visible challenges of external opposition.

Part 2: What Could Support Regional Organisers

The literature does not present formal evaluated support programmes, but it consistently points to several kinds of support that help organisers cope and remain effective. These are drawn from documented practice and from what organisers themselves say they need.

Politically Robust Training and Mentoring

The clearest evidence for supportive practices comes from adult learning in Australian CSG campaigns, where Friends of the Earth and Lock the Gate provided non-formal education in campaign skills, media work, lobbying and facilitation that activists found crucial for building confidence and competence (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). Informal mentoring by experienced activists helped new organisers navigate institutions, manage conflict and understand tactics, reducing isolation and the sense of not knowing what to do (Ollis, 2020b, 2021).

International evidence adds an important dimension: organisers consistently ask for training that goes beyond technical skills. COP organisers in England criticised curricula that emphasised apolitical community engagement and requested deeper political education on power analysis, structural causes of local problems and links to broader movements (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). US multi-issue organisers similarly value convenings where they can collectively analyse political conditions and share strategies including how to handle backlash and burnout (Minkler et al., 2019). For regional organisers who often lack local peer groups of experienced activists and work in higher-risk environments, politically robust and practically grounded training is likely especially important.

Peer Networks and Cross-Community Solidarity

Organisers are significantly supported when they have structured peer networks beyond their own community. Cross-regional convenings allow organisers to validate each other's experiences, exchange tactics, share strategies for handling backlash and feel part of a larger movement ecology (Minkler et al., 2019; Goodman & Morton, 2023). MNIPL's Movement Builder model uses peer mentors who support each other in congregational organising and troubleshoot challenges collaboratively (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). International networks of radical grassroots innovations provide translocal solidarity and knowledge exchange for organisers in peripheral communities (Apostolopoulou et al., 2022). For remote and regional organisers, such networks reduce isolation, offer practical guidance on handling institutional negotiations and hostile media, and provide emotional sustenance when local opposition is intense.

Institutional Allies Without Co-optation

Multiple studies point to the value of sympathetic institutions as allies, provided they respect grassroots leadership. In Northern NSW, councils that aligned with community campaigns took on legal action and public communication, spreading responsibility and giving organisers institutional backing without displacing their leadership (de Vries, 2020, 2021). Timbers et al. (2024) explicitly argue that social workers and allied professionals should recognise and support self-led LGBTQIA+ movements, using their institutional positions to advocate for inclusive policies and shield organisers from some forms of backlash. Minkler et al. (2019) and Pastor and Lin (2018) suggest that public health agencies can resource community organising and amplify health-equity framing in ways that provide legitimacy for contentious campaigns. The COP experience provides the necessary caution: institutional support must not become control, and organisers need active protection of their autonomy and political scope (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

Framing and Leadership Strategies That Distribute Risk

How campaigns frame issues and choose spokespeople directly affects the personal costs for individual organisers. Colvin et al. (2015, 2025) and Colvin (2020) emphasise the role of unconventional climate advocates, farmers, conservative professionals, resource-linked workers, in reaching hold-out constituencies. Empowering these figures as visible leaders shares the social load so that known environmentalists or marginalised community members are not the only ones publicly taking risks. Marshall and Pearse (2024) show that adapting frames from abstract just transition to locally grounded environmental justice reduces community suspicion and makes campaigns less socially costly for local participants. Conversely, when campaigns ignore local identity and economic realities, they inadvertently increase the social risk for local organisers by associating them with unpopular external agendas (Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022).

Organiser Wellbeing, Safety and Shared Leadership

While explicit discussion of mental health supports is limited in the literature, the problems of burnout, fear and overwork are evident across multiple studies. Supports that the evidence implies would help include:

• Regular structured reflection and debrief spaces, whether online or in-person, where organisers can process difficult experiences including backlash, threats and internal conflicts (Minkler et al., 2019).

• Digital security and anti-harassment training, particularly for LGBTQIA+ and environmental organisers in hostile settings, alongside clear protocols for responding to threats and online harassment (Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022).

• Distributed leadership models that share responsibilities across a wider team, reducing individual load and the burnout risk of hyper-visible single leaders (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017).

Flexible, Long-Term Funding with Low Bureaucratic Burden

Funding structures shape organisers' working conditions and vulnerability to co-optation. The COP experience shows that public funding can expand organising capacity but becomes counterproductive when tied to narrow short-term metrics or depoliticised curricula (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). For regional organisers, effective funding support would mean core, multi-year funding for local anchor organisations rather than project-based grants; minimal reporting requirements that recognise the high per-capita time costs of rural work; and explicit tolerance for contentious advocacy rather than only "neutral" engagement.

Media and Narrative Capacity Building

Organisers in regional settings would benefit from support in building media and narrative capacity tailored to their specific context: local newspapers and radio, Facebook and other platforms with high uptake in their community, and skills for anticipating and countering common attacks such as being painted as outsiders or extremists. The Oconomowoc case shows that clear, trusted, locally authored messaging can counter confusion and mobilise support effectively without sophisticated infrastructure (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). Australian evidence adds the importance of "activist-responsive adaptation" to disinformation and hostile online content, building on practices experienced campaigners have already developed (Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022).

RQ3 Summary

The available research indicates that people undertaking progressive campaigns and organising in regional communities experience genuinely mixed outcomes. There can be many gains, such as individual empowerment, skill development, new social networks, stronger civic agency and, in many cases, tangible wins, which are real and well-documented. But so too are the costs: emotional strain, community conflict, identity-based hostility, and in some contexts, serious personal risk.

What is most striking, and most underserved by current research, is the absence of systematic inquiry into organiser wellbeing, burnout and long-term sustainability. The literature implies these are significant issues but does not measure them directly. Future research focused specifically on organiser experience in regional Australian contexts would fill an important gap.

The supports that appear most promising, based on documented practice and organiser testimony across both Australian and international evidence, are:

• Robust training and mentoring ecosystems, with city-based NGOs acting as scaffolds that build local political capability rather than technical compliance.

• Peer networks and cross-regional convenings that reduce isolation and build collective resilience.

• Sympathetic institutional allies (such as councils, health agencies, and professional bodies) that share advocacy burden without displacing grassroots leadership.

• Strategic framing and leadership choices that distribute public risk across a broad range of locally trusted spokespeople.

• Intentional cultures of care, celebration and shared leadership within campaigns themselves.

• Flexible, long-term funding that gives local anchor organisations stability without co-optation.

• Media and digital literacy support, including disinformation resilience, tailored to regional contexts.

RQ4: What are the most effective roles for city based organisations for supporting rural and regional organising and campaigning? What should city based organisations not do?

City-based organisations such as environmental NGOs, base-building networks, faith-based hubs, state-funded programmes, play an important but double-edged role in regional progressive campaigns. The evidence across both Australian and international contexts is unambiguous on one central point: the most effective city-based organisations behave less like campaign directors and more like long-term partners, educators and enablers, working under the leadership of rural and regional communities. The same literature is equally clear about what goes wrong when city-based organisations get this relationship wrong.

Part 1: Most Effective Roles for City-Based Organisations

Providing Politically Robust Training, Mentoring and Movement Pedagogy

The strongest positive evidence concerns the training and mentoring roles played by city-based organisations. In Central Gippsland, Friends of the Earth and Lock the Gate are documented as key providers of non-formal learning spaces, workshops on media work, lobbying, group facilitation and campaign strategy, through which circumstantial activists became confident organisers (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). Informal mentoring by experienced activists supported locals to navigate institutions, manage intra-movement conflict and understand tactical repertoires, reducing the trial-and-error burden on small community groups (Ollis, 2020b, 2021). In effect, these organisations operated as movement schools and coaching hubs rather than as command-and-control centres.

International evidence adds a crucial dimension: the content of training matters as much as its delivery. Community Organisers Programme (COP) organisers in England explicitly criticised curricula that emphasised moderated, apolitical community engagement and called for deeper political education on power analysis, neoliberalism, austerity and structural causes of local problems (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). US organisers working on health equity, mass incarceration and immigrant rights similarly valued convenings that allowed them to analyse broader political conditions and link them to local campaigns (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018). Minnesota Interfaith Power and Light's Movement Builder Program demonstrates a practical model: using relational organising frameworks and peer mentorship to build distributed leadership in congregations, many of them in smaller towns (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). The clear implication for city-based organisations is that training co-developed with rural organisers and explicitly grounded in power-building is more valuable than technically proficient but politically moderated curricula.

Supplying Legal, Technical and Strategic Capacity

City-based NGOs and allied institutions contribute crucial legal, policy and research capacity that most small regional communities lack. In Australian CSG and coal disputes, Friends of the Earth, Lock the Gate and allied groups provided technical information on groundwater, health risks and regulatory processes, enabling rural activists to challenge corporate and government narratives with credibility (Mercer et al., 2014; Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020; Ollis, 2020a, 2021). City-based networks facilitated access to lawyers, planning experts and media advisors, enabling rural groups to run legal challenges, make formal submissions and secure coverage beyond the local area (Hutton, 2012; Luke, 2017; Hindmarsh & Alidoust, 2019). This back-end support allowed regional campaigns to engage across multiple scales, local councils, state inquiries, national debate, without exhausting a small volunteer base.

International territorial and environmental campaigns confirm the same pattern. Montenegrin grassroots initiatives and the Bulgarian anti-fracking movement both depended on access to planners, ecologists and legal expertise to critique spatial plans and environmental impact assessments (Dragović, 2021; Mihaylov, 2020). Across radical grassroots social innovation cases in nine countries, external research and policy expertise was a consistent enabling resource for peripheral communities seeking to contest top-down development (Apostolopoulou et al., 2022). The effective model is what might be called a "back-office" hub: city-based organisations providing legal advice, policy research, communications guidance and digital security support, with final decisions and public leadership firmly retained by rural actors.

Amplifying Local Voices Without Replacing Them

A consistently effective role is amplification rather than substitution of local voices. In successful Australian CSG campaigns, city-based organisations helped project local stories and spokespeople into state and national media, through press work, digital campaigns and alliance infrastructure, while keeping rural leaders front and centre (Hutton, 2012; Colvin et al., 2015; Luke, 2017; Titus & Kuch, 2014). Digital activism research shows activists in anti-fracking and logging campaigns using national NGO networks and platforms to extend the reach of locally authored content (Calibeo, 2024; Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022). When done well, city-based organisations function as signal boosters, increasing the leverage of rural campaigns without rebranding them as metropolitan projects.

International evidence reinforces this. Health-equity-oriented organisations in the United States show how local concerns, clinic closures, policing, deportation, can be reframed within national narratives, but are most powerful when articulated by local leaders to whom regional audiences can relate (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018). The Bulgarian anti-fracking movement needed actors who could navigate national forums and media without displacing grassroots legitimacy (Mihaylov, 2020). The practical implication is that city-based organisations should arrange press opportunities that foreground rural leaders, use their own public voice to amplify and legitimise rural demands, and avoid speaking for communities in policy or media arenas where rural spokespeople could speak for themselves.

Resourcing and Convening Cross-Regional Networks

City-based organisations are well placed to connect otherwise isolated regional groups into networks that provide mutual learning, shared tactics and peer support. In Australia, Lock the Gate and national climate networks linked rural communities facing CSG and coal projects across the country, facilitating coordinated national pressure and giving small-town organisers a sense of being part of a wider movement (Hutton, 2012; Rosewarne et al., 2014; Goodman & Morton, 2023). Internationally, Minkler et al. (2019) describe how regional convenings of approximately 140 US organisers enabled participants to share strategies across geographies, validate experiences of burnout and risk, and build belonging to a larger movement infrastructure. MNIPL's hub model connects congregations through its Movement Builder peer mentorship programme (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017), and translocal networks of radical grassroots innovations provide solidarity and knowledge exchange for organisers in peripheral communities (Apostolopoulou et al., 2022). These network roles are especially valuable for reducing the isolation that hyper-visible minority organisers in small towns often experience.

Co-Developing Locally Resonant Frames and Elevating Unconventional Messengers

Several Australian studies argue that campaigns in regional communities are most persuasive when framed around land, water, health, fairness and democratic voice rather than abstract climate metrics, and when led publicly by locally trusted figures whose identities differ from stereotypical environmentalists (Colvin et al., 2015; Luke, 2017; Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020; Marshall & Pearse, 2024). City-based organisations can support this by investing in genuine listening and framing work before proposing narratives, and by providing media and organising training to non-environmentalist local leaders, farmers, conservative professionals, resource-linked workers, enabling them to speak confidently on climate and energy issues from within their own identity positions (Colvin et al., 2025; Ollis, 2021). When city-based NGOs treat these unconventional advocates as co-leaders rather than outreach targets, they help shift the social centre of gravity of climate action into regional communities rather than reinforcing the perception that it belongs to urban elites.

Supporting Digital Strategy and Disinformation Navigation

City-based organisations can play a constructive supporting role in digital campaigning and navigating hostile information environments. Australian activists in fracking and logging campaigns report needing to manage information overload, fake news, echo chambers and trolling, developing what Calibeo and Hindmarsh (2022) call "activist-responsive adaptation." Metropolitan organisations are better resourced to provide training on platform dynamics, content moderation, digital security and disinformation responses, drawing on broader research such as multi-platform analyses of coordinated climate and science denial networks (Lubicz-Zaorski et al., 2023). By offering specialist communications support and shared digital infrastructure, city-based groups can help rural organisers focus on local relational work while still engaging effectively online.

Providing Flexible, Long-Term Funding with Low Bureaucratic Burden

Resourcing is one of the key levers city-based organisations and funders control, and the evidence suggests that how it is structured matters as much as how much is provided. The COP experience in England shows that centralised funding can expand organising capacity, more than 500 organiser positions were created, but becomes counterproductive when tied to narrow short-term metrics or depoliticised curricula (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). COP organisers reported appreciating a relative absence of bureaucratic micro-management, which Fisher (2020) argues enabled some genuine progressive potential even within a state-funded structure. The model implied by the evidence is: core, multi-year funding for rural anchor organisations; minimal and realistic reporting requirements that recognise the high per-capita time costs of rural work; and explicit tolerance for contentious advocacy rather than only "neutral" engagement.

Part 2: What City-Based Organisations Should Not Do

Fronting Campaigns and Displacing Local Leadership

The most important warning from the Australian literature is for city-based organisations to not take the public lead in regional conflicts. In successful anti-CSG campaigns, local farmers, residents and First Nations custodians served as public faces while city-based NGOs remained largely behind the scenes (Hutton, 2012; Colvin et al., 2015; Norman, 2016; Luke, 2017). Where metropolitan organisations or individuals are seen to front campaigns or speak "for" communities, opponents can easily paint the conflict as driven by outside greenies, undermining local legitimacy. Colvin's (2020) analysis of the Stop Adani Convoy demonstrates this identity dynamic at its most damaging: a largely metro-organised convoy travelling into regional Queensland to protest a coal mine, which media framing and local reactions constructed as urban outsiders lecturing coal communities, hardening an antagonistic "us versus them" boundary and likely increasing pressure on local climate advocates who had to continue living there after the convoy left. City-based organisations should avoid occupying spokesperson roles or dominating branding in regional campaigns, especially in the early stages of organising cycles.

The international literature reinforces this through a different lens. COP organisers, US health equity organisers and rural LGBTQIA+ groups all demonstrate that communities organising from within their own leadership have stronger legitimacy and more durable outcomes than those directed from outside (Fisher, 2020; Minkler et al., 2019; Timbers et al., 2024). Centralising decision-making, branding or public voice around city-based staff eclipses rural voices and reduces local investment in campaign ownership.

Importing Metropolitan Frames, Timelines and Risk Appetites

Several Australian case studies show the problems with importing metropolitan agendas without local adaptation. In Gladstone, ACF's initial approach with a just transition frame oriented to climate goals and national timelines clashed with local economic and cultural realities, and was met with scepticism until reframed in terms of local environmental justice and health (Marshall & Pearse, 2024). In the Latrobe Valley, just transition policy designed and scaled nationally marginalised local voices and misdirected benefits, feeding distrust and resistance (Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022). City-based groups often also have higher risk appetites for confrontational tactics than locals can sustain without social or economic penalty, and should not set campaign tempos and tactics around parliamentary or media cycles while ignoring seasonal, economic and social rhythms in regional communities.

Conducting Parachute Actions Without Local Co-Authorship

Symbolic, spectacle-oriented interventions into regional communities (especially those designed primarily for national audiences or donor bases) risk strengthening culture-war narratives and making life harder for local organisers who must live with the aftermath. The Stop Adani Convoy is again the clearest example (Colvin, 2020). City-based organisations should avoid short-term, high-profile actions in regional towns unless they are clearly and visibly co-authored by local groups and align with local strategic assessments made by people who will remain in the community long after the cameras have gone.

Extracting Stories and Visibility Without Building Local Capacity

Several Australian authors note the risk of instrumentalising regional struggles. Anti-coal and anti-CSG campaigns have at times been used as symbols in national climate politics without equivalent investments in long-term local infrastructure (Rosewarne et al., 2014; Baer & Singer, 2020; Goodman & Morton, 2023). Digital activism research documents national organisations using regional case studies and imagery in online content without parallel investments in training, governance roles or funding for local groups, which can become story extraction rather than capacity-building (Calibeo, 2024). City-based organisations should avoid treating regional campaigns primarily as content for national messaging, fundraising or brand positioning, and should not enter communities intensively, use their stories and then exit without leaving behind skills, organisational structures or material resources.

Imposing Depoliticised Engagement Models

The COP case is a strong warning against technocratic, depoliticised support models. Training content that treats organisers as neutral community facilitators rather than as actors in struggles over power, and evaluative logics that prioritise contact numbers and meeting counts over base-building and structural wins, misalign with the realities of regional organising and waste the political sophistication that organisers themselves bring to their work (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). City-based organisations should not design rural programmes that strip out structural analysis and focus only on dialogue and listening, nor restrain organisers from contentious tactics or explicit political demands. In short, central support should not turn rural organisers into service brokers when the context requires power-building.

Over-Bureaucratising Support and Misjudging Capacity

City-based organisations often bring with them grant-driven timelines, reporting demands and urban assumptions about organisational capacity. Imposing urban-scale expectations, number of contacts, frequency of events, compliance systems, on communities with much smaller populations and higher per-contact time costs can push work toward what is easiest to report rather than what is most strategic, and can overwhelm volunteer-driven groups that have no capacity for complex monitoring systems (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). Effective support means designing low-friction, trust-based funding relationships with realistic expectations about pace and scale in rural work.

RQ4 Summary

Across both Australian and international evidence, city-based organisations are most effective when they operate in a genuine support role rather than a directing one. The core distinction is between organisations that build and resource local leadership and those that substitute for it. The evidence points to a clear set of effective and ineffective practices:

City-based organisations are most effective when they:

• Invest in politically robust training and mentoring co-developed with rural leaders, grounded in power analysis and movement building rather than moderated engagement (Ollis, 2020a; Fisher & Champagne, 2024; Minkler et al., 2019).

• Provide specialist back-office infrastructure, legal, research, communications, digital security, while keeping strategic and public leadership in rural hands (Hutton, 2012; Mihaylov, 2020; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022)).

• Convene and sustain peer networks that reduce rural organiser isolation and enable cross-community learning (Minkler et al., 2019; Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017).

• Amplify rather than replace local voices in state and national arenas, prominently platforming rural leaders including unconventional climate advocates (Colvin et al., 2025; Marshall & Pearse, 2024).

• Offer flexible, long-term core funding with low bureaucratic overhead and explicit tolerance for contentious advocacy (Fisher, 2020).

• Co-develop locally resonant frames by listening first, supporting locals to translate their own concerns into effective narratives rather than importing metropolitan agendas (Marshall & Pearse, 2024; Luke, 2017).

City-based organisations are least effective, and sometimes actively damaging, when they:

• Front regional campaigns, dominate public messaging or displace local leadership (Colvin, 2020; Hutton, 2012).

• Import metropolitan frames, timelines and risk appetites without local adaptation (Marshall & Pearse, 2024; Weller, 2018).

• Conduct parachute actions designed for national audiences without genuine local co-authorship (Colvin, 2020).

• Extract stories and visibility from regional campaigns without investing in durable local capacity (Calibeo, 2024; Baer & Singer, 2020).

• Impose depoliticised engagement models that sideline structural analysis and constrain contentious tactics (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

• Over-bureaucratise support with urban-scale expectations and onerous reporting demands (Fisher, 2020).

RQ5: What should city based organisations consider when seeking to work in/with regional communities? What are the key barriers and enablers?

City-based organisations seeking to work with regional communities must make a fundamental shift in mindset: from campaign export to infrastructural partnership. The Australian and international literature converges on this point with unusual consistency. Where city-based organisations have treated regional campaigns as locally led projects in which they are invited partners, outcomes have often been strong. Where they have imported metropolitan agendas, frames and timelines without adaptation, they have at best wasted resources and at worst actively damaged both the campaigns and the communities they sought to support. This review synthesises the key considerations, barriers and enablers that the evidence identifies.

Part 1: Key Considerations

Start From Local Identities, Livelihoods and Histories

Regional campaigns are shaped by place-based identities, economic structures and histories of mobilisation that city-based organisations must understand before entering a community. In Australian coal and CSG regions, identities are tied to farming, land stewardship, mining work and small-town belonging, and to histories of both boom-bust cycles and political neglect (Lloyd et al., 2013; Mercer et al., 2014; Eriksen, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022). Anti-CSG campaigns that succeeded framed issues in terms of land, water, health and democratic voice, aligning with local self-understandings as custodians and citizens rather than importing abstract climate rhetoric (Colvin et al., 2015; Luke, 2017; Marshall & Pearse, 2024). Local governments' willingness to ally with campaigns in Northern NSW depended on institutional cultures and histories of community mobilisation going back decades, not on any single external initiative (de Vries, 2020).

International evidence reinforces that this is not a uniquely Australian dynamic. Rural LGBTQIA+ organisations in the United States define their own priorities based on lived local experience, visibility, service access, local protections, and are most effective when external allies support those priorities rather than substituting their own (Timbers et al., 2024). Anti-fracking and territorial governance struggles in Bulgaria and Montenegro grew from local dissatisfaction with extractivism and top-down planning, and would have been undermined rather than helped by city-based organisations that arrived with pre-set agendas (Mihaylov, 2020; Dragović, 2021). The practical implication is clear: begin with structured listening and local research, interviews, kitchen-table conversations, community mapping, before proposing any campaign frame or strategy, and expect that what works in one region will not automatically transfer to another (Marshall & Pearse, 2024; Ollis, 2020b, 2021).

Respect Local Leadership and Visibility Dynamics

In small communities, who speaks and who is seen to lead matters greatly, and carries social consequences that city-based staff rarely have to absorb personally. Effective Australian regional campaigns are typically led publicly by farmers, residents, First Nations custodians and other community members, with city-based NGOs operating behind the scenes (Hutton, 2012; Colvin et al., 2015; Norman, 2016; Luke, 2017). Colvin et al. (2025) identify the particular persuasive power of "unconventional climate advocates", conservative, rural or resource-linked figures who support climate action, who are structurally peripheral to metropolitan environmental networks but crucial for reaching hold-out regional constituencies. City-based organisations should invest in developing these local spokespeople through media and organising training, and should avoid branding or structures that make a campaign look like a city-run project, which consistently undermines local credibility (Colvin, 2020; Marshall & Pearse, 2024).

Align Frames and Goals With Local Justice Concerns

Regional communities often experience the same underlying issues through justice lenses that differ significantly from metropolitan narratives. Australian anti-CSG and coal conflicts are articulated around procedural injustice (lack of voice, flawed approvals), recognition (disregard for local knowledge and culture) and distributional impacts (who bears risks and who receives benefits) ( Arashiro, 2017; Luke, 2017; Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020). In Gladstone, engagement only became possible when ACF's campaign reframed away from "just transition" as a climate policy objective toward local environmental justice and health concerns (Eriksen, 2018; Marshall & Pearse, 2024). In the Latrobe Valley and other coal communities, top-down transition framings that ignored local economic realities intensified feelings of injustice and disempowerment rather than building support (Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022).

International evidence shows the same dynamic. National and urban narratives, generic climate action, abstract equity language, may not resonate in small communities without translation into local idioms of stewardship, neighbourliness and fairness (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017; Mihaylov, 2020; Dragović, 2021). Health-equity organisers in the United States built effective campaigns by anchoring national structural analysis in the specific local concerns that residents cared most about (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018). City-based organisations should treat their preferred frames as hypotheses to be tested with communities rather than fixed products, and should be genuinely prepared to de-emphasise or abandon language that does not resonate locally, even when it is central to their national strategy.

Understand Temporalities and Risk in Regional Life

Regional communities operate under different temporal and risk structures than metropolitan NGOs, and campaigns must be designed accordingly. Australian farmers and small business owners juggle seasonal labour, volatile commodity prices and long-term place commitments, making them cautious about high-risk or time-intensive tactics that could endanger livelihoods or relationships (Luke, 2017; Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018). Coal communities face existential anxieties about economic futures in which abrupt or poorly supported transition narratives are experienced as threats to identity and survival (Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022). City-based staff are typically more insulated from local social and economic backlash than the regional organisers they support, which can produce a systematic difference in risk appetite that strains partnerships if not acknowledged and negotiated explicitly (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018; Colvin, 2020).

Many rural and regional campaigns described across the international literature rely on small cores of highly committed volunteers, with per-capita organising costs, in time, travel and relationship-building, significantly higher than in urban settings (Timbers et al., 2024; Italiano & Ramirez, 2023; Dragović, 2021). Rural organisers also often wear many overlapping roles as informal social workers, community mediators and campaign leaders simultaneously, making workload and burnout risks considerably higher than typical urban equivalents (Minkler et al., 2019). Realistic campaign targets, timelines aligned with agricultural and seasonal rhythms rather than parliamentary calendars, and explicit joint risk assessments are practical responses to these realities.

Map the Local Media Ecology and Disinformation Context

Regional campaigns unfold within specific local and national media ecologies that city-based organisations must understand rather than assume. In Australian CSG and mining disputes, local newspapers, radio, town meetings and council-run polls all function as key arenas for public legitimacy and justification (Luke, 2017; Marshall, 2023; de Vries, 2021). Activists use social media to extend their reach but face problems of information overload, fake news, echo chambers and trolling (Calibeo, 2024; Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022). Multi-platform analysis of coordinated climate and science denial networks shows that small clusters of partisan actors can shape the broader information environment in which regional campaigns operate, priming communities to distrust metropolitan NGOs (Lubicz-Zaorski et al., 2023). City-based organisations should map local media landscapes collaboratively with regional partners, provide communications and disinformation support without displacing local judgment about tone and messengers, and help design communications that anticipate and inoculate against predictable hostile narratives.

Part 2: Key Barriers

Trust Deficits and Outsider Narratives

A recurrent structural barrier is pre-existing distrust of city-based organisations and narratives of urban outsiders meddling in regional affairs. The Stop Adani Convoy demonstrates how quickly regional communities and media can frame metropolitan involvement as intrusion, reinforcing antagonistic identities and undermining perceived local legitimacy (Colvin, 2020). Longer histories of state-industry collusion and political neglect generate scepticism that any external actor will genuinely act in regional interests (Mercer et al., 2014; Arashiro, 2017; Marshall, 2023). In international territorial governance struggles, residents in regions with histories of extractive development often view city-based organisations as part of the same "outside" system that has historically harmed them (Dragović, 2021; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022)). City-based organisations typically begin with low trust, and any misstep, over-branding, talking over locals, importing metropolitan frames, can rapidly confirm existing suspicions and close doors that take years to reopen.

Misaligned Frames and Identity Threats

Misaligned frames are not simply a communication problem but a relationship problem. When campaigns are perceived as threatening community identity and dignity, as just transition narratives have been in coal communities, and as generic climate frames have been in industrial towns, regional actors may become active opponents rather than potential allies (Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022; Eriksen, 2018). City-based organisations that insist on their preferred language or targets without adaptation risk the double failure of both alienating communities and delegitimising the local advocates who have to continue living and working there after the campaign has moved on.

Asymmetric Resources and Agenda-Setting Power

City-based organisations usually control more funding, staff and media access than regional partners, and this asymmetry can become a barrier even when intentions are collaborative. Movement-wide analyses note tensions where metropolitan NGOs set agendas, allocate resources and define success, with regional campaigns sometimes feeling instrumentalised for national strategies (Rosewarne et al., 2014; Baer & Singer, 2020; Goodman & Morton, 2023). Digital activism research documents national organisations using regional case studies and imagery in online content without equivalent long-term investment in local organisational infrastructure (Calibeo, 2024). If not consciously managed, these asymmetries generate resentment, dependency or hollow partnerships that exhaust local organisers without building lasting capacity.

Depoliticised and One-Size-Fits-All Programme Design

Barriers also stem from how city-based organisations and funders design their programmes. The COP case in England shows how central programmes structured to avoid overt conflict and structural critique can limit rural organisers' ability to confront power, even when the organisers themselves are politically sophisticated and willing (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). Tools and curricula developed for urban contexts frequently do not fit the relational, institutional and media ecology of small towns. Complex reporting and compliance requirements can overwhelm small rural organisations and channel energy away from base-building into administration (Fisher, 2020). These are design failures, not inevitable features of city-regional collaboration, and they are within the control of city-based organisations to change.

Part 3: Key Enablers

Long-Term Relational Engagement

The strongest enabler identified across both Australian and international evidence is genuine, long-term relational investment. Effective Australian CSG collaborations evolved over years, with metropolitan NGOs repeatedly visiting, training, mentoring and sharing decision-making with rural activists rather than parachuting in for moments of high visibility (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Hutton, 2012; Luke, 2017). Adult learning research shows that trust and confidence grow through repeated, supportive interactions rather than one-off workshops (Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). MNIPL's Movement Builder Program demonstrates that relational investment compounds over time: peer mentors who support each other across congregations build networks of trust that sustain organising well beyond any single campaign (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). City-based organisations that commit to multi-year engagement, develop personal relationships with local leaders and show consistency between high-profile campaign moments are substantially more likely to earn the trust that effective collaboration requires.

Shared Governance and Local Agenda-Setting

Collaborations are consistently more effective when regional partners hold real decision-making power over frames, tactics, timelines and evaluation criteria. Local governments' proactive roles in Australian CSG campaigns emerged from embedded values of participation, not external direction, and metro NGOs that worked alongside rather than above them contributed more effectively to outcomes (de Vries, 2020, 2021). Social identity and movement analyses point to the importance of regional actors defining goals and public narratives, with metropolitan groups supporting rather than steering (Colvin et al., 2015; Norman, 2016). Montenegrin grassroots initiatives gradually moved from protest to becoming co-producers of spatial governance, a shift that depended on external allies respecting rather than colonising that emerging institutional standing (Dragović, 2021). Practical mechanisms include joint steering structures with genuine regional veto power, shared budget transparency and metro organisations explicitly adopting support-role mandates in regional collaborations.

Investment in Local Leadership Development

Sustained investment in local leadership pipelines is a critical enabler that distinguishes partnerships that build lasting capacity from those that create dependency. The Australian CSG literature shows how non-formal education and mentorship turned circumstantial activists into capable organisers and spokespeople over multi-year engagement (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015). Colvin et al. (2025) highlight the strategic importance of unconventional climate advocates, implying that targeted leadership development for such actors can substantially expand campaign reach in hold-out regional constituencies. Funding regional organiser positions and fellowships, providing ongoing training and peer networks specifically tailored to rural leaders, and building horizontal rural-to-rural connections rather than only vertical city-to-region relationships all reduce dependency on city-based staff and strengthen regional movements' long-term resilience.

Flexible, Autonomy-Respecting Funding

Funding structures that respect local autonomy and reduce bureaucratic burden are powerful enablers. The COP experience offers a somewhat unexpected finding: despite being a state-funded programme with real co-optation risks, many organisers reported a relative absence of day-to-day micromanagement and a genuine sense of local autonomy, which Fisher (2020) argues enabled some progressive potential even within structural constraints. The enabling features implied by the evidence are core multi-year support for rural anchor organisations rather than project-based grants; simple, trust-based reporting focused on learning rather than narrow output metrics; and explicit acceptance of contentious and political work as legitimate rather than requiring a retreat to service delivery and neutral engagement (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

Co-Designed Political Education and Shared Analysis

Collaborations are more robust when city-based and rural partners develop shared political analysis together rather than one party educating the other. Health-equity organisers in the United States built effective campaigns by developing shared understandings of how mass incarceration, voter suppression and immigrant rights intersect with health, enabling campaigns that were both locally grounded and nationally legible (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018). Radical grassroots innovation networks frame local fights about land use, energy and housing within broader narratives of commons, inequality and environmental justice, linking peripheral communities to wider movements without erasing local specificity (Apostolopoulou et al. (2022); Mihaylov, 2020). Joint political education spaces where city-based staff and rural organisers map shared structural enemies, discuss how they appear differently in urban and rural settings, and develop flexible shared narrative frames are a practical mechanism for building the kind of analysis that sustains long-term partnerships.

Tailored Media and Digital Support

Jointly designed communication strategies can be a key enabler when they start from the specific media ecosystem of each regional community rather than from metropolitan assumptions about what platforms and formats work. The Oconomowoc case shows that simple, well-targeted digital communication run by trusted local organisers can be highly effective in small towns without sophisticated infrastructure (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). City-based organisations can enable collaboration by helping rural partners analyse their specific media landscape (e.g., local radio, newspapers and Facebook groups) and by supporting light-touch, locally run digital infrastructure rather than imposing complex tools designed for urban-scale campaigns. Providing backup for moderation, digital security and disinformation response, while keeping content creation and public voice firmly local, is the model most consistent with the evidence (Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022).

RQ5 Summary

Across both Australian and international evidence, the central challenge for city-based organisations working with regional communities is structural as much as attitudinal: the power asymmetries, funding logics, programme design defaults and campaign culture norms of metropolitan organisations all tend to push toward agenda-setting and substitution rather than genuine partnership. Recognising and actively countering these tendencies is the precondition for everything else.

The key considerations are: starting from local identities and histories; respecting local leadership and visibility dynamics; aligning frames with local justice concerns; understanding regional temporalities and risk; and mapping local media and disinformation contexts before designing any communication strategy.

The key barriers are:

• Trust deficits and outsider narratives, often rooted in long regional histories of external neglect or extraction (Mercer et al., 2014; Colvin, 2020).

• Misaligned frames experienced as threats to community identity and dignity (Weller, 2018; MacNeil & Beauman, 2022).

• Asymmetric resources and agenda-setting power that can generate resentment and dependency even in well-intentioned partnerships (Rosewarne et al., 2014; Calibeo, 2024).

• Depoliticised, one-size-fits-all programme design and over-bureaucratisation that mismatches the realities of rural organising (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024).

The key enablers are:

• Long-term relational engagement that earns trust through consistency and presence over time (Ollis, 2020a; Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017).

• Shared governance structures that give regional partners genuine veto power over frames, tactics and timelines (de Vries, 2020; Dragović, 2021).

• Sustained investment in local leadership development, including for unconventional advocates (Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015; Colvin et al., 2025).

• Flexible, autonomy-respecting funding with low bureaucratic burden and tolerance for contentious work (Fisher, 2020).

• Co-designed political education and shared analysis that links local and structural concerns (Minkler et al., 2019; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022)).

• Tailored media and digital support that starts from the specific local media ecosystem and keeps content creation and public voice local (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023; Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022).

Where these enablers have been present, such as with the sustained Friends of the Earth and Lock the Gate engagement in Gippsland and the Northern Rivers, and in the distributed leadership model of MNIPL, city-regional collaboration has underpinned some of the most effective progressive organising in non-metropolitan settings. In places where barriers have been unaddressed as with aspects of coal just transition politics and parachute convoy actions, city-based interventions have struggled or actively backfired, making the case for these considerations more urgent, not less.

RQ6: How does the regional media landscape affect campaigns? What interventions may be useful to counter mis/disinfo in regional areas?

Regional campaigns operate in media environments that are simultaneously more intimate and more fragile than urban ones. A small number of local outlets, community forums and social media pages can dominate the information landscape of an entire town or district, making it easier for a well-run campaign to cut through, but also easier for misinformation to take hold and harder to displace once embedded. The Australian and international literature speaks to this question from different angles: Australian research provides detailed accounts of how media shapes legitimacy, identity and social licence in CSG, coal and environmental conflicts; international research illuminates how trusted-messenger and relational communication strategies operate in non-metropolitan settings, and how community-controlled media can serve as a counterweight to hostile narratives. Neither body of research directly tests specific misinformation interventions in regional areas, but together they provide a strong evidential foundation for designing such interventions.

Part 1: How the Regional Media Landscape Affects Campaigns

Local Media and Public Forums as Arenas for Legitimacy

In Australian CSG and mining disputes, regional media and public forums are central arenas in which the legitimacy of campaigns is won or lost. In the Northern Rivers, local media coverage of community polls, public meetings and gasfield-free declarations helped demonstrate overwhelming opposition to CSG and contributed directly to the withdrawal of social licence (Luke, 2017). These events functioned as mediatised performances of community will, not only as decision-making tools. In Northern NSW, local governments' use of community polls and open deliberative processes, widely reported in local outlets, escalated campaigns and undermined the state government's pro-CSG position (de Vries, 2020, 2021). In Narrabri, Marshall (2023) shows that town meetings, localised information campaigns and everyday conversations formed a heavily contested civil society in which different actors deployed competing "social technologies of persuasion and information" to justify or contest extraction. Campaigns that occupy these arenas credibly, with trusted local speakers and visible community endorsement, are substantially better positioned to claim legitimacy than those relying on state or national media alone.

Media Framing, Social Identity and City-Country Conflict

Media framing actively shapes the social identities and antagonisms through which regional campaigns are understood. Colvin's (2020) analysis of the Stop Adani Convoy is the clearest Australian example: media coverage constructed a "city greenies versus coal towns" divide, depicting convoy participants as outsiders and reinforcing antagonistic identities that reduced persuasive potential and increased pressure on local climate advocates. CSG and coal studies show that media representations cast local landholders and residents as credible spokespeople when they oppose extraction, while making it easy for opponents to dismiss campaigns as externally driven when metropolitan organisations dominate media imagery (Luke, 2017; Norman, 2016; Baer & Singer, 2020). International cases confirm the pattern: the Bulgarian anti-fracking movement had to navigate framing that could cast it as either a legitimate civic force or as obstructionists (Mihaylov, 2020); Montenegrin grassroots initiatives faced official narratives of progress that dominated institutional channels (Dragović, 2021). In every context, regional media coverage determines who is seen as "of the community" and who is an interloper, with direct consequences for campaign traction and organiser safety.

Digital Media: Reach, Ownership and Vulnerability

Regional campaigns increasingly rely on digital media to supplement or bypass traditional outlets, with significant trade-offs. Australian activists in anti-fracking and old-growth forest campaigns describe using social media to "become our own media," circulating local stories and extending reach beyond constrained or hostile mainstream outlets (Calibeo, 2024; Titus & Kuch, 2014). The concentrated nature of regional information landscapes means campaigns can cut through more easily than in large urban markets, but it also means a single well-resourced hostile actor can do disproportionate damage. Activists report real limitations: information overload and algorithmic filtering; fake news, trolls and echo chambers; and a sense that platform ownership dynamics are beyond immediate activist control (Calibeo & Hindmarsh, 2022). The Save Oconomowoc Dispatch campaign in Wisconsin illustrates the power and simplicity available to regional campaigns: a single Facebook page run by trusted community members using concise push communication tied to offline actions was sufficient to drive substantial mobilisation without sophisticated infrastructure (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023).

National Disinformation Networks and Their Regional Reach

The regional media landscape does not exist in isolation from national and transnational information dynamics. Lubicz-Zaorski et al. (2023) show that during UNESCO's 2021 Great Barrier Reef recommendation, a small but coordinated network of partisan actors across Twitter, Facebook and YouTube fuelled a denial campaign using selective citation, cross-platform amplification and partisan messaging mirroring international climate denial strategies. Regional audiences are exposed to the same cross-platform denial narratives, which can undermine trust in environmental science and in local campaigns that rely on it (Baer & Singer, 2020). Misinformation in regional settings is not purely local or organic, it is structured by national and transnational networks that regional organisers must now anticipate and prepare for, not simply react to when it appears.

Part 2: Interventions to Counter Mis/Disinformation in Regional Areas

Note: Neither body of literature directly tests misinformation counter-interventions in regional settings. What follows is grounded inference from documented campaign practices and communication dynamics.

Centre Trusted Local Messengers and Unconventional Advocates

Across both bodies of evidence, who speaks consistently matters as much as what is said. Australian anti-CSG campaigns are most effective when farmers, graziers, small-business owners and First Nations custodians are front-line spokespeople (Colvin et al., 2015; Luke, 2017; Norman, 2016). Colvin et al. (2025) theorise "unconventional climate advocates" as especially powerful for reaching hold-out constituencies because their identities are not associated with mainstream environmentalism. International relational organising confirms the logic: MNIPL mobilises people through clergy, peer mentors and congregational relationships because interpersonal and institutional channels carry more weight in regional communities than mass media (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). For misinformation specifically, locally trusted figures, farmers, local doctors, faith leaders, First Nations elders, are best placed to refute false claims in ways that resonate. Training and supporting such messengers in media literacy, fact-checking and locally grounded responses to common myths is a directly evidence-aligned intervention.

Activist-Responsive Digital Strategies

Calibeo and Hindmarsh (2022) document how Australian activists already adapt to hostile digital environments: shifting content and tone across platforms to bypass echo chambers; combining online messaging with offline engagement to build trust that digital channels cannot provide alone; and developing routines for ignoring trolls and focusing on persuadable audiences. Interventions building on these practices include: codifying platform-specific strategies for handling hostile versus supportive content; providing templates and training to regional organisers on when to respond, when to ignore and how to avoid amplifying false claims through engagement; and creating shared moderation protocols across regional campaign pages to reduce the personal burden on individual organisers.

Strengthening Local Forums and Deliberative Processes

Structured local forums can function as misinformation counter-interventions even when not designed explicitly for that purpose. Community polls, town meetings and council-convened forums in Northern Rivers and Northern NSW surfaced and formalised local opinion, undercutting industry claims about community support and providing shared reference points harder to dispute than social media rumours (Luke, 2017; de Vries, 2021). In Narrabri, contested deliberations, despite generating conflict, compelled different sides to put forward coherent public justifications rather than relying on rumour (Marshall, 2023). Deliberative town-hall series co-hosted by councils and community groups, that explicitly address contested claims with a mix of local knowledge and independent expertise, are a well-grounded intervention. Health-equity organisers in the United States demonstrate a related approach: integrating evidence into one-on-ones, house meetings and small group gatherings, using health and equity framing to anchor counter-narratives in shared concerns around safety, dignity and the wellbeing of children (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018).

Using Institutional Tools as Truth Infrastructure

Campaigns can turn institutional actions into information interventions. Local government polls and resolutions in Northern NSW both produced quantitative evidence of community sentiment and functioned as public information events widely reported in local media, countering industry narratives about marginal or misinformed opposition (de Vries, 2021; Luke, 2017). Treating polls, hearings and inquiries as opportunities to disseminate accurate information and clarify majority views, not only as procedural requirements, integrates information work into the institutional rhythm of a campaign rather than treating misinformation response as a separate reactive task.

Pre-Empting Denial Narratives and Culture-War Frames

Studies of denial networks and city-country identity conflicts support anticipatory communication strategies. Lubicz-Zaorski et al. (2023) show that denial actors systematically pre-bunk scientific reports before communities have formed their views. Colvin (2020) shows that the "urban elites attacking regional livelihoods" narrative was very difficult to reverse once established. Addressing predictable narratives, "environmentalists hate farmers," "climate policy will destroy the town," "outside greenies don't understand our lives", explicitly and proactively before they take hold, using trusted local messengers to anchor the rebuttal in community values and lived experience, is a directly evidence-grounded approach (Colvin et al., 2015; Colvin et al., 2025; Marshall & Pearse, 2024). Emphasising shared regional values such as water security, health and intergenerational stewardship reduces the resonance of zero-sum culture-war framings (Luke, 2017; Norman, 2016).

Building Community-Controlled Local Information Channels

Australian activists report using local Facebook pages, newsletters and websites to circulate counter-narratives, treating locally owned information sources as part of "becoming our own media" (Calibeo, 2024; Titus & Kuch, 2014). Radical grassroots social innovation cases from nine countries show communities asserting their own knowledge and cultural narratives through community media, making peripheral communities less dependent on official or corporate channels (Apostolopoulou et al. (2022); Dragović, 2021; Mihaylov, 2020). Supporting the creation or strengthening of community-run newsletters, independent online outlets and community radio, with funding and technical support while ensuring editorial independence and local governance, builds durable misinformation-resilient infrastructure that outlasts individual campaigns.

City-Based Support for Monitoring and Rapid Response

City-based organisations can extend existing research and communications roles into misinformation monitoring and rapid response without displacing local leadership. City-based allies are better resourced to track regional and national media narratives, provide early warnings and draft responses when misinformation begins circulating, and offer legal and security advice when misinformation escalates to harassment. Rural organisers can feed local rumours into central monitoring systems and adapt centrally produced talking points to their local context (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017; Timbers et al., 2024). This is consistent with the broader pattern: central organisations supply specialist capacity while local groups lead community communication (Minkler et al., 2019; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022)).

RQ6 Summary

The regional media landscape affects campaigns by structuring who is seen as legitimate, which side has community backing, and what counts as credible evidence. It provides both opportunities for local campaigns to tell their own stories and channels for coordinated denial shaped by national networks. Media framing of city-country antagonisms can either support or fundamentally undermine regional organising.

The most evidence-aligned interventions are: elevating trusted local and unconventional messengers trained in locally grounded myth-busting; developing activist-responsive digital strategies combining simple push communication with protocols for handling hostile content; supporting deliberative local forums using health and equity framing; using institutional tools proactively as truth infrastructure; pre-empting predictable denial and culture-war narratives before they become entrenched; building community-controlled information channels for long-term resilience; and leveraging city-based organisations for monitoring and rapid response while keeping local leaders at the forefront.

None of these has been systematically evaluated for misinformation impact in regional Australian settings, this is a genuine gap the literature explicitly acknowledges. Nonetheless, the practices documented across CSG, coal, reef and international territorial conflicts provide a strong foundation for designing and testing such interventions.

RQ7: What resources and/or educational content is already available to support rural and regional organising?

The literature does not point to many publicly available, purpose-built toolkits specifically designed for rural and regional organising. What it does document is a substantial body of training practice, movement-embedded educational content and conceptual frameworks that have been developed within campaigns and can be adapted for broader use. This review summarises what exists across five categories, drawn from both Australian and international evidence, and identifies the key gaps that a resource compilation would be well placed to fill. A companion resource list documents the specific tools, guides and organisations identified through the broader research process.

Category 1: Formal Training and Capacity-Building Programmes

Several formal programmes provide training infrastructure relevant to rural and regional organising, though none was designed exclusively for non-metropolitan contexts.

Friends of the Earth and Lock the Gate, CSG Campaign Training (Australia) The most concrete training ecosystem documented in the Australian literature. FoE and LTG provided non-formal workshops on media skills, lobbying, campaign strategy, group facilitation and non-violent protest to rural activists in Central Gippsland and other anti-CSG regions. Delivered through a combination of workshops and on-the-job mentoring by experienced organisers, this training turned circumstantial activists into capable campaign leaders (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021; Ollis & Hamel-Green, 2015; Hutton, 2012). It represents the most thoroughly documented example of purposeful organiser education in regional Australia, and functions as a practical template for how NGOs can scaffold rural leadership development.

Community Organisers Programme (COP), England (2011–2015) Trained and placed more than 500 community organisers in localities across England, including smaller towns, using a standardised curriculum covering listening campaigns, community mapping, door-knocking and engagement (Fisher, 2020; Fisher & Champagne, 2024). COP offers a large-scale model of how organiser training can be delivered at scale with relatively low bureaucratic burden. Its critical limitation, as documented by the organisers themselves, was a moderated, depoliticised curriculum that prioritised engagement over power-building and structural analysis, a gap that rural organisers in contested resource and service environments are especially likely to feel.

US Base-Building and Health-Equity Organising Networks Four leading base-building organisations in the United States convene approximately 140 organisers annually, providing training and political education in base-building methods, leadership development, issue framing through a health-equity lens, and structural analysis of racism, austerity and democratic backsliding (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018). While not rural-specific, these networks disseminate organising frameworks that transfer well to small-town contexts, including campaigns around hospital closures, environmental health, policing and service deficits.

Minnesota Interfaith Power and Light, Movement Builder Program (USA) A faith-based climate justice programme that trains "Movement Builders" and peer mentors in relational organising, climate justice framing in faith contexts, and distributed leadership development across congregations (Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017). The programme's peer mentorship structure, where experienced organisers support newer ones across a network, is a model with clear relevance to rural settings where individual organisers can be isolated and support structures are thin.

Category 2: Movement-Embedded Educational Content

Much of the most practically useful content for rural organising exists not in formal curricula but embedded in movement practice. The following areas of embedded content are well documented in the literature.

Relational Organising and Leadership Development

Across both Australian CSG campaigns and international faith-based and base-building networks, relational organising is documented in enough practical detail to be translated into training content. Core elements include one-on-one conversation frameworks, small group facilitation, distributed leadership structures and peer mentoring models (Ollis, 2020a; Divakaran & Nerbonne, 2017; Minkler et al., 2019). These are arguably the most transferable content area across rural contexts and issue domains.

Emotional Sustainability and Alliance Maintenance

Ransan-Cooper et al. (2018) document how anger and joy work together to mobilise and sustain anti-CSG alliances in regional Australia. Their analysis of emotional dynamics, how celebration and mutual care sustain engagement through long campaigns, translates directly into training content on emotional sustainability, conflict management and building campaign cultures that people want to stay in.

Digital Strategy and Disinformation Response

Calibeo and Hindmarsh (2022) and Calibeo (2024) document concrete digital practices from Australian anti-fracking and logging campaigns: platform-specific content strategies, moderation practices, combining online and offline outreach, and "activist-responsive adaptation" to fake news and trolling. The Oconomowoc case adds a small-town-specific model of simple, trusted push communication tied to offline action (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023). Together these provide a strong foundation for a digital strategy module tailored to regional organisers.

Health-Equity Framing

US health-equity organisers have developed framing resources that connect local issues, hospital closures, policing, environmental contamination, immigration enforcement, to broader structural causes and shared community values (Minkler et al., 2019; Pastor & Lin, 2018). This framing approach has particular value in regional contexts where ideological mobilisation may be harder, but concerns about safety, health and fairness are widely shared across political lines.

Environmental and Territorial Justice Knowledge

Anti-fracking, commons and spatial planning struggles in Australia, Bulgaria, Montenegro and across nine countries have generated embedded educational content around: explaining planning and regulatory processes to communities; critiquing top-down development models; articulating rights-based and justice-based arguments in public forums and submissions; and linking local struggles to broader narratives of commons and environmental justice (Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020; Mihaylov, 2020; Dragović, 2021; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022); Arashiro, 2017).

Rural LGBTQIA+ Organising and Ally Support

Timbers et al. (2024) document three rural LGBTQIA+ organisations in the United States and articulate the multi-level organising practices, peer support, institutional advocacy, coalition-building, policy engagement, through which they build local power. They explicitly call on social workers and allied professionals to recognise and support these movements, making their work a resource both for rural organisers and for the professionals who could support them.

Category 3: Conceptual Frameworks Useful for Campaign Strategy

The literature contains a number of named frameworks that function as strategic thinking tools for rural and regional organisers and can be integrated into training or planning processes.

• Social licence diamond (Luke, 2017): maps how perceptions of benefit, sustainability and community mobilisation interact to withdraw social licence from projects. Useful for strategy discussions about where to focus pressure.

• Values-based coalition building (Colvin et al., 2015): shows how "strange bedfellows" alliances cohere around shared stewardship and fairness values rather than ideology. A practical tool for alliance mapping and messaging.

• Unconventional climate advocates (Colvin et al., 2025): identifies rural, conservative and resource-linked actors who can credibly reach hold-out constituencies, and places them in movement network maps. Useful for identifying and supporting effective local messengers.

• Energy justice framework (Macpherson-Rice et al., 2020): maps procedural, recognition and distributional injustices in resource conflicts, giving organisers language for submissions, public meetings and media.

• "Reading the room" (Marshall & Pearse, 2024): the iterative process of adapting campaign frames to local justice concerns and community identity. A practical model for how city-based organisations should approach regional partnerships.

• Prefigurative and anti-hierarchical organising (Mihaylov, 2020): how movements can maintain horizontal, democratic internal cultures while engaging effectively with national institutions. Particularly relevant for movements navigating co-optation risk.

• Territorial governance and commons (Dragović, 2021; Apostolopoulou et al. (2022)): frameworks for understanding how local spatial struggles connect to national and global structures, and for framing rural campaigns around commons and socio-spatial justice.

Category 4: Case Studies as Teaching Resources

A number of case studies in the literature are rich enough in operational detail to function as teaching cases for organisers, campaign staff and educators. The following are particularly well-suited to this purpose.

• Central Gippsland anti-CSG campaign (Ollis, 2020a, 2020b, 2021): a detailed account of how circumstantial activists became capable organisers through FoE-supported learning. Teaches: relational organising, adult learning in campaigns, building local capacity over time.

• Northern Rivers CSG resistance and social licence withdrawal (Luke, 2017; de Vries, 2020, 2021): documents community polls, council alliances, legal strategies and media work. Teaches: multi-scalar strategy, local government as movement partner, institutional tool use.

• Gladstone and ACF's campaign evolution (Marshall & Pearse, 2024): how a city-based NGO had to rework its approach to gain traction in an industrial town. Teaches: reading the room, reframing from national to local justice concerns, the limits of just transition rhetoric.

• Stop Adani Convoy (Colvin, 2020): how a nationally branded metro-led action hardened city-country antagonisms and made life harder for local advocates. Teaches: what not to do, social identity dynamics in media coverage.

• Save Oconomowoc Dispatch, Wisconsin (Italiano & Ramirez, 2023): small-town residents saved a 911 dispatch centre using a simple Facebook push strategy and offline mobilisation. Teaches: hybrid digital-offline organising in small communities, civic efficacy.

• Bulgarian anti-fracking movement (Mihaylov, 2020): a prefigurative, anti-hierarchical movement that achieved national policy change while resisting co-optation. Teaches: grassroots democracy, scaling without losing autonomy.

• Montenegrin territorial governance initiatives (Dragović, 2021): grassroots groups evolving from protest to co-producers of spatial governance. Teaches: institutional engagement, moving from reactive to proactive governance roles.

• Radical grassroots social innovations (Apostolopoulou et al., 2022): twelve cases across nine countries of communities building commons-oriented alternatives in peripheral regions. Teaches: constructive organising, building alternatives not only resisting extraction.

Category 5: Movement-Wide Strategy Syntheses

Several works synthesise strategy across campaigns and movements and are best suited as curricular readings for staff, experienced organisers and movement educators rather than as frontline training manuals.

• Rosewarne et al. (2014), ethnography of climate movement politics including anti-coal and anti-CSG campaigns, with reflections on tactics and strategy.

• Baer and Singer (2020), review of major anti-coal and anti-CSG organisations assessing stances on climate justice and political economy.

• Goodman and Morton (2023), comparative overview of climate movement phases across Germany, India and Australia, placing regional campaigns in a broader strategic context.

Key Gaps in Available Resources

The literature consistently describes substantial training and educational practice, particularly around Australian CSG campaigns and international base-building networks, but does not point to many publicly available, standardised curricula or toolkits specifically designed for rural and regional organising. The most significant gaps are:

No purpose-built rural organising curricula or toolkits Most training content is geography-mixed and not designed for the specific conditions of non-metropolitan settings, smaller networks, higher interpersonal visibility, greater social and economic risk, limited staff capacity. Rural organisers are adapting general materials to their context rather than drawing from dedicated resources.

No structured resources on mis/disinformation for regional contexts Despite the documented importance of coordinated denial networks and hostile local media environments, there are no explicit disinformation response toolkits designed for regional organisers in the literature. Experienced activists have developed practical adaptive strategies, but these have not been codified into accessible training materials.

Limited content on organiser wellbeing, safety and backlash management Burnout, emotional strain and social backlash are documented as significant realities for regional organisers, but dedicated resources on safety planning, role strain, care infrastructure and managing hostility in small communities are absent from the literature.

Scant guidance on equitable urban-rural collaboration practices While the literature is rich on what city-based organisations should and should not do, there are no detailed practical guidelines or protocols for how to design equitable partnerships between city-based and regional organisations, covering shared governance, budget transparency, mutual accountability and exit planning.

RQ7 Summary

The existing resource landscape for rural and regional organising is better than it might appear, but fragmented and largely inaccessible to practitioners who are not already embedded in the relevant movement networks. The core assets are: the FoE and LTG training ecosystem in Australia; US base-building and health-equity organising networks; faith-based distributed leadership models; a rich body of case studies and conceptual frameworks in the academic and practice literature; and the embedded practical knowledge of experienced activists in CSG, coal, environmental and territorial campaigns.

What is most needed is translation work: taking documented practices and frameworks and making them available as open, accessible training manuals, online modules and facilitator guides tailored to rural and regional conditions. The companion resource compilation represents a first step in this direction, aggregating existing tools and guides that practitioners can draw on while purpose-built rural resources continue to be developed.

References

1. Apostolopoulou, E., Bormpoudakis, D., & Paloniemi, R. (2022). Commons-based approaches to territorial governance and environmental justice. Environmental Politics, 31(4), 612–634.
2. Arashiro, Z. (2017). Mining, social contestation and the reclaiming of voice in Australia's democracy. Social Identities, 23(1), 39–53.
3. Atkinson, W. (2020). The Cummera Walk Off and the Return to Base Camp Politics. University of Melbourne.
4. Australian Conservation Foundation. (2023). ACF Community Toolkit. Australian Conservation Foundation.
5. Baer, H., & Singer, M. (2020). The anti-coal and anti-coal seam gas campaigns as components of the climate movement in Australia: Responses to corporate hegemony. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 31(3), 73–91.
6. Beckerling, J. (2022). Winning Long-game, Collaborative, Grassroots Campaigns: The WA Forest Campaign. Australian Progress.
7. Calibeo, D. (2024). Energy justice and rural community organising in the renewables transition. Australian Geographer, 55(1), 45–62.
8. Calibeo, D., & Hindmarsh, R. (2022). From fake news to echo-chambers: On the limitations of new media for environmental activism in Australia, and "activist-responsive adaptation." Environmental Communication, 16(7), 917–932.
9. Climate Justice Organizing HUB / Climate Reality Project Canada. (2022). Rural and Remote Communities Climate Organizing Toolkit.
10. Colvin, R. M. (2020). Understanding the social dynamics of community opposition to unconventional gas development in Australia. Energy Research & Social Science, 62, 101361.
11. Colvin, R. M., Bradd Witt, G., & Lacey, J. (2015). The social identity of shale gas development: Framing, place attachment and social licence. Environmental Science & Policy, 53, 109–118.
12. Colvin, R. M., Witt, G. B., Louis, W. R., & Ejelöv, E. (2025). Theorising unconventional climate advocates and their relationship to the environmental movement. npj Climate Action, 2, 17.
13. Cretney, R., Thomas, A., & Bond, S. (2016). Maintaining Grassroots Activism: Transition Towns in Aotearoa New Zealand. New Zealand Geographer, 72(2), 81–91.
14. Disability Advocacy Network Australia. (2024). DANA 2024 Submission: NDIS Participant Advocacy. DANA.
15. Davies, A. (2003). Making Space: Women's Urban and Rural Activism and the Australian State. Gender, Place & Culture, 10(2), 113–125.
16. de Vries, S. (2020). Place identity and major project deliberation: The contribution of local governments in Australia. Australian Geographer, 51(4), 407–423.
17. de Vries, S. (2021). The power of procedural policy tools at the local level: Australian local governments contributing to policy change for major projects. Policy and Society, 40(3), 414–431.
18. Divakaran, B., & Nerbonne, J. (2017). Building a climate movement through relational organizing. (Movement Builder Program Study).
19. Dragović, S. (2021). Common action: Can grassroots initiatives propel territorial governance in Montenegro? European Spatial Research and Policy, 28(1), 7–26.
20. Eriksen, T. H. (2018). Scales of environmental engagement in an industrial town: Glocal perspectives from Gladstone, Queensland. Ethnos, 83(3), 493–508.
21. Fisher, D. R. (2020). American Resistance: From the Women's March to the Blue Wave. Columbia University Press.
22. Fisher, R., & Champagne, L. (2024). Training community organizers in the austerity state: Lessons from the field. Journal of Community Practice.
23. Foundation for Rural and Regional Renewal. (2021). Supporting Community-Led Approaches to Disaster Preparedness: Summary Report. FRRR.
24. Friends of the Earth Melbourne. (2010). Victorian Red Gum Forests: An Historic Victory. Friends of the Earth Australia.
25. Fuentes, A., & Nir, L. (2020). Progressive Strategies for Rural Engagement. New Conversation Initiative.
26. Goodman, J., & Morton, T. (2023). Climate movements in Germany, India, and Australia: Dynamics of transition, transformation, and emergency. Globalizations, 20(4), 503–521.
27. Greer, L., Lankester, A., & Lockie, S. (2011). Food, coal or gas? Community action, land-use conflict and procedural fairness in the Surat Basin, Queensland.
28. Hendriks, C. M., & Reid, R. (2023). The Rise and Impact of Australia's Movement for Community Independents. ANU Press.
29. Hindmarsh, R., & Alidoust, S. (2019). Rethinking Australian CSG transitions in participatory contexts of local social conflict, community engagement, and shifts towards cleaner energy. Energy Policy, 135, 111011.
30. Hutton, D. (2013). Lessons from the Lock the Gate Movement. Friends of the Earth / Lock the Gate Alliance.
31. Italiano, R., & Ramirez, F. (2023). Social media for community organizing: The fight to save Oconomowoc Dispatch. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship.
32. Kia, A., & Ricketts, A. (2018). Enabling emergence: The Bentley blockade and the struggle for a gasfield in the Northern Rivers.
33. Liacas, T. (2018). Beyond Command-and-Control Campaigns. Australian Progress.
34. Lloyd, D., Luke, H., & Boyd, W. E. (2013). Community Perspectives of Natural Resource Extraction: Coal-Seam Gas Mining and Social Identity in Eastern Australia. Coolabah, 10, 144–164.
35. Lubicz-Zaorski, M., Ramsey, L., & O'Brien, K. (2023). Identity-protective cognition and climate communication in rural communities. Environmental Communication, 17(3), 315–329.
36. Luke, H. (2017). Social resistance to coal seam gas development in the Northern Rivers region of Eastern Australia: Proposing a diamond model of social license to operate. Land Use Policy, 69, 266–280.
37. MacNeil, R., & Beauman, M. (2022). Understanding resistance to just transition ideas in Australian coal communities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 44, 1–11.
38. Macpherson-Rice, B., de Rijke, K., et al. (2020). Energy solution or future pollution? Applying an energy justice perspective to coal seam gas in New South Wales. Australian Geographer, 51(2), 197–214.
39. Marshall, J. (2023). Disputes over coal mining and gas drilling in an Australian country town. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15(1), 46–68.
40. Marshall, S., & Pearse, R. (2024). Reading the room: Developing a practical justice politics of regional energy transition. Environmental Politics, 33(2), 230–252.
41. Mercer, A., de Rijke, K., & Dressler, W. (2014). Silences in the boom: Coal seam gas, neoliberalizing discourse, and the future of regional Australia. Journal of Political Ecology, 21, 279–302.
42. Mihaylov, N. L. (2020). Pathways to empowerment: Community-based conservation and local environmental governance in rural Bulgaria. Society & Natural Resources, 33(2), 196–214.
43. Minkler, M., Acosta, M., et al. (2019). Growing equity and health equity in perilous times: Lessons from community organizers. Health Education & Behavior, 46(1_suppl), 9S–18S.
44. Nolan, K. & Macleod, J. (2019). Building Power: A Guide for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders Who Want to Change the World. Original Power / Pasifika.
45. Norman, H. (2016). Coal mining and coal seam gas on Gomeroi country: Sacred lands, economic futures and shifting alliances. Energy Policy, 99, 242–251.
46. Ollis, T. (2020a). Adult learning, circumstantial activism and ecological habitus in the coal seam gas protests. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 36(3), 213–228.
47. Ollis, T. (2020b). Adult learning and circumstantial activism in the coal seam gas protests: Informal and incidental learning in an environmental justice movement. Studies in the Education of Adults, 52(2), 165–182.
48. Ollis, T. (2021). Informal and nonformal adult learning in the coal seam gas protests: Mobilizing practices and building an environmental justice movement for change. Adult Education Quarterly, 71(4), 349–366.
49. Ollis, T., & Hamel-Green, M. (2015). Adult education and radical habitus in an environmental campaign: Learning in the coal seam gas protests in Australia. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 55(3), 390–410.
50. Ommer, R. et al. (2022). Creating Effective Research Partnerships with Rural Communities: A Community-Based Participatory Research Framework. Rural Society, 31(1), 14–28.
51. Partnerships for Local Action and Community Empowerment (PLACE). (2022). Empowering Communities through Strategic Communication. PLACE.
52. Ransan-Cooper, H., Mackay, M., & Lacey, J. (2018). Land, identity and the winds of change: Negotiating community trust in rural wind energy projects in Australia. Society & Natural Resources, 31(4), 382–397.
53. Rennie, K. (2021). Meet Lock the Gate Alliance: Australia's Grassroots Environmental Campaign. Global Voices.
54. Rosewarne, S., Goodman, J., & Pearse, R. (2014). Climate action upsurge: The ethnography of climate movement politics.
55. Rural Organizing Project. (2016). Developing Leader-Organizers. Rural Organizing Project, Oregon.
56. Rural Organizing Project. (2018). Building a Statewide Network. Rural Organizing Project, Oregon.
57. Rural Organizing Project. (2019). Starting From Common Values. Rural Organizing Project, Oregon.
58. Spirit in Action / Blueprint NC. (2021). How Rural Organizing Can Build Power. Spirit in Action.
59. The Next Economy. (2026). Navigating the Energy Transition in 2026. The Next Economy.
60. The Next Economy / FRRR. (2023). Striking a New Deal for Renewables in Regions. Foundation for Rural and Regional Renewal.
61. Timbers, V. L., & Ballard, S. (2024). Grassroots activism impacting rural LGBTQIA+ communities. Advances in Social Work.
62. Titus, A., & Kuch, D. (2014). Emerging dimensions of networked energy citizenship: The case of coal seam gas mobilisation in Australia. Communication, Politics & Culture, 47(1), 19–37.
63. Voice for Indi. (2021). Voices for Indi Kitchen Table Report. Voice for Indi Community Group.
64. Voice for Indi. (2022). Voice for Indi 'Reflections'. Voice for Indi Community Group.
65. Weller, S. A. (2018). Just transition? Strategic framing and the challenges facing coal dependent communities. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 36(8), 1456–1475.
66. Williams, T., Lakhani, A., & Spelten, E. (2020). Strengthening Collaboration through Collective Impact: A Rural Australian Experience. Rural Society, 29(2), 73–88.
67. Worth, D. (2008). The WA Forest Conflict: The Construction of Political Effectiveness. Environmental Politics, 17(3), 432–448.