Abstract: There are ongoing debates in the contemporary environment and development literature regarding the role of scientific, local and indigenous participation in sustainable development initiatives. The debates have been critical of the supremacy of western scientific knowledge in such initiatives, with some academics asserting that science can be imperialistic, and its application can sometimes lead to social inequity and exclusion. In response, local and Indigenous knowledges have been offered as providing a panacea for all environment and development problems. This thesis argues that in Australia the meta-narrative of ecologically sustainable development is in fact unsustainable because it perpetuates the intra- and inter-generational inequalities that it is supposedly meant to overcome. This is because the meta-narrative of ecologically sustainable development separates ways of knowing the world into dichotomies of self/other and universal scientific knowledge versus place-based local knowledge. The thesis argues that equitable and sustainable ecologically sustainable development is dependant upon moving beyond these dichotomies. The research questions what lies between the complex sets of knowledge of best practice environmental management at the local environmental management and community development interface in Australia. An investigation is conducted into the knowledge synergy that is, or indeed is not, occurring between government organisations, non-government organisations, local community groups and individuals involved with two environmental management and community development projects in Australia. One project works across interest groups to protect and enhance threatened species habitat in Victoria. The other project considers what it means to manage fire across different land tenures in the Northern Territory. These case studies act as points of access into the localised knowledge networks surrounding environmental governance and management in Australia. They give life to the thesis critique and relevance to the practical outcomes. Part 1 grounds the thesis within the discipline and practice of critical human geography. Part 2 locates the thesis within the contemporary environment and development literatures. It demonstrates an applied peoples’ geography to consider the power and the potential of local spaces of environmental management and community development. Part 3 practices this applied peoples’ geography. It illustrates how the political, cultural, knowledge and social landscapes of any environmental management and community development project reflect the diverse knowledges of the environment in Australia. Understanding these complex landscapes provides the means for moving beyond ‘them and us’ dichotomies inherent to the meta-narrative of ecologically sustainable development in Australia. Part 4 demonstrates that knowledge of best practice environmental management move across and between multiple, networked and entangled local spaces of environmental governance. Individuals choose to engage with these local spaces of management for a variety of social livelihood reasons. As such, projects have a responsibility to deliver both tangible management outcomes and intangible social processes for ecologically sustainable development. Part 5 illustrates that the success of any environmental management and community development project is contingent upon acknowledging the value, the power and the limitations of local community knowledge. Equally, project success depends upon recognising the many varieties of local knowledge at the environmental management and community development interface. Equitable and successful ecologically sustainable development in Australia depends upon improved knowledge sharing and knowledge synergies between these many knowledge cultures. Part 6 demonstrates that improving knowledge sharing at the local environmental management and community development interface is contingent upon four applied principles. Engaging in activities that complement these principles will result in the social action necessary to celebrate what lies between the different ways of knowing and managing the environment in Australia. This research contributes to debates in the environment and development literature. It demonstrates what it means to move beyond the above mentioned dichotomies. It informs contemporary environmental governance and management policy and practice in Australia. It highlights the importance of diversity in overcoming issues of social and environment degradation. It sheds light on the local spaces of power and knowledge of two environmental management and community development projects. It illustrates the potential of and the necessary processes for increased knowledge sharing and synergy at the local environmental management and community development interface.