Farming smarter, not harder: securing our agricultural economy

In the context of rising global demand, resource scarcity, and environmental pressures, this report considers the future of Australian agriculture. Global populations are growing and food prices are skyrocketing. This creates new market opportunities for Australian agriculture. But Australia has fragile and vulnerable soils, which are being degraded at an unsustainable rate. If we continue with ‘business as usual’, we will keep losing soils faster than they can be replaced. Acting now to improve soil condition could increase agricultural production by up to 2.1 billion per year. It could also help farmers cut costs on fertiliser and water use. “Winners of the food boom will be countries with less fossil fuel intensive agriculture, more reliable production, and access to healthy land and soils” said the report’s lead author Laura Eadie. “How we manage our land and soils will be key to whether Australia sees more of the upsides or downsides of rising global food demand.” Farming Smarter, Not Harder finds that Australian agriculture can build a lasting competitive advantage through innovation that raises agricultural productivity, reduces fuel and fertiliser dependence, and preserves the environment and resources it draws on. To achieve this, Australia needs to: Invest in knowledge: increase government investment in research and development by up to 7% a year; increase funding for extension programs; implement the Productivity Commission’s recommendation to set up Rural Research Australia; fund the national soil health strategy with an endowment sufficient to support ongoing research and monitoring for at least 20 years. Stop chopping and changing support for regional natural resource management: Federal and State governments should commit to a 10-year agreement to provide stable longterm funding for regional Natural Resource Management (NRM) bodies, including specific funding to monitor long-term trends in natural resource condition. Enable accountable community governance of land and soil management: To enable farming communities to protect themselves from free-riding, they should be supported to develop stewardship standards based on a shared understanding of what it takes to maintain productive agricultural landscapes over the long term. Align financial incentives with the long-term needs of sustainable farming communities: In addition to the drought policy reforms announced on October 26, drought assistance policies should support farming communities to take a lead in preparations for more frequent and severe droughts, and should be linked to community stewardship standards. “Recent projections indicate the potential doubling of exports by 2050, according to the National Food Plan and ANZ-commissioned Greener Pastures report. Our work looks at how to support farmers dealing with the practical challenges of seizing this opportunity, in the context of soil degradation and rising input costs”, said Laura Eadie. The case to increase research funding and foster innovative farming is made even stronger by the likely impacts of climate change. Without action to adapt to more variable and extreme weather, by 2050 Australia could lose 6.5 billion per year in wheat, beef, mutton, lamb and dairy production. The report profiles leading farmers who are already seeing the benefits of innovations in sustainable farming. It proposes simple measures to support them and the agricultural communities that depend on healthy farming landscapes. Download Farming Smarter, Not Harder report in full [Australia\u27s newly appointed Advocate for Soil Health, Michael Jeffery, also chairs the non-profit organisation Soils for Life which is already actively encouraging wider adoption of smarter farming. The Soils for Life report Innovations for Regenerative Landscape Management showcases a range of case studies of these farming innovations in practise, and the positive economic, environmental and social outcomes they are achieving. Read the case studies, learn more about the challenges landscape degradation will bring and what we can do about it at www.soilsforlife.org.au.

Preserving our marine wealth: an economic evaluation of the proposed Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network

This report looks at the proven benefits of marine parks for fish stocks (and therefore for the fishing industry), and estimates the value of ecosystem services provided by areas to be covered by the new marine parks. It also puts the modest and short-term economic impacts of the new marine reserves on the fishing industry in context, noting the need to avoid the flaws in the Great Barrier Reef compensation package, and looking at the advantages of designing compensation to support the long-term profitability of commercial fishers in Australia. Key findings: • CPD’s analysis shows that the new National Marine Parks in the Proposed Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network cover an area that provides $1.2 billion a year in ecosystem service value that is not recognised in our economic accounts, bringing the total value of Australia’s fully-protected Marine Parks to$2 billion a year in ecosystem services. • CPD has estimated the value of ecosystem services covered by the fully-protected National Parks only. We have calculated the economic value provided by four categories of marine ecosystem: coral reefs, seagrasses, coastal shelf and open ocean. Each of these areas provides services of value such as nurseries for fish, carbon storage, etc. • Australia can be very proud of having taken such a strong step to protect its marine resources. Preserving the marine environment will help to secure Australia’s marine economy, underpinning the long-term productivity of our marine estate. • The Proposed Marine Reserves Network covers 36% of Australia’s marine territory. The fully- protected part, the National Marine Parks, cover 13% of the total. In the other 23% recreational fishing is allowed and some kinds of commercial fishing, varying by zoning. Most of the reserve restricts the most damaging forms of fishing including bottom trawling – this is likely to deliver long- term benefits for recreational fishers and commercial fishers using more sustainable practices. • The National Marine Parks, areas closed to fishing, are an essential part of preserving marine ecosystems and marine life, including fishing for the longer term. Given the high economic value provided by coral reefs, seagrasses, and coastal shelf areas, more of these areas should have been included in marine parks under the Proposed Marine Reserves Network • Marine parks have been shown to have numerous benefits, leading to larger fish and more biodiversity. The parks make marine ecosystems more resilient to environmental shocks and act as restocking areas for the surrounding waters. Studies show that in the long run they provide benefits to fishers. Recent studies on marine parks in the Great Barrier Reef find that they are working as they are supposed to – rebuilding the biomass of local fish populations in ways that are likely to deliver long-term benefits to fishers. • The Great Barrier Reef compensation package, which blew out to $250 million, would form a very poor precedent for compensating fishers who are displaced by the Marine Reserves Network. The Finance Minister at the time, Nick Minchin, thought that the Great Barrier Reef package was too large. Initial estimates of the value of fishing production displaced by the Great Barrier Reef rezoning were$14 million a year, but dropped to $3-$7 million after accounting for the fact that many fishers were able to shift to other areas. Initial estimates are that $11.1 million a year of commercial fishing production may be displaced by the newly announced Marine Reserves Network.$100 million, a figure flagged by Minister Tony Burke as available for compensation, would be a generous compensation package. • Compensation should be implemented along the lines of the ‘Securing our Fishing Future’ package to ease rather than displace long-term pressures on fish stocks and the profitability of the fishing industry

Going solar: renewing Australia’s electricity options

Recent debates around electricity prices and renewable energy policy have ignored the crucial factors of rapidly dropping solar technology costs, and the critical risks involved in continuing with \u27business as usual\u27. Going solar is the first economic assessment of future electricity price shocks if fossil fuels continue to dominate. The report takes a close look at Australia’s electricity price security and singles out rising gas prices and more frequent droughts as key risks. Prices for gas-fired electricity are now linked to volatile international fuel prices. Water scarcity reduces supply from water-cooled coal plants, pushing up wholesale electricity prices. Without stable policies to support renewable energy, we risk future bill shocks of up to $250 a year for the average household, plus supply interruptions. Embracing the shift to renewable energy – a line powerfully supported by trends in the USA and China – can reduce vulnerability to electricity price shocks and energy insecurity. Rising popularity and rapidly falling costs put rooftop solar at the leading edge of this change, threatening traditional electricity business models

All boom, no benefit?

This paper responds to the draft Queensland Plan, asking where economic growth will come from to lift incomes above the rest of Australia. All boom, no benefit?  from the Centre for Policy Development argues Queensland must chart a new course toward reliable, sustainable and equitably distributed growth – or face a future of fewer jobs and economic disruption. Queensland is at a fork in the road. The days of easy coal mining revenue are running out, and Queensland’s incomes are yet to match the rest of Australia. In fact, average Queensland household incomes are 5 per cent below the national average. Experience from previous mining booms suggests incomes may fall further behind as the investment phase of the latest mining boom cools. A new era of global growth will challenge the performance of commodity exporting economies. Focusing on economic diversity is now more important because the structure of the global economy is changing rapidly. The transformation underway is unlikely to be smooth. Slowing demand for coal, a new economic growth model in China, and high commodity price volatility are likely to be permanent features of the next phase of global growth. Key findings from the report include: Coal prices have dropped at least 30 per cent from their 2008 highs, and the rest of Asia is unlikely to replace falling Chinese demand. China’s new growth model will reshape Queensland’s economy, since it represents Queensland’s largest export market. Exports to China were Queensland’s largest growth point over the past decade, increasing from $1 billion to over$9 billion. A tripling in commodity price volatility will challenge Queensland’s less competitive mines and impact government budgets. Agribusiness, tourism, education, health and wealth management are industries forecast to grow rapidly over coming decades, while mining is forecast to grow slower than global GDP. Only 26 per cent of jobs from new mines and related infrastructure are long-term. The draft Queensland Plan shows Queenslanders understand these risks and want to develop a much more diverse economy to prepare for them. The Queensland Plan represents a step in the right direction toward governing for the future – if it has staying power through multiple election cycles and no gaps in its measures of progress. If Queensland misses this opportunity to chart a new path, it is likely to be forced through a rapid economic transit ion as underperforming industries and their assets become stranded. The report recommends Queensland adopt a new economic strategy that focuses less on attracting capital investment, and more on promoting economic diversity. To capitalise on its natural competitive advantages, Queensland should level the playing field for non-mining industries, establish an endowment fund to manage natural resources, and convene a State Summit to identify growth opportunities. Download the All boom, no benefit? report by Laura Eadie and Michael Hayman Read more about the Too Many Ports report showing the under-utilisation in Queensland’s existing ports and questioning the need for port growth

Rapid literature review of smoking cessation and tobacco control issues across criminal justice system settings

This review was undertaken to inform the development of the Regional Criminal Justice Coordinator role in the North West Region. It was conducted by the Institute for Social Marketing at the University of Stirling and involved a rapid review of literature on smoking cessation and tobacco control issues across criminal justice system (CJS) settings, namely prisons, probation services, police and courts

Evaluated interventions to reduce alcohol-related harm among young people

First paragraph: The European Alcohol and Health Forum (EAHF) Task Force on youth-specific aspects of alcohol recommended the development of a database resource that could be used to share information on good practice projects intended to reduce alcohol-related harms among young people. The working title for the initiative during the preparation of this report is the Resource on Alcohol and Youth Projects (RAYPRO)

Natural History of Stuttering to 4 Years of Age: A Prospective Community-Based Study

These findings from a community-ascertained cohort refute long-held views suggesting that developmental stuttering is associated with a range of poorer outcomes. If anything, the reverse was true, with stuttering predicting subsequently better language,nonverbal skills, and psychosocial health-related quality of life at 4 years of age.Future research with this cohort will support a more complete longitudinal understanding of when and in whom recovery occurs. Current best practice recommends waiting for 12 monthsbefore commencing treatment, unlessthe child is distressed, there is parental concern, or the child becomes reluctant to communicate. It may be that for many children treatment could be deferred even longer. Treatment is efficacious15 but is both intensive (median of 15.4o ne-hour clinical sessions followedby 10 one-hour clinical maintenance sessions) and expensive; this "watchful waiting" recommendation would therefore help target allocation of scarce resources to the small number of children who do not resolve and experience adverse outcomes, secure in the knowledge that delaying treatment by a year or more has been shown not to compromise treatment efficac

A review of the effectiveness of smokefree strategies and interventions in secondary care settings

The aim of this review was to systematically review the effectiveness of smokefree strategies and interventions in secondary care settings (acute, maternity and mental health settings). The initial search and screening stages were combined with a parallel review of the barriers to and facilitators for implementing smokefree strategies and interventions in secondary care settings conducted by members of the same research team.The review aimed to address the following questions:Question 1: How effective are strategies and interventions for ensuring compliance with smokefree legislation and local smokefree policies in secondary care settings?Subsidiary question: How does the effectiveness vary for different population groups, health status or speciality care services?Question 2: Are there any unintended consequences from adopting smokefree approaches in acute and maternity care settings?Question 3: Are there any unintended consequences from adopting smokefree approaches in mental healthcare settings?As the extent of evidence on the effectiveness of smokefree strategies was limited to two studies for Question 1, the data are also presented from identified effectiveness studies with a comparative design to measure indicators of compliance in settings which had a smokefree policy with at least one supporting strategy covering the whole estate or an indoors-only policy