Improving NRM Investment through a policy performance lens

Choosing a mechanism to encourage landholders to change their land management in order to deliver environmental outcomes is a complicated process. Careful instrument selection may count for little if uptake and adoption are insufficient to meet performance targets. Similarly, investors may require assurance that the proposed investment will deliver the stated goals. In order to reduce the uptake uncertainty facing policy makers we evaluate and describe several possible methods to guide and frame adoption targets. We conclude that referring to past adoption experience of a wide range of mechanisms offers the best approach to setting feasible adoption targets for future mechanisms. We call this adoption points of reference. This approach is tested by application to mechanisms focusing on delivering water quality improvements in GBR catchments. We conclude that the points of reference approach is appropriate and useful but should be supported by processes designed to incorporate the impact of heterogeneity and local knowledge and an emphasis on improving the accuracy of future data.adoption targets, NRM investment, reasonable assurance, water quality,

Where are the hot spots of ecosystem services?

Ecosystem services (ES) are the bridge between nature and society, and are essential elements of any community's wellbeing. Australia is a place of diverse climates with a narrow band of wet tropics in Far North Queensland. The Wet Tropics is environmentally diverse, iconic in biodiversity, and supplies numerous ES influencing community wellbeing of this region, Australian national economy, and global climate change mitigation efforts. However ES in the Wet Tropics have rarely been assessed. We dealt with two questions: i) how are ES spatially distributed across the Wet Tropics, ii) where are the hot spots of ES production. We have classified the Wet Tropics forests into four types: coastal eucalypt forests and wood lands, coastal rainforests, eucalypts hills and ranges, and wet highland rainforests. Vegetation data metrics have been collected from 70 plots of 0.05 ha each located from coast to more than 1000m above msl. We have spatially assessed the ES in these forest types. We have found spatial congruence and differences of ES production across the forest types. Different forests types have produced different ES in higher quantity. Our study has revealed that hot spots of ES production are widely distributed across the different forests types in the Wet Tropics. Disturbance regimes (cyclones, forest fire) and conservation priority in management options have also influenced the usual spatial trend of ES production. This study shall be useful for decision makers to incorporate ES into their natural resource management planning, and for practitioners to evaluate areas identified with ES significance

Ecosystem services based adaptation to climate change: why and how?

Ecosystem services (ES) are the benefits community receive from ecosystems. The necessity of ES for community well-being and sustainable development is universally accepted. ES have already been negatively impacted by climate change and will only deteriorate further during this century, if adequate adaptation measures are not taken. Noting ES are a relatively new dimension in the context of climate change, globally scientists and policy makers are busy searching for suitable adaptation options and ensuring an uninterrupted flow of ES. In this study, we have used climate change models, and synthesized the scholarly findings to answer two research questions (i) Why are ES based adaptations required? and (ii) What types of suitable adaptation options are available to ensure an uninterrupted supply (and flow) of ES? The study has been conducted in the Wet Tropics, Australia considering its outstanding national and global ecological significance. Our study has revealed that apart from the temporal and spatial variation, the magnitude of climate change impacts will be different for each ES. Therefore ES-based adaptations will ensure a sustainable supply and flow of ES, generating multiple ecological and community co-benefits. We have found a number of available adaptation options for different ES with substantial scientific evidence in the scholarly findings which can be implemented quite readily in the face of climate change. Some of these are: climate regulation- natural forests protection, agroforestry, planting higher wood density trees; water provision and regulation- upland forests protection, riparian restoration; coastal protection and erosion control- mangrove protection and landward facilitation, restoration of littoral forests, coastal plantation, green engineering; habitat provision-ecological connectivity, agroforestry; timber provision-planting tropical cyclone resistant trees. This study shall be useful for decision makers to incorporate suitable ES based adaptation options into their climate change related decisions, and for practitioners to select suitable adaptation options for interested ES

Participatory evaluation of co-management in wet tropics country: interim report

This technical report contributes to the December 2013 Milestone for the National Environmental Research Program (NERP) Tropical Ecosystem Hub (TEH) Project 12.1 Indigenous co-management and biodiversity protection. The overall goal of this co-research is to interrogate the capability of Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) and other collaborative planning models and mechanisms to provide the means for effective engagement of Indigenous knowledge and comanagement for biodiversity and cultural protection in the region; and to provide for joint management of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area between governments and Rainforest Aboriginal people, in partnership with communities. Our definition of co-management as a continual solution-building process, not a fixed state, involving extensive talking, negotiating together and jointly learning so it gets better over time, underpins our derived framework of comanagement (see Fig 2). This framework, that includes thirteen separate but related parts that can be grouped into two features of co-management (Rainforest Aboriginal Peoples Keeping Strong; and Keeping Engagement Strong), guides the participatory evaluation shared in this report. The framework was refined from earlier project work (see Maclean et al, 2012), ongoing discussions with the project co-research team and a regional participatory workshop held in October 2012 (Hill et al. 2012). The results reported here are located within the second phase of a three year co-research project, providing an interim participatory evaluation of co-management in wet tropics country, NE Australia1. Both qualitative and a quantitative data contribute to the evaluation which was conducted together with Rainforest Aboriginal peoples in two separate workshops. Workshop one was hosted by Girringun Aboriginal Corporation in Cardwell on 23 November 2013, and brought forward data informed by the nine tribal groups that are represented therein. Workshop two was hosted by the Rainforest Aboriginal People’s Alliance as part of the ‘Warrama: for Rainforest Country, Kin and Culture’ held at Genzanno 28 November-1st December 2013. This workshop brought forward data informed by the wider twenty tribal groups across the region of wet tropics country. A health rating of 1 to 5 (where 1=very sick; 5=excellent health) was given to three indicators (structures, processes and results) for each part of the framework at both workshops, and the reasons for the ratings discussed in small groups. This Interim Report presents a quantitative analysis of data from both the Girringun and RAP Workshops, but qualitative and spatial analysis of only the Girringun data. The short time frame between the regional RAP workshop and the data for report submission did not allow for a full analysis of the data, which will be included in the Final Participatory Evaluation Report in June 2014. This Final Report will also include data from participatory workshops with governments and other partners involved in co-management of wet tropics country Both the Girringun and RAP workshops evaluated the structures, processes and results for the Rainforest Aboriginal Peoples Keeping Strong parts of the framework as in better health than thethose for Keeping Engagement Strong. The results of participatory evaluations reported here resonate with the concept of the creation of an equitable intercultural space as the key means of achieving co-management (Hibbard et al. 2008; Hill 2011). Indigenous Protected Areas were identified as the most useful tool for creating an equitable intercultural space, due to their\adaptability and flexibility, providing opportunities for effective collaboration with government and others

Participatory evaluation of co-management in wet tropics country: interim report

This technical report contributes to the December 2013 Milestone for the National Environmental Research Program (NERP) Tropical Ecosystem Hub (TEH) Project 12.1 Indigenous co-management and biodiversity protection. The overall goal of this co-research is to interrogate the capability of Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs) and other collaborative planning models and mechanisms to provide the means for effective engagement of Indigenous knowledge and comanagement for biodiversity and cultural protection in the region; and to provide for joint management of the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area between governments and Rainforest Aboriginal people, in partnership with communities. Our definition of co-management as a continual solution-building process, not a fixed state, involving extensive talking, negotiating together and jointly learning so it gets better over time, underpins our derived framework of comanagement (see Fig 2). This framework, that includes thirteen separate but related parts that can be grouped into two features of co-management (Rainforest Aboriginal Peoples Keeping Strong; and Keeping Engagement Strong), guides the participatory evaluation shared in this report. The framework was refined from earlier project work (see Maclean et al, 2012), ongoing discussions with the project co-research team and a regional participatory workshop held in October 2012 (Hill et al. 2012). The results reported here are located within the second phase of a three year co-research project, providing an interim participatory evaluation of co-management in wet tropics country, NE Australia1. Both qualitative and a quantitative data contribute to the evaluation which was conducted together with Rainforest Aboriginal peoples in two separate workshops. Workshop one was hosted by Girringun Aboriginal Corporation in Cardwell on 23 November 2013, and brought forward data informed by the nine tribal groups that are represented therein. Workshop two was hosted by the Rainforest Aboriginal People’s Alliance as part of the ‘Warrama: for Rainforest Country, Kin and Culture’ held at Genzanno 28 November-1st December 2013. This workshop brought forward data informed by the wider twenty tribal groups across the region of wet tropics country. A health rating of 1 to 5 (where 1=very sick; 5=excellent health) was given to three indicators (structures, processes and results) for each part of the framework at both workshops, and the reasons for the ratings discussed in small groups. This Interim Report presents a quantitative analysis of data from both the Girringun and RAP Workshops, but qualitative and spatial analysis of only the Girringun data. The short time frame between the regional RAP workshop and the data for report submission did not allow for a full analysis of the data, which will be included in the Final Participatory Evaluation Report in June 2014. This Final Report will also include data from participatory workshops with governments and other partners involved in co-management of wet tropics country Both the Girringun and RAP workshops evaluated the structures, processes and results for the Rainforest Aboriginal Peoples Keeping Strong parts of the framework as in better health than thethose for Keeping Engagement Strong. The results of participatory evaluations reported here resonate with the concept of the creation of an equitable intercultural space as the key means of achieving co-management (Hibbard et al. 2008; Hill 2011). Indigenous Protected Areas were identified as the most useful tool for creating an equitable intercultural space, due to their\adaptability and flexibility, providing opportunities for effective collaboration with government and others

Climate change impacts and adaptation pathways on key regional ecosystem services in the Wet Tropics NRM Cluster Region, Australia

Climate change alters the functions of ecosystems and as a result, the provision of ecosystem services and wellbeing of people that rely on these services. The concept of ecosystem services is aimed at supporting this broad and open dialogue in ways that allow potential synergies and tradeoffs among social, economic and ecological objectives to be identified and addressed with due reference to the multiple perceptions that people have about benefits and beneficiaries from the environment. In this paper we discuss insights about the impacts of climate change on key regional ecosystem services for the Wet Tropics. Syntheses of published ideas and approaches are presented with key climate change messages for NRM groups to enable them to incorporate into their new regional plans for the Wet Tropics Cluster Region

Is investment in Indigenous land and sea management going to the right places to provide multiple co-benefits?

Indigenous land and sea management (ILSM) has been the focus of large government investment in Australia and globally. Beyond environmental benefits, such investments can deliver a suite of social, cultural and economic co-benefits, aligning with the objectives of Indigenous communities and of governments for culturally appropriate socio-economic development. Nevertheless, there have been very few studies done on the spatial distribution of this investment and the extent to which its associated co-benefits address socio-economic disadvantage, which is unevenly distributed across Australia. This study draws on Australian ILSM programmes to examine the spatial and temporal distribution of investment for ILSM between 2002–2012 and considers implications for the distribution of associated co-benefits. Mapping and analysis of 2600 conservation projects revealed that at least $462M of investment in ILSM projects had occurred at 750 discrete sites throughout Australia. More than half of this investment in ILSM has been concentrated in northern Australia, in disadvantaged remote and very remote areas where a high percentage of the population is Indigenous, and Indigenous land ownership extensive. Our research has shown that ILSM investment has successfully been spatially distributed to areas with high needs for multiple social, economic, environmental and health and well-being co-benefit outcomes

Valuing ecosystem services in complex coastal settings: An extended ecosystem accounting framework for improved decision-making

What gets measured gets managed is an axiom common to the business world that also applies to the management of environmental assets and processes. But what is the most adequate way to measure ecosystem value to optimise ecosystem management? In this paper, we unpack three valuation frameworks often applied in understanding ecosystem services and their benefits: 1) the Ecosystem Services framework, operationalised by the United Nations System of Environmental Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) framework; 2) value-centric approaches operationalised by the Total Economic Value framework; and 3) First Nations Peoples (FNP) frameworks, which seek to capture values from FNPs’ perspective. By assessing the strengths and weaknesses of these value frameworks for managing the World’s largest reef ecosystem—the Australian Great Barrier Reef—we construct an extended SEEA-EA valuation framework tailored to complex coastal settings. The significance of our approach is the inclusion of the whole range of benefits from all coastal and marine uses and users and therefore the integration of non-market and FNP values into the more traditional market-based valuation approach. Assessments that jointly consider multiple values originating from these three different frameworks are more likely to produce sustainable management outcomes than more restrictive approaches

Are Indigenous land and sea management programs a pathway to Indigenous economic independence?

This paper focuses on Indigenous business development, an under-researched co-benefit associated with investment in Indigenous land and sea management programs (ILSMPs) in northern Australia. More than 65% of ILSMPs undertake commercial activities that generate revenue and create jobs. In addition to generating environmental benefits, ILSMPs thus also generate economic benefits (co-benefits) that support Indigenous aspirations and help to deliver multiple government objectives. We outline key features of northern Australian economies, identifying factors that differentiate them from Western urbanised economies. We discuss literature highlighting that, if the aim is to stimulate (short-term) economic development in northern Indigenous economies, then the requirement is to stimulate demand for goods and services that are produced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (herein referred to as Indigenous people), and which generate benefits that align with the goals and aspirations of Indigenous people. We also discuss literature demonstrating the importance of promoting a socio-cultural environment that stimulates creativity, which is a core driver of innovation, business development and long-term development. ILSMPs have characteristics suggestive of an ability to kick-start self-sustaining growth cycles, but previous research has not investigated this. Using 8 years of data relating to Indigenous businesses that are registered with the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations (a subset of all Indigenous businesses), we use statistical tests (Granger causality tests) to check whether ILSMP expenditure in the first year has a positive impact on Indigenous business activity in subsequent years. This analysis (of admittedly imperfect data) produces evidence to support the proposition that expenditure on ILSMPs generates positive spillovers for Indigenous businesses (even those not engaged in land management), albeit with a 3-year lag. ILSMPs have been shown to be an appropriate mechanism for achieving a wide range of short-term benefits; our research suggests they may also work as catalysts for Indigenous business development, fostering sustainable economic independence