Looking back to look forward: a timeline of the Fitzroy River catchment. Report to the Australian Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

Given proposed expansion of developments in northern Australia and current tensions among different interest groups, there is a need to develop new planning approaches that support multiple uses of land and water, while maintaining environmental and cultural values. Our project aimed to demonstrate how to operationalise multi-objective catchment planning supported by scenario thinking, by which stakeholders collaboratively build and assess the outcomes of alternative development futures. The project used participatory scenario planning to guide stakeholders through a systematic and critical examination of possible development trajectories and their associated environmental and socioeconomic outcomes. A multi-stakeholder group worked through a series of workshops to explore alternative development pathways and their outcomes. On July 10-11, NESP researchers led the first project workshop, gathering 40 people from 26 organisations across all main interest groups, including the federal Department of the Environment and Energy, state agencies, local governments, mining, agriculture and tourism organisations, environmental NGOs, and Aboriginal organisations representing the views and interests of Traditional Owners. The workshop involved a series of activities for team members to get to know each other, strengthen relationships, and build trust – all critical elements of participatory scenario planning. During the workshop, we discussed the meaning of development, driving forces of land use change, and development initiatives proposed for the region. An important goal of the first workshop was to create shared understandings of what is happening in the region that could shape the future development of the catchment. Therefore, before exploring the future, we looked back into the past. We created a timeline for the Fitzroy, identifying the events and forces that have shaped how the catchment looks today and could drive land use change in the future. Such events included social movements, policy changes, resource exploration, early irrigation projects, road improvements, and the proclamation of the Native Title Act that recognizes the rights and interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in land and waters according to their traditional laws and customs, among many others. This report summarises the process underpinning the creation of a timeline of the Fitzroy River catchment. For this timeline, the group identified the things that have changed the region and shaped the way things are today. Building this timeline helped participants to understand and share ideas about driving forces of land-use change. This activity opened up thinking on how local and external events and processes have shaped and will continue to change the region. The Story Map referred to in this report (Looking back to look forward: A timeline of the Fitzroy River catchment) was created based on the timeline. The online application combines text, images, and maps to describe a series of key events that have shaped the Fitzroy catchment

Future scenarios for the Fitzroy River catchment: summary of key findings relevant to the WA Government Discussion Paper

We summarise the significant components and findings from NESP project 1.6 (Multi-objective planning in northern Australia: co-benefits and trade-offs between environmental, economic, and cultural outcomes). In particular, we discuss results relevant to the Western Australia government's draft paper 'Managing water in the Fitzroy River Catchment – Discussion paper for stakeholder consultation'. Specifically, we provide comments regarding the seven components of the draft paper: (1) adaptive management, (2) policy on dams, (3) groundwater extraction, (4) surface water harvesting, (5) opportunities for Aboriginal economic development, (6) regulatory requirements, and (7) water development options posed by the WA government for the consideration by stakeholders

A systematic literature review of non-market valuation of Indigenous peoples’ values: Current knowledge, best-practice and framing questions for future research

Non-market valuation (NMV) can be effective to understand the value people place on ecosystem goods and services for which there are no market prices. Over the last 20 years, NMV has increasingly been applied to Indigenous contexts, albeit with important conceptual and methodological limitations. We conduct a global systematic literature review and detailed meta-synthesis of 63 peer-reviewed studies on NMV research applied to Indigenous peoples’ values. Selected studies are categorized by methods, year of publication, geographic area and ecosystem components. Australia (n = 19), the USA (n = 9) and Canada (n = 8) account for over half of all articles. Important knowledge gaps remain in the NMV peer–reviewed literature for other geographic areas. Our taxonomy based on ‘whose values’ and ‘which values’ reveals that a large proportion of studies (n = 24) focused on values held by Indigenous peoples, predominately on direct-use values (n = 12) and total economic values (n = 10). Studies based on the general population (n = 17) typically examined altruistic and/or existence values (n = 15). Our analysis identified seven main strategies used by previous studies to overcome critical limitations of NMV when applied to Indigenous peoples’ values. Strategies include: (1) engaging directly and ethically with Indigenous peoples; (2) investigating multi-dimensional values; (3) valuing health benefits; (4) adopting nonmonetary payment vehicles; (5) using market prices for valuation; (6) sampling the broad population; and (7) investigating non-cumulative values. Based on this review, we provide seven critical questions to guide future NMV research: (1) What is the purpose?; (2) How does Indigenous knowledge inform NMV?; (3) Who benefits?, (4) What ethical frameworks apply?; (5) Whose values are considered?; (6) What is the expected change?; and (7) How are NMV limitations handled? Our contribution provides researchers and policy-makers with the most upto- date review of the state-of-knowledge and suggestions for best-practice on the use of NMV methods when applied to Indigenous peoples’ values.This research was undertaken under the auspices of the Water Justice Hub and was funded, in part, by the Australian Research Council grant FL190100164 ‘Water Justice: Indigenous Water valuation and Resilient Decision-making. This funding supported Ana Manero, Kat Taylor, Alaya Spencer-Cotton, Mai Nguyen and R. Quentin Grafton. The Gathering Voices Society, Vancouver British Columbia, supported William Nikolakis

Public preferences for marine park design in Western Australia

● Effective design and planning of marine protected areas requires an understanding of the socioeconomic uses and values that exist for the proposed marine area. Inevitably, different stakeholders will have different preferences for the spatial design of the no-take sanctuary zones within a marine park. One key stakeholder group that is often missing from marine park planning is the broader community, or public. This group might currently visit and use the proposed marine park area, they might plan to visit in the future, and may also derive benefit from other non-use outcomes such as from marine ecosystem services. ● In 2023, Western Australia started consultation for the establishment of two new marine parks. The extension and rezoning of an existing marine park adjacent to metropolitan Perth, the Marmion Marine Park, and one new marine park on the south coast of the state, named here as the Proposed South Coast Marine Park. ● This working paper presents results from surveys of the Western Australian public that included two stated preference experiments, a single binary choice question and a multiple discrete choice experiment. ● Results demonstrate a strong public desire for world-class conservation outcomes for both the Marmion and the Proposed South Coast Marine Parks, with 75% of the general public supporting the creation of no-take sanctuary zones across at least 31% of both marine park areas. We estimate that Western Australian households are willing to pay more to achieve larger areas of no-take sanctuary zones - A$112 per household per year for 45$123 per household per year for 45% at the Proposed South Coast Marine Park, for an aggregate value of A$84.3 million and A$92.3 million respectively. We also find that public valuation increases by between 19% and 57% when sanctuary zones include extensive shore protection enabling greater connection with the community

Human values and aspirations for coastal waters of the Kimberley: Social values and management preferences using Choice Experiments

This is a report from the Kimberley Research Node Project 2.1.2 “Human values and aspirations for coastal waters of the Kimberley” research project funded by the Western Australian Government and administered by the Western Australian Marine Science Institution. The study area is the Kimberley coastline and waters extending from south western part of Eighty Mile Beach to the Northern Territory border. This research supports the management intentions of the State Government to establish a network of marine parks in the State waters along the Kimberley coast. This report presents the findings of an online choice experiment survey conducted with a range of participants and stakeholders. The online survey comprised of two parts, it was a collaboration with Murdoch University. In the choice experiment, respondents were presented with two active management options, and a third ‘no-action’ option. A particular research focus of this choice experiment is the impact of making the choice experiment questions spatially explicit. Researchers were interested in people’s choices for management options that were linked to a specific region (or ‘management zones’) of the Kimberley coast. In this study the Kimberley region was divided into six management zones, determined in consultation with key stakeholders. The management options contained four spatially specific attributes and an associated management cost. The spatially specific attributes were: percentage of State waters zoned as sanctuary areas; number of Aboriginal rangers, level of average recreational facilities in the region, and whether additional development (as defined using a description and photograph) would occur in the region. Mixed logit models were estimated to account for random taste differences across respondents. Interactions between socio-economic variables and the choice attributes were included to account for systematic heterogeneity. Separate models were estimated for each sample as preliminary analysis suggested there is unlikely to be a single unifying model of preferences, Results suggest that hold values and preferences for the choice attributes presented. Focussing on the key management question of providing marine sanctuary zones in State waters, all models confirmed that increasing the area of sanctuary zones is valued by WA residents. Increasing recreation facilities to a relatively high level was generally not valued or valued negatively. This change reduces welfare especially in the four northern more remote zones (Dampier Peninsula, Buccaneer Archipelago, Camden Sound, and North Kimberley). The same pattern emerges for the coastal development attribute. Coastal development was defined as a relatively small change, representing impact on the sense of remoteness. There was a strong aversion to this change, particularly in the northern zones. Although there was some heterogeneity in preferences, the overall picture that emerges from the analysis is that respondents are prepared to pay to increase environmental protection in coastal waters and wish to avoid development along the coast, even where this would improve current public access

Scope and scale in valuing coastal management in the remote Kimberley region of Australia

The Kimberley region in northern Western Australia is well known for its impressive coastal landscapes, unique marine ecosystems, its Aboriginal heritage and culture, and its rich minerals and metals deposits. To inform future management of Kimberley coastal waters, a discrete choice experiment was undertaken to estimate the values that Western Australians attach to different management outcomes in the Kimberley. These management outcomes (marine reserves, aboriginal values, recreational facilities and development) were made spatially explicit to show respondent in what regions of the Kimberley outcomes would occur. A split sample design was used to estimate values for the Kimberley region as a whole, and for two separate smaller sub-regions. This choice experiment design allows us to test for scope sensitivity, which has not been explored much in the choice experiment literature. This study is one of the few discrete choice experiments that explores scope effects for environmental non-market valuation. Willingness to pay results show similar estimates between the two smaller sub-regions. Willingness to pay for the attributes increased when management occurs at the larger geographical scope. However, it was less sensitive to changes in attribute scale. We contribute to the literature on exploring scope effects for environmental non-market valuation using discrete choice experiments in the remote Kimberley region of Western Australia