Central Queensland Showcase
Integrated Area-Wide Management as an Approach to Landscape Management
- Background
- What is different about this case study that shows how government, industry and communities can better engage with each other?
- What are the key outcomes of the case study for government, industry and community?
- What are the key learnings/insights about community engagement?
- What will sustain community engagement into the future in this case study?
- Have you got the support of others involved to publish this case study?
Background
The Integrated Area Wide Management case study demonstrates how natural resource management can be achieved through a landscape or area wide approach. It establishes a self-management environment for natural resource management that lies within the bounds of the existing regulation framework administered by government. It is an engaged way of ‘doing business'.
Non-point source pollution and farm management practice is difficult to regulate using orthodox regulation and policy. Much of the change in farm resource management at present is reactive, done in response to threats or legislative change. This results in confrontation, conflict and short-lived improvements, and disengagement from the process. Current regulatory and planning approaches do not recognize the benefits of integrating information and skills from all sectors to view the 'big ' picture satisfactorily ie. 'the triple bottom line'. A more inclusive and cooperative approach, that makes more effective use of valuable resources, and recognizes regional capacity in both public and private sectors, is needed. Further improvements by the rural sector in managing environmental adverse impacts are needed. This project responds to the need to take a new approach.
Drivers initiating the project were:
- Growers and the community:
- better management practices
- sustainable resource management
- environmental pressures
- improved water management
- statutory requirements
- Change fatigue amongst the participants and rural communities
- Local managers needed solutions and took the initiative by:
- organizing a broad based workshop in 1999
- endorsing local researchers and participants to get IAWM going.
- fully supporting the new initiative since 1999.
The pilot project has been successful in engaging landholders and the community. It has required participants (landholders, peak industry, private sector and government) to be flexible and mature enough to work differently and jointly commit to building a landscape scale monitoring and information support system. The IAWM system now enables the local community of interest to look at natural resource management solutions pro-actively and they can now participate more confidently within a 'safe' learning environment.
What is different about this case study that shows how government, industry and communities can better engage with each other?
This case study challenges the continued focus on natural resource management by policy and regulations established by centralised planning that have been largely determined by government scientific studies. Developing systems and processes to support self-regulation encourages active participation and engagement in the process of improvement.
A key principle driving the process towards outcomes and sustainability was knowledge.
Knowledge is a key component driving people's behavior and thinking. Information is used in developing knowledge. If farmers and other resource managers can obtain information that is current and relevant, delivered in an appropriate way, and participate in the information generation process, they can and will self-manage successfully. Farmers need good information that is perceived to be locally relevant, that not only identifies a problem, but also helps identify the likely cause of the problem. This establishes cause and effect' enabling targeted change in practice to improve environment outcomes. It means learning and understanding are essential processes in helping a farmers feel more in control of their own destiny, but learning can not be rushed.
Key challenges:
- Reform processes
- Rate and volume of change
- Chasm of trust / Disengagement
- Decreasing profit margins
- Harsh climatic conditions /drought
- Imbalance of information and resources
- Farm Management Practice does lend itself to orthodox regulation approaches
- Realistic, flexible support system required.
This new way of doing business acknowledges existing processes and the positive moves by government and industry in Queensland.
What are the key outcomes of the case study for government, industry and community?
- Irrigators have built an accurate irrigation map for the whole Fitzroy Basin (182,000km2).
- Irrigators have shared data to build area wide data sets for better management.
- Irrigators now have access to government natural resource data.
- Accurate water quality data across farms and the irrigation landscape.
- Private sector consultants have shared data to build area wide datasets.
- IAWM is now recognised as a valued, objective service provider that supports local landscape management.
What are the key learnings/insights about community engagement?
- Thorough, strategic 'action' planning identified the 'right' need, so a common purpose for engagement was identified.
- Community engagement activities must be structured around community needs.
- All stakeholders must have clear accountabilities.
- Stakeholder participation throughout pre-planning, planning, and implementation phases.
- In rural areas, acknowledging that communities already engage with each other usually around social communities of interest (ie, communities are not necessarily defined by geographic boundaries).
- Valuing local knowledge and contribution - developing real partnerships.
- Strategies based on common, realistic objectives not agendas.
- Purpose driving this case study is physical (ie. Catchment outcomes, decreased environmental impacts), but what will make the difference is people - working together to a common purpose, respecting outcome needs of community, industry and government.
What will sustain community engagement into the future in this case study?
Positive outcomes for farmers, industry and government. Positive relationships have been established, and the system and processes which facilitate determination of cause and effect regarding environmental impacts are in place.
- NAP Water Quality and Salinity Program.
- Normalising regional investment and returning some fee for service yet maintaining a balanced financial and technical input from Government.
- It's a way of doing business not a project.
The practical aspects, relationships and attitude shifts developed over thorough pre-planning and planning phases, engaging all stakeholder groups and individuals in a timely way. The following aspects of IAWM will facilitate stainability into the future:
- 'Ground up' not top down Ownership of and participation in the process.
- Better knowledge of nrm issues and incorporation into decision making processes.
- 'People processes' and trust.
- IP and confidentiality.
- Utilises and strengthens existing networks.
- Complementary partnerships and shared learnings.
- Whole of landscape - rural/urban/industrial.
- Rigorous operating procedures and protocols.
- Practical cost-effectiveness and compatibility with management systems (profit).
Frustrations of fitting farm management practice into orthodox regulatory frameworks have been somewhat reduced. Farming practice is innovative and flexible due to the need to manage variables beyond the land manager's control. Land managers and industry are experiencing the benefits of IAWM - a key factor in resulting commitment from stakeholders to continue engagement activities.
Have you got the support of others involved to publish this case study?
Yes.
Other languages