National coordination of consistent NRM data and information to inform land use policies and planning
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes341 views
The document discusses national coordination of natural resource management (NRM) data to inform land use policies in Australia, highlighting successful examples and defining characteristics of effective coordination. It reviews a case study on the National Reserve System (NRS) and emphasizes the importance of consistent, reliable data that is relevant to policy and planning. The document concludes with key lessons about the need for continuous review and coordination to maintain effective land use planning and management.
National coordination of consistent NRM data and information to inform land use policies and planning
- 1. National coordination of consistent NRM data and information to inform land use policies and planning Richard Thackway Land Use Symposium 2015 Crawford School, ANU 29-30 June 2015
- 2. Outline • Examples of successful data and information based on coordination/ collaboration • What characterises good national coordination • Case study • Lessons • Conclusions
- 3. Examples of successful data and information based on coordination/ collaboration • Many exemplars – Australian Land use – Interim Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation For Australia (IBRA) – National Wilderness Inventory (NWI) – National Vegetation Information system (NVIS) – Vegetation Assets States and Transitions (VAST) – National Invasive Species datasets (WONS) – Aquatic Ecosystems (ANAE) – Many others datasets including those associated with: • climate, water, soils, fauna, flora, birds, forests, ground cover …
- 4. National NRM data and info for land use policy and planning has a history • Datasets and info were: – Collected for different purposes using different methods – Inconsistent and incompatible – Stored using different standards – Disparate and patchy – Lack of seamlessness across jurisdictions because of: • thematic detail, spatial and temporal issues • Much effort and resources have gone into making the above datasets exemplars i.e.: – Trustworthy and authoritative – Transparent in development and maintenance – Rigorous and repeatable – Consistent across state borders – Reliable & accurate within constraints – Joint ownership of data and info products National coordination
- 5. What do good policy and land use planners need: consistent, fit for purpose data & info Characteristics of good underpinning cooperation /collaboration: 1. Addresses a well defined problem /key question 2. Agreed conceptual model / framework/ information hierarchy 3. Effective leadership /champion/ sponsor 4. Unambiguous governance arrangements 5. Strong relevance to one of more policies and programs 6. Adequate resourcing (people & ~ $) 7. Sound technical, scientific and IT support 8. Interoperability / capacity to integrate 9. Published and peer reviewed 10. Custodian/s committed to continuous improvement - spatial & temporal 11. Continuum of levels of detail /processing /standards 12. Data and info products discoverable, reusable and accessible 13. Data and info products relevant to research & education 14. Data and info products relevant to planners and on-ground managers 15. Data and info products relevant to key client/s or partner/s
- 6. Case study: National Reserve System Program Bioregions or IBRA dataset
- 7. Problem statement • In the 70s and 80s Australia had a minimal commitment to policy and planning for a representative system of protected areas i.e. – A national reserve system (NRS) • 1996 new policy was approved to develop a NRS i.e. – Based of ecosystems and NOT of the area of each jurisdictions protected Drivers • Initially to spend $80M in partnership with the states and territories • Regularly report progress re type and extent of ecosystems protected – Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative • Reclassify all existing & new protected areas using a common typology – E.g. IUCN I-VI
- 8. 1st approximation – a framework to build a NRS http://media.wix.com/ugd/4f7b6e_81acc6f2469e4cd0ac18382860993b10.pdf >10 years in the making A data intensive and quantitative approach 1992 30 group Environmental Regionalisation 12 attributes
- 9. 12 environmental attributes classified into 30 environmental groups
- 10. Hierarchy of levels of detail – Level 1 broad Level 1 Super Groups Level 2 Groups
- 11. Level 2 Group 20 Climate profile Elevation range
- 12. Soils Levels 1 & 2 Super Groups
- 13. Land use Vegetation cover Level 2 Group 20
- 14. Strategic plan developed and put to the vote ~1993 • Goals, targets and objectives for the NRS • Plan included priorities for investment over time • BUT no ‘buy in’ from key stakeholders – the Environmental Regions dataset was rejected by the Ministerial Council
- 15. What went wrong? 1st approx solution Characteristics of good coordination – re Data and info products Evaluation Addresses a well-defined problem /key question Agreed conceptual model / framework/ information hierarchy Effective leadership /champion/ sponsor Unambiguous governance arrangements Strong relevance to one of more policies and programs Adequate resourcing (people & ~ $) Sound technical, scientific and IT support Interoperability / capacity to integrate Published and peer reviewed Custodian/s committed to continuous improvement - spatial /temporal Continuum of levels of detail /processing /standards Discoverable, reusable and accessible Relevant to research & education Relevant to planners and on-ground managers Relevant to key client/s or partner/s Environmental Regions 30 groups
- 16. 2nd approximation: – a framework to build a NRS IBRA 4 - 1995 http://media.wix.com/ugd/4f7b6e_99b934e660484fc4a10d81bbeca23f63.pdf 85 regions
- 17. Strategic plan developed and put to the vote ~1996 • Goals, targets and objectives for the NRS • Plan included priorities for investment over time • Complete ‘buy in’ from key stakeholders - the IBRA dataset was endorsed by the Ministerial Council
- 18. Evaluation of IBRA version 4 Characteristics of good coordination – re Data and info products Evaluation Addresses a well-defined problem /key question Agreed conceptual model / framework/ information hierarchy Effective leadership /champion/ sponsor Unambiguous governance arrangements Strong relevance to one of more policies and programs Adequate resourcing (people & ~ $) Sound technical, scientific and IT support Interoperability / capacity to integrate Published and peer reviewed Custodian/s committed to continuous improvement - spatial /temporal Continuum of levels of detail /processing /standards Discoverable, reusable and accessible Relevant to research & education Relevant to planners and on-ground managers Relevant to key client/s or partner/s
- 19. Design and implement the NRS Program • Land acquisition projects funded jointly with the States and Territories • Initially $80M • Commitment to monitoring, evaluation and improvement • Capacity to engage the wider community (public-private partnerships) – Private nature conservation reserves - covenants – Indigenous Protected Areas (IPAs)
- 20. Ministerial endorsement of Australian guidelines for establishing the NRS Commonwealth of Australia (1999). Australian Guidelines for Establishing the National Reserve System. Environment Australia, Canberra.
- 21. Australia’s Strategy for the National Reserve System 2009-2030 Endorsed by the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council May 2009
- 22. Proportion of IBRA bioregions included in the National Reserve System 1995-2008 http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/643fb071-77c0-49e4-ab2f-220733beb30d/files/nrsstrat.pdf http://www.environment.gov.au/land/nrs/about-nrs/history
- 24. Evaluation of IBRA versions 5-7 Characteristics of good coordination – re Data and info products Evaluation Addresses a well-defined problem /key question Agreed conceptual model / framework/ information hierarchy Effective leadership /champion/ sponsor Unambiguous governance arrangements Strong relevance to one of more policies and programs Adequate resourcing (people & ~ $) Sound technical, scientific and IT support Interoperability / capacity to integrate Published and peer reviewed Custodian/s committed to continuous improvement - spatial /temporal Continuum of levels of detail /processing /standards Discoverable, reusable and accessible Relevant to research & education Relevant to planners and on-ground managers Relevant to key client/s or partner/s
- 25. ‘Huston - we have a problem’ • Funding for the NRS ceased in 2013 • Total of $260M since 1996 – $ 80M 1995-2008 – $180M 2008-13
- 26. Evaluation of the need for IBRA version 8 Characteristics of good coordination – re Data and info products Evaluation Addresses a well-defined problem /key question Agreed conceptual model / framework/ information hierarchy Effective leadership /champion/ sponsor & Unambiguous governance arrangements & Strong relevance to one of more policies and programs & Adequate resourcing (people & ~ $) Sound technical, scientific and IT support Interoperability / capacity to integrate Published and peer reviewed Custodian/s committed to continuous improvement - spatial /temporal Continuum of levels of detail /processing /standards Discoverable, reusable and accessible Relevant to research & education Relevant to planners and on-ground managers Relevant to key client/s or partner/s &
- 27. Why has IBRA in particular been a successful example of national coordination? • Represents an meaningful environmental representation of the landscape at various spatial scales – Based on essential environmental measures – Multiple and integrated spatial scales • All governments variously use it to set priorities, plan investment and to monitor, evaluate and improve biodiversity conservation - not just NRS • Most governments use it as a framework for SoE reporting • States and territories maintain it because gives them ‘skin in the game’ – Keep on improving i.e. interim and iterative • Aust Govt support for its maintenance, access, discovery and promotion – NB: reportedly one of the most downloaded NRM dataset from Dept Envt since 2000
- 28. IBRA Spatial data viewer and metadata http://www.aurichtprojects.com/maps/ibra/ and http://www.auricht.com/projects/ibra-7-update/
- 29. Key lessons • Key players must continually revisit land use policies and planning to ensure NRM data and info are fit for purpose and decision ready • History shows that national coordination waxes and wanes • Where there is a lack of national leadership in the coordination of NRM data/ info land use policy and planning becomes haphazard & localised • National info products (e.g. IBRA) can provide a sound baseline to evaluate change and trend in underpinning essential environmental attributes
- 30. Conclusions • National coordination of NRM data and info for use in land use policy and planning requires systems-thinking • Deciding what data, information and knowledge is important and fit for different purposes requires ongoing coordination of communities of interest Oliver McGee: Three Words That Make You An Influencer
Editor's Notes
- #5: Site survey, classification, mapping
- #9: TERRAIN Mean elevation Range of elevation Roughness TEMPERATURE Annual Mean Temperature Maximum Temperature Warmest Month Minimum Temperature Coldest Month RAINFALL Annual Mean Precipitation Precipitation Warmest Quarter Precipitation Coolest Quarter SOILS Profile Form Available Water Holding Capacity Moist State Permeability
- #27: SA has gone ahead but is waiting the AG to catch-up