National coordination of consistent NRM data and information to inform land use

policies and planning

Richard Thackway

Land Use Symposium 2015Crawford School, ANU

29-30 June 2015

Outline

• Examples of successful data and information based on coordination/ collaboration

• What characterises good national coordination • Case study • Lessons • Conclusions

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 …

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

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 question2. Agreed conceptual model / framework/ information hierarchy 3. Effective leadership /champion/ sponsor4. Unambiguous governance arrangements 5. Strong relevance to one of more policies and programs 6. Adequate resourcing (people & ~ $)7. Sound technical, scientific and IT support8. Interoperability / capacity to integrate9. Published and peer reviewed 10. Custodian/s committed to continuous improvement - spatial & temporal 11. Continuum of levels of detail /processing /standards12. Data and info products discoverable, reusable and accessible 13. Data and info products relevant to research & education14. Data and info products relevant to planners and on-ground managers15. Data and info products relevant to key client/s or partner/s

Case study: National Reserve System Program

Bioregions or IBRA dataset

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

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

12 environmental attributes classified into 30 environmental groups

Hierarchy of levels of detail – Level 1 broad

Level 1Super

Groups

Level 2Groups

Level 2 Group 20Climate profile Elevation range

Soils Levels 1 & 2

Super Groups

Land use

Vegetation cover

Level 2 Group 20

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

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

2nd approximation: – a framework to build a NRS

IBRA 4 - 1995

http://media.wix.com/ugd/4f7b6e_99b934e660484fc4a10d81bbeca23f63.pdf

85 regions

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

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

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)

Ministerial endorsement of Australian guidelines for establishing the NRS

Commonwealth of Australia (1999). Australian Guidelines for Establishing the National Reserve System. Environment Australia, Canberra.

Australia’s Strategy for the National Reserve System2009-2030

Endorsed by the Natural Resource Management Ministerial CouncilMay 2009

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.pdfhttp://www.environment.gov.au/land/nrs/about-nrs/history

IBRA 7 -2012

http://www.environment.gov.au/land/nrs/science/ibra#ibra

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

‘Huston - we have a problem’

• Funding for the NRS ceased in 2013• Total of $260M since 1996

– $ 80M 1995-2008– $180M 2008-13

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 &

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

IBRA Spatial data viewer and metadata

http://www.aurichtprojects.com/maps/ibra/ and http://www.auricht.com/projects/ibra-7-update/ /

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

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