Home >Environment >National coordination of consistent NRM data and information to inform land use policies and...

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

Date post:13-Aug-2015
Category:
View:22 times
Download:1 times
Share this document with a friend
Transcript:
  1. 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. 2. Outline Examples of successful data and information based on coordination/ collaboration What characterises good national coordination Case study Lessons Conclusions
  3. 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. 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. 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. 6. Case study: National Reserve System Program Bioregions or IBRA dataset
  7. 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. 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. 9. 12 environmental attributes classified into 30 environmental groups
  10. 10. Hierarchy of levels of detail Level 1 broad Level 1 Super Groups Level 2 Groups
  11. 11. Level 2 Group 20 Climate profile Elevation range
  12. 12. Soils Levels 1 & 2 Super Groups
  13. 13. Land use Vegetation cover Level 2 Group 20
  14. 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. 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. 16. 2nd approximation: a framework to build a NRS IBRA 4 - 1995 http://media.wix.com/ugd/4f7b6e_99b934e660484fc4a10d81bbeca23f63.pdf 85 regions
  17. 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. 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. 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. 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. 21. Australias Strategy for the National Reserve System 2009-2030 Endorsed by the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council May 2009
  22. 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
  23. 23. IBRA 7 -2012 http://www.environment.gov.au/land/nrs/science/ibra#ibra
  24. 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. 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. 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. 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. 28. IBRA Spatial data viewer and metadata http://www.aurichtprojects.com/maps/ibra/ and http://www.auricht.com/projects/ibra-7-update/
Popular Tags:

Click here to load reader

Reader Image
Embed Size (px)
Recommended