Australian Natural Resources Atlas

Publications

Australia's Natural Resources

1997-2002 and beyond
National Land and Water Resources Audit, 2002

Appendix 1 - The National Land And Water Resources Audit - An Accountability

Origins of the National Land and Water Resources Audit

The Natural Heritage Trust Act (Part 3, s 11) provided for the National Land and Water Resources Audit, to have primary objectives

(a) to estimate the direct and indirect causes and effects of land and water degradation on the quality of the Australian environment and to estimate the effects of land and water degradation on Australia's economy;

(b) to provide the baseline for the purposes of carrying out assessments of the effectiveness of land and water degradation policies and programs

Following its creation, the following more detailed objectives were endorsed by the Natural Heritage Board comprising the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the Minister for Environment and Heritage.

To achieve these objectives, the Audit was required to provide a series of outputs to meet user needs.

AUDIT OBJECTIVES

  • Providing a clear understanding of the status of, and changes in, the nation's land vegetation and water resources and implications for their sustainable use.
  • Providing an interpretation of the costs and benefits-economic, environmental, and social-of land and water resource change and any remedial actions.
  • Developing a national information system of compatible and readily accessible resource data.
  • Producing national land, vegetation and water-surface and groundwater-assessments as integrated components of the Audit.
  • Ensuring integration with, and collaboration between, other relevant initiatives.
  • Providing a framework for monitoring Australia's land and water resources in an ongoing and structured way.

AUDIT OUTPUTS

  • Scientific assessments on the status of, and where possible recent changes in the nation's land, vegetation and water resources to assist decision makers in their efforts to achieve ecological sustainability. The assessments are also to serve as a baseline or benchmark for future trend analysis.
  • Reports on economic, environmental and social dimensions of land and water resource change, including land cover and remedial actions.
  • Integrated, nationally compatible data sets to support the Audit process and which are suitable for ongoing development and maintenance as a readily accessible national information system.
  • National water resources assessment to show the extent of the surface and groundwater resources, quality, supply capacity and use. The assessment is to consider all water uses, including environmental requirements.
  • Defined and agreed reporting links between the Audit and the State of the Environment reporting process, the Indicators of Sustainable Agriculture and other relevant activities at State and Commonwealth level.
  • Framework for the long-term monitoring and assessment of the health and management of Australia's land and water resources that meets the needs of all major stakeholders.

Establishing the Audit

To implement the Audit, an advisory council was established with:

The Audit Advisory Council was responsible for advising the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy and thence the Natural Heritage Ministerial Board on strategic directions, policy priorities, program review and on establishing processes and performance evaluation of the Audit activities. An executive director of the National Land and Water Resources Audit, together with a small support staff made up the Audit Management Unit. This group reported directly to the Audit Advisory Council. In an agreement between the Commonwealth and the Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation (now operating as Land and Water Australia), provision was made administratively for the Audit Management Unit to operate as a special program attached to Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation.

The outputs for which the Audit Advisory Council was accountable included a strategic plan and annual operating plans subject to Ministerial overview, annual reports meeting Natural Heritage Trust standards for submission to the Ministers and a final report-this document-which reviews Audit activities, summarises Audit findings and proposes arrangements for continuation of Audit-type activities.

The Audit Advisory Council had detailed terms of reference (see box below).

Audit Advisory Council
Chair Roy Green
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Australia Geoff Gorrie (October 1997 to October 2001)
Bernard Wonder (from October 2001)
Environment Australia Stephen Hunter
Sustainable Land and Water Resources Management Committee Peter Sutherland
Kevin Goss (October 1997 to July 1998)
Michael Lee (July 1998 to March 2000)
Roger Wickes (from July 2000)
CSIRO John Radcliffe
Land & Water Resources R&D Corporation Alex Campbell (October 1997 to June 2001)
Warwick Watkins (from June 2001)
Standing Committee on Conservation Jon Womersley
Standing Committee on Environment Protection Bryan Jenkins (October 1997 to July 2001)

Audit Management Unit
The Audit Management Unit comprised seven or eight staff at any time over the period of activities. Following is a list of staff at the Audit in its final year:
Executive Director Colin Creighton
Technical Director Warwick McDonald
Technical Manager, Ecology Jim Tait
Technical Manager, Data Stewart Noble (resigned December 2001)
Business Manager Sylvia Graham
Information Specialist Maria Cofinas
Project Manager Rochelle Lawson
Publicist Drusilla Patkin
Staff who contributed to earlier phases of the Audit included:
Ian Cresswell, Janice Oliver, Kate Ord, Andrea Schuele, Robert Scott, Paul Shelley, Heping Zuo

AUDIT TERMS OF REFERENCE

  • 'The Advisory Council is established to advise the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy and the Natural Heritage Trust Board on implementing the NLWRA consistent with objectives and outcomes agreed by the Minister and the NHT Board.
  • Developing and detailing the Audit's strategic direction within a strategic plan for the Minister's approval.
  • Preparing within the context of the strategic plan, annual operating plans for the Minister's approval.
  • Developing policy, priorities and operational procedures for the implementation of the Audit.
  • Recommending arrangements for national implementation after the four years of the Audit development program of an integrated resource accounting system capable of estimating the spatial extent of land and water resource condition and management, and trends on a regular basis.
  • In supervising the implementation of the Audit, the Advisory Council will:
  • manage the financial resources allocated from the NHT;
  • facilitate integration of the Audit with industry, State and Commonwealth initiatives;
  • set, monitor and direct strategic outcomes for the Audit Management Unit and participating working groups;
  • regularly review performance of implementing the Audit.
  • As part of the development of the Audit as a nationally integrated ongoing resource accounting system, the Advisory Council will:
  • ensure effective communication and interaction with all key stakeholders in the development and implementation of the Audit;
  • establish regular reporting arrangements with peak groups particularly ARMCANZ (through SCARM/SLWRMC) and ANZECC (through SCC/SCEP) and
  • report regularly to the Minister and the NHT Board, evaluating progress and performance of implementing the NLWRA.'

Audit Operations-making it happen

The flow diagram outlines the conduct of the Audit. A detailed description of how the Audit was developed and conducted, the outputs of the Audit, experience gained and the benefits already achieved through adoption of Audit outputs is given below.

Figure A1 Implementing the National Land and Water Resources Audit.

The primary components of the Audit's operations were:

The whole process had to be underpinned by an ethos of good data management that led to making available the information sought by clients, all achieved with effective two-way communication.

A most important issue was to achieve 'engagement' and 'ownership' among the likely stakeholders, and to do so at an early stage to achieve the best possible outcomes. Initial awareness visits were made to Ministers' offices and those of senior State/Territory officials.

Phase 1. Scoping the program

The Audit commissioned a needs analysis from Hassall and Associates, assisted by the Audit's Executive Director. The aim was to determine, through consultation, the questions that needed to be answered. It encompassed:

AUDIT THEMES

  • Surface and groundwater management - availability, allocation, use and efficiency of use
  • Dryland salinity
  • Vegetation cover, condition and use
  • Rangelands monitoring
  • Land use change, productivity, diversity and sustainability of agricultural enterprises
  • Capacity of, and opportunities for farmers and other natural resource managers to implement change
  • River, estuary, catchment and landscape health
  • Biodiversity

At the same time, the process provided an opportunity to market the Audit initiative to Commonwealth, States and Territories, and industry groups, and to explore the potential for synergy between the Audit and other initiatives. A series of workshops was held in all States, the Territories and in the Commonwealth, with attendees from government agencies, local government, farmers federations, the Landcare movement, conservation groups and Aboriginal land councils. Based on outcome priorities established for each State and Territory, the Audit Advisory Council framed a strategic plan and work program around the identified major sets of resource issues or 'themes', which were managed as subprograms of the Audit.

To underpin each of the themes, to meet Audit Objective 6 of establishing a framework for monitoring Australia's land and water resources in an ongoing and structured way, and to communicate findings, the Audit established a subprogram for data management and information provision. Key activities and outputs from this subprogram included:

A communication strategy was developed and implemented as a further subprogram to attract involvement of natural resource managers from across Australia. The strategy was based on:

The Audit's Strategic Plan was endorsed by the Natural Heritage Trust Ministerial Board and published in June 1998.

Phase 2. Scoping the methods, applying regionally and building the work plans

Initiating an Australia-wide program that brings together multi-disciplinary and multi-partner science and seeks to develop comparable information across Australia from variable quality and coverage data sets as well as applying untested methods for assessment required a multi-faceted and well-planned approach. The Audit chose a three-part and interlinked process:

Following a series of workshops involving many of Australia's best natural resources scientists, 24 'methods development' papers were commissioned.

BENEFITS FROM THE METHODS PAPERS

The methods papers helped scope the possibilities for the Audit, defined how assessment could be undertaken, and helped to define those issues which were readily able to be assessed, and those which were likely to be more difficult. Notably highlighted were the social issues, where originally there was no clear consensus on the attributes to be assessed or how to approach an assessment. Most papers showed that additional methods development would be required before assessments were commenced, albeit more in some fields than others. At the same time, the papers gave a measure of the costs, time and skills necessary to undertake the assessments. In preparing the papers, the researchers also helped generate a perspective of what the Audit could be-a perspective drawn from the natural resource science community that could also be reviewed with staff of Commonwealth, and State and Territory agencies when developing the work program. Not all of the papers produced methods which were adopted. Most made a useful contribution. Several were crucial to the ultimate choice of approach.

Outputs of the methods papers are available at www.nlwra.gov.au/minimal/30_themes_and_projects /50_scoping_projects/04_methods_papers/methods_papers.html.

Each paper was prepared to a set format so that issues such as data quality, data coverage, compilation, assessment methods and information presentation were consistently covered. Most papers involved small teams of researchers, building on the findings of the methods workshops.

Complementing the scoping of methods, a group of projects at regional scales were selected across the themes for application within Australia's States and Territories. The 'Regional Applications' project proposals were developed by Audit staff with key contacts in the States and Territories. Invitations to suggest projects were also circulated to all members of the Sustainable Land and Water Resources Management Committee of Standing Committee on Agriculture and Resource Management; Standing Committee on Conservation and Standing Committee on Environment Protection, these being the principal Commonwealth/States/Territories forums for discussing land and water management policies and issues. Seven projects were undertaken. The experience and outputs from these projects were incorporated into the design of Audit work plans and subsequently into the theme reports and the communications program.

BENEFITS FROM REGIONAL APPLICATIONS

The Regional Applications Projects:

  • tested and enhanced various Audit methods;
  • provided Audit projects operating at a regional level, and in some instances finer scale than subsequent Australia wide projects;
  • demonstrated the Audit's applicability to solving problems and assessing development opportunities;
  • engendered widespread support for the Audit program and its concepts within agencies, including recognition for data sharing, model building and the integration of economic, social and environmental data; and
  • acted as a 'springboard' for Australia-wide Audit activities.

The work program

Work planning for each of the subprogram themes and for data management completed the scoping and planning of Audit assessment activities. Leaders were appointed for all themes, usually under contract. Each leader was supported by a group of contact officers from key client groups including Commonwealth agencies, each State and Territory and CSIRO. The groups, in association with Audit staff, prepared work plans for each theme.

All work plans followed a similar format and included:

BENEFITS OF WORK PLANNING

The work planning involving full documentation of all component projects, the negotiation of partnerships and contributors, reaching agreement of working group members and then the approval of the Audit Advisory Council of the proposed budget allocations and outcomes generally took a year to complete for each theme. This was done in a staged process so that the final work plan was approved by the Audit Advisory Council some two years after the initiation of the Audit program. The time taken in planning proved to be well justified providing:

  • detailed specifications for the next and very important phase of project management;
  • basis for negotiated agreement amongst all stakeholders of methods, activities and presentation of outputs; and
  • context for negotiating partnerships.

SCIENTIST AND AGENCY PARTICIPATION

Scientists, through contributing to the methods papers, the needs analysis and the work planning and thereby becoming aware of the possibility of contracting to undertake parts of the work program, engendered an immediate interest in the Audit. This ensured a grounding for the Audit in 'good science'.

The States and Territories held many of the data sets which the Audit would be seeking to access. The Audit staff found that once the themes had been identified, assembling agency and research staff from similar fields of expertise to develop theme planning in an inclusive manner had the advantage of broadening 'ownership', bringing to light a range of technologies useful for assessment, and providing a forum in which data standards might be progressively improved.

From the participants' viewpoint, it also opened up an Australia-wide perspective of the field in which they were operating, and led to stronger professional cohesiveness. This was particularly so, for example, among the rangelands group and the native vegetation mapping, estuary and river assessment groups across the States and Territories, whose members deal with quite disparate ecosystems spread across large areas of the country. Indeed the lack of Australia-wide approaches and shared understanding was one of the more surprising institutional gaps. The vegetation mappers, for example, had never previously had an Australia-wide forum within which to develop comparable and consistent approaches. Subsequently, these groups proved invaluable in helping to integrate the data sets and interpret them during the theme workshops which were a prelude to drafting the theme reports.

Phase 3. Letting and project managing contracts

A total of 150 contracts were progressively let on a basis of merit by the Audit Advisory Council in implementing the endorsed work plans. Contracts were let to a wide range of government and private sector contributors (see Acknowledgments section).

Contracts were broadly classified in three categories:

The contracts required specified data management standards, the standards and form of data presentation, the milestones for continuous appraisal of contract performance and the outputs required at the end of the project. To assist project scheduling Gantt charts covering the project duration and any phases of project activity and milestones were negotiated and agreed to with contractors at time of letting contracts.

Project management was a major body of work for all eight members of the Audit Management Unit. Activities were based on a project management system and formal training and included:

The Audit Management Unit also defined and reviewed the data dependencies between projects as they proceeded and therefore the interdependencies across all Audit themes, with outputs of some themes becoming data for other theme activities.

Individual Audit Advisory Council members assume roles of 'champions' for specific themes, and for data and information management. During the project management phase, champions had a watching brief over progress, becoming involved as appropriate to ensure specified outputs were achieved. This approach has merit for continuation in the future of the Audit.

EFFECTIVE PROJECT MANAGEMENT ESSENTIAL

Well-structured and defined project management processes were essential to the successful delivery of Audit outcomes. These encompassed recognition of adequate formal training, clear definition of objectives and outputs, attention to specific details in the preparation of contracts and their implementation, selection and use of appropriate computer-aided project management systems, and encouraging adherence to performance timelines.

Welcoming co-investment

Wherever possible, the contracts were approached on a collaborative basis, encouraging co-investment in the work by the contracting groups. This inclusive approach ensured greater return on the Audit investment and client focus, with many of the Audit's partners also being organisations that would use Audit findings in their work for improved natural resource management in Australia.

THE GAINS FROM CO-INVESTMENT

The contribution through co-investment by research organisations such as CSIRO and cooperative research centres and industry bodies, particularly research and development corporations, increased the level of data capture for the Audit, while also helping those bodies achieve their own additional outcomes which the Audit infrastructure could help facilitate. The co-investment in the Audit from other organisations exceeded $18 million, and when in-kind support was taken into account, effectively doubled what the Audit was able to undertake. Particularly supportive relationships developed between the Audit and the dairy, horticulture, fishing and grain industries, and also with a number of research organisations including CSIRO and many of the 'public good' cooperative research centres. The fertiliser industry for the first time generously provided access to many years of historical soil test and diagnostic data which were able to be geo-referenced to the nearest towns.

It could be anticipated that there might be added commitment from the agricultural industries towards supporting future audit-type activities, as environmental issues are becoming increasingly important in international trade. Industry organisations are assuming greater responsibility for environmental standards within their industries. This involves moving towards establishing their own best management practices programs, and encouraging individual growers to adopt environmental management systems, or ISO 14000-type accreditation. Buyers in some markets are demanding these standards.

Phase 4. Developing and implementing a data management and information presentation system

There were two key components to developing the data management and information management system.

1. Securing the data sets in appropriate form, quality and content

Contracts ensured data collected and collated was in forms that provided the content for the system. This was a large part of the Audit's project management activities and involved adoption of three key principles in all projects:

2. Building the information services

Once the projects to collect, collate and interpret data sets had been initiated, work began in parallel with the main group of project management activities across the Audit themes to build the information and data access system.

Developing and maintaining the data management framework

In summary, to identify the potential content of a data framework, gaps in coverage, project specifications for its management and data access specifications, the Audit let a series of contracts, asking Australian Survey and Land Information Group (now the National Mapping Division of Geoscience Australia) to coordinate project outputs to ensure standardised products. An agreement between the Audit and the Australia New Zealand Land Information Council specified documentation, access, ownership, custodianship, archiving and updating arrangements for the data collected, and was developed for and used with the outputs from the Audit's assessments. Agreements with data custodians in Commonwealth, State and Territory agencies were developed to secure access to data. A tripartite agreement was established between the Audit, the Bureau of Resource Sciences in Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia; and Environment Australia through a shared understanding of the role and objectives of the Audit, to provide data management and processing services. Environment Australia has assumed responsibility for the ongoing management of the Australian Natural Resources Atlas, and the Bureau of Rural Science of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia has assumed the role of managing and maintaining the Australian Natural Resources Data Library.

ACHIEVING EFFECTIVE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OUTCOMES

The second group of participants after the scientists to become involved with the Audit were those involved in managing information technology and databases within the State and Territory agencies and the research organisations. The Audit was obliged to win commitment at a high level to facilitate development of data management processes. As far as possible, existing protocols such as Australian Spatial Data Directory and Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure were adopted for good data management.

Ultimately, resolution of policy issues at the level of the Commonwealth Spatial Data Committee and subsequently the Australian and New Zealand Land Information Council ensured acceptance of the Audit's approach and meeting the standards for Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure.

Nevertheless, some difficulties did arise. Core data standards and specifications had to be unified between data suppliers. Very large historical data sets proved difficult to manage within the standards agreed. There were limits of expertise available to some contributors to facilitate resolution of problems. In some cases, former staff had to be brought back to resolve or clarify these issues. Audit staff had to spend considerable effort checking some data sets. Definition of data confidence limits was important, and this also had to be included on the subsequent outputs. A developed data input plan proved essential. At an early stage, a decision was taken to resist the temptation to pick up 'extra' data as they came to light, but rather to concentrate on securing a consistent supply of data with the quality that the Audit was seeking, and to ensure that the process was managed well.

In developing systems, off-the-shelf software was adopted as far as possible. This was to ensure that upgrades would be provided by commercial providers and that systems would stay current. Strategic partnerships were developed with providers so that any additionally required functionality they were to deliver became part of their software systems.

Contractors and contributors of data sets and projects needed the capacity and commitment to manage tightly and to deliver on time. An accountability system was set in place, with a summary report on all projects being provided to all meetings of the Audit Advisory Council. Some organisations, both public and private, found it difficult to meet contract schedules. Nevertheless, without the support of State, Territory and Commonwealth agencies, CSIRO, a number of cooperative research centres, universities and private consultancies, the achievements of the Audit would not have been possible.

Phase 5. Presenting and communicating findings

Individual Audit Advisory members assume roles of 'champions' for specific themes, for data and information management and for communications. During the project management phase, 'champions' had a watching brief over progress, becoming involved as appropriate to ensure specified outputs were achieved and subsequently chaired workshops at which the project contributors worked together to develop an integrated interpretation of theme data.

A communications strategy encompassing electronic communication through email and the use of brochures and Fast Fact leaflets was established at an early stage to ensure stakeholders were kept informed and had ownership of the Audit processes as they developed. Regional presentations on the Audit were made as the opportunity arose. The major communications endeavour was to develop effective web access to the Audit and its data sets, and hence to develop a series of reports and tools which could be used in future decision making by stakeholders. This necessitated a close relationship being developed between the Audit's communications and data handling programs.

Communicating Audit outputs

Communicating the outputs of the Audit has been difficult and challenging, with a wide range of techniques used to maximise dissemination of the findings and foster the use of Audit information in improving natural resource management. A key strength of the Audit approach has been the very deliberate development of 'storyboards' on the Australian Natural Resources Atlas - planned and implemented as much as possible within the context of the information needs of the Audit's clients.

All of the various techniques used had their advantages. Fast Facts allowed for the rapid dissemination of consistent messages. The Australian Natural Resources Atlas has built an increasing clientele as users became aware of its functions and information sets. Verbal presentations and interactive sessions with regional, community and policy groups have led to increased engagement in the Audit and recognition of the role of information as input to decision making. These presentations have also increased the understanding by the community of the ethos of natural resource management. Articles in the media have led to others outside our network of contacts to become aware of the Audit. 'Info@audit' as an email newsletter has been a cheap and rapid means of keeping many interested persons up to date. Parliamentary briefings, particularly those in Canberra have been well attended. Launches of reports have stimulated further media interest. Conferences have provided forums for discussion, particularly the policy implications of Audit findings. Project reports were deliberately at a technical level and only disseminated via the Australian Natural Resources Atlas. Theme reports were designed to integrate across projects and presented as high quality publications. Dissemination of these reports and accompanying summaries has been a massive task. All reports have evoked positive responses in terms of the quality, content and relevance.

All these activities come at a cost, with expenditure on communication activity well in excess of the actual communication budget and staff time well in excess of the time allocated to the Audit's Publicist. All staff contributed. Particularly, time in excess of that allocated was required from the Audit's Business Manager in supporting various communication activities and mail outs and the Executive Director and Technical Director, as key participants in forums and writing of articles, summaries and conference papers and PowerPoint presentations. In the last two years the Executive Director averaged at least two presentations each week, with substantial travel required across Australia to meet client demands for briefing on the Audit findings.

LESSONS FOR AUDIT 2

Distinguishing between promotion and communication.

Across the Audit and its partners there has been a general tendency to promote Audit outputs to the wider community (through media releases and launches), and to facilitate adoption of key findings at senior government levels. There has been substantially less effort communicating the value of Audit information to regional natural resource managers.

Addressed by demonstrating real benefits of Audit outputs to key stakeholders

Facilitating uptake of Audit outputs into natural resource management decision making means demonstrating the benefit of using Audit information to key stakeholders. This requires linking Audit activities with 'hands-on' regional activities and remains a key challenge.

Addressed by improving accessibility of Audit products to a wider range of stakeholders

Audit 1 focused on getting the technical information right. Audit 2 provides an opportunity to value add to this information through improving Atlas accessibility and increasing interaction with key stakeholders.

Balancing partner needs

Balancing the needs of various Audit partners provided opportunities for cross promotion, but also created conflict between partners wanting to promote their role in Audit activities ahead of the findings.

Ways to address communication issues

Redefining the Audit target audience.

Developing a communication plan that focuses on adoption and promotion. This requires setting clear targets and outputs within each year's operational plan, then working in a more structured, coordinated and planned manner to deliver these outputs.

Tailoring communication products to meet target audience needs including:

  • ensuring all the messages to be communicated are always well thought through using a decision-support framework similar to that employed in the Atlas storyboards;
  • increasing attention in costing all communication activities, their inclusion within all programs and with these program budgets complemented by a core well-resourced communication program; and
  • employing an in-house science writer who is well aware of Audit findings, contributing to finalising all Audit reports and capable of preparing multiple articles, press releases and other outputs in very short time frames-responsive and proactive to opportunities that arise.

Increasing ownership of Audit activities across all stakeholders:

  • involving Audit Advisory Council members more in both the preparation and the delivery of presentations.

Independent evaluation of progress of the Audit

To provide an independent monitoring and evaluation of progress of the National Land and Water Resources Audit, Agtrans Research was contracted by Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Australia. The Executive Summary of Progress Report No 6, dated 10 October 2001, is given in Appendix 3.

THE VALUE OF THE INDEPENDENT EVALUATION TO PROGRESS OF THE AUDIT

The independent monitoring and evaluation of progress proved to be a helpful adjunct to the conduct of the Audit. Although there were from time to time differences of interpretation, the involvement of independent reviewers charged to take a dispassionate view of Audit activities was especially valuable in participating in the initial theme workshops which examined the data sets obtained, helping to identify the limitations of the data sets and the extent and quality of conclusions which could be drawn, and contributing to how the final reports from each theme might be developed. Similarly, the reviewers offered a number of valuable and constructive suggestions towards the preparation of the Audit's final report.

The published outputs

The initial outputs from the Audit were a series of assessment reports covering each of the themes, providing descriptions of the Audit's approach to assembling natural resource data sets, the quality standards set, and providing in comprehensive yet easily understood detail, the results obtained together with discussions of future options. Summaries of the individual reports follow.

Water

The Australian Water Resources Assessment 2000 provides details of water allocation and use within 335 surface water management areas. Hydrogeological characteristics estimated included annual inflows, run-off from rainfall, and outflows. Water quality measures considered were salinity, turbidity, the levels of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, acidity (pH), and faecal coliforms. Using a framework of 538 groundwater areas, estimates were obtained of the possible groundwater extraction from current infrastructure and present levels of use. Aquifer characteristics recorded included depth, thickness, salinity and where available, results from monthly hydrograph readings.

The Audit also commissioned the development of an assessment technology which can be used to review proposals for new resource developments such as reservoirs and dams. Titled, Large scale resource developments-an integrated assessment process, it is available on the web (NLWRA 1999).

Salinity

The Australian Dryland Salinity Assessment 2000 presents the outcomes of regional-scale dryland salinity or hazard assessments undertaken by State agencies, using information on groundwater levels and trends, the known incidence of salinity, soil characteristics and topography. These data were used to assesses the current extent of salinity and the anticipated extent in the year 2050 if no action were taken. A model of how salinity develops, based on a range of groundwater flow systems, is described. The likely impact of salinity on agriculture and on public infrastructure in regional areas is outlined. Management options are explored and some case studies considered.

Native vegetation

Australian Native Vegetation Assessment 2001 defines the structural and floristic characteristics of native vegetation using an agreed National Vegetation Information System facilitated by the Audit. Using data from States/ Territory lead agencies, pre-European and present-day native vegetation maps were assembled covering two-thirds of Australia using 23 major vegetation groups for reporting. These groups encompass the broad structural and floristic groupings of Australia's native vegetation. The information has been used to generate a rapid assessment of the relative condition of native vegetation in Australia's bioregions and subregions. A synthesis of 'landscape stress' was undertaken, reported in Landscape Health in Australia (NLWRA 2001g).

Rangelands

Rangelands-Tracking Changes-an Australian Collaborative Rangelands Information System summarises currently available information on Australia's rangelands at national and regional scales. Trends are identified in ecosystem function, land tenure and use, stocking rates, native and feral animals, and climate variability, and their impact on rangelands biodiversity. Economic, social and institutional factors affecting rangelands communities were also considered. The report defines elements of a comprehensive monitoring and reporting program (the Australian Collaborative Rangelands Information System) that provides for the introduction of regular Australia-wide assessment encompassing the impact of climate variability, pasture availability, seasonal variation, grazing density, fire, land use and tenure, introduced plants and animals and native vegetation clearing on rangelands biophysical resources.

Agriculture

The Australian Agriculture Assessment 2001 includes a description of the Australian agricultural environment, with details of agricultural production, soils, climate, carbon, landscape nutrients, and where possible, river nutrients in terms of budgets, together with erosion and sediment transport for Australia's river basins. A description is given of soil acidification, with forecasts of its likely future extent and impact on agriculture. The first comprehensive assessment of water-borne soil erosion and sediment transport is provided for Australia's agricultural catchments and rivers.

The range of Australian soils is described in the Australian Soil Resources Information System.

Australians and natural resource management

The Australians and Natural Resource Management 2002 report presents the social and economic dimensions of natural resource management based on natural resource accounting and a social profile of rural Australia. To demonstrate the value of natural resource accounts, the report includes an assessment of the economic consequences (in profit terms) on-and off-farm (e.g. soil acidity on farm and (e.g. dryland salinity and river turbidity). Some insight into current and future opportunities for structural adjustment in agriculture is provided. An assessment of the willingness of the Australian community to support natural resource management initiatives suggests that the community is willing to pay $4 billion over 20 years, in addition to existing investments, to achieve enhanced natural resource outcomes-in the form of species protection, bushland restored and river and estuary rehabilitated to a condition that supports fishing and swimming.

Catchments, rivers and estuaries

Australian Catchment, River and Estuary Assessment 2002 presents an assessment of catchment biophysical condition using an indicator approach assessing land, water and biota attributes at a river basin and subcatchment scale. The river assessment reports biological and environmental condition indices and subindices for river-reach reporting units. The estuary assessment classifies Australia's nearly 1000 estuaries in terms of their dominant physical process drivers and defines their condition in terms of level of modification from the pristine state using a 'pressure, state, response' assessment framework and indicators. Catchment, river and estuary management challenges including opportunities for protective initiatives and priority remedial works are identified by reference to identified drivers of change and observed patterns of condition. Summary integrated findings from the catchment, river and estuary assessments and other Audit assessments are presented for each of Australia's drainage divisions, highlighting the catchment based nature of river and estuary condition and the need for region-specific integrated natural resource management approaches.

Biodiversity

The Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment 2002 provides a synthesis of terrestrial biodiversity characteristics, values, potential threats and conservation and management options collated for Australia's 354 biogeographic subregions. Biodiversity data collated include species richness and endemism for Acacias, Eucalypts, birds and mammals, and numbers of threatened species and ecosystems. Processes which threaten the condition and trend of ecosystems, species, riparian zones and nationally important wetlands are also identified. Information on dynamic aspects of biodiversity is provided through change in distribution and reporting rates for bird and mammal species, encompassing groups, guilds, exotic species and translocated species. Management challenges are defined with collated information on threatened species and ecosystem recovery needs, priority bioregions and subregions for consolidation of the National Reserve System, key data gaps and existing natural resource management measures serving biodiversity conservation, within each subregion. Fourteen biodiversity conservation option case studies stratified across major agro-ecological regions provide detail of the specific resource and operational needs for delivering biodiversity conservation outcomes and give an indication of Australia-wide challenges for subregions with similar management contexts.

Information

Australian Natural Resources Information 2002 recommends an Australia-wide natural resources information system based on building fundamental data, providing access to information, maximising value for money, and annual reporting as part of the Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure. Database maintenance concepts for surface and groundwater, land use, native vegetation, salinity, soils, river health and estuaries are given.

Underpinning projects

Details of the 150 projects commissioned as inputs to the various themes are available on the Audit's archive website www.nlwra.gov.au.

The Australian Natural Resources Atlas and Australian Natural Resources Data Library

The integrated outputs from the Audit have been placed on a single Audit website www.environment.gov.au/atlas, a contractually managed site operated on behalf of the Audit by Environment Australia, and forms the Australian Natural Resources Atlas, operating through http://audit.ea.gov.au/ANRA/atlas_home.html which also provides access to the Theme reports outlined above.

The Australian Natural Resources Data Library was established to contain the collected primary and derived data acquired through the Audit processes. It has been lodged in a Bureau of Rural Sciences-managed website http://adl.brs.gov.au/ADLsearch/, from where the data may be accessed by scientists and other potential users.

Details of the Atlas and Data Library are provided in Appendix 4.

Free community access to the available data

The progressive availability of the Audit's output has led to development of a Commonwealth Spatial Data Policy providing for community access to Atlas data at the cost of downloading the information from the internet. A foundation agreement was established (Data Access and Management Agreement 2001) under which the Commonwealth, States and Territories as members of Australia New Zealand Land Information Council, provide community access to data sets under a single license agreement. Commercial use of the information can be arranged subject to licensing conditions.

ACHIEVING AWARENESS AND ACCESS

It was recognised that there would need to be ready access to the outputs from the Audit for a range of stakeholders. These included technical users, policy staff, the local and regional community, and ultimately the public at large. The cooperation between the Commonwealth, States and Territories, spearheaded through the Australia New Zealand Land Information Council has been crucial in the development of the Audit. This cooperation ultimately resulted in an agreement that data obtained by the Audit could be accessed under licence. Cost for community use would exclude intellectual property charges and be the cost of electronic transfer only. A mechanism to allow negotiation for the data for commercial purposes was also set up.

Suitable access has helped achieve awareness in the media for emerging issues. This was notably evidenced in the extent of national debate on the issue of dryland salinity which received extensive feature-level cover in the press, radio and television following the release of the Audit's Australian Dryland Salinity Assessment 2000.

The inclusion of case studies, enabling readers to appreciate how environmental interactions are occurring in a real situation, has proved helpful in broadening the appreciation of opportunities and threats which can be derived from the data.

Nevertheless, as awareness of the Audit's products grows, there could be a risk that the limitations of Audit data may not always be appreciated, resulting in un-met expectations. At the current time, it is rarely possible to secure property-sized information from the Audit's Atlas and Data Library.

One of the major groups perceived to be potential users of Audit's data library and products has been the staff and senior managers of agencies responsible for development of and implementation of natural resource management policies. Perhaps not surprisingly, they evinced commitment, but no especial commitment to the Audit's activities until outputs began to derive from the Audit's activities. This undoubtedly reflected a healthy and critical scepticism until there were products to evaluate.

Adoption of Audit principles in Australia

As described at the conclusion of Chapter 2, there has been considerable adoption of products from the Audit as projects have drawn to a conclusion and outputs been published.

Adoption of Audit principles overseas

Implementing the Audit was an entirely new initiative for Australia, which had no previous background infrastructure for its conduct. It has been recognised overseas that the Australian government, through the National Land and Water Resources Audit, has developed an innovative new approach to objectively assembling a library of benchmark data capable of easy access and suitable for assessing the nation's natural resources and potentially tracking them in the future. As a consequence, the Audit has been requested to make major contributions to the infrastructure planning for and hence has been assisting in the creation of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment www.millenniumassessment.org/en/index.htm. This is described as:

... an international assessment of the impact of changes to ecosystems on the goods and services they provide, and will provide a foundation for wise policy making.

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment was launched by United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, on World Environment Day, 5 June 2001.

MEETING AUDIT OBJECTIVES

The extent to which the Audit has met the objectives set for it is summarised below. More detailed aspects are described in the individual theme reports which underpin the Audits principal outputs-the Australian Natural Resources Atlas and the Australian Natural Resources Data Library.

Objective 1. Providing a clear understanding of the status of, and changes in, the nation's land vegetation and water resources and implications for their sustainable use.

The Audit has collated and presented information on Australia's land use including agricultural and rangeland productivity, nutrient status, and potential continuing degradation in terms of salinity, acidity and erosion loss, has generated maps of pre European settlement and current day native vegetation resources, and assessed the availability, quality and use of surface and groundwater resources. The information is readily available in integrated form on the Australian Natural Resources Atlas, and the collected data is available on the Australian Natural Resources Data Library.

Objective 2. Providing some interpretation of the costs and benefits-economic, environmental, and social-of land and water resource change and any remedial actions

The Audit has evaluated the economic impact and aspects of the social impact of natural resource changes on rural and regional communities in the intensively managed land use zones and in the rangelands. These changes include effects of land degradation on agricultural productivity and economic returns and on public infrastructure.

Objective 3. Developing a national information system of compatible and readily accessible resource data.

The Audit established bilateral protocols with custodians of data in each State/Territory to streamline data access for Audit assessments. An agreement with the Australia New Zealand Land Information Council ensures ongoing community access to Audit data. Australia-wide data sets established after agreements with data custodians include the Australian Soil Resources Information System, the National Vegetation Information System, a national inventory of estuaries and their condition, and assessments of the sustainability of Australia's surface and groundwaters. The Audit also gained agreement on parameters for establishing a rangeland monitoring system.

Objective 4. Producing national land, vegetation and water-surface and groundwater-assessments as integrated components of the Audit.

Fundamental data sets have been developed which have been integrated for an evaluation of Australia's water resources, and have been accessed by the National Competition Council in overseeing the National Water Reform Agenda. Water and native vegetation data sets have been used as integral components of river and catchment health and as inputs to the Audit's assessment of biodiversity. Catchment and river health have been linked with carbon, water and nutrient budgets, evaluated from a perspective of nutrient and sediment transport. Vegetation data sets have contributed to rangelands assessment. An Australia-wide land-use map has been produced.

Objective 5. Ensuring integration with, and collaboration between, other relevant initiatives.

The Audit has worked in partnership with Australia's leading research, industry and resource management agencies to develop an agreed harmonised approach to standards and quality underpinning data collection, and to deliver valuable new outputs that define the status of Australia's natural resources. These outputs have, where possible, drawn on data from earlier initiatives such as Landcare and Natural Heritage Trust projects. Audit products have provided a basis for the further development of new initiatives and their priorities such as the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality.

Objective 6. Providing a framework for monitoring Australia's land and water resources in an ongoing and structured way.

The agreements with Commonwealth State and Territory agencies promote and maximise cooperation and collaboration in all aspects of data and information management. Common frameworks developed for all Audit projects have resulted. These provide a basis for consistent, comparable Australia-wide data sets to continue to be collected and to be integrated with past collections to generate readily interpretable trends in natural resource management. A system has been set in place for storing, managing and retrieving fundamental data, derived data and information products. Institutional arrangements have been developed to provide a data system to underpin natural resource assessment after completion of the Audit through Environment Australia continuing to support the Australian Natural Resources Atlas and Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Australia managing the Australian Natural Resources Data Library.

The independent monitoring and evaluation report No 6 (Agtrans Research) noted The Audit has produced a set of products and outputs to date that are impressive in their coverage and depth. Overall, we consider the investment in the Audit to be sound and it provided good value for money (see Appendix 3).

The completion of the Audit, issuing of reports on the status of Australia's principal natural resources, and the establishment of the Data Library and the Australian Natural Resources Atlas means for the first time that there is a comprehensive benchmark against which the outcomes of future natural resource management initiatives can be evaluated.