• Change text size
• Skip to content

Australian Natural Resources Atlas

Natural Resource Topics

• About us
• Contact us

Search

• ANRA home
  • Map maker
  • Natural resource topics
  • Data Library

• Natural resource topics
  • Agriculture
  • Coasts
  • Dryland Salinity
  • Invasive species
  • Irrigation
  • Land
  • Natural resource economics
  • People
  • Rangelands
  • Soils
  • Vegetation and biodiversity
  • Water
  • Publications

• Vegetation and biodiversity
  • Overview
  • Assessment
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Landscape health
  • NVIS framework
  • Extent
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Clearing
    • New South Wales
    • Victoria
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Western Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Northern Territory
    • Australian Capital Territory
  • Management

11. Ways forward—providing the information to underpin effective biodiversity conservation

Summary

Each of the chapters in this report summarises some of the key management activities required for the conservation of Australia's biodiversity. Synthesising priorities in the context of policy and investment strategies is beyond the scope of this assessment and is a necessary follow-on activity by Australia's nature conservation agencies. This chapter concentrates on opportunities for collecting and enhancing information to monitor biodiversity and inform management priorities.

To meet the increasing demand on the use, productivity and health of our natural resources, Australia should implement an integrated and coordinated monitoring and assessment program, building on State and Territory activities. For Australia's terrestrial biodiversity, this would cover its condition and status, trend and management needs using an hierarchical and landscape based bioregional monitoring and assessment program that tracks change in species, populations and ecosystems, determines the impact of threatening processes, details management activities and assesses opportunities for improved management.

The bioregional, subregional and ecosystem hierarchy that underpins the Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment provides a sound scientific basis for monitoring condition and trend. Considerable support from partner agencies exists for the Biodiversity Assessment data to be further enhanced as a fully distributed and linked information system across jurisdictions.

Distributed and linked information systems refer to a similar database operating in each jurisdiction with a standard set of fields but with the flexibility to add unique fields relevant to their particular needs. This type of information system allows for cost-effective, timely and relevant updates by State and Territory lead agencies. A strategic and systematic approach to monitoring and reporting on Australia's terrestrial biodiversity requires a strategic analysis of the existing database in order to define and clarify information needs and link to other data sets.

Coordination is best undertaken through the continued National Land and Water Resources Audit with clearly identified partnership arrangements with Commonwealth, State and Territory agencies. The Audit would provide technical support through ensuring the database is part of and linked to other datasets within the Australian Natural Resources Data Library and corresponding State and Territory data library systems under the Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure. Information collated from the databases and linked to other natural resource information should be provided through the Australian Natural Resources Atlas and corresponding State and Territory information systems.

This assessment identified some necessary improvements to the existing biodiversity database:

• an update where new data are known to be available but not yet included in the current national database
• a review of cross border data and standardisation of qualitative components of the assessment
• better definition of the key attributes for threatening processes and for species and ecosystem management
• refinement of the information on wetlands, threatened ecosystems and threatened species

Assessing and reporting on the condition of Australia's terrestrial biodiversity needs to be an ongoing process. Five-yearly intervals are likely to be most cost-effective for Australia-wide assessment and reporting, working closely to the time scale of major management programs and maximising opportunities to inform these programs. Ongoing assessment at five-yearly intervals would also link to and inform the Australian State of the Environment reporting process

Building Australia-wide Biodiversity Information

The Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment was limited in scope and resources. It was undertaken in one year with $1M. Within these limitations it has clearly shown the commitment of all States and Territories to working collectively and with an Australia-wide focus to provide information. Most importantly, it has demonstrated the role of information in setting priorities for investment in biodiversity conservation at both national and regional scales.

The Audit's Final Report (NLWRA 2002c) details nine recommendations as to the way forward to assess and manage Australia's natural resources based on information that set priorities and foster increased understanding of the key issues.

In summary, these recommendations cover:

• information, the currency for implementing sustainable development;
• translating information into priorities and actions;
• tracking changes in natural resource condition and use;
• integrating social, economic and biophysical components of natural resource management;
• assessments, the key to improving programs and policies;
• meeting changing client demands and providing information on emerging issues;
• maximising returns on investment in data collection;
• coordinating data collection and the provision of information; and
• establishing an Australia-wide natural resources information agency with a formal process of review and provision of strategic advice on natural resource priorities and investment.

All of these components of a strategic approach to information delivery apply to terrestrial biodiversity information activities. Specifically, tracking changes in terrestrial biodiversity is included in recommendation 3 of the Final Report as follows:

To meet the increasing demand for use, productivity and health information, Australia should implement an integrated and coordinated monitoring and assessment program, building on State and Territory activities and covering:

3.5 Australia's terrestrial biodiversity, its condition and management needs using an hierarchal and landscape based bioregional monitoring and assessment program that tracks change in species, populations and regional ecosystems, determines the impact of threatening processes, details management activities and assesses opportunities for improved management.

Implementation of this recommendation could be part of the functions of the continuation of the Audit as part of natural resource monitoring and should complement the range of existing processes relevant to biodiversity information and reporting. These include the National Framework for Natural Resource Management Standards and Targets, the National Natural Resource Management Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and the National Action Plan and Natural Heritage Trust regional delivery model. The following sections detail the key activities required to meet this recommendation and deliver information that will support investment in biodiversity management.

A Bioregional Framework

There has been a growing trend towards the more widespread use of bioregional planning by the States, Territories and Commonwealth since the inception of the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) in 1995. The Biodiversity Assessment and several other assessments undertaken by the Audit have utilised the IBRA framework and the IBRA subregions as units for analysis. With each Audit assessment the States and Territories have increasingly committed to this bioregional approach for data collection and analysis because of its functionality and veracity for biodiversity conservation planning. Two things have emerged from this process. Firstly, the clear benefits of the States and Territories being directly responsible for data collection and interpretation. Secondly, the importance of the agreed IBRA framework as a mechanism for unifying both data collection and interpretation to enable continental overviews to be built up from local spatially referenced datasets.

There is an array of regional frameworks for program delivery and other administrative purposes. To avoid unnecessary duplication and confusion, biodiversity monitoring should reflect an established ecological framework rather than contemporary administrative arrangements. Administrative arrangement can change dramatically over time and thus provide limited benefits for the monitoring of Australia's biodiversity. The bioregional, subregional and ecosystem hierarchy that underpins the Audit approach reflects patterns within the natural environment and provides a sound scientific basis for monitoring trend and condition of terrestrial biodiversity.

Distributed and Linked Information Systems

Distributed information systems allow for cost-effective, timely and relevant updates by State and Territory lead agencies. Revision of the data collated for this assessment and Australia-wide adoption of an ongoing system for tracking the condition of terrestrial biodiversity requires the following steps:

1. Strategic analysis of the existing database to:

• reassess and define information needs and therefore determine key data fields
• specify and facilitate data queries and reporting that meets the client needs for information
• identify information gaps
• define links to other information within the Australian Natural Resources Data Library such as the National Vegetation Information System
• define links to the National Frameworks for Monitoring and Evaluation and Standards and Targets
• define process that allows State and Territory agencies to add additional fields to suit individual needs

2. Design a revised database that:

• meets the requirements specified in the strategic analysis
• specifies agreed standards for data fields
• is linked and distributed across jurisdictions with overall version control maintained by a lead agency

3. Implementing an Australian terrestrial biodiversity information system which will involve:

• building the database structure
• refining standards for data collection and collation in all States and Territories
• fostering commitment within key agencies as well as links to other data collection activities within States and Territories such as those for native vegetation, river condition and estuary condition
• gaining resources to fill key gaps
• undertaking assessment and reporting, demonstrating the role and management relevance of the system
• determining processes for collation, assessment, distribution, client access and reporting

Roles and Responsibilities

Coordination of this set of tasks should be reviewed in terms of the proposed future direction of the National Land and Water Resources Audit. Technical support will also need to be reviewed and at least, the database should be linked to other datasets within the Australian Natural Resources Data Library and corresponding State and Territory information systems under the Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure.

Provision of information collated from the databases and linked to other natural resource information is probably best provided through the Australian Natural Resources Atlas and corresponding State and Territory information systems. Assessment and reporting would meet various client needs and might be done Australia-wide as part of the next Australian State of the Environment Report in 2006-2007.

Key Information Gaps and Improvements to the Data Collated

During this assessment, corrections were made directly to the maps and output tables. The original database needs to be updated to include these corrections and additional data that have since become available. Cost-effective version control of the database is required to ensure current and correct information is available to all clients.

Differences in the scale of data available across State and Territory borders make Australia-wide assessments difficult. As part of the process to update data sets and information for biodiversity-related decision-making, the report supports the progressive use of more quantitative data together with a collective review amongst all partners of the standards and methods. This approach is currently being used to develop measurement methods for performance indicators related to the National Monitoring and Evaluation Framework.

Refining standards for updating biodiversity data is essential.

For example, the qualitative rankings of condition and trend, and the interpretation of threats and management constraints present opportunities for inconsistency of interpretation to occur. The progressive use of more quantitative tools together with a collective review amongst all partners of standards and methods is part of the process to upgrade data sets and information upon which management decisions can be made. Similarly, more comprehensive and compatible spatial data sets are required to inform assessments.

It is difficult to link changes in species distribution and population abundance with threatening processes. This knowledge is essential to plan species or ecosystem protection or recovery. Research activities ranging from comprehensive vegetation mapping and monitoring of spatial change in vegetation, through to understanding life history and ecological requirements of particular species are required. In addition, systematic fauna survey and collection of floristic data are needed to assess the impacts of landscape change. Findings of these research initiatives would inform the next assessment and specify further the key attributes to be monitored.

Regionally significant wetlands were identified Australia-wide in most jurisdictions for the first time as part of this assessment. Completion of the identification of these wetlands and further data on their biodiversity values, condition, trend and management needs would be valuable for regional conservation and management initiatives, as would a more complete delineation of their spatial extent and occurrence.

The provisional list of threatened ecosystems across Australia is one of the significant outputs of this assessment. The scale of delineation of threatened ecosystems varies. In some States and Territories it has not been possible to determine the proportion of threatened ecosystems across bioregions because of differing scales of ecosystem data available within the bioregion. More comparable delineation of ecosystems across bioregions and assessment of their condition require further investigation. In addition, the linking of these threatened ecosystems with the National Vegetation Information System's Major Vegetation Subgroups provides the first broad grouping of threatened ecosystems to compare where strategic conservation effort is required. The grouping of threatened ecosystems into finer categories is desirable, as well as for on-ground interpretation of protection and recovery strategies, and this represents a key aspect for the future development of the National Vegetation Information System. This would contribute to the development of whole of landscape biodiversity conservation planning.

The database could be refined by further cross-referencing of threatened species with subregional trend and threatening processes and to identify groups of threatened species for multi-species recovery planning. This would assist in developing a more strategic approach to recovery planning.

The eucalypts and acacias component of the assessment demonstrate the need to consider biodiversity values that are not specifically associated with threatened species issues, especially endemism, richness and irreplacability. Extension of this work to other taxa would be a useful addition to the Biodiversity Assessment and provide further information of relevance to management.

A strategic review of priorities for further data collection would recognise the role of modeling to complement mapping and monitoring activities. The strategic review would also need to address the issues of distributed database systems and how any new Australia-wide system interfaced with or enhanced existing systems, such as the database developed to support the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Integrated Natural Resource Information and Management

While the Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment may have been limited in scope and resources, it has demonstrated the importance of information in setting priorities for investment in biodiversity conservation at both the national and regional levels. The information provided through the assessment provides context for regions across Australia in the development of their plans in response to the requirements of both the National Action Plan for Water Quality and Salinity and the extension of the Natural Heritage Trust.

The challenge before each of these regional groups is how best to utilize these various information sets to create a regional investment strategy, trading-off various values and determining the most cost-effective and achievable activities to improve the productive and environmental quality of their landscape, refer Box 11.1.

The Australian Natural Resources Atlas will soon have the capability to subset relevant regional information from the Australia-wide information. The next step, requiring consideration as part of the Audit Phase 2, is the development of decision support tools and knowledge brokering activities that assist the regional groups translate these information sets into strategies and activities for their region and allow the evaluation of various investment options.

Much remains to be done at the regional scale. The information provided through the Biodiversity Assessment provides the context for developing key biodiversity management strategies. In addition, it identifies where some major constraints to achieving effective biodiversity outcomes as part of integrated natural resource management may occur. It should be noted that the information reflects our current state of knowledge and data collection and significant gaps remain. These constraints and any identified opportunities should be further investigated so as to inform the development of regional investment strategies.

Coordination, Continuation and Sponsorship

The Biodiversity Assessment is the first step in providing Australia-wide information on terrestrial biodiversity. As well as additional information on the attributes collated and the inclusion of other aspects of biodiversity, biodiversity information needs to be related with other natural resource information that describes the Australian landscape. Most importantly, collection and collation of biodiversity data and its interpretation need to be linked with other monitoring activities that are designated as part of Audit Phase 2 responsibilities. These include Australia-wide monitoring of rangelands, soil condition, water quality, water use, river and estuary condition, native vegetation, resource accounting and dryland salinity.

The coordination role of Audit Phase 2 should be to continue the Australia-wide partnerships and to ensure inter-relationships with other datasets so that Australia-wide information is provided to meet client needs. Sponsorship within the States and Territories, championing and leading the collection and collation of biodiversity information for a particular jurisdiction is probably best undertaken through their lead nature conservation agency and will need to be formalised as part of Audit Phase 2.

Assessment and reporting of the condition of Australia's terrestrial biodiversity needs to be an ongoing process. Five-yearly intervals are likely to be most cost effective for Australia-wide assessment and reporting, working closely to the time scale of major management programs and maximising opportunities to inform these programs. Ongoing assessment at five-yearly intervals would also link into and inform the Australian State of the Environment reporting process.

• Next
• Contents
• Previous