RIRDC Completed Projects in 2003-2004 & Research in Progress as at June 2004

BACK TO INDEX

To Resilient Agricultural Systemds  Research in Progress
 

4.2 RESILIENT AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS - COMPLETED PROJECTS

Sustainable production systems development

PROJECT No	PROJECT TITLE	RESEARCHER	PHONE	ORGANISATION
AEM-1A	Landscape & Property GIS	Dr Lyndal Hugo	(07) 4614 0455	Agricultural and Environment Management Systems
GAP-2A	Linking incentives - integrated policy instruments to achieve sustainable agricultural systems	Prof. Neil Gunningham	(02) 6254 8354	Gunningham & Associates Pty Ltd
SAR-30A	Developing free-range animal production systems	Dr. Phil Glatz	(08) 8303 7786	SARDI

Impediments / Risk Management

PROJECT No	PROJECT TITLE	RESEARCHER	PHONE	ORGANISATION
ASH -2A	The Taxation of Primary Producers and Landholders and Natural Resource Management Issues (NRM)	Mr Rod Ashby/ Mr Lachlan Polkinghorne	(03) 5224 2662 (03) 5266 2104	Rural Resources Group
CSL-14A	The farmer’s road to clean and green horticulture	Dr. Richard Stirzaker	(02) 6246 5570	CSIRO Land and Water

New technology systems - management

PROJECT No	PROJECT TITLE	RESEARCHER	PHONE	ORGANISATION
CSW-34A	Economic and environmental benefits / risks of precision agriculture and mosaic farming	Dr. Brian Keating	(07) 3214 2373	CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems

Accreditation Systems

PROJECT No	PROJECT TITLE	RESEARCHER	PHONE	ORGANISATION
DAV-186A	Integrating QA, EMS and ICM in the Yarra Valley – a case study	Ms Alison Medhurst	(03) 9210 4246	Dept Primary Industries VIC

Sustainable production systems development
 

Project Title:	Landscape & Property GIS
RIRDC Project No.:	AEM-1A
Researcher:	Dr Lyndal Hugo and Louise Orr
Organisation:	Agricultural & Environmental Management Systems (AEMS) P.O. Box 514, 2/185 Perth Street TOOWOOMBA QLD 4350.
Phone:	07 4613 0455
Fax:	07 4613 0427
Email:	lyndal@aemsaustralia.com.au; louise@aemsaustralia.com.au;
Objectives	· Provide an overview of the various forms of software used in agriculture to provide farmers with production, business and environmental management; · Outline a framework for integrated regional mapping information and spatial datasets with property management plans, wildlife management practices and environmental accreditation and compliance processes which strive for sustainable production; · Demonstrate this model using a description of the spatial and textual databases created.
Background	Property management planning support, with environmental management systems as the foundation, could be an incentive for landholders to participate in the SWE project. Combining natural resource management objectives and agricultural production requirements will necessitate the integration of complex regulatory and certification processes with new technologies and data management systems.
Research	A number of software packages dealing with specific areas within the agricultural and natural resource management industries were sourced, evaluated and briefly described. The technological requirements of a SWE that included several properties and various production activities within a sub-catchment, were investigated and identified, and used to create a hypothetical SWE, the "Caroo Wildlife Conservancy".
Outcomes	A hypothetical scheme addressing all the required aspects of a SWE was created using the AEMS Property OpsManager technology. This specifically addressed the issues of biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services, industry codes of practices, EMS, marketing and certification schemes, the development of wildlife conservancies including data sharing and security, adaptive management and research and support.
Implications	The use of innovative software with GIS mapping technology enables complex data management, rapid communication across boundaries, and supports the integration of regional and property management planning and certification processes.


 
 

Project Title:	Linking incentives - integrated policy instruments to achieve sustainable agricultural systems
RIRDC Project No.:	GAP-2A
Researcher:	Neil Gunningham
Organisation:	Gunningham and Associates
Phone:	0262548382
Fax:	0262548382
Email:	neilgunning@yahoo.com
Objectives	To provide a policy strategy that will improve environmental sustainability, facilitate the uptake of effective risk management tools and their integration into holistic farm management and integrate with the development of internationally acceptable accreditation/quality assurance systems .
Background	Australian agriculture is facing an environmental crisis, with alarming trends in the degradation of rural landscapes. These trends in turn have serious commercial implications, not only in terms of the declining productivity, but also in terms of the marketability of Australia’s agricultural produce. How should these environmental challenges be addressed? Recognising the limitations of the traditional approach, heavy emphasis is now being placed on the adoption of various voluntary environmental management arrangements (VEMAs), such as environmental management systems and codes of practice. Yet VEMAs are no panacea, and may best be used as part of an optimum mix of voluntary and formal approaches to environmental management. How this might be achieved, and the design principles involved in ‘linking incentives’, is the subject matter of this report.
Research	This report is based on a survey of international evidence, interview data and a case study of the Australian cotton industry.
Outcomes	Implementing a VEMA can be costly, not only in financial terms but also in term of time and resources. Sometimes, these initiatives may help to meet the expectations of supply chain partners; or maintain a sector’s credibility with export markets or others. But often the benefits of implementing VEMAs do not readily translate into financial terms, or may only be reaped in the medium or long term, while the up-front investment is primarily short term. And in some circumstances, the benefits will be substantially outweighed by the costs of introducing and implementing such initiatives.
Implications	Thus the ‘taken for granted’ view of the merits of pure voluntarism must give way to reasoned debate about the very substantial range of circumstances where VEMAs can only make a valuable contribution when combined with a range of other policy instruments, including positive and negative incentives, intervention by third parties and in some cases, an underpinning of regulation. What is needed is a strategy that builds on the strengths of VEMAs while compensating for their weaknesses by combining them with other, complementary policy instruments. This Report provides such a strategy and develops a principle-based framework for integrating VEMAs into broader policy mixes in any given circumstances. Ten Design principles are identified. The report demonstrates that the key is ‘linking incentives’: using a combination of integrated policy instruments to achieve sustainable agricultural systems.
Publications	Gunningham N "Incentives to Improve Farm Management: EMS, Supply-Chains and Civil Society" paper delivered to OECD Expert Workshop on Environmental Indicators, New Zealand, March 2004; "Beyond Voluntarism: Integrating Environmental Management Systems with Incentives and other Policy Instruments" proceedings, Conference on EMS Systems in Agriculture, Barossa, Nov 2003.


 

Project Title:	Developing free-range animal production systems
RIRDC Project No.:	SAR-30A
Researchers:	Dr Phil Glatz and Dr Yingjun Ru
Organisation:	South Australian Research and Development Institute
Phone:	08 83037786
Fax:	08 83037689
Email:	Glatz.phil@saugov.sa.gov.au
Objectives	· Establish a crop-pasture-free-range pig and poultry production system. · Monitor soil fertility, weed population, disease control and crop yield under this system; · Evaluate the feasibility of adoption of innovative crop/pasture/animal rotation systems
Background	Free-range pig production in Australia has generally been left to specialist enthusiasts or low input/low output operations. Experience in biodynamic farming systems suggests that health problems of animals in free-range systems are comparable with the intensive systems.  In southern Australia, however, summer temperatures and environmental concerns have limited the use of pigs and poultry in free-range systems. Nevertheless there is a growing consumer demand for greener and chemical free pork and free-range eggs.
Research	Pigs and poultry, housed in eco shelters were integrated into a pasture crop rotation to establish if free-range pig and poultry operations associated with organic grain production could be used on a niche scale in the wheat belt of Australia. Pigs and poultry were successfully integrated into the rotation and could be used in the same way sheep are used in the wheat belt with benefits to soil fertility and potential for weed control.  Performance of batches of pigs was comparable to intensive standards and the production of egg layers in the free-range system, generally matched the industry benchmark. A concern however was the predation of poultry by foxes.
Outcomes	·1 Pigs and poultry can be integrated into a pasture crop rotation and used to improve soil fertility and weed control.
Implications	Free-range pig and poultry operations associated with organic grain production could be used on a niche scale in the wheat belt of Australia.
Publications	Y. J. Ru, P. C. Glatz and H. Reimers (2001). Performance of grazing pigs in southern Australia. Pig Industry News June 2001 P. 5. Glatz, P.C. Y.J. Ru, H Reimers, M.Fischer, S Wyatt and B. Rodda (2002). Integrating free-range poultry into a pasture and cropping rotation. Pig and Poultry Fair 2002, Seminar Notes and Research Summaries Ru, Y.J. Glatz, P.C. H Reimers, M.Fischer, S Wyatt and B. Rodda (2002). Performance of grazing pigs in southern Australia. Pig and Poultry Fair 2002, Seminar Notes and Research Summaries; in press. Ru, Y.J., Glatz, P.C. H Reimers, M.Fischer, S Wyatt and B. Rodda (2002). Grazing pigs and sheep have similar influence on soils. Pig and Poultry Fair 2002, Seminar Notes and Research Summaries; in press. Glatz, P.C. and Ru, Y.J. (2001). Eco shelter housing of free-range poultry integrated into a pasture/crop rotation in the wheat belt of Australia. Proceedings of the 6th European Symposium on Poultry Welfare, pp. 299-301 Ru, Y.J., P. C. Glatz, H. Reimers, M. Fischer and S. Wyatt (2001). Performance of grazing pigs in summer in southern Australia. In Manipulating Pig Production VIII p. 44

Impediments / Risk Management
 

Project Title:	The Taxation of Primary Producers and Landholders and Natural Resource Management Issues (NRM)
RIRDC Project No.:	ASH-2A
Researchers:	Rod Ashby and Lachlan Polkinghorne
Organisation:	Rural Resources Group PO Box 916 Geelong VIC 3220
Phone:	Rod Ashby (03 5224 2663); Lachlan Polkinghorne (03 5266 2104)
Fax:	03 5229 7566
Email:	Rod Ashby rga@rrg.com.au; Lachlan Polkinghorne l.polkinghorne.@bigpond.com
Objectives	·1 To provide a comprehensive summary of the current framework in Australia and its possible role in encouraging investment into natural resources and their management ·2 To analyse the existing system and identify potential improvements ·3 To identify additional innovative tax policy initiatives which would further increase investment into natural resources
Background	The most cost-efficient way of improving NRM is to encourage land managers to improve their knowledge, management skills and access to appropriate systems of management. Understanding the tax system is necessary, whether considering current management, or new opportunities.  Where the tax law is helpful, land managers and tax practitioners need to understand how it can be applied to their situation. Improvements can also be identified but considerable analysis is required to understand the impact of changes to a complex system. Often, it is a combination of tax provisions, and other considerations such as landholder profitability which are important in the decision making process.
Outcomes	The book provides a summary and analysis of the income and other tax laws in Australia that are likely to affect investment and management of natural resources. It also provides an overview of innovative tax policies and identifies topics for further policy analysis. A major focus of the book is on the taxation of primary producers, as they manage a major portion of land within Australia. Contents of the book include an outline of relevant tax provisions for primary producers, and for all taxpayers, discussions on key tax issues and discussions of innovations which are relevant to natural resource management.
Implications	As natural resource management changes, both in a policy sense and from a land management point of view, it is necessary to review tax law. Understanding the impact of changes in tax provisions on the entire farming business is an essential aspect of review.
Publications	The Taxation of Primary Producers and Landholders and Natural Resource Management Issues (NRM)


 

Project Title:	The farmer’s road to clean and green horticulture
RIRDC Project No.:	CSL-14A
Researcher:	Richard Stirzaker
Organisation:	CSIRO Land & Water PO Box 1666 CANBERRA ACT 2601
Phone:	(02) 6246 5570
Fax:	(02) 6246 5965
Email:	richard.stirzaker@csiro.au
Objectives	To provide the land manager with a simple device (FullStop wetting front detector) in order to help them evaluate their own performance in managing water, salt and nutrients in irrigated horticulture, and to assist them to monitor the benefits of adopting new practices worthy of the clean green label.
Background	The FullStop wetting front detector was designed to be a simple and user-friendly tool to help land managers think about water and nutrient management on their own farms. The aim of the project is to give land managers the confidence and impetus to change practice where necessary. This might be a change to their irrigation, fertilizer or salt leaching practices, redesign of the irrigation system or the purchase more sophisticated monitoring tools.
Research	Wetting front detector were installed on farms in five locations covering surface drip, buried drip, fixed sprinkler, mini-sprinkler and centre pivot irrigation systems. The detector provides an electronic or visual signal to the farmer that water has infiltrated to the prescribed depth. The detector stores a water sample which was monitored for its nitrate content and electrical conductivity. The performance of the wetting front detector was compared to standard, more complex monitoring tools.
Outcomes	The wetting front detector proved to be a learning tool that opened up a dialogue with farmers. When this dialogue is properly facilitated the detector was able to point farmers to the aspects of their water, nitrate or salt management they should focus on. The project contributed greatly to our knowledge of how detectors should be deployed for different irrigation systems and how best to make the information they provide useful to farmers.
Implications	The management of water salt and nitrate in irrigated horticulture is complex and there is an urgent need for simple tools that can stimulate irrigators to improve practices. The simple information provided by wetting front detector could have a powerful impact on management decisions. However there remains an urgent need to build information package to support the technology.
Publications	Stirzaker R and Wilkie J (2002). Four lessons from a wetting front detector. Irrigation Association of Australia conference, Sydney May 2002 Stirzaker R, Sunassee S and Wilkie J (2004). Monitoring Water, Nitrate and Salt on-farm: a comparison of methods. Irrigation Association of Australia conference, Adelaide, May 2004

New technology systems - management
 

Project Title:	Economic and environmental benefits / risks of precision agriculture and mosaic farming
RIRDC Project No.:	CSW-34A
Researcher:	Lisa Brennan, Michael Robertson, Neal Dalgliesh, Stuart Brown, Brian Keating
Organisation:	CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems
Phone:	07 3214 2375
Fax:	07 3214 2308
Email:	Lisa.Brennan@csiro.au
Objectives	This project aimed to provide improved tools and processes to evaluate the economic and environmental benefits, and risks, associated with technologies that address spatial variability in Australian farming systems, such as precision agriculture and mosaic farming.
Background	Despite the breadth of possible applications of precision agriculture technologies, they are not in widespread use, and most attention has focused on the technical aspects of these technologies in the absence of a capability to explain the variation that such technologies have detected. Continuing growth in precision farming may provide the basis for sustainable agriculture through more closely matching resource use to resource capability, but it will rely on a capability to not only detect, but interpret and manage variation, and to assess the economic and environmental consequences of management alternatives guided by the use of these technologies.
Research	The research conducted in the project revolved around the decisions faced by farmers seeking to manage spatial variability at different scales on two case study farms –a grains-based farm in the north-east Australian wheat belt and another in the south-east Murray Darling Basin. Farmers and their advisers were involved in activities to test hypotheses of the causes of observed spatial variation, and consider management alternatives that may exploit such variability, through the application of soil characterisation, crop monitoring, farming systems simulation and economic analysis.
Outcomes	The project is a pioneering study in the application of dynamic, farming systems simulation to the evaluation of spatially-variable management alternatives for Australian agricultural landscapes. The research undertaken by this project has advanced the development of a new, ‘multi-point’ simulation capability to assess the impact of landscape-scale processes, such as surface water flows, as the potential determinant of variable production performance at the sub-paddock scale. One measure of this project’s success has been the collaborators’ improved understanding of their own or their client’s spatial variability from the project activities. The discussion sessions using farming systems modelling with landholders and their advisers have indicated strong interest in the potential of this to complement current precision agriculture technologies. Simulation modelling teamed with historical climate records can play an important role in interpreting the causes of variability and placing the performance of individual seasons in a long-term context, as well as assessing the likely responses to changed management practice.
Implications	While this research focussed on the management of only two farms, the tools and processes developed can potentially be made available to many more landholders around Australia via established commercial advisory services and public extension activities and can potentially be well utilized within established PA advisory services for landholders.
Publications	Brennan, L, Brown, S, Dalgliesh, N, Smith, C, Keating, B, Robertson, M, Cocks, B, 2002, ‘Economic and environmental benefits / risks of precision agriculture and mosaic farming'. Programs and abstracts, Precision Agriculture in Australia, 6th Annual Symposium on Precision Agriculture Research and Application, Sydney, August.

Accreditation systems
 

Project Title:	Integrating QA, EMS and ICM in the Yarra Valley – a case study
RIRDC Project No.:	DAV-186A
Researcher:	Alison Medhurst
Organisation:	Department of Primary Industries, Victoria
Phone:	03 9210 9246
Fax:	03 9800 3521
Email:	Alison.Medhurst@dpi.vic.gov.au
Objectives	The objective of this project was to develop and test a model regional environmental management system (EMS) for the Yarra Valley region in Victoria. The project aimed to develop a prototype or model for linking farm QA & BMP’s to a regional EMS using consultative and negotiated methods.
Background	An Environmental Management System (EMS) is defined as "a systematic and methodical approach to planning, implementing and reviewing an organisation’s efforts to manage its environmental risks and impacts" (DNRE, 2001) while providing opportunities for improved business performance (AFFA, 2002). An EMS gives a management framework based on a simple "plan, do, check, act" cycle that achieves continuous improvement.  A number of issues made the Yarra Valley an ideal place to pilot the concept of a regional EMS. These issues include conflict on the urban rural fringe about traditional production methods and concerns about contributions to the level of pollution in the Yarra River and ultimately Port Phillip Bay. A regional EMS is seen as an important tool for growers to demonstrate to consumers that food grown in the Yarra Valley is produced in an environmentally responsible manner.
Outcomes	Participatory processes were used throughout the project to engage with stakeholders in identifying environmental issues and developing the tools to enable industry to adopt the regional EMS. This approach resulted in a high level of ownership and advocacy for the project by the participants. The primary outputs of the project were the production of Regional Environmental Best Management Practices for Viticulture in the Yarra Valley and a Self-Assessment Questionnaire which are available on request from the authors.
Implications	This project has provided a model for development of a regional environmental management system.
Publications	· Regional Environmental Best Management Practice for Viticulture - Yarra Valley  · Regional Environmental Best Management Practice for Viticulture - Yarra Valley - Self-Assessment Questionnaire





Last updated: September 2004
Copyright © RIRDC
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/comp04/ras1.html