|| Home || Search || Contact ||

R & D Plan for the Joint Venture Agroforestry Program 1999–2004

ã Copyright 1999 RIRDC. All rights reserved  (Please read our Disclaimer)

The Joint Venture Agroforestry Program was established in 1993 and is jointly funded by:

• the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation;
• the  Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation; and
• the Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation.

Supported by the Murray Darling Basin Commission and the Natural Heritage Trust funding.

Foreword 2. Vision and Guiding Objective 4. Introduction to Agroforestry 6. The R & D Program	1. Purpose of the Plan 3. Background to the Program 5. Key Issues for Agroforestry 7. Approach to R & D Management

Foreword

by Peter Core, Managing Director, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Within the context of the Corporation's Five Year Strategic Plan (1997–2002), we have committed ourselves to the development of five-year plans for each of the major RIRDC programs.

This is the first agroforestry plan for RIRDC and another step to meeting our commitment of having R&D plans for each of the major programs that we manage. The plan identifies six key objectives for the R&D investments made on behalf of the agroforestry industry and the Commonwealth Government.

The objectives recognise the range of commercial and environmental benefits that may be pursued through farm forestry and each will foster research and development in areas that have been identified as contributing to an increased uptake of agroforestry. This publication has been prepared by the Joint Venture Agroforestry Program's Management Committee. It is based on a review of priorities by AACM International that included extensive consultation with tree growers, wood processors, land managers, researchers and government agencies.

It also draws on priorities established by the former Minister for Primary Industries and Energy for the Natural Heritage Trust funds administered through the Program. The plan is for all stakeholders in the industry. It will be distributed widely by the Corporation and used by JVAP to guide the ongoing R&D investments that are made.

The Plan is consistent with RIRDC's Strategic Plan (1997–2002) and will be implemented in accordance with the provisions of the Primary Industries and Energy Research and Development Act 1989.

Peter Core


---

1. Purpose of the Plan

This document presents the strategic plan for the Joint Venture Agroforestry Research and Development (R&D) Program (JVAP) for the period 1999–2004.

It has three main purposes:

• to identify priority agroforestry R&D needs for the period 1999–2004;
• to provide a rationale for the Joint Venture Agroforestry Program; and
• to encourage collaboration on, and coordination of, agroforestry R&D between farmer organisations, wood (and other forest product) processing industries, the JVAP, R&D corporations and various research agencies, community organisations, and others involved in the uptake of agroforestry research.




---

2. Vision and Guiding Objective

The vision for the future shared by farmers, rural landcare groups, the Joint Venture Agroforestry R&D Program, R&D corporations and the research community is:
 
 

"A dynamic Australian agroforestry sector which is economically viable through its contribution to the sustainable production of agricultural and forest products; is managed to sustain land, water and biodiversity resources; and is designed to enhance landscapes valued by landholders and communities at the regional and national levels."

With this vision in mind, the Joint Venture Agroforestry R&D Program has the following guiding objective: To integrate sustainable and productive agroforestry within Australian farming systems

---

3. Background to the Joint 
Venture Agroforestry R&D Program


The JVAP was established in 1993. It is a collaborative undertaking by three R&D corporations: Rural Industries (RIRDC), Land and Water Resources (LWRRDC), and Forest and Wood Products (FWPRDC).

Additional funding has been provided for some activities by the Murray Darling Basin Commission, the Grains R&D Corporation, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Australia (formerly the Department of primary Industries and Energy), and private investors. The JVAP invested about $1.5 million in agroforestry R&D in 1995/96, $2.0 million in 1996/97 and $2.6 million in 1997/98.

The nature of agroforestry makes it ideal for collaboration between R&D partners with varying priorities. It has the potential to provide multiple benefits to timber production, farm productivity, and to natural resource management by contributing to soil, water and biodiversity conservation.

The joint venture approach ensures that outcomes from agroforestry R&D expenditure are balanced amongst these benefits by focussing resources on a set of priorities agreed by all partners.

Setting Future Priorities

In 1997–98, the consultancy firm AACM International, undertook a review¹of the JVAPwith the aim of advising on future priorities . It did this based on extensive consultation with tree growers, wood processors, land managers, researchers and bureaucrats through the use of questionnaires and a series of consultative meetings.

In February 1998, the then Minister for Primary Industries and Energy advised that $4 million over three years, sourced from the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT), would be set aside for national farm forestry R&D.

Of this $4 million:

• $1.5 million would focus on the timber production elements of agroforestry and the sustainable management and use of private native forests and woodlands. These funds would be managed by FWPRDC; and
• $2.5 million would be available to assess new tree crop products and industries with an emphasis on native species and the development of commercial farm forestry as an integral part of sustainable agricultural systems, including biodiversity and the protection of the natural resource base.


Of particular relevance would be areas where farm forestry has so far been limited, such as in the medium to lower rainfall areas. These funds would be managed by RIRDC. In addition the Murray Darling Basin Commission will be contributing $275,000 to the Joint Venture Program in 1998–99 and 1999–2000.

The Minister invited the Management Committee of the JVAP to determine a specific funding program on the basis of these priorities. The strategic plan described in this booklet builds on the current outcomes sought for the JVAP. It draws on the priorities established by the former Minister for Primary Industries and Energy for the NHT component of the Program, and on those set out in the review by AACM International.

---

4. Introduction to Agroforestry

Agroforestry, also called farm forestry, can be defined broadly as the management of trees and shrubs integrated with agricultural systems for multiple products and benefits.

Many farmers have long recognised the value of trees as part of the agricultural system. For example, trees offer wood products for commercial sale, shade for livestock, protection of crops from the wind, and habitat for the predators of insect pests. But trees have been seen by others as an impediment to agriculture.

They compete for water and other resources with crops and pastures, they damage property improvements such as tracks and fences, and they impede the operation of machinery. In Australia over the last two centuries, trees have been cleared in large numbers to facilitate agriculture.

The widespread clearing of trees and other native vegetation has had unforeseen consequences. For example, in parts of the continent (most markedly in the Murray Darling Basin and the West Australian wheatbelt), the removal of trees has had a devastating effect on the hydrological balance.

Watertables have risen, bringing salt held in the soil profile to the surface. Dryland salinity is currently estimated to affect 2.5 million hectares of farmland; a total of 12 million hectares is estimated to be at risk² .

Driving Forces for Agroforestry

The trend of land clearance has slowed considerably — and even reversed— in some regions of the country, although it continues in others.

At the same time, agroforestry has become increasingly popular on Australian farms. Broadly speaking, farmers plant trees for four main reasons:

• new product diversification: tree products such as wood, pulp or oils provide opportunities to generate new income;
• enhancement of existing enterprises: agroforestry can increase the productivity of a traditional pasture-based enterprise through, for example, the provision of shelter for animals and crops;
• natural resource protection: trees can help protect the quality of soil and water resources. For example, trees may help limit wind and water erosion. Depending on the scale and configuration of plantings and their position in the landscape, they can also help in salinity management;
• conservation and beauty: trees add horizontal and vertical structure to the landscape and provide new niches for other plants and animals. Trees can be planted to buffer remnant vegetation and to provide wildlife corridors.


Farmers often plant trees for a combination of reasons: trees, it is hoped, will provide farm income, while simultaneously solving land degradation problems and enhancing the productivity of other enterprises. In many situations, this may be an unrealistic expectation, but in others the judicious use of agroforestry design principles may provide the farm with multiple benefits.

---

5. Key Issues for Agroforestry

Why Has the Uptake of Agroforestry Been Slow?
The Role of R&D
The Role of the JVAP
How Can the Risks be Managed?
What is the Potential Return?


Agroforestry has the capacity to deliver both private and public benefits. Private benefits can accrue to landholders in the form of income from wood and non-wood products. In a sense, agroforestry provides farmers with an alternative crop — albeit one with a relatively long rotation — that can supplement farm income.

Other benefits of agroforestry to the landholder may include increased farm productivity, increased land value and reduced damage to infrastructure (from, for example, salinity or wind and water erosion).

Agroforestry may also provide benefits to the processors of forest products. An increasing resource of wood fibre grown in farm plantations, for example, could help offset dwindling supplies from native forests and facilitate the expansion of a wood products sector.

The public benefits are potentially substantial, and of national significance. The widespread adoption of agroforestry in critical regions will address a range of natural resource management and environmental issues such as:
 

• the loss of productive land to salinity and other types of soil degradation – it is in the national interest to maintain and enhance the capacity of the land to grow food and other products;
• biodiversity conservation (both on-site and off-site, such as downstream wetlands);
• the loss of water quality (such as that caused by rising salinity levels and siltation); and damage to public infrastructure such as roads and buildings.


An increasing area of tree plantations may also help address the country’s trade deficit in wood products and revitalise rural communities.

In addition, agroforestry may be a useful means of sequestering carbon, particularly should carbon credits trading become practised widely. This could provide private benefits to landholders, emitters of greenhouse gases (such as power companies) and brokers. It may also provide public benefits by reducing the national contribution to the enhanced greenhouse effect.

Australian agroforestry is most developed in regions of relatively high rainfall that are close to timber markets or wood processing facilities. It is less well advanced and less easily driven by wood fibre production in the sheep-wheat belts and pastoral zones, which generally are further from markets and processing facilities and have lower rainfall. In these circumstances a mix of public and private investment may sometimes be needed to encourage agroforestry plantations in these areas.

Valuing the benefits of agroforestry presents considerable difficulties, particularly since many potential impacts are not readily amenable to traditional cost-benefit analyses. Nevertheless, a recent JVAP-funded study³ attempted to estimate the potential benefits that agroforestry might make should it be adopted across the country at optimal rates.

Based on a range of arguable assumptions, the study predicted:
 

• an increase of $2.7 billion per year in farm income, of which about 40 per cent would accrue from timber production and 60 per cent from yield improvements in other farm enterprises;
• an increase in the annual volume of wood available equal to about 4 times the current annual harvest.
• This would have a market value of $20 billion and lead to an increase in employment of over 40,000 people
• the delivery of non-market environmental services worth $363 million per year, consisting of $150 million in reduced land degradation, $115 million in carbon sequestration, $32 million in reduced salinity, $27 million in improved water quality, $35 million in enhanced biodiversity and aesthetics, and $5 million in regional spillover effects.


In 1997 the Commonwealth and State Governments announced the 2020 Vision Framework, recognising the need to promote plantation forestry in Australia. The goal is to treble the effective area of Australia’s plantations between 1996 and 2020.

The strategy’s focus is particularly on addressing the impediments to the wider uptake of plantation forestry. About 60 per cent of Australian lands are managed privately and plantations on cleared agricultural land will be vital to achieving this vision. It is also clear that if the considerable public benefits offered by agroforestry are to be achieved we need a growing commercially viable agroforestry sector.

Why Has the Uptake of Agroforestry Been Slow?

A national-level inventory of agroforestry has not yet been conducted, so the full extent of its practice is not known. The indications are that it is expanding, particularly in regions such as south western Australia and the ‘green triangle’. Nevertheless, advocates suggest that the rate of expansion has generally been slow.

For example, a recent study⁴ commissioned by the JVAPsuggests that:  Despite greater recognition of farm forestry as a potentially important landuse and timber supply option, there is still much to be done before it could realistically be considered anything other than of marginal significance to Australia’s agricultural and timber industries.

The widespread adoption of agroforestry faces a number of impediments. These include:
 

• market impediments – the unclear or conflicting role of state governments as both regulator and dominant wood grower can cause distortions in the market for wood products. Private growers lack confidence that pricing mechanisms are transparent and that log markets are subject to fair competition. There are also gaps in the information available on the market opportunities for the products of some species. Another issue is the lack of clear market values for farm forestry environmental services;
• public policy constraints – historically, government policy settings have not been conducive to agroforestry. The fragmentation of responsibilities across spheres of government and between agencies creates policy confusion, as do inconsistencies and irregularities in local government land-use planning.


There are other, more specific public policy constraints. For example, the way that agroforestry is to be taxed remains unclear. In addition, governments have generally failed to allow tree-tenure, which would permit ownership of trees as distinct from the land they occupy. This would help establish clear markets for plantations and facilitate investment in them;

• economic barriers — farm forestry has a poor public profile, which inhibits investment — especially by institutional investors such as superannuation funds and investment managers. In general, agroforestry (outside a few select regions) is perceived to offer a high level of risk on substantial investment outlays, coupled with long delays before income is generated;
• lack of a farm forestry culture — Australia does not have a farm forestry culture. Trees have often been viewed as an impediment to agriculture and their potential role as part of a productive landscape has not always been appreciated;
• lack of technical knowledge — many practical questions of science and technology remain unanswered. For example, there is still a very limited understanding of the relationship between trees and catchment water balances, and about the nature of the trade-offs involved in implementing different agroforestry systems.


Design principles to maximise the benefits of trees and minimise their negative effects require greater refinement. In addition, if agroforestry is to be extended into lower rainfall areas to address environmental concerns, more information is needed on how to optimise the commercial benefits for farmers in those regions. And more research is needed into the environmental benefits of agroforestry, such as its role in the conservation of biological diversity, and mechanisms to ensure that landholders benefit from providing such public goods.

At a broader level, the lack of an adequate farm forestry inventory hinders investor interest and the development of regional infrastructure; lack of supporting knowledge systems — the collection and dissemination of knowledge about farm forestry can be improved.

The dispersal of R&D efforts across a diversity of organisations with few structured or formal means of cooperating further impedes the transfer of knowledge. The trend towards corporatisation of state government agencies also impedes the free flow of knowledge.

The Role of R&D

Against the background of these impediments it can be argued that future commercial agroforestry investments, particularly in the medium to low rainfall regions, are subject to considerably greater risk than other commercial land use enterprises with proven production systems and more transparent commodity markets. R&D intervention can help reduce this risk by:
• quantifying land, water, biodiversity and social responses to agroforestry systems;
• developing and demonstrating design principles for agroforestry systems;
• extending commercial forestry research to agroforestry systems; and
• demonstrating the ability of agroforestry systems to meet forest industry needs.

The Role of the JVAP

The JVAP has a key role in initiating and coordinating these four spheres of action. It will vary between regions. Where commercial agroforestry is already well advanced, the JVAP should assist the removal of remaining policy and institutional impediments and help rectify market failures. In the lower rainfall zones, where agroforestry is less dynamic, the JVAP will need to become increasingly active.

How Can the Risks be Managed?

The principal risks associated with investment in agroforestry R&D relate to:
• continuing gaps in information and data
• complex biophysical issues relating to tree performance and the impact of trees on the landscape
• the large regional differences in agroforestry systems
• lack of uptake of research results.


The JVAP can maximise its impact by concentrating on R&D that has a national focus and that provides the knowledge base to increase the confidence of investors in agroforestry. The program can also address some of the above risks by ensuring that, where relevant, research outcomes are built into advice on design principles and guidelines for agroforestry systems.

What is the Potential Return?

RIRDC has recently undertaken a cost/benefit analysis of a number of its emerging industries sub-programs including agroforestry. Many projects related to agroforestry are difficult to evaluate because they require an estimation of the value of non-market benefits.

Even when quantification is possible, estimates of the net benefit are likely to be fairly low because of the long time lag for the pay-off in terms of merchantable timber and natural resource management benefits. Nevertheless, a recent benefit-cost analysis⁵ of one JVAP project on cost reduction in tree establishment provided an internal rate of return of 59 per cent (benefit–cost ratio of 8:1).

On a more qualitative basis it can be argued that the successful integration of agroforestry into Australian farming systems can deliver large public and private benefits. However, as identified above, there remain significant knowledge gaps that could impede the realisation of these benefits. Investment in the JVAP’s integrated set of R & D priorities will address some of these gaps and therefore has the potential to realise a positive benefit cost ratio.

---

6. The Research and Development Program

The following pages set out strategies to achieve each of the identified research objectives, along with performance indicators.

The objectives identified for the program recognise the range of commercial and environmental benefits that may be pursued through farm forestry. Aspects of these benefits are identified in separate research objectives, while Objective 5 seeks to provide the tools to enable forest growers to adopt integrated systems:

1. Targeted strategies for implementation of farm forestry

2. More sustainable management of natural resources eg soil, water, biodiversity

3. Optimised productivity of crops and pastures

4. Optimised direct returns from tree products

5. Cost effective multi-purpose agroforestry systems to meet commercial and environmental objectives

6. Effective communications


 
 
 

Objective 1: Targeted strategies for implementation of farm forestry

Background

There remains a range of economic, institutional and social impediments to the adoption of farm forestry. These increase the risk and uncertainty associated with agroforestry as a farm enterprise. This objective seeks to underpin the removal of these impediments by improving information flows, particularly relating to markets and commodity products, and by complementing the process of policy and institutional change by providing well researched analysis and options.

Strategies

1.1    Market development of niche and commodity products for wood based and non-wood based industries and the development of new tree crop industries, particularly where there is potential for larger scale application.

1.2    Facilitate the provision of market information on a region by region basis.

1.3    Examine options for addressing the cultural, legislative, policy and legal impediments to the development of commercial farm forestry.

1.4    Documentation of successful agroforestry activities.

1.5    Develop informed cost sharing arrangements for agroforestry systems, especially in medium to low rainfall areas, that enable the negotiation of arrangements to share the costs of delivering environmental services to the regional community.

Performance Indicators

• Number of viable commercial options that underpin an expansion of agroforestry.
• Extent and quality of market information available to growers.
• Availability of a basis for cost sharing that has the confidence of agroforestry stakeholders within two years.

---

Objective 2: More sustainable management 
of natural resources eg soil, water, biodiversity

Background

Tree planting is a key means of dealing with some of Australia’s major natural resource and environmental problems such as dryland salinity and soil erosion. Trees are also accepted as a potential carbon sink that can contribute to reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases.

Since some 60 per cent of Australia’s land is managed by private landholders, the integration of trees into farming systems will be crucial to achieving the level of tree planting that will address these issues. In addition there is now significant public investment in tree planting through a variety of State and Commonwealth Government programs.

This objective seeks to provide and disseminate the biophysical and economic information needed to optimise the investment in trees to improve Australia’s environmental amenity and natural resource base.

Strategies

2.1 At the farm and catchment scale, develop an understanding of the influences of management and design on tree water use and assess the feasibility of commercial tree production in irrigated and shallow water tables.

2.2 Determine how best agroforestry can contribute to biodiversity and nature conservation. This will particularly focus on a quantified understanding of changes in biodiversity between cleared agricultural land and agroforestry systems including the development of indicators to measure such changes. It will also focus on the development of guidelines to enhance biodiversity in agroforestry.

2.3 Develop and apply catchment models to sites strategically situated in a selection of agroecological and hydrogeological zones in order to optimise catchment health and tree productivity.

2.4 In collaboration with other relevant agencies, assess the carbon sequestration capacity of agroforestry systems and examine issues relating to the availability of carbon credits for farm forestry.

2.5 Understand the influence of agroforestry systems on soil physical, chemical and biological properties and determine the best species combinations for particular soil conditions.

Performance Indicators

• Availability by end-1999 of farm and catchment design information that provides clearer guidance on the placement of trees in the landscape to manage groundwater.
• Availability by 2000 of design options that facilitate the incorporation of biodiversity objectives into agroforestry systems.
• Availability and uptake of information on the impact of agroforestry on soil properties
• Contribution of farm trees to improvements in the condition of Australia’s environment and natural resources.
• Quality of the R & D on which a potential carbon credit system is based.

---

Objective 3: Optimised productivity of crops and pastures


Background

This objective recognises that the integration of agroforestry with farming systems can provide benefits such as shelter, and increased yields of crops and pasture. A JVAP national project is underway which aims to determine the impact of windbreaks on agricultural systems. Further research is required to obtain a better predictive capacity.

Strategies

3.1 Assess the effects of agroforestry on productivity of other agricultural enterprises.

3.2 Provide an integrated and quantified assessment and predictive capacity of the response of agricultural systems to windbreaks.

Performance indicators

• Availability of information to farmers which allows them to quantify and predict the impact of trees on their farming systems
• Availablity of design principles for windbreaks by end-1999.




---

Objective 4: Optimised direct returns from tree products


Background

Commercial timber production and production of oils and other products has the potential to be a major new farm industry and thus provide for diversification of farm income. Uptake, however, requires improved information on commercially viable species, forest management systems, harvesting and processing.

If the multiple objectives of farm forestry are to be achieved its geographical range needs to be extended. The development of agroforestry in medium to low rainfall areas and in northern Australia is highlighted in this objective.

Strategies

4.1 Identification and development of commercial species and provenances for agroforestry systems and products in medium to low rainfall areas and in northern Australia.

4.2 Assessment of high potential species for commercial farm forestry in the higher to medium rainfall zones, including the use of growth models for commercial farm trees.

4.3 Assessment and development of wood processing technologies and applications for smaller woodlots and timber belts, including different methods and approaches to on-farm processing.

4.4  Development of best practice farm forestry management systems for commercial purposes, including cost effective silvicultural and harvesting methods and systems.

4.5. Assessment and development of new methods of control of insect pests.

Performance Indicators

• Extent of systematic information available on financially viable species and provenances for agroforestry systems and products.
• Availability and uptake of on-farm harvesting and processing methods.




---

Objective 5: Cost effective multi-purpose agroforestry 
systems to meet commercial and environmental objectives

Background

Given the complex range of benefits that can be achieved from farm forestry, farmers will inevitably face tradeoffs in decisions relating to their own particular circumstances. This objective aims to bring together the research outcomes from the program’s other objectives to provide a better understanding of agroforestry systems and to develop design guidelines and decision making tools that will assist farmers to balance commercial objectives and those relating to natural resource management and the environment.

Strategies

5.1 Develop farm forestry design options and decision-making tools applicable to emerging industries and the multiple benefits of such development. This will particularly include the integration of perennial species for production and environmental services into medium to low-rainfall grazing and cropping farming systems.

5.2 Investigate the sustainable management and use of private native forest, including consideration of techniques for protection of the natural resource base and biodiversity and silvicultural regimes for farm regrowth.

5.3 Development of a design principles framework drawing on the research results from the other objectives.

5.4 Develop decision support tools to assist landowners assess the financial and economic viability of agroforestry options.

Performance Indicators

• Availability and uptake of design options and decision making tools.
• Availability of information packages on best management practices for the management of private native forests.




---

Objective 6: Effective Communications


Background

Effective communications are crucial to the success of the strategies in this R & D Plan. Each of the above objectives will be managed to ensure that the research outcomes are accessible to forest growers and their advisors. This will include working with regional groupings, such as regional plantation committees and developing R & D products that facilitate the flow of information.

Strategies

6.1 Develop mechanisms for forging stronger linkages with researchers and the farm forestry community, disseminating research to farm forestry stakeholders and strengthening human capacity within farm forestry.

6.2 Ensure that communication of research outcomes is integral to the planning of R & D strategies and projects.

Performance Indicators

• JVAP products are widely available and used by agroforestry advisors and forest growers.
• Strengthened human capacity within farm forestry.




---


 

7. Approach to Research 
and Development Management

To achieve more effective research outcomes and promote a stronger research and development capacity the Joint Venture will continue to pursue the following strategies:
• use of competitive bidding, open tenders and commissioning
• encourage the design of multidisciplinary projects
• promotion of economies of scale
• encouragement of links with forest growers
• co-financing of multidisciplinary projects.


Monitoring and Evaluation

Expansion of the Joint Venture and the inclusion of NHT funds highlight the need for continuing effective monitoring and evaluation of the Program’s performance. The sub-program was assessed in 1997 as part of an overall cost benefit analysis of RIRDC’s emerging new industries program (see page 18). Both RIRDC and the FWPRDC have processes in place to monitor rogress in funded projects and close attention is paid to the best strategies for communicating outcomes.

A specific program of evaluation of the R&D outcomes of the investment of NHT R&D funds will be conducted in 2001. Such an evaluation will be based on the performance indicators identified in this plan, but will also assess the impact of the R&D activities on the NHT objectives by using the relevant indicators currently being developed for the NHT funded vegetation programs.

---


 

Copyright and Disclaimer Statement

© 1999 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation.
All rights reserved.

The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this WWW publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of persons consulted. RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report. This publication is copyright. However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Corporation is clearly acknowledged. For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186.

RIRDC Research Manager Contact Details
RIRDC Research Managers: Dr Roslyn Prinsley/Sharon Davis,
RIRDC
PO Box 4776
KINGSTON ACT 2604
Phone: 02 6271 4033/02 6271 6671
Fax: 02 6272 5877
Email: roslynp@rirdc.gov.au  or  sharond@rirdc.gov.au

RIRDC Contact Details
Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation
Level 1, AMA House
42 Macquarie Street
BARTON ACT 2600
PO Box 4776
KINGSTON ACT 2604

Phone: 02 6272 4539
Fax: 02 6272 5877
Email: rirdc@netinfo.com.au


---

References

1. Priority setting for the Joint Venture Agroforestry Program (1998). Prepared by AACM International. Joint Venture Agroforestry Program, Canberra.

2. National Dryland Salinity Program Management Plan 1998–2003, LWRRDC, Canberra.

3. Contribution of Farm Forestry to Australia—A Quantitative Assessment (1996). Prepared by AACM International, the Centre for International Economics and Forestry Technical Services. Joint Venture Agroforestry Program, Canberra. (Part of a 3 part agroforestry resource kit "Commercial Farm Forestry in Australia: Development of a Strategy Framework).

4. Creating a viable farm forestry industry in Australia: what will it take? (1998). Final report of the project ‘Policy reforms for farm forestry – post NPAC’. Prepared by Jason Alexandra and Michael Hall. Joint Venture Agroforestry Program, Canberra.

5. Benefit-cost analysis of RIRDC’s emerging industries program (1998). Prepared by the Centre for International Economics. Rural Industries R&D Corporation, Canberra.
 
 
 

Last updated: 19 May 1999 Copyright © RIRDC
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/pub/aft5yr.htm