Australia's Natural Resources
1997-2002 and beyond
National Land and Water Resources Audit, 2002
Appendix 3-Monitoring and Evaulation of the National Land and Water Resouces Audit Progress Report 6
Agtrans Research, 10 October 2001
Executive summary
This aim of this report is to provide an evaluation of the Audit's performance, products and processes up until the end of September 2001. The timing of this report has been determined so that is can provide input before the final Audit report is written and finalised.
Achievements
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. The foundation provided by the Audit including the development of ongoing standards and protocols, the establishment of baselines, and a framework for ongoing monitoring at a national level of natural resource management information are expected to be the most valuable outputs.
The Atlas and the Data Library are high profile products of the Audit and will be valuable for a range of natural resource management managers. These resources, together with the enhanced comparability of data sets, and the development of a range of new natural resource management information products targeted at decision-making needs, all represent a significant improvement in information availability and accessibility.
Objectives and role
All of the six objectives of the Audit have been at least partially met, with delivery of the second objective relating to interpretation of costs and benefits, being the weakest. However, for what the Audit tried to achieve, it was under-resourced and its objectives were over-ambitious for the time period, the complexity of the tasks, and the budget. The Audit could have been even more effective if it had been more focused on a specific role.
Information provided
The Audit has been successful in drawing on a wide range of existing data and has reworked it into comparable national data sets and products. This has been an outstanding achievement in itself given the difficulties faced. However, information about cause and effect, trends over time, and the 'condition' of some natural resources has proved difficult to provide, largely due to existing data inadequacies and different perceptions regarding condition. Also, information on management practices, important in understanding causal effects and impacts and leading to appropriate remedial activities was scarce. This was understandably not a principal focus of the Audit but where information was assembled, (e.g. the dairy industry) its value is already being demonstrated.
Availability, accessibility and relevance of the data provided were generally good, but less confidence is held in the capacity for integration, repeatability and accuracy of the information due mainly to its different sources and methods of collection/estimation.
Integration of data across themes was generally weaker than integration within themes. This is particularly so with regard to future monitoring systems that might evolve and become established from the existing theme initiatives. The future framework for monitoring needs to be integrated to ensure that it is useful for natural resource decision making.
Outcomes
There are difficulties in relating changes in policy and investment programs to improved information and also in attributing changes in the state of natural resources to policy and investment changes. The long lead times to measurable improvements is one reason. However, whatever the final outcome, it is clear that Audit information is already being used by a range of natural resource management decision makers and examples of this use are provided in this report. It can be expected that such decisions in program planning and policies will result in improved natural resource management.
Management
The Management of the Audit via the Audit Management Unit has been outstanding, given the starting point, the very broad brief, the resources and the constraints faced due to the investment in existing data collection processes and the range of jurisdictions involved. The Audit Management Unit is held in high esteem by all those involved in the Audit and project management by the unit has been accountable and of a high standard.
On the other hand, the Audit would have benefited from a better designed program plan and an integration model that recognised the critical pathways needed to provide the integrated outputs and outcomes. Greater emphases could have been placed on the early consultative processes with regard to each theme. Permanent steering committees should have been established for each theme and representatives should have been drawn from a wider cross section of natural resource management interests and with a strong representation from users. An independent mid-term review of each theme in order to refocus the highest priority theme outputs would have improved outputs and built ownership.
Consultation and communication with interested users outside of the Commonwealth, State and Territory agencies varied with those engaged in projects or peak bodies subject to regular communication. More general consultation with decision makers, industry and community groups would have been beneficial in building support and knowledge.
The Audit has made a start regarding team building and leadership in a nation-wide approach to natural resource data and monitoring. However, significant improvement in processes, institutional arrangements, and change in cultures is required.
Jurisdictional factors inhibit the efficiency and continuity of a comparable national data assembly program for natural resources. This particularly applies to coordination of effort between departments and agencies within both Commonwealth and State/Territory governments.
Communication and training
Strong communication and extension of the Audit's products will be required to obtain the most value for the Audit investment. This communication should detail the products available, where they can be found, their limitations and how they can best be used. Some form of training for using the Atlas and Data Library will also be required to maximise use and effectiveness of the Audit products.
The Audit final report
Suggestions for material that might be contained in the final report from the Audit have been made. The most important include:
- what has been delivered set in the context of varying expectations;
- the important products and outputs produced;
- integration and demonstration of linkages between themes;
- needs, uses and benefits of information in decision making;
- index/signposts as to where information resides and how it can be accessed;
- lessons learnt;
- plans for maintaining the data within an ongoing framework; and
- policy issues regarding natural resource management information.
-
The future
To take advantage of many of the outputs of the Audit, it is essential that some manner of nationwide comparable data collection and monitoring continue. Future initiatives should be accompanied by a higher level of consultation and involvement with target groups particularly those who are involved in natural resource management decision making.
An improved balance will be required in the future between regional and national level data assembly. It would be appropriate for any future Audit to focus on priority areas and be comfortable with investing greater effort in some areas compared with others.
It would be worthwhile examining the theme structure used in Audit 1 with the objective of providing a higher level of integration in future Audit products.