Reinventing Irrigation Catchments, The System Harmonisation Story

Reinventing Irrigation CatchmentsThe System Harmonisation Story

Keith L. Bristow and Tim StubbsStories collated and edited by Tim Stubbs

Water and land are connected and interconnected; they are separate but one

ISBN 978 0 9808109 4 3 (PDF)ISBN 978 0 9808109 5 0 (Print)

Digital Publication

A PDF version of this book is available from the CRC for Irrigation Futures website at: http://www.irrigationfutures.org.au/SystemHarmonisationStory/

Copyright and Disclaimer

2010 IF Technologies Pty Ltd. This work is copyright. It may be reproduced subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source.

Important Disclaimers

The Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures and its participants advise that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements based on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures and its participants (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.

The views or opinions presented in the stories and talking points within this book are those of the individuals and do not necessarily represent those of the authors or the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures.

Every effort has been made to trace and acknowledge copyright material and all information and data are accurate and correct at the time of publication, September 2010.

Contacts

Keith L. Bristow, CRC for Irrigation Futures, PMB, Aitkenvale, Townsville, QLD 4814, AUSTRALIATim Stubbs, Yellow and Blue Pty Ltd, [email protected]

Design Notes

Cover by Miriam Alexander, Toot Toot Design, Balmain, NSWTypeface 'ArumSans' by Australian Type Foundry, Merewether NSWPrinted by Galloping Press, Kirrawee, NSW

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2

The System Harmonisation Story 7

Before you Start

How to Read this Book

Just like System Harmonisation this book can be approached in many different ways. You can read the book from cover to cover like a conventional book. We hope you find it interesting and enjoy the way the stories and findings evolve.

You can read the book from an area of interest. Five topics have been identified. These topics are explained in the following five pages and each is represented by an icon. Throughout the book you will find a water gauge on the right hand of the right page. The topics in each story will be represented by the icons on the water gauge on that page.

If you prefer you can read about a particular region. Page 13 has a legend linking each region with a colour. Also at the front of the section for each region is a family tree which maps the relationships between the interviewees of the stories and people named in the stories.

At the back of the book you will find an index of topics, an index of people and an index of terms.

Reading by Topic

8 Reinventing Irrigation Catchments

Region


Reading by Topic

To find out how much of an impact the ENVIRONMENT had in the System Harmonisation process follow the above symbol in GREEN

Environment

Perhaps the most important part of System Harmonisation was trying to understand how irrigation systems integrated within their broader environment.

What are the interactions and relationships? Are they positive or negative? Are these interactions factored into decision making or are they an afterthought?

One of the objectives of System Harmonisation was to bring the environment into the discussions about the future of a region.

A harmonised system would be one where progress of the region would be closely linked to progress in understanding and improving the environmental condition of the region.

The record shows that the environment was not a cornerstone for most of the System Harmonisation groups that were formed. In some it became a more significant issue as the work progressed but it was never identified as one of the issues that needed to be addressed and resourced from the beginning.

Invariably, if people had been asked a more specific question about the importance or significance of the environment, it is likely it would have figured more prominently in the answers. However, this is to some extent the problem, it only features when prompted. It is not seen as the critical infrastructure which underlies irrigation and its future sustainability and profitability.

The exception to this is the Macintyre Brook group. Their starting point of trying to develop a green tick accreditation showed they had a belief that the market valued the environment. Unfortunately for them they later found this was not so much the case.

However, even after this setback the Macintyre Brook group still developed a State of the Catchment report. This was not based on the social or economic health but rather the environmental health of the catchment.

This report gives the Macintyre Brook group a starting point to understand where they are and also gain an insight into what they might do to their ecological infrastructure as they make decisions about their irrigation future.

As Mary Annand, former Chair of the group so eloquently says, I think that we have started to sow the seeds, to turn on the lights in peoples heads, about the fact that a healthy river is ultimately a strong productive business.

9The System Harmonisation Story

Story Name


Before you Start

Look for the above symbol in YELLOW to focus on SCIENCE as a reading topic in System Harmonisation

Science

System Harmonisation is all about science, but not science on its own. It is about bringing all different types of science together with economics, environment and communities to solve catchment scale problems. To do this well requires strong disciplinary skills working collaboratively.

For System Harmonisation to work the science needs to be flexible, not in terms of the rigour of the process or the statement of the findings but rather in the way the issues are approached. In System Harmonisation the decisions about what science is needed and where it is needed must be driven by the environmental, social and economic conditions of a region. The science must also be able to evolve as the community evolves in its understanding of the system and each other.

Science has had some success in the System Harmonisation Program. However, this has generally been due to the leadership shown by only a few individuals. The program has highlighted that scientists still struggle to connect their science with the people who can use it. It also seems that they struggle to understand what irrigators need from them and their research.

Bridging this divide would appear to be one of the biggest hurdles to Australia having a resilient environment and a profitable irrigation future. The Burdekin and Western Sydney regions provide signs of hope but there is still a long way to go!


Reading by Topic

Look for the above symbol in BLUE to read the perspectives of IRRIGATORS in the System Harmonisation story

Irrigators

The irrigators were the people at the centre of System Harmonisation. To a large extent their stories tell the success or failure of the program.

Irrigation and irrigators in Australia are at a critical fork in the road. The world has changed and people are now more than ever aware of the health of the environment.

Yet at the same time the population of the planet continues to grow and with it the demands for food and fibre, the products of irrigation.

Irrigators find themselves jammed in the middle of what appear to be conflicting requirements - more food, less impact.

System Harmonisation potentially offered a way forward, a way to meet both needs and ensure a productive and sustainable irrigation future.

Yet to some extent irrigators failed to engage. The courageous and pro-active did but even they lament the difficulty in engaging the broader group.

To some degree System Harmonisation has shown that for the majority of irrigators today is more important than tomorrow, next year and the next 50-years.

In this way they are not different from most. However, if this does not change the future of irrigation will be stunted and difficult.


Story Name


Before you Start

Trace the above symbol in PURPLE to see how LEADERSHIP AND COLLABORATION played a role in System Harmonisation

Leadership and Collaboration

Now this seems strange; these are people words. Isnt System Harmonisation all about irrigation, catchments, science, environment and economics? What has it got to do with leadership and collaboration? What could it possibly have to do with relationships and communication?

System Harmonisation is about people and their environment. How do you lead so that people feel they are part of a process where their aspirations and thoughts are heard, respected and considered? How do you communicate so people learn from the science and economics but also teach the people doing the science and economics? How do you build and strengthen relationships so that people trust and share and collaborate fully?

The challenge of people and how we work and how we are is the greatest challenge of System Harmonisation. This area was perhaps the greatest success of the System Harmonisation Program and was worth doing.

All regions learnt something about leadership and collaboration. This learning ranges from Hugo Hoptons comment, we found out pretty well where we differed but didnt necessarily find where we had shared views, to those of Andrew Kelly in the Burdekin, to get over that we have learnt just to be totally upfront, honest and everyone has got the common goal now around that table and its good and it was about trust but it took time.

All regions also found that it was the people stuff that was the difference between success and failure. Where people were not able to communicate effectively and develop collaborative relationships, the program struggled or was put on hold.

Leadership was also shown to be a critical ingredient. Limestone Coast appeared to lack clear leadership on the side of the CRC. As a result the stakeholders of the region found it difficult to engage. Coleambally clearly shows what can happen when there is a sudden loss of leadership. Macintyre Brook to some degree was an example of a program without leadership until the irrigators took a greater level of control. Subsequently the group was able to develop a product of benefit to them out of the program.

Both the Burdekin and the Western Sydney Groups showed the benefits of strong leadership. Both these groups evolved through their early stages largely as a result of the leadership shown by one or two key individuals. This leadership ensured communication was good enough to keep things moving forward and to keep people engaged. This leadership also provided an environment where relationships could develop and grow.

Both these groups have further challenges; however, what they and all the groups have learnt about leadership and collaboration is extremely valuable for the future of irrigation.


Region


Reading by Topic

To find out how BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS shaped System Harmonisation track the above symbol in RED

Business and Economics

The future of irrigation is about economics but it is also about the environment, so how do we get the best possible outcome now and in the long term?

Irrigation regions and individual irrigators are constantly being challenged to make good economic decisions to ensure they have an irrigation future.

But in a harmonised system is economics about more than just the dollars in your hand? Is it possible to make decisions based on not just the economics of an individual farm or even a region but on the economics of an entire system?

Would it be possible to make economic decisions that included investing in the environment, the impacts on people and future growth and productivity?

Through the Regional Irrigation Business Partnerships (RIBPs), the System Harmonisation Program tried to tread this fine line. Could the economists work with communities, scientists and policy makers to get the right business mix for a region that would mean a healthy irrigation future with improved environmental conditions and positive impacts on the social fabric of the region?

Despite the efforts of many the System Harmonisation Program did not produce any significant Regional Irrigation Business Partnerships. The vision was definitely there to start with but the people involved were not able to carry it through to completion. Coleambally was the region that

probably started with the strongest business vision but the relatively sudden departure of two key players was more than the project could take.

So where was the problem? A large amount of economic analysis and modelling was undertaken across the five regions. There were many economists involved as part of the program yet none of the people interviewed articulated a change in how they saw their future as a result of economic enlightenment they had received through the program.

Coleambally may yet provide an exception to this. In their stories both Austin Evans and Kieran OKeeffe identify the potential value of the program if the final report gives irrigators a clearer picture of potential economic futures.

13The System Harmonisation Story 13The System Harmonisation Story

Before you Start

Each region is colour coded. To focus on any of the five regions as a reading topic, follow the adjacent colour guide

Reading by Region

LIMESTONE COAST, SA

WESTERN SYDNEY, NSW

COLEAMBALLY, NSW

MACINTYRE BROOK, QLD

LOWER BURDEKIN, QLD

Contents

BEFORE YOU START 7How to Read this Book 7Reading by Topic 8Reading by Region 13

INTRODUCTION 18Foreword 18Preface 19Acknowledgments 20The System Harmonisation Experiment 22 ChairoftheCRCIFBoard 23 IrrigationinAustralia 28 SystemHarmonisation 28The Five Regions 30System Harmonisation Family Tree 34

WESTERN SYDNEY, NSW 36Family Tree 37Background 38Science Leader 40Chair of WISER 42Program Coordinator 46Local Government Member 50What Does the Experience Teach Us? 53

TALKING POINT 54A Doubting Thomas 55

LIMESTONE COAST, SA 58Family Tree 59Background 60A Science and Policy View 62An Industry View 66What Does the Experience Teach Us? 69

TALKING POINT 70A Former CRC IF Board Member 71

LOWER BURDEKIN, QLD 74Family Tree 75Background 76Water Board Manager 78Local Resident and Government Employee 80

Irrigator 82Deputy Chair of Burdekin Water Futures 84Natural Resource Manager 86Peak Body Member 90What Does the Experience Teach Us? 93

TALKING POINT 94A System Harmonisation Program Initiator 95

COLEAMBALLY, NSW 98Family Tree 99Background 100Senior Operations Engineer 102Agronomist 106Project Coordinator 108What Does the Experience Teach Us? 111

TALKING POINT 112A Researcher 113

MACINTYRE BROOK, QLD 116Family Tree 117Background 118Chair of the Sustainability Initiative 120Consultants 124Irrigator and Farm Manager 128Irrigator 130What Does the Experience Teach Us? 133

SYSTEM HARMONISATION 136System Harmonisation 2010: A platform for the future 136

INDEXES 142Index of Acronyms 142Index of Topics 143Index of People 144Index of Terms 146


INTRODUCTION The System Harmonisation Story

Ian Atkinson Chief Executive Officer CRC for Irrigation Futures

Between 2006 and 2010 the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures (CRC IF) ran two successful research programs; Irrigation Toolkits to Improve Enterprise Performance and System Harmonisation through Regional Irrigation Partnerships. It also ran a very fruitful Education Program which produced over 50 postgraduate students. This book examines key aspects of the System Harmonisation Program from a variety of perspectives to help anyone wanting to learn from our experiences.

A key point to know before you read this account is that our System Harmonisation Program was an experiment in itself. Sure we also aimed to do some good and useful research for each of the target regions but that was within an experimental approach to transdisciplinary research. Water issues are complex and no one branch of science or research can claim to have all the answers. This fact is commonly acknowledged but seldom tackled head on to any serious extent. The CRC for Irrigation Futures put over $5 million in cash and thousands of weeks of participant staff time into a new approach for research-based solutions to some serious regional water issues.

From my point of view some of the learning has been obvious - after the fact! For instance, it took the System Harmonisation Program researchers over a year to develop a common understanding. This is partly because each specialist branch of research uses its own terms and mental concepts. In some instances this meant people were

initially using the same word to describe different things. A classic example is harmonisation which means different things to the legal fraternity compared to the professional engineers.

I can assure you that this Program was by far the most difficult to manage within CRC IF. On the one hand we had a research agreement signed by all 14 (at times 15) owners of CRC IF; and on the other a dynamically changing interaction between the regions and a diverse range of staff. Allowing some flexibility whilst at the same time reminding people of the promises contained in the Commonwealth contract involved significant risk and challenges.

Many years ago I attended a lecture on the Philosophy of Science where an eminent professor lamented the fact that too few people published details of experiments that didnt work out as expected. He felt there was at least as much to be learnt from experiments that didnt quite work as those that succeeded - so long as you looked at why that happened. He would be pleased that we havent shied away from looking at the problems as well as our successes in this book.

If anyone is looking for evidence that the Program has come a long way from the initial hesitant steps this book provides plenty. For the last four years a regular refrain from the Governing Board has been We need to make sure others can learn from this difficult but critical process, and I commend everyones efforts to do that in this book.

Foreword


Story NameIntroduction

Enjoy!

The Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures (CRC IF) System Harmonisation Program has involved considerable technical analysis and detailed modelling by a range of researchers and stakeholders. However, more than any other program of the CRC, it has involved and focussed on people. People trying to work together and resolve long standing differences and people trying to challenge the status quo and change the way things are done.

At a local level this work has had varied levels of impact. However, whatever the level of impact the key thing is that people have tried something different, have tried to forge a way forward and from this trying always comes learning.

There will be many technical papers and reports that come out of the System Harmonisation Program which will contain valuable information, but they will not tell the stories of people and their experiences. This book attempts to capture those stories, their ups and downs, and most importantly the learning that has come from the experience. The stories have come directly from the people involved; they are real, honest and sometimes confronting.

From the stories it would be easy to find fault with the System Harmonisation Program and even the ideals and goals that lead to its development and ultimate implementation. This though would be a very short-sighted response. The System Harmonisation Program has taken the first step out

of a comfort zone that was leading to degradation of our environment, irrigation industries and communities.

The first step is always the hardest; it will have the most ups and downs, successes and disappointments. However, once that first step has been taken, the second is always easier and then the third easier again. The CRC IF has risked much by taking this first step but by taking risk much has been gained. It is now up to others to learn from this first step and then take the second and then the third, the fourth, the...

The audience for this book is anybody interested in taking on this learning and playing a part in the next step. Whether you are reading it to better understand how to take the next step, or to inform research, or simply out of interest, hopefully you will take something out of the stories and experiences of those that have been involved so far. The writing style has intentionally been relatively informal and accessible in an attempt to appeal to many.

Preface


The System Harmonisation Story

A large number of people have been involved in many different ways with the CRC for Irrigation Futures (CRC IF) System Harmonisation Program, and while there are too many to thank individually, we recognise and appreciate all the different contributions. Some were involved in initiating the concept, some criticised it, some supported it, and many more invested considerable time and energy making it work.

We thank in particular:

6 The CRC IF Board, who recognised the need to take a different approach to irrigation research for the benefit of all Australians, and who took the risk to back a complex, high risk, difficult-to-define program that was not fully developed, knowing it would require reassessment as it progressed. It highlighted their commitment to try something new to better link the science with end users to radically improve irrigation management and performance on a regional scale

6 John Williams, Shahbaz Khan and the late Peter Cullen who initiated and grappled with the idea and coined the term System Harmonisation that became one of the research programs within the CRC IF

6 Matthew Durack, Wayne Meyer and Ian Atkinson who at various times served as CEO of the CRC IF. They were each in their own way committed to the System

Acknowledgments

Harmonisation experiment, and debated with and when necessary cajoled the System Harmonisation team and regional stakeholders

6 The Northern Australia Irrigation Futures (NAIF) Steering Committee and Project Team who had already embarked on the System Harmonisation journey, but who used different language and were more strongly driven by sustaining Northern Australias fragile ecosystems than by business priorities per se

6 Members of the System Harmonisation team including, but not limited to, Akhtar Abbas, Mobin Ahmad, Saud Akbar, Nadeem Asghar, Deborah Atkins, Claudia Baldwin, Matthew Berrisford, Gavin Beveridge, Heinz Buettikofer, Shelley Burgin, Jeff Camkin, Jason Carroll, Yun Chen, Richard Culas, Rick Darroch, Brian Davidson, Susan Davies, Eric de Regt, Gayathri Devi Mekala, Peta Dzidic,

Amgad Elmahdi, David Essaw, Imogen Fullagar, Virginie Gillet, Adam Gray, Mohsin Hafeez, Diwakara Halanaik, Ismail Hirsi, Avril Horne, Tamara Jackson, Regan Jenkins, Bart Kellett, Sue Kendall, Ganesh Keremane, John Lacy, Meagan Laidlaw, Kris Latu, Matt Lenahan, John Louis, Olivia Louis, Daniel Lovell, Basant Maheshwari, Hector Malano, Steve Marchant, Paul Martin, Jennifer McKay, John McVeigh, Michael Mitchell, Kelvin Montagu, Paul Mulley, Kumar Narayan, Bandara Nawarathna, Kieran OKeeffe, Di Popham, Gavin Ramsay, Tariq Rana, Lucy Reading, Peter Regan, Michael Reynolds, David Russell, Melanie Schwecke, Mark Shepheard, Bruce Simmons, Ranvir Singh, Glen Starkey, Christopher Stone, Maria Varua, Jacqui Watt, Jacqueline Williams, John Wolfenden, Emmanuel Xevi

6 Jeff Camkin and Di Popham for their commitment to System Harmonisation and support over an extended period



6 Brent Clothier from New Zealand who reviewed the science being carried out in the System Harmonisation Program in August 2008 and provided strong endorsement for the transdisciplinary and collaborative approach being pursued through the Program

6 A large number of unnamed colleagues and staff from a range of research agencies, universities, local, state, territory and federal government departments, other organisations and community members who engaged in various ways with the System Harmonisation Program

6 The interviewees and contributors whose stories, which lie at the heart of this book, reflect the progress, challenges, opportunities and lessons of the System Harmonisation journey to date. We thank them for their courage in sharing their personal views so we all can learn from their experiences

6 Individuals who contributed photographs. Their collective efforts have enhanced the telling of the System Harmonisation story

6 Miriam Alexander from Toot Toot Design, who brought inspiration and a different and creative perspective and provided the leadership in developing the look and feel to the book that we hope reflects some of the flow, complexity, non-linearity and need to take a different approach to irrigation that lies at the heart of System Harmonisation

Thank you!



System Harmonisation was one of two successful research programs run by the Cooperative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures (CRC IF) between 2006 and 2010. System Harmonisation was an experiment in itself, one that sought to deliver a whole new approach to better integrating and improving the research and practice of irrigation within a catchment context. As an experiment, System Harmonisation was particularly successful in demonstrating that many different stakeholders can come together to tackle difficult and complex problems that they could not tackle on their own, and in doing so are able to harness the energy and commitment of the group to make local, regional and catchment scale change.

This section begins with a story from the Chair of the Board of the CRC IF. This is followed by an overview of irrigation in Australia and a description of System Harmonisation.

The System Harmonisation Experiment

CSIRO



Transdisciplinary studies integrate academic researchers with contrasting research paradigms from the natural and social sciences and non-academic participants, such as land and water managers and the public, to research a common goal and create new knowledge, theory, tools and practices

Peter Hayes servedasChairoftheBoardfortheCRCforIrrigationFuturesfromitsinceptionin2003toitsclosurein2010.Thisishisstory.

System Harmonisation arose from a need seen by many to achieve a major breakthrough in the way we approached water and its use for production agriculture, amenity use and environmental purposes. For this to be possible a high degree of relevance and importance would be required to generate support and deliver impact at a regional and catchment scale.

The traditional approach of separate unlinked studies undertaken by discipline specialists would not achieve the rate or extent of innovation needed to meet the ongoing challenges around these issues. Classical discipline based research, whilst essential to creating new knowledge, is poorly adapted to delivery of complex policy and practical advice around water management and accountability.

In 2003/04 when the Board of the CRC IF reviewed, debated and then committed to the broad concept of System Harmonisation, considerable pressure was being felt by regional irrigation communities arising from drought, impact of national water reform and increasing competition and accountability over scarce water resources.

Today, in 2010, the pressures remain as evident and perhaps more clearly defined. Policy formulation has progressed, although subject to ongoing review.

Many challenges remain around actual adaptation of water policy and irrigation practice that should be informed by good knowledge, accessible to and embraced by all key players, including politicians, regulators, irrigation managers, Natural Resource Management (NRM) agencies and the broader community.

CRC IF researchers and management identified considerable difficulties in linking discrete researchers or research groups with the wider aspects of development and application of research to real world situations. Similarly, catchment community interests and potential clients were not able to construct a strategic approach to multi-faceted policy and implementation issues confronting them.

To do this the capacity of both scientists and community must be harnessed and the potential of transdisciplinary research realised. So it was proposed to establish regional catchment and business based activities to formulate CRC IF sponsored regional R&D1 projects. These would:

6 engage regional irrigation and community leadership with scientific leadership and scientific resource management

6 identify high community priority regional water issues related to irrigation

6 introduce transdisciplinary research capacity to the region

1 Research and Development.

Chair of the CRC IF Board


RegionThe System Harmonisation Story

6 develop mutually supported R&D and application needs to address targeted priorities

6 test the capacity of each of the scientific and irrigation communities to engage and focus on clearly defined issues and to deliver relevant R&D derived outcomes.

In making its very considerable commitment of funds and resources, especially of the many personnel, the Board of the CRC IF recognised that endeavouring to implement System Harmonisation through such regional partnerships involved considerable risk. Nevertheless, it seemed appropriate that the CRC IF be the agent to initiate this experimental approach and to manage such risks on behalf of a very wide range of interest groups.

During the term of this project several large challenges arose. These chiefly related to:

6 leadership and personnel changes in both community groups and research arrangements leading to temporary loss of focus and continuity of effort

6 research organisations and personnel unfamiliar with the complexity and non-linear nature of the broader engagement and participatory approaches required

6 consultation weary communities which had difficulty in understanding either the novel approach to engagement or the concept of System Harmonisation as a development tool

6 changes in objectives and commitment of participants and unacceptably long periods in defining a focus and outcomes desired.

As the System Harmonisation process and Regional Irrigation Partnerships approach evolved, the CRC IF board too was frequently and seriously challenged by the non-linear, stop-start and redirected efforts across the five focus regions. Nevertheless, it maintained a view that whatever the specific regional outcomes, the novel approach offered must provide a guide for planning future approaches to irrigation catchments, environments and their communities.

Has this regional irrigation partnership approach to deployment of transdisciplinary research worked? I think it fair to say that results are mixed but that the concept itself demonstrates considerable merit and warrants further refinement and customisation for each situation to which it might be applied.

This document is but one output from this extensive implementation and evaluation of the concept of System Harmonisation as enacted through Regional Irrigation Business Partnerships. A number of ways to approach and deal with these complex issues will now be better guided by our R&D and experiences with regional engagement.

It is very evident that vision, leadership, commitment, patience and resourcing is needed, from both the communities concerned and the R&D teams

involved; this will have to be generated from within the target communities in preference to imposition from an outside research organisation. A prime challenge appears to be in defining and agreeing on the scope of works to be undertaken, the questions to be addressed and the capacity of relevant collaborators to respectively fund the work and to deliver timely, high quality and relevant R&D results.

As the approach was genuinely experimental and innovative, success was in part to be demonstrated by achieving successful outcomes directly meeting the regional groups defined needs and priorities. As a research organisation, success might also have been attained by researching and reporting on the effectiveness of tools and processes for engagement of researchers, policy and regulatory personnel, the irrigation industry and community.

The following account endeavours to document the human and social experiences associated with the System Harmonisation Program of the CRC IF and its particular expression via the Regional Irrigation Business Partnerships as ultimately adapted for and by each of the participating regions.

Its focus is directed to the human elements as therein lie the greater challenges for effective access to current and future knowledge for policy, regulation and operational effectiveness of irrigation regions


Introduction

under ongoing resource constraints, increasing competition for use and heightened public expectation.

We now have a clear vantage point, and experience from which to define future approaches to regional cooperative, transdisciplinary R&D to support regional (re)development, conservation, and utilisation of water for irrigation and other social and/or environmental purposes.

Has success been attained? I firmly say Yes, but only if people, groups and institutions learn from the experiences learnt and described herein.



Irrigation in Australia System Harmonisation

Irrigation is critical to meeting Australias, and the worlds, food and fibre needs. Irrigation is also the single biggest user of extracted water accounting for some 60-70% of Australias freshwater withdrawals.

Irrigated agriculture in Australia occupies about 2 million ha compared with 470 million ha for dryland agriculture. The fact that irrigated agriculture represents about 0.5% of Australias agricultural land area but produces some 30% of the gross value and 40-50% of total profit from agriculture commodities highlights the importance of irrigation to Australias economy. It also emphasises the importance of continuously seeking new ways to improve the performance and resilience of irrigated production systems.

Several irrigated areas in Australia, like many around the world, are struggling to meet expectations because of increasing problems associated with degradation of river health, groundwater systems and the wider environment.

It is obvious that the old way of doing business cant continue. Australias water reform agenda is encouraging new approaches to the way Australia views and manages its water resources, including a strong focus on returning water to and looking after the environment. This means all water users, including irrigation, need to change.

System Harmonisation was defined in 2008 as:

Astrategytoimprovecross-organisationalcommunicationandsystem-widemanagementtoimproveproductionandenvironmentaloutcomesinawhole-of-catchmentcontext.2

System Harmonisation recognises that irrigation is part of a dynamic, complex social-ecological system that requires new approaches based on integrating science, policy, planning, management and communities if we are going to have an irrigation future.

6 It involves working with regional irrigation partners to increase profitability and reduce the environmental footprint of improved irrigation systems.

6 It requires researchers from different disciplines working together to find new ways to increase understanding to support implementation of new, more resilient land and water management strategies.

6 It leads to improved communication between organisations and individuals as well as more transparent and objective decision making to support irrigation planning and management at all levels within a catchment and beyond.

2 Khan, S., Malano, H. M. and B. Davidson. 2008. System harmonisation: A framework for applied regional irrigation business planning. Irrigation and Drainage 57: 493506.

System Harmonisation deals with the high risk hard stuff that everyone says is needed but almost no one is doing!

It addresses the tough questions organisations and communities associated with irrigation are faced with, including:

6 Do we have the right policies and institutions in place?

6 Are we using appropriate economic models that account for impacts on the environment to support long term decision making?

6 If current trends in population, water demand and energy usage persist, where will we get our water and food from?

6 Should we encourage more local food production through careful design of urban and peri-urban zones and set aside particular areas as horticultural precincts?

6 Are we properly considering systems and long-term thinking for the benefit of future generations?

6 Can we design improved allocation and use of water resources via collective discussion and negotiation as opposed to an adversarial or prior right, precedent or entitlement, based approach?

6 Are irrigation communities demonstrating environmental, social and economic responsibility?

6 What if governments introduce changes that mean irrigation is no longer viable in a particular catchment; what will the people do?



A strategy to improve cross-organisational communication and system-wide management to improve production and environmental outcomes in a whole-of-catchment context

6 How do you decide where and why you establish new irrigation schemes?

6 Where should irrigation be located within a catchment, what should it look like and how should it be managed?

6 What role could mosaics play in helping build more resilient and regenerative irrigated catchments?

6 How do we redesign irrigation schemes and irrigation businesses so they remain viable and profitable in highly uncertain and changing climatic and economic environments?

6 And many more equally difficult questions.

System Harmonisation relies on collaboration. Collaboration requires a change in attitude, a high level of commitment and, ultimately, a lot of hard work. It takes time to build the trust necessary for effective collaboration.

Effective collaboration, which is ultimately about relationships based on genuine caring and alliances that share risks, solutions and benefits, is essential to help create a better future for all.



The Five Regions

Australia is not only the oldest and driest inhabited continent, but also a land of contrasts and extremes.

Australia has a variable and uncertain climate, which results in variable and uncertain freshwater supplies. It is also a generally flat landscape with low hydraulic gradients and low fertility soils. These attributes combine to present particular challenges to Australian agriculture in general, and irrigation in particular.

In terms of supply and demand for water, the Tropic of Capricorn delineates a clear division between the north and the south of the continent.

Some 60-65% of Australias run-off, or potential water supply, takes place in the tropics, from Broome in the west to south of Rockhampton in the east. Conversely, most of the demand in terms of population, industry and agriculture is located in the south.

Growing public awareness of the scale of the problems in the Murray-Darling Basin has increased political pressure to assess the relatively undeveloped land and water resources of northern Australia.

In the south of the continent much of the damage has already been done so the need is to invest in repairing degraded ecological systems and reconfiguring irrigated systems to achieve sustainable use.

In northern tropical Australia, where irrigated agriculture is largely still in its infancy, the focus needs to be on

developing completely new approaches to irrigation that are in tune with and sympathetic to the northern landscapes and that maintain the integrity of the unique and diverse northern ecological systems.

Investment is also needed to improve the environmental, social and economic performance of all other irrigated catchments across the continent, including peri-urban catchments, which are major suppliers of fresh produce to Australias burgeoning cities.

Knowing about the emerging environmental and water challenges facing Australia and Australian irrigation influenced the choice of regions for System Harmonisation, resulting in establishment of regional irrigation partnerships covering a diverse range of situations in:

i. Western Sydney, a peri-urban irrigation region in New South Wales

ii. Limestone Coast, a groundwater dominated irrigation area in South-East South Australia

iii. Lower Burdekin, an irrigated coastal floodplain in tropical north Queensland

iv. Coleambally, a surface water dominated irrigation area in New South Wales in the southern Murray-Darling Basin (MDB)

v. Macintyre Brook, a surface water dominated irrigation area in Queensland in the northern MDB.

The stories that follow reflect personal experiences of people involved in the System Harmonisation Program and people who live and work in the regions where the System Harmonisation experiment was put into practice.


The Five Regions

AUSTRALIA ... A land of sweeping plains, of ragged mountain ranges, of drought and flooding rainsMyCountrybyDorotheaMackellar,1908


RegionSystem Harmonisation Family Tree

SYSTEM HARMONISATION

Shahbaz Khan

FormerProgramLeader,CRCIF

FormerResearcheratCSIROandCharlesSturtUniversity(CSU)

Chief,WaterandSustainableDevelopment,UNESCO

Keith Bristow

ProgramLeader,CRCIF,SystemHarmonisation

Program

The latePeter Cullen

(18 May 1943 - 14 March 2008)

FormerBoardMember,CRCIF

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Story Name

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH CENTRE FOR IRRIGATION FUTURES

Ian Atkinson

CEO,CRCIF

Peter Hayes

ChairoftheBoard,CRCIF

Ticky Fullerton

BoardMember,CRCIF

Journalist,AustralianBroadcastingCorporation

(ABC)

John Williams

FormerBoardMember,CRCIF

Commissioner,NSWNaturalResourcesCommission

Hector Malano

Researcher,CRCIF

HeadofDepartment,DepartmentofCivilandEnvironmentalEngineering,University

ofMelbourne


WESTERN SYDNEY, NSW

CSIRO

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Family Tree

WESTERN SYDNEYLiz Jeremy

DirectorofSustainableLivingattheCityofBlacktownCouncil

Member,WISER

Colin Berryman

ProgramCoordinator,WesternSydneyRegionalOrganisation

ofCouncils(WSROC)

Member,WISER

Kevin Rozzoli

ChairofWISER

FormerMemberofParliament,NSWStateGovernment

Basant Maheshwari

Researcher,AssociateProfessorattheUniversityofWesternSydney

ProjectLeader,WaterandIrrigationStrategyEnhancementthroughRegionalPartnership

(WISER)Project

Colin Pittman

Director,CityProjects,SalisburyCouncil


Western Sydney

Dryland farming is farming where rainfall is the only way crops are provided with water

Irrigated farming is where human activity provides a crop with additional water

The Penrith Lakes Scheme is a 30-year program where the mining of coarse gravel and sand will ultimately lead to the development of a series of recreational lakes. The first of these is already in place and was the rowing venue for the 2000 Sydney Olympics

Background

Western Sydney is one of the most dynamic regions in Australia. Its population and industry is growing rapidly. This in turn is putting pressure on agriculture in the region which is a supplier of food, fibre and amenity to the Sydney market. Both the expanding population and existing agriculture and industry put pressure on the health of the main river system of the region, the Hawkesbury-Nepean.

The Greater Western Sydney region had a population of 1.8 million at the 2006 Census. This represents 43% of the total population in the Greater Sydney region. The region is made up of a number of local government areas ranging in size from Blacktown (over 270,000 people) to Auburn (just under 65,000 people). The average annual growth for the period 2001 to 2006 was 4.3% compared to 4.0% for Sydney as a whole. By 2021 it is estimated Greater Western Sydney will have a population of over 2.2 million or 49% of Sydneys population3.

The population growth and the subsequent growth in housing and industry have had a big impact on the areas farming land. Much of the region was originally used for agricultural production, both dryland and irrigated. Over time the area used for agriculture has been reduced as land has been converted for housing and industry.

Currently market gardens and farms in the region produce 12% of

3 http://www.wsroc.com.au

NSWs agricultural production on 1% of the states agricultural lands. Between 6,000 and 12,000 people are directly employed in agricultural production in the Sydney Basin4.

Demands are not only placed on the landscape itself but also on the river system. The Hawkesbury-Nepean river system provides the bulk of Sydneys water supply. The river also supports a broad range of commercial, industrial and recreational activities, including:

6 extractive industries coal mining and quarrying, including the PenrithLakesScheme

6 industry manufacturing and processing

6 rural residential development non-commercial users of water for stock and domestic purposes

6 irrigated agriculture horticulture, cropping and animal production

6 recreation and tourism activities in, on or by the river system

6 commercial fishing and prawn trawling

6 oyster aquaculture.5

The original aim of the CRC IF System Harmonisation Program in this region was to develop pathways for substituting freshwater use with recycled water while improving the water quality in the catchment. Was this achieved? The following stories will let you judge.

4 http://www.wsroc.com.au5 http://www.ohn.nsw.gov.au

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Background


Western Sydney

The idea of irrigation business partnership was a good one but really didnt work here so we had to change it and from there things started flowing, says Basant Maheshwari.

Maheshwari is an Associate Professor at the University of Western Sydney. He is recounting some of his experiences as the project leader of the Water and Irrigation Strategy Enhancement through Regional Partnership (WISER) project. The project is the Western Sydney version of a series of System Harmonisation projects initiated in irrigation areas across Australia by the CRC for Irrigation Futures.

According to Maheshwari there were quite a few challenges to the success of the project. Some things were helpful but some things just wasted our energy. Maybe you dont want to hear those things but I think theyre important, he says. At the program level, sometimes some of the people at management level didnt understand and unnecessarily put pressure on some things, Maheshwari says.

Another area of concern was that many of the important partners that would need to be involved to achieve System Harmonisation were not involved in irrigation. The CRC had their program and their approach and so on and OK, well use that, but then we modified things to be more like what the councils wanted and eventually it looked the same, but if we kept the

CRC line I think we wouldnt have gone far, says Maheshwari.

Maheshwari modified the program by broadening its focus from just irrigation to the whole water cycle and its importance for all the stakeholders. Not everybody was happy with this approach. In the early days Maheshwari felt the message from the CRC IF was, We are in irrigation futures, irrigation is the key aspect we want to do, we cant do the water cycle, as a whole thing.

The other stakeholders were also throwing up challenges. In any research like this where you are involved with a range of partners, agencies, they have their own agenda, ministerial guidelines and requirements. Councils have their own challenges, they want to do something on the ground, Maheshwari says. To understand all of their needs and fit into their agenda took a fair while.

Many would have given up but not Maheshwari. Myself and Bruce Simmons were the driving force behind that, he says. We made lots of presentations and listened to their views and I think a good aspect that came out was that we linked the councils together.

There were four or five councils that we were working with and I think a transformation came when we started thinking we need to manage water at the regional level, not at the council level, says Maheshwari. That really made a difference.

The outcome of all this hard work is the current WISER project. It is one of the most successful of the five System Harmonisation groups that were originally set up. One of the important achievements of the group has been collaboration between four councils in the region. The councils have submitted to the Federal Government a joint bid for funding for a multimillion dollarstormwaterharvesting and managed aquiferrechargeandrecoveryproject. The water harvested will be used to water playing fields across the region.

According to Maheshwari, this success was not just the result of hard work. Bit of luck as well, so for example, Keith Bristow suggested it would be a good idea to run a workshop and, Liz Jeremy and others wanted help with managed aquifer recharge and, although this was not the agenda of System Harmonisation, we thought this might be the hook, he says.

So we contacted some of the agency people and some of the consultants that were involved in the area as well as Colin Pittman and National Water Commission people, says Maheshwari. This was organised within three to four weeks, a one-day workshop and somehow the presentations and the panel discussion everything fitted so nicely, he says. I was amazed how it happened and that lead to this project with groundwater recharge.

This success is having an impact. We have started becoming known and I think that will help us develop a network, says

Science Leader

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Science Leader

Stormwater harvesting is the capture of stormwater as it runs off surfaces before it reaches streams, creeks and rivers. In the case of this project the captured water will be used to recharge underground aquifers which act like water storage tanks. Once the aquifers have been recharged the water can be pumped out at a later date to water parks and playing fields

Maheshwari. For example I have been contacted by Deutsche Bank. They want to train their staff to be aware of water issues and understand what the bank should do to help sustainability in water.

The WISER Group have also submitted a proposal to the National Water Commission with support of a wide range of stakeholders to set up a National Centre for Peri-Urban Water to follow on after the completion of the CRC for Irrigation Futures.

When asked to provide advice for others who might try to replicate their success Maheshwari has plenty to give. We had the early good support from the partners and they believed in us and what were doing and we kept in contact, he says. Weekly we were talking and we were open, so people can come and go. Some agency people came on board and they got less interested or didnt feel they wanted to continue but we kept in contact and some came back.

Maheshwari also takes this opportunity to reinforce an earlier point. I was thinking of what value we can add to their work and some aspects were not related to the CRC but we still helped them, he says. It is give and take and asking people to come here and spend two to three hours to come to meetings, they need to feel there is value in coming and I think we showed them that.

I think there is a lot more to do but the basic work has let us establish some scientific credibility, says Maheshwari.

Although he highlights the importance of collaboration, success has not always resulted in new friends. It has challenged some of the agencies, sometimes we felt we should be soft and not raise those things but then we thought it was our integrity so if there is something we can say to the public I think we should, he says.

As for the original approach of the CRC IFMaheshwari feels it would have been better if the ideas had been allowed to come from the partners and then get the CRC IF involved in helping them achieve their goals rather than trying to prescribe to them what the approach should be.

Openness and building trust is very, very important and you need to clearly understand what your partners want, what you are trying to do and how you are going to help them, says Maheshwari.


Western Sydney

Chair of WISER

It is only on good knowledge that you can make good decisions

My first inclination was to politely decline because I have worked in this area now for something like forty years and have had many frustrations and disappointments along the way and I just felt that I had probably done my bit and it was over to a younger generation to do it.

This was the view of Kevin Rozzoli when he was first approached to get involved in the Western Sydney component of the CRC for Irrigation Futures System Harmonisation Program. After some soul searching Rozzoli decided to go against his initial inclination and sign up.

The research side of things appealed to me, he says. It is only on good knowledge that you can make good decisions.

Initially it seemed Rozzoli had made the wrong decision. I came along and it was very frustrating in the early days, he says. The meetings seemed to roll on, the meetings always ran an hour overtime and people got frustrated.

Rozzolis years as a state MP means he knows how to run an effective meeting. The important message is if you have a meeting and you want it to last two hours or three hours ration out your time and make sure people

fit their material in the allotted time, he says.

Long meetings werent the only challenges in the early days. We really didnt know what it was we were doing, Rozzoli says. Getting a framework around the research projects was very difficult in the early stages and it is typical of the Hawkesbury-Nepean because it is such a huge and complex area that it is difficult to button it down.

The group had started with some terms of reference, however, they did not seem relevant. After a long discussion it was suggested that people go home and write what they thought would be the right terms of reference and send them in for the group to evaluate and use to distil a final terms of reference.

I went home and immediately bent my mind to it and drafted up terms of reference, says Rozzoli. Lo and behold mine was the only terms of reference that had been sent in, he says. So we went through those and everyone was generally in agreement, a couple of suggestions so I went and made those and they became the terms of reference.

There were some very interesting meetings but thats about all they were, they didnt really lead us on to the next

phase, says Rozzoli. Thats another thing thats very

important in any of these projects,

is to make sure that

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Chair of WISER

every meeting determines to do something before the next meeting and those somethings are done by the next meeting, otherwise things are just marking time.

According to Rozzoli that didnt happen so of course there was a sense of djvuat every meeting. Key people kept turning up but others were changing and sending other staff. With so much change, much of the time was spent reviewing things for these new people. This took large amounts of time and also meant that things were pretty frustrating for those who did come regularly.

A twist of fate resulted in Kevin being asked to chair one of the meetings. The meeting ran in a more structured way and people felt things occurred in a more efficient and timely manner.

Ultimately the question of why we werent going very well came up, says Rozzoli. People asked why it was not progressing as well as it should do? Rozzoli suggested to the group that what you need for this sort of exercise is a chairman who is a champion for the thing, a person who is prepared to go out and represent the public face of it, not somebody who does the hard grind and the research.

In saying this Rozzoli was aware of the trap he might be setting for himself. I just had a funny feeling that it sounded like and you ought to pick me but it wasnt that because I really did not want to take it on.

The rest of the group didnt need the idea suggested to them a second time. Basant asked me to come and talk to him one day, says Rozzoli. At that meeting Basant told Rozzoli we would like you to take on the job.

I just said to him I cant afford to do it for nothing, if I take it on there is quite a bit of work involved in it and working mainly with people who were there as part of their paid job, says Rozzoli.


Western Sydney

You have got to be very careful how you handle volunteers because if they are in the minority and everyone else are doing it in their paid time they tend to think that the volunteers can just produce in the same way as they do in the context of the job

It has grown on those principles of integrity and independence. If you can strike that note then you become very useful to governments

This is an important point for Rozzoli. You have got to be very careful how you handle volunteers because if they are in the minority and everyone else are doing it in their paid time they tend to think that the volunteers can just produce in the same way as they do in the context of the job.

Rozzoli also felt that people value the work less if somebody provides it for nothing. Ultimately a small payment system was arranged to address his costs and some basic fees.

Once in the chairmans role Rozzoli took swift action. Firstly he dispensed with long presentations. He told the group, Everyone has to produce a shortened summary in writing which they will send to us before the meeting and if they want to address some key points then that is what they do at the meeting.

In the chairmans role, Rozzoli also worked on things like the Memorandum of Understanding with the partners. His experience meant he often brought a different view to others in the group. At times he also had to crack the whip to help give shape to pulling the work together.

We have moved in the last three years from almost being abandoned by the CRC to becoming their showcase centre, so that shows you the sort of turnaround we were able to achieve, he says. The quality of the work didnt change, it was always

good but what we had done is put shape and focus and linked it up so that it actually meant something.

Even though things were now running smoothly there were still challenges ahead. The question that the CRC was going to finish in the middle of this year came up and it was quite obvious that all the research that was necessary to be done would be by no means done by that time, says Rozzoli.

Faced with this issue Rozzoli made a suggestion to the group. What we need to do is to develop something that will take the research on beyond 2010 so we are now working on this National Peri Urban Water Security Centre. This suggestion was taken up and things are progressing well to establishing the centre.

Rozzoli is quick to define the reason for the success of the group. It has grown on those principles of integrity and independence, he says. If you can strike that note then you become very useful to governments.

But the work is not finished and the group must continue to work hard. I think the CRC has done some very good work but if nothing follows it in three or four years time people will be thinking of setting up something and doing it all again, says Rozzoli. You get the feeling though that whilst ever he

is in charge Rozzoli will be doing everything possible to make

sure that is not the case.

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Chair of WISER


Western Sydney

What changes politicians minds tends to be more to do with direct impact on people and anecdotal evidence about what happens where and what will happen rather than what is probably objective science, policy is very subjective

The project could have benefited from a communications and public relations strategy that recognised that they need to get these issues in messages that both people could understand and politicians would see as important

One of the activities of the CRC IF has been to develop computer models which use the best science to model the hydrology of a region. Once developed and tested the model allows people to replicate different scenarios to see what could happen

Program Coordinator

Colin Berryman is sitting in a bustling cafe in the heart of Blacktown. He is sipping a mug of coffee but it is not what he ordered. His order was a small coffee but when a mug was served he refused the offers of a replacement preferring his practical and more environmentally-friendly approach of simply drinking half of the mug. Berryman clearly has a commitment to looking after the environment but is practical about how it can be delivered.

I was a little bit sceptical about the hydrologysciencemodelscenarios being able to change policy because of their complexity and margins of error, says Berryman. From my experience of working in WSROC, what changes politicians minds tends to be more to do with direct impact on people and anecdotal evidence about what happens where and what will happen rather than what is probably objective science, policy is very subjective, says Berryman.

Berryman is reflecting on some of the challenges faced by the WISER Group. The group was formed as part of the CRC for Irrigation Futures System Harmonisation Program. It is useful and successful because there is recognition that there is a big need for this by policy makers in institutions, he says.

Berryman joined the group in late 2007 after taking up a new role in the environment portfolio of the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC).

It seemed a cohesive and pretty high quality information delivery group, says Berryman. At the point when I came on there was a lot of work in train, but not reporting on outcomes but that has changed over the last few years, he says. I could see the signals coming out of the work were quite concerning about prospective water issues and shortage for the region as it grows and with climate change.

I thought the project could have benefited from a communications and public relations strategy that recognised that they need to get these issues in messages that both people could understand and politicians would see as important, says Berryman. That is more than just having public meetings and having websites with information and stuff like that.

The WISER Group now has a Communications and Public Relations Strategy. The WISER Group took the approach of we get the information first then we get the message out and I think you have really got to think a lot earlier about the message, says Berryman. Even if the data is not all in, it takes a long time to get people to change their thinking and if you leave it to the end, you are going to find it difficult to deliver an outcome or deliver an awareness, inside a timeframe that you are going to be happy with.

It might be three or four years to get the project

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Program Coordinator

over and then it is three or four years waiting for an impact and this does not make people feel happy, Berryman says. They would like to see it happen much sooner and if it doesnt happen sooner then the whole thing gets dropped.

Berryman sees this getting the message out as the next big challenge for the WISER Group and believes if the group last the period until this happens then they will have a significant impact. This impact will be the result of the many positive aspects of the group.

The personnel here has been pretty stable and committed, the same faces are there, says Berryman. I think the people who are actually doing the work, they have been outward looking to the other partners, he says. For example, this aquifer recharge project is something that WISER approached the councils about.

They have been pro-active in going out to their partners and saying Look can you do something? says Berryman. That has been outside their brief in a way.

Berryman feels there is also another ingredient to the success of the group.

The other reason it has been strong is because it has been connected to a strong lobby around retaining agricultural production in the region, he says. So there are people in the community who are passionate about ensuring water is still available for irrigation

so that industry, way of life and regional amenity is not lost.

For Berryman this strength is also a weakness. On one hand that has made WISER strong to have those people on board, but on the other hand it tends to narrow its focus towards the agricultural issues, he says. For me people are very supportive about the need for better policy around the need for water for the environment but there is not the same level of activity, says Berryman.


Western Sydney

We need to have a vision about what sort of place the region should be. What the role of water is in that and the priorities in achieving that vision and that they are inclusive of environmental advocacy as well as agriculture and land use planning as well as good management

There is not the same level of lobbying and advocacy around that issue as there is around the agricultural issue, he says.

At a recent public forum held by the WISER Group there was an interactive session between the audience and a panel of experts, which examined the choice of using water for the environment or using it for irrigation. The audience overwhelmingly responded, we want water for the environment, says Berryman. I dont agree with that; I think there needs to be a balance between the two.

Berryman sees the future of the group being one where there is a greater inclusion of environmental groups that have been active in the policy debate for water use in Western Sydney.

I think it would be a benefit to get a clearer message out there that is not just about irrigation but it is about the environment, says Berryman. The work that has been done is relevant to much more than agriculture and that message needs to get out there.

As with his coffee, Berrymans view about what will ultimately be successful is one of intelligent compromise. We need to have a vision about what sort of place the region should be, he says. What the role of water is in that and the priorities in achieving that vision and that they are inclusive of environmental advocacy as well as agriculture and land use planning as well as good management.

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Program Coordinator


Western Sydney

Local Government Member

Often projects will be undertaken to restore a degraded wetland or in some cases develop a new wetland to change the flow properties of a drainage system or to improve water quality as a result of the wetlands ecological processes

Aquifer storage and recovery projects (ASR) are where stormwater is captured and used to recharge an aquifer which has less water in it than its capacity

The other reason I hung on was because I have very deep roots to Western Sydney and the Hawkesbury and would like the river to be loved. These are the words of Liz Jeremy, Director of Sustainable Living at the City of Blacktown Council. Initially, it would seem that her goal should be relatively easy to achieve for such a talented woman in her position. However, a closer look at the make-up of Blacktown reveals the nature of the challenge.

The City of Blacktown Local Government Area is the largest in NSW and has grown at a rate of over 17% since 1996. It has a dynamic population with over half the population under 30 years of age. It is also home to 184 nationalities who speak 156 different languages.

The WISER Group was a potential way to move towards the outcome Jeremy hoped could be achieved in Western Sydney. She and a colleague had been approached to get involved with the group. Jeremy was quick to take up the opportunity and then stick with it. I just couldnt get how water wasnt valued and some of these other things werent pursued so thats why I hung around, says Jeremy.

Initially the going was hard and Jeremy knew that more could be done. I persisted because I had worked in Adelaide for a long time and I worked in a council that adjoined Salisbury Council and knew a guy called Colin Pittman really well, she says. Hes run aquiferrecharge projects for years and set up wetlands projects and ASR projects.

To Jeremy these were good projects that might work in Western Sydney but the challenge was to get them into the thinking of the rest of the WISER Group. Then as the process progressed, I did get a bit frustrated with the slowness of it because I just dont have the time, but there came a point where they wanted to run a workshop, she says. Jeremy saw the opportunity and made the suggestion Cant we look at aquifer recharge and some different options?

The group took Jeremys idea on board. Colin came along he was completely inspiring to them all, says Jeremy. The WISER Group are now working with four councils to put in a large bid for Federal Government funding for a stormwater recharge and reuse project that will span all four council areas.

This is a great outcome but could have been missed if the group had taken too much longer getting themselves organised. According to Jeremy different backgrounds played a role in the early challenges and delays for the WISER Group. Theyre academics, they live in a bit of a different world to us, so their process was different and slower and more time consuming, she says. Im not saying its worse. Their process is different and more time consuming than I necessarily had.

This approach did not suit everyone. A lot of my colleagues couldnt work with them, they werent patient enough you need patience to work through the process, says Jeremy.

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Local Government Member

A lot of my colleagues couldnt work with them, they werent patient enough you need patience to work through the process

Although the outcomes have been positive, Jeremy has some ideas about how things could be further improved. The financial investment that councils are able to make and the time, the universities need to understand that and take it into account, she says. You cant just produce hundreds of thousands of dollars. Their expectation is that you can and its just not that simple.

Jeremy says, WISER needs to be more plugged in with councils financial cycle so if they want to put in a bid they need to put in a fair bit of lead time; it needs to fit in with the council process.

Jeremy sees that WISER can have a future as long as it continues to have projects to focus on and would see it as a waste of resources if it were to fall apart.

It is clear that Jeremy sees WISERs role as very important. My relatives came out in the Second Fleet and they settled on the Hawkesbury and grew citrus and weve gotta look after it, we cant leave it like that, she says.

Western Sydney


5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2

Learnings


What Does the Western Sydney Experience Teach Us?

The WISER stories show that things did not start particularly well for the Western Sydney group and System Harmonisation. It seems it could easily have fallen away completely if not for the early enthusiasm and persistence of a couple of key people.

These key people recognised the importance of continually engaging with existing and potential stakeholders. They were also committed to evolving the program to develop something that was in line with the general direction of System Harmonisation but that also fitted the local physical and community landscapes.

This evolution clearly involved some push back on the CRC IF itself and an acknowledgment that the CRC parameters of the program were too focused for what was going to work in the Western Sydney region. This early leadership appears critical to the success of the program; without it the program would never have reached a stage where other types of leadership were also able to make a contribution.

The stories show that the leadership kicked up a gear with the appointment of a paid chair. The impact of this has been very significant. This high level leadership has provided the group with a robust framework within which to communicate about issues and ideas and for delivery of outputs.

The stories also show there is leadership from within the different stakeholder

groups. There is leadership at council level to drive ideas forward and suggest opportunities. At the WSROC level there is leadership to push the group to continue to evolve and broaden its base of stakeholders and refine its methods of communication and engagement. At the research level there is leadership that is recognised locally and is able to connect with cutting edge research nationally and internationally.

This combination of leadership at a range of levels has resulted in WISER initiating some ambitious proposals as well as mapping a realistic path for a long-term future after completion of the CRC IF.

Clearly it has not all been plain sailing and there will obviously be plenty of bumps and challenges to come. However, it does seem that the WISER Group has developed a structure and level of trust between members that have allowed it to manage the hurdles that have come up so far.

Is this System Harmonisation? Of all the groups, WISER seems to have the most defined future with the development of the Centre for Peri-Urban Water. The WISER Group also has an organisational structure and level of engagement that appears to have a fair amount of resilience. This will inevitably be tested in coming years.

The stories indicate that WISER still has some further evolution to engage all the water stakeholders of the catchment, however, this is on the

radar of the group members which is a positive sign. Even with these future challenges it seems WISER has achieved a level of System Harmonisation. The challenge is to be able to maintain the process, to keep evolving the group and its methods so that as new issues come up the group can tackle them and keep delivering for Western Sydney.


TALKING POINT

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


A Doubting Thomas

A Doubting Thomas

Ticky Fullerton isalongstandingjournalistwiththeABCandservedontheBoardofCRCIFfromitsinceptionuntilitscompletion.Thisisherstory.

In November 2009 I was standing on a podium at the Penrith Council Chambers talking to anyone interested in the many challenges facing one of the fastest growing areas in the country. Another 600,000 people by 2050, in an area of Western Sydney that is also a wonderful food bowl for the city, with its own unique mix of cultural backgrounds. And I can remember thinking with some pride what a crucial part that the CRC for Irrigation Futures had played here: bringing together four separate councils, farming interests, fishing, academics and the media to take on the huge challenges of managing water in Sydneys burgeoning west. As a result, the central idea of recycling water for many users has been embraced. To me, it went some way towards achieving the vision of the great scientists on the CRCs board at the start of its seven-year term. And we had come a very long way.

System Harmonisation - it would be fair to describe me as the resident sceptic on the Board. The CRC was my first directorship. The early thrill of winning a Government mandate to take top researchers from around the country and build a healthy, more productive and efficient irrigation industry was replaced by a good dose of reality at the first meeting with our stakeholders, in particular, CSIRO, the universities and

government departments contributing cash and researchers to our projects. Such was the ding dong about the direction the CRC would take, I remember the independent directors at one stage threatening to walk out unless order was reinstated. Ah, how the blood boils when theres a bucket of money to fight over!

The big idea of Regional Irrigation Business Partnerships came years into the life of the CRC, building on the work we were doing in planning for the changes that were needed in communities. It was driven by two of the most experienced scientists in water, Dr John Williams at board level, and Professor Shahbaz Khan, who at the time was running a big chunk of the CRCs research program. It was strongly supported by another tremendous former board member, the late Professor Peter Cullen, whose work with another CRC had earned him the title of Environmentalist of the Year in 2001.

Yet I was utterly unconvinced. For a start, the name filled me with horror! I was after all put up for the board for my communications expertise. To me System Harmonisation was up there with externalities and collateral damage. Yet my squeals were in the end ignored as I failed to convince the board of a better alternative that fully encapsulated this, this well this amorphous idea that was so difficult to explain in a paragraph, never mind one or two words. So I sympathise greatly with some of the locals who share this view out on the land.


Talking Point

The board seemed genuinely won over by the size of the challenge, the fact that it was a bold move that had not been done before, that would bring together many aspects of irrigation research and that the experience would be incredibly valuable for the government, the industry, the community and research itself

As I understood it at that stage, the idea was to use the CRCs spread of researchers across Australia to choose different regions with their own unique challenges around water management, to inject our analysis and expertise, to pull in business to financially back new projects that would lead to a thriving, healthy and sustainable water outcome for that particular region and community. So how was this any different from what any catchment management organisation was trying to do? Answer? The valuable research that we would provide for the region, and the business catalyst. Hmm, thought I.

The board seemed genuinely won over by the size of the challenge, the fact that it was a bold move that had not been done before, that would bring together many aspects of irrigation research and that the experience would be incredibly valuable for the government, the industry, the community and research itself. In the end, I rather reluctantly went along with System Harmonisation.

What then followed is very well documented in this book, which does indeed provide a wealth of experience for irrigation research going forward from here: the stories of each of the five projects that the CRC took on, warts and all and what value we imparted, as told by those we wanted to help. But the other side of the story is what was going on at HQ, which to me makes our achievements, such as they are, all the more worth acknowledging.

Let me see; the three people whose research vision we pursued all left the CRC shortly after the project began Professor Cullen in December 2005, Dr Williams in June 2006 and Professor Khan in April 2008 leaving the organisation with big shoes to fill and a program whose ambitions were even bigger. All three were much in demand at the time.

Then there was also the challenge of research organisations deciding for a good while that they were less interested in research around industry productivity than they may have initially indicated they were. Support for the work that research leaders were doing for the CRC rather than their own organisations was to be frank, extremely patchy, which at times placed considerable stress on the CRC. Personally, Im not sure that a CRC structure, with its inevitable compromises between stakeholders, is the best way to deliver new, challenging research.

In year 5 of the CRC, the business element, that I know both John and Shahbaz believed to be a critical part of System Harmonisation, was dropped. It was simply too difficult for the CRC to bring business on board. Perhaps this was because there was no money to follow, perhaps because most scientists arent marketers and we werent being bankrolled by billionaires, but by a government department.

So I take my hat off to our researchers who continued with the System Harmonisation Program, working

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


A Doubting Thomas

up detailed technical models, talking in depth with locals, negotiating complex ideas between players with very different objectives, trialling the tools we developed in other parts of the CRC out in the regions to see just how useful they could prove. In particular, the determination of Keith Bristow to inspire, to drive these projects home and pull together the many lessons learned is laudable.

In the end, all the board needed was patience. The tide turned in my view about a year ago, when enough of the on-the-ground research had been completed and end users and interested parties suddenly realised the value that the CRC was providing. Great anecdotes filtered up to directors from out in the field, and researchers themselves suddenly seemed more optimistic. And the project which was almost dropped by the board at the first consideration of regions, turned out as probably the most important and the most successful.

I hope this book is useful, particularly to anyone embarking on this sort of collaborative research again. I think all the researchers who have contributed to our System Harmonisation project can feel proud that while theyve had a chance to develop their own careers, theyve also help tackle one of the most amorphous problems in healthy water management. You as individuals are so important to Australias future. So thank you very much, stay in water and good luck from here.


LIMESTONE COAST, SA

MDBA; Photographer Michael Bell

5.0

4.9

4.8

4.7

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2


Story NameFamily Tree

LIMESTONE COAST

Fred Stadter

ProgramManager,SouthEast,NaturalResources

ManagementBoard(NRM)

Tony Beck

Irrigator,FamilyFarm

Hugo Hopton

GeneralManager,NRM

Grant King

CEO,RegionalDevelopmentBoard

Glenn Harrington

Manager-GroundwaterGroup,SouthAustralianDepartmentofWaterLandandBiodiversity

Conservation(DWLBC)

Limestone Coast


Background

The Limestone Coast region covers an area of approximately 28,000 square kilometres bounded by the Victorian border to the east, the Southern Ocean to the south and the Coorong6 to the west.

The climate of the region is characterised by cool wet winters and mild to hot, dry summers. Average annual rainfall varies considerably within the region, from approximately 850 mm in the south to 450 mm in the north of the region.

6 The Coorong, which consists of a series of lagoons which stretch along the coast for approximately 140 km south of the River Murray mouth, is part of the mosaic of interconnected freshwater to estuarine and saline habitats at the end of the Murray River.

With a favourable climate, suitable soils and underground water, the South East has a strong history as a highly productive area that supports a diverse and profitable industry base. In 2005/06 the estimated gross food revenue for the Limestone Coast was $1,320 million (SA Food Scorecards).

The key economic activities in the region supported by natural resources include plantation forestry, wine/viticulture, agriculture, dairy, potatoes, fishing/aquaculture and their associated industries.

In 2006/07 the Limestone Coast had 87,000 ha of irrigated crops which were supported by the availability of a large groundwater resource. There are two regionally extensive groundwater resources in the region, an upper,unconfinedaquiferandadeeper,confinedaquifer.

The unconfined aqu

Reinventing Irrigation Catchments, The System Harmonisation Story

Documents

Transcript of Reinventing Irrigation Catchments, The System Harmonisation Story