Griffith University

What are best practice

techniques to increase
landholder awareness of
ecosystem services in
regional landscape?
Name: Faezeh Samadani
Choy

Student ID: S2799295

Convenor: Apro Darryl Low
Subject:
3097ENV
Date Due: 22nd April 2014

Griffith University

Griffith University

Griffith University

Griffith University

Griffith University

Griffith University

Griffith University
Table of Contents
Executive Summary..3
1.0 Introduction 3
2.0 Working Definitions ..3
3.0 Study Objectives.4
4.0 Methodology4
5.0 Key Issues....4
6.0 Evaluation of Findings.......5
6.1 Planning Principles and Policies..........5
6.2 'Best Practice'........6

7.0 Case Studies.7

7.1 Case Study 1: US Wetland Mitigation Banking.....7
7.2 Case Study 2: Victoria BushBroker....................7

8.0 Conclusion...8

Griffith University
Executive Summary
This report has in detail discussed the key issues that associated with landholder awareness in regards to the protection of
ecosystem services incentive programs. This study outlined the key issues relating to upbringing the attention of
landholder awareness, which are mainly due to uncertainties, education and commitment. In addition, it also outlines the
effects of planning decisions affecting their land. Two case studies were made to reach a conclusion. The first case study
was in US wetland mitigation banking, the second outlined Victorias Bushbroker program. It later analyses the case
studies and assesses their significance for present and future principles and sustainable management principles. Through
this study the best practice case study was discovered to be the Victoria BushBroker program.

1.0

Introduction

Landholders are seen as stakeholders involved in decision making process and occupants of land. Landholders in this case
can be seen as a group of people living on public or private land, and sharing the same interest and living within a defined
geographical location (Merriam Webster, 2011). The reasoning behind this is that landholders as a whole are affecting by
planning decisions and involvement in environmental programs. The concepts of ecosystem services are the many and
varied benefits that people obtain from natural resources (Queensland Government, 2014). The aim of this report is to
discuss the relevance around the world programs that protect the maintenance of ecosystem services through the viability
of landholder awareness. Consequently, the key issues and case studies in regards to this case will be outlined and
discussed.
The key issue in regards to this report is based on the lack of landholder awareness of ecosystem services and the effective
outcome of incentive programs. This report highlights the significance of landholder programs in two case studies. Case
one is based on US wetland mitigation banking, and case two outlines Victoria, Australia BushBroker program. The
central reason these case studies were chosen to investigation the effects of programs on landholder awareness, ecosystem
services, and the effects on regional landscape. When the case studies have been outlined and completed with their
planning principles and policies, discussion in regards to the most sustainable and adaptable management principles will
be outlined. Consequently, the cases will be compared and contrasted to describe the best practice case in regards to
maintaining effective landholder programs to protecting ecosystem services in regional landscapes.

2.0 Working Definitions

Ecosystem Services
Defined as the conditions and processes that allow natural ecosystems to provide direct and or indirect anthropocentric
benefit to sustain and support the well-being of people. Benefits include regulating services such as, water and air
purification; provisioning services such as medicines, food and shelter and cultural services such as, education and
recreation and supporting services from which all ecosystem services are derived such as soil formation and nutrient
cycling (Queensland Government 2009, pg., 67).

Natural Resource Management

9

Griffith University
Natural resource management refers to the management of natural resources such as land, water, soil, plants and animals,
with particular focus on how management affects the quality of life for both present and future generations (Australian
Government, 2014)
In-Lieu Fee
Permittee pays a few into a compensation fund program in lieu of creating their own offset or buying a credit. ILFs are run
by government or non-profit organisations which use the funds to undertake offset activities (Becca, 2013).

3.0 Study Objectives

1. Firstly, the report sets out to establish the research frontier for respected key issue,
2. Then breaks down the key issues associated with landholder awareness and their involvement in planning
decisions,
3. List of key main working definitions that are relevant to this topic,
4. After that, adopted principles will established that are applicable to future sustainable and adaptable management,
5. The adopted principles will be used to choose which case study will be best achieved all criteria and be best
practice,
6. Summary of what should be adopted/ applied to further develop and maintain landholder and ES programs.

4.0 Methodology
Two relevant case studies were chosen that are all of importance when related to landholder programs of maintain ES and
the impacts it has had on that particular region either indirectly or directly. These will be discussed in the findings with the
case studies chosen at different locations and the time of occurrence. This was done to better analyse and evaluate the
programs that affected landholders in land use. The case that was addressed the most principles was deemed best
practice and then evaluated.

5.0 Key Issue

Absence of landholder awareness can create degree of conflicts and benefits within the planning process, this is often the
case when landholders participate as an active stakeholder. The experience that landholders gain from their participation
in land use programs will affect their own attitudes towards participating in future schemes, and those of the people
around them (Australian Government , 2005). Similarly, past experience with incentives and the organisations running
them will influences decisions (Allan Curtis, 2010). Examples of this are outlined in the case studies that highlight this
issue. This credit process also helped landholders to understand their costs in undertaking the actions in their offsets.
Still today, landholders have always been given sufficient weighting in planning decisions affecting their land along with
governmental rulings (Fenton, 2008). Through research analysis it can be assumed that landholders that are self
empowered appear to be more efficient at dealing with vegetation programs and thus formulating positive sustainable
solutions.

6.0 Evaluation of Findings

6.1 Planning Principles and Policies

10

Griffith University
Modern planning is heavily based in the spheres of regional planning. Within the regional system of planning, it is
conducted in a way that sees the relation and organization of the allocation of resources in space, the location of
productive facilities, and the arrangement of resources as imperative to proper planning (Iowa Law Review, 1965 p.g,
67).
The planning principles that have been affective in the US and Victoria are of similarity. The techniques used in all two
cities are all to be implemented in the future for better management of ecosystem services in respect to landholder
awareness. Future planning has generated in BushBroker program in Victoria due to it has delivered more financial
incentives and more hectares protected and improved over the years. US policy of responding to provide equivalent
standards of supply credits to anyone who may be involved can create most credits and will have long term funding
requirements (PennState, 2013). This goes to show the new rules have the promise to shake things up in compensatory
mitigation. These planning principles and policies, if used right, would be affective and adaptive for future strategies of
sustainability and management of ES. Table 1 demonstrates the main principles and elements related to landholders and
ecosystem services.
Table 1: Planning Principles for Landholder Awareness (Source: adapted from: Queensland Government. 2012)
Principles
Integration

Description
Landholders are an integral part of
private or public land of managing
natural resources and agricultural
systems.
Landholder awareness and knowledge
of ES must be raised to increase the
capacity and willingness of individuals
to manage ES.

Elements
Strengthen capacity building elements
within activity plans of natural
resources in regional landscapes

Communication

Ensure all landholders have equal

opportunity to participate in ES
management

Commitment

Effective ES management requires a

long-term commitment to ES
management by the community,
industry groups and government
entities.
Consultation and partnership
arrangements between local
communities, industry groups, state
government agencies and local
governments must be established to
achieve a collaborative approach to ES
management.
ES management planning must be
consistent at local, regional, state and

Use a variety of communication

methods
Big billboards
Newspaper articles

Ensuring the landholders to be

comfortable in management of ES and
clear about all aspects of the work
being carried out on their land.

Landholder awareness

Consultation and partnership

Planning

Encouraging landholders through

education programs or incentive
services.

Making sure landholders have strong

participatory action research to engage
in collaborative approach to help
landholders achieve their goals.

Management, incorporating broader

elements of ES management is needed
11

Griffith University

Prevention

Improvement

national levels to ensure resources

target priorities for ES management
identified at each level.
Preventative ES management can be
achieved by:
Natural resource destruction
especially by human activity

to assist with ES planning services for

landholders and engage appropriately.

Research about ES, and regular

monitoring and evaluation of ES
activities, is necessary to improve
natural resource management
practices.

Recognition and incentives needed for

landholders who have enabled to
improve and achieve the
environmental outcomes.

A comparative study is needed for

landholders to prevent any damaged
access to the natural environment.

6.2 Best Practice

The philosophy of best management practice and principles is to integrate the human dimensions of NRM into a technical
or scientific view of how ecosystems need to be managed (Clark 1997 p.g, 16). In regards to best practice both case
studies have achieved good outcomes. Both have had to endure a long arduous process of qualifying for funding subsidies
from various associations. Both have achieved positive outcomes for the future.
The BushBroker program seems to integrate all planning principles and initiatives to be best practice. The BushBroker
program is best practice due it helps landholders to generate native vegetation credits by protecting and managing their
native vegetation and assist holders clearing native vegetation (Becca, 2013). Extensive education process has occurred
and landholders have been consulted with and offered progressional insight into the works of any projects and its
outcomes (State Government Victoria , 2014). The BushBroker has provided the landholders with a sustainable income,
which can aid in the pursuit of additional future program establishments as well as assist their land. The BushBroker
ensured a satisfactory outcome of adapting to different kinds of ecosystems on various scales, provides practical
guidelines on what to do and why; sustains the integrity of particular ecosystems; and represents a working consensus
among managers, landholders, other practitioners and researchers (ScienceMedia, 2012).
However, all the outcomes established by US wetland mitigation banking have proved to be an importance, valued and
financially capable program. It has achieved a great deal of goals in creating offsets in restoration, enhancement, creation
and preservation program, though, they still not recognized and economically stable and will need to rely on external
funding for future programs (NMBA, 2012). Fundamentally, the BushBroker program in Victoria can be easily
implementation in South East Queensland as it seems to be more financially independent as a program, the more merit it
has in directly influencing planning decisions. Thus reinforcing this research frontier hypothesis, those landholders willing
to participate in this program will be self empowered at better chance at dealing with planning issues and ecosystem
services.

7.0 Case Studies

12

Griffith University
7.1 Case Study 1: US Wetland Mitigation Banking
Founded early by US Army Corps of Engineer (US ACE) in 1980s and finally grounded in 2008, after the founding of the
Clean Water Act, the equivalent standards and criteria for mitigation banks was established (Becca, 2013). Mitigation
banking term used colloquially in the US to refer to wetland and stream mitigation banking; the setting includes the
banking of any environmental credit including species, habitat, ecological function or other (The Katoomba Group, 2011).
Wetland and stream offsets in the US are created via: restoration, enhancement, creation, and preservation; indirect offsets
(e.g., payments to fund research) are not allowed. Offsets must be located within the same watershed (service area) as the
impact, usually designed by the US Geological Survey Hydrologic Unit Codes (NMBA, 2012). Permittees may create
their own offsets (called permittee- responsible mitigation), or pay offsets via third-party mitigation banks or other
programs such as In-Lieu Fee (ILF) (Hallwood, 2010). Then, when a land developer fills or otherwise impacts a wetland
they may buy offsets from a mitigation banker. The mitigation banker then restores, enhances, creates or preserves an area
of wetland to generate credits (EPA, 2014).
These aims and policies are techniques to protect any wetland and stream, as time changes rules and policies must also
change to suit the time and place. Wetland and stream mitigation banks are a viable and cost effective tool for providing
compensatory mitigation throughout the US, as well as meeting the goals of the Clean Water Act Section 404 to restore
the physical, biological, and chemical integrity of the nations waters (NMBA, 2012). This program allows the most-like
offset program in the world, featuring price signals that indicate to the developers the scarcity of the resource; third-party
investments and involvement in offset creation, as well as units of credit standardised enough to allow trading (EPA,
2014).
7.2 Case Study 2: Victoria, Australia BushBroker
Firstly introduced in 2006 by Victorias Native Vegetation Management Framework, is a program to facilitate native
vegetation offsets in the state of Victoria (Queensland Government, 2012). The BushBroker program works primarily on
the supply side, identifying landowners willing to preserve and manage native vegetation. It is a convenient source of
offsets for proponents who are seeking approval to clear native vegetation, providing proponents with access to a
statewide register of available native vegetation credits that could be purchased off the shelf (Becca, 2013).
BushBrokers role is to provide advice on the availability of credits, relevant landholder expressions of interests and
options to satisfy offset requirements (Doole, 2014).
The benefits of BushBroker Program assists with giving something beneficial to both landholders and permit holders.
BushBroker provides an opportunity to improve biodiversity on landholders properties to generate a potentially new
income stream from native vegetation by generating native vegetation credits. There are three types of native vegetation
credits:
1. Habitat hectares: Protecting, maintaining and improving the management of a remnant patch of native vegetation.
Includes activities such as week control, rabbit control or stock exclusion (Becca, 2013).
2. Large old trees: Protecting large old scattered trees and protecting old trees in a remnant patch from adverse
impacts and managing the area around the tree to facilitate the regeneration of native plants (ScienceMedia,
2012).
3. New recruits: Planning new recruits into an area that was previously cleared of native vegetation through
revegetation using plants indigenous to the area (Doole, 2014).

13

Griffith University
The success of the BushBroker program has measured the success of its brokering services by transactions, tracked 35
offset transactions in 2007/2008 and 63 in 2008/2009 (Becca, 2013). In BushBroker, there is a current assessed stock of
about 2,750 hectares (or 600 habitat hectares credits) of supply available within BushBroker (Doole, 2014).

8.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, this report has outlined the key issues that associated with landholder awareness in regards to ecosystem
services incentive programs. It has done this by a thorough research of two case studies, broken down and analysed how
they have and havent met future criteria. This method was used to indicate whether or not the planning principles of
Victoria and US have met the requirements of sustainable and adaptable management of landholder awareness programs
and the protection of natural resources.

14

Griffith University
9.0 Comprehensive Bibliography
Allan Curtis, R. S. (2010, March). Landholder Participation . North Central Catchment , p. 24.
Australian Government . (2005, December ). Biosecurity awareness and peri urban landholders. Retrieved April 10,
2014, from data.daff.gov.au: http://data.daff.gov.au/brs/brsShop/data/periubanreport.pdf
Australian Government. (2014). Natural Resource Management. Retrieved April 12, 2014, from nrm.gov.au:
http://www.nrm.gov.au/about/nrm/
Becca, M. C. (2013). State of Biodiversity Markets: Offset and Compensation Programs Worldwide. Queensland: Ian
Dickie.
Doole, G. (2014). Determinants of cost-effectiveness in tender and offset programmes for Australian biodiversity
conservation. America: Steven Schilinze.
EPA. (2014, March 20). Compansory Mitigation. Retrieved April 15, 2014, from water.epa.gov:
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/wetlandsmitigation_index.cfm
Fenton, M. (2008, July). Landholder beliefs about NRM in the southern rivers NRM region . Retrieved August 12, 2014,
from southern.cma.nsw.gov.au: http://www.southern.cma.nsw.gov.au/documents/Southern%20Rivers%20CMA
%20Benchmarking%20Landholder%20Beliefs%20about%20NRM.pdf
Hallwood, P. (2010). Contractual difficulties in environmental management: The case of wetland mitigation banking.
America: Kathy Segerson.
Merriam Webster. (2011, June). Landholder. Retrieved April 13, 2014, from merriam-webster.com: http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/landholder
NMBA. (2012). Mitigation Banking. America: Charles Darwling.
PennState. (2013, September). Tree Farming News. Retrieved April 12, 2014, from extension.psu.edu:
http://extension.psu.edu/natural-resources/forests
Queensland Government. (2012). Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Retrieved April15 2014, from
daff.qld.gov.au: http://www.daff.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/52651/IPA-Local-Government-Pest-ManagementPlan.pdf.pdf
Queensland Government. (2014, April 4). Department of Natural Resources and Mines. Retrieved April 13, 2014, from
dnrm.qld.gov.au: http://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/land/vegetation-management
ScienceMedia. (2012). Victoria: BushBroker, Habitat Hectare and Offsets. Retrieved April 16, 2014, from
sciencemedia.com: http://www.sciencemedia.com.au/downloads/2013-5-1-8.pdf
State Government Victoria . (2014). BushBroker. Retrieved April 14, 2014, from Department of Envionmental and
Primary Industries : http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/environment-and-wildlife/biodiversity/native-vegetation/nativevegetation-permitted-clearing-regulations/native-vegetation-offsets/bushbroker
15

Griffith University
The Katoomba Group. (2011). Market Features and Rules. Retrieved April 14, 2014, from ecosystemmarketplace.com:
http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/pages/dynamic/web.page.php?
section=biodiversity_market&page_name=uswet_market

16