Abstract

Commitment to EMS varies

In areas of primary production where the pressure for public accountability in sustainable resource management has been high for a number of years, the level of acceptance and adoption of formal EMS approaches is greater. This is particularly true for fisheries and forestry, where larger, corporate enterprises are beginning to consider EMS as an industry norm, just as it has in the manufacturing sector.

In the agricultural sector, pressure to demonstrate diligence in care for the environment and greater regulatory pressures is also being felt particularly in the intensive industries (e.g. poultry, piggeries, dairies, feedlots) and in industries with a high profile for their potential adverse impact on natural resources such as cotton and sugar

The forestry and fisheries industries are nevertheless further down the path of accepting an EMS as a standard part of doing business. The fishing industry has embarked on an extensive program of encouraging EMS adoption, partly driven by recent requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). The EMS efforts fit in with the development of a national framework for ecologically sustainable development in the fishing industry. The forest industries also recognise EMS as an accepted and increasingly widespread process for achieving desired outcomes under ecologically sustainable forest management principles. EMS is a component of the very first criteria laid out for the Australian Forestry Standard.

Reservations about EMS

Elsewhere EMS continues to face resistance and slower uptake especially where little benefit is perceived for the effort invested in the formal documentation procedures required. The initial effort of developing the system is often deemed too hard by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and those industries where the marketing of undifferentiated bulk commodities blocks the flow-on benefits of environmental differentiation.

Of the producers that have carried out serious EMS trials, the majority are taking it slowly, encouraging further development while awaiting signals from the marketplace, regulatory agencies or the community about the need to move forward on environmental assurance.

The grains and horticulture industries in particular are preparing entry-level programs for their producers that could in time lead to certified EMS if and when required by market, community or legislative demands Some are developing mechanisms such as best management practice guidelines and monitoring tool kits that can support future development of EMS.

The majority of these approaches are using risk assessment as their starting point, either as defined through HACCP principles already mandatory for meeting existing food safety requirements or models specifically designed for the industry (such as the dairy self assessment tool, DairySAT).

They first carry out the preliminary step of identifying and prioritising risks to the environment caused by industry activities (e.g. dairy, cotton). Some are developing voluntary extension of existing quality assurance (QA) schemes to include an environmental module (e.g. cattle, dried fruit).

Government support

There has been a substantial investment by Government in support tools and education materials designed to develop EMS. These include the Australian Government-funded EMS national training kit (incorporating the Biodiversity Resource Guide with the main national and state biodiversity policy objectives, legislative requirements, resources and contacts) and the Australian Landcare Management Systems training kit. An EMS course specifically targeted to the needs of NRM and NHT coordinators and facilitators has also been developed based on the national materials.

Government support for EMS activities has also derived from the National EMS Implementation Plan launched at the 2003 EMS Conference, held in Tanunda, South Australia. Investments made to date range from commitments to the Pathways to Industry EMS Program through to individual agency programs offered by State Environment Protection Agencies and Agriculture / DPI departments.

Linking to other initiatives

EMS projects need to develop links with catchment and regional targets. Unfortunately, the majority of INRM regional plans developed under the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality (NAP) and the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) programs do not explicitly recognise EMS as a possible tool for achieving aims of improved environment and natural resource management outcomes. This may be largely due to the fact that many of these plans were developed before there was a widespread awareness of EMS.

Coordinations and communication

Many approaches to EMS have evolved, driven by industries, by farmer organisations and by governments, all at various stages of development and frequently varying perceptions of EMS. The complexity of the resulting activity and the ongoing potential for confusion and divisiveness mean that it will remain important to improve the co-ordination between these groups while maintaining a focus on the actual outcomes desired from improved management.

International trends

A key message from international trends is some degree of certification, or at least independently verified evidence, for the responsible management of natural resources is inevitable. The emphasis is increasingly on the global application of sustainability concepts across all of agriculture, rather than development of separate approaches across different agricultural sectors.

National Certification Process for Environmental Management in Australian Agriculture

This collation of information was the platform for further research and meetings that concluded that a national framework is needed a National Certification Process. It would bring together the efforts and activities of recent years throughout the industry and proposed a mechanism for carrying the opportunities in EMS forward. It suggested that Australia could be a world leader in developing a coherent environmental certification system for its agricultural land.

Conclusions

While not exhaustive, it is hoped that this inventory and report will be a step towards improving communication, collaboration and co-ordination among the wide array of EMS proponents across Australian industries and regions. It has highlighted that an important issue facing Australian rural industries is how to foster effective and efficient communication channels in order to promote consistent approaches, keep track of everything taking place and prevent both duplication and fragmentation of effort.

Another equally vital need is for an active watch-in-brief on international developments and the development of some effective mechanism for relaying relevant information to producers and support agencies. This is a role for governments, in close collaboration with industry.

Attachment1. Structure of the Inventory

EMS and Australian primary industries

• Existing industry approaches
• Supply chains
• Sustainability
• Catchment management linkages
• Australian and State Governments
• Financial institutions
• World trade

International initiatives

• International agencies and companies
• Europe
• North America
• South-East Asia
• Ecolabelling, environmental labelling and regional branding

EMS Activity by Industry Sectors in 2004

• Plant-based broad-acre industries
• Cotton
• Grains
• Rice
• Sugar
• Horticultural industries
• Dried Fruits Research and Development Corporation
• Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation
• Horticulture Australia Ltd (HAL)
• Queensland Fruit and Vegetable Growers (QFVG)
• Pacific Coast Eco Bananas
• Horticultural EMS Pilots
• Extensive animal industries
• Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA)
• Sheep and wool
• Pastoral EMS pilot
• Dairy
• Poultry
• Pigs
• Australian feedlot industry
• Organics
• Fisheries
• Forestry
• Collaborative/Catchment-based Research and Development (R&D) Programs
• Catchment-based Pilots
• Grain and Graze
• Innovate Australia - Food and Fibre
• Joint Venture Agroforestry Program (JVAP)
• Land and Water Australia (LWA)
• Managing Climate Variability Program
• Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC)
• Sustainable Grazing Systems (SGS)
• Murray Darling Basin Commission (MDBC)
• Watermark-Environmental Stewardship Program (Watermark-ESP)
• Landmark
• Marketing/Labelling Pilots

EMS Activity by Farmer Federations

• National
• Victoria
• Queensland
• South Australia
• Western Australia
• New South Wales
• Northern Territory
• Tasmania

EMS Activity by Governments

• Collaborative Australian Government / State Programs
• Natural Heritage Trust (NHT)
• National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality
• Market-based instruments (MBIs)
• Regional Plans
• EMS National Framework and Implementation Plan
• Reef Water Quality Protection Plan
• Local Government EMS Support
• State/Territory Government EMS Support
• Australian Government EMS Support
• Pathways to industry EMS program
• EMS National Pilot Program
• EMS Incentives Program
• EMS National Training Kit
• Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF)
• Department of Environment and Heritage (DEH)
• Greenhouse and agriculture
• Standards Australia
• JAS-ANZ