1stInternationalConferenceofLandcareStudiesGlobalResilienceThroughLocalSelf-Reliance–TheLandcareModel
5-8November,2017
Nagoya,Japan
NanzanUniversityInstituteforSocialEthicsAustralianLandcareInternational
Withsupportfrom
i
ConferenceProgram
Sunday5thNovember201715:30 Registration16:30 GeneralpresentationonLandcare19:00 WelcomepartyMonday6thNovember20179:00 WarmUpsession9:15-12:30Session1:TheCriticalRoleofLocalSelf-RelianceinAchievingGlobalSustainability
Curators:MichaelSeigelandAllanDale
9:20 Keynotespeech:Landcare:GrassrootsparticipatorygovernancefortheAnthropocene?Andrew Campbell, CEO, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research,Australia …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1
10:00 Morningtea10:20-11:20 Session1-1. …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2
Lisa Robins, Honorary Senior Lecturer, Fenner School of Environment andSociety,AustralianNationalUniversity,Australia
Session1-2. …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3Graham R. Marshall, Associate Professor and Principal Research Fellow,Institute for Rural Futures, School of Behavioural, Cognitive and SocialSciences,UniversityofNewEngland,Australia
Session1-3. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4PaulMartin(viavideoandskype),ProfessorandDirector,AustralianCentreforAgricultureandLaw,UniversityofNewEngland,Australia
Session1-4. …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5SoniaWilliams,StateLandcareCoordinator,LandcareNSW,Australia
11:20 Paneldiscussion12:30 LunchBreak
ii
13:30 Rapporteursreport:summaryofthediscussionsofar (Rapporteurs:AllanDale,MichaelT.Seigel,PipJobandNarumiIshihara)13:45-17:00Session2:WhatMakesLocalSelf-RelianceDeliveronSustainability?
Curator:AndreaMason
13:50 KeynoteSpeech: Human-humanandhuman-naturebonds:Thekeystoself-relianceandresilienceJoseph Runzo-Inada, Chief Resilience Officer, Toyama City, Japan………………………… 6
14:30 Afternoontea14:50-15:50
Session2-1. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………7ClintonMuller,SeniorConsultant,RMConsultingGroup,Australia
Session2-2. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………8TomomiMaekawa,ResearchFellow,GraduateSchoolofEngineering, MieUniversity,Japan
Session2-3. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………9FrancisSteyn,WesternCapeDepartmentofAgriculture,SouthAfrica
Session2-4. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………10Andrea Mason, Director of Finding North; Chair of Leigh Catchment Group;BoardMemberofAustralianLandcareInternational,Australia
15:50 Paneldiscussion17:00 Break18:00 Supper
EveningsessionSpeaker: Evy Carusos, Project Manager, Landcare Foundation of the Philippines, Inc.,Philippiines
iii
Tuesday7thNovember20178:45 WarmUpsession
Rapporteursreport:summaryofthediscussionsofar
9:15-12:30
Session3:LandcarePracticeModelsandPragmaticsCurator:RobYoul
9:20 Keynotespeech:Landcarepraxis-"Fromlittlethingsbigthingsgrow"Jen Quealy, Master of Research Student, Western Sydney University; AustralianLandcareVolunteer;GeneralManager,TBLCreativePartnerships,Australia
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1110:00 Morningtea10:20-11:20
Session3-1. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………12RobYoul,Chair,AustralianLandcareInternational,Australia
Session3-2. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………13BeatriceDossah,EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyofGhana,Ghana
Session3-3. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………14NickEdgar,ChiefExecutive,NZLandcareTrust,NewZealand
Session3-4. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………15MeganRowlatt,Co-founderandChair,IntrepidLandcare,Australia
11:20 Paneldiscussion
12:30 Lunchbreak
iv
13:30 Rapporteursreport:summaryofthediscussionsofar13:45-17:00Session4:LandcareasaTransformativeAgentinCrises(IncludingNaturalDisasters
andEmergencies)Curators:JenQuealyandKazukiKagohashi
13:50 KeynoteSpeech:Communityastransformationagentandthetemporalityofdisaster
Stewart Lockie, Distinguished Professor andDirector, The Cairns Institute, James CookUniversity,Australia ……………………………………………………………………………………………16
14:50-15:50Session4-1. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………17
MaryJohnson,RoyalMelbourneInstituteofTechnology,AustraliaEvy Carusos, Project Manager, Landcare Foundation of the Philippines, Inc.,Philippines
Session4-2. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………18AshleyBland,SustainabilityManager,SkillsetEnvironment,Bathurst,Australia
Session4-3. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………19KazukiKagohashi,SeniorResearchFellow,NanzanUniversityInstituteforSocialEthics, Japan; Vice-chair, Secretariat to Promote the Establishment ofLandcareinJapan
Session4-4. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………20JenQuealy,MasterofResearchStudent,WesternSydneyUniversity;AustralianLandcareVolunteer;GeneralManager,TBLCreativePartnerships,Australia
15:50 Paneldiscussion17:00 Break18:00 Supper
v
Wednesday8thNovember20178:45 WarmUpsession
Rapporteursreport:summaryofthediscussionsofar9:15-12:30Session5:InnovationandRiskTakingthroughLandcareApproaches
Curator:JenQuealy
9:20 Keynotespeech:Learninglikecrazy:Prototypes,heuristicsandemergentpracticesRossColliver,Director,TheTrainingandDevelopmentGroup;VictorianLandcareCouncilCommitteeofManagement,Australia …………………………………………………………………21
10:00 Morningtea10:20-11:20
Session5-1. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………22LiddyNevile,ComputerScientist;Member,BellarineLandcareGroup,Australia
Session5-2. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………23Joseph Tanui, Landcare Coordinator and Co-chair, African Landcare Network,Kenya
Session5-3. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………24TokihikoFujimoto,AssociateProfessor,FacultyofAgriculture,
ShizuokaUniversity,JapanSession5-4. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………25
PipJob,SeniorProjectManager,NSWDepartmentofPrimaryIndustries, CEO,LittleRiverLandcare,Australia
11:20 Paneldiscussion12:30 Lunchbreak
vi
13:30 Rapporteursreport:summaryofthediscussionsofar13:45-17:30Session6:SystemicChangeandMergingDiscourses
Curators:AllanDaleandMichaelSeigel
13:50 KeynoteSpeech:CrossscalestewardshipcapacityofcommunitybasedorganizationsfromnorthernCaliforniaacrosstheAmericanwesttoWashingtonDC:Willitworkforcannabis?
Yvonne Everett, Professor, Department of Environmental Science and Management,HumboldtStateUniversity,USA ……………………………………………………………………………26
14:30 Afternoontea14:50-15:50
Session6-1. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………28AndresArnalds,ProjectManager,SoilConservationServiceofIcelandBrianSlater,OhioStateUniversity,USAJoninaS.Thorlaksdottir,RifFieldStation,IcelandFredYikii,MakerereUniversity,Uganda
Session6-2. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………29KayeRodden,DeputyChair,LandcareVictoriaInc.,AustraliaTerry Hubbard, Chair, National Landcare Network and Landcare Victoria Inc.,Australia
Session6-3. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………30LisaRobins,HonorarySeniorLecturer,FennerSchoolofEnvironmentandSociety,AustralianNationalUniversity,Australia
Session6-4. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………31MichaelT.Seigel,VisitingResearchFellow,NanzanUniversityInstituteforSocialEthics,Japan;Chair,SecretariattoPromotetheEstablishmentofLandcareinJapan
Session6-5. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………32AllanDale,Professor,TropicalRegionalDevelopment,TheCairnsInstitute,JamesCookUniversity,Australia
15:50 PaneldiscussionBeginningwithfinalreportbyrapporteurs
17:30 Closingremarks
1
Session1
TheCriticalRoleofLocalSelf-RelianceinAchievingGlobalSustainability
KeynoteSpeech
AndrewCampbell CEO,AustralianCentreforInternationalAgriculturalResearch,Australia
Landcare:GrassrootsparticipatorygovernancefortheAnthropocene?
Astheimpactofhumankindonourfiniteplanethasbecomeevermoreprofoundandinescapable,
geologistshaveofficiallyrecognisedanewera–theAnthropocene—characterisedbyitsdominant
force,humans. Asweacknowledgeourownresponsibility forstewardshipofnatural resources,
andourcapacitytoaffecttheEarthfundamentally—forgoodorfor ill—itbecomesevermore
important to develop better ways of sharing knowledge and making decisions about land use
(consideringlandbroadlytoincludewaterandbiodiversity)andmanagementatalllevels. Asthe
vastmajorityof landuseandmanagementdecisionshappenat thescaleof local sitesandsmall
farms,governanceatthatleveliscrucial.
LandcarehasbeenoperatinginAustraliaforoverthirtyyears,andintwentyorsoothercountries
foruptotwentyyears.InAustraliathetermisusedlooselytorefertovoluntary,community-based
approaches to natural resourcemanagement (NRM), and cooperative activities at a community
level directed to more sustainable use of natural resources. In its early years, Landcare in
Australiawasseenasanew,potentiallymoreeffectiveformofagriculturalextension, influencing
the behaviour of farmers towards more sustainable practices by changing social norms,
encouragingcollectiveactivityacrossfarmboundaries,andprovidingentrypointsforsocialgroups
who had hitherto not been visibly active in NRM, includingwomen, youth, ‘hobby’ or ‘lifestyle’
farmers, conservationists and urban people. Internationally, Landcare approaches have been
applied to rebuild social capital in post-conflict situations in The Philippines, in post-cyclone
contextsinthePacific,andtoimprovesmallholderaccesstofoodvaluechainsinAfrica.
Thispresentationwillexplore,usingexamplesfromAustraliaand internationally,theelementsof
landcare that are worthwhile exploring in the context of the quest for more sustainable and
resilientgovernancemodelsintheAnthropocene.
2
Session1-1
LisaRobins HonorarySeniorLecturer,FennerSchoolofEnvironmentandSociety, AustralianNationalUniversity,Australia
Morethan30yearsof‘Landcare’inAustralia:Fivephasesofdevelopmentfrom‘childhood’to‘mid-life’(crisisorrenewal?)
This paper describes the five major development phases of ‘Landcare’ in Australia – from its
‘childhood phase’ beginnings in themid-1980s to its current day ‘mid-life phase’. The ‘Landcare
approach’initscontemporaryformisarticulatedinthe‘AustralianFrameworkforLandcare2010–
2020’ as comprising the Landcare ethic (a philosophy, influencing the way people live in the
landscape while caring for the land), the Landcare movement founded on stewardship and
volunteers(localcommunityactionputtingthephilosophyintopractice)andtheLandcaremodel(a
rangeofknowledgegeneration,sharingandsupportmechanismsincludinggroups,networksfrom
districttonationallevels,facilitatorsandcoordinators,governmentandnon-governmentprograms
andpartnerships).Landcareemergedinthemid-80sasagrassroots,community-ledapproachthat
wasstronglygrounded,inthefirstinstance,infarmer-to-farmerknowledgeexchangeandtackling
local-level issues. It evolved into a national movement following the Australian Government’s
declaration of the 1990s as the ‘Decade of Landcare’ and announcement of the first National
LandcareProgramat thebehestandwith the imprimaturofahithertounlikelyalliancebetween
theNationalFarmers’Federation(the‘brownies’)andtheAustralianConservationFoundation(the
‘greenies’).Now,more than30yearson, there ismuchevidence to substantiate thepivotal role
Landcarehasplayedinstimulatingandenablingknowledgesharing,learningandon-groundaction
across Australia in the arena of natural resource management; and also to conclude that its
potentialforcontributingtobroaderimpacts,especiallylandscape-scalechange,hasbeenseriously
hindered by various ill-conceived and/or executed policy settings and related institutional
arrangements. Nevertheless, the Landcare approach (with its consistently sound ethic and
movement, butwith itsmodel imperfections atdifferent times throughout the fivedevelopment
phases)hasstoodthetestoftime,andprovenitselftoberobust.
3
Session1-2
GrahamR.Marshall AssociateProfessorandPrincipalResearchFellow,InstituteforRuralFutures,SchoolofBehavioural,CognitiveandSocialSciences,UniversityofNewEngland,
Australia
Community-basedgovernanceforglobalsustainability
The scale of collective action required for global sustainability is feasible only to the extent that
effortsatthis levelareabletobuildonthetrust,reciprocityandcooperationalreadyestablished
for sustainability at national and successively lower levels. Such a bottom-upprocess of building
capacities for global sustainability is one of community-based environmental (including natural
resources) governance – at least where this governance is understood properly as a nested
multi-levelsystemof(privateandpublic)groupsandorganisationsestablishedinaccordancewith
theprincipleof subsidiarity.TheAustralianexperimentwithcommunityengagement inLandcare
andregionalisednaturalresourcesgovernanceisreviewedtoprovideinsightsforongoingattempts
tostrengthenvoluntarycooperationwithgovernancestructuresbeyondthelocalleveltowardsthe
nationalandgloballevels.Thedifficultyoftheseattemptsshouldnotbeunder-estimated;success
willinvolvenothingshortoftransformationalpolicyreform.Yetperseveringwiththeseattemptsis
essential;thesolutiontotheglobalproblemofsustainabilityisultimatelycommunity-based.
4
Session1-3
PaulMartin ProfessorandDirector,AustralianCentreforAgricultureandLaw,
UniversityofNewEngland,Australia
RuralLandcare:Creatingthemissingbusinessmodel?
Landcaremembersaroundtheworlddoextraordinaryworkinthepublicinterest.Theirvoluntary
effortsreduceandinmanycasesreverseharmsthataredonebyothers.Those‘others’frequently
profitfromtheirharm-doing,andtheyarenotfinanciallyaccountableforthisimbalance.Landcare
members also provide substantial public good benefits, relieving the whole population of this
burden. However laudable thismay be, there are significant problems of fairness and feasibility
built into a business model where some people willingly carry a large load that should be the
financial responsibility of others. Beyond any issues of fairness, it is clear that Landcare
organisationsaroundtheworld,foralloftheirheroicintent,areinsufficientlyresourcedtodowhat
isneeded.
Thispaperquestions “howmightwe findabusinessmodel for sustainable Landcare, thatbetter
addressesthefairnessandfeasibilityproblemsofruralsustainability?”Thepaperlooksatsomeof
thefundamentalfeasibilityquestionsforafewcountries,andsuggestssomeconceptstobeginto
findthatmissingbusinessmodel.
5
Session1-4
SoniaWilliams StateLandcareCoordinator,LandcareNSW,Australia,
IndividualLandcarerAwardWinner1997(NSW)
Theabilitytolookafterourownbackyard–Understandingthecriticalfactorsthatenableself-relianceinlocalcommunities
Globalsustainabilitycannotoccurwithoutlocalaction.Theadoptionofsustainablepracticesatthe
localscalereliesuponthewillingnesstoacknowledgingthatwe,aspeopleinthelandscape,exert
aninfluenceoverthestateofourecosystems.However,whatisoftenoverlookedbymanyinpolicy
positions and bymany practitioners in theNRM /sustainability sphere is the importance of ‘the
peopleINthelandscape’andthatifwearegoingtoinfluenceenvironmentaloutcomes,THEkeyis
toinfluenceandbuildtheself-relianceofthepeoplethatmanagetheirownenvironments.
Noamountofscience,noamountoflegislation,noamountofsubsidywillproducelastingchange
unlessitisownedandadaptivelymanagedbythoseclosesttoTHEIRenvironment.Thisbuildingof
self-reliance – the capacity to acknowledge, assess,manage and continuously adapt to changing
circumstances, can only occur when we ensure that those who are affected by the changes
required tomoveus to amore sustainable future, arepart of theprocessof learning about the
causalfactors,andarevaluedascontributorstothedesignandimplementationofthatchange.
This was and still is the basis of the Landcare model, established around 30 years ago.
Internationally recognisedas a successful gamechanger, Landcare supported landmanagers and
communitiestocontributetheirknowledge,learnfromothersandbeempoweredtotakeactionto
improvethesustainabilityoftheirlandscapes.
Drawing upon my 30 years of experience as a Landholder and Landcarer, which started (and
continues)atthescaleoffamilyfarmmember,throughtothatofNSWStateLandcareCoordinator;
thissessionwillexplorethefactorsthatenableandsupportcommunitiestorespondtoandtackle
thechallengeswefaceataglobalscaleastheirown.
6
Session2
WhatMakesLocalSelf-RelianceDeliveronSustainability?
KeynoteSpeech
JosephRunzo-Inada ChiefResilienceOfficer,ToyamaCity,Japan
Human-humanandhuman-naturebonds:Thekeystoself-relianceandresilience
Sustainabilityofhumanlifeandlandusepracticesarecriticalandirrevocablyinterrelatedissuesfor
the21stcentury.ToyamaCityisrecognizedbothinJapanandabroadasamodelofecologicaland
resilience planning. The first Japanese city to be chosen for the Rockefeller 100 Resilient Cities
initiative,thefirstnon-nationalentitytosignanMOUwiththeWorldBank,andtheonlyJapanese
city intheUnitedNationsSEforALLprogram,Toyamaisavirtual laboratoryforsustainabilitybest
practices. Created from the coalescing of 7 former municipalities under a Japanese national
program to combine rural and urban centers, Toyama’s 30 year Resilience Strategy 2050,
developed under the auspices of the 100RC initiative, explicitly unifies and harmonizes urban,
agriculturalandruralareasforlongtermresilience. Coveringthe1,242sqkmofthecityfromthe
Sea of Japan to crest of the Northern Japan Alps, Toyama’s Resilience Strategy 2050 offers
numerous examples of programs for rural sustainability, agricultural protection and ecological
preservation.Most importantly, the key lesson from the city’s 2-year resilienceplanningprocess
anditsintergenerationalagriculturalandfarmingpromotionprograms,istheessentialcentralityof
communal bonds, other respect, and respect for nature, as the foundation for self-reliance and
resilience.
7
Session2-1
ClintonMuller SeniorConsultant,RMConsultingGroup,Australia
DoesLandcareinUgandacontributetoimprovedfoodsecurityandlivelihoodoutcomesatthehouseholdscale?
Sustainablemanagementofnaturalresourceshasbeenplacedontheglobaldevelopmentagenda
asequalinimportanceaspovertyeradication.Theinterlinkednatureoftheseglobalchallengesis
increasingly apparent, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where incidences of rural poverty are
aligned to degraded landscapes. Solutions for management of land degradation are viewed as
requiring collective approaches through engagement of community at the grassroots and actors
within the landscape.In Uganda, the Australian inspired Landcare approach has been adopted
since2001asameansofempoweringthecommunitytomanagetheirnaturalresourcesthrough
linking landmanagementpracticesto livelihoodoutcomes.Thisstudyexaminedtheeffectiveness
of theLandcareapproach inKapchorwaandKweenDistricts,Ugandaat thehousehold levelasa
mechanism tocontribute to foodsecurityand livelihoodoutcomes.Through thedevelopmentof
binary logistic regressionmodel for food security and Pearson chi-square tests for livelihoods, a
comparative analysis of households engaged and not engaged in Landcarewas undertaken. The
significant variables of household assets, farm assets, livestock and specialization of income
generation activitieswere identified for food security andhousehold education, landownership,
household assets and farmownership as the variables of significance for livelihoods. The results
concludedthehigherperformanceofLandcarememberhouseholdsinthesecategories,suggesting
thepositivecontributionLandcarehasonfoodsecurityandlivelihoodmeasures.Furthermore,the
application of the Landcare approach in enabling effective collective action was examined and
discussed in the context of the sustainable adoption of positive land management practices to
address incidences of household level poverty. It is concluded that the unique nature of the
Landcare as a community model to empower communities to address landscape scale land
degradation should be further considered as a development approach to address incidences of
povertyandlandscapedegradation.
8
Session2-2
TomomiMaekawa ResearchFellow,GraduateSchoolofEngineering,MieUniversity,Japan
Keyconceptsfortheautonomyoflocalcommunitygroupsandtheiractivities:ThestructureofsupportsystemsinAustralianLandcareandadecisionmakingprocessgroundedinEastAsianculture
Japanisfacingseriouspopulationdeclineandanageingsociety.Thismakesitdifficulttomaintain
traditionalstylesofnaturalresourcemanagementsuchasSatoyamathroughfarmingandforestry.
Inordertofindstrategiestoovercomethechallengesraisedbypopulationdeclineandtheageing
society, I have been analyzing and theorizing the outcomes of my field research carried out in
AustraliaandJapan.
Inthispaper,inordertoexplorepossibleapproachestotheseproblems,Iwilldiscussthesystemof
LandcareinAustraliafromtheperspectiveofmyselfasanoutsidertoAustralia,bypointingoutits
structuralandspiritualfeaturesasawidespreadmovement.Thein-fieldresearchinAustraliawas
carried out through participatory observation at local events andmeetings of Landcare groups,
Landcare Facilitators/Coordinators, etc., and interviewswithmembers of Landcare groups, other
community groups, government and semi-government bodies, etc. The research was conducted
mainlyinVictoria,duringtheperiodofmystayinAlbury,in2013-2014,withsupportfromCharles
Sturt University, Australian Landcare International, and a lot of members and staff members of
relatedcommunitygroupsandorganisationsofLandcare.
Also Iwill suggest skills andabasic philosophyof consensusbuilding, as theother aspectofmy
researchinordertoseekamethodofsustainabilitybasedonvoluntarybasedcommunitygroups.
This approach may provide new ideas or views to Landcare groups in Australia for conducting
activitiesmoresmoothly,eventhoughtheapproachisrootedinEastAsiancultureandphilosophy.
Finally,Iwillpresentsomebriefideasofwhatweneedtoconsiderformovingforwardtothenext
stepinJapan,basedontheexperienceofSPELJ.
9
Session2-3
FrancisSteyn WesternCapeDepartmentofAgriculture,SouthAfrica
Scalingupclimatesmartagriculturefromthepilotprojectof80000hato500000hadoingittheLandcareway
Introduction
SmartAgricultureforClimateResilience(SmartAgri)iswellpresentedinthecasestudyof80000ha
Koupdevelopment in the formofaLandCareAreaWide initiative that is increasingtoapossible
500000haproject,doingittheLandcareway.
Purposeofthepresentation
Thispresentationwillillustratethemassivegainsinworkingtogetherwithpartnerstocreateaplan
andimplementprojectsaccordingtotheplanwithwillmakethisareamoreclimatesmartthanany
otherinitiativepresentedtofarmers.
Conclusionsandextensionimplications
This case studyhasproven thatworking inpartnershipwith severalorganisations isessential for
success, but the farmer is the pivoting role in this partnership and according to the Landcare
principlesanessential leaderofthemethodology if it istobesuccessfully implemented.Froman
extension point of view it is the ultimate test of successful extension to create an enabling
environment for this leadership and largeAreaWideProjects to takeplace. From thenumerous
advantagesandimpressiveresultsofthisSmartAgriculturalproject,themostimpressiveiswithout
doubt the development of Human Capital which resulted in the base line studies of ecological
infrastructureandeffectiveprojectimplementation.
10
Session2-4
AndreaMason DirectorofFindingNorth;ChairofLeighCatchmentGroup;BoardMemberofAustralianLandcareInternational,Australia
EveryoneEverywhereLandcare
ThispresentationwillcoversomeelementsoftheLandcaremovementthathavecontributedtoits
success in Australia and helped its spread throughout the globe- becoming the foundation for
resilientcommunities.
Asacommunitymember,Landcarerandsustainabilitypractitionerwithexperience incommunity
development, local action, marketing and communications, I will draw on personal and group
experiencetoshowhowtheLandcaremodelhascreatedavehicleforthedevelopmentofpersonal
andcommunityresilience.Thepaperwilldiscusstheneedforasenseofbelongingatthepersonal
andgroup level,the importanceofthegreaterorganisationandtheabilitytoadapttochange. It
willexplorehowthatsenseofbelongingmanifestsitselfandbuildsuptrustwithincommunitiesin
timesofneed.
Conversely,Landcare’sdiversity isoneof itsgreateststrengths.Landcareusesamulti-disciplinary
approach to resolve problems. Its grass roots approach, embedded in communities, encourages
diverseandcreativeapproachestoissuespertinenttoitsowncommunities.Howdoesthisfitwith
thatsenseofbelongingandhowhasthemovementthatisLandcareachievedthis?
Landcare does not have amonopoly on community action. I will also explore other community
actiongroups/movementsandwhichoftheseelementshaveaffectedtheirsuccess.Inparticular,I
will discuss the importanceofbranding, advocacyandpolitical influence in achieving success for
Landcarewhereothershavestruggled.
11
Session3
LandcarePracticeModelsandPragmatics
KeynoteSpeech
JenQuealy MasterofResearchStudent,WesternSydneyUniversity;
AustralianLandcareVolunteer;GeneralManager,TBLCreativePartners,Australia
Landcarepraxis-"Fromlittlethingsbigthingsgrow"Afascinating'speed-date'onLandcareorigins,practice,fieldsandfutures,
andthecriticalelementsfora'Landcareeverywhere'model
ThefocusofthisKeynotepresentationistodistilthemodelofLandcaretosharewiththeworld.The process will be an explanatory and exploratory ‘speed-date’, covering 30 years and theAustraliancontinent.Theoutput:todistilthesharablemodelfromthecharacteranddevelopmentofLandcare,ourmuch-loved,30-yearold,ouryoungAustralianmodelofgrounded,collaborative,local, voluntary action to ‘care for the land’,within a context of support, innovation, risk-taking,capacitybuildingandknowledgesharing.Ouryoungsterneedstoventuremoreconfidentlyintotheworld, to be shaped and changed, to allow us to keep adapting and to reach out for new andimprovedoutcomeswithourglobalcollaborators.
ThepresentationwilllookathowLandcarebeganandadapted,fromtheearlydaysinthe1980’s,within progressive (but stressed) rural farming communities, growing by an organic process of‘inviting-in’ and ‘reaching-out’ into other communities and landscapes. The session will presentLandcareasatransferablemodelofself-relianceatthecommunityscale,bringinglocalfarm-basedknowledgeandlearningtogetherwithscience,innovative(government-community)extension,theenablinginfluenceofindigenousneedandknowledge,youngandolderknowledgeanddevelopinginteractionswithunlikely,unusualbuttransformative‘partners’andcollaborators.
November2017isagreattimeforthisgathering;Landcarehasreachedearlymaturity;withmuchsharablecontentandadvocates,thatenablesustoanalysetheLandcare‘model’.TheKeynotewillhelp reflect and ‘distil’ the essence of Landcare, so we can state the sharable model. We willconsideran‘elevatorpitch’fora‘Landcareeverywhere’modelfortheworldasanaidtoknowledgetransfer.This isnot just forAustralia’sownreflection,buttodefineLandcareasa legitimateandimportantworldmodeloflocalandempoweredself-reliance,togroundLandcareasacontinuouslyadaptivemodelwithinacontextofclimateimpactsonagriculture,foodsecurityandecology,andtheimportantsharedprocessofLandcareasdiscoveryandco-development.
12
Session3-1
RobYoul Chair,AustralianLandcareInternational,Australia
BehindLandcare'ssuccess:Soundmanagementatstateandnationallevels
LandcarestartedinAustralia31yearsago,whenagroupwaslaunchedatWinjallokinVictoriaon25 November 1986. Today 5-6000 groups operate nationwide, often formed into networks tobetterutiliseregionalresources.
InAustralia,Landcare’smajorfunctionsarecommunityactiononenvironmentalrestoration-withamulti-disciplinaryapproach;sustainabilityprojects,especiallyamongstfarmers;advicetoalltiersof government; training at many levels covering co-ordinators and community; on-groundmanagement of numerous public reserves; citizen science, such as Waterwatch programs;environmentaleducationforschoolsandthepublic;and, increasingly,post-disasterrehabilitationwithincommunitiesaffectedbycyclones,floodsandwildfire.Notunexpectedly,thisbroadcharterrequiresmuch effort behind the scenes. This paper lists themany infrastructural elements thathaveevolvedinAustralia.OthercountriesinitiatingLandcarewillprobablyneedsimilarprovisions.
They include publicity; non-government (corporate, philanthropic and community, including‘crowd’) fund-raising; political lobbying; liaison and direct collaboration with all tiers ofgovernment; insurance; legal support for incorporation; signage and logos, including usage forcommercial purposes; appointing official patrons; supporting revegetation contractors andrevegetation nurseries; co-ordinating volunteers; spreading the word overseas; ensuringinvolvement of ethnic and indigenous communities; awards and honours; and forging linkswithartists,musicians,writersandpoets.Notyetachieved,buthighlydesirable,wouldbesystemsofenvironmental payments to landowners helping broader communities by protecting biodiversity,sequesteringcarbon,restoringlandscapesandmaintainingcatchmentvalues.
All this needs excellent internal communications, readily achieved today via the internet. It alsodemands specialised support from government departments, budget allocations coveringcommunityprojectsandcontributionstowardsgroupandnetworkoverheads,andpossiblyformaladvisorycommittees.
Involved in Landcare since its inception, the author briefly discusses thesemanagerial elementsfromtheAustralianstandpoint.Heisparticularlyinterestedinonlinetrainingand,asaforesterforfifty-five years, promoting major multi-network revegetation projects, especially across stateboundaries,whichsadly,inAustralia,oftenhamperconcertedaction.
13
Session3-2
Beatrice Dossah was a late but welcome addition to the speaker's list and was unable to supply her abstract for this publication.
14
Session3-3
NickEdgar ChiefExecutive,NZLandcareTrust,NewZealand
Predictingthesuccessofcommunity-ledresourcemanagementinitiatives
Theresourcemanagementframework inNewZealandplacesconsiderableemphasisonengaging
communities to address water quality problems. This has resulted in a resurgence in
community-led approaches to catchment management. The NZ Landcare Trust has lead and
deliveredanumberofsuccessfulcatchmentmanagementprojectsinrecentyears. Collaborative
efforts between the NZ Landcare Trust, local farmers and the wider catchment community to
improveriverandcoastalwaterqualityresulted intheAorereRiverbeingawardedthe inaugural
MorganFoundationNZRiverPrizeinSeptember2015bytheInternationalRiverFoundation.
KeyaspectsoftheAorereRiver initiativehavebeenintegraltothesuccessofthiscommunity-led
approach. These have included the initiative’s focus on “farmers as leaders” of water quality
improvement, using science to model catchment cause and effect dynamics, developing farm
plansthatpromotegoodmanagementpracticestoreduceagriculturalrunoffintowaterways,anda
varietyofengagementpracticesaimedatenhancingcommunityownershipofwaterqualityissues
andsolutions.
The NZ Landcare Trust has been supporting a number of other community-led catchment
managementprojectsinNewZealand. TheseincludetheKakanuiCommunityCatchmentProject
(Kakanui River, Otago Region), the North Canterbury Sustainable Farming Systems Project
(Canterbury Region), and the Upper Buller Enhancement Group Project (Buller River, Tasman
District). Implementation of these catchment management initiatives has included research to
identifypredictorsofsuccessfulcommunity-ledwaterqualitymanagement.
Sixkeypredictorsofsuccessordeterminantsofeffectivecommunityengagementwereidentified.
The identification of key determinants of successful community-led catchmentmanagementwill
allow the transfer and application of this knowledge to other catchments in New Zealand, and
potentially,toothercountries.
15
Session3-4
MeganRowlatt Co-founderandChair,IntrepidLandcare,Australia
IntrepidWay:Anadventurouswayforwardtowardsahappier,connected,sustainableworld
Since its inception thirty years ago, Landcare in Australia has grown to be one of the largestgrassroots environmental movements which is actively addressing some of Australia’s greatestenvironmentalandsustainabilityissues.
Butwhathasbeenmissing,isaneffectivecommunityengagementstrategytargetingyoungpeople,andthedevelopmentofyoungpeopletobestrong,resilient,compassionateleadersfortheissueswefacelocallyandglobally.
IntrepidLandcare isa refreshing, innovativeway forward thatengagesandempowersyouthandyoungadults acrossAustralia to leadand take actionon stuff thatmatters. Frommarinedebris,species decline, and habitat loss to reversing climate change, Intrepid Landcare supports youngpeopletodevelopskills,confidence,connectionandknowledgetotacklethesematters.
Inlessthan2years,IntrepidLandcarehasbecomeahighlyrecognisedorganisationandbrand,andhas inspired and supported the establishment of new youth-lead networks and projects beingdeliveredbyyoungpeopleforyoungpeopleacrossAustralia.
Over75%ofyoungpeopleinvolvedinIntrepidLandcareprogramssaythatourleadershiptrainingchanged their Landcare experience - and their life, and over 80% of all people who attendedIntrepidLandcaretrainingsaythatithasimpactedtheirengagementandleadershippractice.
RegionalandmetropolitancommunitiesthatwehaveworkedwithsayIntrepidLandcareprogramsencourage cross-sectoral, regional, intergenerational and cultural collaborations, which bringspurposeful support for youth through mentorship, sponsorship and personal relationships. Andyoung people are constantly sharing how happy they feel having being involved in IntrepidLandcare.
Thispresentationwillexploreandshare theevolutionof IntrepidLandcare,andhowtaking risksandhaving funhas lead to theestablishmentof a successful youthengagement initiative that isinspiring and supporting the development of happier, healthier, connected communities takingactiononstuffthatmatters.
16
Session4
LandcareasaTransformativeAgentinCrises(IncludingNaturalDisasters
andEmergencies)
KeynoteSpeech
StewartLockie DistinguishedProfessorandDirector,TheCairnsInstitute,
JamesCookUniversity,Australia
Communityastransformationagentandthetemporalityofdisaster
The importance of altruistic social relationships, and the limitations of state capacity, in helping
people cope with natural and technological disasters is reflected in a variety of approaches to
community-basedplanning, resourcemanagement, risk reduction,emergencyreliefetc.Thevery
importance of community begs questions, however, two of which will be explored in this
presentation.First,justhowmuchcanbeexpectedofcommunitywhendisastersare,bydefinition,
eventsthatexceedourabilitytocope?Whiletheanswertothisquestionwill,ofcourse,becontext
specific, it is important toconsiderwhether lessonscanbedrawn fromdisaster research for the
design and support of community-based programs that do make a genuine difference to risk
reduction,post-disaster recovery,etc.Second, justhowmuchcanbeexpectedwhen inequalities
withinandbetweencommunitiesaremajordeterminantsofvulnerabilityandconflict?Again,it is
important to consider whether lessons can be drawn for the design of programs that deal
constructively with competing interests, values and aspirations – with tension between the
resilience of communities 'as they are' and the desirability of pre- or post-disaster social
transformation. A key theme running through exploration of both questions will be time.More
specifically,thepresentationwillconsiderhowthetemporalityofdisasterevents(theirfrequency,
tempo,durationetc.)shapeexperiencesoftraumaandresponse.
17
Session4-1
MaryJohnson RoyalMelbourneInstituteofTechnology,Australia
EvyCarusos ProjectManager,LandcareFoundationofthePhilippines,Inc.,Philippines
Lessonsfromthefield:Mitigationandvulnerablecommunities
ThePhilippinesisidentifiedasoneofthemostdisaster-pronecountriesintheworld.Moreover,for
overfourdecadestheMindanaoregionofthePhilippineshasexperiencedanotherformofdisaster
-armedconflict-whichsometimesturnsviolent.
AsignificantoutcomeoftheMindanaoconflictisincomedeprivation,alongwithsocialdislocation
and isolation from services. Successfulmitigation, recovery or rebuilding is highly contingent on
communitycapacity.Since2013AustralianandPhilippineresearchteamshavebeenjointlyworking
with conflict vulnerable Mindanao communities on community-based livelihood improvement
activities.
Lessonsfromthefieldfeaturesocialorganisationexamplessuchasnetworks,trustandreciprocity,
that improve theabilityof community toengage in coordinatedendeavours includingmitigation
andrecovery.
18
Session4-2
AshleyBland SustainabilityManager,SkillsetEnvironment,Bathurst,Australia
GreenBuildingsandmarketdrivers–AcasestudyanalogyforLandcareandsustainabilityThe desire to improve environmental performance has not just been limited to farms and
landscapes in Australia. Activists of the 60’s and beyond frequently promoted an image of
sustainablelivingthatincludedenvironmentallyfriendlyhousingwithdesignandmaterialchoices
tolimitsocialandecologicalharm.ThismovementultimatelyledtoupgradingtheBuildingCodeof
Australiain2003toincludeenergyefficiencyand,soonafter,variousState-basedhomestarrating
schemes.Everyhomebuiltnowneedstomeetminimumstarratingsoutofamaximum10starsto
beapproved forconstruction.Homeswithmorestarsareworthmore in themarket.Theresults
aresustainability impactsthatareclearandmeasurable,andthatdrivebehavioursandresilience
thinking.
Imagine a similar system for landholders. What would be the indicators of higher performing,
betterpropertiesandhowwouldtheybemeasured?Whatmarketmechanismcouldbeharnessed
todrivebehaviourchangebymakingpeoplewanthigherstarratings?Whatlegislativeframework
mightbeconsideredtosetminimumstandards?
InthissessionIwilldescribehowSkillsethasworkedwithGreenHomesAustraliasince2008with
the aim of further transforming the housing sector by both increasing the demand for energy
efficient, environmentally friendly, affordable homes and training builders to be competent in
delivery. For Landcare, there are many parallels and lessons to be taken regarding: the
implementation of scientific and evidence-based knowledge in an accessible way, properly
understanding the target audience, critically analysing the true role and capacity of various
stakeholders, understanding the effectiveness of top-down versus bottom up drivers, and,
accountingfortheimportanceofexternalsocialfactorsandtiming.
This paper/presentation reflects on lessons through the Green Homes journey and points to a
possible model that could increase the uptake of Landcare and create a robust framework for
funding.
19
Session4-3
KazukiKagohashi SeniorResearchFellow,NanzanUniversityInstituteforSocialEthics,Japan;
Vice-chair,SecretariattoPromotetheEstablishmentofLandcareinJapan
Whatdeterminestheresilienceoflocalcommunities?Acomparativeanalysis
betweenLandcareandapondirrigationsysteminJapan
ThispresentationfocusesonacaseofdroughtadaptationinapondirrigationsystemintheSanuki
PlaininJapanandexaminestheresiliencethereofinlightoftheunderlyingprinciplesofLandcare–
i.e.,autonomyoflocalgroups,apracticalandholisticapproachtolocalissuesandpartnershipand
networkingamongthevariousactors(includingnotonlyotherLandcaregroupsbutgovernments,
academics, specialists, business corporations, NGOs, etc.). The Sanuki Plain is located in Kagawa
PrefectureontheIslandofShikokuinJapanandisknownasoneofthemostdrought-proneareas
ofJapan.Tocopewithseriousdroughts,morethan14,000pondshavebeenconstructedoverthe
centuriesandfarmershavedevelopedvariouslocaltraditionsforwatermanagement.TheKagawa
Canal,whichdeliverswaterfromoutsidetheSanukiPlain,wasconstructedinthe1970stomitigate
droughts. The combination of the traditional knowledge by which farmers effectively adapt to
drought situations and the modern infrastructure of the Kagawa Canal have contributed to
augmentingtheresilienceofthepondirrigationsystemintheSanukiPlain.Iwillarguethatwecan
find a commonality between Landcare and the pond irrigation system in the Sanuki Plain in the
autonomyoflocalgroups,thepracticalviewpoints(focusingaspecificobjective)andinnetworking.
Specifically, “theprincipleof subsidiarity”wouldbeakey toeffectiveadaption to thecrises that
localcommunitiesface.
20
Session4-4
JenQuealy MasterofResearchStudent,WesternSydneyUniversity;AustralianLandcareVolunteer;GeneralManager,TBLCreativePartnerships,Australia
Landcareinpost-disasterrecoverypracticeandsocialsectorpartnerships
The Community Landcare model, which includes the knowledge and values held by Landcare
networks, makes Landcare an ideal partner of broader communities and agencies, for both the
thinking and preparation for, and the responses and recovery from natural disasters and
emergencies. Landcare helps build resilience. But Landcare hasn’t been a formal emergencies
partner,exceptinafewcases,andissometimesleftoutofsuchstructuresandresources.Research
is needed to understand the experience of Landcare in disasters, and that where and when
Landcareisinvolved,recoverycanbemoresuccessfulandsustainable,canbuildresilienceinboth
landscapeandcommunity,andcanextendtheLandcaremodel’srelevancetotheworld.Iwilllook
at theemergingLandcare role in suchevents, through threecase studies, (cyclone, fireandpest
animals) to focusattentionondescribinganactivecommunityLandcarerole, inpartnershipwith
the ‘usual’ emergency and disaster agencies. I aim to raise discussion around the critical role of
Landcare (and resourcing this) in pre-building both community and landscape resilience, with
Landcarebeingtheultimate‘greeninfrastructure’thatanycommunity,anywhere,needsandcan
developtoassistthemthroughsuchchallenges.
21
Session5
InnovationandRiskTakingthroughLandcareApproaches
KeynoteSpeech
RossColliver Director,TheTrainingandDevelopmentGroup;
VictorianLandcareCouncilCommitteeofManagement,Australia
Learninglikecrazy:Prototypes,heuristicsandemergentpractices
Three passions drive Landcare at local level -love of the land,mutual responsibility and learning
with peers. This keynote takes up the third of these, and asks how learning with peers can be
extended beyond the local sphere, to strengthen the place and contribution of Landcare, and
improve public governance. In the Australian context, organising in community continues to be
marginalised by top-down scientific management; with collaboration and advocacy, Landcare
continuestomaintainitsinfluence.Butwhatcanwedotomovelearningfromthemanyisolated
localsocialnetworksinwhichitfirstarisesandconnectthis intoawidernetworkatregionaland
Statescale? IdescribeCLEA(CommunityLearningforEnvironmentalAction),athreeyearproject
researchingways tostrengthenpeer-to-peer learning in theLandcarecommunity inVictoria.The
threestrategiesofthisprojectconstituteaprototypeforscalingupandscalingoutsociallearning
in Landcare. A second challenge in moving learning beyond the local is how to improve the
practicesand institutional relationshipsofpublicgovernance.Approachedasco-design, this isan
undertaking premised on equality between practitioners, paid and unpaid, at local, regional and
state level, andon social learningbetween thosepractitioners.Here, I describe five yearsof the
Systemic Inquiry into NRM Governance, a project bringing systems thinking and practice into
co-design, a task inwhich Landcare staff andvolunteershavebeenmajor contributors. Forboth
projects, the aspiration is that learning between peers can widen beyond tacit and localised
knowledge to explicit practice that influences howwe organise local actionand our governance
systems. I describe somemodels of learning thathave informedbothprojects, treating these as
heuristics thatguideaction. I thendiscuss sevenpracticesofdesign for social learning thathave
emergedfromtheprojects.
22
Session5-1
LiddyNevile ComputerScientist;Member,BellarineLandcareGroup,Australia
Landcareas‘CaringforCountry’
In this talk, Liddyhas takennoteof theAustralianAboriginal community’s expression ‘caring for
country’.ItreferstothemanypracticesthathaveoperatedinAustraliaforthousandsofyears.
Australia is an old country and its environment is fragile. Aboriginal practices have supported
inhabitantswithoutdestructionoftheenvironmentbutinthelasttwohundredyearsthelandhas
changed.Thistalkwilldrawattentiontothedifferencesbetweentheoldandnewpracticesandask
if the immigrantsof the last200yearsmightbeableto learnfromtheirpredecessors,and if the
volunteeringenterpriseLandcareitselfmightalsobenefitfromstudyingtheolderpractices.
Inparticular,Liddycontraststherolefirescanplayintheenvironmentandassociatedpracticesasa
wayofdrawingattentiontoandinterpretinglandcareandcaringforcountry.Thesocialpractices
thatsupportthedifferencesarealsoconsidered.
23
Session5-2
JosephTanui LandcareCoordinatorandCo-chair,AfricanLandcareNetwork,Kenya
StrengtheningruralinstitutionsinSub-SaharaAfrica:StrategiesforeffectivecapacitybuildingofgrassrootscommunitiesthroughtheLandcareapproachACriticalperspectiveinaddressingemergingglobalchallengesoffoodinsecurity,poverty,climate
change, ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss is understanding their high interlinkages.
These interconnectionsare increasinglyapparent inAfrica’sgrowingeconomiesandthreatenthe
development gains achieved painstakingly over the last three or four decades. Further, African
farming systems are highly heterogeneous: between agro ecological and socioeconomic
environments, inthewidevariability infarmers’resourceendowmentsandinfarmmanagement.
Smallholderfarmersinrurallandscapescontinuetodominateagricultureinthedevelopingregions
of the world. In Africa, smallholder farmers are experiencing formidable challenges, rapid
populationgrowth,intensifiedpressureonnaturalresourcesandintensivefarmingonsmallplots.
This notwithstanding, smallholder farmers have increasingly sought solutions beyond traditional
agriculturalapproaches.Thoughadvances inscienceandtechnologyofferopportunities formore
rewardingandefficientuseofresources,however,adoptionratesremainlow.Poorinvestmentin
sustainable solutions by smallholder farmers can be attributed to weak institutional support,
shortfalls in extension service models, weak and inappropriate governance and regulatory
processesandlowmarketintegration.Thepaperhighlightslessonsandinsightsfromtheadoption
oftheLandcareapproachintheregionwherebuildingblocksforasocialinfrastructure,apathway
for successful strengthening of grassroots institutions hitherto amissing link for large-scale rural
development.
24
Session5-3
TokihikoFujimoto AssociateProfessor,FacultyofAgriculture,ShizuokaUniversity,Japan
Renewableenergyandsmallsociety:Casestudiesofcommunitypracticein
Japanesemountainousvillages
Inthispresentation,wearegoingtotalkingaboutkindsofrenewableenergies(naturalresources)
for community development. We will focus on community based action toward sustainable
communitybyappropriatemanagementofnaturalresourcesandenergies.Renewableenergiesare
essentially local commons. So, in caseof installingandmanaging renewableenergy resourcesby
community powers, renewable energies contribute to energy independence and regional
sustainability.
We want to insist on that we pay attention to Small Hydropower (=SHP) toward community
sustainability.Hydropowerenergiesarehighlypublicfromthebeginningofdevelopingnation-state
inthelastof19thcentury.Untilthemiddleof20century,almostmegahydropowerwhichprovided
withbigdamwerealreadydevelopedindevelopedcountries.But,therearestillexistingsmall-scale
hydropowerpotentialsinthemountainousandremotearea.
In the aspect of community development, “Landcare” approach for consensus building about
focusing, installingandmanagingSHPwill raisenotnation-state’sbenefitsbutawarenessof local
people byproposing variousproblems and introducing knowledge and appropriate technologies.
Therefore,localpeoplecanmakedemocraticdialoguesaboutmanaginglocalresourceswithfuture
visionandfuturedesignoftheircommunities,basedonthelandbasedenvironmentalcapacity.
Thepurposeofthispresentationwilldiscusswithpracticalmethodologyandcomputepossibilityof
“Landcare”approach for installingnewSHP, for thepurposeofmakingcommunities sustainable,
basedonourcasestudiesandpracticalexperiencesinJapanesemountainousvillages.
25
Session5-4
PipJob SeniorProjectManager,NewSouthWalesDepartmentofPrimaryIndustries;CEO,LittleRiver
Landcare,Australia,2014NationalRuralWomanoftheYear
Landcare–Leveragingtheopaquetobuildresilience
Landcare provides so much more than planting trees. Yes, Landcare does make a significant
contribution towards the betterment of our landscape, improvement in ecosystem function and
increasedsustainableagriculturalpracticeadoption,butitaddsvalueinareasthatarelesstangible
andoften,alittlemoredifficulttoevaluatefromaquantitativeperspective.LandcareinAustralia
isn’t just ‘green’ (enviro) or ‘brown’ (agriculture), it’s a beautiful shade of ‘khaki’ with a lot of
opaqueelementstoo.
Afterworking for the LittleRiver LandcareGroup in theCentralWestofNSW inAustralia for12
years I will reflect on those opaque areas of value and what that means to the Little River
community andmore broadly. Someof the key opaque elements are the role Landcare plays in
beinganimportantpartofthesocialfabricofacommunity,itsabilitytobeinclusiveandprovidea
senseofconnectedness,problemssolvingof localised issuesandstrong leadership in the faceof
adversityanditsholisticapproachandabilitytosoftenred-tapetoachieveoutputsandoutcomes
forinvestorsandstakeholders.
Landcare drives community resilience and in some cases, helps to build individual and family
resilience.Landcaregivessomuchmorethanwhatisperceived.Itisapowerfulvehicletoleverage
givenitsstrongleveloftrustandrespectatalocalisedlevel.
This presentation will focus on key reflections and observations during my time as a Landcare
employeeandtheworkIdotodayanddrawonpersonalexperiencesacrossthekey‘opaque’areas
inwhichLandcarethrives.
26
Session6
SystemicChange,andMergingDiscourses
KeynoteSpeech
YvonneEverett Professor,DepartmentofEnvironmentalScienceandManagement,
HumboldtStateUniversity,USA
Crossscalestewardshipcapacityofcommunitybasedorganizationsfromnorthern
CaliforniaacrosstheAmericanwesttoWashingtonDC:Willitworkforcannabis?
Community based organizations (CBO), what might be called Landcare groups, have long been
involvedinnaturalresourcemanagementandconservationonprivateandpubliclandintheUnited
States. TheapproachesCBOshaveusedhaverangedfromcooperationandpartnershipamong
private landowners,with the public sector, andwith private industry to active protest and legal
challengesagainstperceivedpublicandprivatesectorfailures(Speece2016). Inthe1990’snew
CBOsemerged in theWesternUnitedStates thathavedeveloped their communities’ capacity to
respond creatively and effectively to a wide range of natural resource management challenges
locally,whilenetworkingwithCBOsatregionalandnationallevelstoaffectpolicyshiftsatbroader
scales (Abrams, Davis and Moseley 2015; Baker and Kusel 2003; Charnley et al. 2014). These
groupshavemaderuralcommunityvoicesheard,influencingpolicydecisionsbystateandfederal
governmentinanewtwistonpolycentricgovernance(AndersonandOstrom2008).Theirgrowing
organizational capacity has led some CBO to develop strong networks and partnerships for
implementing environmental stewardship across jurisdictional boundaries. These activities take
place in relatively remote rural areas that experience a vacuum of national, state and local
27
governancecapacityonfederalandprivatelands.Thispresentationwillilluminatetheseprocesses
for the case of farNorthern California. Local forest, range andwatershed restorationwork by a
number of CBO there has included fuels reduction and prescribed fire management, invasive
speciesremoval,fisherieshabitatandoakwoodlandsrestorationandcommunitycapacitybuilding
alongwithregionalandnationalcollaborativenetworkingtoeffectpolicychangeatthestateand
federallevels. Currently,theseorganizationsarerespondingtotherelativelyrecentchallengeof
newlysemi-legalcannabiscultivationthatthreatensmuchoftherestorationandgovernancework
CBOhavebeeninvolvedin,andpromisestobeatestofgovernanceandofallofthecrossscaleand
crossboundarystewardshipcapacityCBOhavemusteredtodate.
References:
Abrams,J.,E.J.DavisandC.Moseley.2015.Community-BasedOrganizationsandInstitutionalWorkintheRemoteRuralWest.ReviewofPolicyResearch,Volume32,Number6Anderson K.P. and E.Ostrom2008. Analyzing decentralized resource regimes from a polycentricperspective.PolicySci(2008)41:71-93
Baker,MarkandJ.Kusel.2003.CommunityForestryintheUnitedStates:LearningFromthePast,CraftingTheFuture. IslandPress,WashingtonD.C.
Charnley,S.,T.SheridanandG.Nabhan.2014.StitchingtheWestBackTogether:ConservationofWorkingLandscapes. UniversityofChicagoPress,Chicago.
Speece,Darren.2016.DefendingGiants:TheRedwoodWarsandtheTransformationofAmericanEnvironmentalPolitics.UniversityofWashingtonPress,Seattle.
28
Session6-1
AndresArnalds ProjectManager,SoilConservationServiceofIceland
BrianSlater OhioStateUniversity,USA
JoninaS.Thorlaksdottir RifFieldStation,Iceland
FredYikii MakerereUniversity,Uganda
Knowledgeandprogress-Buildingthebridges
Experiences from community-based approaches in caring for the land indicate a need to build a
stronger bridge between the generation of knowledge and action for progress. Such a paradigm
shifthasthepotentialtogenerateknowledgeacrossunprecedentedscalesandatlowercostthan
throughconventionalapproaches.
Thismeansthatresearchandotherrelevantinstitutionsneedtobestakeholdersinthechange,and
activelyformingacommunitywithlandmanagers.Thisextendstoresearchinitiation,definingthe
keyquestionsofwhyandforwhom,settingtheresearchquestions,planning(thehow), funding,
operation,andassessment.Commonfailuresofpastapproachesarepartlyfromlackofrespectfor
theprinciplethatknowledgeismostusefulandusedwhenitisjointlyproducedbyparticipantsin
decision and action for progress, such as by land users, and experts with technical and domain
knowledge.
Thepresentationwill examine the conceptof participatory knowledgemanagement approaches,
suchasinresearch,planning,monitoringandevaluationwithaviewofimprovingprogressincaring
forthe land.Whatconditionsneedtobe inplace,howdowefosterco-productionofknowledge
andformbondsbetweengroupslikeresearchers,professionalsandfarmers?Howcanparticipation
aid in learning, developing awareness and skills, increasing capacity, reducing costs, and
strengtheningpolicyformation?Whatistheroleofsuchapproachesinadvancingunderstandingof
theneedsof the land, fosteringawareness, land literacyandethic?Can theprocessofcapturing
datainacollaborativeenvironmentbeasimportantastheactualdataitself?
29
Session6-2
KayeRodden DeputyChair,LandcareVictoriaInc.,Australia
TerryHubbard Chair,NationalLandcareNetworkandLandcareVictoriaInc.,Australia
TheMeaningofSupport!
The history of Landcare’s formation and expansion in Victoria, Australia and overseas, is well
documented elsewhere. It commenced as a willing and respectful partnership between
organisations, who had a vision of a community led approach to sustainable private land
management,withasupportinggovernmentpolicyframeworkthatsmoothedthewayandprovide
foundationalresourcingtoenabletheprocess.
Whilst many associate Landcare with action to build a sustainable and productive natural
environment, what sets Landcare apart is its focus on building resilient and sustainable
communities thathave the capacity to act to repair, enhanceandmaintain thenatural assets in
theirlandscape.
Thesecommunities ineffectactuallybecomeavaluableassetthemselvesandtheirabilitytoadd
value to investments from elsewhere means that their economic value to governments of all
persuasionissignificant.
Thequestioniswhatdoesittaketoprovideanenvironmentwherethiscommunityasset,likeother
assetswithinourlandscape,canthrivetoapointwhereitisself-reliantandregenerative?
Self-relianceevolvesfromaconfidenceinbeingabletomakedecisionsasacommunity,whichare
respected, acknowledged and included in those government andnon-government policieswhich
willhaveanimmediateimpactonthatcommunity.Policysettings,atwhateverlevelofgovernment,
andsubsequentresourcingneedtodevelopaframeworkthatenablesthisprocesstooccur.
This presentationwill discuss some of our experiences in what helps tomake a strong resilient
Landcarecommunity,andhowgovernmentcanhelp.
30
Session6-3
LisaRobins HonorarySeniorLecturer,FennerSchoolofEnvironmentandSociety,
AustralianNationalUniversity,Australia
What might Australia’s ‘Landcare’ contribute to achieving the SustainableDevelopmentGoals(SDGs)?:Alocalself-relianceapproachtoglobalsustainability
ThispapermapstheAustralianexperienceofLandcareagainst theUnitedNations’ frameworkof
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The ‘Landcare approach’ in its contemporary form is
articulatedinthe‘AustralianFrameworkforLandcare2010–2020’ascomprisingtheLandcareethic
(a philosophy, influencing the way people live in the landscape while caring for the land), the
Landcaremovement foundedonstewardshipandvolunteers (localcommunityactionputtingthe
philosophy intopractice)andtheLandcaremodel (a rangeofknowledgegeneration, sharingand
support mechanisms including groups, networks from district to national levels, facilitators and
coordinators, government and non-government programs and partnerships). Landcare is an
example of a long-lasting local self-reliance approach that has been flexible, innovative and
dynamic enough to survive for over 30 years and, mostly, thrive in an ever-changing, and
occasionally evenhostile, policy environment. The analysis presented in this paper suggests that
the Landcare approach hasmuch to contribute beyond Australia to achieving the SDGs in both
developedanddevelopingcountrycontexts.
31
Session6-4
MichaelT.Seigel VisitingResearchFellow,NanzanUniversityInstituteforSocialEthics,Japan;
Chair,SecretariattoPromotetheEstablishmentofLandcareinJapan
LandcareasanexplorationofmeansofimplementingthePrincipleofSubsidiarity
Many interpretations of the principle of subsidiarity treat it merely as a principle dealing with
appropriate levels for decision-making, arguing that decision-making should be at the lowest,
smallest scale, most local level possible for the particular decision. The principle is reduced to
somethingsimilartothedevolutionofpowerordecentralisation.
ThePrincipleofSubsidiarity
1. Theword“subsidiarity”isderivedfromtheLatin“subsidium”(help,relief;reinforcement).Itis
not just thedevolutionofdecision-makingauthoritybutapositive roleof strengtheningand
empowering.
2. Theprincipledoesnotsimplypointtoakindofinvertedhierarchyinwhichdecision-makingis
devolved from central government to regional governments, regional governments to local
governments,andlocalgovernmentstoindividualsorsmallgroups.Itisaboutoptimalsupport
foreachlevelofsocietyfromeachlevelofsociety.
No manual exists for the implementation of the principle of subsidiarity and many factors in
governance work against it. The experience of Landcare may help identify strategies for
implementation.
LessonsfromLandcare
1. Networking and partnership are an effective means to supporting and empowering local
autonomousgroups.
2. TheexperiencethatsomegovernmentsmaybelessawareandlessattentivetoLandcarehas
demonstratedtheneedforasysteminwhichthevoicesofthesmallestscaleandmost local
levelsofsocietycanmadetobeheardateverylevelofdecision-making.Asystematicfeedback
loopbringing the voicesof grassroots individuals and groups to all decision-making levels of
societyisessentialfortheimplementationoftheprincipleofsubsidiarity.Suchasystemmay
helpingettingdemocracybeyondthestultifiedstatethatitisin.
32
Session6-5
Allan Dale Professor, Tropical Regional Development, The Cairns Institute, James Cook University,
Australia
Strengtheningnationalgovernancesystemstosupportself-reliance
The Australian and increasingly international Landcare movement reflects the re-emergence of
recognition of the concept of personal and local self-reliancewithin our national, provincial and
localgovernancesystems.WhilethewordisseldomusedtodescribeLandcare,theconceptdeeply
espousesandreflectsthekeygovernanceprincipleofsubsidiarity;themakingofdecisionsatthe
most appropriate scale to effect positive outcomes for society. In many of our nations, the
emergence of more centralized forms of governance have tended to eschew the subsidiarity
principle, implicitly (and often explicitly) diminishing the importance and profile of local
self-reliance.Thisongoing trend ingovernancesystemsacross theworldbringssignificant risk to
policydomains that fundamentally relyonthebehaviorof individuals,propertyownersand local
communitiesasthefirstlineofaction. Thispaperexploreswhylocalself-relianceissocriticalin
somany policy domains, ranging fromenvironmentalmanagement to health and socialwelfare,
law and order, counter-terrorism and even economic development. It then explores several
common trends in governance that weaken self-reliance. Finally, the paper explores what
governmentscando(fromnationaltolocallevels)torevisitsubsidiarity.Indoingso,Icelebratethe
conceptofLandcareasagrass-rootsmovementofextremelywideimportance.