Using Policy to Protect Agricultural Land

The situation:

Agricultural land in Australia is being lost to urban expansion, mining and other competing land uses. Where different land uses interact (for example, when new housing developments are built near feedlots or other intensive farming enterprises), conflict can arise which makes the remaining agricultural land more difficult to use.

As part of a suite of reforms intended to manage this conflict, the NSW Government released an options paper for a proposed Agricultural Land Use Planning Strategy for public comment in early 2021. NSW Farmers and Australian Pork Limited (APL) approached Open Lines to help with their submissions to the Department of Primary Industries on the options paper.

We were asked to:

  1. Review the options paper

  2. Consider other possible approaches (beyond those set out in the options paper) that might be more effective

  3. Set out a broad program of reform to protect agricultural land and minimise land use conflict in the long term

NSW Farmers and APL needed good ideas, a robust and realistic policy program to make them happen, and they needed them fast. To support their submission we had to complete the job in three weeks.

The solution:

Step 1: Understand what is causing the problems and the proposed options

We came to the project with some important gaps in our knowledge. We’re familiar with creating policies and programs, we have experience dealing with competing land uses at the strategic planning level, and we have worked on policy for conservation on agricultural land in NSW. But we weren’t well versed in the planning issues around competition for or conflict around agricultural land.

To remedy that, we combed through the NSW Government’s reforms to date, the reviews of those reforms, and the options paper. We also discussed the issues with NSW Farmers and APL, and talked to a number of their members to develop case studies that illustrated some of the key issues.

It soon became clear that the options paper for the proposed Agricultural Land Use Planning Strategy (the Strategy) was lacking some crucial components:

  • It did not recognise the complexity of the problem or the range of government departments or agencies that play a role in managing agricultural land use

  • It did not adequately address the underlying drivers of the loss of important agricultural land or land use conflict more generally

  • It did not set out how the Strategy would be developed or implemented

  • It did not include key features of strong government programs (like clarity about the goals of the program or how the program would be evaluated and thus implemented)

Between the options paper, the previous reforms, the reviews, our discussions with NSW Farmers and APL, and our conversations with farmers affected by these issues we had a range of good ideas and a few suggestions of our own. This was enough to start our review of the options paper, but it also made it clear that just reviewing the options paper wasn’t going to grapple with the key issues.

We needed a way to turn the good ideas into a solution that would manage land use conflicts and protect agricultural land in the long term.

Step 2: Make sense of all the pieces

We developed a plan that the NSW Government could follow to manage competing land uses in a coherent and strategic way. It had five key elements, each of which was supported by specific recommendations:

  1. Clearly set out and identify the goals of the Agricultural Land Use Planning Strategy. We made this recommendation as soon as we saw that the options paper did not set out clear goals for the Strategy. Without clear goals it’s impossible to say if the Strategy is working or whether it needs to be changed

  2. Map important agricultural land and set targets for the protection of these areas. This was one of the good ideas in the options paper, but without the broader policy framework around it the map would not be effective. We added recommendations about how the map and targets to protect land could be built into the planning system to ensure they were used to make good decisions about development

  3. Establish a duty for government agencies to consider important agricultural land. We suggested this addition based on our experience with duties in biodiversity conservation. This “duty” would require each part of government to consider the impact their actions are taking on agricultural land and make agricultural land use planning a priority across the whole NSW Government

  4. Improve operation of the planning system to support agriculture. We expanded on some of the ideas in the options paper to recommend greater consistency and clarity within the planning system, identification of appropriate forms of development or activity on agricultural land, and definition of adequate buffers between agricultural areas and other land uses

  5. Improve dispute resolution mechanisms. We drew on the advice of NSW Farmers, APL, and the case studies to recommend one of the options from the options paper

To oversee and implement this process, we recommended:

  1. That the role of the NSW Agriculture Commission be expanded to provide oversight of the creation and implementation of these reforms. In our experience, a lack of clarity about who is responsible for government programs often leads to the program stalling or failing

  2. Certainty of funding to develop and implement each element of the program

  3. A robust process for monitoring, evaluating, and reporting on the components of the program and making the necessary changes to ensure the program stays on track

This approach took the ideas that NSW Farmers and APL already had, improved and refined them, and turned them into a roadmap for a viable set of legislative and regulatory reforms.

To ensure that our report aligned with the NSW Farmer’s submission, we stayed in touch with them as the report was written. Drafts of the report were regularly sent to the client for review, with the first draft provided just one week after the project commenced.

The solution:

We delivered this project in three weeks - in time for the report to contribute to NSW Farmers and APL’s response to the option paper.

Because we had developed the report with constant input from NSW Farmers and APL, they had the confidence to attach the report in full to their submissions to the Department of Primary Industry’s review. The report took their ideas, expanded on them and turned them into a policy program you could put on the Minister’s desk.

Previous
Previous

Impact Assessment at the Dugald River Mine