Michael H. O'Connor

Australian Aboriginal Peoples’ Seasonal Knowledge: a Potential Basis for Shared Understanding in Environmental Management

Natural resource scientists and managers increasingly recognize traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) for its potential contribution to contemporary natural resource management (NRM) and, through this, to more resilient social-ecological systems. In practice, however, inadequate cross-cultural means to organize and communicate TEK can limit its effective inclusion in management decisions. Indigenous seasonal knowledge involving temporal knowledge of biota, landscapes, weather, seasonal cycles, and their links with culture and land uses is one type of TEK relevant to this issue. We reviewed the literature on Australian Aboriginal seasonal knowledge to characterize contemporary and potential applications to NRM. This knowledge was often documented through cross-cultural collaboration in the form of ecological calendars. Our analysis revealed a variety of basic and applied environmental information in Aboriginal seasonal descriptions and calendars that can contribute directly to NRM. Documented applications have been limited to date, but include fire management, inclusion as general material in NRM plans, and interpretative information about environments. Emerging applications include water management and climate change monitoring. Importantly, seasonal knowledge can also contribute indirectly to NRM outcomes by providing an organizing framework for the recovery, retention, and cross- cultural communication of TEK and linking to its broader cultural and cosmological contexts. We conclude that by facilitating the combination of experiential with experimental knowledge and fostering complementarity of different knowledge systems, Aboriginal seasonal knowledge can increasingly contribute to more resilient social-ecological outcomes in NRM. Nevertheless, the seasonal framework should augment, rather than override, other approaches to cross-cultural NRM such as those with spatial and/or social-ecological emphasis.

An assessment of biomass for bioelectricity and biofuel, and for greenhouse gas emission reduction in Australia

We provide a quantitative assessment of the prospects for current and future biomass feedstocks for bioenergy in Australia, and associated estimates of the greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation resulting from their use for production of biofuels or bioelectricity. National statistics were used to estimate current annual production from agricultural and forest production systems. Crop residues were estimated from grain production and harvest index. Wood production statistics and spatial modelling of forest growth were used to estimate quantities of pulpwood, in‐forest residues, and wood processing residues. Possible new production systems for oil from algae and the oil‐seed tree Pongamia pinnata, and of lignocellulosic biomass production from short‐rotation coppiced eucalypt crops were also examined. The following constraints were applied to biomass production and use: avoiding clearing of native vegetation; minimizing impacts on domestic food security; retaining a portion of agricultural and forest residues to protect soil; and minimizing the impact on local processing industries by diverting only the export fraction of grains or pulpwood to bioenergy. We estimated that it would be physically possible to produce 9.6 GL yr−1 of first generation ethanol from current production systems, replacing 6.5 GL yr−1 of gasoline or 34% of current gasoline usage. Current production systems for waste oil, tallow and canola seed could produce 0.9 GL yr−1 of biodiesel, or 4% of current diesel usage. Cellulosic biomass from current agricultural and forestry production systems (including biomass from hardwood plantations maturing by 2030) could produce 9.5 GL yr−1 of ethanol, replacing 6.4 GL yr−1 of gasoline, or ca. 34% of current consumption. The same lignocellulosic sources could instead provide 35 TWh yr−1, or ca. 15% of current electricity production. New production systems using algae and P. pinnata could produce ca. 3.96 and 0.9 GL biodiesel yr−1, respectively. In combination, they could replace 4.2 GL yr−1 of fossil diesel, or 23% of current usage. Short‐rotation coppiced eucalypt crops could provide 4.3 GL yr−1 of ethanol (2.9 GL yr−1 replacement, or 15% of current gasoline use) or 20.2 TWh yr−1 of electricity (9% of current generation). In total, first and second generation fuels from current and new production systems could mitigate 26 Mt CO2‐e, which is 38% of road transport emissions and 5% of the national emissions. Second generation fuels from current and new production systems could mitigate 13 Mt CO2‐e, which is 19% of road transport emissions and 2.4% of the national emissions lignocellulose from current and new production systems could mitigate 48 Mt CO2‐e, which is 28% of electricity emissions and 9% of the national emissions. There are challenging sustainability issues to consider in the production of large amounts of feedstock for bioenergy in Australia. Bioenergy production can have either positive or negative impacts. Although only the export fraction of grains and sugar was used to estimate first generation biofuels so that domestic food security was not affected, it would have an impact on food supply elsewhere. Environmental impacts on soil, water and biodiversity can be significant because of the large land base involved, and the likely use of intensive harvest regimes. These require careful management. Social impacts could be significant if there were to be large‐scale change in land use or management. In addition, although the economic considerations of feedstock production were not covered in this article, they will be the ultimate drivers of industry development. They are uncertain and are highly dependent on government policies (e.g. the price on carbon, GHG mitigation and renewable energy targets, mandates for renewable fuels), the price of fossil oil, and the scale of the industry.

The Avon River Basin in 2050: scenario planning in the Western Australian Wheatbelt

Scenario planning was used to identify issues and drivers of change that are relevant to community efforts to improve regional prospects in the Western Australian Wheatbelt. The region, some 20 million hectares in area, is under pressure to respond to a variety of environmental (salinity, erosion, acidification, biodiversity decline), economic (declining agricultural terms of trade), and social forces (rural decline, isolation). Regional strategic plans have been increasingly seen as the means of achieving sustainability in the face of these challenges, but until recently typically had single-activity outlook and timeframes of up to a decade into the future. Systematic futures-based research has been used in various regions to avoid reliance on business-as-usual as the default strategy, and to identify opportunities and challenges not presently apparent. The Avon River Basin, the central region of the Wheatbelt, was selected as the geographic focus of the project, and the time horizon was set at 2050. The project was developed by a group of 50 stakeholders from the basin, with expertise and strategic interests across a wide range of economic, social, and environmental themes. Through a series of workshops the stakeholders identified critical issues and their attendant drivers, then documented relevant past trends. Four regional scenarios, Saline Growth, Grain and Drain, Landcare Bounty, and Harmony with Prosperity, were developed based on positive and negative combinations of 2 clusters of uncertain and important drivers: environmental change and access to new markets. Common opportunities, threats, and critical success factors for the Avon River Basin region out to 2050 were also identified. We also found that the stakeholders have a tendency to strive for positive outcomes despite negative initial conditions. This resulted in 4 scenarios that were superficially similar due to the regional scale of analysis and the continuation of agricultural industries as significant shapers of economy, society, and environment. However, each scenario represents profoundly different outcomes for the residents and communities of the Avon River Basin in 2050. The triple-bottom line outcomes for the Avon River Basin in 2050 were estimated to be in the range 4.9-9.7 Mt of wheat (currently 4.0), 46 000-66 000 people (currently 43 000), and 10-30% of farmland salinised (currently 6). The application of these results to other regions in Australia is discussed.

A spatial assessment of potential biomass for bioenergy in Australia in 2010, and possible expansion by 2030 and 2050.

This paper provides spatial estimates of potentially available biomass for bioenergy in Australia in 2010, 2030 and 2050 (under clearly stated assumptions) for the following biomass sources: crop stubble, native grasses, pulpwood and residues (created either during forest harvesting or wood processing) from plantations and native forests, bagasse, organic municipal solid waste and new short‐rotation tree crops. For each biomass type, we estimated annual potential availability at the finest scale possible with readily accessible data, and then aggregated to make estimates for each of 60 Statistical Divisions (administrative areas) across Australia. The potentially available lignocellulosic biomass is estimated at approximately 80 Mt per year, with the major contributors of crop stubble (27.7 Mt per year), grasses (19.7 Mt per year) and forest plantations (10.9 Mt per year). Over the next 20–40 years, total potentially available biomass could increase to 100–115 Mt per year, with new plantings of short‐rotation trees being the major source of the increase (14.7 Mt per year by 2030 and 29.3 Mt per year by 2050). We exclude oilseeds, algae and ‘regrowth’, that is woody vegetation naturally regenerating on previously cleared land, which may be important in several regions of Australia (Australian Forestry 77, 2014, 1; Global Change Biology Bioenergy 7, 2015, 497). We briefly discuss some of the challenges to providing a reliable and sustainable supply of the large amounts of biomass required to build a bioenergy industry of significant scale. More detailed regional analyses, including of the costs of delivered biomass, logistics and economics of harvest, transport and storage, competing markets for biomass and a full assessment of the sustainability of production are needed to underpin investment in specific conversion facilities (e.g. Opportunities for forest bioenergy: An assessment of the environmental and economic opportunities and constraints associated with bioenergy production from biomass resources in two prospective regions of Australia, 2011a).