Irrigation RD& Foresighting Workshop Report

Alexandra & Associates Pty Ltd

Development of an Irrigation RD&E Program for the

Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture

Foresighting Workshop Report V3

April 2014

Development of an Irrigation RD&E Program for the Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture

Foresighting Workshop Report

i

Alexandra & Associates Pty Ltd 16 Homestead Rd │ Eltham │ Victoria │ 3095

Mobile: 0407 943 916 │ Email: [email protected]

Macquarie Franklin 112 Wright Street | East Devonport | Tasmania | 7310

Phone: 03 6427 5300 | Fax: 03 6427 0876 | Email: [email protected] Web: www.macquariefranklin.com.au

Primary author: Jason Alexandra Alexandra & Associates

Contributions by: Mel Rae Macquarie Franklin Rohan Nelson Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture

Document status: Final

This report has been prepared in accordance with the scope of services described in the contract or agreement between Macquarie Franklin, Alexandra & Associates and the Client. Any findings, conclusions or recommendations only apply to the aforementioned circumstances and no greater reliance should be assumed or drawn by the Client. Furthermore, the report has been prepared solely for use by the Client and Macquarie Franklin and Alexandra & Associates accept no responsibility for its use by other parties.

Alexandra & Associates Pty Ltd



ii

Contents

1 Executive summary .................................................................................................................... 1

2 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 The scenario workshop ...................................................................................................... 2

2.2 An R&D project on design R&D........................................................................................... 3

2.2.1 Rapid appraisal to reconcile supply and demand for irrigation RD&E in Tasmania ....... 3

3 Exploring future directions through scenarios ............................................................................ 4

3.1 Drivers and scenarios ......................................................................................................... 4

3.2 Using scenarios for exploring the role and modes of RD&E ................................................. 5

3.3 Using scenarios for exploring the focus of the RD&E .......................................................... 6

4 Articulating RD&E priorities and sorting to themes .................................................................... 7

4.1 Emerging themes and priorities .......................................................................................... 7

4.2 Distilling the key questions for each theme ........................................................................ 8

5 Developing ideas for each theme ............................................................................................... 9

5.1.1 On-farm systems ...................................................................................................... 10

5.1.2 Natural resource management ................................................................................. 11

5.1.3 RD&E & E (Education) .............................................................................................. 12

6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 13

6.1 Overarching questions ..................................................................................................... 13

6.2 Literature cited ................................................................................................................ 14

7 Appendices attached ............................................................................................................... 15

7.1 Appendix 1: Workshop Agenda ........................................................................................ 16

7.2 Appendix 2: Background materials for workshop participants .......................................... 19

7.3 Appendix 3: Workshop presentation on megratrends, drivers and scenario recap ............ 27

7.4 Appendix 4: Scenarios for exploring RD&E priorities ........................................................ 50

7.5 Appendix 5: Ideas generated for future RD&E priorities ................................................... 58



1

1 Executive summary

In April 2014, a foresighting workshop was held in Launceston Tasmania. It was one important step

in a process of stakeholder consultation exploring research, development and extension (RD&E)

priorities for irrigated agriculture in Tasmania. The workshop used foresighting methods to involve

stakeholders in exploring and generating ideas on the kinds of irrigation-related RD&E that could

assist in delivering preferred futures for Tasmania. It was not intended to be a forum for decision-

making or finalisation of priorities, but rather a forum for exploring possibilities. The next steps in

the planning process are to evaluate the ideas generated in the workshop and prioritise them

against the resources available to implement research, development and extension.

Approximately 40 industry and government stakeholders generated a wide range of priorities for

future RD&E as well as ideas on how to organise, deliver, and structure RD&E.

There was consensus that irrigation-related RD&E is critical to Tasmania and to the challenges of

creating a more sustainable and prosperous futures. The workshop identified the need for broad

partnerships across the research, education, policy and private sectors. There was strong advocacy

for the adoption of ambitious goals, and dynamic and responsive implementation towards those

goals.

Four dominant themes emerged. Future RD&E should:

1. Enable decisions that result in more productive, profitable and viable farms;

2. Assist in attracting investment in production, processing, manufacturing and exporting;

3. Protect catchment health and sustain productivity; and

4. Establish effective innovation networks that actively contribute to the above.

The following overarching questions encapsulate and summarise the directions identified:

1. How do we achieve more productive, profitable and viable farms that are able to

optimise resources (land, water, capital, labour) and sustain production, while also

minimising risks like salinity, eutrophication and soil decline?

2. How can we attract investment in processing, advanced manufacturing, exporting and

marketing that sustains demand for Tasmanian primary products?

3. How can we protect catchment health and sustainably manage natural resources at the

farm and catchment scale?

4. What approaches and arrangements for RD&E (the innovation systems) are required to

achieve the above goals?

This report provides a summary of the workshop and its key findings for discussion purposes. It is a

valuable starting point in a process designed to reconcile the supply and demand of irrigation related

RD&E. The topics discussed are not necessarily Government policy, nor will they necessarily be

adopted as core priorities by TIA or its partners. Additional workshops are already underway with

research and extension professionals in TIA and related research organisations to assess the

emerging priorities against current capability, and how they direct the development of future

research capability.



2

2 Introduction

2.1 The scenario workshop On the 2nd and 3rd of April 2014, a two day workshop was held in Launceston, Tasmania. The

workshop was part of the stakeholder consultation process designed to explore future RD&E

priorities for irrigated agriculture in Tasmania.

The workshop was held over two days. The first day was a field tour to set the scene about what is

happening with irrigation expansion in Tasmania. On the second day, foresighting was used to

explore how RD&E can assist in delivering preferred futures for irrigated agriculture (see appendix

1). Scenarios were used to stimulate participants’ ideas about the nature of possible futures as the

basis for evaluating future RD&E priorities.

About 30 attendees participated in the field trip of irrigation districts, new irrigation schemes and

farms that had used irrigation to convert to new or different enterprises, including large scale dairy

farming and intensive perennial horticulture.

About 40 people attended the foresighting workshop, representing key stakeholders and industries

with an interest in the future directions for irrigation, agriculture and regional development. The

invitees to the workshop and related interviews were a mix of middle to senior policy advisors,

researchers and executives in industry, government and community groups. Other participants

included owner/operators of large irrigated farming businesses, and the managers of other

agribusinesses such as banks and input supply companies.

The foresighting workshop was structured in three sessions:

1. Introductions and exploration of the scenarios - stakeholders explored the three

scenarios and defined their views about RD&E that would be useful and influential in

shaping preferred futures;

2. Identification of possible RD&E priorities and the sorting of these into themes; and

3. The development of short statements providing a rationale for investing in programs of

work under each of four themes.

The workshop was intended as an open forum for stakeholders to articulate what they see as the

priorities for future RD&E.

The main advantages of cooperatively planning like this include:

The research priorities of TIA’s emerging irrigation RD&E program are seen as salient,

legitimate and credible (Cash et al. 2003);

There is high uptake of TIA’s research because it is co-developed with end-users;

TIA’s research will have high economic benefits because it is enables end-users to maximise

the benefits of irrigation while minimising the social and environmental costs; and

TIA is exposed directly to the views of its key stakeholders in Government and industry.



3

2.2 An R&D project on design R&D TIA and the consultants designed the workshop so that the data collected could contribute to a

research project on the use of foresighting methods to reconcile the supply and demand of this type

of applied research (see the box below). For example, participants completed a survey early on day

one, with a follow up survey late on day two, to explore the extent to which the foresighting

workshop had changed their on the opportunities and challenges associated with irrigation-related

RD&E. Summaries of the detailed methodologies, workshop approach and project planning are

provided throughout this document.

2.2.1 Rapid appraisal to reconcile supply and demand for irrigation RD&E in

Tasmania

Aims:

The aim of this research is to show that strategic foresighting workshops (Loveridge 2010) can be

used as a practical, timely and efficient methodology to reconcile the supply and demand for a

new research program. A paper by Sarewitz and Pielke Jr (2007) on reconciling the supply and

demand for science is the fourth most downloaded paper in the Journal of Environmental Science &

Policy but provides only high level guidance on methods for applying this approach.

This research is an experiment in creating a practical methodology for reconciling the supply and

demand for science for a new research, development and extension (RD&E) program. The

context is the development of a new irrigation research and development program for the

Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture (TIA) at the University of Tasmania (UTAS). Strategic

foresighting workshops with researchers (supply) and potential end-users (demand) will form

the core of an iterative process for eliciting and reconciling the supply and demand for irrigation

related R&D to support the expansion of irrigation schemes across Tasmania.

A first workshop with industry and government stakeholders was used to understand emerging

opportunities and challenges associated with the expansion of irrigation, and initial view on

which of these should be prioritised for research. A second workshop with researchers will

assess and refine these emerging goals for research based on existing scientific understanding,

the nature of each issue and their tractability for further research, and capacity to do this

research.

The two workshops will be supported by interviews and small group meetings to iteratively

refine and reconcile the research (supply) and end-user (demand) until reasonable consensus has

been achieved on the RD&E priorities for the new program. The functional output of the research

will be a strategic plan for the new research program. The research output will be a journal

paper documenting its development using strategic foresighting to implement the supply and

demand approach.

Justification:

This study is worth doing because the societal value of research is always more likely to be

realised if research is targetted towards enabling end-users to take advantage of opportunities

and overcome challenges. There is extensive literature debunking that idea that science is best



4

done for its own sake because this will lead serendipitously to solutions for the challenges faced

by society (Jasanoff et al. 1998, Sarewitz and Pielke Jr 2007, Sarewitz 2010). Empirical studies have

shown that deeper scientific knowledge often follows rather than leads technological or market

opportunities, and public awareness of environmental or health issues. Using participatory

approaches to understand and co-produce knowledge results in science that is more relevant and

timely to emerging issues in society.

TIA’s irrigation RD&E program is being established to support a $500 million public/private

investment in irrigation infrastructure across the state. This proposal to use strategic foresighting

to reconcile the demand and supply of irrigation research is worth doing because it will focus

limited research funding on the highest research priorities of end-users. This will enable the

economic benefits of the investment in irrigation infrastructure to be realised as fully as possible

while anticipating and managing unintended social and environmental impacts.

3 Exploring future directions through scenarios

3.1 Drivers and scenarios Attendees were provided with a package of background materials (see appendices 2 and 3) prior to

the workshop including:

Project objectives;

A recent Rabobank analysis of global trends and opportunities for Tasmanian agriculture;

Tasmanian water use and irrigation statistics; and

Three framing macro-scenarios for the future of Tasmania’s irrigated agriculture.

Many of the workshop attendees had also previously participated in briefing sessions where the

project objectives had been discussed in detail, along with preliminary discussions about future

RD&E needs.

The three scenarios used in the workshop were:

1. Tasmania unlimited – go for growth;

2. Muddling through; and

3. Decline and stagnation.

A short presentation on mega trends and drivers, such as global population growth, was used to set

the scene for the workshop (see appendix 3), and to review the three scenarios (see appendix 4). An

outline of the foresighting method was provided and participants were invited to share in

developing “stories about the future”.

The scenarios offered were used to illustrate a range of plausible futures for Tasmania and to

provide a way of examining the complex relationships and interplays between policy settings,

research and practice change.

Foresighting using scenario planning is an established technique used within the discipline of future

studies to explore alternative futures because it is recognised method of investigation, capable of



5

dealing with the non-linearity of complex systems which does not rely on extrapolating existing

trends, as result it is commonly used in the development of corporate strategies and has been

applied to national science planning (Alexandra 2012). For example, the Australian Science

Technology and Engineering Council study "Matching Science and Technology to Future Needs 2010"

found scenarios useful for redirecting established mindsets and for identifying trends relevant to

Australia’s international competitiveness (Australian Science Technology and Engineering Council

1996).

3.2 Using scenarios for exploring the role and modes of RD&E After setting the scene with the presentation on trends, drivers and scenarios, attendees were

invited to work together in small groups to discuss which of the three scenarios, alone or in

combination, should be used to frame irrigation RD&E priorities. Groups were encouraged to add or

modify the scenarios and to define ways in which RD&E would be useful and influential in shaping

their preferred futures.

Five small discussion groups, each structured to encourage an eclectic mix of participants, explored

the scenarios and their implications for the kinds of RD&E needed to work towards preferred

futures. The conclusions that they arrived at then were presented by a spokesperson to the whole

group at the end of the session. In this section the views expressed on the role and modes of RD&E

are outlined.

The use of the scenarios generated broad discussion about the relationship between RD&E and

future industry and regional development. A diversity of proposed approaches were articulated.

Groups approached the task in various ways and the latitude for flexibility within the small groups

proved useful to encourage creative exploration and innovative thinking.

Most of the groups (3 of 5) opted for the “going for growth” scenario, arguing that the Government

and agricultural industries need to adopt aspirational “stretch” goals and then work on ways to

achieve them. They argued that the achievement of aspirational targets should be conceived of as a

cooperative venture across the public and private sectors. This is sometimes described as a

“networked” innovation system, rather than alternative more limited to “linear” innovation where

the “discovery” takes place in labs or research farms followed by transfer or diffusion of the

“innovation” to industry. This approach is as an evolving co- learning system, where participants

actively explore new possibilities, investigate options and devise strategies.

One group considered key RD&E opportunities relevant to irrigation development and explored how

they might manifest under each of the three scenarios. Another group chose to focus on the

“muddling through” scenario on the basis that it was the most likely future.

The dominant call for the adoption of more dynamic innovation models recognises that expertise,

information and capacity for innovation is distributed across networks, rather than housed solely or

mainly within organisations. By supporting learning networks within and across industries, RD&E can

be focused on providing support to achieving outcome-oriented targets, rather than being

specifically tied to particular types of activity.



6

Advocacy for action-learning models and researcher-business cooperation was a common theme

throughout the workshop. RD&E systems need to be conceived of as facilitation of development

support that contributes towards a set of explicit targets.

A key message for TIA is that it is being invited to revise its modes of operation, and strengthen and

recommit to participatory models. This represents a significant opportunity for TIA to constructively

facilitate the emergence of improved models of investigation and learning that will lead to profitable

and sustainable systems of production, suited to the Tasmanian context.

3.3 Using scenarios for exploring the focus of the RD&E As stated above, the presenters for the five groups provided a summary of their discussions. The

following is a summary of some of the key ideas expressed about the proposed focus of future

RD&E.

Future RD&E should aim to improve the viability and profitability of enterprises by focusing on:

The factor or aspects of business systems that deliver growth, productivity and efficiency

gains both on-farm and in processing;

Facilitating business growth, through investment and attracting more capital intensive

processing including through partnering between companies;

Understanding processing options and constraints including scale and diversity;

Exploring the potential for new business models including marketing clusters and

collaborative processing systems;

Better branding, marketing and exporting;

The development and use of key performance indicators (KPI’s) for benchmarking

enterprises;

Documenting best management practices and how these can be delivered;

The search for the elusive “sweet spot” of productivity that optimises return on capital and

other resources;

Improving labour skills and leadership; and

Enhancing agricultural production through improved public infrastructure.

Future RD&E should aim to improve irrigation and farming systems by focusing on:

Tasmania becoming internationally renowned as a centre of world expertise on moderate

scale irrigation scheme development and on pivot irrigation technologies and techniques;

Design principles for better water harvesting, application and drainage;

Precision farming techniques and technologies and how to use them to improve profitability

and/or sustainability of farming systems;

The potential and benefits of irrigation system accuracy including through variable rate

irrigation (VRI);

Identifying and modelling potential use options for currently under or “unallocated water”;

and

New crops and cropping systems.



7

Future RD&E should aim to improve natural resources management by focusing on:

Coupling productivity and environmental best practice;

The sustainability of productive farming systems;

The assessment and protection of fragile and vulnerable soils and landscapes;

Understanding natural advantages and constraints, including soils;

Balanced development by identifying options for the “right” production systems in the

“right” places; and

Clearly articulating and measuring the factors that will determine the social licence to

operate future irrigation schemes.

Future RD&E needs to have the capability to:

Scan for “high impact wild cards” that will shape the future in unexpected ways;

Use systems-based and value-chain approaches, where the systems include the inputs,

production, processing and markets;

Adopt an innovation-platform approach focused on policy and regulatory facilitation;

Use cluster-based business models;

Ensure demand driven RD&E;

Understand what shapes regional identity;

Facilitate and enable partnerships including public-private partnerships (PPP); and

Support policy and business decision-making.

4 Articulating RD&E priorities and sorting to themes

4.1 Emerging themes and priorities In the second session, after some general discussion recapping and reaffirming the workshop

purpose and approach, and the reasons why we had chosen to use foresighting methods, the

attendees were invited to write their ideas about the top RD&E priorities onto small sticky notes.

Attendees were given the option of writing these as a research question or as a suggestion. There

were no specific constraints on the scope of the suggestions, however the project framing,

backgrounding of the scenarios and discussions indicated that it was most likely that suggestions

would fall within a suite of broad categories such as:

• On-farm production systems;

• Irrigation systems and technologies;

• Processing and marketing;

• Business models;

• Regional economic development;

• NRM; and

• Extension, education and training.

Individuals were invited to paste their notes below seven signs indicating the broad categories

outlined above. The initial clustering and classifications were then reviewed. Each sticky note was



8

reviewed by the project team and reorganised into more specific and appropriate themes and sub-

themes that were more clearly representative of the specific ideas expressed.

Approximately 140 ideas on sticky notes were clustered into 14 sub-themes. These 14 were then

grouped in to four major themes. (See appendix 5 for details of the ideas generated). The final set of

themes were:

1. On farm systems (productivity, farming systems, precision tech, new crops)

• On-Farm productivity

• Farm economics and optimisation of options

• Precision irrigation and irrigation systems

• Water use efficiency

2. Business models, investment, processing and exporting

• Business models

• Attracting capital investment

• Branding and marketing Tasmanian products

3. Natural resource management

• Landscape health and ecosystem protection

• Maintaining soil productivity

• Drainage and waterlogging, salinity and other environmental risks

• Interaction between on-farm and landscape scales

4. RD&E arrangements

• Arrangements and institutions for RD&E

• Effective innovation

• Education and adoption

4.2 Distilling the key questions for each theme Taking into account the ideas generated by the workshop attendees, the consultants reflected on

the RD&E priorities emerging and distilled these into over-arching questions for each theme that

covered the kinds of issues and priorities within it. These were:

1. On farm systems

What on-farm effectiveness, productivity and optimisation options are

possible?

How can we achieve water use efficiency?

What are the options for precisions agriculture?

How does precision irrigation fit in precision agriculture?


How can innovative business models be developed?

What is needed? Is there a role for Government?

What is needed to attract capital investment in processing?



9

How can value chain analysis support more value-add?

How can Tassie products be better branded and marketed?

3. Natural resource management

How can we protect landscape health?

What are the environmental risks? How should these be managed on-farm and

regionally?

What are the soil health, drainage and sustainable production issues on farm?

How do these interact regionally?

4. RD&E arrangements

How do we build an effective innovation system?

How would it work? What would it look like?

How can Tassie have a competent system of training, skills development and

education for agriculture?

Is more needed to ensure skilled labour? What is the role of Government?

What is needed to deliver better and effective extension?

Are there better models and approaches to extension?

5 Developing ideas for each theme

In the final session, four small groups worked on an exercise to develop a short “policy brief”

outlining the scope, rationale and merits of RD&E focused on each major theme identified above:

1. On-farm systems;

2. Business models, investment, processing and exporting;

3. Natural resource management; and

4. RD&E arrangements.

The groups were formed by self-selection. Participants were invited to work on the theme they had

the greatest interest in. This approach resulted in fairly even distribution of numbers between

groups. A rapporteur and scribe were selected by the groups to consolidate the group’s “policy

brief” on butcher’s paper and to report back.

This exercise was a continuation of the “thought experiment” about RD&E shaping the future and

was not an attempt to formalise the design of a future program in detail. In part, it was asking

participants to go beyond the identification of priorities into thinking through how to fund and

implement the delivery of them.

It must be emphasised that any “priorities” sketched out here are neither government policy nor

projects that TIA has committed to deliver. They are simply part of a workshop exercise designed to

engage TIA and its stakeholders in a detailed conversation about what kinds of RD&E are needed.



10

Summaries from group discussion are outlined below:

5.1.1 On-farm systems

Productivity

• There is a need to benchmark productivity by enterprise and by region.

What are the key profit drivers?

These need to be measureable.

• Role of R&D:

Establish KPIs for best practice.

What does best-practice look like? What influences its adoption?

• Extension: utilise focus farms to demonstrate best practice and benchmarking.

Work with leading farmers to test, assimilate and extend best practice.

Water use efficiency (WUE)

• WUE should take a whole systems view and consider procurement,

management (water storage & application) and commercial outcomes – not just

how water is applied through an irrigator. For example, considerable quantities

of water can be lost via evaporation from dams and drainage – need to better

understand how much of an impact this can be.

• Use R&D to better understand on-farm and system scale WUE.

• R&D into water flows and environmental flows in waterways – are old

methodologies still relevant? What is the margin for environmental flows?

Precision agriculture

• Precision agriculture: WUE and productivity drive the need for precision

agriculture. It is difficult to pre-empt what precision agriculture technology is

required without knowing more about productivity and WUE

requirements/needs.

• The level of precision needs to be quantified approximately– 2% vs 20%

accuracy.


Two priority needs were identified:

1. Understanding how to attract and retain investment in agribusiness and downstream

processing; and

2. Investigation into the potential for different business models and structures

Priority 1: Possible RD&E – regular surveys of large-scale investors on what is needed to make

Tasmania more attractive to invest in, with the aim to improve policy and regulatory settings,

infrastructure and build awareness on prospects.

• Rationale: We need capital to build sustained growth (including ideas and skills) and improve

the state and regional economies (everybody benefits).



11

• Elevator pitch: providing access to information will secure more investment into Tasmania.

• Implementation:

i. Identify who investors are, who they talk to, what information do they need/want?

ii. Establish a business liaison office, which is the first go-to point for investor enquiry.

iii. Collate and provide information (e.g. regional profiles etc.), and redirect investors to key

influencers and information sources.

iv. Utilise and build on feedback obtained – what policy or infrastructure needs to be

modified?

v. Establish an ongoing business liaison function with a role in clarifying directions for R&D

and policy on innovation and investment?

Priority 2 - Can collaborative models, such as unit trusts, be developed within Tasmania to drive

growth across landscapes?

Who benefits: Existing and new investors, landholders.

Rationale: Offers industry options for growth capital.

Elevator pitch: This research project will be more effective in connecting growth and

investors.

Implementation:

o Identify existing and new investors and survey regularly.

o Provide a single focal point for business liaison to provide information (e.g.

regional profiles etc.), and direct investors to key influencers and information

sources.

o From feedback, what do we need to tweak?

o Use an innovation platform

o Clearly identify what Government and research agencies need to do?

• For both projects need a dossier of high quality information needs to be collated and made

available – a role here for TIA.

5.1.2 Natural resource management

Public perception drives social licences to operate. In New Zealand, a large billboard showing

irrigated dairy farms and dead fish in graphic details asks: “Irrigation – have we got too much?”

This is a risk to irrigation futures in Tasmania. There is a risk that we will approach, and unwittingly

exceed, the socially acceptable limits of landscape conversation to irrigated agriculture. This could

make irrigation the next big environmental issue in Tasmania. More information is needed:

• What attitudes currently prevail?

• What are the facts about risks and impacts? Is current best practice enough?

• Are there threshold effects due to expansion? What levels of change are acceptable?

• What level of environmental management is required?

• Research is needed on how to best minimise, monitor and manage impacts?

• Biodiversity –what can be protected? What can be sacrificed? What levels of change are

acceptable?



12

• How can Tasmania avoid making the same mistakes of other irrigation areas?

• Is irrigation the next hydro or forestry?

• How can a social licence be maintained into the future?

Tasmania needs to use predicative capabilities to adaptively manage risks inherent in bringing water

to formally unirrigated landscapes. An approach is needed that can effectively monitor and evaluate

irrigation schemes in order to proactively steer the development of sustainable and highly

productive irrigation schemes and on-farm systems. Tasmania has the opportunity to proactively

manage the risks inherent in the large scale watering of challenging soils in a landscape with

challenging drainage management issues.

A proposed vision: to become a world leader in irrigation, drainage and effluent management. A

simple proposal: A study tour looking at what has already been done.

5.1.3 RD&E & E (Education)

Note, many of the issues in this discussion have previously been summarised in: Birch C, Bonney L,

Murray S (2014) Exciting future for graduates in the food industry – from agroecosystem to

consumer health. Chronica Horticulturae 54, 7-11.

Training and education

Pathways in training need to be considered (school – Tafe – uni).

Agriculture is not instantly associated as being a desirable career choice for young people –

need to change this perception and encourage people in to it.

Need to identify needs and expectations of clients.

Don’t just teach technical information – good decision making skills are important.

Research: Irrigation is a unifying theme.

Adopt systems thinking, systems approaches included as basis for research.

Use value chain approaches to identify productive points for intervention.

Think in terms of innovation networks not just value chains.

How do we develop an innovation network – local and global level – take what is relevant and

apply/adapt here.

Extension: What sorts of extension are needed? Explore alternative models of extension:

Old DPI/DA/1 on 1 model;

Danish model (like Birchip, Vic);

USA land grant systems;

Discussion groups and thematic participatory learning; and

Apply user driven model to research – bottom up approach where needs are identified – then

develop the research to answer clients’ needs/questions.



13

6 Conclusions

Foresighting proved to be a useful approach in consultative research planning because it drew

attention to possible alternative futures and required participants to explicitly articulate their views

about how possible RD&E interacts with the drivers and trajectories of change.

Despite a large number of separate ideas about priorities being generated, these were logically

ordered into 14 sub themes and 4 major themes.

The development of each of the themes, as reported in section 7, was able to identify a clear

rationale for focusing RD&E on critical issues and aspects. Furthermore, the group clearly identified a

wide range of disciplines and change processes as relevant to irrigation RD&E, including some critical

to achieving regional economic diversification.

While this kind of work has not historically been within TIA’s core set of capabilities, subsequent

steps in the project will be used to identify the viability of taking specific suggestions further and

various pathways towards implementation.

Some of the implementation pathways will include building partnerships and coalitions to entrain

capability – not all the ideas identified here will be within TIA’s mandate to pursue. Having a broad

suite of stakeholders openly engaged in identifying RD&E needs in the early stages of program

planning, is likely to contribute a useful foundation to the emergence of such partnerships now and

into the future.

6.1 Overarching questions Based on further analysis by the consultants, the following four questions are offered as the basis for

the proposed RD&E strategy:

1. How do we achieve more productive, profitable and viable farms that are able to

optimise resources (land, water, capital, labour), and sustain production while

minimising risks like salinity, eutrophication and soil decline?

2. How can we attract investment in production, processing, advanced manufacturing,

exporting and marketing that sustains demand for Tasmanian primary products?

3. How can we protect catchment health and sustainably manage natural resources at the

farm and catchment scale?

4. What kinds of approaches and arrangements for RD&E (the innovation systems) are

required to achieve the above goals?



14

6.2 Literature cited Alexandra J. (2012), Australia’s future landscapes – caution, hope, inspiration and transformation

CSIRO Crops and Pastures 63, 215–231 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/CP11189

Australian Science Technology and Engineering Council (1996) "Matching Science and Technology to

Future Needs 2010" Australian Science Technology and Engineering Council Canberra

Birch C, Bonney L, Murray S (2014) Exciting future for graduates in the food industry – from

agroecosystem to consumer health. Chronica Horticulturae 54, 7-11.

Cash, D. W., W. C. Clark, F. Alcock, N. M. Dickson, N. Eckley, D. H. Guston, J. Jäger, and R. B. Mitchell.

2003. Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences 100:8086-8091.

Jasanoff, S., M. Lynch, C. Miller, B. Wynne, F. Buttel, F. Charvolin, P. Edwards, A. Elzinga, P. Haas, and

C. Kwa. 1998. Science and decisionmaking.

Loveridge, D. 2010. Foresight: The art and science of anticipating the future. Routledge.

Sarewitz, D. 2010. Frontiers of illusion: Science, technology, and the politics of progress. Temple

University Press.

Sarewitz, D. and R. A. Pielke Jr. 2007. The neglected heart of science policy: reconciling supply of and

demand for science. Environmental Science & Policy 10:5-16.



15

7 Appendices attached

Appendix 1: Workshop agenda

Appendix 2: Background materials for workshop participants

Appendix 3: Workshop presentation on megratrends, drivers and scenario recap

Appendix 4: Scenarios

Appendix 5: RD&E priorities identified



16

7.1 Appendix 1: Workshop Agenda

Day 1: Wednesday 2 April 2014

Session 1.1 – Bus trip

10.25 Bus depart TIA reception, Prospect

10.30-11.20 Bus ride from Prospect to Cressy:

Welcome, brief introduction to project, outline of day, introduce project

team

Complete Day 1 survey

Introductions: everyone has 1 minute to introduce themselves and outline

what their top opportunity / limitation for irrigated ag is

Quick intro to Cressy-Longford irrigation scheme and what irrigation has done for this area

11.30-12.30 Visit George Rigney, dairy farmer at Cressy

History of how irrigation has changed their business

Key learnings

1.30-2 Lunch, Ross

2.10-3.10 Visit Sam Riggall, mixed enterprise farming system and cherry grower at Ross

How has irrigation changed the business?

Production, agri-tourism, perennial fruit etc.

Key learnings

3.10-3.30

3.30-4

Bus ride from Ross to Tunbridge, drive along Tunbridge Tier Rd

General discussion about physical limitations of irrigation expansion

o NRM issues – soil constraints, landscape issues

o Climate

o Role of precision ag

o Monitoring

Other limitations

o Markets/cropping rotations/enterprise options

o Skilled & entrepreneurial people

o Governance

4-5 Bus ride from Tunbridge to Prospect

5pm Drop off at TIA reception, Prospect

Session 1.2 – Dinner

6.30pm Drinks in bar area

7.00 Seated for dinner

Welcome, TIA’s response to emerging RD&E needs in Tasmania.

- Professor Holger Meinke, Director, TIA



17

TFGA’s vision for irrigated industry Jan Davis, CEO, TFGA

Irrigation development, opportunities for RD&E.

- Richard Gardner, producer at Tunbridge

Main course served, open discussion

Day 2: Thursday 3 April 2014

Session 2.1 – Setting the scene – introductions - scanning the issues AIM to develop a richer picture of the critical issues and the scenarios.

9-9.05 Introductions, recap on project objectives, welcome and rules of engagement–

Statements on project and workshop objectives to be distilled from brief

9.10-9.15 Recap on tour and issues identified - 4 or 5 informants prompted to speak of

critical issues identified on tour

9.15- 9.25 Introduction exercise - Individuals to advocate for their top two priorities for

RD&E based on their responses in the day 1 questionnaire. They will work in pairs

to convince partner of their merits and why they should be funded in period of

declining public investment

Session 2.2 – Using the scenarios – RD&E in shaping preferred futures

9.25-9.40 Introduction to the three scenarios and macro trends and drivers – PowerPoints

(note the scenarios were distributed to all participants as part of the information

pack prior to the workshop)

9.40 to 10.40 Small group exercise to develop richer pictures of the scenarios and implications

for Tasmanian R&D&E

This session aims to brainstorm and scope out plausible futures and nature of

change drivers and innovations. It provides an opportunity for participants to

modify and further develop the scenarios. Small groups will be invited to use

optimistic and pessimistic scenarios to gain insight into the types of risk and

opportunities and the possible trajectories of change. Use muddling through

scenario to look for ideas about incrementally reforming the current system

towards a superior innovation system. At the feedback they will be asked to

emphasise outliers.

The aim of this session is to get groups to identify how RD&E (innovation

systems) will provide capacity to direct Tasmania towards preferred futures. Each

group was asked to provide short feedback and to produce a short summary,

therefore a presenter and scribe is required. A butcher’s paper record of each

small group session will be prepared and collected. Small group notes will also be

collected for future reference.

10.30 –11 Morning tea

Session 2.3: What RD&E is needed? The aim of this session is to get issues and priorities identified, ready for sorting and further prioritising in session 3.



18

11-11.20 Brief report back on scenarios especially any new major issues or ideas about

how a better innovation system would lead to more profitable and sustainable

farms, regional development and better resource management

11.20 - 12.20 Small groups to work on setting R&D priorities – In this session the ideas

generated individually and written in response to day 1 questionnaire will be

revealed and then discussed collectively. Individuals may wish to modify their

priorities based on the discussion or may wish to maintain them. Each

respondent will be asked to write their priorities on sticky notes (one per note).

12.20 12.30 A cluster analysis of priorities - Clustering of sticky notes into 7 or 8 themes.

12.30-1.00 Lunch

12.30 -1.00 Lunch – over lunch an analysis of the clustered notes will be undertaken by the

project team who will synthesise/summarise the priorities and critical issues in

each of the themes.

The output from this session will be a record of stated priorities on the sticky notes plus their grouping into themes.

Session 2.4: Afternoon sessions - What RD&E questions are top priority?

1.15-1.50 Small groups worked on further developing the top priorities in each of the themes. Each theme developed into short statement on why a program is needed including:

- rationale, - who should pay, - who will benefit and - any ideas on how a program/project should be implemented

1.50-2.30 Report back Completion of exit survey

Session 2.5: Wrap up and workshop conclusions

Reminder re completion of exit survey

2.30-3 Final discussions, wrap up and workshop close



19

7.2 Appendix 2: Background materials for workshop participants

This presentation was supplied with the initial invite to participate in the workshop.

You are invited to participate in a

Foresighting Workshop

to look ahead at possible future scenarios facing Tasmanian agriculture and identify research, development & extension priorities for TIA

to support productive and sustainable agricultural industries

Wednesday 2nd & Thursday 3rd April 2014 Launceston

Details attached in following pages. For further information and to rsvp, please contact Hugh Ludford on 0400 039 387 or [email protected]

This workshop is being delivered by Macquarie Franklin and Alexandra & Associates as part of a project funded by the Tasmanian Government to develop an

irrigation RD&E program for the Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture.

Project background

• As we know, irrigation is changing Tasmanian agriculture

• There is potential to increase profitability, sustainability and global competitiveness of Tasmania’s agricultural industries

• What is the role of RD&E? – catalysing innovation and efficiency

– ensuring sustainability of industries & businesses

– optimising the social and economic benefits of irrigation

– minimising social and environmental costs

• TIA received seed funding from the Tasmanian Government to develop a strategic program for irrigation RD&E

Macquarie Franklin and Alexandra & Associates are facilitating this process

Project overview

• Project objectives – identify and address stakeholder irrigation RD&E needs (now &

future)

– consolidate existing activities and resources

– attract additional investment

• Irrigation program – targeted to Tasmanian industry needs

– cross-commodity collaboration

– national relevance

– build cross-sectoral collaboration and organisational linkages

– to be developed by June 2014

Snapshot of Tasmania’s irrigated agricultural industry

Figure 1: Percentage of gross value of agricultural production produced using irrigation (ABS 4610)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Tas. Qld Vic. NSW SA ACT NT WA

Average (2009-10 to 2011-12)

Australian average

MDB average

%

Figure 2: Use of irrigation water, Tasmania, 2011-12 (ABS 4610).

Pasture for livestock grazing

48%

Vegetables19%

Other broadacre crops

13%

Cereals for grain and seed

5%

Fruit4%

Hay3%

Grapes1% Other

7%

• Between 2009-10 and 2011-12, on average 57% of Tasmania’s gross value of agricultural production was produced by irrigating 5.5% of the land area under crop or pasture (ABS 4610, 4618).

• This is much higher than the national average (29%), or the average across the Murray-Darling Basin (33%) (Figure 1).

• Of the 192 giga litres of irrigation water applied in Tasmania during 2011-12, half of it was used on pastures and a third was used for irrigation of vegetables and other broadacre crops (Figure 2).

Purpose of workshop

• To identify RD&E needs to support sustainable (financially, environmentally & socially) irrigated agricultural industries in Tasmania

• Consideration of RD&E needs under different future scenarios

– 1) booming industry development

– 2) business as usual / maintaining status quo

– 3) less favourable conditions for industry

• How and what RD&E can help shape preferred futures for Tasmania?

• Balancing priorities:

short term needs (next 5 years)

longer term needs (10-20 years time)

Tasmanian needs

national relevance

Workshop logistics

When: Wednesday 2nd & Thursday 3rd April 2014

Where: Launceston

What: Wednesday 2nd April: Irrigation bus tour

10am departure from Hotel Charles, Launceston

10.15 departure from TIA reception, Mount Pleasant Laboratories

Tour of historical, recent and future irrigation developments in Tasmania’s north and midlands

5pm return to Launceston

6.30pm Dinner at Hotel Charles

Thursday 3rd April: Irrigation futures foresighting workshop

9am-3pm, Hotel Charles, Launceston

Workshop logistics

• All meals included for both days of the workshop

• Accommodation and breakfast, if required, is at own expense

Rooms at Hotel Charles are on hold until 25 March at special rate of $145/night (mention “TIA WS” when booking)

Project will not book or pay for any participant accommodation

• Bus departure points - Wednesday 2nd April

10am Hotel Charles driveway 10.15am TIA reception, Mount Pleasant Laboratories

287 Charles Street, Launceston 165 Westbury Road, Prospect

Ph: 1300 703 284



27

7.3 Appendix 3: Workshop presentation on megratrends, drivers and

scenario recap

This presentation was provided to confirmed participants as background reading prior to the

workshop.

Development of an Irrigation RD&E Program for TIA

Foresighting Workshop

to look ahead at possible future scenarios facing Tasmanian agriculture and identify research, development & extension priorities for TIA

to support productive and sustainable agricultural industries

Wednesday 2nd & Thursday 3rd April 2014 Launceston

This workshop is being delivered by Macquarie Franklin and Alexandra & Associates as part of a project funded by the Tasmanian

Government to develop an irrigation RD&E program for the Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture.

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Workshop Program

Day 1: Wednesday 2nd April 2014: Bus tour Please arrive 10 minutes before your bus departure time.

10.00 am Bus departs Hotel Charles Driveway, Launceston 10.15 am Bus departs TIA reception car park, Mount Pleasant Travel out through Cressy, Ross and Tunbridge looking at examples of opportunities and limitations associated with irrigation development. 5.00 pm Return to TIA 5.15 pm Return to Hotel Charles

6.30 - 9pm Dinner at Esca Restaurant, Hotel Charles

Day 2: Thursday 3rd April 2014: Foresighting workshop Frankland meeting room, ground floor, Hotel Charles

8.45 am Tea and coffee available on arrival 9 am Start 3 pm Wrap up

Day 1 Notes:

Buses will leave on time and will not wait for latecomers.

Please bring warm clothes, a rain coat and boots with you.

Lunch, snacks & drinks will be provided.

Dinner Wed night will be provided, however drinks are at your own expense.

Day 2 Notes:

Scenario summaries in following pages. Full scenarios will be provided in hard copy on Day 1 in the workshop booklet.

It is recommended you are familiar with the scenarios prior to the start of Day 2.

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Bus departure points Wednesday 2nd April

10 am Hotel Charles driveway 10.15 am TIA reception, Mount Pleasant

287 Charles Street, Launceston 165 Westbury Road, Prospect

Ph: 1300 703 284

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Purpose of workshop

• To identify RD&E needs to support sustainable (financially, environmentally & socially)

irrigated agricultural industries in Tasmania

• Consideration of RD&E needs under different future scenarios

– 1) booming industry development

– 2) business as usual / maintaining status quo

– 3) less favourable conditions for industry

• How and what RD&E can help shape preferred futures for Tasmania?

• Balancing priorities:

short term needs (next 5 years)

longer term needs (10-20 years time)

Tasmanian needs

national relevance

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

To set the scene…

Macro trends and drivers for Tasmania’s future

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Global population growth

Population growth 8 billion by 2030?

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Urbanisation

An global empire of connected cities – 60% of the world’s 2050 cities not yet built (UN ICLEI)

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Increasing demand for protein

Source: The State Of World Fisheries And Aquaculture 2012

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Rise of affluent middle class in Asia

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=UhJSteKlLe3O7M&tbnid=yaZige80SjwPLM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.economist.com/node/13063298&ei=5LAzU9bEH4G_lQXmx4HIAQ&bvm=bv.63808443,d.dGI&psig=AFQjCNH09EZvQ_fFR5kuC16NcSW2ryfiFQ&ust=1395982789549294

Global supply & demand for wine & wood fibre

Source: NewForests Timberland Investment Outlook 2013-17

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

A hotter & drier climate

Global average temperature

Australian average temperature

Satellite estimate of soil moisture

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Carbon policy

Australia’s emission profile by sector and the breakdown of emissions in the agricultural sector by activity

Source Data: National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 2011 and CIE (2010), ABARES (2010), DCCEE analysis.

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

http://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energy-future/securing-a-clean-energy-future/chapter-2-australias-targets-for-reducing-carbon-pollution-and-a-new-australian-climate-advisory-committee/

http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/publications/projections/australias-emissions-projections/agriculture.aspx

Natural resources competition & conflict

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Impacts of science & technology

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

http://cropmetrics.com/wp-content/uploads/VRI-Circles-01.jpg

Aging and decline of the baby boomers

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Specialisation, education and sophistication

Source: www.dfat.gov.au/trade/export_review/key_issues.html

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Food safety

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Regions in competition for mobile global capital, skilled people and reputations

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

The Scenarios The foresighting workshop will use scenarios to stimulate discussion about :

• What RD&E will deliver a more prosperous and sustainable future for Tasmania?

• What will make Tasmanian irrigated agriculture productive, viable, profitable and

sustainable?

Remember, scenarios are stories about the future, not predictions!

The three scenarios are:

1. Tasmania unlimited – go for growth

2. Muddling through – business as usual

3. Decline and stagnation

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Characteristics of Scenario 1: Tasmania unlimited - go for growth

• Irrigation expansion phase 5 - $500 million for “piping the state”

• Tasmania has “best” environmental protection and environmental flows

• Good industry infrastructure – training, planning, coordination, R&D

• Stable water investment policy

• Climate change refugees - industries relocate from MDB and California, enterprises flee persistent droughts and uncertain policy

• Capital and expertise “migrates” south to Tasmania

• Prices boom - global food insecurity

• Sustained export growth

• Processors attracted to reliable supplies

• High tech, bio energy and bio-manufacturing, and advanced technology development

• Exports of high value, quality assured products – pharmaceuticals, herbs, food and fibre

• Buoyant demand for dairy and live beef cattle export to China

• Big demand for fodder and feed grains

• “Tasmanian Grown” globally recognised. “Tasmanian Quality Naturally” campaign in Beijing, Hong Kong, Tokyo... “pollution free food”

• Direct action to sequester carbon in the landscapes

• Water politics are cool

• Farmers leaders in International Water Stewardship

• Stringent quarantine for feral fish and aquatic weeds

• Tasmania has internationally recognised forward looking R&D programs - collaborations across university engineering, geography,

agriculture, business and economics etc. , public/private partnerships, innovation networks

• Water R&D levies on all water used for growers’ innovation fund

• Tasmania drives development of world competitive irrigation industries

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Characteristics of Scenario 2: Muddling through – business as usual

• Demand for irrigated production waxes and wanes, aligned to commodity boom and bust cycles

• Optimism re economic diversification not justified

• Constraints include growing public opposition, confusing policy, regulatory incoherence, poor coordination, and non-competitive

scale

• Opposition to new irrigation grows. “no dams” refrain returns to noisy Hobart protests

• Irrigation investment goes to Northern Australia

• Commonwealth industry policy hardens: no business free hand-outs

• Carbon markets are limited – just niche reforestation schemes

• Low commodity prices and high labour costs

• Food processors shut down Australian operations - growers have stranded assets and declining equity

• Industry relocates to NZ and South America due to lower costs and tax incentives

• R&D focused on “survival crops”

• “Grown in Tasmania” brand partially successful - boutique art, food and wine tourism thrives

• Water politics are warm

• Protests target planned dams

• Feral fish & aquatic weeds are major problems

• RD&E funding is fragmented - RDCs critical

• High reliance on government assistance

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd

Characteristics of Scenario 3: Decline and stagnation

• Tasmanian irrigation in a graceful, gradual decline

• Infrastructure treated as “sunk capital” to get a dividend out of whenever possible

• Demand waxes and wanes

• Broad-acre grain and animal industries dominate due to low labour costs

• Capital flight from agriculture, processing and manufacturing continues

• Confidence eroded to bed rock

• Opposition to irrigation misplaced – no new dams planned

• Buyer boycotts on Tassie exports

• Tasmania promoted as a large quaint “national and heritage park”

• Economy based largely on tourism

• Assistance to relocate to mining regions in Western Australia

• Major food processors shut down their Australian operations, relocate to Asian and South American countries

• Opium poppy industry moves to Victoria and overseas

• Growers left with stranded assets

• Growing livestock feed and grains barely covers costs

• “Grown in Tasmania” brand not successful

• Water politics are dull

• Irrigation RD&E programs struggle to survive, no longer relevant

• RD&E arrangements fragmented with limited funding

Alexandra &

Associates Pty Ltd



50

7.4 Appendix 4: Scenarios for exploring RD&E priorities

Introduction

Using scenarios for planning

What research, development and extension (RD&E) will deliver a more prosperous and sustainable

future for Tasmania?

In this project we are trying to answer this question. We are consulting on RD&E priorities for

irrigated agriculture that will help to deliver a more prosperous and sustainable future for Tasmania.

We are using a method known as foresighting, where scenarios are used to assist in the planning

process. The scenarios are focused on irrigation, water resources and related industries.

By using these scenarios, we are aiming to focus stakeholder thinking and workshop discussion on

the nature of innovation systems and the way RD&E addresses risks and opportunities for irrigation

and related industry development.

A specific objective of this foresighting process is to bring out ideas on the roles of innovation

systems and the priorities for RD&E.

The scenarios are intended to be credible, yet stimulate discussion and generate debate beyond a

continuation of business as usual. The scenarios are stories, but not fantasies about the future. They

are bounded by factors like climate change projections and the global supply and demand of

commodities. The scenarios are not predictions, but stories about the “nature of the future” and

will be used to focus discussion about pathways to preferred futures, with a particular emphasise on

how RD&E can contribute to achieving these.

The scenarios are intended to start discussions at the workshop. We invite participants to use their

imaginations and to further debate ways to actively shape preferred futures.

The foresighting workshops and related consultation will be used to gather broad ranging ideas

about Tasmania’s irrigation futures and to identify R&D directions and priorities.

Tasmanian irrigation futures – 3 scenarios for exploring RD&E priorities

The following three scenarios are for Tasmania in the years 2025 to 2030 – only 11 to 16 years from

now. They focus on irrigated agriculture and are being used to explore RD&E roles in “creating”

preferred futures.

We are asking you: what innovations will make Tasmanian irrigated agriculture productive, viable,

profitable and sustainable?



51

The three scenarios are:

1. Tasmania unlimited – go for growth

2. Muddling through – business as usual

3. Decline and stagnation.

Mega trends and Drivers

In each scenario we have used a combination of the following drivers:

1. Changing global demands for food and fibre

2. Water resources policy and infrastructure

3. Licence to operate - community legitimacy (or illegitimacy) re social and

environmental conflicts – regional reputational risks (eg forest conflict)

4. Regional economic diversification strategies

5. Climate change and flow on impacts including climate and carbon policies

6. Climatic and natural resource advantages

7. Trends in market demands

8. Tasmanian and Australian competiveness and comparative advantage - our capacity

to meet global markets –etc

9. Branding and marketing

Scenario 1: Tasmania unlimited - go for growth

Commonwealth offers $500 million for a “piping the state” project, with a network of irrigation

mains capable to delivering abundant water to nearly all agricultural regions. Tasmania wins

competitive grants over Queensland and the Northern Territory for water resource developments.

Both Tasmanian and Commonwealth have active policies to support relocation and expansion of

agriculture to Tasmania through incentives and facilitation.

Tasmania’s competitive advantage over other states is due to stringent adherence to COAG water

reform principles, including serious commitment to robust institutional arrangements,

environmental protection and environmental flows, and the advantages of complementary social

and industry infrastructure – training, planning, coordination of marketing and RD&E.

Sustained export growth in a range of industries resulted from the State’s 2015 economic

diversification strategy, which supports industry coordination, commercialisation of RD&E and the

emergence of high value-add, industry clusters. These drove demand for expanding and increasing

irrigated production.

The relatively high cost of new water did not impede a swarm of new industries relocating in

Tasmania. The networks of established growers, mild climate and the security of the water (both in

terms of water rights and the climate) attracted capital-intensive industries – such as dairy and food

processors, wine and freshwater aquaculture industries. Water markets are active and water policy

stable, attracting long term, capital-intensive industries from interstate and overseas.



52

Water using enterprises fled established irrigation regions including the MDB and California due to

persistent droughts and uncertain policy – climate change was reluctantly implicated in various

national assessments of water and food security. Capital and expertise “migrated” south to Chile, NZ

and Australia (including Tasmania).

Food and fibre prices boom, partly due to food insecurity globally, as do Tasmanian land values,

particularly in those locations suited to intensive and reliable production. Processors are attracted to

reliable raw material supplies, including for pharmaceuticals and advanced bio-based industries.

Advanced industrial systems that rely on a range of irrigated inputs – eco-industrial systems

including bio-energy - are growth business.

Governments globally embrace climate mitigation policy, and a global market for agricultural offsets

stimulates investment in low emissions farming and strategies for sequestering carbon in the

landscapes. This provides a strong financial incentive to consolidate agriculture in intensive, high

production areas, and to move away from farming marginal lands, where reafforestation and carbon

farming are tending to dominate.

The Australian Government actively and directly invest in sustainable and multi-functional

agricultural/rural landscapes aligning its direct action policies to long standing agricultural subsidies

in Europe and North America. This provides further incentives to consolidate agriculture in the

highest productivity areas.

Tasmania’s industry policies attract high tech industries, including bio-energy and bio-

manufacturing, sensor technology and advanced technology development. The University of

Tasmania(UTAS) and TIA develop an international reputation for advanced R&D on temperate

climate agriculture and resource management, agriculture for international development and

agricultural entrepreneurship and business systems.

Buoyant demand for dairy products and live beef cattle export to China drives demand for fodder

and feed grains. Other export markets grow by meeting global demand for high value, quality

assured products – pharmaceuticals, herbs, teas, spices, food and fibre.

“Tasmanian Grown” becames a globally recognised brand. Direct relationships with overseas buyers

ensure strong “chain of custody” guarantees. Networks of merchants add to the value-chains and

ensure competition for “branded products”. Marketing is used to add to the feel good “mystique”

of the “Tasmanian Quality Naturally” brand. In Beijing, Hong Kong and Tokyo, Cape Grim air quality

data is used as evidence of Tasmania’s pollution free atmosphere with marketing images of an

isolated island swept clean by the “roaring forties”.

The perennial horticulture, vegetables, pharmaceutical and wine industries expand. Affluent

urbanites throughout Asia identify the “Grown in Tasmania” brand with nature, purity and quality.

Food and wine and nature tourism complements exports and creates employment rich service

industries. Many SME provide specialist logistics, marketing and coordination support adding value

to on farm production. Established industries have strong systems for BMP adoption and continuous

improvement. New processing industries with world-class facilities are attracted, and infrastructure

is provided to make them viable.



53

Water politics are cool. The historic State Water Accord limits further public outrage and disruptive

protests at the damming and modifications of rivers. The strong commitment to environmental

flows and riverine ecosystem protection ensures that the Water Accord lasts. Many growers are

champions of riverine restoration and are leaders in implementing the International Water

Stewardship Standards.

Further irrigation developments increase fears about environmental impacts, but stringent policies

on freshwater conservation protect reference reaches and wild rivers, with guaranteed flows to

estuaries and wetlands. Stringent quarantine and early detection limits impacts of feral fish and

aquatic weeds.

UTAS and TIA have an internationally recognised R&D programs spanning agricultural systems,

integrated water resource planning and regional economic development. These support

collaboration across many faculties and disciplines including engineering, geography, agriculture,

business and economics and the natural and computing sciences. TIA’s work on linking agricultural

and secondary industry value chains and equipping growers to adopt optimal plant water use gains

international attention.

RD&E programs are focused on:

Delivering productivity and efficiency in industry – optimising energy, water and labour;

Entrepreneurship, advanced value chain systems, logistics and innovative business models;

Strategies for industry development and global competitive advantage draws together skills

from management and marketing;

New agricultural industries including new and novel crop development – including in areas

of pharmaceuticals and new bio-actives;

Advanced dairy manufacturing supports the expansion of dairy into global markets, and

expansion of intensive livestock industries on the back of this;

o NOTE - Feed grain demand increases greatly, and grains begin to push poppies out

of their dominant position in irrigated grain rotations.

Education and training to deliver a highly skilled work forces and builds professional

capacity across the entire value chain;

Food science and technology and the cultural geography of food systems;

Applied climate adaptation and climate science, including medium term forecasting;

Carbon sequestration methods, carbon accounting and climate-carbon policy; and

Large scale environmental monitoring and modelling and advanced spatial modelling.

Water R&D is funded through the “levy bank” based on a landmark agreement on raising R&D levies

on all water used in Tasmania. An independently governed growers’ innovation fund, is matched by

State and Commonwealth funds. This builds a funding base to support R&D that both drives best

practice in water resource planning and the development of world competitive irrigation industries.

Tasmania develops a range of competitive advantages in medium scale processing, marketing,

logistics, coordination and integrated production.



54

Scenario 2: Muddling through

This scenario is based on “business as usual”. After a flurry of new irrigation schemes developed in

the first decade of the 21st century, irrigation grew moderately. Demand for irrigated production

waxed and waned, aligned to commodity boom and bust cycles.

Tasmania’s natural advantages – soils, water and climate – have resulted in moderate growth of

irrigation industries. The optimism about economic diversification was not justified. Constraints

limiting growth have included growing public opposition, confusing policy settings, lack of regulatory

coherence, poor coordination, immature logistics and non-competitive scale.

Several new water resource developments were constrained by complex regulatory processes and

plagued by costs over runs. After the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement, the “forest

protest movement” turned its attention to new water infrastructure. Community opposition to new

irrigation grew steadily. The “no dams” refrain returned noisily to Hobart protests. The protest

movement was adept at using the Internet, to give a “smelly” reputation to irrigation. This taints

many products. European buyers tend to avoid branded Tasmanian products because of

reputational risks, although there is some demand for high quality but unbranded products.

Commonwealth irrigation development funds are delivered to the Northern Australia food bowl

projects. New projects in Tasmania are tied up in slow and complex regulatory approvals, due to

community opposition and some scandals about shoddy practices in environmental protection and

environmental flows planning.

After the public debate about SPC’s and Qantas’s call for subsidies, the Commonwealth Government

industry policies hardened: no business receives direct hand outs. After the tough 2014 budget, the

Commonwealth became increasingly reluctant to fund Tasmania’s economic diversification

strategies. Previous funding had failed to result in significant economic and employment growth.

Without a carbon price, carbon markets are limited to the voluntary market, benefitting only niche

reforestation schemes.

The Australian Government remains an avid free-trade advocate despite limited progress in

influencing international trade policy. Low commodity prices coupled with relatively high labour

costs, force continued extensification of Australian agriculture.

Australia’s high cost of labour, water and transport became major impediments to attracting

investment from increasingly globalised industries. Instead, industry relocated to NZ and South

America. Lower costs and generous tax incentives make theses much more attractive locations for

global-scale industries.

Several major food processors shut down their Australian operations leaving those contract growers

who did not go broke, with stranded assets and declining property values.

Industry and government R&D focuses on the search for “survival crops” and alternatives markets

after the hard line “free market” Australian Government rejected calls for industry adjustment

funding.



55

Big investment in recycled coal seam gas water and new dams in northern Australia provided

alternative water sources for new irrigation based investments. In the decades after the millennium

drought, a long run of good water years took the MDB reforms off the political agenda and provided

bumper years to water entitlement holders.

Efforts to establish a “Grown in Tasmania” brand were partially successful, particularly on the

mainland. Many cashed up suburbanites buy Tassie wine and cheese when entertaining. Boutique

businesses based on art, food and wine tourism thrive. Tassie gains the image as a quaint, historic

“must see” location for at least one holiday in the average middle-class Australian’s life.

Water politics are warm. Well-organised protests target the few proposals to dam and further

modify rivers. Growers’ efforts to introduce voluntary standards are fragmented with several

competing standards confusing buyers.

Opponents cite the environmental impacts of previous hydro and irrigation developments as

evidence of why new developments must be stopped. Feral fish and aquatic weeds cause major

problems.

Industry is constantly reacting - responding to changing demands and cost pressures. Growers want

advice on improved agricultural systems and water use optimisation, but information sources are

fragmented.

Irrigation RD&E programs are focused on:

Agricultural science projects, including plant breeding and genetics;

Strategies to increase production and enterprise scale;

Expansion of existing industries into new districts;

Reducing risks for investors in cropping systems;

The economics of reducing farm production costs;

Farm production models, rotation advice and DSS;

Efficiency of water use within major water using industries;

Regional strategies for keeping existing industries going;

Finding alternative crops for growers who previously supplied exporters; and

Social impacts of structural adjustment out of agriculture (and the dynamics of declining

rural communities, etc).

Water and irrigation RD&E funding arrangements are fragmented, with funding from the RDCs

critical for keeping a range of RD&E programs going. Most is focused on farm production systems

with a widely held view that the State and Commonwealth should fund water resource planning and

regional economic development strategies. Transaction costs are high and while there are many

small R&D projects, it is often hard to find out about who is doing what.

In this scenario there is essentially no change to a passive industry approach to value chains and

competitiveness, and a high reliance on government assistance.



56

Scenario 3: Decline and stagnation

After approximately 20 years of relatively rapid expansion, the Tasmanian irrigation industry is in a

graceful, gradual decline. Existing infrastructure, both private and public is used, but it is often

treated as a “sunk cost” to wring a dividend out of whenever possible.

Demand for irrigation production waxes and wanes, but most is targeted to supplementing

production in the broad-acre grain and animal industries due to their relatively low risk, and the

lower labour costs involved compared with intensive industries.

Tasmania’s many natural advantages – soils, water and climate – were not enough to sustain growth

- other constraints to economic diversification prevailed. Constraints include confusing and unstable

policy settings, regulatory incoherence, expensive logistics and the non-competitive scale of

Tasmanian industries. Capital flight from Australian agriculture, processing and manufacturing

continued to erode confidence.

Community opposition to irrigation hardened, with the “forest protest movement” turning its

attention to water infrastructure. The protest movement called for buyer boycotts on Tassie exports.

They used the internet to perfection and smeared a “smelly” reputation across many Tasmanian

Branded products.

The Commonwealth no longer funds Tasmania’s proposals for infrastructure and economic

diversification after previous attempts failed to result in any significant economic and employment

growth.

Policy at both State and National levels begins to view Tasmania as a large quaint “national and

heritage park”. The economy is based on largely on tourism. Government assistance is provided to

retrain and relocate people to other areas of Australia, particularly the booming northern and

western mining provinces.

The decades-long mining boom has resulted in high cost for labour and transport. These are the

major impediments to retaining processing industries exposed to global markets. Like manufacturing

before them they have relocated to Asian and South American countries where lower costs and

generous incentives make them attractive locations for labour intensive industries.

The opium poppy industry gradually moved to Victoria and then consolidated its operations there.

Most major food processors shut down their Australian operations leaving contract growers with

stranded assets.

Searches for “survival alternatives” for growers have mostly defaulted to livestock feed and grains,

but there are concerns that these barely cover the operational costs.

Efforts to establish a “Grown in Tasmania” brand were not successful – supermarkets on the

mainland are flooded with canned fruits and juices from Chile and South Africa, tomatoes and

sauces from Italy, frozen veggies from NZ and cheeses and milk products from all over the world.

This is cleverly marketed as the gourmet benefits of globalisation.



57

Water politics are dull. There are few proposals to dam and further modify rivers. Growers have

given up on efforts to introduce voluntary standards due to fragmentation and the limited

advantage from doing more paper work.

Irrigation RD&E programs are struggling to survive as they not seen as relevant to current economic

conditions

Agricultural RD&E funding arrangements are fragmented with funding from the RDCs critical to

keeping a few extension programs going. Transaction costs are high and while there are many small

R&D projects, it is often hard to find out about who is doing what.

R&D programs are focused on:

Reducing the cost intensity of farms;

Farm scale and consolidation strategies;

Vulnerability assessment, structural adjustment and options ensuring equitable access

to social welfare funding;

Land systems assessment to determine the NRM and carbon farming benefits of

targeted land retirement; and

Benefits of regression to lower intensity farming.



58

7.5 Appendix 5: Ideas generated for future RD&E priorities

Summary of key themes and ideas from Session 2.3: What RD&E is needed?

Stakeholders generated approximately 140 separate ideas about future RD&E priorities. These were

sorted into 4 main themes or categories, with 14 separate sub-themes. For each theme a set of

distilled questions were used to try to sum up the main R&D questions posed. These distilled

questions are in italics below. Individual priorities have been rationalised and summarised into the

dominant topics proposed by stakeholders, with a minimum of editing, mostly for clarity.

7.5.1 On-farm systems

Distilled questions

What on-farm effectiveness, productivity and optimisation options are possible?

How can we achieve water use efficiency?

What options for precisions agriculture? How does precision irrigation fit in precision

agriculture?

Water use efficiency (WUE)

Develop optimisation strategies and DSS based on integrated understanding on the

dynamics between: application of water, infiltration, soil organic matter levels, energy use,

capital expenditure, labour, waterlogging and profitability

Maximise WUE for net profit: use ML/Ha per crop type and $per ML benchmark best

practice for yield target projects e.g. wheat 10t/ha, spuds xt/ha, pasture x kg DM/ha

Develop autumn irrigation strategies for dairy in the midlands: focus on grass production

and soil sustainability

Precision technology

Use precision farming techniques to lower water, energy and fertiliser use

Work with “demonstration” properties – use real examples of precision agriculture

techniques to promote adoption and benefits

Identify soils for irrigation development eg EM 38 mapping to manage soil types and

drainage

Water application techniques: systems, rate, soil type and crop system eg VRI in managing

variable soil in vegetable crops

Vigour mapping, variable irrigation, variable nutrition, automated systems, particularly for

perennial horticulture

Analysis of VRI systems: cost/benefit, complexity, practicality and durability etc

Evaluate control systems and emerging sensor technologies for VRI – is it a costly

distraction? Can apps & smart phones replace common sense?



59

On-farm enterprise economics

Information that enables decisions about adopting robust production systems: i.e.

economic analysis of different crop options and cropping systems

Quantify resource availability to ensure we avoid over-capitalising on water infrastructure

(on and off farm) and make irrigation too expensive

Enterprise mix to optimise resource potential

Soil/Plant/Water optimisation: How to reduce input costs? i.e. technologies and practices for

energy and water use efficiencies etc.

What is the $ difference between an optimised irrigation farm and just any irrigation farm?

What is enterprise best practice? How to mitigate risk? How to maximise outcomes?

Assess the profitability of irrigated wheat for dairy feed grain

New crop agronomy

Scope and evaluate possible future crops

New crops – production systems and economics

7.5.2 Business models

Distilled questions

How can innovative business models be developed?

What is needed? Is there a role for Government?

What is needed to attract capital investment?

How can value chain analysis support more value-add?

How can Tassie products be better branded and marketed?

Value chain

How to capture more value from crops/products?

How do we maximise the captured value of products? What can Value Chain Analyses

contribute?

Systems research on value chain opportunities: use engagement with supply chains to target

research to deliver greatest tangible outcomes

What whole-of-chain interventions have greatest ability to value add and produce practice

change?

Capital investment

What ways can Government and industry attract investment capital to facilitate growth?

How have other irrigation growth areas attracted outside capital (e.g. equity partnerships).

Develop a program to survey potential investors requirements and motivations

Provide resources, education & decision making tools for the investors to support informed

decisions



60

Branding & marketing

How do we improve national and international reputations?

How do we identify new market opportunities?

How do we maintain quality products?

Industry economics

Benchmark competitiveness of the irrigation Industries in Tasmania vs. the same industries

in other countries

There is an interplay between confidence building & technology development in irrigation.

How can this be best optimised?

How do we optimise the processing sector to support growth & value-add?

What strategies suit scaling up in agriculture: farm mergers, business models that combine

small farms?

Business models

What are some possible business models? Can we look at other niche markets and how they

conduct business

Can cooperatives deliver benefit to the producer/community?

What business models enable investment in on-farm & food processing infrastructure?

How will farmers develop new enterprises in their business and farming systems?

What constrains the development of marketing clusters?

7.5.3 Natural resource management

Distilled questions

How can we protect landscape health?

What are the environmental risks and how should these be managed on farm and

regionally?

What are the soil health, drainage and sustainable production issues on farm? How do these

interact regionally?

Resource protection & risk management

Scope out optimal resource use efficiency at farm and landscape level

How can we effectively use remote sensing to monitor and report on landscape health?

What are acceptable or desirable levels of change in ecosystems?

Detailed mapping of soils, climate data etc. as guidance for suitable enterprises

Social impact & regulations: How to get the compliance model right? What are effective

and pragmatic approaches to meeting community’s expectations regarding environmental

protection.

What are the social consequences of irrigation development?



61

Is integrated production possible that reduces waste, enhances ecosystems and biodiversity

and minimises or mitigates “pollution”?

How to manage irrigated agriculture to have a neutral or positive impact on environment?

Understand what others (E.g. NZ) have done re best practice and minimising impacts –

particularly with dairy effluent and eutrophication.

Catchment scale landscape health and resource protection

What are the areas most suited to irrigation?

How do we prevent adverse impacts to the environment?

How to maintain & improve landscape function – minimise/avoid environmental damage?

Catchment mapping and modelling for resource protection - Soil mapping, enterprise

suitability mapping, soil resilience (irrigation/cultivation), salinisation, waterlogging, water

table risk etc

What options for biodiversity conservation in an agricultural matrix? Eg Identify

undeveloped prime agricultural land & develop in exchange for preserving less productive

land

Rainfall/water-cycle drainage management, from on-farm to catchment i.e. where do the

water/nutrients move to?

Baseline understanding of resource health needs to be understood & monitored & managed

On-Farm - Soil health & drainage

How to prevent problems occurring as a result of irrigated Agriculture?

What are suitable techniques for draining duplex soils?

Drainage RD&E for irrigated agriculture: what is best practice drainage/irrigation for

midlands

Systems for maintaining and improving soil health (drainage, rotations, nutrients,

amendments)

How do we improve soils into the future to maintain sustainability while maintaining

profitability?

7.5.4 RD&E & E

Distilled questions

How do we build an effective innovation system? How would it work? What would it look

like?

How can Tassie have a competent system of training, skills development and education for

ag?

Is more needed to ensure skilled labour? What is the role of Government?

What is needed to deliver better and effective extension?



62

R&D systems & innovation

Use and support producer action-learning groups to investigate local needs and focus

research on local priorities – eg TIA to work with top producers as research partners

What are the successful RDE models (that are driven by industry demand) around the world?

How can we learn from them?

What examples exist, on innovative ways government policies can support adoption on-

ground to get optimal benefits from large-scale infrastructure P/P investment?

Effectively connect with international research agendas and identify pathways for UTAS/TIA

to become a world leader in temperate irrigation research and extension

Research on how agrifood innovation occurs in practice?

Should there be a dedicated water user levy to fund R & D (regionally specific)

Training & education

Develop strategic business skills education/training courses for agriculture/agribusiness

Incorporate agribusiness, ecology & extension skills in tertiary education

Business management and financial training for robust and realistic analysis of new

enterprise

Up-skilling of farm business owners/operators: What enables businesses to undertake

transformational change without serious consequences (eg bankruptcy, soil destruction)?

Profile opportunities for young managers of complex, diverse intensive farms (with scale)

Extension

Every research project needs communication, adoption/extension strategies

Ensure research findings are delivered to practitioners in a useable format

Facilitated learning and discussion groups

Ensure producers know how to best apply tech & info & are confident to do so.

National network of peer-to-peer learning (farmers, agronomist, researcher) using learning

sites to build confidence on an agreed range of priority topics

Enable commercial service providers & sales people with better skills & knowledge about

water, soils, energy & nutrients for efficient production.

Publish agrifood innovation case studies

Irrigation RD& Foresighting Workshop Report

Documents