4.2.3 Recommendation 4: Rigorously evaluate all incentives used within LDC, and advocate for better use and access to evaluation reports.
LDC should rigorously evaluate the uptake of incentives offered. The level of investment and scale of the LDC Project provides a unique opportunity to evaluate how graziers respond to the mix of incentives on offer. As well as assessing outcomes( levels of engagement, levels of adoption, effectiveness of gully remediation trials) evaluation should focus on learning more about‘ what works for who, and why’ i. e. for the different cohorts of land managers in the BBB( using the information described in RECOMMENDATION 2). These learnings should be fed back into the LDC project implementation, and transferability considered. This work should use the major gully remediation trials to co-design and test incentives for this new area of GBR investment. Findings will help inform the refinement of longer-term institutional arrangements for managing catchment restoration activities in the GBR( RECOMMENDATION 5).
This project has revealed the lack of systematic approaches to incentive and program evaluation and access to previous evaluation reports. This constrains opportunities for learning and improvement. Relevant research papers provide some information, but tend to generalise findings, are slow to publish and may access may difficult to access. LDC should encourage Queensland and Australian Governments to facilitate better access to evaluation reports prepared for water quality programs.
4.3 Recommendations to influence longer-term outcomes
The short time frame of the LDC project is a major constraint to trialing new incentives. Culture and behaviour change programs require sustained incentives over time. However, the level of investment and integrated delivery approach of the LDC project provides a unique opportunity to broker longer-term arrangements to support improved and ongoing incentives to improve water quality from grazing lands.
Recommendation 5: Institutionalise Long Term Approaches to Catchment Repair
Catchment repair activities in the BBB( and wider catchment) require a stable, long-term institutional arrangement to plan, mobilize investment, design, coordinate and negotiate significant effort and to monitor long term compliance and outcomes. Establishing clear institutional responsibilities for catchment repair could:
1. Continue to build catchment erosion prevention and repair capacities within the BBB / Burdekin and across key utilities( e. g. Council, Transport and Main Roads, Mining Companies, etc.);
2. Explore mechanisms to consider catchment repair efforts as insurable assets; 3. Continue to improve design and delivery associated with catchment repair; and 4. Report competently on actual improvements in water quality outcomes relative to costs.
Consultation undertaken as part of this project has generated a specific suggestion for a governance mechanism, such as a trust, to support ongoing investment in gully repair.
Landholders driving change: Exploring new incentives | 47