7.4 Messages arising from the material
While there is little BBB-specific data , the material presented in this document is relevant to understanding landholders in the BBB catchments and sends a cohesive message . There is no evidence to suggest that landholders in the BBB are different from landholders elsewhere in the Burdekin or northern Australia .
Adoption of BMPs is a process . It is embedded in an economic , social and psychological context . A purely biophysical problem definition and promotion of BMPs based on environmental merit therefore does not generate widespread adoption of BMPs .
BMPs represent complex and risky innovations in the context of a grazing property . The decision to adopt BMPs typically involves more than one person and is subject to a range of real and / or perceived constraints . Considered non-adoption is a valid decision .
Likelihood to adopt BMPs cannot be gleaned from socio-economic property descriptors such as size of operation , geographical location , type of ownership , age and education level of operator , and previous experience with conservation programs . Rather , it is critical to understand the causality of adoption decisions .
Adoption decisions are guided by the principal motivations that drive the decision maker ( s ) in any given situation , their attitudes and risk perceptions . Motivations are broadly defined by economic-financial , stewardship-lifestyle and social motivations . Motivations influence attitudes and perceptions about what constrains adoption and how a positive adoption decision can be helped . Landholder motivations and perceptions are heterogeneous .
Policies and programs which target an average set of motivations or a specific spectrum of preferences will appeal to few . Tailoring to a diverse set of preferences is critical for maximising landholder participation . Tailoring is particularly important in situations where the participation of geographically identifiable landholders can be critical to achieving a ( water quality / biodiversity / etc ) conservation goal .
Communication has to be tailored , too . While some landholders will be best targeted through state extension , regional NRM and industry associations , many of these landholders are likely to be more stewardship motivated and have already ( partially ) adopted BMPs . As yet unengaged landholders are likely to have little or no association with these organisations and separate communication strategies are needed that better match their habits , circumstances and aspirations .
Recent information events convened in the BBB catchments have been well attended , indicating that communications have been generally effective . It is unknown , however , whether these events have been able to attract any of the as yet unidentified landholders . Evidence suggests that achieving rapid water quality improvements through the MIP requires a multi-tiered and tailored approach . This needs to be underpinned by a more systematic understanding of BBB landholders , including what motivates them , what they perceive to be barriers to adoption , how they manage risk and how they source relevant information .
To succeed in engaging the full spectrum of landholders , the MIP strategy needs to entail communication , education / demonstration / extension , different financial incentives , and business / succession planning tools .
Some ideas for MIP investment include :
• For maximum engagement , the MIP needs to be embedded in a participatory approach which recognises and validates local knowledge and experience , and value adds to existing local and institutional networks . Given that there are only about 70 landholders in the BBB catchments , a personalised approach is warranted .
- 69 -