Lake Eyre Basin Rivers Assessment Implementation Plan Project: Milestone 3 Report Governance arrangements for the lebra

Pressure-State-Response approach to the LEBRA: implications for governance

Describing the pressures bearing on the condition of the LEB is an important element of a comprehensive assessment of the LEB. The Pressure-State-Response (PSR) framework provides a broader context for assessing the pressures that various activities place on the Basin. The PSR approach was developed by the OECD and is now widely used. The model considers that human activities exert pressures on the environment that affect its quality and the quantity of natural resources (state). Society then responds to these changes through environmental, general economic and sectoral policies, and through changes in awareness and behaviour or activities (societal response). Often, decisions are targeted not at the original pressures, but at the symptoms exhibited by the changed state. Without considering the pressures, and the driving forces behind them, such measures are almost always doomed to failure.

In Australia the PSR model, and variations on it, are used in State of the Environment reporting by governments at the local, state and national level. "Indicators" are the essential components of these models, but often data is lacking to demonstrate trends over time (Williams et al. 2001). Table 4 outlines the key pressures on the LEB.

Table 4: Pressures and sources of pressure on the LEB
Broad pressure (Beeton et al 2006)	Sources of pressure in LEB
Vegetation clearance and modification	Agricultural production; some mining; some tourism, some light industry
Altered fire regimes	Agricultural production
Altered hydrology	Agricultural production; some mining
Trampling and compaction	Agricultural production; some mining; some tourism
Invasive species	Agricultural production; some tourism
Pollution (water, soil and air)	Mining; some agricultural production, some tourism, some light industry
Disease and pathogens (minor issue)	Some agricultural production
Climate change	Agricultural production; some mining; some tourism, some localised light industry
Direct decline of biodiversity from harvest (minor)	Some agricultural production (kangaroo harvest)

Pressures identified specifically in the State of Basin report 2008 include:

• 
  Major water development proposals including mining and irrigation
  
• 
  Cumulative impacts of minor water developments (including bores) and diversions
  
• 
  Intensified land use around waterholes
  
• 
  Presence and spread of introduced pest plants and animals, especially their impact on waterholes
  
• 
  Isolation of floodplains through levee construction or roadway embankments
  
• 
  Impacts of pastoral activities, tourism and mining
  
• 
  Intensified surface water extraction and drawdown
  
• 
  Impacts of climate change on water resources
  
• 
  Modification of basin catchments, such as vegetation clearance and inappropriate grazing, soil management and cropping practices
  
• 
  Stocking rivers and waterholes with non-local fish species.
  

The PSR approach, together with an adaptive management approach (see next section) is embedded into the revised LEBRA methods set out in Section 4. One implication of the approach is that it squarely positions the LEBRA in terms of informing responses to the impacts imposed by various pressures. Examples of responses a well conducted LEBRA can elicit are outlined in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Responses the LEBRA should seek to elicit

With a need for the LEBRA to have utilitarian practicality, the SAP at its workshop on 11-12 August 2009 agreed to the following purpose of the LEBRA:

The purpose of the LEBRA is to gain an understanding of the LEB’s condition in order to: underpin responses to condition, including a range of on-ground management, government and industry policy, enterprise and personal decision making and local and regional resource planning responses form consistent messages appropriate to, and encourage constructive dialogue between, specific target audiences about condition, outlook and appropriate responses guide ongoing research, investigation and monitoring efforts so that they can form a reliable basis for evidence-based responses. The participating government, community, industry and research partners will support this purpose by engaging in an adaptive management process. This process involves collaboration in undertaking the Rivers Assessment, interpreting its results in terms of required responses, influencing the implementation of responses and evaluating these responses.

It is simply not possible to expect that the conduct of a resource assessment in the LEB will indeed elicit the range of responses outlined in Figure 4 across the community and breadth of stakeholders. Other than putting in place regulatory regimes, most responses will be voluntary in nature. Voluntary responses by amorphous stakeholder groups without clear stakeholder identification, communication, encouragement and, in many cases, incentives, are likely to be limited. For that reason, it is important that the governance arrangements for the LEBRA take into account appropriate conduits to turn the ‘amorphous’ in the ‘tangible’ in respect to eliciting responses to LEBRA findings. Within the current structure supporting the LEBIA, these conduits are considered in Table 5.

Table 5: Conduits to desired responses to LEBRA findings
Desired response	Conduit to desired response
On-ground management	CAC; Regional NRM boards
Policy and planning	LEBMF; SOG; CAC; Regional NRM boards
Industry policy	Community Advisory Committee
On-ground monitoring	SOG; CAC; SAP; Regional NRM boards
Ongoing research	SAP; SOG; Regional NRM boards
Communication	Secretariat; LEBMF; Regional NRM boards
Modified social behaviour	CAC; Regional NRM boards

The means by which the response conduits outlined in Table 5 operate is dealt with in detail in Section 5.