Australian Local Government Association

Local government and future NRM programs

July 2006

This is a discussion paper developed by the local government NRM facilitators to inform the ALGA position on future NRM programs. The paper was developed in preparation for discussions as part of the Future NRM Directions Working Group under the Natural Resources Programs and Policies Committee¹ in July 2006.

Download this paper (PDF 101 kb)

Recent reviews and inquiries have clearly identified the need to have a greater level of involvement from local government in the regional NRM model. Local government undertakes around $1.9 billion of investment in NRM activities. In addition, local government invests around $2.6 billion in environment protection activities. This is important as there are significant inter-relationships between sound environmental protection practices and achieving good environmental outcomes, including NRM. Provision of NRM is just one of many competing council services. There is still a strong need to increase the priority given to NRM within councils.

Recognition of the important role local government plays and an appreciation of the significant impact council activities do and can have on regional targets is important. This recognition can start with the inclusion of local government in the institutional arrangements of future NRM programs.

In taking NRM forward, ALGA has identified three key actions required to increase local government engagement and participation in regional NRM:

• acknowledge and recognise the work already undertaken by local government,
• remove any political or practical barriers and impediments to greater local government participation in policy development and implementation, and
• encourage and support greater partnerships between local government and regional bodies, respective state and territory governments and the Australian Government in the future.

This paper outlines the institutional or governance changes that would increase local government participation in the regional NRM model and also highlights a number of principles to guide the development of future programs. Further, a number of key issues associated with impediments and opportunities for greater local government involvement are identified.

Institutional arrangements

Local government engagement needs to be improved at all levels of the regional NRM model. This includes in the development of high level agreements and as a full member of Joint Steering Committees, at the state and regional levels.

Bilaterals

Current bilateral arrangements fail to acknowledge local government as a relevant sphere of government and subsequently their significant contribution to NRM investment is not recognised. As a result, there has been a lack of coordination of local and regional NRM activities. Councils are still undertaking NRM activities, but on their own terms and outside of the regional model. Subsequently, there is limited alignment between local and regional priorities or objectives, which may not result in the best possible environmental outcomes for a given level of investment.

It is expected that future NRM programs will require the negotiation of new high level agreements outlining governance and investment arrangements between the Commonwealth and states/territories. These new arrangements need to have a stronger emphasis on the role local government can play.

The high level agreements should highlight local governments' contribution to NRM, outline the policy commitments local government is willing to provide to make the regional model work (these are currently being considered by the state local government associations) and set out a framework for engaging local government at other levels. This would provide a strong basis to outline why and how local government should be engaged.

The framework to engage local government may require the development of trilateral agreements at the state level, between the state government, the peak local government association and the peak body of the regional NRM organisations. This trilateral agreement would set out the roles and responsibilities of each of the signatories, relevant programs and funding mechanisms and monitoring and compliance measures.

State level trilateral agreements provide a basis to drive closer relations between regional bodies and local government. Such trilaterals could also require regional organisations and local government to develop similar regional specific agreements. A trilateral at the state level could also assist the peak local government associations and regional bodies to drive collaborative relationships and set out a framework for engagement.

Summary of proposed governance arrangements

• High level agreement between Australian Government and states and territories
•   ↓
• Formal agreement between state, local governments, and regional NRM bodies
•   ↓
• Regional agreement between regional NRM body and local governments

Joint Steering Committees

There is currently limited local government involvement in the Joint Steering Committees (JSCs). This is unfortunate given the important decision making activities of these committees and the impacts their decisions can have on local government activities and investment. Some peak local government associations have commenced lobbying the Australian Government and respective state and territory governments for local government membership to their JSC. Queensland has recently achieved local government membership on the JSC and Western Australia has had observer status since 2002.

Local government membership on the JSCs will assist to foster whole of government partnerships. Local government adds governance and priority setting skills to these committees and can provide valuable input into how local government can contribute to the environmental outcomes of proposed programs and projects. This input is becoming more and more critical as emerging issues such as planning, coastal development, urban and peri-urban issues are increasingly being drawn into the regional NRM model.

Full membership for local government on each JSC is recommended to ease the current impediment to local government participating in high level policy and program development and implementation.

Future programs

Future NRM programs should focus on building better linkages between local government and regional bodies, and encourage strategic collaboration and effective coordination between the two.

Support for the regional model

There are a number of policy principles that should be followed in the development of future programs. ALGA supports the regional model and believes future programs should be delivered through the regional bodies. For more effective regional delivery, local government and regional bodies need to work together to identify and align local and regional priorities and projects contributing to regional targets.

It is recognised that this can be a time consuming task and the capacity of both local government and regional bodies will affect the outcome. Some regions have a large number of local governments to work with, many local government boundaries go across a number of NRM regions and some local governments have greater capacity than their regional bodies. Additionally, the capacity will vary greatly between individual local governments. As such, capacity building activities need to be flexible to meet a number of circumstances and should be adequately resourced at the regional level and coordinated at the state level.

The funding stream should provide a focus on capacity building and strengthening local government and regional body partnerships to deliver regional objectives.

Local government allocation

The ability of local government to access funding through regional planning processes differs between regions, however, a number of regions undertake local government specific funding rounds for on-ground activities. These require local government to work in partnership with their regional body to secure project funding. It is proposed to have a national local government funding stream to build upon these successes, and to create opportunities in regions where it does not currently exist.

A specific funding allocation for local government would assist local governments to leverage their investment which may provide an incentive to increase NRM investment. Once local governments and regions have agreed on a common set of priorities and actions, local government could apply (with the regional bodies endorsement) for funding from the national stream.

The establishment of a local government specific allocation would address access to funding, a key issue that local government continues to identify with regional NRM delivery. It would also acknowledge the importance of the sector as a true NRM partner.

Parameters should be established to ensure that such an allocation remains part of the current model and is delivered through the regions. Projects would acknowledge the existing investment that local government contributes to NRM and have the potential to cover the range of NRM activities that the sector undertakes. Project proposals would be encouraged to be developed in partnership with the regional body, need to meet Resource Condition Targets and demonstrate building the capacity of local government to ensure long term change in NRM.

The mechanics of delivering a local government allocation would include assessment panels that would evaluate proposals. The peak local government associations would be represented on these panels. If designed appropriately, the program could use this as a capacity building exercise for both local governments and regional bodies, and this would build on the earlier initiative of aligning local and regional priorities. Such a program would also create a greater incentive for regional bodies to work in partnership with local government in order to attract more investment to their region.

The initiative would focus both on capacity building and on-ground projects resulting in improved environmental outcomes. Regional bodies and local governments would develop project proposals to address common priority areas and local government financial contributions or in-kind support would be required.

Identification of local government activities

Not all regional plans identify all the NRM activities that local government is involved in. Attachment 1 outlines a range of statutory and non-statutory services and functions that local government undertakes which may contribute to regional targets. While these may not be applicable to achieving targets in all regions, it may provide a starting point for undertaking partnership projects with local governments.

It is not proposed that local government seek funding partnerships with regional bodies for all the activities listed in Attachment 1, however there are instances where it would be appropriate. As such, in some cases it is appropriate to broaden out regional plans and investment strategies to accommodate the positive environmental impacts these local government activities can have.

Issues to address

Whilst this paper focuses on broad program ideas for future NRM programs, there are a number of more specific opportunities for local government partnership projects. These potential project proposals would increase the engagement of local government in regional NRM and address a number of key concerns and gaps in current NRM programs.

• There will be a continuing need to capacity build local governments to undertake natural resource management as a priority activity. Projects may be specifically focused on capacity building, or on-ground projects may contain capacity building elements. Either way, the local government associations can play a significant role to assist to build this capacity, as can the regions.
• There are a number of trial projects underway aimed at integrating regional and local planning activities which will be completed in the final years of current NRM programs. These projects could be evaluated and built on to develop a national project in the future. A number of approaches are being taken, providing a range of opportunities, depending on regional and local circumstances.
• Local government is a significant asset and land manager, particularly in coastal areas. Significantly more investment is required in coastal NRM. Stronger local government partnerships and a greater focus on coastal issues in regional plans will help to achieve greater levels of overall investment in coastal NRM. Local government is interested in developing stronger partnerships to improve the natural resource base in these areas. An obvious area for greater collaboration between governments and the regions is in the area of planning.
• Local government has significant expertise in managing and protecting biodiversity. Council planning activities can have significant impact on regional targets. In Western Australia the local government association (WALGA) has developed the Perth Biodiversity Project, supported by the Swan Region, which has since been expanded to the south west of the state with support from the South West regional body. Amongst other things, the project provides councils with comprehensive Biodiversity Planning Guidelines, resources and capacity builds councils to improve biodiversity outcomes in their LGA. It may be applicable to adapt this project to fit in with legislation and planning practices in other states to achieve broader scale biodiversity protection and conservation.

Summary

Local government supports the regional model and delivery of programs through regional bodies. Stronger involvement in governance arrangements will build local government engagement and interest in regional NRM. Capacity building for local government is a key element for future programs. There needs to be an acknowledgement of the inter-relationships between environmental protection activities and NRM outcomes. In some cases, a broader definition of NRM activities would increase the environmental outcomes possible through local government participation. Given the opportunity, local government is well placed to develop and implement innovative projects in partnership with other NRM stakeholders to effectively meet regional and national environmental targets.

Attachment 1

The current and potential local government NRM services and functions

Biodiversity management, enhancement and protection (native flora and fauna)

Examples: land acquisition, management agreements, targeted incentives, free trees, threatened species, native vegetation

Riparian (wetland and estuarine systems) management, enhancement and protection

Examples: monitoring, pollutant traps, revegetation, planning

Water management

Examples: water quality, water supply, wastewater, flooding, stormwater, planning, WSUD

Integrated coastal zone management planning

Examples: development, protection, infrastructure, community support, beach management, recreation pressure, volunteer management, tourism

Weeds and pest animals management planning

Examples: mapping, control; education, extension, enforcement, emergency management

Land management

Examples: salinity, erosion and sediment control, remediation, public land management, agricultural landuse and development assessment

Sustainable land use development

Examples: strategic and statutory landuse planning, development control, land use controls, conservation zones; acid sulphate soils control and protection

Community leadership, extension and education

Examples: sponsors, host offices; Landcare programs, publications and display; volunteer mgt, community engagement

Cultural heritage (indigenous and non- indigenous)

Examples: identification, protection, interpretation (signage) material, education

Climate change

Examples: abatement and adaptation, education, planning, leadership (CCP)

Information management

Examples: Collection and reporting SOE, data management, GIS, M&E, ground truthing

Sustainable communities

Examples: LA21, building codes, energy and water efficiency

Infrastructure investment, maintenance and management

Examples: road and drainage, landfill, sewerage, public facilities

Air quality management

Examples: planning, monitoring; regulating, education

Waste management

Examples: strategic planning, location, rehabilitation, monitoring, education

Download this paper (PDF 101 kb)

For information regarding this paper, please contact: