The Aspect of Land Use in the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia - Literature review Example

Review of an unsustainable land use example Name of the Student: Name of the Instructor: Name of the course: Code of the course: Submission date: Review of an unsustainable land use example Introduction The concept of sustainability has evolved into becoming prominent in policy oriented research as a manifestation of what public policies in diverse regions around the world ought to achieve. According to Kuhlman and Farrington (2010), the term sustainability as a policy concept traces its origin in the Brundtland report of 1987. This concept was originally coined in the realms of forestry to infer to the undertaking of never harvesting over and above what is yielded in the forests’ new growth (Wiersum, 1995). Since then, various scholars and practitioners like Helming et. al., (2008), Kates and Parris (2005) and Strange and Bayley (2008) among others have determined that this concept has evolved in meaning and has been re-interpreted to include three primary dimensions namely, economic, social and environmental. Thus, while the concept of sustainability has been subjected to elevated discredit as a helpful concept in itself, it has appeared to serve some specific purposes when it is preceded by delimiting modifiers, for instance, ecological, economic or agricultural (Morelli, 2011). However, even in the utilization of different resources like water which is tied to the above modifiers, the concept of sustainability has not received a formidable definition, though recent efforts have made some advancement in defining the issue, for instance, Golubev et al. (1988), Koudstaal et al. (1992), Plate (1993), and Raskin et al. (1995) among others. Nonetheless, this report will adopt the definition of sustainability which was forwarded by Kuhlman and Farrington (2010). According to these authors, sustainability can be defined as a state of affairs where the total natural resources as well as the man-made resources remain at least constant in the forthcoming future so that the well-being of the future generations does not decline. The concept of land use is related to sustainability. This is evidenced by the emergence of the concepts of either sustainable or unsustainable land use. In a generic sense, land use can be taken to infer to the human use of land. This entails the management as well as modification of the natural environment into built environment, for instance, settlements, fields and pastures among others. Land use can also be perceived as the arrangement, inputs and activities which are undertaken by people in a particular land cover type aimed at producing, maintaining or changing it. Decisions on land use have been revealed to be made on strategic, operational as well as tactical levels (Bouma, 1997). This report aims at exploring the aspect of land use in the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia. Towards this end, it will analyze the socio-economic as well as the ecological features of the Murray-Darling basin and the ways in which the land use in this basin is regulated by the society. Additionally, this report will forward criticisms on the less than sustainable feature of the Murray-Darling Basin as well as the regulatory deficiencies associated with land use in this case study. Lastly, this report aims at forwarding solutions which are core in addressing unsustainable land use at the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia. Brief description of the Murray-Darling Basin According to the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (2010), the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia is perceived as the most iconic river system which is extensively defined by the catchment areas of the Murray and Darling rivers and their various tributaries. In a wider scope, this basin entails 23 river valleys and has an extended area of over one million Km2 of the South-Eastern Australia. This means that the basin covers three-quarters of New South Wales, more than half of Victoria, a substantial part of Queensland and South Australia and all of the Australian Capital Territory. The general arrangement of this basin has a wide alley of climatic and natural environment. It is imperative to note that the major segment of this basin is either arid or semi-arid, with a narrow humid region along the south and the east. Additionally, the environment in this basin has a wide range of environmental orientation which is characterized by rainforests of the cool eastern uplands, the inland sub-tropical areas of the far north, the temperate Mallee country of the south-east as well as the hot, dry, arid and semi-arid lands of the far western plains (Murray–Darling Basin Authority, 2010). Additionally, Commonwealth of Australia (2011) cited that the water in this basin is used primarily for two large purposes which have a direct relationship to land use in the Murray-darling basin. These are consumption which involves meeting fundamental human needs and supplying irrigated agriculture and industries. This is coupled with the use of the waters from rivers in this basin for the environment which entails allowing natural river flows, watering the wetlands and inundating floodplains. In the current Australian set-up, these are often competing and in sometimes conflicting demands for the water which is available and present serious crisis to the sustainability of land use in this basin. Social, economic and ecological features of the Murray-Darling Basin In regard to the social features, the Native Title Report (2008) revealed that the rivers in the Murray-Darling Basin sustain the culture as well as confirm the existence of the local communities in this region. Additionally, the indigenous people in this basin are interconnected by a compatible structure of kinship law which is fundamental in maintaining a continuous socio-cultural and spiritual connection to the waters, land as well as the natural resources in the Murray-Darling Basin. Nonetheless, the recent commercialization of both water and land use in this basin has meant that the spiritual and cultural connection that the indigenous people in this basin attach to this lands and waters has in many instances been denied. In regard to the demography of the Murray-Darling basin which is related to the social structure of this region, the recent census revealed that there are 2.1 million people who live within the basin and have direct dependence on its water resources and the land cover by 2006. This is not to forget further 1.3 million people who are outside the basin and also heavily dependent on its water sources (Murray–Darling Basin Authority, 2010). In regard to the economic features, land use in the Murray-Darling basin has been cited as being integral in promoting diverse economic activities like farming, fishing as well as providing extensive support to the establishment of industries. These economic features are usually supported by a wide alley of natural aquatic habitats which according to the Helfrich, and Parkhurs (2009) include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, bays, springs and other types of wetlands. These natural aquatic habitats which are found along the Murray-Darling basin have been cited as playing an integral role in defining the trends of land use in this basin, though the support of the aforementioned economic activities. According to the Native Title Report (2008), apart from the provision of drinking water to over three million people with more than one third of this population living outside the basin, the Murray-Darling basin is fundamental in the provision of close to 45% of the value of agricultural output in Australia. This includes its cattle and sheep industry as well as main food and produce best epitomized by cotton, rice, wheat, canola and soy as well as vineyards. Moreover, the Murray-Darling basin has been credited for generating an approximated $800 million annually in tourism activities as well as recreational industry income. In this case, the Murray-Darling basin can be perceived as a major feature which supports diverse land use activities. However, the sustainability or the unsustainability of the land use activities will be extensively explored in the subsequent section. The following figure shows the general overview features of the Murray-Darling basin which are key in supporting major economic features of this region. Table 1.0: Fast facts: Murray–Darling Basin Source: Murray–Darling Basin Authority (2010). Guide to the proposed Basin Plan: overview. Canberra: Murray–Darling Basin Authority,  The last feature in this analysis is the ecological feature. The Murray-Darling Basin is credited to host a wide alley of flora and fauna. In regard to the fauna, this region hosts different species of fish which support the widespread fishing activities in the region. According to the Native Title Report (2008), the diverse species of fish and birds have extensive reliance on the natural drying as well as flooding regime in appropriate times of the year. This form of variability is integral in providing for the chief bleeding events for the fish, birds as well as other fauna in this basin. Nonetheless, recent human activities like those mentioned in the subsequent section have adversely affected the fauna in this basin, mostly the fish. According to Norris et al. (2001), despite the fact that the there is a great variance of the present state of fish habitats in the natural aquatic habitats along the rivers in this basin, those in the mid as well as in the lower slopes have been adversely affected by the human activities like fishing and farming in this region. This has also included the degradation of diverse habitats like wetlands, riverbanks and billabongs to pave way for extended land use in this region. On the other hand, the Murray-Darling basin also has extensive cover of fauna, best epitomized by the river red gum forest and woodlands. These have been of great importance in the maintenance of both the aquatic life in this basin as well as human economic activities in this region. Nonetheless, extensive environmental degradation has been rampant in this region which has seen issues like stressed forests, threat to the native tree and animal species, noxious weed, salinity, dried wetlands and poor water quality being prevalent in this basin (Native Title Report, 2008). The unsustainability of land use in this basin which has negatively impacted on the general ecological set-up has culminated to the proposal for the introduction of alternative sentencing approaches aimed at deterring diverse environmental crimes in this basin. According to Cole (2008), the alternative sentencing approach ought to include utmost flexibility in order to fulfill the twin purposes of punishment as well as the provision of social outcomes which are more acceptable. In this case, the measures which have been extensively discussed in this literature as being endowed with particular merit have been termed as ‘alternative orders’. These are best epitomized by Cole (2008), Martin (2003), Hain and Cocklin (2001) as well as Preston (2007) among other scholars. This alternative orders can be combined with a disciplinary action or put into utility in place of the more traditional penalties (Bricknell, 2010). In regard to the way in which the land use is regulated in this society it is worth noting that the indigenous people currently constitute 3.4% of the total population in the Murray-Darling basin (they are approximately 15% of the national indigenous population) and have extensive socio-cultural and spiritual connections with this land as evidenced in the preceding section. It is also imperative to note that the Murray-darling basin is a home to close to 40 distinct and autonomous indigenous nations across the five states and territories (Native Title Report, 2008) However, the Native Title Report (2008) reveals that there has been extensive alienation of the indigenous communities from the regulation of land use and water management in the Murray-Darling basin. This is despite the indigenous nations having sought to engage the government about land use and the health of the rivers in this basin for generations (Morgan et. al., 2006). Against this backdrop, land use in the Murray-Darling basin is often regulated by external agencies like the Water Management Committees which act as advisory committees and provide a community perspective on land use around the basin, water allocation to various activities and environmental flows, the river facility operations as well as flood protection (Bhat, 2008). Less than sustainable features of land use in the Murray-Darling basin According to the Native Title Report (2008), the Murray-Darling River basin has seen alarming changes in the recent past and is currently being considered to be in a state of crisis and ecological stress. From an environmental/ecological viewpoint, this has been attributed to extensive land as well as water mismanagement which have been perceived to contribute to unsustainability of the land use in this region in the foreseeable future. Some of the unsustainable land use practices in this region include bad farming practices which have involved extensive deforestation. This has been aimed at clearing additional land for agriculture as well as settlement purposes with the ever inflating population in this region. The extent of deforestation in this basin is epitomized by the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (2010) who determined that the decline of river red gum forest and woodland has elevated in the Macquarie Marshes since the first recording was done in the 1990s. By 2004, up to 30% of the trees that had previously been identified as stressed in 1996 had died. By 2008, with more than 80% of the canopy dead, 40% of the river red gum communities in the marshes were in poor condition. Similar decline has in the recent past been recorded in the Murrumbidgee and Lachlan valleys. Additionally, there has been significant human manipulation of the rivers which has been attributed to the construction of dams and weirs which have culminated to the reversal of the natural flow cycles. It is also worth noting that the over allocation of water licenses for irrigation purposes has not only culminated in the straining of the water resource in this basin but has also seen the increase of human settlements and farms in this region. From an economic perspective, the inflating population and industrial activities in this region (Bhat, 2008) has seen increased strain of the environment in this basin due to the need for settlement space and the emission of harmful substances which when released to the rivers culminate to detrimental impacts on the ecosystem in the region. This insensitivity to environmental well-being in the Murray-Darling basin can be seen in the work by Costa and Forey (2000) who cited that one of the major impacts of reduced environmental sensitivity in policy making means that increasing areas of forest cover are converted to pasture and cropland. From a social point of view, the trends of land use in the Murray-Darling basin like those mentioned in the preceding section have played a key role in alienating the local populations from their ancestral land (Native Title Report, 2008). This has been credited to the setting up of industries in regions which the indigenous people have socio-cultural attachments among other economic activities. These trends are unsustainable in the long run and are bound to jeopardize the social well-being of the future indigenous populations. All the above are some of the less than sustainable features of land use in the Murray-Darling basin. Regulatory deficiencies associated with land use in the Murray-Darling basin It is imperative to be cognizant at this juncture that there have been diverse regulatory frameworks which have been instituted in the past aimed at regulating land use in the Murray-Darling basin. This is best epitomized by diverse legislative tools which control the utility and disposal of particular hazardous materials, remediation of sites which are contaminated, prohibition of oil, sewage and garbage as well as noxious substances into marine waters not only in the Murray-darling basin but also in other regions in Australia. Some of these regulating legislations include Hazardous Waste (Regulations of Exports and Imports) Act 1989, Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 and Protection of the Sea (Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Act 1983 among others (Bricknell, 2010). This has been coupled with the Murray-Darling basin plan which was released in October 2010 aimed at establishing an integrated management system for all the water resources and land use in the basin. This management entails enforceable long-term average sustainable diversion limits (SDLs), arrangements for the coordination and management of environmental water and the generic rules for water trading (Murray–Darling Basin Authority, 2010). Nonetheless, there are still some apparent regulatory deficiencies in the promotion of sustainable land use in the Murray-Darling basin. This is best epitomized whereby there is a deficiency of a regulatory framework to ensure compliance with the set policies. This fact is revealed by Bhat (2008) who determined that there is a regulatory crisis in addressing state non-compliance with the policies set by the Murray-Darling basin Committee (MDBC). In addition, there has been the issue of high turnover rates in the leadership of the MDBC. This is attributed to the fragmentation of electoral cycle in the basin states. Thus, with elections taking place at least every 12-18 months, there is usually a high turnover among the commissioners and ministers which provides a major challenge to the sustainability of leadership in there regulatory body (Bhat, 2008). However, so far there has been an inadequate regulatory framework to address this challenge. Solutions Firstly, the regulatory bodies like MDBC ought to receive increased facilitation in order to expedite their activities of addressing water and land use in this region. This will be key in instituting ideal mechanisms of solving land use challenges in this basin as well as tackling diverse challenges linked with unsustainable land use, for instance, climate change. This is founded on the realization by the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (2010) which revealed that that the climatic change will mean more extreme weather conditions including floods and drought which are likely to occur more often. Secondly, robust mechanisms ought to be instituted aimed at ensuring compliance with the set policies on land use in this basin. This is against the backdrop of extensive non-compliance with the land and water use cited by Bhat (2008). Additionally, the agencies mandated with the role of ensuring compliance ought to be adequately facilitated in order to ensure the effectiveness of their activities. The other solution is related to deliberate efforts to increase the forest cover in the Murray-Darling basin. With scholars like Costa and Forey (2000) citing the detrimental impacts of minimal environmental sensitivity in the policy making processes in terms of conversion of forests into cropland and pastures, the environmental agencies in collaboration with the government ought to engage in elevated afforestation efforts in the wetlands which will increase the economic capacity of the basin in the future due to the long-term availability of materials like timbers which will pose economic benefits to the population. Other social benefits like rubber extraction will emanate from these efforts which will also heighten the gross domestic product (GDP) of the country. Additionally, the incorporation of more environmental factors in the policy making process by the relevant agencies in regard to the mitigation of long-term erosion and reduced productivity in the Murray-Darling basin will be imperative in complying with the commonwealth legislation. On the other hand, the policy makers and the pro-environment organizations ought to instigate widespread advocacy and campaigns aimed at cautioning all the stakeholders about the impacts of their land use activities on climate change as well as short-term and long-term food security. This inference was determined by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2008) where they cited that climate change affects all the four dimensions of food security: food accessibility, food availability, food system stability and food utilization. Lastly, based on the revelation by the Native Title Report (2008) about the non-involvement of the indigenous communities in the formulation and implementation of the land use policies, feasible mechanisms ought to be instituted in order to ensure that the issues of these members of the Australian population are adequately addressed in the land use frameworks and their participation in the determination of the land use policies is considered. This will ensure that the locals exhibit ownership to the instituted policies which will be principle in ensuring the long-term sustainability of the implemented strategies and interventions in the Murray-Daring Basin. Conclusion The preceding analysis has comprehensively explored the concepts of sustainability and land use. In addition, it has given a brief background of the Murray-Darling basin which has been an example of land use in the Australian set-up. The Murray-Darling basin was chosen for the purposes of this report based on its imperative niche in ensuring sustainability of land use in Australia based on the fact that this basin entails 23 river valleys and has an extended area of over one million Km2 of the South-Eastern Australia. This report has also explored the social, economic as well as the ecological features of the Murray-Darling basin in relation to land and water use. This includes the socio-economic benefits of this basin to the Australian population as well as the ecological centrality of this basin in the Australian environmental set-up. This has been coupled with some of the land use activities which are bound to affect the socio-economic as well as the ecological features of the Murray-Darling basin. Moreover, this has also presented the less than sustainable features of land use in the Murray-Darling basin. This are related to unsustainable land use practices in this region which include bad farming practices which have involved extensive deforestation. This has been aimed at clearing additional land for agriculture as well as settlement purposes with the ever inflating population in this region. Additionally, there has been extensive human manipulation of the rivers which has been attributed to the construction of dams and weirs which have culminated to the reversal of the natural flow cycles. In the latter section of this report, the regulatory deficiencies associated with land use in the Murray-Darling basin have been investigated. These include deficiency of a regulatory framework to ensure compliance with the set policies as well as lack of regulations to address the issue of high turnover rates in the leadership of the MDBC. Lastly, this report has presented feasible and practical solutions that would assist in making land-use in the Murray-Darling basin more sustainable. These include but not limited to increased inclusion of the locals in formulation and implementation of policies, deliberate efforts by the government and other agencies to increase the forest cover in the Murray-Darling basin as well as institution of robust mechanisms aimed at ensuring compliance with the set policies on land use in this basin. References Bhat, A. (2008). The Politics of Model Maintenance: The Murray Darling and Brantas River Basins Compared. Water Alternatives 1(2): 201‐218. Bouma, J. (1997). The land use systems approach to planning sustainable land management at several scales. ITC Journal, 3(4): 237-242. Bricknell, S. (2010). Environmental crime in Australia. AIC Report, Research and Public Policy Series 109. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. Cole, D. (2008). Creative sentencing—using the sentencing provisions of the South Australian Environment Protection Act to greater community benefit. Environmental and Planning Law Journal 25(1): 25–33. Costa, MH., & Forey, JA., (2000). Combined Effects of Deforestation and Doubled Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations on the Climate of Amazonia. Journal of Climate, 13: 18-34. Commonwealth of Australia (2011). Restoring the Balance in the Murray-Darling Basin. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2008). Climate Change and Food Security: A Framework Document, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved May 09, 2013 from http://www.fao.org/forestry/15538-079b31d45081fe9c3dbc6ff34de4807e4.pdf Golubev, G. N., David, L. J. & Biswas, A. K. (1988). Sustainable Water Development: Special Issue’, Water Resources Development, 4 (2) Hain, M & Cocklin, C, (2001). The effectiveness of the courts in achieving the goals of environment protection legislation. Environmental and Planning Law Journal, 18(3): 319–338 Helfrich, LA. & Parkhurs, J. (2009). Sustaining America’s Aquatic Biodiversity Aquatic Habitats: Homes for Aquatic Animals. Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Helming, K., Pérez-Soba, M.,Tabbush, P., (2008). Sustainability Impact Assessment of Land Use Changes. Berlin: Springer. Kates, R.W, Parris, T.M, Leiserowitz, A.A, (2005). What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environmental Science and Policy Sustainable Development Journal, 47: 8-21. Koudstaal, R., Rijsberman, R. R. & Savenije, H. (1992). Water and sustainable development. Natural Resources Forum, 16(4): 277–290. Kuhlman, T. & Farrington, J. (2010). What is Sustainability?. Sustainability, 2: 3436-3448. Martin, R, (2003). Alternative sentencing in environment protection: Making the punishment fit the crime. Law Institute Journal 77(7): 32–36. Morelli, J. (2011). Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for Environmental Professionals. Journal of Environmental Sustainability, 1: 19-27. Morgan, M, Strelein, L. & Weir, J. (2006). Authority, Knowledge and Values: Indigenous Nations Engagement in the Management of Natural Resources in the Murray-Darling Basin. In M Langton, O Mazel, L Palmer, K Shain & M Tehan (eds), Settling with Indigenous Peoples: Modern treaty and agreement-making, Sydney: The Federation Press,. Murray–Darling Basin Authority (2010). Guide to the proposed Basin Plan: overview. Canberra: Murray–Darling Basin Authority,  Native Title Report (2008). Case Study 2: The Murray-Darling Basin – an ecological and human tragedy. Retrieved May 09, 2013 from https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/social_justice/nt_report/ntreport08/pdf/casestudy2.pdf Norris, R. H., Liston, P., & Davies, N. et al. (2001). Snapshot of the Murray-Darling Basin river condition: Report to the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. Canberra: Murray-Darling Basin Commission. Plate, E. J. (1993). Sustainable Development of Water Resources. Water International, 18: 84– 94. Preston Justice BJ, (2007). Principled sentencing for environmental offences–Part 2: Sentencing considerations and options. Criminal Law Journal, 31: 142–164 Raskin, P.E. & Margolis, R. (1995). Water and sustainability: A global outlook. Polestar Series Report Number 4. Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute. Strange, T.; Bayley, A. (2008). Sustainable Development. Linking Economy, Society, Environment. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Wiersum, K.F. (1995). 200 Years of Sustainability in Forestry: Lessons from History. Environmental Management, 19: 321-329. Read More