How do we know if we are becoming more sustainable? There is increased interest in sustainability indicators in Australia (Hamblin, 1992) Over the coming decades, as growers and supporters seek sustainability, the immediate need is a means to monitor progress and obtain clear feedback to see if changes in practices or materials used on the farm are contributing to increasing economic, social and environmental sustainability. Sustainability indicators or performance standards were presented as useful tools. Indicators are firstly "quantifiable" observations or measurements to monitor change. They are most useful when they are simple, easily seen, and
"farmer-friendly" so that anyone can monitor on their own farm. They cane be used to improve the producers' capacity to self-monitor management practices and have on-farm early warning systems for detection of environmental deterioration, productivity loss, and progress toward increasing sustainability. In addition to the feedback/control function, indicators can also be useful to predict critical thresholds, particularly where irreversible degradation may occur. These sorts of'leading'
Keeping It Sweet - ACF indicators are most useful to assist prediction. Indicators reflect the natural resource base, our domesticated plants and animals and our human management of both, but can rarely accurately reflect past degradation. They are also useful as aggregated statistics to evaluate performance in a region or industry and point out areas of achievement and areas where increased attention is needed. Indicators can also be constructed to allow for ranking within industries or regions to establish key indicators. These are the most useful, preemptory, or widely representative indicators that can be used to compare progress between industries, in say, erosion control. T h e use of such an iterative feedback mechanism allows tracking of moving targets like sustainability. allows different conditions to be accommodated, and re empowers local communities through their involvement.
This involvement is essential for newly developing tools like sustainability indicators, in a sense, this is new science and is only slowly being developed. The role of practical agriculturalists will remain important as these tools are developed and applied.
Focus groups were asked to consider a number of strong themes emerging from the scenarios, generally following the previous topic format of farmland, fertility management, etc. For each topic, they were asked what measurement, observations, trends, or changes would .be useful to monitor the achievement of the scenario objectives in that topic starting from the current situation as described in Phase I. They were also advised that while current types of sustainability indicators are more often environmental (monitoring the environmental impact of farm practices) there is further potential for developing and using social, psychological, and economic indicators, although often decreasing ability to quantify. In all cases, indicators were sought that were accessible and as topic/practice specific as possible so that clear linkage would be established between action and indicator. Indicators are listed in order of frequency mentioned across the groups.
ACTION GOAL Farmland Erosion controlled
Vertical expansion
Socially Responsible Resource Management
Farming Operations Increased soil health
Decreased compaction
Suitable equipment
SUSTAINABILITY INDICATOR Environmental -Amount silt deposited -Runoff water colour -Amount visible row rills/gullies
-Extent of streambank erosion -Depth of topsoil -Tonnes sugar/ha - # irrigated ha
-Amount wildlife habitat
-Soil texture/friability -Microbial population levels -Weight of root/plant -Rate of growth/uniformity -% area as fallow -ratoon life span
-Type of fallow (green manure vs. bare)
-Moisture holding capacity -Soil depth
-Water infiltration rate -Ease of working or less HP required
-Amount of runoff per amount of water
-Porosity or bulk density -Extent/depth of roots -Equipment tyre pressure needed
-# green capable harvesters -Equipment meets environmental needs and constraints
Economic
-Net$
income/tonne -Taxable income/tonne -Harvesting cost/ha -Net $ income/ha
-Amount of input replacement -Net return at the same yield
-Reduced tillage cost
-Sales of suitable equipment -Cost efficiency -Energy efficiency
Social
-Area surveyed for conservation structures
-Amount positive community feedback
-Diversity of products from sugar
-Employment level in region -Lifestyle quality
-Lack of negative media criticism
-Level of Landcare involvement -Attitude of growers -Amount of government intervention
-Amount of soil testing and interpretation
-Amount of wet weather harvesting ordered by mills
-Labor time needed per ha or tonne
-Meets the needs
Keeping It Sweet - ACF
Fertility Management Transition from synthetic to biological and mineral' approaches
Improved Water Management Efficient Irrigation
Increased water supply Improved drainage
Environmental -Level of soil life -Ratio of syn/bio-min types used -Amount of off-site impacts
-% area in bare fallow -Yield, nutritional content of plants
-Amount irrigation tailwater recovered -Degree of water penetration -Growth of soda patches
-Crop variability over time
-Area irrigated -Amount water stored- available
-Amount of paddock ponding
-Amount of equipment bogging
-Time to return to paddock after wet -Amount of waterlogging stress- cane health -Amount of N lost (denitrifi cation) -Amount of erosion -Amount of water recovery (on farm dams)
Economic -Amount synthetics purchased per unit output -Yield maintained at less cost
-Synthetics cost
-Tonnes/megaliter applied -Net $/megaliter applied -Amount applied per gross dollar
-Labor cost
-Tonnes/ha
-Sales of gum boots
Social
-Irrigation frequency -Uniformity of income over time
-Stability of water availability -# drainage schemes in place
- # farm plans in place -Area leveled for field drainage
-Long term consistency in yield & growth
Increased water retention
Improved Water Management Reduced water contamination
Pest-Disease Management Implementati on of IPM
Breeding for pest/disease control
Economic Success
-Evidence of ground water recharge (bore levels over pumping time)
-Interval between irrigations (vs. evapo- transpiration) -Ability to maintain stream flows-wildlife -Soil condition (at tillage) -Amount drought die- off of ratoons Environmental
-Lab testing of on-farm samples
-Evidence of nutrient loss (algae in dams, drain grasses) -Presence of wildlife, including in farm dams -Amount stream bank erosion
-Salt indicator plants/bore tests -Amount of stream bank revegetation -Stream-dams clear of silt
-Yield success
-Varieties available to prevent loss -Amount of chemical controls used -Length of ratoons
Economic
-Increased return from fertiliser used
-Amount of chemical controls used per unit production -Amount of pest-disease loss
-$ and work needed for economic control -$ amount and work needed for economic control -Degree of loss
-Amount of water storage in area
-Amount area contoured -Amount area with reduced row slopes
Social
-Amount of negative media coverage
-Amount of pest monitoring -Number of alternative controls available -Positive community support -# varieties available (resistant, green capable) -Breeding criteria according to growers needs
Keeping It Sweet - ACF
-A stable, viable income
Economic Success Psychological Health
-Degree of implementation of sustainable practices -Improved equipment available
Environmental -Level of Adoption of sustainable practices -Community prosperity
-Farm value, total district wealth
-Value of farm serviceable loans
-Consistent, stable, average level net income over time -Level of marginal rate of return
-Lower break-even point to profit margin
Economic -Amount of personal drawings-net profit -Farm price
-# Family farms-young farmers
-Confidence of community (employment, growth, % flow on, stability)
-# of services available (town)
-# options for diversification -# different products from sugar cane
-Amount of financial advice used -# small communities -Improvement in equipment -Stable lifestyle maintained Social -Amount of leisure- family time -Amount of positive community feedback -Amount of young people employed in area -Level of stress induced illness, job satisfaction, confidence and self esteem
-Occurrence of suicide- depression and family break-up
-Level of outside cooperation -Stability of farm size mix
-Willingness to cooperate
Transfer the skills of cane farming
Institutional
| Environment Increased representation to and accountability from institutions
Effective research and extension
- # Farm plans done -Level of innovation and adoption of sustainable practices
-Farm efficiency -Farm production maintained
-Cost effectiveness of results
-Least cost effectiveness of results
-# staff jobs retained in community -Degree levy income is based in grower income
- # Training schemes offered
-Farmers' average age - # Farm youth staying in farming
-Level of farmer skill -# Pest control applicator licenses
-Extent of recognition of farmer skill
-Level of confidence in information-decisions -Correct, consistent policies from government -# of growers involved in representation -# advisory information reports available to growers
-Level of communication -Amount of intervention by institutions -Amount of grower control (prompt, local decision making) - # on-farm trials -Level of R & D adoption - # new farmers involved -Level of farmer interest in research and demonstration -Amount of information based on local conditions -Accessibility of information (versus secret data)
-Extent of communication among growers
-Level of farmer satisfaction with service
Keeping It Sweet - ACF Discussion
F a r m l a n d In managing the farmland base for cane growing in Mackay, the scenarios pointed out three major areas for activity in increasing sustainability. controlling erosion, vertical expansion and acceptance of a wider social responsibility in the husbandry of the coastal plain. For erosion control, a number of easily observed indicators emerged, including some that would detect low erosion losses that might not be directly visible in the paddock such as off-site silt deposits and run- off water colour, Top soil depth would be a useful indicator only in a single variable, controlled condition situation. The two social indicators would be useful, although the second is difficult to quantify or collect.
Vertical expansion is seen as the primary route to improving income in an area of marginal horizontal expansion potential. The results are skewed to the extent that participants were existing growers with, generally, no opportunity to occupy new lands economically. Two strategies are included, producing more cane from the same area and generating more dollars from the same amount of raw sugar. Participants were keenly aware that it is the net result that is important and that larger crops or income must include consideration of additional costs in inputs or operations.
All are clearly measurable except lifestyle quality and some will need controlled trials to eliminate other variables. Horizontal expansion is easily monitored by number of hectares in production or amount of land clearing for cane but this was seen as a minor element in managing farmland for increased economic sustainability.
To monitor increased social responsibility in managing their resources, participants saw the primary indicator being the lack of negative criticism in the media. Given the nature of people, they saw little hope for positive feedback but would welcome both as an indication of achievement in this arena. All appear reasonably measurable, except perhaps grower attitude, which might be reflected in feedback. If Mackay cane farming is socially responsible there should be less need for outside intervention like banning trash burning or regulating inputs.
F a r m i n g O p e r a t i o n s In the actual operations on the farms, participants addressed two major themes emerging from the scenarios: increased attention to soil health and decreasing compaction to solve a number of problems and increase sustainability. A minor point was the suitability of equipment. Increased soil health has a number of fairly clear and farmer-friendly indicators to use.
Soil testing and microbial monitoring may require laboratory assistance but most farmers know when the soil "smells right" even if they can't articulate this into a measurable indicator. The economic indicators imply that when soil life systems are up and running, increased soil health should reduce the need for inputs, especially fertilisers.
While compaction was previously not thought to be a major constraint in the district, once participants comprehended the system and the impact of compaction on nutrient conservation, soil life, erosion, water retention, and ratoon growth; it emerged as a central issue in the shift toward more sustainable farming operations. They also clearly recognised the role of other segments of the industry such as mills. All indicators appear measurable on the farm, with a bit of help. Having suitable equipment is evidence of having both the economic sustainability to purchase and the ability to utilise the equipment in practices that contribute to sustainability, such as fertiliser application equipment suited to below ground placement in heavy trash blankets.
suggested a substantial shift in fertility management. They recognised that the transition to alternative biological and mineral strategies needed to be carefully phased in with minimum disturbance to yield and economic sustainability and that some new approaches would need a lot of research and development over the coming decades. The assumption inherent in the economic indicators is that the new approach will be more cost effective, ardifferent attribute to predict. An interesting position was that as growers move away from synthetic fertilisers, less demand and competition may actually reduce their costs, all else being equal.
Improved Water Management. In managing water, several important themes emerged from the scenarios. Increasing total supply of irrigation water was seen as assisting both economic and environmental sustainability. By increasing drainage to cope with wet times participants recognised the need to link drainage with irrigation development to allow maintenance of soil and plant health.
Conversely, water retention in dry times to resist drought and increase irrigation efficiency emerged as a more useful approach than first seen in the survey.
Increased water availability is easily measured but yield indicators will need to exclude other variables. Interestingly, the psycho-social security aspect of water availability appeared important, though admittedly difficult to quantify. Net economic gain per unit of irrigation water, taking into account costs, might also be useful as an economic indicator.
Increased drainage should be easily visible on the farm. Cane health was articulated as monitored by colour, vigor, uniformity and variability over the years. Most of the indicators for progress in achieving increased drainage are easily measured. "Sales of gum boots" is perhaps not to be seriously considered. Again, the element of predictability in performance emerges as an important psychological indicator, allowing planned development, infra-structure investment and peace of mind as consistent production is realised from improved drainage and other changes. Achieving water retention would include the use of some indicator above: amount of erosion, water recovery, yield stability, and number of farm plans are linked to keeping water where it falls. All appear fairly specific, though obviously linked to compaction, and quantifiable, except perhaps soil condition.
Reduced water contamination mainly addresses some off-site concerns and a number of measurable indicators that will assist monitoring of progress in solving known and potential environmental impacts. Unfortunately, few participants saw the economic value to them or economic indicators of successful water quality maintenance beyond retained nutrients. This may be the fault of economic models that cannot discriminate or include water quality in a dollar sense. Certainly coastal irrigators now pumping sea water know the costs of poor water quality, as do fishermen and the town of Mackay. Irrigation efficiency appears best monitored from an economic perspective but includes some environmental indicators. Some earlier indicators more useful in high rainfall periods (under improved drainage) may apply here as well.
Pest-Disease Management The scenarios suggested a number of sustainable practices, summarised as a transition to IPM (Integrated Pest Management), using cultural, biological, mechanical, system redesign, chemical, and breeding approaches. Indicators pertain to cost and time to contain damage below economic thresholds. The most measurable indicators will be the relative use of the approaches above. Yield success is hardly specific top pest-disease management alone, Positive support will be hard to measure. There was an underlying feeling that IPM will be cheaper than chemical controls- a difficult prediction to make, especially as the community sees
Keeping It Sweet - ACF
cane farming continuing as a monoculture. The importance of choices to the grower is clear and is linked to accountability of research and extension organisations.
Economic Success In achieving economic success in sustainable cane farming, participants saw no need to be greedy, just to have a fair return on investment and labor coming in on a stable and predictable basis. The scenarios suggest a number of approaches to be used that reduce costs, increase returns, or both. The indicators listed are obviously, primarily economic but include a significant set of social indicators of economic success; most being measurable within the community. Clearly, economic success requires sustainable practices on the ground by a confident community of knowledgeable farmers with the essential tools at hand.
Social Sustainability In achieving social sustainability, a number of concerns evident from the survey and scenarios were addressed. The largely social indicators become increasingly difficult to measure compared to clearer environmental and economic indicators since psychological health is primarily perceived from within the individual. For effectively transferring the great skills of farming cane, the "culture of agriculture", we have a few more quantifiable and goal specific indicators. These apply both to exchange between existing farmers and the training of new farmers and as indicated in the scenario are largely farm based. Note how the implementation and adoption of sustainable practices is linked to achieving psychological health and continuing a competent community of farmers in the community.
Institutional Environment Clearly; the service, costs, effectiveness and amount of intervention of the institutions surrounding cane farmers will affect their progress towards sustainability. One argument can be made that until the institutions around cane growing embrace sustainability as a guiding principle it will be difficult for the community and growers to do so. Some institutions are grower based, some government, some distant in accessibility and response. Growers want more communication both ways and service they can trust. In keeping with their view that most environmental concerns are best left to their on-site implementation, institutions remain advisory or facilitative. Indicators of progress are difficult to quantify for representation and accountability but clearer for monitoring effectiveness of research and extension for achieving increased
sustainability. Growers especially see the need to watch carefully to ensure research and demonstration activities become much closer to their farm and needs.
11.1 Cooperating to grow cane sustainably
After receiving and reviewing the mission statements, focus group scenarios and composite scenarios to develop consensus, in late May to early June 1993 the focus groups met again with the consultant for the final phase of the project. On the basis of the work of the previous phases, the groups were asked to consider what was needed to be done, by whom, to create a sustainable future cane industry. They were also asked to consider what measurement, observations, trends, or changes would be useful to monitor progress toward the achievement of the scenario objectives.
Several assumptions based on the work to date, were presented for the purposes of the final focus group exercises:
1. We will be growing cane sustainably;
2. Technical barriers will be overcome; and
The first assumption reflects the growers' views of limited scope for diversity through alternate crops, but also supports the position that cane farming might not survive at all without conscious re-direction, suggesting that simply still growing cane in 50 years will be long term evidence of movement toward sustainability.
The second assumption implies that it is not the technical problems that will constrain increasing sustainability in the short and mid-term. History demonstrates that farmers, researchers and extension agents are excellent innovators possessing considerable ability to collectively solve technical problems. While clearly technical solutions, such as integrated pest management require resourcing, this second assumption provided scope to consider whether significant support or constraints to sustainability occurs within non-technical arenas such as, industry planning and regulatory structures, research, extension and education institutions, and the arenas of political and economic management.
The third assumption implies a cooperative approach quite different to the present "us and them"
dichotomy of farmers/greenies, farmers/extension, local/federal, etc. It assumes mutual support for farmers in progressing toward sustainability, implying that everyone will be working on getting their own house in order, in contrast to past tendencies to hand pass responsibility eg. "cane farmers aren't polluting the reef, urban sewage plants are to blame". As ESD embraces a total and broad agenda all segments of society need to direct their efforts to such goals. Therefore, it would be fruitless to have a sustainable agriculture serving unsustainable urban consumptive lifestyles.
11.2 Sustainability Indicators - a discussion
How do we know if we are becoming more sustainable? There is increased interest in sustainability indicators in Australia (Hamblin, 1992). Over the coming decades, as primary industries pursue sustainability goals, means of monitoring progress and obtaining feedback are necessary.
Monitoring is necessary to see if changes in practices or materials used on farms are advancing or retarding progress toward sustainability.
Sustainability indicators or performance standards were defined to focus group participants as
"useful tools". Indicators are firstly "quantifiable" observations or measurements to monitor change. They are most useful when they are simple, easily seen, and "farmer-friendly" so that anyone can monitor on their own farm. They can be used to improve the producers' capacity to self- monitor management practices and have on-farm early warning systems for detection of environmental deterioration, productivity loss, and progress toward increasing sustainability. In addition to the feedback/control function, indicators can also be useful to predict critical thresholds, particularly where irreversible degradation may occur. These sorts of 'leading' indicators are most useful to assist prediction. Indicators reflect the natural resource base, our domesticated plants and animals and our human management of both, but can rarely accurately reflect past degradation.
They are also useful as aggregated statistics to evaluate performance in a region or industry and point out areas of achievement and areas where increased attention is needed.
State of the environment reporting using indicator systems can also be adopted to allow for ranking within industries or regions to establish key relevant indicators. These are the most useful, pre- emptory, or widely representative indicators that can be used to compare progress between industries, in say, erosion control. The use of such an iterative feedback mechanism allows tracking of moving targets like sustainability, allows different conditions to be accommodated, and re