Introduction

1. The National Reserve System (NRS) is Australia’s terrestrial network of protected areas. The Australian Government’s aim in supporting the NRS is to secure the long-term protection of a representative sample of Australia’s bioregions and the plants and animals they support. The NRS is made up of national parks, Indigenous lands and reserves established and managed in perpetuity through partnerships between the Australian Government; state, territory and local governments; Indigenous and private landholders and non-government organisations.

2. The NRS is one of the six priority areas of the Australian Government’s $2.25 billion Caring for our Country (2008–13) initiative (CfoC). The goal of CfoC is to achieve an environment that is healthier, better protected, well managed, resilient, and provides essential ecosystems in a changing climate. Expanding the NRS is a key element of this policy aim, with the objective of increasing the size of the NRS by 25 million hectares, or 25 per cent, by 2013.

3. Various mechanisms exist for incorporating areas into the NRS, including outright purchase of properties by governments and other organisations as well as the development of covenants, incentives, contracts and conservation agreements with individuals and conservation and philanthropic groups. Australia’s Strategy for Australia’s National Reserve System 2009–2030 (the Strategy) describes the direction, strategic approach and priorities for the expansion and effective management of the system of protected areas to meet NRS and relevant international conservation goals and standards.

4. The achievement of the objective to expand the NRS requires the progressive extension of protection to Australia’s 85 bioregions in sufficient size, variety and density to provide ecological viability. An analysis of the composition of the NRS in 1994 identified that unrepresented and under-represented bioregions were largely Indigenous owned. As the purchase of Indigenous land was no longer legally possible , efforts were made by the Australian Government to develop a mechanism that would enable the inclusion of this land in the NRS while at the same time recognising and maintaining its status as Indigenous owned and managed.

5. The Indigenous Protected Areas (IPA) program was implemented in 1997 as a vehicle to support Indigenous land management and to increase the size of the NRS and improve its comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness. Similar to other contributing partners to the NRS, Indigenous communities commit to manage their land in perpetuity to maintain biological diversity according to one or more of the six internationally recognised land management categories defined by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Unlike other contributors to the NRS, Indigenous communities provide this commitment through a voluntary, rather than a statutory agreement, with the Australian Government. This commitment is made through a Plan of Management developed by the community for their land and endorsed by Traditional Owners. As at June 2008, the IPA program had contributed 20.5 million hectares—more than half the contribution to the NRS in this period.

6. The development of the CfoC initiative in 2008 led the Australian Government to increase funding for the IPA program. An additional $50 million was provided to enable the inclusion of between eight and 16 million hectares of Indigenous land into the NRS, and the use and reinvigoration of traditional ecological knowledge to support biodiversity conservation in newly initiated IPA projects.

7. The CfoC initiative is jointly managed by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC) and Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF ). While the CfoC initiative is jointly managed by SEWPaC and DAFF, the IPA Program is specifically managed by Parks Australia within SEWPaC.

8. The IPA program operates in two ways. Firstly it operates as a mechanism to draw land into the NRS, and secondly as a land management mechanism. Indigenous protected areas are drawn into the NRS when Indigenous landowners voluntarily declare their intent to manage their land in perpetuity, in accordance with local traditional lore and culture, and consistent with the national and international conservation guidelines of the NRS. The IPA program provides grants to interested groups, whose land meets prescribed NRS priorities, to undertake a community-led engagement process. This process enables communities to consider, at their own pace, the merits of declaring their land as a protected area.

9. Prior to the declaration of land as a protected area, a detailed Plan of Management for the area is developed during the consultation or land planning phase of the program. The development of this plan is supported by IPA program grants. The Plan of Management establishes the governance arrangements, including the identification of Traditional Owners and their custodial links to the land, and cultural and other principles that guide decision-making. The plan also identifies and describes which one, or more, of the six International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Protected Area Management Categories best describes the land management approach of the particular protected area. This categorisation provides consistency in the classification and management of all protected areas nationally and internationally.

10. The IPA program currently operates as a grants program. Grants are provided to Indigenous landowners who wish to be involved, and who can demonstrate how the inclusion of their land will contribute to the comprehensiveness, adequacy and representativeness of the NRS. Grants are provided initially to support Indigenous landowners to consult with their communities about whether they wish to declare their land as a protected area, and what the potential benefits of this may be. The acceptance of a grant at the consultation phase of the program does not obligate Indigenous landowners to declare their land as a protected area. At this point it is open for communities to walk away from the program if they wish to.

11. The IPA program does not apply a predetermined schedule for movement from the consultation to the declaration phase of the program. Over time, however, the consultation phase for all IPA projects has generally been between three and four years. If the community decides to declare their land as a protected area, IPA program grants are provided to support ongoing land management activities and refinement of the Plan of Management. The declaration of a protected area is formally acknowledged by the Federal Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. Property details are recorded by the Environmental Resources Information Network (ERIN) unit of SEWPaC and registered on the Collaborative Australian Protected Area Database (CAPAD).

Audit objective, scope and criteria

12. The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of SEWPaC’s management of the IPA program in relation to the two primary targets of the IPA program under the Caring for our Country initiative (2008–13) which are to:

• expand the contribution of the IPA program to the NRS by between eight and 16 million hectares (an increase of at least 40 per cent), of which 1.8 million hectares are to be in northern and remote Australia; and
• ensure the continued use, support and reinvigoration of traditional ecological knowledge to underpin biodiversity conservation in the Plans of Management of 32 newly initiated projects.

13. The audit criteria focussed on: the effectiveness of the department’s program management arrangements; the department’s strategy for engagement with Indigenous landowners; and the department’s management of funding arrangements between the department and Indigenous landowners.

14. The ANAO also considered the management of the IPA program from the broader perspective of the program being an example of ways in which government can flexibly engage with Indigenous communities using existing grant programs. Effective engagement with Indigenous communities is increasingly emphasised by governments as being central to the effective implementation of programs to achieve objectives.

Overall conclusion

15. The National Reserve System (NRS) has grown to encompass 102 million hectares since 1992. Within this growth, SEWPaC’s ongoing management of the Indigenous Protected Area (IPA) program has contributed 25.9 million hectares of bioregionally significant land to the NRS through the declaration of Indigenous owned land as protected areas. In addition, through the development of Plans of Management, the department is contributing to the second program objective of supporting the use and reinvigoration of traditional ecological knowledge.

16. Since 2008, the annualised Caring for our Country (CfoC) target for the IPA program of the addition of two million hectares to the NRS has been exceeded in two of the three program years as indicated below:

• 330 296 hectares in 2008–09 (six IPA declaration projects);
• 2.7 million hectares in 2009–10 (eight IPA declaration projects); and
• 2.4 million hectares in 2010–11 (five IPA declaration projects).

Accordingly, against the overall targeted increase of between eight and 16 million hectares in the period 2008–13, some 5.4 million hectares have been added in the period up to June 2011.

17. As at June 2011, there were 38 IPA projects in the consultation phase of the program which could provide further additions of land to the NRS. These 38 projects cover a combined area of approximately 60.6 million hectares. The historical performance of the program indicates that most IPA consultation projects move to the declaration phase, and the average time taken to achieve this is between three and four years. No declaration, or its timing, is certain, and the size of individual consultation projects and the area nominated for declaration varies widely. However, if the current pattern of movement is maintained, SEWPaC is likely to exceed the primary CfoC outcome of expanding Indigenous protected areas by between eight and 16 million hectares by 2013.

18. The second primary CfoC target to include traditional ecological knowledge in 32 Plans of Management for newly initiated IPA projects by 2013 is behind schedule. In the three years to June 2011, nineteen new IPA projects had Plans of Management using traditional ecological knowledge approved against a target of 32 newly initiated projects over four years. The approval of an additional 13 Plans of Management in newly initiated projects is required by June 2012 if this target is to be achieved. The consequence of a shortfall in meeting this target has no immediate impact on the primary program target to increase the size of the NRS, as the approval of a Plan of Management is not predictive of the area of Indigenous owned land contributed as a protected area. However, as the approval of a Plan of Management is a critical trigger for the declaration of land as a protected area, the target remains an important priority set by the department to increase the number of newly initiated IPA projects.

19. Overall, SEWPaC’s administration of the IPA program has been effective in achieving increases in land contributed to the NRS. A key aspect of this effectiveness has been the engagement with Indigenous landowners, which is essential for the achievement of the IPA program targets, in particular the growth in the size of the NRS. SEWPaC’s alignment of program targets with broader national environmental objectives has resulted in the development of a targeted and clearly defined grants assessment process. Tailored program material and support from SEWPaC staff has facilitated Indigenous communities’ compliance with prescribed grant reporting and acquittal processes.

20. The IPA program, however, faces a strategic challenge. Although the program runs to 2013, all funds are already committed and no further funding is available for new consultation projects beyond those already in the consultation phase of the program. Further growth therefore can only come from projects already in progress. More broadly, Indigenous protected areas are declared in perpetuity and, under the current model, their retention in the NRS requires ongoing management activities which are currently funded by the Australian Government through the IPA program. IPA grant allocation post 2013 is uncertain, and SEWPaC has yet to address the question as to how the investments made to date in Indigenous communities will be sustained. In these circumstances, and to promote the sustainability of investments already made, it would be timely for the department to begin to develop options for future funding, including options that would reduce, over time, the dependence of declared IPA projects on Australian Government funding.

21. For most of its history, the IPA program has been managed as a conservation program that involves Indigenous people rather than as an Indigenous-specific program targeted at the social, economic or cultural development of Indigenous Australians. The development, in 2008, of the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Closing the Gap strategy provides an opportunity for the department to give greater consideration to the contribution the IPA program could make to the government’s policy goals in Indigenous affairs.

Key findings

Program Management

22. SEWPaC has aligned its activities under the IPA program with the broader objectives of the Australian Government in relation to the NRS. To achieve the goal of a comprehensive, adequate and representative NRS, all IPA program grant applications are prioritised against the strategic framework of the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA). The IBRA identifies 85 distinct bioregions nationally, with each bioregion being a large, geographically distinct area of similar climate, geology, landform, vegetation and animal communities. To ensure that Australia progressively extends protection to examples of all Australian bioregions, all IPA projects, in the first instance must demonstrate their contribution to the values of the NRS through an assessment of the IBRA bioregion/s in which it is located.

23. International consistency and compliance in the management of protected areas is facilitated through a Plan of Management that identifies one or more of the six IUCN Protected Area Management Categories under which the area is declared. The application of the IUCN Protected Area Management Categories creates a common understanding of protected areas, and the way in which areas in each category are managed, within Australia and internationally. SEWPaC’s management of the IPA program has, to date, facilitated the expansion of the NRS through the IPA program, consistent with national criteria and international management standards, and has positioned the department to meet the outcomes set by government for the program for the period to 2013.

24. SEWPaC’s monitoring and reporting against targets for the IPA program has focussed on the two primary outcomes of CfoC. However, through the progressive implementation of Cybertracker, a computer linked data gathering system, SEWPaC anticipates an increased capacity to report on the environmental impact of land management activities of IPA projects. In addition, SEWPaC has commenced work to gather evidence attributing socio-economic benefits to Indigenous communities engaged in land management activities on their country. The development of data collection strategies to formally capture this information will assist SEWPaC to make stronger linkages between the IPA program and contributions to the broader Australian Government initiative to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage.

25. The rapid expansion of the IPA program made possible by the increased funding under CfoC has resulted in significant growth in the number of declared Indigenous protected areas, as well as consultation projects that are likely to progress to declaration. Indigenous protected areas are declared in perpetuity and the maintenance costs to preserve Australia’s biodiversity under the NRS are an important financial consideration. IPA program grants facilitate the maintenance of Indigenous protected areas consistent with national and international criteria. Without access to ongoing funding there is a strong risk that the management of these areas may not meet the criteria to maintain inclusion in the NRS. This emphasises the importance of the department working with IPA project communities, and providing advice to government, on the development of strategies that support the maintenance of Indigenous protected areas.

Program Performance

26. Against the overall targeted increase of between eight and 16 million hectares in the period 2008–2013, some 5.4 million hectares had been added to the NRS through the declaration of Indigenous land as protected areas by July 2011. This is less than the annualised target of two million hectares per year, or six million hectares over the first three years of the CfoC. However, if the 38 projects in the consultation phase of the program move to declaration within the established program timeframe, several declarations of land as protected areas are likely in 2011–12 and 2012–13, in which case it is likely that the targeted increase in the size of the NRS will be met. Within the program expansion target, the target to include 1.8 million hectares in northern and remote Australia was met in 2009–10. To achieve the four-year target of the use of traditional ecological knowledge in the Plans of Management of 32 newly initiated IPA projects over four years, the approval of an additional 13 Plans of Management is necessary prior to June 2012.

27. Although the program is currently behind its overall targets, the growth in the number of consultation projects indicates a strong potential trajectory of growth overall. With the increased funding under the CfoC initiative, the intake of new consultation projects almost doubled from nine new projects in 2007, to 16 in 2008, followed by sustained growth of 14 in 2009 and 15 in 2010. The large number of potential declaration projects indicated by the growth in the number of consultation projects, positions the department well to achieve the outcomes of CfoC to 2013.

28. However, the growth in numbers at the consultation phase of the program also indicates a likely substantial demand for the funding of the land management activities at the declaration phase. Historically, all IPA projects have received grants, with some projects receiving grants for more than ten years. Progressively, the demand for funds at the land management or declaration phase of the program will reduce the number of grants available for consultation projects which have the capacity to draw land into the NRS. Of the 2010–11 IPA program grants, approximately 40 per cent were allocated to consultation projects and approximately 60 per cent to declaration projects.

29. The future and ongoing challenge for the IPA program is to be able to identify and fund consultation projects that progress to declaration as protected areas, as well as to identify strategies to support work on declared Indigenous protected areas to ensure the maintenance of national and international land management standards within the NRS.

Community Engagement and Support

30. The term country is often used by Indigenous Australians to describe family origins and associations with particular areas of Australia. The IPA Program engages with Indigenous Australians through this strong traditional and cultural relationship with the land, and provides a strategy that supports their customary responsibility to take care of country while delivering land management services for the Australian Government. Taking advantage of this shared interest represents one policy model of co-production. Models of co-production have multiple design characteristics, but central to all models is the engagement and involvement of those community groups who are best placed to act on or address a particular issue or deliver a particular service. Importantly, models of co-production ‘tend to be more successful where there is an equal relationship…and where both parties stand to gain from the outcome’ . This approach to engagement is reflected in the original design and access approach of the IPA program.

31. Since the establishment of the IPA program, Indigenous landowners have become the single largest contributor of land to the NRS. The contribution of this land is, in part, a result of SEWPaC’s capacity to effectively engage with Indigenous landowners to support their customary responsibility to care for their country consistent with national and international guidelines. SEWPaC’s initial engagement strategy of referral and endorsement by Indigenous and/or environmental advocates engendered interest and facilitated access to the program by interested landowners. The public promotion of the program and increased funding under CfoC capitalised on the growing interest in the program and resulted in an almost doubling of IPA projects, most of which have the capacity to add land to the NRS.

32. SEWPaC’s engagement with Indigenous landowners is supported by a flexible approach to program management, and supports IPA project communities to build capacity by identifying and facilitating access to professional networks, resources and training. In addition to ongoing assistance to individual project communities and sponsorship of a number of environmental conferences at which IPA project communities attend and make presentations, SEWPaC funds and hosts the annual IPA Managers’ Meeting. These strategies have developed a cohort of IPA project peers, and established awareness of IPA project communities and their role within the broader environmental network.

33. Effective engagement with the Indigenous community is, in part, reliant on government agencies having access to and acting on guidance from specialist advisors. SEWPaC has ensured that the IPA sub-committee of the Indigenous Advisory Committee (IAC) has an active advisory role in guiding the development of the program, and providing specialist input to the assessment of program grants. This has enabled the committee to work effectively with the department and intervene as necessary to ensure program engagement, access and management strategies remain appropriate for Indigenous communities.

IPA Program Grants Management

34. Grant programs involving Australian Government funding necessarily require procedures in place for recipients to effectively acquit funds received and report on results achieved through the use of the grant funds. Government agencies can support recipients manage these requirements by ensuring that administrative processes are commensurate with the size and nature of the grant, reporting guidelines and formats are concise and clearly aligned with the activities for which the grant was allocated, and by providing assistance, as necessary, to ensure recipients are able to comply with grant requirements. This support is particularly important in the context of providing grants to community organisations in remote areas.

35. SEWPaC has aligned the IPA program grant application and assessment process with the broader intended objective of the CfoC initiative to increase the size of the NRS, and has also tailored the grant application process to facilitate access by Indigenous communities. Through the use of head agreements, multi year funding, and support for reporting and acquittal processes, SEWPaC has sought to minimise the administrative burden on grant recipients.

36. SEWPaC’s approach to monitoring individual IPA grant projects relies mainly on the grant acquittal and reporting arrangements contained in the grant agreements with participants. The department’s approval of multi-year grants with payments made biannually on receipt of a progress report and an annual report provides an effective risk management strategy, while limiting the administrative burden on Indigenous communities. Additionally, ongoing contact and site visits by SEWPaC staff to project communities facilitates the early identification, and action to address, any potential or actual reporting and acquittal issues.

Summary of agency response

37. A summary of SEWPaC’s response to the report, dated 4 November 2011, is reproduced below. SEWPaC’s full response is at Appendix 1.

The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities welcomes the ANAO audit into the Indigenous Protected Area program, and particularly notes the report’s findings that the program has been very successful in bringing Indigenous land into the National Reserve System through its effective model of consultative engagement with Indigenous landowners. SEWPaC notes that the report highlights the need for IPAs to have access to ongoing funding to support their management as protected areas, and emphasises the importance of the Department working with IPA project communities and providing advice to government on the development of strategies that support the maintenance of Indigenous Protected Areas. In this context, SEWPaC supports the report’s recommendation that the Department develop options for future funding including options that would reduce over time the dependence of IPAs on Australian Government funding. The Department is continuing to work with private sector partners and across governments to develop approaches and maximise opportunities to broaden the base of support for ongoing sustainable management of Indigenous Protected Areas. SEWPaC notes the audit findings in relation to the potential linkages between the IPA program and contributions to the broader Australian Government initiative to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage, and is continuing work to reinforce the contribution made by IPA program outcome to closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage.