Resource Management in Asia-Pacific News

Rice and water in Australia: a debate set in a rapidly changing global context

The debate by three eminent scientists about whether growing rice in Australia is a waste of Australian water takes place in the broader global context of water scarcity and climate change. What are the details of the broader picture for Australia?

Firstly there is a severe drought affecting much of south east, particularly the Murray Darling Basin. Each week brings even more dire warnings from expert commentators about how severe the effects of the drought are for irrigated agriculture, the health of the river system and associated ecology. It is particularly alarming that, without rain, meeting urban water supply in the lower part of the Basin is uncertain beyond 2009-2010 - a very short time frame in which to plan mitigation.

The ramifications of drought significantly impact our ability to supply global and local grain markets. Many of us believe that the global economy changed irreversibly in the middle of the decade and we are witnessing a period of particularly rapid change. A number of major physical and economic forces are operating that will require significant adjustments to outlook and policy.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dr Mike Bourke has invited three eminent agricultural scientists to debate the issues of growing rice in Australia. Dr John Angus will argue that rice is not a waste of Australian water and will contest that high profitability along with the ability to change production in response to water supply, are positive factors. Disputing this position, Dr Eric Craswell will illustrate a global perspective and highlight the incongruence of rice growing under conditions of scarce water supply. He recommends Australia abandon rice production and leave it to countries with a adequate water, such as Thailand and Vietnam. Dr Barney Foran will argue that the ‘rice and water’ debate needs to be set within a consumption lifestyle frame and recommends a water policy based on analysis of ‘full life cycle’ impacts - those created by us, the consumers.

The Argument will be held on Monday 28 July 2008 at 4.30-5.30 pm in the Sparke Helmore Theatre with opportunity for discussion over refreshments that follow. Biographical data of the panel and Dr Mike Bourke, the Moderator for the Australian Rice Argument, is available on the Argument Page and comments regarding issues raised are welcomed.

This is my last in a series of posts from the 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons. The final session, a roundtable discussion on Authority, Property and Democracy, was facilitated by Ashwini Chatre and included Jesse Ribot, Andy White, Anne Larson, Melissa Leach and Elinor Ostrom as panelists.

Ribot challenged researchers to move on from discussions on the ‘tragedy of the commons’, which he said was a dead horse, to examine and better understand the dynamic, contested nature of the commons within their larger political economy. A few speakers from the floor responded that the ‘tragedy’ is very much alive and well in the minds of policymakers, leading to related policies of ‘enclosure’, and therefore could not be walked away from just yet.

Leach set out two main challenges for researchers in this field. Firstly, she saw a need to shift global and national institutions towards more deliberative and reflective governance where powerholders understand their own subjectivities. Secondly, related to the first point, we need to bring local knowledge and perspectives into debates - not in a glorified sense, but for their substance and to enable social justice. Read the rest of this entry »

Those interested in reslience and commons research may already know of the editorial by Elinor Ostrom in the May 2008 issue of Global Environmental Change. Ostrom’s keynote at the IASC Conference dinner, like this paper, argued for a need to define a set of diagnostic questions and variables to better understand multi-scale social-environmental systems and the problems these are currently facing. The GEC paper maps out a working set of variables in more detail, which her group aims to further develop through interaction with scholars across disciplines.

As someone who tends to work across disciplinary and spatial boundaries I find this a really important contribution, but also wonder how this fits with the more contextualised knowledge that my colleagues are so good at producing. I think we need both, and conversations between.

The high point of the conference dinner though was sharing a drink (or several) with my friend Floriane Clements of University of Newcastle, who had just successfully defended her PhD thesis that afternoon - Ostrom being one of the examiners. Congratulations Floriane!

Day 2 of the 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of the Commons was as busy and stimulating as the first. In the morning I followed a panel session organised by Fikret Berkes, which brought together a series of case studies and overview papers dealing with community based enterprises. Berkes’ own paper analysed the management of several community enterprises in terms of their the organisational structures and relationships. Factors affecting the resilience of these bodies in the face of turbulence and change were discussed, for instance the idea that having redudancy (more linkages than are seemingly necessary) provides these enterprises with a ‘plan B’ and a degree of resilience.

Many of the case studies presented in this panel picked up the theme of how indigenous enterprises were grappling with social sustainability issues in striving for a balance between enterprise viability, equity and community values. Read the rest of this entry »