Construction is now underway at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-townhouses/cumulus-grand-villas-carrara-17-baltimore-court-carrara-qld-4211">Cumulus Grand Villas</a> in Carrara, with all stages fully funded as <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/venturecrowd-property-projects">VentureCrowd</a> progresses its 59-residence gated community on an elevated ridgeline overlooking 100 hectares of natural savanna.

The commencement marks a key milestone for the Gold Coast project, designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/bda-architecture">BDA Architecture</a> and being delivered by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/devcon">Devcon Property Group</a>, at a time when buyers are placing greater emphasis on delivery certainty and builder track record.

With Devcon active in South East Queensland since 1993 and having delivered more than 1,000 homes, the team is positioning Cumulus as a fully financed, under-construction offering in a market where risk mitigation has become a central consideration for off-the-plan purchasers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135663 project_image_fid=360496]

Located at 17 Baltimore Court, Cumulus Grand Villas comprises 59 three- and four-bedroom villas across four collections, Skyline, Canopy, Savanna and Broadview. Pricing starts from $1,455,000, with completion of the first stage targeted for Q4 2026.

Across the four collections, each design represents an expansive and thoughtfully considered offering. The Broadview provides additional flexibility within its floorplan, incorporating a multipurpose room or optional additional bedroom, and is priced from $1,895,000.&nbsp;

Configured across two levels, the four-bedroom villas feature two master bedrooms with private ensuites, as well as a multipurpose room (MPR), supporting intergenerational living, guest accommodation, or the creation of a dedicated retreat space.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135663 project_image_fid=360497]

The main living areas are positioned on the ground floor, while the bedrooms are located upstairs, a configuration that promotes both family separation and connected living. All villas include a second master suite on the ground floor, reinforcing the project’s focus on flexibility and long-term adaptability.

That adaptability was central to BDA Architecture’s design approach. The team sought to create a sophisticated, low-maintenance product that makes the most of the site’s elevation and outlook while responding to evolving household needs. Expansive glazing, open-plan interiors and private outdoor areas draw in natural light and frame views towards the savanna, hinterland and Broadbeach skyline.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135663 project_image_fid=360470]

VentureCrowd Director of Property David Whitting said the project responds to a growing group of buyers reassessing what premium living on the Gold Coast looks like.

Flexible floorplans have proven particularly relevant for purchasers aged between 40 and 65, including next home buyers, downsizers and investors. The inclusion of dual master suites in the Broadview design, along with options for a downstairs MPR or guest bedroom, allows homes to adapt as family dynamics shift, whether accommodating older parents, adult children, or extended stays.

Across the community, villas are specified with European appliances and premium fixtures and fittings, alongside double garages and landscaped private areas. The gated enclave includes number plate recognition entry, reinforcing a focus on security and exclusivity.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135663 project_image_fid=360474]

Lifestyle amenity is anchored by the Infinity Terrace, an elevated communal space incorporating a 20m heated pool, alfresco zones and barbecue facilities, designed as a shared retreat within the neighbourhood. A two-acre private nature reserve with walking trails and rehabilitated bushland further integrates the development with its savanna-edge setting, reflecting a broader masterplan initiative to restore native vegetation and habitat corridors.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/carrara-qld-4211">Carrara</a>’s positioning continues to attract attention from prestige buyers seeking proximity to the coast without beachfront pricing. The suburb offers access to major retail centres including Pacific Fair and Robina Town Centre, is around 15 minutes from Broadbeach, and benefits from connectivity via the M1 to Brisbane and the Gold Coast Airport.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=135663]

Joel Robinson

VentureCrowd’s Cumulus Grand Villas in Carrara advances with construction underway

Joint venture partners <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/abadeen">Abadeen</a> and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/perifa">PERIFA</a> are officially launching the third and final residential stage at their landmark $350 million harbourfront precinct, Putney Wharf, with The Residences representing the final opportunity to secure a new home within this rare waterfront destination.

Strong demand has already been established across the earlier stages of <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/putney-wharf-residences-20-waterview-street-putney-nsw-2112">Putney Wharf</a>, with more than 50 per cent sold ahead of this final release. The Residences will introduce a selection of the precinct’s most premium apartments, many of which were deliberately reserved for this concluding stage.

Located at 20 Waterview Street, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/putney-nsw-2112">Putney</a> NSW, the completed precinct will comprise 67 residences, including 18 terraces and 49 apartments, alongside five retail tenancies and a 36-berth marina.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=13962 project_image_fid=1338]

Developed alongside partners Phoenix Property Investors and Mitsubishi Estate Asia, Putney Wharf occupies a prized 300-metre stretch of absolute waterfront and incorporates the historic former Halvorsen’s Boatshed. The precinct connects directly to surrounding parklands via a landscaped foreshore walkway and a large, landscaped podium linking both sides of the development to the adjoining foreshore parklands.

The Residences comprise two newly built, three-storey apartment buildings delivering a boutique collection of 30 generously proportioned waterfront apartments. Designed to capture harbour outlooks, natural light and cooling breezes, The Residences balance architectural refinement with relaxed, low-maintenance living.

Architecturally designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/sjb-architects">SJB</a>, the apartments continue the cohesive design language seen across the broader precinct. A refined palette of light and dark materials, softer-toned stone and neutral, earthy finishes reflect the surrounding landscape and harbour setting. Interiors feature painted timber veneers, tactile joinery, timber flooring to living spaces and 100 per cent natural wool carpets in bedrooms, creating warm and sophisticated homes.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=13962 project_image_fid=362525]

Justin Brown, Executive Chairman and Founder of Abadeen, said the release of the final residential stage marks an important milestone for the project.

“Putney Wharf brings together everything we’ve learned over more than 25 years of development,” Mr Brown said. “It respects the site’s extraordinary maritime history while delivering contemporary homes that connect people directly to the harbour.

The Residences offer the rare combination of low-maintenance apartment living, waterfront outlooks with beautiful sunset views, and the convenience of retail and amenity at your doorstep. For boating enthusiasts, the opportunity to secure a private marina berth completes a truly unique Sydney harbourfront lifestyle.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=13962 project_image_fid=291197]

PERIFA Managing Director and Co-Founder Fabrizio Perilli added that the diversity of housing across the precinct has been central to the project’s success.

“Whether it’s the heritage Halvorsen’s apartments, the Waterview Terraces or now The Residences, Putney Wharf offers a range of homes that respond to different lifestyles, all united by an unrivalled harbourfront setting,” Perilli said. “This is a precinct that will add lasting value to the Putney community.”

Managing project marketing and sales, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/srm-residential">SRM Residential</a> Partner Tim Rees said the final release has already attracted strong demand reflecting the project’s unique harbourfront position and the success of earlier stages.

“Following the strong response to both the Halvorsen’s Boatshed residences and the Waterview Terraces, The Residences represent the final chance to secure a new home within this tightly held waterfront precinct,” Rees said. “Buyers are drawn to the rare combination of absolute harbour frontage, parkside living and genuine architectural quality.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=13962 project_image_fid=362240]

Putney Wharf is a one-of-a-kind mixed-use destination, delivering an exclusive residential offering alongside waterfront dining, retail and a 36-berth marina designed to the latest Australian Standards, accommodating vessels up to 18 metres and helping address Sydney Harbour’s ongoing marina shortage.

The precinct will include five retail tenancies and a prominent waterfront jetty area fronting the retail village, creating an activated harbourfront destination for residents and visitors alike.

Residents will enjoy direct access to lush harbourfront parklands, a public foreshore walkway and landscaped podium gardens connecting the development to the surrounding waterfront reserve. Construction across the Putney Wharf precinct is expected to be completed by Q2 2027.

Sales of The Residences officially launch this weekend, with the display suite open Saturday and Sunday from 10am to 12pm at Putney Wharf. Visitors are invited to enjoy a complimentary coffee while touring The Residences and experiencing the Putney Wharf lifestyle firsthand.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=13962]

Final Harbourfront release in Putney Wharf launches this weekend

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/draycon">Draycon Building</a> is nearing completion of Boutique Chevron Island, a 42-apartment development on the northern end of Chevron Island at 17–19 Parneno Street, with a limited-time offer of fully furnished apartments available.

Now more than 90 per cent complete, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/buildings/boutique-chevron-island-17-19-parneno-chevron-island-qld-4217">Boutique</a> has been shaped by one of the Gold Coast’s most tightly held island addresses, where riverfront outlooks and walkable access to Surfers Paradise converge.

For Draycon Building Managing Director Howard Dabit, the appeal of the site was immediate.

“I knew it was a good site as soon as I saw it,” Dabit said.

“The position and location on the north end of <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/chevron-island-qld-4217">Chevron Island</a>, the way the river swirls around the site basically from the north to the east, it feels like the site is surrounded by the water. The height that we’ve got and the aspect looking north is beautiful. Eighty per cent of the apartments are looking north so they get that drenching sunlight coming in.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=89709 project_image_fid=360922]

That northern orientation places the development within a stretch of Chevron Island defined by open river aspects and skyline views, while remaining embedded in the suburb’s established village setting.

Chevron Island has increasingly drawn owner-occupiers seeking centrality without the intensity of high-rise beachfront living. Positioned at the geographical centre of the Gold Coast, the island offers direct access to both the beach and key cultural infrastructure while retaining a neighbourhood-scale character.

Connected by bridge to Surfers Paradise, Chevron Island offers walkable access to beaches, riverfront parklands and a revitalised foreshore boulevard animated by walkers and cyclists throughout the day. The Pacific Ocean is only minutes away, reinforcing the suburb’s dual river-and-surf identity.

At the same time, Thomas Drive forms the spine of the island’s village life, delivering cafés, wine bars, casual dining and everyday services within easy reach. Independent grocers, wellness operators and neighbourhood retailers contribute to a community atmosphere that remains distinct from the vertical scale of the beachfront.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=89709 project_image_fid=360915]

In the opposite direction, the Green Bridge links directly to HOTA – Home of the Arts – placing galleries, performance venues and parklands within walking distance. Weekly markets and major exhibitions draw visitors from across the region, while residents return to a quieter residential pocket at day’s end.

Public transport, including nearby bus routes and the G:link light rail corridor along the coastal spine, strengthens connectivity north and south. Griffith University, the Gold Coast University Hospital precinct and established private schools such as The Southport School are all within a short drive.

Ongoing investment across Surfers Paradise, HOTA and the broader Southport corridor has elevated amenity while preserving Chevron Island’s comparatively low-rise residential character. It is this balance, walkable village atmosphere paired with metropolitan-scale infrastructure, that continues to differentiate the suburb from higher-density beachfront precincts.

Boutique comprises just 42 residences, designed to maximise river and skyline outlooks within this tightly held island setting.

Boutique Chevron Island is slated for completion in April 2026, with prices starting from $1,220,000.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=89709]

Draycon Building’s Boutique Chevron Island places 42 residences at the heart of the Gold Coast

Sydney developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/deicorp">Deicorp</a> has secured planning approval for a $300 million residential development in Lindfield, marking the company’s second project on Sydney’s North Shore and its first on the Upper North Shore.

Located on Beaconsfield Parade and designed by DKO Architecture, the state significant development comprises three buildings of up to 10 storeys and will include 399 residences, including 59 affordable homes and 40 adaptable homes.

Residences will range in size from one, two and three bedrooms, with two-bedroom apartments accounting for over 60 per cent of the product make-up. Residents will have access to a broad suite of amenities, including a wellness area, indoor and outdoor recreational spaces, a pool, a gym, a community room and a golf simulator.

In line with Deicorp’s long-standing focus on creating transit-oriented communities, the project is located just 260 metres from the Lindfield Train Station, reinforcing its role in delivering well-connected housing close to established infrastructure, retail and local services.

The inclusion of affordable and adaptable housing supports greater diversity within the local market, while the mix of apartment types responds to demand from downsizers, young professionals and families seeking access to the Upper North Shore.

Deicorp Founder Fouad Deiri OAM said the approval represents an important milestone for both the company and the suburb

“This approval allows us to deliver well-designed homes in a location that is already supported by strong transport and community infrastructure," Deiri said.

"Our focus is on creating places that integrate into their surroundings and provide long-term value for residents, and the broader Lindfield community. Being within walking distance of the station ensures this project supports sustainable growth in the right locations."

Across its portfolio, Deicorp currently has 4,703 apartments under construction, playing a leading role in shaping connected, liveable communities across Sydney.

Its expanding portfolio of Metro-linked developments includes Tallawong Village, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/kings-bay-village-five-dock-53-75-queens-road-five-dock-nsw-2046">Kings Bay Village</a> in Five Dock, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/hyde-metropolitan-sydney-133-141-liverpool-street-sydney-nsw-2000">Hyde Metropolitan</a> in Sydney CBD, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/falcon-alexander-crows-nest-8-alexander-street-crows-nest-nsw-2065">Falcon &amp; Alexander</a> in Crows Nest and Showground Village, Castle Hill.

Deicorp purchased the Beaconsfield Paradise site last year. Construction is scheduled to commence in Q2 of 2026 and will be completed in 2029.

Deicorp expands portfolio to nearly 5,000 apartments with Lindfield project

In a joint venture with The Trump Organization, Australia developer Altus Property Group has announced plans to bring a Trump International Hotel &amp; Tower to the Gold Coast, marking the first Trump-branded project in Australia.

"Trump International Hotel &amp; Tower, Gold Coast is our first official project in Australia and reflects our unwavering commitment to delivering world-class luxury experiences in iconic locations around the world," Eric Trump, Executive Vice President of The Trump Organization, said.

"This development exemplifies the Trump brand’s dedication to quality, sophistication, and unmatched service, and we are thrilled to bring this vision to the vibrant Gold Coast community."

The 91-storey building, which will become the tallest in Australia at 335 metres, will feature a&nbsp;285-room luxury hotel bearing the trademark Trump logo. It will also include 272 luxury residential apartments, a three-level podium with an exclusive Beach Club, and over 3,400 sqm of premium commercial, retail, and dining space, revitalizing the central Surfers Paradise precinct.

“Trump International Hotel &amp; Tower, Gold Coast will be a truly unique offering in the Australian market, bringing the prestige and allure of a world-class luxury brand,"&nbsp;Altus founder and chief executive David Young said.

"Altus Property Group is proud of its track record in delivering landmark developments across Australia, and our expertise ensures this project will be an outstanding success."

Trump Hotel heads for the Gold Coast to become Australia's tallest building

Rural Economy

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has <a href="https://theconversation.com/slimmed-down-migration-program-has-regional-focus-113847" target="_blank">announced two new regional visas</a> as part of a national population plan. The <a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/regional-migration/news/new-regional-visas" target="_blank">Skilled Employer Sponsored and Skilled Work regional visas</a> require workers to live outside major cities for three years before they can apply for permanent residency. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/20/coalitions-permanent-migration-cap-revealed-as-morrison-launches-population-policy" target="_blank">Morrison said</a> the new visas would benefit communities “looking for more people to come and settle in their districts, to fill jobs, inject more life into their towns, and shore up the important education and health services for the future”.
However, <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/0/B7616AB91C66CDCFCA25827800183B7B?Opendocument" target="_blank">newly released statistics on regional population growth</a> in Australia in 2017-18 show current growth is heavily concentrated in the capitals. People clearly prefer to settle in these cities. So how can migration to the less favoured regional centres be made to work?
POPULATION GROWTH ACROSS AUSTRALIA, 2017-18
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266214/original/file-20190327-139371-1pnuf27.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266214/original/file-20190327-139371-1pnuf27.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Population change by SA2 (a community that interacts together socially and economically) across Australia in 2017-18. <a class="source" href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/0/B7616AB91C66CDCFCA25827800183B7B?Opendocument" target="_blank">ABS</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY</a>
<a href="https://welcomingcities.org.au/regional-migration-queensland/">Research by the Monash Migration and Inclusion Centre and Welcoming Cities</a> has examined the benefits and risks of regional migrant settlement. We identify five key factors — four essential and one desirable — that will make regional settlement successful.
Five elements of success
First, coordination and planning must be inclusive and driven by local communities. These are more than just buzzwords. Local employers, service providers and community groups are best placed to determine realistic settlement options together.
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.26">Local councils</a>, in particular, are a crucial channel for information and community perspectives. Planning should carefully consider social and economic conditions so migrants and existing residents can develop <a href="https://www.qcoss.org.au/refugee-re-settlement-regional-australia" target="_blank">clear expectations</a>.
State and federal authorities may be called upon to provide a <a href="https://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/media-and-resources/publications/refugee-resettlement-in-regional-and-rural-victoria" target="_blank">package of supportive policies</a>, such as funding for relocation programs. However, in the absence of a <a href="http://scoa.org.au/policy-hub/scoa-publications/scoa-regional-settlement-policy-paper/" target="_blank">whole-of-government regional settlement strategy</a>, local stakeholders still need to lead the process.
Second, sustained employment is vital. It “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2013.830882" target="_blank">speeds up</a>” migrants’ integration into Australian society and makes long-term settlement viable. The celebrated “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/mar/24/australias-fierce-immigration-debate-is-about-to-get-louder" target="_blank">win-win scenario</a>” in regional areas demands stable employment. The example of the <a href="https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/economics/articles/economic-social-impact-karen-resettlement" target="_blank">Nhill poultry business in western Victoria</a> shows some destinations can be a good fit for migrants and refugees from rural-agricultural backgrounds.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/f_gNQ59X5bY?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe> Karen-Burmese refugees helped revitalise the previously shrinking town of Nhill.
However, regional labour markets can be quite “thin”. The <a href="http://inform.regionalaustralia.org.au/population-and-people/population-and-migration/item/regional-retention-of-migrants-critical-success-factors">number and variety of jobs</a> on offer are often limited.
Short-term visa schemes can help plug gaps in local labour markets. But migrants may not stay if they find themselves in jobs that <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/pm/migrants-sceptical-about-morrisons-policy-announcement/10921952">don’t match their skills and experience</a>.
Third, public housing, transport and services form crucial infrastructure to support migrant settlement. Regional towns <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2017.1358410">vary significantly</a> in their levels of access and affordability. Communities like <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/austory/a-field-of-dreams-opening-teaser/7999312">Mingoola</a> have taken the creative step of renovating abandoned farmhouses to accommodate refugee families.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R4QRC_eR0uQ?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
Resettling African refugees saved Mingoola’s school from closure and breathed new life into the small town.
But, in addition to housing, new migrants may require access to specialised service providers, like skilled health workers. Regional towns already grappling with social challenges can face a “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fes003" target="_blank">double disadvantage</a>” when migrants increase demand on existing services.
Here again, consultation and thorough needs analysis are required. Local government and community associations have central roles to play in this.
Fourth is a culture of welcome in regional communities. Building and sustaining such a culture is perhaps the most challenging element of success. The early stages of planning need to develop an understanding of local attitudes towards migrants, as well as perceptions about different cultures and ethnicities.
Some communities may benefit from induction and resources to develop long-term <a href="https://www.vu.edu.au/sites/default/files/Relocation_RefugeeSettleJune07.pdf" target="_blank">acceptance of cultural change</a>. The City of Greater Bendigo - a recognised <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/what-is-a-refugee-welcome-zone/" target="_blank">Refugee Welcome Zone</a> — has <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/australia-day-bendigo-s-new-citizens-looking-forward-to-giving-back" target="_blank">attracted migrants</a> by promoting its approach to cultural diversity and inclusion.
A culture of welcome can reduce the cultural distance between migrants and local residents, and reduce the risk of isolation for migrants. This not only bolsters the longer-term viability of migrant relocation, but can also lead to the social, cultural and economic revitalisation of the broader community.
As custodians of all settlement destinations in Australia, the leadership of First Nations people in welcoming work is also critical in negotiating matters of <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2015/09/06/first-australians-can-speak-refugee-crisis-who-listening" target="_blank">cultural exchange and understanding</a>.
A final, desirable element of regional settlement is the presence of multicultural organisations and ethnic communities. Established migrant communities can act as “anchors” for new arrivals. They provide experience, advice and familiarity with local settlement processes and opportunities.
In contrast, the absence of culturally and linguistically diverse groups in regional towns can be a “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.03.016" target="_blank">unique source of acculturation stress</a>”, especially for young migrants.
Moving forward with regional migration
Migration has the potential to breathe new life into regional economies. It can add cultural richness and diversity to regional communities. At the same time, regional migration can ease the pressure on capital city infrastructure and services.
In reality, however, few regional destinations optimally combine all key success factors. Potential benefits of migration can be offset by existing inequalities, narrow employment pathways and gaps in social infrastructure. Limited understanding of cultural diversity also acts as a barrier to the inclusion of new migrant communities.
These risks can compromise the sustainability of regional settlement before it has begun.
<a href="https://welcomingcities.org.au/regional-migration-queensland/" target="_blank">Our research</a> recommends that regional councils and local partners consider their readiness to grow a culture of welcome, build intercultural connections, and inform uptake of regional visa opportunities. Early planning that considers both the challenges and the opportunities for migrant settlement is critical to ensure a sustainable win-win outcome.
<hr>
Aleem Ali, the national manager of <a href="https://welcomingcities.org.au/who/" target="_blank">Welcoming Cities</a> and CEO of <a href="https://welcoming.org.au/" target="_blank">Welcoming Australia</a>, is a co-author of this article.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114196/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
John van Kooy, Research Associate &amp; PhD Candidate, Monash Migration and Inclusion Centre, Monash University 
Rebecca Wickes, Associate Professor in Criminology and Director of the Monash Migration and Inclusion Centre, Monash University
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/settling-migrants-in-regional-areas-will-need-more-than-a-visa-to-succeed-114196" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Settling migrants in regional areas will need more than a visa to succeed

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
If you’ve eaten fresh strawberries recently, they likely came from one of Australia’s city foodbowls. Around <a href="https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/bitstream/handle/11343/121776/Melbourne%27s%20Food%20Future%20planning%20a%20resilient%20city%20food%20bowl%20%287.1mb%29.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y" target="_blank">40% of the nation’s strawberries are produced on Melbourne’s fringe and 28% on Brisbane’s fringe</a>. All of Australia’s state capitals have city foodbowls that are an important source of fresh food, particularly fruit and vegetables.
These foodbowls also <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-climate-change-hits-our-food-supply-city-foodbowls-could-come-to-the-rescue-51406" target="_blank">increase the resilience to pressures on city food supplies from climate change</a>, particularly drought. But Australia’s cities are growing rapidly and their foodbowls are under threat as farmland gives way to housing.
The <a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne" target="_blank">Foodprint Melbourne research project</a> today released its <a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne/publications/roadmap-resilient-sustainable-melbourne-foodbowl" target="_blank">final report</a> outlining a “roadmap” of recommended actions for protecting and investing in Melbourne’s foodbowl. And there are signs that state governments are waking up to the threat to fresh food supplies.
In 2017, the South Australian government took action to preserve Adelaide’s foodbowl. Legislated <a href="https://www.saplanningportal.sa.gov.au/planning_reforms/new_planning_tools/environment_and_food_production_areas" target="_blank">Environment and Food Production Areas</a> now protect significant areas of farmland on the city fringe from urban development. The Queensland Farmers Federation has <a href="https://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au/story/5815518/protecting-brisbanes-foodbowl/" target="_blank">called for the Queensland government to take similar action</a> to protect Brisbane’s foodbowl.
In Victoria, the government recently began <a href="https://engage.vic.gov.au/protecting-melbournes-ag-land" target="_blank">public consultation on protecting Melbourne’s farmland</a>. The government has committed to <a href="https://www.danandrews.com.au/policies/protecting-melbournes-green-wedges-from-skyscraper-guy" target="_blank">permanently protect “strategic agricultural land”</a> on the city fringe.
This is an important step in preserving Melbourne’s foodbowl. Existing measures to protect this farmland – including the city’s <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/greenfield/more-information/urban-growth-boundary-key-facts/" target="_blank">urban growth boundary</a> and “<a href="https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/policy-and-strategy/green-wedges" target="_blank">green wedges</a>” – have not prevented ongoing loss of farmland. Stronger measures are clearly needed.
What actions does the roadmap present?
Collaboration with stakeholders from local and state government, industry, civil society groups and farmers has informed the roadmap of actions to protect Melbourne’s foodbowl.
The report recommends permanently fixing the city’s <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/greenfield/more-information/urban-growth-boundary-key-facts/" target="_blank">urban growth boundary</a> and introducing a “food production zone”. This could reduce speculative investment in farmland at risk of development. These measures would also create confidence to invest in farms and infrastructure in the foodbowl.
Protecting farmland is a critical first step in securing Australia’s city foodbowls, but this alone will not be enough.
If Australia’s city foodbowls are to continue to feed cities, farmland protection must be accompanied by other strategies. These would promote farm viability, water access, sustainable farming and <a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne/publications/infographic-circular-food-systems-for-a-resilient-melbourne-foodbowl" target="_blank">recycling of nutrients essential to food production</a> (like phosphorous and nitrogen).
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265711/original/file-20190325-36264-1ctwssa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265711/original/file-20190325-36264-1ctwssa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Roadmap for a resilient and sustainable Melbourne foodbowl. Foodprint Melbourne
<a href="https://theconversation.com/feeding-cities-in-the-21st-century-why-urban-fringe-farming-is-vital-for-food-resilience-106162" target="_blank">Promoting the viability of farming</a> in city foodbowls and ensuring farmers have access to water are just as important as protecting farmland.
Foodbowls can recycle city waste
City foodbowls have access to large volumes of city wastewater and organic waste. This can increase these farms’ resilience to growing <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-food-system-is-at-risk-of-crossing-environmental-limits-heres-how-to-ease-the-pressure-104715" target="_blank">environmental pressures on food production</a>. City foodbowls offer opportunities to use natural resources more efficiently by creating <a href="https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Cities-and-Circular-Economy-for-Food_Exec-Sum_240119.pdf" target="_blank">circular food systems</a> that “close the loop” on valuable resources from city waste by returning these to the soil.
City wastewater, such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/it-takes-a-lot-of-water-to-feed-us-but-recycled-water-could-help-55502" target="_blank">recycled water from water treatment plants</a> and treated stormwater, can provide a relatively secure source of water for food production in a <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate/State-of-the-Climate-2018.pdf">drying climate</a>.
Composts and <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-5001-6_15" target="_blank">biofertilisers</a> made from city organic waste can improve soils on farm. This is a more sustainable alternative to conventional fertilisers based on non-renewable resources (like <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-015-0442-0" target="_blank">phosphate rock</a>).
Learning from other cities
Australia’s cities need to have flexible responses to increase the resilience of their food systems. This requires city planners to take a precautionary approach now to protecting their foodbowls. International leaders in protecting city fringe food production, <a href="https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/bitstream/handle/11343/214114/Foodprint%20Melbourne%20Food%20for%20Thought%20July%202018.pdf?sequence=1&amp;isAllowed=y" target="_blank">such as Toronto and Vancouver in Canada</a>, offer valuable lessons in how to achieve this.
<a href="https://research.unimelb.edu.au/foodprint-melbourne/publications/roadmap-resilient-sustainable-melbourne-foodbowl">Our report</a> recommends that Melbourne follow Vancouver in developing an <a href="http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/RegionalFoodSystemStrategy.pdf" target="_blank">integrated food systems planning strategy</a>. This will support collaboration between government departments and other stakeholders in promoting farm viability, water access, nutrient recycling and sustainable farming in the city’s foodbowl.
The report also recommends that local governments on Melbourne’s fringe should form an alliance to develop a common vision and actions to strengthen the city’s foodbowl – as the <a href="http://www.foodandfarming.ca/about/" target="_blank">Golden Horseshoe Food and Farming Alliance</a> has done in Toronto. And it emphasises the importance of actively promoting city foodbowls to the public. The <a href="https://www.greenbelt.ca/foundation" target="_blank">Friends of the Greenbelt Foundation</a> in Ontario is a good example of this.
If Australia’s city foodbowls are to keep producing fresh local food for current and future generations, the public needs to be more aware of city fringe farmers’ role in feeding cities.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114085/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Rachel Carey, Lecturer in Food Systems, University of Melbourne
Jennifer Sheridan, Researcher in sustainable food systems, University of Melbourne
Kirsten Larsen, Food Systems Research and Partnerships, University of Melbourne
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-protect-fresh-food-supplies-here-are-the-key-steps-to-secure-city-foodbowls-114085" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: Apple orchards are among the farmland that has been lost to urban growth. Matthew Carey/Foodprint Melbourne, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-NC-SA</a>
</body></html>

To protect fresh food supplies, here are the key steps to secure city foodbowls

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Australia’s federal agriculture minister, David Littleproud, has called for a boycott of supermarket-branded milk. He is angry about lack of support for a “milk levy” of 10 cents a litre wanted by the dairy industry to support drought-stricken farmers.
Fellow National Party colleagues have called for nothing less than a royal commission into the supermarkets’ support for farmers. Nationals leader, and deputy prime minister, Michael McCormack, has said he is open to the idea.
Amid intense price competition across many supermarket categories, the price of milk stirs passions like nothing else.
But calls to boycott supermarket-branded milk are misguided; and a royal commission would not be money well-spent.
The widely held belief that supermarkets are hurting dairy farmers by driving down the price of milk is incorrect.
It overlooks basic supply chain dynamics and the findings of the 18-month-long inquiry by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which was ordered by then federal treasurer Scott Morrison to investigate the low milk prices paid to dairy farmers.
Indirect relations
Looking at the supply chain for fresh milk helps show why the retail price of supermarket-branded milk does not determine the price paid to farmers as some claim.
There are many players within a food supply chain: producers, processors, wholesalers, retailers and consumers.
<hr>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241784/original/file-20181023-169816-xw6s3p.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241784/original/file-20181023-169816-xw6s3p.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Fresh dairy supply chain volume map: <a class="source" href="http://www.agriculture.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/ag-food/food/national-food-plan/submissions-received/foodmap-an-analysis-of-the-australian-food-supply-chain-30-july.pdf" target="_blank">Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry</a>
<hr>
Dairy farmers typically sell their milk to processors, who then sell to supermarkets. There is a relationship between the supermarket and processor, not supermarket and farmer. Whether the supermarket sells a litre of milk at $2, $3 or $4 has no direct relationship on the price the processor pays to the farmer.
In the words of <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/dairy-inquiry-final-report" target="_blank">the final report</a> of the competition watchdog’s Dairy Inquiry, “the farm-gate price paid to farmers for milk used to fulfil private label milk contracts is not directly correlated with private-label milk retail prices”.
Blame dairy processors
The ACCC’s report does identify a range of market failures due to bargaining power imbalances and information asymmetry, but these are crucially between dairy farmers and processors.
Dairy farmers’ weak bargaining power means any higher price paid by supermarkets to processors would not necessarily result in higher farm-gate prices. The ACCC report notes that farmers get no more money for the milk that is sold at higher retail prices (such as branded milk).
Processors, not supermarkets, set farm-gate prices in response to market conditions (global and domestic demand), at the minimum level required to secure necessary volumes. Farmers are not paid according to the type or value of the end product their milk is used in. They are paid the same price for their raw milk regardless of what brand goes on the container.
<hr>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241787/original/file-20181023-169831-1kibwcv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241787/original/file-20181023-169831-1kibwcv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
Distribution of revenue from sale of private label vs branded fresh drinking milk: <a class="source" href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/1395_Dairy%20inquiry%20final%20report.pdf" target="_blank">ACCC Dairy Inquiry</a>
<hr>
Also blame consumers
Supermarkets are under pressure to keep food prices low, particularly on staples such as bread, milk and eggs. This is evident from the fact that campaigns to get shoppers to exercise their power as ethical consumers quickly run out of steam.
In April 2016, for example, national attention on the plight of dairy farmers led to a campaign encouraging shoppers to leave “supermarket branded milk” on the shelves. In a single month the supermarket brands’ share of milk sales dropped from 66% to 51%. Then it began to rise again. Within a year it was back to nearly 60%.
<hr>
<iframe style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/NyTIZ/1/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<hr>
Adding to confusion
While a milk levy to directly help farmers during the drought has many supporters, the disconnect within the supply chain means it is near impossible for retailers to pass the money directly to the intended beneficiaries. That, again, depends on those who buys the milk from the farmers – the processors.
Despite this, and because the ACCC inquiry’s findings have so far done little to dispel myths about the price of milk, retailers such as Woolworths have seen it as prudent to embrace the levy idea and publicly demonstrate support for dairy farmers.
All the additional proceeds from its “Drought Relief” milk go back to processor Parmalat, who is responsible for distributing the money to suppliers in drought-affected areas. Coles, meanwhile, has slapped a 30 cent levy on its three-litre milk containers, with the funds going to the Coles Drought Relief Fund.
These measures arguably add to continuing confusion about how the milk market works and the relationship between farm-gate and retail prices.
In the court of public opinion the supermarkets probably had no option but to go along with the charade.
A minister for agriculture, however, should know better.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105300/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Gary Mortimer, Associate Professor in Marketing and International Business, Queensland University of Technology
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/supermarkets-are-not-milking-dairy-farmers-dry-the-myth-that-obscures-the-real-problem-105300" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Supermarkets are not milking dairy farmers dry: the myth that obscures the real problem

<html><body>
Progress in agricultural technology is gathering pace, attracting investment from sources both inside and outside the industry, according to Savills.
Savills have listed seven innovations that will enable reduced use of resources (from labour to natural resources), better decision-making based on reliable data and improved transparency and traceability within the supply chain. 
1. Robotics and drones
Practical applications for drones are expanding fast. Armed with cameras, they are used to round up livestock, carry out stock and crop checks, apply nutrients and even take crop samples. Using drones for tasks such as these means using smaller machines, which reduces the possibility of damaging natural resources.
2. Sensors
Sensors can be used for myriad of tasks including monitoring temperature, nutrients, moisture, irrigation, environment composition, crop yields and enabling electronic identification (EID) to name but a few – and all in real-time, too. Soil management, crop storage, livestock identification and the supply chain can all benefit from the use of sensors.
3. SMART irrigation
Sustainable, Managed, Accountable, Responsible and Trusted (SMART) irrigation is focused on the efficient use of water and energy to apply irrigation, both for field and intensive cropping systems.
4. Next-generation farms
Vertical and indoor farming systems, which grow food without using soil or sunlight, are popping up in all sorts of locations from vast warehouses in the USA to disused underground stations in the UK. An opportunity to use SMART irrigation, these farming systems are said to use 95% less water to produce the same output and require just 1% of the land used for conventional farming.
5. Big data
The use of data analytics and predictive modelling can enable all parts of the food chain – from field to fork – to make decisions based on reliable data.
6. Artificial intelligence (AI)
Automating basic customer service tasks is just one example of how AI (intelligence demonstrated by machines) can be used to improve customer/user experience and satisfaction.
7. Blockchain
A shared digital record, which everyone can inspect but no single user controls, blockchain is already being used to log cattle ID. Blockchain makes it possible to record all aspects of an animal’s journey through the supply chain, providing complete traceability for the industry and consumers. The Foods Standards Agency has successfully completed a blockchain pilot, using the technology to ensure compliance in a cattle slaughterhouse.
 
</body></html>

The seven tech trends reshaping rural property: Savills

<html><body>
Farmers affected by the worsening drought crisis in NSW and Queensland are being urged to contact their bank to access assistance on offer.
The drought assistance has been available during the drought. 
There is a Federal Government roundtable on drought affected communities with banks invited by Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, the Hon David Littleproud to participate. 
Anna Bligh, the CEO of the Australian Banking Association, said that banks were willing to help drought affected communities and have been rolling out assistance for to their customers in need. 
“I have seen firsthand the difficulties that drought brings to our farmers and regional communities, including significant financial stress,” Ms Bligh said. 
“Australian banks are ready to lend a hand to drought affected communities, particularly throughout New South Wales and Queensland, who are doing it tough. 
“My message for regional communities is there’s no reason for anyone to struggle in silence, call your bank today and ask what assistance can be offered to help you through this difficult time.
"The Industry will continue to work with government to play its part in helping those affected.
"Customers are encouraged to contact their bank to discuss what hardship arrangements are available to them," she said. 
ABA Member banks offer a range of services to help customers experiencing drought or other circumstances outside their control. 
These can include: 
<ul type="disc">
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">A deferral of scheduled loan repayments</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Waiving fees and charges, including break costs on early redemption of Farm Management </li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Deposits</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Debt consolidation to help make repayments more manageable</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Restructuring existing loans free of the usual establishment fees</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Deferring interest payments on a case-by-case basis</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Offering additional finance to help cover cash flow shortages</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Deferring upcoming credit card payments</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Increasing emergency credit card limits</li>
<li class="x_MsoBodyText">Waiving early termination fees for customers who wish to access their term deposits.</li>
</ul>
</body></html>

Farmers offered banking assistance during drought

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
As politicians raise concerns about immigration straining infrastructure and public services in Australia’s state capitals, the federal government is considering the idea of binding immigrants to particular regional and rural areas.
The minister for citizenship and multicultural affairs, Alan Tudge, was quoted as saying:
"We’re looking at ways that we can effectively bind people to the regions if they’ve got a sponsorship to go to those locations."
The idea behind these sorts of policies is also to develop regional and rural economies. But in recent research with co-authors Louise Roos and John Madden, we find that binding migrants on temporary 457 visas to the country is largely ineffective in boosting regional economies in the long run.
The 457 visa program (replaced in April 2017 with a stricter but essentially similar temporary skill shortage visa) allowed employers to bring in foreign skilled workers for up to four years. While employers in any location can apply, the program can be used to direct migrants to non-urban areas, because visa holders are bound to the employers and their locations.
As part of our research, we modelled two scenarios. In the first we looked at what happens with regionally targeted 457 visas, by assigning workers on these visas to non-metropolitan regions. In the second we modelled what would happen if the visa holders were to settle across regions according to their current settlement patterns.
We took into account the labour market and visa details of workers in each capital city and in the rest of each state or territory (except for the ACT, which we treated as one territory). We also factored in the desire of workers to change occupations and regions due to movements in wages.
At the national level, we found that employment and real GDP increase by nearly identical amounts and, likewise, decreases in national wages are the same under programs where immigrants are targeted to rural and regional areas and where they haven’t been targeted.
At the regional level, in the short run, we found targeted visa programs boost regional activity. But this does not hold in the long run. After five to 10 years, economic variables such as real regional GDP and regional employment start to look the same as the untargeted scenario.
The reason for this largely lies in the regional displacement of workers already in the country. In the short run, the targeted migration program boosts workers in the target region. This causes wages in the region to fall relative to wages in other regions. This discourages workers from other regions from moving to the region, and encourages workers in the region to leave.
We have also examined what would happen with permanent skilled migration programs targeted at regional and rural areas.
There are a number of permanent regional skilled migration programs, such as the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme, the skilled nominated visa and the skilled regional visa. In these schemes visa holders can remain in the country indefinitely, although they must remain in their nominated region for at least two years. This is in contrast to temporary visa holders, who must eventually depart Australia unless, as many do, they transition to a permanent visa.
In investigating targeted permanent visas, we found similar results to temporary visas. The short-run employment and regional GDP gains from regionally targeted migration programs, whether under permanent or temporary visa arrangements, gradually become like those of untargeted programs.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96852/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Over time, new immigrants move to other regions, mostly to capital cities, or go overseas. Even if implementable and effective policies could be found to bind new immigrants to regions, the displacement effect we’ve outlined would continue to weaken the long-run impact on regional populations and economies.
James Giesecke, Professor, Centre of Policy Studies and the Impact Project, Victoria University
Nhi Tran, Senior Research Fellow, Victoria University
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/forcing-immigrants-to-work-in-regional-areas-will-not-boost-regional-economies-in-the-long-run-96852" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Forcing immigrants to work in regional areas will not boost regional economies in the long run

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Groundwater being pumped from a highland aquifer, only to be whisked away in tankers and sold in little plastic bottles by a multinational corporation – it’s a difficult concept for a small farming town to swallow.
Just ask the residents of Stanley, Victoria, whose four-year court battle to stop a farmer bottling local groundwater for Japanese beverage giant Asahi ended in failure last month. They were left with a A$90,000 bill for legal costs.
Locals have clashed with the bottled water industry in many parts of the world, including the United States and Canada, and perhaps most famously in the French spa town of Vittel, where residents have accused Nestlé of selling so much of their water to the rest of the world that they barely have enough left for themselves.
These conflicts demonstrate the challenge of balancing the competing demands on water drawn from underground. Compared with surface water, which is less tricky to monitor, groundwater is far harder to govern.
Under the Australian Constitution, water is primarily governed by the states. In Victoria, groundwater in high-use areas is managed using groundwater management plans under the Water Act, and water for commercial or irrigation purposes requires a take and use licence. This licence specifies the maximum volume of water a user is allowed to divert each year and under what conditions - what is often called an ‘entitlement’.
If a licence-holder wants to amend their licence, they need to apply to their regional water corporation.
It was one such application that triggered the dispute in Stanley. Local farmer Tim Carey applied to change the source of 19 million litres of his existing licence from surface water to groundwater, and from agricultural to commercial purposes. This would allow him to truck the water to a bottling plant run by Mountain H2O, owned by Asahi.
The changes were approved by Goulburn-Murray Water under the local water management plan. Stanley’s residents were concerned about the impact on irrigation and the environment, and tried to challenge Carey’s operation under local planning laws. But the court said that his approved water licence meant he didn’t need planning approval too. With no clear legal options now left for local residents, that may well prove to be the final say on the matter.
How did this happen?
Unfortunately, before about 1980, water entitlements were given away like kittens by various water agencies. As a result, in some areas, users are entitled to much more water than they actually use - sometimes more than is sustainable. And politics generally precludes any intervention to amend these inflated entitlements once the licence-holders have become used to having them.
Extensive droughts in the late 1970s and early 1980s, combined with the Darling River’s striking algal bloom in the early 1990s, catapulted the importance of effective water management into the public consciousness.
In 1997, this resulted in “the cap” – limits on surface water diversions in the Murray-Darling Basin. However, the cap didn’t limit groundwater extractions, which then increased dramatically. The regulation of groundwater, memorably described in an 1861 court case as too “secret, occult and concealed” to even attempt, has long lagged behind that of surface water.
It wasn’t until the Millennium Drought (2000-09), with the advent of the National Water Initiative and the federal Water Act 2007 that Australian groundwater management underwent significant, large-scale reform. The main thrusts of the reforms were the development of legal and planning frameworks to achieve sustainable management of surface and groundwater, and the restructuring of water markets to be nationally compatible.
The new water governance regime created under the federal Water Act, under which the Commonwealth assumed important powers over waters in the Murray-Darling Basin, allows for groundwater markets and new limits on groundwater withdrawals. Groundwater trading is generally constrained by rules that require the “to” and “from” locations to be hydrologically connected to one another.
Stanley’s groundwater falls within a new mega-planning area that covers great swathes of northern Victoria. The new management plan for this area is due at the end of the year, but is currently only 30% complete.
Even if the plan is finished on time, groundwater sustainability in regions like the Ovens might elude us. Limits on water extraction are generally based on the entitlements in the area. But as current groundwater usage is less than those entitlements, “sleeper” licences can still be activated. During shortages, when the economic value of water peaks, people can trade water that would otherwise remain unused. In some management regions, the total entitlement volume is roughly double or more than the actual usage.
The Stanley case shows how communities can mobilise when groundwater moves from one use to another. If new plans further encourage groundwater markets, we should brace ourselves for more of the same – although it is unclear whether other communities would enjoy any more legal success than the people of Stanley.
What are management decisions based on?
High-profile cases like Stanley’s highlight the need for a robust scientific basis for licensing decisions. Communities facing change will have a difficult time accepting decisions that are not supported by rigorous science.
Unfortunately when it comes to groundwater, it’s far from straightforward to work out how much water is down there and where it goes. An expert hydrogeologist retained by Stanley’s residents argued that the modelling used to estimate the impact of the bottled water extractions was very simplistic. Mapping groundwater with an overly simplistic model is akin to using an identikit sketch of a smiley face to catch a criminal.
But water corporations have finite resources, and if we want in-depth analysis, then we need to invest in management planning tools such as drilling programs and numerical groundwater models supported by monitoring data and surveys of groundwater-dependent ecosystems. This sort of analysis is time-consuming, expensive and currently a political stretch. Governments only tend to spend serious money on groundwater investigations once people start running out of water.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96418/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">However, if we want to get groundwater licensing right, it needs to be scientifically robust, environmentally sustainable, and procedurally fair. As Stanley’s residents discovered, there might be no second chance.
Emma Kathryn White, PhD Candidate, Infrastructure Engineering, University of Melbourne
Rebecca Louise Nelson, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Melbourne
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happens-to-small-towns-whose-water-becomes-big-business-for-bottled-brands-96418" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

What happens to small towns whose water becomes big business for bottled brands?

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Even though Australia has enjoyed 25 years of economic growth, many regional communities have either struggled to recover or never recovered from factory closures, declining commodity prices, or a drop in tourists.
My research, with colleagues from Europe and North America, shows Australian development agencies are reluctant, or do not know how, to reach out and work with other government bodies. They are also less inclined than those in Italy, Germany and Finland to build bridges between government departments or tiers of government. Instead, their solutions are constrained by their own resources.
And unlike in the United States, Australia does not have a well-funded economic development agency able to mobilise significant resources in a practised manner. In the United States, local developers often command multi-million-dollar budgets that come from dedicated sales and other taxes, giving them the capacity to bring about change.
Australia’s local development agencies are starved of funding and too often can offer only limited responses to very complex challenges.
The Productivity Commission says leadership is key to forging a new economic future for these regional communities. But my research shows local leadership, including from business executives, state government and other government agencies, is relatively weak compared with the other countries.
The local leadership gap means Australian regional communities are less able to develop coherent strategies to deal with events like a major plant closure. Even good news, such as the arrival of a new firm, is not guaranteed an appropriate reaction.
Part of the challenge lies in the absence of clearly identifiable leaders with the authority to act. Compared with other countries in my study, it is harder to find who in Australia takes ownership of responding to regional economic shocks.
In Australia, mayors often play a role, but have few powers to bring about change. State policitians can be reluctant to associate with adverse news. Few politicians, for example, saw photo opportunities in the closure of Australian car makers.
In Italy, on the other hand, mayors are pivotal in responding to crises like the closure of a car factory. Our research found Italian mayors reach out to the civil sector in times of crisis – the church, non-governmental organisations, unions and even the media. This is done to influence public opinion, build confidence and mobilise private, public and community resources to ensure the well-being of the community.
Transition towns
The American city of Pittsburgh has transformed from a rapidly declining steel town in the 1970s to a prosperous city with an economy built on medical research and services.
Tampere in Finland shifted from being a 19th-century manufacturing base to producing software for Nokia in the 1990s. After 2010 it shifted again to information technology as Nokia itself transformed. The city has also become a hotbed of tech startups.
There are a few reasons these two communities successfully rejuvenated themselves while many Australian communities have spiralled downwards.
In the United States, local development practitioners are important local leaders because they mobilise the support of political leaders at the state and local level. They also provide the intellectual and financial capital needed to shape a new future.
In Finland, local leadership comes from a network of professionals working across departmental lines. In Tampere, for example, they helped to deploy the technical skills of workers. In other places they have moved workers into new technologies and promising new businesses.
Within a few years Chinchilla in Queensland cycled between a gas exploration and development boom, which pushed up prices, to an equally sharp bust as construction crews moved away, leaving excess housing.
Communities in northern Adelaide have been confronted by the need to map out a new future as the car industry closes. What that looks like and how many workers will be able to transition into the defence sector remains very uncertain.
These are not problems limited to a few isolated economies. The southeastern states struggled economically when the nation was in the grip of a mining boom. Communities in Western Australia joined them as real estate prices and labour force growth lagged in the absence of new mine development.
There are significant leadership deficits within Australia’s regions, towns and communities. These contribute to our failure to promote the vibrancy and resilience of all parts of the nation.
The decision-makers in Australia – largely state and federal politicians – as well as the resources they command, are just too far away from regional centres. Their absence creates a significant gap at the local level.
But all this doesn’t mean that better solutions can’t be found for Australian communities experiencing economic change.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/95066/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">We can give more responsibility to local governments. We can empower communities through the sharing of information and knowledge. And we should give them the resources needed to bring about the changes they see as the bedrock of their future.
Andrew Beer, Dean, Research and Innovation, University of South Australia
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-governments-dont-work-with-each-other-and-its-holding-back-regional-economies-in-trouble-95066">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Australian governments don't work with each other and it's holding back regional economies in trouble: Andrew Beer

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The revived trade agreement, now known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), has finally made it across the line. It’s a considerable win for Australian farmers and service providers, in a trading area worth about A$90 billion.
The 11 remaining countries from the initial Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement finally agreed to go ahead with the deal without the US, at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The deal reduces the scope for controversial investor-state dispute settlements, where foreign investors can bypass national courts and sue governments for compensation for harming their investments. It introduces stronger safeguards to protect the governments’ right to regulate in the public interest and prevent unwarranted claims.
Despite earlier union fears of the impact for Australian workers, the CPTPP does not regulate the movement of workers. It only has minor changes to domestic labour rights and practices.
The new agreement is more of an umbrella framework for separate yet coordinated bilateral deals. In fact, Australia’s Trade Minister Steven Ciobo said:
"The agreement will deliver 18 new free trade agreements between the CPTPP parties. For Australia that means new trade agreements with Canada and Mexico and greater market access to Japan, Chile, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei."
It means a speedier process for reducing import barriers on key Australian products, such as beef, lamb, seafood, cheese, wine and cotton wool.
It also promises less competition for Australian services exports, encouraging other governments to look to use Australian services and reducing the regulations of state-owned enterprises.
Australia now also has new bilateral trade deals with Canada and Mexico as part and parcel of the new agreement. This could be worth a lot to the Australian economy if it were to fill commercial gaps created by potential trade battles within North America and between the US and China.
What’s in and out of the new agreement
The new CPTPP rose from the ashes of the old agreement because of the inclusion of a list of 20 suspended provisions on matters that were of interest for the US. These would be revived in the event of a US comeback.
These suspended provisions involved substantial changes in areas like investment, public procurement, intellectual property rights and transparency. With the freezing of further copyright restrictions and the provisions on investor-state dispute settlements, these suspensions appear to re-balance the agreement in favour of Australian governments and consumers.
In fact, the scope of investor-state dispute settlements are narrower in the CPTPP, because foreign private companies who enter into an investment contract with the Australian government will not be able to use it if there is a dispute about that contract. The broader safeguards in the agreement make sure that the Australian government cannot be sued for measures related to public education, health and other social services.
The one part of the agreement relating to the temporary entry for business people is rather limited in scope and does not have the potential to impact on low-skilled or struggling categories of Australian workers. In fact, it only commits Australia to providing temporary entry (from three months, up to two years) of only five generic categories of CPTPP workers. These include occupations like installers and servicers, intra-corporate transferees, independent executives, and contractual service suppliers.
The above categories squarely match the shortages in the Australian labour market, according to the Lists of Eligible Skilled Occupation of the Home Affairs Department.
Bits of the original agreement are still included in the CPTPP such as tariffs schedules that slash custom duties on 95% of trade in goods. But this was the easy part of the deal.
Before the deal is signed
The new agreement will be formally signed in Chile on March 8 2018, and will enter into force as soon as at least six members ratify it. This will probably happen later in the year or in early 2019.
The geopolitical symbolism of this timing is poignant. The CPTPP is coming out just as Donald Trump raises the temperature in the China trade battle by introducing new tariffs. It also runs alongside China’s attempts to finalise a much bigger regional trade agreement, the 16-nation Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership.
Even though substantially the CPTPP is only a TPP-lite at best, it still puts considerable pressure on the US to come out of Trump’s protectionist corner.
It spells out the geopolitical consequences of the US trade policy switch, namely that the Asia Pacific countries are willing to either form a more independent bloc or align more closely with Chinese interests.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90619/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Will this be enough to convince the Trump administration to reverse its course on global trade? At present, this seems highly unlikely. To bet on the second marriage of the US with transpacific multilateral trade would be a triumph of hope over experience.
Giovanni Di Lieto, Lecturer, Bachelor of International Business, Monash Business School, Monash University
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/farmers-and-services-industry-the-winners-under-the-revised-trans-pacific-partnership-trade-deal-90619" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Farmers and services industry the winners under the revised TPP deal: Giovanni Di Lieto

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
When you think of devastating deforestation and extinction you usually think of the Amazon, Borneo and the Congo. But eastern Australia ranks alongside these in the top 10 of the world’s major deforestation fronts – the only one in a developed nation. Most of the clearing is happening in Queensland, and it is accelerating.
Only last year a group of leading ecologists voiced their alarm at new data which showed the clearing of 296,000 hectares of forest in 2013-14. This was three times higher than in 2008-09, kicking Australia up the list as one of the world’s forest-clearing pariahs. At the 2016 Society for Conservation Biology Conference, a Scientists’ Declaration was signed by hundreds of scientists, expressing concern at these clearing rates.
But the latest snapshot, Queensland’s Department of Science report on land cover change published last month, showed a staggering 395,000ha of clearing for 2015-16: an increase of one third on 2014-15. As far as we can tell this rate of increased clearing is unmatched anywhere else on the globe.
showed a staggering 395,000 of clearing for 2015-16: which is an increase of one third on 2014-15, or 133% over the period
Strong vegetation management laws enacted in Queensland – the Vegetation Management Act 1999 – achieved dramatic reductions in forest and woodland loss. But the subsequent Liberal National state government, elected in 2012, overturned these protections.
The current government, elected in 2015, has tried and failed to reinstate the protections. In response, “panic clearing” caused clearing rates to shoot up, in anticipation that the state election will deliver a government that will reintroduce the much-needed protection of forests.
The Queensland Parliament is now in caretaker mode ahead of the November 25 election. The Queensland Labor Party has pledged to reinstate laws to prevent wholesale clearing, while the LNP opposition has vowed to retain current clearing rates.
Australian community and wildlife lose
Whichever way you look at it, there is not a lot of sense in continued clearing. Australia already has some of the highest extinction rates on the planet for plants and animals. With 80% of Queensland’s threatened species living in forest and woodland, more clearing will certainly increase that rate.
Clearing also kills tens of millions of animals across Australia each year, a major animal welfare concern that rarely receives attention. This jeopardises both wildlife and the A$140 million invested in threatened species recovery.
This rate of clearing neutralises our major environment programs. Just one year of clearing has removed more trees than the bulk of 20 million trees painstakingly planted, at a cost of A$50 million. Australia’s major environment programs simply can’t keep up, and since 2013 are restoring only one-tenth of the extent of land bulldozed just last year.
Restoration costs to improve the quality of waters running onto the Great Barrier Reef are estimated at around A$5 billion to A$10 billion over 10 years. Nearly 40% of the land cleared in Queensland is in reef catchments, which will reverse any water quality gains as sediment pours onto the reef.
Climate efforts nullified
Since 2014, the federal government has invested A$2.55 billion on reducing emissions in the Carbon Farming Initiative through the Emissions Reduction Fund. Currently 189 million tonnes of abatement has been delivered by the Emissions Reduction Fund. This – the central plank of the Australian government’s climate response – will be all but nullified by the end of 2018 with the current clearing rates, and will certainly be wiped out by 2020, when Australia is expected to meet its climate target of 5% below 2000 emissions.
Ironically, this target will be achieved with the help of carried-over results from the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, which Australia was only able to meet because land clearing had decreased between 1990 and 1997.
Why is this happening?
Most of the clearing in Queensland since 1999 has been for pasture. Most good cropping land was cleared decades ago. Removing trees in more marginal lands can increase the carrying capacity for a short time with an immediate, and usually short-lived, financial reward. These rewards come at the expense of long-term sustainability, which future landholders and government will bear.
Large areas of the cleared lands have been subject to substantial erosion and nutrient loss from the newly cleared lands, and land degradation over time, and some areas have suffered massive woody weed incursions.
This is playing out today across the north where pastoralism is a marginal activity at best, with declining terms of trade of about 2% per year, with no net productivity growth, high average debts and low returns, and many enterprises facing insolvency. Clearing vegetation won’t change that.
A recent preliminary valuation of ecosystem services, on the other hand, estimated that uncleared lands are worth A$3,300-$6,100 per hectare per year to the Australian community, compared with productivity of grazing lands of A$18 per hectare.
With a clear divide between the policies Labor and the LNP are taking to the election, now is a good time to give land clearing’s social, economic and environmental impact the scrutiny it deserves.
Noel D Preece, Adjunct Principal Research Fellow at Charles Darwin and, James Cook University.
Penny van Oosterzee, Principal Research Adjunct James Cook University and University Fellow Charles Darwin University, James Cook University.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-is-a-global-top-ten-deforester-and-queensland-is-leading-the-way-87259" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Picture: Forest cleared by bulldozers towing massive chains. Source: Provided by author. 
</body></html>

Rural Economy

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Rural Economy

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News