Examination of the Reporting Problem We need a better way! Forest - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Examination of the Reporting Problem

We need a better way!

Forest C&I Analytical Framework and Report Workshop, Finland 19-21 May 2008

Claire Howell

www.brs.gov.au

Overview of Presentation

• Brief background on national forest reporting in Australia
• External Communication Review of 2003 State of the Forests

Report (SOFR)

• Review Recommendations
• Implementation for 2008 SOFR Report
• Opportunities and Threats
• Conclusion

www.brs.gov.au

Australia’s 5-yearly ‘State of Forests Reports’

• 1998, 2003 and now 2008

www.brs.gov.au

Introduction

1992 National Forest Policy obligation to prepare 5-yearly State of the Forests Reports 1994 Australia adopted the Montréal Process

• Montréal Process Implementation Group for Australia

1998 SOFR implicitly based on the MP C&I framework 2003 SOFR explicitly based on the MP C&I framework All national level forest reporting is dependent on the contribution of data by states and territories, and therefore very much on the relationship between all parties

www.brs.gov.au

Australia’s Forests

• Forest management

undertaken at the state government level.

• Federal government

responsible for trade, export licences, tax & targeted spending.

Western Australia South Australia Northern Territory Queensland New South Wales Victoria Tasmania Australian Capital Territory

www.brs.gov.au

Montréal Process Framework of Criteria & Indicators

• 1. Biodiversity
• 2. Productive Capacity
• 3. Ecosystem Health
• 4. Soil & Water
• 5. Carbon
• 6. Social & Economic Benefits
• 7. Regulatory Framework

www.brs.gov.au

State government adoption of C&I

• State governments have increasingly adopted elements of the

C&I framework for jurisdictional reporting

• Domestic indicator review of 2005/06 generated strong

understanding of the national C&I framework

• Ownership in the national process because of the links to the

State systems

• The 2008 national report was smoother compared to 2003 and

1998 reporting processes

www.brs.gov.au

Victoria ‘State of Forests

Report’

New South Wales ‘SEEing Reports’ Western Australia ‘Forest Management Plan’ Tasmania ‘State of Forests Report’

National Report

www.brs.gov.au

www.brs.gov.au

Existing forest communication products

Science for Decision Makers series Eg: ‘Plantations and Water Use’

www.brs.gov.au

Terms of reference:

• Consult with key stakeholders about the usefulness of the report
• Seek views on possible improvements in format and

presentation

• Identify subsidiary products to coincide with the release of the

2008 Report

• Analyse the target audience
• Provide suggestions for broadening the audience and engaging

with that audience

Review of 2003 State of Forests Report

www.brs.gov.au

Stage One: Key clients’ and contributors’ perception of the report

• Identify range of stakeholders (current contributors, current

users, potential users)

• Branding/communication audit
• Stakeholder interviews – 8 -10 existing priority stakeholders
• Interim report with stakeholder feedback and future options

Stage Two: Explore and develop future options with target audience

• Stakeholder interview – additional five interviews
• Final report

Review Process

www.brs.gov.au

Internal – Minister, Department Head, Policy Divisions, Parliamentary committees Other Federal Government – Environment, Trade, Science, Education,

Industry, Tourism, Transport, Regional Services, Embassies, Bureau of Statistics, Bureau of Economics, Greenhouse Office, Research Corporations

International – MP, UN, FAO, ITTO, APFC, MCPFE, OECD, WTO, CBD,

UNCCC

State/Regional – State agencies (see Federal equivalents), Catchment

Management Authorities, Landcare, Local government, Schools

Lobby Groups – Farmers, Forest Industry, Pulp & Paper, ENGOs Academia – Universities, national and state research organisations Media – rural and regional press, national press, forest magazines

Stakeholders (Contributors and Users)

www.brs.gov.au

Findings of the Review

Reporting obligations: – Meets international obligations – Domestic ? (Australian Government says that it does) Presentation: Hardcopy report produced to highest standards Value to Stakeholders: – Internationally - Best practice reporting – Domestically: Comprehensive for nationally aggregated but not enough detail ?? (Are the data too packaged??) Stakeholder information needs: – Competes alongside other sources that meet stakeholder needs ?? (again, are the data too packaged??) – Range of topics identified but not clear if they’re in the report ????

www.brs.gov.au

1. Bushfires 2. Climate change 3. Economics 4. Employment 5. Farm Forestry 6. Feral Animals 7. Forest Products 8. Forest Industry 9. Forest Usage

• 10. International
• 11. Land
• 12. National Parks
• 13. Plantation forests
• 14. Resources
• 15. Reforestation
• 16. Social impacts
• 17. Soil erosion
• 18. Sustainability
• 19. Tourism
• 20. Water
• 21. Weeds
• 22. Wood production

Findings: Forest Topics of interest to stakeholders

www.brs.gov.au

Findings: The Case for Change

• The Report needs to create greater stakeholder value
• Broad agreement that SOFR has a role as a comprehensive

source of nationally aggregated forest data

• Some stakeholders (data providers) want ‘value free’

presentation of the information ...and to leave that for others to analyse ie. discussion if there is a change, but not why

• BUT other stakeholders want the analysis (suspect they are not

the data providers)

www.brs.gov.au

Findings: Report structure, content and tone

• 400 pages is neither user friendly nor environmentally friendly
• Diminishing utility of big publications: a smaller more summary

hardcopy report is desirable

• C&I Framework isn’t always logical (overlap in some criteria)
• Concise readable text with graphs and tables in context
• Too much focus on data gaps and deficiencies
• Tension between presenting the data and progressing into

some form of data analysis

• Timeliness: perception the report is old for much of its 5-year

life, though contributors reluctant for timeframe to be reduced

www.brs.gov.au

Recommendations of the Review

• 1. Create greater value to existing stakeholders via a strong,

accessible online presence with core data

• 2. Engage with the wider community using the internet and

subsidiary products

• 3. Searchable SOFR website and portal to other forest

information

• 4. Glossy ‘Executive Summary’ with photos

www.brs.gov.au

Recommendations of the Review

• 5. Produce annually updated summary products (eg. Forests

at a Glance) & a product placement marketing strategy

• 6. Develop theme-based forest fact sheets
• 7. Prepare stakeholder commentary as snapshot narratives
• 8. Involve the federal Minister in launching SOFR products,

and actively promote new/updated web content to stakeholders

• 9. Simplify the branding of the Report

10.Investigate developing a website with a queriable, scaleable, real-time database with linkages to other data (viz: Canada, Finland, Japan)

www.brs.gov.au

Recommendations of the Review – widening stakeholder access

Engaging with the following:

• General community
• Students (and a section for teachers)
• Media
• Environmental movement
• Other industry sectors

www.brs.gov.au

Forests Australia Website

Simple structure Self guiding Searchable keywords Links to State/Territory sustainability reports Links to other forest research sites Analysis & mapping capacity

www.brs.gov.au

Forest Type & Extent

Conservation

Employment Sustainable Yield

Forest Fact Sheets

www.brs.gov.au

Carbon Fire Certification Water

www.brs.gov.au

Review Recommendations Not Supported

• 1. Stakeholder Narratives

‘Here’s what our stakeholders say’

• A healthy way to engage with key

stakeholders Decision: Untested so not to be pursued at this stage

• 2. ‘Value Free’ or Analysis and Interpretation

Decision: Remain independent, but work with

• thers to take up this task

www.brs.gov.au

Opportunities and Threats for C&I reporting in Australia

Threats – Increased productivity in public service (less $$) – High staff turnover (loss of corporate knowledge) – Varying levels of senior management support for C&I – Varying levels of individual commitment to C&I, especially by those in positions of influence – C&I still perceived by many as an overhead, rather than integral, to forest management, though changing at the forest management level

www.brs.gov.au

Opportunities and Threats for C&I reporting in Australia

Opportunities – RFA Act 2002 … the (federal) Minister must cause to be established a comprehensive and publicly available source of information for national and regional monitoring and reporting in relation to all of Australia’s forests… – States increasingly adopting C&I approach for reporting – Strong coordination between national and state agencies with responsibilities for forest management and reporting – Increasing demand for evidenced-based policy – Rapid advances in internet technologies

www.brs.gov.au

Conclusions

• A valuable exercise – forced us to assess our

stakeholders and identify potential new ones

• Implemented most of the recommendations, many
• f which pointed to a standalone simple but

comprehensive website, a smaller report and ancillary communication products

• Didn’t agree to all recommendations
• Released the report in the first-half of the year
• Reinforced the importance of the relationship with

the data-providing stakeholders

www.brs.gov.au

Australia’s State of the Forests 2008

• ‘Forests Australia’ website built but not yet ‘live’ nor fully

developed

• A much smaller hardcopy report, written in simple language

(also coincides with a change from 74 to 44 indicators)

• Eight thematic summaries (Forest Fact sheets)
• Glossy ‘Executive Summary’, Bookmark, CD with report
• Minister launching the 2008 Report on Wednesday 21 May

www.brs.gov.au

www.daff.gov.au/forestsaustralia Thank You