Print this page

Published: 29 September 2014

Wild Australia: ecologists meet at our red heart


Australia’s leading ecologists are meeting in the red heart of the country today to present the latest research that will help solve the nation’s most pressing environmental problems.

A thorny devil, one of the diverse inhabitants of Australia’s red centre.
A thorny devil, one of the diverse inhabitants of Australia’s red centre.
Credit: Tourism NT

More than 500 ecologists, policy makers and land managers will be in Alice Springs for the annual Ecological Society of Australia (ESA) conference.

The ESA is the peak group of ecologists in Australia, and promotes the application of ecological principles in the development, use and conservation of Australia's natural resources.

Conference chair, CSIRO’s Professor Alan Andersen, said the red centre is the ideal meeting place for researchers and stakeholders from across the country.

‘We will be embracing a diversity of world views and approaches at the ESA conference in Alice Springs, as this is likely to lead to the best new ideas in ecology and solutions for environmental management,’ he said.

The conference will feature symposia on regionally relevant issues such as arid ecology, the ecology of northern development and Indigenous ecological knowledge.

Researchers from CSIRO's Land and Water Flagship will be convening two key symposia: one on savanna burning, led by Dr Garry Cook, and another on Indigenous knowledge, led by Josie Douglas.

Ms Douglas will explore how young Aboriginal people adapt and shape ecological knowledge in modern everyday life amongst kin and in relation to their country.

An Indigenous Ecological Knowledge symposium will be convened on Arrernte country on Tuesday, as part of the conference. The event will bring together Aboriginal speakers and their colleagues from across Australia, from Bardi and Jawi country in the Kimberley to Gunditj Mirring country in Victoria.

Ms Douglas said the presenters will speak about their roles in cultural and natural resource management.

Ecologists at the ESA conference will also share their findings on native mammal decline and how northern Australian landscapes can be better managed to reverse this decline.

Australia’s tropical savannas are one of the most fire-prone environments in the world, due to the region’s long dry season. While these savannas make up around 20 per cent of the country’s landmass, they account for 75 per cent of the total area burnt each year.

Recent research has implicated predation by feral cats as a major driver of mammal decline, but cat predation may be influenced by other factors such as fire, which may also have direct impacts on mammal numbers.

Mammals can survive during and after some fires, but their ability to find cover and food, and to reproduce or retain their numbers can be drastically reduced.

Dr Graeme Gillespie, whose research comes under the National Environmental Research Program (NERP) is chairing a special session on mammal decline.

‘Many people start fires without it being part of an overall plan to manage the landscape,’ he said. ‘We could increase the survival chances of native mammals by managing fire to reduce its frequency, extent and intensity.’

NERP partner, the Australian Wildlife Conservancy (AWC), has been a leader in implementing improved fire research and management through its EcoFire project n the Kimberley. Research undertaken at AWC’s Mornington Wildlife Sanctuary has shown that fire allows other threats, such as predation by feral cats, to have a much bigger impact on native mammal populations.

‘Mammal mortality is likely to be higher after more intense fires because after an intense fire, extensive burnt ground offers few refuges and they are easily picked off by cats,’ said the AWC’s Dr Sarah Legge.

‘Fire management protocols need to be evidence-based. They should also include targets that leave large areas unburnt for between three and ten years, and ongoing monitoring.’

Source: ESA







Published: 4 July 2011

Assured sustainability reporting – navigating obligations

Nick Fleming

As the way in which organisations address environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues comes under increasing scrutiny, sustainability reporting is gathering importance and momentum. Yet reporting must be seen as a product of sustainable business practices, not the focus of it.

Emphasis on more robust sustainability reporting is helping to drive the wider assessment and reform of companies’ associated supply chains and logistics infrastructure.
Emphasis on more robust sustainability reporting is helping to drive the wider assessment and reform of companies’ associated supply chains and logistics infrastructure.
Credit: iStockphoto

While sustainability reporting is new territory for some organisations, many leading businesses have been engaged in reporting for over a decade. Indeed, sustainability reporting is typically one of the first vehicles for engagement with the topic and issues of sustainability, often at the encouragement of a few passionate staff.

However, the call for greater organisational accountability and transparency is growing. An increasing number of shareholder resolutions are placing pressure on company boards to ensure they are effectively identifying, disclosing and addressing ESG risks. Institutional investors are already using ESG data to differentiate firms and guide investment decisions.1

Powerful customers are also forcing their suppliers to become more transparent. The classic example is Walmart, which launched a supplier sustainability initiative in July 2009. Locally, Woolworths recently announced its own Sustainable Fish Sourcing Strategy.2

There is also an expectation for assurance. This reflects a stakeholder desire for reports to be relevant, reliable and free from bias, while the reporting organisation wishes to build a case for lower costs for finance and insurance. This all takes time and money; reporting can be a costly exercise and carries risks.

The banking sector provides an insight to the challenges posed by sustainability reporting. In Australia, banks have typically lead sustainability reporting and have performed well against international benchmarks such as the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. Yet this year, the big four banks have been publically criticised over their involvement with coal-fired power stations.3 People ask how an organisation that receives sustainability accolades can also finance environmental pollution. This questions the connectivity between sustainability reporting and governance.

Scrutiny is also being applied by the regulators. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has prosecuted cases against companies such as GM Holden and Prime Carbon for overstating their ‘green’ credentials. It’s clear that inaccurate communication on ESG matters presents serious risks to an organisation’s reputation – and that of the rating or assurance agency.

These issues have been behind recent reviews of reporting guidelines and benchmarking methods.4,5 The reviews found that ratings and reporting tend to be backward-looking measures of compliance with ‘good practice’, failing to enable a meaningful assessment of an organisation’s ability to create and sustain value, in the short and longer term.

What’s lacking is adequate interrogation and reporting of the strategic capabilities and the core competencies required to underpin business continuity and delivery of sustainable outcomes; that is, a truly sustainable enterprise.

However, the push for integrated financial and non-financial (sustainability) reporting may offer a silver lining – the trigger to focus conversations among executives and boards about the things that will drive genuine business continuity, profitability and sustainability. Without these conversations, there will neither be the understanding, focus nor commitment to cultivate truly sustainable enterprises.

The adage ‘What gets measured gets managed’ remains true; as does ‘It’s what you do, not what you say, that counts’. Reporting without subsequent actions to manage risks and create value is meaningless, and arguably harmful.

While there are growing market and stakeholder pressures for integrated reporting of financial and ESG matters, reporting should only be entered into with an eye on:

  1. material business risks

  2. core competencies for organisational continuity

  3. a core set of meaningful performance measures that offer real insight

  4. integrating reporting into governance

  5. commitment to real action in response to identified risks and opportunities.

Organisations that assume this approach take sustainability reporting beyond a ‘nice?to?have’ PR exercise to a ‘must?have’ business improvement tool. It’s a factor in the superior financial performance demonstrated by ethical and sustainable organisations. Getting it right is good for business – and good for communities.

Dr Nick Fleming is Chief Sustainability Officer Sinclair Knight Merz, leading the application of sustainability thinking in business operations and client services. Through his Sustainable Enterprise column, Nick provides insight to how businesses and organisations are effectively putting sustainability theory into practice.


1 Ernst & Young (2011). Shareholders press boards on social and environmental risks. tinyurl.com/social-environmental-risks
2 tinyurl.com/sustainable-fish
3 Greenpeace (2011). Pillars of pollution. www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/GI-profundo.php
4 Eccles RG, Cheng B, Saltzman D (Eds) (2010). The landscape of integrated reporting: reflections and next steps. Harvard Business School. tinyurl.com/integrated-reporting
5 SustainAbility (2011). Rate the raters: uncovering best practices. www.sustainability.com/library/rate-the-raters-phase-one




ECOS Archive

Welcome to the ECOS Archive site which brings together 40 years of sustainability articles from 1974-2014.

For more recent ECOS articles visit the blog. You can also sign up to the email alert or RSS feed