strategy: corangamite regional knowledge, data and information … · 2010-11-10 · page iii...

Page i Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

SSTTRRAATTEEGGYY:: CCOORRAANNGGAAMMIITTEE RREEGGIIOONNAALL KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE,, DDAATTAA AANNDD IINNFFOORRMMAATTIIOONN NNEETTWWOORRKK

CCOORRAANNGGAAMMIITTEE CCAATTCCHHMMEENNTT MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT AAUUTTHHOORRIITTYY

AA FFoouunnddaattiioonn PPrroojjeecctt ooff tthhee NNaattiioonnaall AAccttiioonn PPllaann ffoorr DDrryyllaanndd SSaalliinniittyy,, WWaatteerr QQuuaalliittyy aanndd BBiiooddiivveerrssiittyy

DDeevveellooppeedd iinn ccoonnjjuunnccttiioonn wwiitthh tthhee SSttrraatteeggiicc RReessoouurrcceess PPllaannnniinngg UUnniitt,, AAggrriiccuullttuurree VViiccttoorriiaa

SSeerrvviicceess,, SSttaattee CChheemmiissttrryy LLaabboorraattoorryy,, WWeerrrriibbeeee,, DDeeppaarrttmmeenntt ooff NNaattuurraall RReessoouurrcceess aanndd EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt,, VViiccttoorriiaa,, aanndd tthhee NNaattuurraall RReessoouurrcceess MMaannaaggeemmeenntt CCoommmmuunniittyy ooff tthhee CCoorraannggaammiittee

RReeggiioonn..

Disclaimer - Any representation, statement, opinion or advice, expressed or implied in this publication is made in good faith but on the basis that the State of Victoria, its agents and employees are not liable (whether by reason of negligence, lack of care or otherwise) to any person for any damage or loss whatsoever which has occurred or may occur in relation to that person taking or not taking (as the case may be) action in respect of any representation, statement, or advice referred to above.

Page ii Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

AACCKKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEEMMEENNTTSS

PPRR OO JJ EE CC TT MMAA NN AA GG EE MM EE NN TT

Jo Roberts – Project Manager - CCMA Rick Pope - Woady Yaloak Catchment Group Ted Rowley – NAP implementation CCMA Adam Hood - AV- DNRE Ian Shurvell - RS – DNRE.

PPRR OO JJ EE CC TT TTEE AA MM

NRE

Agriculture Victoria (AV) - State Chemistry Laboratory (SCL) - Werribee

Adam Hood: Project Manager and Senior Strategic Policy Analyst Hemayet Hossain: Senior Resources/GIS Analyst and Programmer Adam Skelton: GIS/Resource Analyst Victor Sposito: Strategist/Senior Consultant Lee Kerr: Administration Trainee. Enplan Australia Pty Ltd Alan Thatcher: Environmental Planning/Logistics Graeme David: Natural Resources and Business Development.

OOTT HH EE RR CC OO NN TT RR II BB UU TT OO RR SS

Focus Group Craig Allen CCMA Wetlands Officer Catherine Barnes CCMA Patrice Braun University of Ballarat Peter McDonald Colac Adult Education Centre Pam McRae-Williams University of Ballarat Rick Pope DNRE – GIS adviser to Woady Yallock Kay Rodden Farmer, CCMA Board Marianne Schrieke Leigh Catchment Group Ian Shurvell DNRE, Colac Greg Slater Colac Otway Shire Steve Williams Centre for Land Protection Research, Bendigo (DNRE)

Page iii Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

OOTT HH EE RR CC OO NN TT RR II BB UU TT OO RR SS ((CC OO NN TT II NN UU EE DD ))

Workshop 1 Geelong 7 August 2002 Dale Appleton A/g Ranger in Charge, Parks Victoria Geoff Beilby Landcare, Australian Plant Society Mohamed Ghafouri Deakin University Michaela Holroyd Anakie Maude Landcare Group Ron Irvine Land Manager Oz Kyak Friends of Lorne Margaret McDonald Friends of Angahook-Lorne State Park Cam Nicolson Agricultural consultant, member CCMA Kay Rodden Farmer, CCMA Board Dyson Scott Dairy Farmer Dianne Tilley

Land management, Gordon Institute of TAFE

Workshop 2 Buninyong (Ballarat) 8 August 2002 Catherine Barnes CCMA, Community Education Jeannette Bellchambers Landcare Patrice Braun University of Ballarat June Cameron Farmer, Meredith Landcare John Carr Farmer, Woady Yallock Catchment Group Tim D’Ombrain Linear Network of Communal Spaces (LINCS) Sequoia Eagles Bonlac Foods – Environment Manager Richard MacEwan Centre for Land Protection Research, Bendigo (DNRE) Allan May Environment/Plantations Officer, Moorabool Shire Pam McRae - Williams University of Ballarat Ron Page Bonlac Foods

Comments on any matter relevant to this project are welcome. These should be addressed to:

Jo Roberts NAP Project Officer

Corangamite Catchment Management Authority 64 Dennis Street

Colac, Victoria, Australia 3250 Telephone: 03 52329122

Email: [email protected]

Page iv Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

CCOORRAANNGGAAMMIITTEE KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE NNEETTWWOORRKK SSTTRRAATTEEGGYY

SSUUMMMMAARRYY RREEPPOORRTT

BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDD

The Corangamite Catchment Management Authority (CCMA), under the auspices of the National Action Plan for Dryland Salinity, Water Quality and Biodiversity (NAP), has recognised the need for a Regional Knowledge Network Strategy. This Strategy provides the framework for implementing a set of projects that will improve awareness, action and exchange of catchment process data, information and knowledge in the Corangamite community.

KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE NNEETTWWOORRKK MMIISSSSIIOONN

Improved and ongoing access to and exchange of knowledge, data and information regarding sustainable natural resources

management (NRM) in the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority Region.

KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE NNEETTWWOORRKK VVIISSIIOONN FFOORR 22000077

Corangamite maintains the most advanced Regional Knowledge Network and Information System in Australia that is accessible and regularly used by natural resources managers, farmers and the wider community for improved understanding and decision-making. The Network has been instrumental in assisting the region to become a world class example of innovative sustainable development.

In order to consider specific elements of the Knowledge Network and to facilitate implementation, the vision has been divided into three themes or areas of focus.

• People – The Corangamite Community

• Access to Information

• Content – A valued source of natural resource information

Page v Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

PPeeooppllee -- TThhee CCoorraannggaammiittee CCoommmmuunniittyy iinn 22000077

VViissiioonn

• There is an integrated network of groups (eg. Government Agencies, Landcare, Universities) and individuals (eg. Landholders, Urban Residents) interested in Natural Resource Management (NRM).

• The CMA, through a series of partnerships and shared projects, coordinates an innovative program that links a range of community information and capacity building projects known as the Knowledge Network.

• There is an active and confident community in the Corangamite Region promoting sustainable development through improved knowledge and understanding of resource management practices.

SSttrraatteeggiicc OObbjjeeccttiivveess ffoorr IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn

1. To coordinate planned engagement, ownership and involvement regarding NRM. 2. To promote activities that develop an ongoing people network. 3. To promote “Community Champions”. 4. To strengthen ties to training and education programs especially those concerned with:

• Community Building;

• Information Collection and Interpretation;

• Understanding Catchment Processes, and;

• Grant Applications. 5. To better link Research and Development (R&D) to community needs.

AAcccceessss ttoo CCaattcchhmmeenntt PPrroocceessss aanndd NNaattuurraall RReessoouurrcceess IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn iinn 22000077

VViissiioonn

• There is a set of personal contact points for the community to access the Knowledge Network.

• There is a set of Local Nodes, coordinated by the CMA, which provide local knowledge in the regional context.

• The Knowledge Network has developed a range of data and their interpretation, sharing and exchange agreements and protocols that provide seamless access to a broad range of NRM knowledge and information from the farm level aggregated to the catchment and region, and vice versa. This is firmly integrated to the key objectives of the Regional Catchment Strategy and the National Action Plan for Dryland Salinity, Water Quality and Biodiversity.

• There is a website that contains networking facilities, links to other websites and existing systems. Data and a range of interpreted online maps can be downloaded or ordered through the website.


1. To provide a personal contact point for local communities. 2. To develop protocols and organisational arrangements for sustainable NRM. 3. To develop local nodes of the Knowledge Network. 4. To build a Knowledge Network Website considering the following key elements:

Page vi Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

• Build networking capacity of the Corangamite Region;

• Website as Portal;

• Links to existing data management and catchment tools,

• Links to existing information sites, and;

• Capacity for online mapping. 5. To encourage agencies to provide appropriate access and systems 6. To develop a Regional Knowledge Centre at a distinct location within the Corangamite

Region.

CCoonntteenntt -- AA VVaalluueedd SSoouurrccee ooff NNaattuurraall RReessoouurrcceess IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn iinn 22000077

VViissiioonn

• The Knowledge Network has its own data management and knowledge audit system that collects, collates, and records knowledge in the region regarding NRM.

• The Knowledge Network interprets relevant regional and local knowledge.

• The Knowledge Network has a strong relationship with regional and local data collectors and encourages an equitable system of collection and sharing of catchment process information.

• The Corangamite Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS) assets and threats indicators and the monitoring and evaluation progress are strongly integrated into the Knowledge Network Data Management System and the website.


1. To build and maintain a data management system. 2. To interpret knowledge for the Corangamite Region. 3. To exploit existing knowledge and systems. 4. To collect and collate data, knowledge and information. 5. To integrate monitoring and evaluation of RCS outcomes. 6. To integrate RCS Assets and Threats indicators.

Page vii Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

Promote activities

that develop

ongoing people

network

Coordinated and

Planned Engagement/

Involvement/Ownership

Catchment Processes

Information collection

and interpretation

Community building

Grant Application

Develop linkages

to education &

training mechanisms

Promote

community champions

Link R&D

to community needs

People

Collect and

collate data,

knowlege &

information

Exploit existing

knowledge

Build & maintain

data mangement

system

Integrate assets

and threat

indicators

Intergrate monitoring

and evaluation of

RCS outcomes

Interpret knowledge

for region

Content

Provide for

personal contact

Portal

Existing

Sites

Existing

Systems

Online Mapping

Build network

capacity

Build knowledge

network website

Develop

Local Nodes

Develop

Regional Centre

Encourage

agencies to provide

appropriate access/

systems

Develop Protocols

and organisation

agreements

Access

Corangamite Regional

Knowledge Network

COPYRIGHT AGRICULTURE VICTORIA SERVICES PTY. LTD. DNRE, 2002

Page viii Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

IIMMPPLLEEMMEENNTTAATTIIOONN FFRRAAMMEEWWOORRKK

While recognising that many other initiatives and projects have a potentially strong relationship with the Knowledge Network, the following flexible implementation framework has been developed. The implementation framework stresses the need for action to occur through specific and manageable projects. The implementation of the Corangamite Knowledge Network will occur through the initial development a Primary Implementation Project and a series of Key Projects that meet the needs of the Corangamite Region identified through the prioritised objectives described in detail in the strategy. This is depicted in the diagram below.

Corangamite Knowledge Network - Primary Project

Implementation and Management

1. Key Project 2. Key Project 3. Key Project 4. Key Project

IIMMPPLLEEMMEENNTTAATTIIOONN PPRROOJJEECCTTSS

CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk PPrriimmaarryy PPrroojjeecctt

This project is chiefly an umbrella project that will ensure the proper and timely implementation, coordination and management of the Knowledge Network. Following is a set of priority actions that should occur in the in the lead up and implementation of the Knowledge Network:

• Create and Maintain Knowledge Network Steering Group

• Implement Strategy – Hand-over, Training, Continuity, Monitoring and Evaluation

• Employ a Knowledge Network Officer – Key skills include environmental and natural resources management, community development in a regional setting, capacity to network and lobby at all levels of community and government and a very good understanding of regional organisational and institutional arrangements

• Create and Promote Knowledge Network Contact Point at CCMA

• Fully develop key Knowledge Network projects for consideration in NAP Investment Plan.

Page ix Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk KKeeyy PPrroojjeeccttss

The realisation of the vision and mission as outlined above, depends on specific linkages between objectives and a series of actions/investments that are packaged as key projects. It highlights the need to develop partnerships and co-investment strategies with other related regional initiatives. It is suggested that key projects would be broken down into sub-projects that could involve outsourcing to different specialists, cost sharing or other forms of co-investment. The diagram below illustrates the key relationships between the various features of the Knowledge Network – from the three components through objectives to key projects. The diagram is shown in its complete version in the following page; each project includes priority elements for implementation in the first two years of the 2002 – 2007 implementation period.

P e o p l e

C o n t e n t

A c c e s s

P r io r i t i s e d

O b j e c t i v e s

P r io r i t i s e d O b j e c t i v e s


1 . C a p a c i t y

2 . N o d e s

3 . S y s t e m

4 . K n o w l e d g e

C o r a n g a m i t e

K n o w l e d g e N e t w o r k

I m p l e m e n t a t i o n

Related

Pro

jects

Page x Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

People

Content

Access

Planned Engagement

Network Activities

Knowledge Champions

Training/Education

Community & R&D

Contact Point

Arrangements

Local Nodes

Website

Agencies - Provision

Knowledge Centre

M anagement System

Interpret

Exploit Existing

Collate & Collect

M onitor & Evaluate

Assets and Threats

3. System

4. Knowledge

2. Nodes

1. Capacity

Knowledge Network Projects

Priority Elements (Year 1 and 2)

Prioritised Objectives Related Projects

•Develop Arrangements- investment•Implement nodes/local contact point:

•1 Local Government,

•1 Catchment Group•Localise Knowledge - aggregate

•Build M anagement System•CCMA with node capacity

•hardware, software•GIS/GPS capacity•CD-Rom production capacity

•W ebsite - Gateway/Network elements

•Develop arrangements to exploit andextend existing systems to Network

•M aintain audit of knowledge•Develop knowledge arrangements for

storing and interpreting existingknowledge for local nodes•Collect/Collate data through localnodes (Use W oady Yaloak Exemplar)

•Assets, threats, RCS outcomes•Input R&D

•Develop Engagement Strategy -

Communications Links - activities,champions, local R&D, RCS•Develop Training/Education programwith existing education infrastructure

through local nodes

RCS

•Smaller Footprint

•Healthy Environment

•Cohesive Communities

•Planning Landscape

•Sustainable Use

•Partnerships

R&D, Data Agencies•Universities R&D

Local Government - Plans

•DNRE - Regional DataNet

•DNRE - Data

•CMA - Data

Other

•NAP- Information

•Landholders Projects

•CMCV - Indicators

•CAE - Programs

Page xi Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt OOnnee –– CCoommmmuunniittyy KKnnoowwlleeddggee aanndd CCaappaacciittyy

This key project focuses on community building, networking, linkages between land managers, specialists and knowledge of local areas within the Corangamite Region. It builds on the traditional notion of extension and represents an investment in the social and cultural capital of knowledge within the Corangamite Region.

OOUU TT CC OO MM EE SS

1. A well connected, trusting community working together to achieve sustainability in the region. 2. A confident community that is able to interrogate and respond to the complexities of

catchment processes using range of information sources. 3. A community that is able to identify knowledge assets and gaps to build a better

understanding of assets and threats to their local area in the context of the region.

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt TTwwoo –– KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk NNooddeess

This key project develops a set of Local Knowledge Network Nodes that will create a set of localised entry points to NRM knowledge for the Corangamite Region. These nodes will have the capacity to inform and direct community members regarding the key elements of the Knowledge Network – the Audit of Knowledge and the Knowledge Management System.


1. The community is able to access a local knowledge specialist that can direct and assist with information regarding catchment process knowledge at a regional and local level.

2. A strong linkage between the local nodes which is driven by key elements of the RCS implementation through NAP.

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt TThhrreeee –– KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk DDaattaa MMaannaaggeemmeenntt SSyysstteemm

This key project provides the technical linkages between different sets of knowledge, data and information. It involves building a computer-based system that works as an assemblage of tools for the community to access, understand, interpret, integrate and network for sustainable development. Many of the elements/tools used within the systems are developed through a series of protocols and arrangements with agencies and organisations. The system operates on two levels:

• Knowledge Network Management – high level GIS, spatial analysis tools, mapping, knowledge database

• Community Access – Website and CD-Roms delivering networking capacity, interpreted information, data and access to a range of knowledge sources.


1. The Knowledge Network staff is able to access, interpret and manipulate a range of information sources within a high-level GIS/mapping system. Tools are used regularly to describe and model catchment processes for a range of services that the Knowledge Network offers.

2. Members of the community frequently access the system through its website to query as well as to contribute to the Knowledge Network regarding catchment processes and sustainability in their local areas and the region.

Page xii Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt FFoouurr –– NNeettwwoorrkk KKnnoowwlleeddggee

This key project forms an integral part to the foundation of the Knowledge Network. It involves sourcing, recording, collecting, collating and storing a range of catchment process information, data and knowledge across the Corangamite Region. This involves maintaining the Audit of Knowledge through the Local Knowledge Network Nodes and the development of a range of protocols and agreements with agencies and other community groups involved with the collection and interpretation of catchment process information. Strong linkage is required between this project and the development of Key Project Three.


1. The Knowledge Network has a full understanding of the information, data and knowledge available in the region.

2. There is a closer relationship between the generators and interpreters of information and the needs of the Knowledge Network

3. A large range of local and region catchment process information, data and knowledge is recorded, stored and managed by the Knowledge Network.

IINNVVEESSTTMMEENNTT FFRRAAMMEEWWOORRKK

The investment framework provides an indicative assessment of the costs of implementation and the likely forms of investment to ensure that the Key Projects are satisfactorily completed. An estimate of the overall level of investment required for each project with a breakdown of costs for various phases has been developed as a guide for the NAP Investment Plan. The phases are Initial (Years 1 and 2) dealing with the start-up trialing and development of the Knowledge Network, Regional (Years 3 and 4) expanding elements across the region and Maintenance (Year 5 and beyond) phases. Included in the table is an indication of likely strategic alliances and an estimation of the proportion of the cash investment required by the CCMA.

MMOONNIITTOORRIINNGG AANNDD EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN

Continuing review and comparison of actual accomplishments with the intentions of the Strategy will be required. The Knowledge Network Steering Committee in conjunction with NAP Committee and the CMA Board should agree upon an appropriate set of performance indicators for the Primary Project and the various Key Projects as they become fully developed. As well as reviewing the actual outcomes against the scheduled progress on implementation actions, the monitoring system would track time and other resources utilised against the resources allocated.

Page xiii Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

Primary Project

1. Capacity

2. Nodes

3. System

4. Knowledge

Projects

Means

Investment Phases - (Total $) Strategic Alliances Investment Share

Initial Yrs 1 and 2 - $300,000

Regional Yrs 3 and 4- $300,000Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $100,000

Initial Yrs 1 and 2 - $200,000Regional Yrs 3 and 4 - $200,000

Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $50,000


Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $200,000


Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $70,000


Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $200,000

•Steering Group•Agencies- DNRE, DOI

•Local Government

•CMA = 100%

•RCS Communications

•Agencies - DNRE, Education

•Education Networks•Community Groups

•CMA = 70%•Other = 30%

•Agencies - DNRE, DOI

•Local Government•Community Groups

•Universities

•CMA = 70%•Other = 30%

•RCS Gateway•Agencies - DNRE

•Universities•Local Government

•CMA = 70%

•Other = 30%

•RCS - Indicators•Agencies - DNRE

•R&D Universities•Local Groups

•CMA = 50%•Other = 50%

Total Estimated Value (Cash and In kind) - $3,020,000

Value - $700,000

Value - $450,000

Value - $800,000

Value - $470,000

Value - $600,000

CMA = ($) - 2,204,000Sub-total Estimated Value Year 1 = $600,000

Page xiv Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCOONNTTEENNTTSS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.....................................................................................................................................II

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK STRATEGY........................... IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................... XIV

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ....................................................................................................................XV

CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION: REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE................................................................1

1.1 BACKGROUND ...............................................................................................................................................1 1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................................2 1.3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS.....................................................................................................2 1.4 PROJECT METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................................................................3 1.5 A REGIONAL APPROACH TO SHARING INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE.......................................................4 1.6 THE REGIONAL KNOWLEDGE, DATA AND INFORMATION NETWORK - CONCEPTS.........................................4

CHAPTER TWO - COMMUNITY NEEDS ANALYSIS......................................................................................8

2.1 IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS AND CLIENTS..................................................................................................8 3.2 ENGAGEMENT PROCESS...............................................................................................................................10 3.3 FOCUS GROUP..............................................................................................................................................11 3.3 COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS ...........................................................................................................................14 3.4 USER NEEDS – OUTCOMES FOCUSSED..........................................................................................................14

CHAPTER FOUR- AUDIT OF CURRENT NETWORKS AND KNOWLEDGE...........................................20

4.1 OTHER EXPERIENCES OF KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS .....................................................................................20

CHAPTER FIVE - DESIGN OF THE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK SYSTEM ...............................................25

5.1 DESIGN OPTIONS AND DEFINITIONS.............................................................................................................25 5.2 PREFERRED OPTION FOR CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK ..............................................................28

CHAPTER SIX - PREFERRED OPTION, ACTIONS AND THE RCS ..........................................................29

6.1 NETWORK MISSION STATEMENT .................................................................................................................29 6.2 VISION PROPOSED FOR 2007: .......................................................................................................................29 6.3 STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES - PRIORITIES AND STEPS TO THE VISION................................................................30 6.4 MULTI-CRITERIA EVALUATION - SETTING PRIORITIES WITH A FOCUS GROUP.............................................33 6.5 IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES FOR THE CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK........................................35 6.2 SHARING AGREEMENTS AND PROTOCOLS....................................................................................................47

CHAPTER SEVEN - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................50

7.1 IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH PROJECTS AND ACTIONS ...............................................................................50 7.2 THE CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK – PROJECTS, INVESTMENT AND TIMELINES ...........................50 7.3 ACTION THROUGH INVESTMENT ..................................................................................................................60 7.4 INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK ..........................................................................................................................61 7.5 MONITORING AND EVALUATION..................................................................................................................63

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................64

Appendix A: Stakeholder Consultation Appendix B: Other Networks - Documentation Appendix C: Data Sharing Protocols - Examples

Page xv Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

LLIISSTT OOFF FFIIGGUURREESS AANNDD TTAABBLLEESS

FIGURE 1.1 OVERALL MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS .......................................................................................2 FIGURE 1.2 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH .......................................................................................................3 FIGURE 1.3 THE BASIS FOR THE CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK ..........................................................5 FIGURE 1.4 DATA, MODELLING OUTPUTS AND INFORMATION PRODUCTS - USES AND LIMITATIONS. ..................7 FIGURE 3.1 THE PROCESS OF COMMUNITY AND KEY STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. ......................................10 FIGURE 6.1 HIERARCHY OF STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES FOR THE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK...................................32 FIGURE 6.2 THE WEIGHTING OF KEY ELEMENTS OF THE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK ............................................35 FIGURE 6.3 THE WEIGHTING OF OBJECTIVES UNDER PEOPLE...........................................................................36 FIGURE 6.4 THE WEIGHTING OF SUB-ELEMENTS UNDER TRAINING AND EDUCATION .......................................36 FIGURE 6.5 THE WEIGHTING OF OBJECTIVES UNDER ACCESS. ..........................................................................40 FIGURE 6.6 THE WEIGHTING OF SUB-ELEMENTS UNDER WEBSITE DEVELOPMENT. ..........................................40 FIGURE 6.7 THE WEIGHTING OF OBJECTIVES UNDER CONTENT. .......................................................................44 FIGURE 7.1 CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK ....................................50 FIGURE 7.2 THE PACKAGING OF PROJECTS FOR MANAGEABLE IMPLEMENTATION ............................................53 FIGURE 7.3 THE KEY PROJECT FRAMEWORK OF THE CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK........................54 TABLE 7.4 INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK FOR KNOWLEDGE NETWORK IMPLEMENTATION. ................................62

Strategy: Corangamite Regional Knowledge, Data and Information Network

CCHHAAPPTTEERR OONNEE

IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN:: RREEGGIIOONNAALL KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE,, DDAATTAA AANNDD IINNFFOORRMMAATTIIOONN EEXXCCHHAANNGGEE

11..11 BBaacckkggrroouunndd

The Corangamite Catchment Management Authority (CCMA) is charged with the sustainable management of the natural resources in the Corangamite Region. The main mechanism for this management occurs through the formulation and implementation of a Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS).

RReeggiioonnaall CCaattcchhmmeenntt SSttrraatteeggyy ((RRCCSS))

Recent review and renewal of the Corangamite RCS involved a series of stakeholder engagement processes that has led to the creation of a Working Draft (August 2002). The draft is divided into an assessment of the region, forces affecting the region, a set of goals, a set of assets and threats and a series of strategies. A number of these strategies relate to the need for improved exchange of information and knowledge between stakeholders within the region. The Corangamite Regional Knowledge Network Strategy (hereafter the ”Knowledge Network Strategy”) is intended to provide a means for the CCMA to improve linkages and exchange mechanisms of key knowledge repositories in the region.

NNaattiioonnaall AAccttiioonn PPllaann

The National Action Plan for Dryland Salinity, Water Quality and Biodiversity (NAP) is a program of the Federal and State Governments that focuses on improving the sustainability of a number of salinity impacted regions across Australia. The RCS is being developed under the foundation funding process of NAP. Following the completion of various foundation year projects and the review and renewal of the RCS, the CCMA will be a position to have the RCS accredited under NAP for implementation through a long-term investment plan for the region. It is intended that the Knowledge Network Strategy would assist in the formation of the communication of the monitoring and evaluation of NAP.

RRCCSS CCoommmmuunniiccaattiioonn SSttrraatteeggyy 22000022--22000077

The CCMA is currently developing a communication strategy that incorporates a range of methods and techniques of communicating the implementation of the RCS. The draft of the Communications Strategy is broken down into several key areas that highlight the need to focus on natural resource management (NRM) roles of agencies, individuals and groups in the community and how to design communication process while understanding the complexity of catchment processes. The key to the Communication Strategy is developed through projects that aim to establish the RCS as the main source of NRM knowledge in the region. The outcomes of the Knowledge Network Strategy are aligned to the RCS Communications Strategy on many fronts.


11..22 PPrroojjeecctt OObbjjeeccttiivveess

The Knowledge Network Strategy has been developed considering the following key objectives: 1. To scope feasible options for shared development and equitable access and exchange of

relevant knowledge, data and information. 2. To identify and engage the appropriate stakeholders in deciding what the regional knowledge,

data and information network (Knowledge Network) will provide. 3. To audit existing relevant networks, decision support tools, knowledge, data, and information

in Corangamite. 4. To design and cost the staged development of a regional Knowledge Network for

Corangamite including data sharing protocols, a Regional Information Centre and Local Nodes and the relevant equipment needed to store and exchange information.

5. To develop a strategy for phased implementation, including budgeting, of the Knowledge Network in Corangamite.

11..33 PPrroojjeecctt MMaannaaggeemmeenntt AArrrraannggeemmeennttss

Figure 1.1 shows the management arrangements put in place to steer and carry out the project. It included overseeing by the CMA NAP Committee, a Project Management/Working Group, and the Project Team. The CCMA Project Manager was Jo Roberts (NAP Project Officer) supported by Ted Rowley (CCMA NAP Team), Rick Pope (Woady Yaloak Catchment Group), Ian Shurvell (Regional Services - DNRE) and Adam Hood (Agriculture Division - DNRE). The Project Team reported through Adam Hood to the Management Team. The management team acted as a conduit for the presentation of material to the NAP Committee, as required for approval/finalisation of documentation.

Figure 1.1 Overall management arrangements


C M A

N A P C o m m i t t e e

P r o j e c t M a n a g e m e n t

W o r k i n g G r o u p

P r o j e c t T e a m


11..44 PPrroojjeecctt MMeetthhooddoollooggyy

Figure 1.2 shows the main components of the project methodology for the development of the consultancy. The tasks were set up as part of a cyclical planning process. Work at each stage (or phase) led to the next stage in the process and, progressively towards implementation and monitoring and evaluation.

Figure 1.2 Methodological Approach

Stakeholder/Client

Identification

Methodological Approach

Scope/Objectives

Engagement

Needs Analysis

Audit Systems

Information/Data

Design Network

System

ProtocolsOptions

Phased Implementation

1

2

3

45

6 7

8

Monitoring and Evaluation9

In applying this methodology, a number of elements were recycled and re-processed in light of what was learned. In particular, Stages 1, 2 and 3 formed a cycle of their own in which the project objectives were progressively refined. A clear shift in the objectives followed the community engagement process. These changes in focus came from the community identifying a need for a community-based network and less focus on a computer based decision support system. Information from this stage of the process was important and helped to establish the general directions and the overall approach leading to a final formulation of objectives at the start of Stage 5, the design of the system. The various stages of the methodology are discuss in the following chapters.


11..55 AA RReeggiioonnaall AApppprrooaacchh ttoo SShhaarriinngg IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn aanndd KKnnoowwlleeddggee

In the 21st Century, major changes to communication and sharing of knowledge are shaping the nations and regions of the World. They range from the Internet and e-mail providing instantaneous international human interaction, information download and computer connections, through to the ability to collect specific information at high resolution about the landscape from satellites circling the planet. This has led to a major shift in the way natural resource managers’ work. From the desktop, land managers can read real time satellite weather maps and by using Global Positioning Systems (GPS), and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) they can integrate high-resolution spatial information about assets and risks into whole-farm, whole-catchment and regional and local land use planning. Alongside this technical revolution, significant changes in the socio-economic composition of Australian regional agricultural communities have taken place. The changes have been partially, if not wholly, attributed to particular circumstances beyond the immediate control of the individual farmer. To remain viable, farm businesses have adopted a range of measures, including technological and efficiency improvements, agricultural diversification, farm consolidation, and off-farm financial support (Gyles, 1999, p2). These issues and appropriate responses for sustainable development of the Corangamite Region need to be communicated effectively and in a useful format for all natural resource managers to consider and incorporate into management and action plans. Already, the review of assets and threats in Corangamite has identified that knowledge limitations are prevalent. These include issues of technical understanding, interpretation and dissemination. A regional approach to improving knowledge sharing is about building confident, more capable decision-makers. Specifically, the regional and local exchange of information and knowledge regarding activities such as improved management practices, farm trials, open days, seminars, conferences, catchment and industry action planning, land use planning and the development of new relevant data sets at relevant scales is essential for a sustainable future in Corangamite. The CCMA has recognised itself as an important stakeholder in the development of a regional community-based network that can provide a conduit for these exchanges.

11..66 TThhee RReeggiioonnaall KKnnoowwlleeddggee,, DDaattaa aanndd IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn NNeettwwoorrkk -- CCoonncceeppttss

A Knowledge Network is an appropriate combination of information,

communication systems, interpretation tools (software, models and data) and

users that attempts to improve the solving of moderately structured problems. The

implementation of such a network involves a combination of information

technology and behavioural science to aid people in decision situations. In the

Knowledge Network people are the decision-makers informed by the systems in

place (Arnott, 1991). Natural resource managers need to make decisions on a regular basis regarding the effect and usefulness that various investments and actions might have on processes in the catchment/region of concern. These range from actions on the farm to the review and renewal of management action plans by the CMA and Local Government. Access to good information and decision support tools is essential to allow managers to deal with the complexities of catchment processes.


“Managers need to access tools [and knowledge] that both integrate current scientific understanding of the impacts of alternative decisions…and provide effective means of collating, interpreting and using that information” (Walker, Lai, Leitch and Johnson, 1996, p.174-175) Increasingly, a combination of social, economic and biophysical information and associated models are needed for ecological sustainable development (ESD) principles to be incorporated into the application, investment and decision-making framework for programs like the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) and the NAP. Currently, if this information is available, it is very difficult for most managers to find it and to judge if the information or data is appropriate (scale, indicator) for the intended use. The Knowledge Network is intended to provide community orientated and managed links between information and the resource managers. Figure 1.3 provides the framework upon which it is proposed the Corangamite Knowledge Network will be built.

Figure 1.3 The basis for the Corangamite Knowledge Network

Corangamite

CMA

Knowledge Network- management,

coordination,Website

Land ManagementCommunity

Agencies - data collection,analysis,

regional development

Regional Catchment

Strategy Database

It is envisaged that there will be opportunity to set up local network nodes at sites across Corangamite. These will allow for access and local knowledge development. They could be based in Local Government locations, telecentres or local libraries.

TThhee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

The Knowledge Network is made up of a combination of a coordinated network of people and the processes, protocols and equipment that allow for the shared assemblage and exchange of information.


The flexibility of the network should account for the different types of stakeholders and their forms of preferred communication, whilst encouraging funding and support for improvement in the capacity of stakeholders to exchange information in the most efficient and expedient way. Most importantly, the network should be based on the importance of the involvement of people in the decision making process for investment and action regarding NRM.

DDaattaa aanndd IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn SShhaarriinngg

Knowledge, data and information come in many forms; they include the following.

• Practical or experiential knowledge is the personal knowledge that some individual or group learns while doing something like managing a farm or applying for a NHT grant. Direct interaction, local histories, field tours, conferences and seminars are usual ways to capture this information.

• Processed or scientific knowledge is the knowledge learned through a uniquely repeatable method, described in formal statements that can be critically examined with a defined understanding of margins of error. This knowledge is built by a combination of empirical knowledge and theory.

• Data can be in the form of tables, pictures, statements, graphs satellite imagery and maps. It can be spatial or non-spatial, quantitative or qualitative.

• Information can any or the above or a combination of those. The Knowledge Network should be able to capture the appropriate types and forms of these sources using the coordinated approach of a stakeholder network and a Regional Information Centre. When considering the presentation, availability and use of different types of regional and catchment information, it is also important to understand the differences between scale and type. Figure 1.4 describes the information pyramid showing appropriate uses, and limitations for different types of information. The ongoing implementation of the Knowledge Network should develop education and training courses as well as a system that filters and encourages use of information at most appropriate scales.


Figure 1.4 Data, modelling outputs and information products - uses and limitations.

Real World:

Complex interrelated/interdependent systems

Information Products

Modelling Outputs

Secondary Data Sources

Primary Data Sources

• Reports • Maps

• Spatial simulations • Predictions

• Summary Tables • Reclassified Data

• Sample Results • Survey Results • Sit e Monitoring

• Quantified/Qualified • Repeatable • Transferable • Minimal Errors

• Based on Primary Data • Repeatable • Statistical Errors

• Broad Application • Integration • Complex • Compounded Errors

• Dedicated Application • Strategic/Policy Development • Highly Subjective

RReeggiioonnaall IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn NNeettwwoorrkk

Following other information sharing systems such as the Herbert Resources Information Centre in Queensland and the Avon Catchment Network in Western Australia (See also Chapter 4, Section 4.1), the Corangamite CMA will develop a regional information network made up of a set of Local Nodes and a system of access, exchange and awareness.

CCoommmmuunniittyy AAwwaarreenneessss

An important role of the Regional Information Centre will be to promote the awareness of the Knowledge Network and to develop interest in the community for participation.

FFiilllliinngg GGaappss iinn CCaattcchhmmeenntt PPrroocceessss IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn

The Knowledge Network will need to develop an understanding of what information is available and what is needed in the region. There will be opportunities to integrate closely with the NAP knowledge being developed in the short- and long-term. Also non-traditional information, such as oral histories and local histories, would be incorporated into the sets of knowledge at the centre.


CCHHAAPPTTEERR TTWWOO

CCOOMMMMUUNNIITTYY NNEEEEDDSS AANNAALLYYSSIISS

22..11 IIddeennttiiffyyiinngg SSttaakkeehhoollddeerrss aanndd CClliieennttss

An important stage in the strategy formulation process was to identify the stakeholders and customers with an interest in accessing and utilising social, economic and biophysical information contributing to NRM. Stakeholders / customers include individuals, groups and organisations who work or operate at various geographic scales, and are located across the urban and rural areas of Corangamite. The main scales are regional, catchment, sub-catchment, specific areas (e.g. reserves), rivers and streams, and local areas extending to the individual property. Their knowledge, and data and information needs are diverse. Several key stakeholder groups were identified for the development of the Knowledge Network Strategy including individual farmers, landcare groups, environmental groups, urban residents, government agencies and regional management bodies, survey and research organisations, and industry.

IInnddiivviidduuaall ffaarrmmeerrss

Individual farmers or rural landholders chiefly work at the local level and have information needs for topics such as farm planning (e.g. whole farm plans), specific technical information (e.g. soils), and precise land and water management issues (e.g. weed identification and distribution). The individual property is a basic unit for NRM and the relationship between each property and regional planning and implementation is paramount to the success of NRM programs. Thus, the whole farm plan (or property management plan) is increasing becoming the vehicle by which funding for specific works is provided to individual landholders under agreed government / community programs for addressing a range of NRM issues. Most recently, there has been a move to the development of environmental management plans and systems for the agricultural industry, and the information needs underpinning this will also be explored.

LLaannddccaarree GGrroouuppss aanndd LLaannddccaarree NNeettwwoorrkkss

Landcare groups work at the sub-catchment level bringing together activity across adjoining properties. They, at first, need “area plans” incorporating basic biophysical information and providing a basis for project planning. This planning process then brings up the issues and control options and, most importantly, the identification of the information necessary to implement the options. In some cases, it might be required to identify recharge areas and linkages to discharge hotspots. In others, the location of remnant vegetation is important. Similar information is also required by Landcare networks but with more emphasis on a regional level of analysis and working with agencies and others in the planning and implementation of regional strategies and underpinning Action Plans.


EEnnvviirroonnmmeennttaall // CCoonnsseerrvvaattiioonn GGrroouuppss

Environmental / conservation groups and other related community organisations work at various different scales on issues at local area through to the regional level. Their needs range from the broad regional picture using statistical data and resource information to maps of specific locations in some detail.

UUrrbbaann RReessiiddeennttss

Urban residents make up the major proportion of the Corangamite Region. The linkage between urban residents and the CMA are not clear except when these residents are part of one of the other groups identified. During the community engagement process, it was stressed that the major users of natural resources are urban residents and it was considered important that the Knowledge Network extends its coverage to improve connections to urban resource use issues.

GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt AAggeenncciieess aanndd RReeggiioonnaall MMaannaaggeemmeenntt BBooddiieess

Development of the government / community partnerships has meant a much increased flow of information for the planning and implementation of strategies/plans as well as augmented accountability requirements. Monitoring has thus become a significant aspect of information flow across all these groups and their respective activities. At whatever scale of activity it occurs, it is about observing (longer term) progress in achieving objectives for asset protection through indicators of resource condition change (regional targets) as part of the planning and implementation feedback loop, as well as providing annual accountability through outputs/targets. This information is vital to management bodies and fund providers (regional, State or Commonwealth). Organisations in this category include DNRE, DoI, EPA, Corangamite CMA, Water Authorities, Local Government, AFFA, and Environment Australia.

SSuurrvveeyy aanndd RReesseeaarrcchh OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnss

Another major aspect is the sharing of practical experience from all levels of planning and implementation of NRM activities. One example of this is landholder participation in on-farm research trials for perennial pasture establishment for recharge control, and the need for rigorous and systematic data collection. Survey (e.g. mapping) is another basic natural resource data collection issue with community organisations more often being asked to collect information vital to the ongoing understanding of the distribution of specific attributes (e.g. occurrence of specific weeds, Waterwatch programs etc). This is becoming increasingly valuable and important with the application of GIS by Local Government and the need to develop the linkages with state and national data collection systems such as the National Land and Water Resources Audit (NLWRA).

IInndduussttrryy

Industry was identified as companies that are directly related to natural resource-based activities. Currently, the linkages between key companies such as Bonlac and other similar large-influence organisations and the CCMA is less than would be expected. The process of engagement and identifying needs for decision making in these companies are very important steps in building long-term partnerships for sustainability in the region.

The audience for the workshops was selected from members of the above groups to ensure an

appropriate coverage of the range of community stakeholders/clients important to the project.


33..22 EEnnggaaggeemmeenntt PPrroocceessss

The Project Team conducted several Focus Group meetings and workshops with stakeholders / customers to encourage them to provide substantial input into the strategy formulation process. This involved, in particular (i) developing an awareness of the project, (ii) needs analysis for a Knowledge Network in the Corangamite Region, (iii) refining the Vision / Mission and Strategic Objectives, and (iv) enhancing (proposed) components of the Knowledge Network. Specific details of this stage were refined to act as a complementary program to the “Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS) Review and Renewal Process”. Due to the large amount of community engagement already conducted during the review and renewal of the RCS, the Project Management Group recognised a danger that the community could experience “burn-out” from over-consultation. Following discussion with the team involved with the community engagement process for the RCS development (Ross Colliver and Jacqueline Gothe) and the Management Group, it was decided that the most effective way to capture community aspirations and needs was by conducting three phases of engagement. The essence of these three phases is outlined in Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 The Process of Community and Key Stakeholder Engagement.

Phase 1. Focus Group

Fine Tuning Vision, Mission and Strategic Objectives

a. Membership - Key Stakeholders representing each identified groupb. Agenda

•Overview of Knowledge Network - Vision, Mission, Objectives

•Discussion of Needs, Roles and Potential Linkages

•Revisit/Redraft Vision, Mission, Objectives

Phase 3. Focus Group

Prioritising Objectives and Forging Ongoing Relationships

a. Membership - Key Stakeholders representing each identified group as

b. Agenda•Priority Setting for Implementation - Weighting objectives and setting action

for implementation

•Building ongoing relationship with Focus Group (potential Steering Group)

Phase 2. Community Workshops

Information and Needs Analysis

a. Membership - All interest community members

b. Agenda•Overview of Knowledge Network

•Community Needs considering current situation and what could be...

Optio

ns for

Desig

n / Im

ple

me

nta

tio

n o

f th

eC

ora

ng

am

ite

Kn

ow

ledg

e N

etw

ork


33..33 FFooccuuss GGrroouupp

The Focus Group is a method of market evaluation that relies on a small targeted group that works through the issues and questions set by a Facilitator to best capture viewpoints. The participants are usually selected with reference to their specialist understanding relevant to:

• Knowledge of the issues,

• CCMA/RCS Project Linkages

• Direct involvement,

• Practitioner, and/or,

• Stakeholder Group Representative. The Project Management Group selected the most appropriate persons to be invited based on the checklist shown in Table 3.1.


Table 3.1 Corangamite Knowledge Network – Focus Group Checklist CORANGAMITE KNOWLEDGE NETWORK – FOCUS GROUP

STAKEHOLDER CATEGORY NOMINEE ORGANISATIONAL LINKS

EXPERIENCE CCMA PROJECT

LINKAGES

1 INDIVIDUAL FARMER � VFF -

2,5

2 RURAL RESIDENT 2

3 URBAN RESIDENT 1,2

4 LANDCARE GROUP OR LANDCARE

NETWORK 2,3,4,5,6

5 ENVIRONMENT / CONSERVATION/INDIGENOUS GROUP

2,3,5

6 LOCAL GOVERNMENT 1,4,5,6, 15

7 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY 3, 4, 9,

8 REGIONAL MANAGEMENT BODY 2, 4, 5

8 INDUSTRY �

9 SURVEY OR RESEARCH ORGANISATION

� 2, 3, 4, 9

Possible linkages with other CCMA Projects 1. Urban Community Education and Awareness Project (see above) 2. Communications Project 3. Subcatchment Salnity Risk Prioritisation 4. Groundwater Monitoring and Research Database 5. An Inventory of the Character and the Condition of Wetlands and Lakes of the

Corangamite Region 6. Landcare (and other) Coordinators Strategy and Plan 7. Research & Development Compendium 8. Developing & Managing a Water-based Monitoring Network – Corangamite &

Glenelg Hopkins-Regions 9. Biodiversity Risk Assessment & Mitigation

10. Municipal Catchment Coordination 11. Scaling up Revegetation – a framework for effective seed supply 12. Information Gap Filling – Water Quality Plan 13. Industry – Natural Resource Management Partnerships 14. Communication, engagement and social change benchmarking. 15. Improving Natural Resource Planners Knowledge in Biodiversity

Conservation. 16. Risk Mitigation – Biodiversity Mapping. 17. Bioregional Biodiversity Planning.


FFooccuuss GGrroouupp AAccttiivviittiieess

Prior to the Focus Group’s meetings, a questionnaire was circulated in advance under the auspices of the Corangamite CMA to the invited participants. The key elements of that questionnaire are outlined below. The questionnaire responses were discussed in the first half of the Focus Group Session. A facilitator from the Project Team led the Focus Group discussions.

FOCUS GROUP QUESTIONNAIRE

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION CIRCULATED Project Description Mission (Draft) Vision (Draft) Strategic Objectives (Draft)

IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDS OF STAKEHOLDER CATEGORY CURRENT KNOWLEDGE NETWORK IN REGION (brief description of one example / case study)

STRONG POINTS ABOUT THE CURRENT KNOWLEDGE NETWORK

ISSUES / ASPECTS THAT COULD BE IMPROVED

BARRIERS / IMPEDIMENTS

POINTS YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE OR EMPHASISE

FFiinnee--TTuunniinngg VViissiioonn aanndd SSttrraatteeggiicc OObbjjeeccttiivveess

At this stage, the main task of the Facilitator was to capture the group perspective on the draft versions of the Mission, Vision and Strategic Objectives (See appendices 4a and 4b). These were then adjusted and redrafted into a hierarchy of related and complementary objectives. Following the community workshops described below, the Focus Group then developed a set of priorities for the implementation of the Knowledge Network. This process is described in detail in Chapter Six.


33..33 CCoommmmuunniittyy WWoorrkksshhooppss

Following the Focus Group discussions, an Expression of Interest (EOI) call was put out at the concurrent RCS workshop through circulation of a pamphlet with details of dates, times and locations and phone contact details. It was considered essential to capture the existing knowledge and expertise in the regional community, especially in an area as fast moving and cutting edge as information technology. At the same time it was necessary to keep our ‘feet on the ground’ by understanding community needs and effective information communication processes.

IInnvviittaattiioonn ooff WWoorrkksshhoopp PPaarrttiicciippaannttss -- WWoorrkksshhooppss

As mentioned in Section 3.1, key community participants include farmers, hobby farmers/ rural residential owners, urban residents, environment/ conservation groups, and industry representatives were invited from those who participated in the development of the Regional Catchment Strategy. Two community workshops were organised at two separate locations of Geelong (7-08-02) and Ballarat (8-08-02) in the region to try to capture a wide representative sample of stakeholders. The workshops were structured to:

• Present the vision, mission and strategic objectives for the project and offer the opportunity for stakeholders to respond at the time or later;

• Identify the needs of the different stakeholder groups (this was the dominant concentration of the workshop); and

• Identify examples of what stakeholders considered to be good examples of knowledge networking in practice.

Eleven people attended the workshop in Geelong and eleven people attended the workshop in Ballarat. The participants included people representing the full range of identified stakeholders. The Management Group and the participants considered the workshops a success.

33..44 UUsseerr nneeeeddss –– OOuuttccoommeess FFooccuusssseedd

This discussion is broken down into user groups represented at the workshops and the main points from the discussion are summarised in Appendix 5. The results of the workshops were broad ranging. Prior to the workshops there was an expectation that the most predominant matters would relate to the more technical requirements or content (e.g. scale and type of data required). However, there was considerable discussion of the types of delivery of the information and issues concerned with performance of current agency providers of information to the community sector. To aid in the analysis the needs / issues raised at the workshop have been divided into three categories: Access, Content and Design requirements/impediments.


AA CC CC EE SS SS

This relates to the formats and mechanisms of delivery and exchange of information (e.g. access to ‘real’ people, capacity for interpretation etc). These are matters of interface between the stored data and the user. We are talking here about encouraging people to access information as contrasted to compulsory situations, such as tax.

CC OO NN TT EE NN TT

This relates to specific information in a more technical sense (e.g. database of plants and animal etc).

DDEE SS II GG NN RR EE QQ UU II RR EE MM EE NN TT SS // II MM PP EE DD II MM EE NN TT SS

This covers both systems requirements (e.g. quality assurance) and impediments to knowledge transfer (e.g. DNRE contact numbers not worth ringing) and potential impediments (e.g. the Privacy Act). The following is an analysis of user needs as identified for each of the user groups that participated in the two workshops (see Appendix 5 for the detail of issues by user groups).

RRuurraall LLaannddhhoollddeerr

AA CC CC EE SS SS

The needs here were well articulated as a face to face interface for initial information retrieval, a single point of service with a clear understanding of who does what, support on how to navigate the system, and reliable information. This represents a hierarchy from initial contact through to information provision. It is fair to say that the participants expressed a strong need for personal contact.


These needs were diverse. One strong thread related to native vegetation and a need to be able to readily access information to identify native plant species. The capacity to be able to distinguish between a weed and a native plant was seen as a fundamental need, and the ‘basic right to the building blocks for landowners as natural resource managers’. In the same vein rural landholders were seeking information on maps and plans relevant to remnant vegetation on private land. (Note: The provision of information for the identification of pest plant species has been the subject of some projects under the Victorian Weeds Initiative for selected areas / municipalities. Are there equivalent thrusts for identifying native plant species?). Landholders identified the need for information on neighbouring ownership to meet obligations for activities such as rabbit baiting programs. (Note: Local Government has this information on their ratepayers database and some pilot projects with municipal councils have linked this information to the design and implementation of weed eradication programs). The need for guidelines and directions on what constitutes good land management was identified and also the need for indicators.



A major issue was the relationship between agencies collecting information on private land and the provision back to the landholder. It was seen very much as a one way street with landholders providing or allowing the collection of information and the agency not allowing access to the information. One reason for this suggested was the impact of the Privacy Act. Other issues concerned the relationship with the agency information providers where the participants identified changeover of staff with loss of local knowledge (e.g. lack of continuity of information), lack of trust, and the time lag between the provision of information, a visit and action on the ground.

LLaannddccaarree ggrroouuppss // nneettwwoorrkkss

AA CC CC EE SS SS

One common thread in this area was the a focus on NRM groups. It was seen that there was an opportunity for a local area group focus in the knowledge network because of the scale of common interests. Such groups can generate their own layers of data but the wished for assistance in developing easier methods to enter and collate data. This approach would also enable groups to record and monitor progress of local and regional natural resource management. Amalgamation (aggregation) of data at the group level would then allow reporting about group activity while at the same time retaining individual privacy (e.g. sensitive data for planning and management). The need for facilitation support in these group processes was identified. As with the landholders, access to a person (not a telephone answering system) was raised as the important interface between user and the data. Access to sources and people with specialist knowledge of the area was also mentioned. The need for an information resource kit / directory was also raised.


A broad range of information needs were identified encompassing, database of plants and animals, knowledge available on native vegetation, information on weed distribution and responsibilities for the control of pest plants and animals (Note: there are good case studies available on all of these matters). A need for basic information on assets (e.g. soils, vegetation, waterways, geology) at a scale of 1:25,000 was identified, along with information on groundwater movement with contours to 2m. The storage of information on existing initiatives as seen as very important to avoid ‘reinventing the wheel’. This links also to a further need for access to experiences of similar organisations and back to the landholders concern for the need to capture local knowledge before people move on. Information needs for practical management (e.g. how to manage a grassland), potential funding sources (e.g. resources / grants available) and local database of contractors were also raised.


Capture of existing information again featured as an issue with a comment that ‘almost all the specialist information has been documented numerous times, but that the custodians are either unknown, retired or deceased’.


Participants voiced their opinion that DNRE contact were not worth ringing, the need for less red tape, requirement for assistance in dealing with a regulation nightmare and the need to develop trust between stakeholders and agency staff (i.e. people who control and hold information).

EEnnvviirroonnmmeenntt // ccoonnsseerrvvaattiioonn ggrroouuppss

AA CC CC EE SS SS

This user group identified reliable, relevant and recoverable sources of information as important to enable the damage (to assets) to be monitored, as well as access to accurate information via, consultants, agencies and local people. They want a place to store knowledge so that it can be accessed and the face to face gathering of information before people disappear. They also expressed a need to know whom to contact in DNRE and Parks Victoria and knowledge of the hierarchical structure to help with this.


There were no specific data needs identified.


The main issue was the relationship with government agencies. They considered there was a lack of knowledge and experience in NRE / Parks Victoria staff and that the need for more resources in that area. Lack of trust between community users and agencies was seen as an impediment, along with the difficulty in getting information (e.g. introduction of Privacy Act). The impact of recreational vehicles was also raised as a major problem. (Note: This may be an issue of the capacity for information provision to external target audiences on specific issues through linkages with other information networks).

LLooccaall ggoovveerrnnmmeenntt

AA CC CC EE SS SS

The need identified here was for the capacity to share knowledge between public and private land managers.


Quite a range of specific content needs were identified. They were: more knowledge at a large scale (1:10,000) and reasonable cost, including for identification of threatened environments; mapping of forestry prospects; land capability information for development; new green development information; electronically available native vegetation plans; planning laws; and weed data along with legal responsibilities (Note: considerable work has been done on this aspect by a range of municipalities).


The one issue raised was the implications of the Privacy Act for access to information.


RReeggiioonnaall bbooddiieess

AA CC CC EE SS SS

For catchment assets / threats there was seen a requirement for information to be available at scales appropriate to statewide, regional and local needs. In regard to management options the use of the system for strategic investment / priority setting was identified along with the capacity for an amalgamated view of progress on spatial and analytical basis to compare to priorities. The need to work at a combined or aggregated level was seen as important to protect privacy. Other access issues were the provision of technical support and lead project officers, easy map site with hyperlinks and a chat line where questions can be asked and it is open for others with knowledge to answer.


Regional level information can be provided at a 1:250,000 to 1:100,000 scale but changes when we look at the needs of catchment or landcare groups where a larger scale is required especially for soils, groundwater flows and vegetation. Other data on contours, waterways, roads etc was considered reasonable. The need for a hierarchical structure of government and semi government groups was identified, along with an accompanying knowledge of who to go to for what. In terms of management options a need to integrate with NRE FIS and PISMO was identified.


Issues identified were similar to previous user groups with a need to store local knowledge before it disappears, the need for trust between community and government agencies and the quality of information inputs.

SSttaattee--wwiiddee SSuurrvveeyy aanndd RReesseeaarrcchh OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnss

AA CC CC EE SS SS

One of the major aspects raised was the need for interpretation services, as not all research data can be understood without expert knowledge. (Note: there is also an issue here of incorrect use of data because of lack of knowledge). In the same vein there was identified the need for an education stream of where to get training or support in data use. The scale of the data needs to be investigated with research often being at a high scale and in specific areas.

The need for ready accessibility to data of community groups and individuals was raised and this in turn linked to the provision of data in different layers of information based on community needs. (Note: this aggregation is important in addressing the privacy issue). The interface between corporate systems was also raised with the need for a portal to access DNRE corporate datasets with the appropriate access agreements or licences.



There was little on specific content needs as this user group tends to lead and determine this aspect for their specific applications.


There was a wide range of issues identified. One was the competitiveness / jealousy between agencies its impact on the availability of information. Others related to the nature of information management including the regular updating of datasets, continual improvement, quality assurance, source acknowledgement and the need for feedback loops.

IInndduussttrryy

AA CC CC EE SS SS

As raised by previous user groups, the single point of information sourcing was the main issue.


The needs were specific, encompassing data on groundwater, soils types, surface water, weeds, pastures, vegetation, air quality, meteorological information, archaeological and heritage data. (Note: this was for one industry but shows the specific nature of information needs).


Issues raised were, need for information to be keep up to date, capacity for industry to add information to the network including industry dialogue (e.g. events, economic issues etc), accuracy of data (e.g. based on limited number of sampling sites and cost of purchasing information (e.g. datasets from SKM).


CCHHAAPPTTEERR FFOOUURR

AAUUDDIITT OOFF CCUURRRREENNTT NNEETTWWOORRKKSS,, KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE,, DDAATTAA AANNDD IINNFFOORRMMAATTIIOONN

A brief introductory audit of the current networks, knowledge, data and information was conducted. This allowed for the needs of the community, identified in Stage 3 of the project methodology (Figure 1.2), to be compared with the actual information available. The framework of the Corangamite Audit of Knowledge is attached as a separate volume. It is intended that this knowledge compendium will become a desktop and online resource for participants of the Knowledge Network.

44..11 OOtthheerr EExxppeerriieenncceess ooff KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkkss

The formulation of the strategy has drawn on the relevant experiences of Corangamite, other regions and catchments nationally and internationally. The following examples offered relevant guidance in its preparation. A broader range of experiences of the Corangamite community is outlined in Appendix A - information that was collected as part of the regional consultation. It should be noted that this is not an exhaustive list of tools and networks. It is a representative assessment of relevant programs and projects. This should be enhanced as part of the development of the Corangamite Audit of Knowledge during the implementation of the Corangamite Knowledge Network.

CCoorraannggaammiittee

WWOO AA DD YY YY AA LL OO AA KK CC AA TT CC HH MM EE NN TT GGRR OO UU PP

The Woady Yaloak Catchment Group has a strong interest in developing information at the farm level and aggregating it to the context of sub-catchment and catchment levels. This has meant that a number of initiatives have substantially progressed the capacity of the group to develop and exchange natural resources management information and knowledge of their catchment. One such initiative has been the development and implementation of a network of landholders/managers who are trained to be GIS operators. These decision makers use satellite imagery and other base data sets to develop farm and catchment plans and reports. This involves data acquisition utilising GPS or on-screen digitising to capture on-ground works intended to improve the sustainability of the Woady Yaloak Catchment. Some examples include weeds mapping, revegetation and fencing. The Group is auspiced by various funding programs at regional, State, Federal and corporate level and has close linkages with a commercial interest that has developed a GIS for low cost farm level data collection and data management. The system now incorporates Global Positioning Systems (GPS) hardware\GIS software, data for catchment, training (subsidised to 90% by FarmBis) and a support mechanism. The package is called Landscapes for the Future and incorporates Street Ahead GIS software.


SS TT RR EE NN GG TT HH SS

• This group provides an important coordination linkage between farm level management decisions and the context of the catchment and region.

• The group is proactive in the consideration of sustainable land management

• The programs implemented are focussed on building capacity through knowledge, technology adoption and neighbourhood networks.

• The group is keenly interested in collaborative efforts to better manage land and catchment assets.

WWEE AA KK NN EE SS SS EE SS

• Uncertainty in ongoing funding

• Not integrated as part of the broader NAP and State knowledge groups

• Relies on external money / grants to progress

• Relies on a couple of key persons to sustain project enthusiasm.

VViiccttoorriiaa

RR EE GG II OO NN AA LL DD AA TT AA NNEE TT

Regional Data Net is an initiative of DNRE that is developing a range of online tools for NRM project development and reporting. The Data Net includes a series of Regional Data Servers and satellites spread across the State in regional NRE offices and institutes and CMAs.


• Regional Data Servers provide regionalised data development and management capacity.

• Currently CAMS (Catchment Activity Management System) is being used to report on a range of activities across the State.


• Regional satellites or nodes of the Regional Data Servers are not funded.

• Currently access to the Regional Data Servers is limited to NRE and CMA data managers

• CAMS is a system for reporting to State level on projects funded under various state and regionally funded projects. It appears to be about aggregation only.

• There is no link to local government and catchment groups such as the Woady Yaloak Catchment Group.

• Poor Internet speed limits the usefulness.

BB II RR CC HH UU PP CC RR OO PP PP II NN GG GGRR OO UU PP

The Birchip Cropping Group (BCG) is a farmer-driven agricultural organisation that conducts agronomic research on cereal, pulse and oilseed crops grown in the Wimmera-Mallee region. The Group operates on the premise that if rural communities are to survive, they need to attract industry, government and educational institutions to their region. In 1993, about 10 local farmers established a group to conduct farmer-driven agronomic research specific to the area. The result has been growth in membership to 500 across four states. The Group employs seven staff and has an annual turnover of almost $700,000.


It is funded by membership fees, industry sponsorship, commissioned research projects from commercial companies and other research and development corporations, primarily the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC), which is supported by grain growers and the Federal Government. A large amount of information about the group, its projects and cropping information in general can be found at http://www.bcg.org.au/. The group is keen to develop linkages with other groups and can be contacted by e-mail on [email protected]. The group offers memberships and uses these to attract sponsors. Annual memberships are $242. The form is attached as part of Appendix C. The group holds an agronomic expo annually and runs a number of field experiments on members properties which also become demonstration sites for best practice cropping. The main aims of the Birchip Cropping Group are:

• to demonstrate and develop better farming practices and technology for the main soil types in the Wimmera and Mallee (primarily on the Culgoa, Hopetoun and Tyrrell Land Systems).

• to transfer information and knowledge to farmers and the agricultural community with the aims of improving productivity, profit and long term viability.

• to draw together farmers, industry and government department representatives in the one resource area so that they may combine and interact to solve common agricultural problems.

Also, the group is a participant in the regional internet portal development for called Mainstreet. This provides a wide range of online information for western Victoria. This site can be found at http://www.mainstreet.au.com/.

WWAA TT EE RR WW AA TT CC HH

Waterwatch Victoria is part of a national community water quality monitoring program, which has been operating since 1993. Through Waterwatch, groups can link with each other, share information, compare findings and build a picture of the health of waterways across Australia. Community groups are collecting water quality information in a coordinated way across a whole catchment, both the regional community and government agencies are more likely to use community data for practical decision making and action. As that happens, recognition and support for community water monitoring groups will increase.


• Uses community to develop data

• Encourages wide ownership of information and catchment processes

• Long term program.


• Volunteer burnout

• Data is not accepted by scientific community.

AAuussttrraalliiaa

HH EE RR BB EE RR TT RR II VV EE RR IINN FF OO RR MM AA TT II OO NN CC EE NN TT RR EE -- QQUU EE EE NN SS LL AA NN DD

The "Herbert Resources Information Centre" in the Herbert River Catchment in Queensland, operates as an independent information broker and a geographic information support provider. It operates under the auspices of a Joint Venture Partnership. Joint Venture Partners are committed


to a medium/long-term (5 years plus) role in the program. There are six partners comprising the Hinchinbrook Shire Council, CSR Ltd., The Herbert Cane Protection and Productivity Board, CANEGROWERS, the Queensland Department of Natural Resources and CSIRO (CSIRO et al. 1999). There is an independent chair and a board made up of Joint Venture Partners. Partners to the program provide seed funding for the centre and the data/information which underpins the functionality of the centre. The centre itself has a small professional staff (depending on projects running) and a high level technical capacity that supports Partner project work. It also provides fee-for-service support and data brokerage to a range of non-Partner clients. The centre offers the possibility for regional training in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and spatial data collection and modelling. Generally, the centre lifts the capacity of the partners and, more generally, the region to develop an integrated understanding of the natural resources in the region. It is considered that a variation of the Herbert River approach would be a very appropriate end point for a Corangamite Knowledge Network. Excellent information regarding the Herbert River Centre is available at http://www.hric.tag.csiro.au. HRIC has produced some guidelines for development and implementation of Collaborative Resource Information Centres (CRIC) and some key point are:

• As well as managing data, a CRIC has a role in helping others to better manage data. One of the key roles of the HRIC has been to help spatial data users better understand the data they have available and the limitations associated with that data, both so that the data is used appropriately and so that future data.

• A CRIC is self-funded The financial input into the HRIC from Joint Venture Partners comes with an associated expectation of results and accountability. We argue that a CRIC that is externally funded as a ‘public service’ is unlikely to be dynamic and vibrant. This is not to say that there is no role for external seed funding to get a CRIC off the ground. Similarly, subsidisation across Joint Venture Partners is, in general, worth avoiding. While apportioning benefits and, therefore, working out appropriate levels of contribution is not straight forward, this general principle of proportional contribution is important.

Appendix B contains important documentation regarding the experiences of the Herbert River Information Centre and a set of codified guidelines for development and ongoing implementation of a CRIC.

AA VV OO NN CC AA TT CC HH MM EE NN TT –– WWEE SS TT EE RR NN AA UU SS TT RR AA LL II AA

The Avon Catchment Council has developed a strategy to implement a Knowledge Network in Western Australia. The draft vision of this network is that “All land managers in the Avon River

Basin will have access to the knowledge needed to undertake sustainable natural resource

management” (ACC, 2002). A substantial amount of information is available on the website: http://www.avonicm.org.au/. A key strength of the Avon approach is the development of program of capacity building and data sharing similar to the system in place in the Woady Yaloak Catchment Group. This is especially focussed on using data collection and management tools in the catchment. Catchment facilitators and farmers are involved in “train the trainer” programs that implement better understanding of catchment processes while building capacity to use spatial information technology in farm and regional resource planning and management.


NNAA RR GG EE BB UU PP CC EE NN TT RR EE –– WWEE SS TT EE RR NN AA UU SS TT RR AA LL II AA

Naragebup is a community built, community run, non-profit organization open to the public six days a week. It aims “To provide constructive, integrated and educational programs which promote the benefits of managing the environment to sustain quality of life. The website http://www.southwest.com.au/~rrec/naragebup/welcome.shtml is limited but the centre itself could provide some useful ideas for implementing a similar approach in Corangamite.

OOvveerrsseeaass

CC EE NN TT RR AA LL AA NN DD EE AA SS TT EE RR NN EE UU RR OO PP EE

The official website of the Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe (REC), a non-advocacy, not-for-profit organisation with a mission to assist in solving environmental problems in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) The REC has a public access library, a number of project officers employed on environmental projects in the region, ranging from assessments of water quality in the Dan ube River to community development and environment. The website http://www.rec.org/ offers a great deal of information and is an important point of access to the Centre, which is located in one city with 15 offices in countries in the region. The website includes information about projects; project websites, project search engines, publications; new REC publications, archived publications, the capacity to order publications, library directory; funding sources, government directory, media source directory, NGO directory, local directory, grants, Envirodirectory and a calender of events. The REC is funded by a range of donor governments and non-government organisations to the order of 10 million Euros in 2001. This major program has received over 50 million Euros in the 10 years it has been operating. Although the level and extent of the approach of the REC is not directly applicable to the Corangamite Region, the concepts driving the centre are quite applicable. Appendix C is a recent sample of “The Bulletin”, a quarterly magazine produced by the REC. This include information about the how the REC is organised and funded.

EE NN GG LL AA NN DD

The NERC-ESRC Land Use Programme (NELUP) uses a general systems framework for organising the large amounts of information that are relevant to decision-making in land use and catchment management. The first level is that of empirical information, which contains descriptive data from, which more sophisticated levels may be constructed ranging from physically based models, through biosystems to the individual and political levels. It has been initially implemented in the River Tyne Catchment in the Newcastle Upon Tyne sub-region. (O’Callaghan, 1995; several a other articles in Journal of Environmental Planning and

Management, Vol. 38, No. 1, 1995).


CCHHAAPPTTEERR FFIIVVEE

DDEESSIIGGNN OOFF TTHHEE KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE NNEETTWWOORRKK SSYYSSTTEEMM

The information gathered from the workshops and the audit of current networks, knowledge, data and information, assisted the further advancement of the project methodological approach outlined in Figure 1.2. The key elements that are considered here in conjunction with those stages are the costing and the timing of implementation.

55..11 DDeessiiggnn OOppttiioonnss aanndd DDeeffiinniittiioonnss

Based on the outputs of the community consultation process a set of four options was developed to explore various characteristics, including the implementation of the Corangamite Knowledge Network. The different options reflect a combination of investment levels required and the emphasis of the functionality of the network. Each option is discussed in terms of People, Content and Access.

OOppttiioonn OOnnee MMiinniimmaall KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

This option reflects a do-nothing outcome of the Knowledge Network Strategy. It suggests a strong reliance on existing and developing processes. It will largely be developed under the auspices of the RCS Communication Strategy – Gateway Projects.

• People

• Loose people network – exploit existing CMA community relations.

• Content: data and information

• Off-the-shelf information and data (currently available)

• Emphasis on building linkages to existing repositories

• Assets and Threats indicators

• Monitoring and evaluation of RCS outcomes.

• Access and exchange

• Website – portal

• Existing sites

• Existing systems

• Existing networks

• Build and maintain audit of knowledge in Corangamite

• Existing protocols and organisational agreements minimal.

OOppttiioonn TTwwoo CCoorraannggaammiittee CCoommmmuunniittyy KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

This option focuses on building community capacity to network and exchange knowledge, data and information. The majority of investment lies in the areas of community development and building a range of partnerships between stakeholders of NRM in Corangamite. Under Content, the key elements involve some brokerage of gap-filling of information by the CMA and an objective driving the localisation of information within the context of the catchment. Access is stressed through community based approaches that allow for local nodes run by people who can


be contacted directly for assistance within the network. This requires a substantial amount of pressure from the CMA to ensure that information is provide by agencies in formats and scales that are useful to the network of land managers in the CMA region.

• People

• Emphasis on people network and trust

• Build and promote ongoing People Network

• Coordinated and Planned Engagement/Involvement/Ownership in catchment management – RCS implementation

• Develop training and education mechanisms

• Catchment processes

• Information collection and interpretation

• Community building

• Grant application

• Promote community champions as vital sources of catchment knowledge

• Link researchers to community and needs.


• Maintain audit of knowledge

• Exploit existing repositories of data and information

• Encourage network to localise data in catchment context

• Identify and broker gap-filling

• Assets and Threats indicators

• Monitoring and evaluation of RCS outcomes.


• Regional and local contact points (local nodes)

• Provide personal contact point and Network Officer/s (phone contact and face-to-face)

• Build Website – portal

• Existing sites

• Existing Systems (tools and data exchange mechanisms)

• Build networking capacity of people and groups interested in NRM – newsletter, email list, chat, FAQs


• Encourage existing content agencies to provide more appropriate access/systems/interpretation – multiple format delivery – minimal cost to users

• Protocols and organisation agreements handled by users with minimal brokerage by CMA.

OOppttiioonn TThhrreeee CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk EExxcchhaannggee SSyysstteemm

This option stresses the need for the CMA to invest in the development of an knowledge, data and information exchange system. Focussing on the development of technology that exists as a system of collection, storage, transfer and interpretation. This involves a strong investment in data collection and management by the CMA as well as a system to provide access. People elements are not directly invested in under this option.

• People

• Loose network – rely on existing community relations

• Exploit current training and education systems






• Promote Knowledge Network Exchange System presence.



• Collect and Collate data, knowledge and information

• Build and maintain data management system

• Integrate assets and threats indicators

• Integrate monitoring and evaluation of RCS outcomes

• Interpret knowledge for region

• Exploit existing repositories of knowledge

• Use network to localise data – broker agency involvement and investment

• Identify and fill gaps.


• Regional Centre – virtual –based in CMA and online

• Local Nodes – Build mirroring systems at local nodes

• Provide multiple format delivery – interpreted – minimal cost to users

• Website –

• Existing sites


• Build tools and data exchange mechanisms

• Build networking tools online

• Online Mapping

• Provide Outlet for R&D


• Protocols and organisation agreements fully brokered by CMA – Knowledge Network.

OOppttiioonn FFoouurr CCoorraannggaammiittee CCoommpprreehheennssiivvee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

This is a comprehensive option that considers direct investment in all areas that have been identified as important for the development of a useful Regional Knowledge Network. This involves community capacity building, collection, collation, interpretation and management of data and the development of a knowledge network exchange system.

• People

• Emphasise people network and trust

• Build and promote ongoing people network

• Coordinated and Planned Engagement/Involvement/Ownership in catchment management – RCS implementation

• Develop training and education mechanisms





• Promote community champions as vital sources of catchment knowledge

• Link R&D to community needs.




• Collect and Collate data, knowledge and information - spatial, non-spatial, codified, experiential

• Build and maintain data management system

• Integrate assets and threats indicators

• Integrate monitoring and evaluation of RCS outcomes

• Interpret knowledge for region

• Exploit existing repositories of knowledge

• Use network to localise data – broker agency involvement and investment

• Identify and fill gaps.


• Regional Centre and local contact points (local nodes)

• Local Nodes – Build mirroring systems at local nodes

• Provide personal contact point and Network Officer/s (phone contact and face-to-face)

• Build Knowledge Network Website

• Portal

• Existing sites


• Online Mapping

• Build networking capacity of people and groups interested in NRM – newsletter, email list, chat, FAQs


• Encourage existing content agencies to provide more appropriate access/systems/interpretation – multiple format delivery – minimal cost to users

• Protocols and organisation agreements brokerage by CMA – Knowledge Network.

55..22 PPrreeffeerrrreedd OOppttiioonn ffoorr tthhee CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

Based on discussions with the CCMA NAP Team and the results of the community engagement process, the Corangamite Knowledge Network Strategy focussed on developing and implementing the Comprehensive Option (Option 4). This aims for a state-of-the-art system of communication, exchange and interpretation of catchment process information for the region. The following Chapter describes the preferred option for the Corangamite Knowledge Network in more detail and identifies a series of prioritised objectives for its implementation.


CCHHAAPPTTEERR SSIIXX

PPRREEFFEERRRREEDD OOPPTTIIOONN,, AACCTTIIOONNSS AANNDD TTHHEE RRCCSS

66..11 NNeettwwoorrkk MMiissssiioonn SSttaatteemmeenntt

Improved and ongoing access to and exchange of knowledge, data and information regarding sustainable natural resources

management (NRM) in the Corangamite Catchment Management Authority Region.

66..22 VViissiioonn pprrooppoosseedd ffoorr 22000077::

Corangamite maintains the most advanced Regional Knowledge Network and Information System in Australia that is accessible and regularly used by natural resources managers, farmers and the wider community for improved understanding and decision-making. The Network has been instrumental in allowing the region to become a world class example of innovative sustainable development.

This vision was proposed following the outcomes of consultation with community and key stakeholders including the CMA Management Team. The vision is articulated through three key components – People, Access and Content. The following points describe the key features and function of the Knowledge Network by the end of 2007.

PPeeooppllee VViissiioonn

• There is an integrated network of groups (eg. Government Agencies, Landcare, Universities) and individuals (eg. Landholders, Urban Residents) interested in natural resource management (NRM).

• The CMA, through a series of partnerships and shared projects, coordinates the Knowledge Network.

• There is an active and confident community in the Corangamite Region promoting sustainable development through improved knowledge and understanding of resource management practices.

AAcccceessss VViissiioonn

• There is a set of personal contact points for the community to access the Knowledge Network.

• There is a set of Local Nodes, coordinated by the CMA, which provide local knowledge in the regional context.

• The Knowledge Network has developed a range of data and their interpretation, sharing and exchange agreements and protocols that provide seamless access to a broad range of NRM


knowledge and information from the farm level aggregated to the catchment and region; and vice versa.

• There is a website that contains networking facilities, links to other websites and existing systems. Data and a range of interpreted online maps can be downloaded or ordered through the website.

CCoonntteenntt VViissiioonn

• The Knowledge Network has its own data management and knowledge audit system that collects, collates, and records knowledge from the region regarding NRM.

• The Knowledge Network interprets relevant regional and local knowledge.

• The Knowledge Network has a strong relationship with regional and local data collectors and encourages an equitable system of collection and sharing of catchment process information.

• The Corangamite Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS) assets and threats indicators and the monitoring and evaluation progress are strongly integrated into the Knowledge Network Data Management System and the website.

66..33 SSttrraatteeggiicc OObbjjeeccttiivveess -- PPrriioorriittiieess aanndd SStteeppss ttoo tthhee VViissiioonn

Strategic Objectives provide a plan to guide us towards the vision described above. A series of packaged actions and investments will then be tailored and prioritised to meet the most important objective(s) first, while ensuring the longer-term vision elements are kept in mind. The following Strategic Objectives were formulated through community consultation. Although they are separately presented for clarity of definition, during implementation a more integrated investment plan (or framework) will attempt to capitalise upon relationships between them and other related projects as much as possible:

PPeeooppllee

People - 1 To coordinate planned engagement, ownership and involvement regarding NRM. People - 2 To promote activities that develop an ongoing people network People - 3 To promote “Community Champions” People - 4 To strengthen ties to training and education programs especially those concerned with:

Training - 1 Community Building Training - 2 Information Collection and Interpretation Training - 3 Understanding Catchment Processes Training - 4 Grant Applications

People - 5 To Link R&D to community needs.

AAcccceessss

Access - 1 To provide a personal contact point for local communities Access - 2 To develop protocols and organisational arrangements for sustainable NRM Access - 3 To develop local nodes of the Knowledge Network Access - 4 To build a Knowledge Network Website considering the following key elements:

Website - 1 Build networking capacity of the region Website - 2 Website as Portal Website - 3 Links to existing data management and catchment tools


Website - 4 Links to existing information sites Website - 5 Capacity for online mapping

Access - 5 To encourage agencies to provide appropriate access and systems Access - 6 To develop a Regional Knowledge Centre at a distinct location within the

Corangamite Region.

CCoonntteenntt

Content - 1 To build and maintain a data management system Content - 2 To interpret knowledge for the region Content - 3 To exploit existing knowledge and systems Content - 4 To collect and collate data, knowledge and information Content - 5 To integrate monitoring and evaluation of RCS outcomes Content - 6 To integrate RCS Assets and Threats indicators. Figure 6.1 provides a hierarchical way of considering these objectives. On the basis of this hierarchy, each of the objectives was priortised using a multi-criteria evaluation technique during the final Focus Group meeting.

DDeeffiinniinngg PPrriioorriittyy ffoorr tthhee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

Priority in this case reflects the importance of the particular objective to be included in the direct, early responsibilities of the Knowledge Network. It does not mean that the elements with less priority are not important or should not be implemented. They are all an integral part of reaching the vision. Nonetheless, those with high weighting will require direct and early investment. (See Investment Framework, Section 7.4, below). Most importantly none of the objectives should be dropped from the overall framework of the Knowledge Network. In some cases, they may be met as a result of direct investment in the first year, while in others, they may be met as a result of five years of co-investment and partnership development. An example is the weighting of Content in the top level of the objective hierarchy, which is lower than the weighting for the other two major components – People and Access (see Figure 6.2). A concern of those users with a primary interest in developing quality data and filling gaps might be that access and people are of no use without a good content. In this situation, it must be understood that it is not considered the role of the Knowledge Network to prepare salinity or soils mapping; it is to encourage the filling of gaps in information and facilitate appropriate access to the knowledge network community.


Figure 6.1 Hierarchy of Strategic Objectives for the Knowledge Network

Promote activities

that develop

ongoing people

network

Coordinated and

Planned Engagement/


Catchment Processes

Information collection

and interpretation

Community building

Grant Application

Develop linkages

to education &

training mechanisms

Promote

community champions

Link R&D

to community needs

People

Collect and

collate data,

knowlege &

information

Exploit existing

knowledge

Build & maintain

data mangement

system

Integrate assets

and threat

indicators

Intergrate monitoring

and evaluation of

RCS outcomes

Interpret knowledge

for region

Content

Provide for

personal contact

Portal

Existing

Sites

Existing

Systems

Online Mapping

Build network

capacity

Build knowledge

network website

Develop

Local Nodes

Develop

Regional Centre

Encourage

agencies to provide

appropriate access/

systems

Develop Protocols

and organisation

agreements

Access


Knowledge Network

COPYRIGHT AGRICULTURE VICTORIA SERVICES PTY. LTD. DNRE, 2002


66..44 MMuullttii--CCrriitteerriiaa EEvvaalluuaattiioonn -- SSeettttiinngg PPrriioorriittiieess wwiitthh aa FFooccuuss GGrroouupp

Following the formulation of the Strategic Objectives, there needs to be some form of prioritisation to identify those most important for immediate action. The main problem with this is that many people find it difficult to clearly identify which issues are most significant. To achieve prioritisation, it is best to use simple, transparent tools to separate the issues involved so that objectives can be logically compared and weighted according to importance. For this purpose, a multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) method known as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to help stakeholders weight the objectives.

TThhee AAnnaallyyttiiccaall HHiieerraarrcchhyy PPrroocceessss ((AAHHPP))

The creator of AHP, Dr. Thomas Saaty explains that: “(AHP) enables experts to make effective decisions on complex issues by simplifying and expediting our natural decision-making process. Basically, the AHP is a method of breaking down a complex unstructured situation into its component parts; arranging these parts, or variables, into a hierarchical order and assigning numerical values to subjective judgements based on the relative importance of each variable; and synthesising the judgements to determine which variables have the highest priority and should be acted upon to influence the outcome of the situation” (Saaty, 1995, p.5). The AHP ordering of critical factors into a hierarchy of importance allows criteria to trade-off against one other depending on the weights assigned to them. The AHP also provides an effective structure for group decision-making by imposing a discipline on the group’s thought processes. The necessity of assigning a numerical value to each variable of the problem helps decision-makers to maintain cohesive thought patterns and to reach a conclusion. In addition, the consensual nature of group decision-making improves the “consistency of judgments and enhances the reliability of the AHP as a decision-making tool” (Saaty, 1995, p.5).

AAHHPP PPrroocceedduurreess

The procedure to carry out AHP is the same for all situations, although certain steps may be given special emphasis depending on the problem of interest. A panel of experts/stakeholders is chosen to provide advice for task at hand. In this case the Focus Group drawn from the stakeholders list at the CMA (see Section 3.3) was enlisted for this purpose. Steps in the process included:

1. Define the issue(s) or problem, and specify the solution desired. The issue(s) are determined by the particular needs and concerns at the local, regional, state or national level.

2. Identify the focus. The focus forms the pinnacle of the hierarchy (constructed in Step 4) and is

the outcome being sought from the application of AHP. 3. Identify the criteria. Criteria in the form of strategic objectives, were developed following the

community consultation process. 4. Construct the hierarchy. The heirarchy is structured in the form of a decision tree with the

overall objective, or focus, at the top. The hierarchy enables assessment of higher-level impact


elements on those of a lower level, or alternatively the contribution of elements in the lower level to the importance or fulfilment of the elements in the level above. There should be only five to nine criteria (factors) contributing to each issue. "Elements (criteria) that are of less immediate interest can be represented in general terms at the higher levels of the hierarchy and elements critical to the problem at hand can be developed to greater depth and specificity" (Saaty, 1994, p.96). Where necessary, primary criteria ought to be broken down into secondary and tertiary criteria. The criteria may be reviewed and modified.

5. Weight the criteria by posing a set of questions between pairs of criterion at each level of the

hierarchy to establish the relative importance or priority. This is carried out through a pairwise comparison - a robust technique for capturing preferences as the user compares all factors against each other but only two factors at a time, and thus can make a more reliable judgement.

The pairwise ratings are determined on a 9-point continuous scale and are entered into a pairwise comparison matrix.

6. Check the consistency of the evaluation. The consistency ratio of the hierarchy should be 10

per cent or less. If it is not, the quality of the information should be improved and reiteration is necessary by revising the assumptions made in answering the pairwise comparisons.

7. Finalise weights. The weights are finalised once the consistency ratio is acceptable, that is the assumptions made in the criteria for growth elements are consistent.

AAHHPP aanndd tthhee FFooccuuss GGrroouupp

AHP is best conducted with a manageable number of people where the group hears the different perspectives on the issues. Due to the limitations of a larger workshop, this weighting was conducted with the Focus Group once the key criteria/objectives were finalised following broader workshop consultations. The following sections describe the priorities resulting from the consideration by the Focus Group of the hierarchy (Figure 6.1) using the AHP.


66..55 IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn PPrriioorriittiieess ffoorr tthhee CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk

As defined in the original project methodology in Figure 1.2, the prioritisation process leads, through a series of iterations, to the formation of a preferred option for the Knowledge Network, Figure 6.2 represents the top hierarchy where the key elements of the Knowledge Network – People, Content and Access - are considered in direct comparison with each other.

Figure 6.2 The weighting of key elements of the Knowledge Network

People Content Access


Knowledge Network

Implementation Priority

43% 14% 43%

The emphasis on People and Access is reflective of a current system’s failure to provide suitable assistance for the regional and local NRM communities to network and for those communities to gain access to useful information. The relative low rating for Content is related to the Knowledge Network’s need to ensure that appropriate agencies and specialist are encouraged to collect and provide content for the network. While considering the sub-level of Content below, it was stressed that linkages to local content development and the creation of a data management system for the overall Knowledge Network should be a priority. This is reflected in the Investment Framework (see Section 7.4, below).


PPeeooppllee

A need to develop a Knowledge Network of people interested in natural resource management and the sustainability of the Corangamite Region.

Figure 6.3 represents the outcomes of the focus group prioritisation of the People section of the objective hierarchy.

Figure 6.3 The weighting of objectives under People

Promote Activities

that Develop

Ongoing People

Network

Coordinated and

Planned Engagement/


Training & Education

NRM

Promote

Community Champions

Link R&D

to Community Needs

People

25% 27% 17% 22% 9%

Figure 6.4 The weighting of sub-elements under Training and Education

Catchment Processes Information Collection

and Interpretation

Community Building Grant Application

Training and Education - Natural Resource Management

18% 22% 52% 8%

The Strategic Objectives related to People, some suggested/possible actions and the potential relationships to other initiatives and projects are presented below in order (higher to lower) of their weighting value.


PPeeooppllee -- 11 CCoooorrddiinnaattee ppllaannnneedd eennggaaggeemmeenntt,, oowwnneerrsshhiipp aanndd iinnvvoollvveemmeenntt

A need to carefully plan ways and means of engaging and providing the community with

ownership of, and involvement in the development and sharing of knowledge and

understanding of regional catchment processes and management options.

PPOO SS SS II BB LL EE AA CC TT II OO NN

• Develop a detailed community engagement plan in conjunction with NAP Implementation Committee and key community development stakeholders in the region

RR EE LL AA TT II OO NN SS HH II PP TT OO RR CCSS AA NN DD OO TT HH EE RR PP RR OO JJ EE CC TT SS

- RCS – Consult local community in ways that capture their interest - RCS – Mobilise mainstream community groups - RCS - Integrate service delivery - RCS – Take more time and care in developing partnerships - RCS – Develop relationships between communities - RCS – Support local learning - RCS – Support local innovation - Woady Yaloak – Exemplar Local and Regional collection and exchange.

PPeeooppllee -- 22 PPrroommoottee aaccttiivviittiieess tthhaatt ddeevveelloopp aann oonnggooiinngg ppeeooppllee nneettwwoorrkk

A need to promote a range of activities that links people through an understanding of

catchment processes.


• Assist and Promote Community Access and Interest in

• Field Days

• Seminars

• Workshops

• Working Groups.


- RCS – Mobilise mainstream community groups - RCS - Consult local community in ways that capture their interest - RCS - Build the human interface between government and community - RCS - Integrate service delivery - RCS – Take more time and care in developing partnerships - RCS – Develop relationships between communities - RCS – Support local learning - RCS – Support local innovation - Woady Yaloak – Exemplar Local and Regional collection and exchange.


PPeeooppllee -- 33 PPrroommoottee ““CCoommmmuunniittyy CChhaammppiioonnss””

A need to ensure that very special and extremely valuable knowledge lies in the heads of a

number of key community members who have a understanding of a range of natural

resource issues. [This includes field naturalists and farmers. These people should be

promoted as knowledge champions.]


• Engage known specialists in regions in working groups

• Consider ways to reward them for their time in assisting the development of the knowledge network

• Capture knowledge before it is too late

• Create an Oral History Library.


- RCS – Mobilise mainstream community groups - RCS - Consult local community in ways that capture their interest - RCS - Build the human interface between government and community - RCS – Place facilitators in the interface between government and community - RCS – Take more time and care in developing partnerships - RCS – Develop relationships between communities - RCS – Support local learning - RCS – Support local innovation - Woady Yaloak – Exemplar Local and Regional collection and exchange.

PPeeooppllee -- 44 SSttrreennggtthheenn lliinnkkaaggeess ttoo ttrraaiinniinngg aanndd eedduuccaattiioonn pprrooggrraammss

A need to strengthen linkages between catchment management stakeholders and NRM

education programs and processes in the region. [Educationists need data and

information for course material and the Knowledge Network has an interest in facilitating

education on sustainability and improved catchment management. The following sub-set of

objectives were identified as important targets for educational programs in NRM. There

are many different types of actions that could be taken. Educational programs are the best

opportunity in this area.]

TTrraaiinniinngg -- 11 CCoommmmuunniittyy BBuuiillddiinngg

A need to improve capacity in the region to build local community networks for improved sustainability.

TTrraaiinniinngg -- 22 IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn CCoolllleeccttiioonn aanndd IInntteerrpprreettaattiioonn

A need to improve capacity in community for information collection and interpretation.

TTrraaiinniinngg -- 33 UUnnddeerrssttaannddiinngg CCaattcchhmmeenntt PPrroocceesssseess

A need to improve community understanding of catchment processes.


TTrraaiinniinngg -- 44 GGrraanntt AApppplliiccaattiioonnss

A need to build awareness grant programs and how to apply successfully


- RCS - Consult local community in ways that capture their interest - RCS – Support local learning - RCS – Support local innovation - RCS – Build up environmental education with young people - RCS – Build up environmental education with tourism - Woady Yaloak – Exemplar Local and Regional collection and exchange.

PPeeooppllee -- 55 LLiinnkk RR&&DD ttoo ccoommmmuunniittyy nneeeeddss

A need to link R&D to community needs. [A number of important research and

development projects are undertaken that have a direct and indirect impact on how

catchment processes are understood and managed. The community needs are not always

considered in the development of these projects nor are they always communicated very

well.]


• Ensure linkages to R&D organisations

• Promote regular events where R&D are communicated.


- RCS – Support local learning - RCS – Support local innovation - RCS – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Develop regional agenda for sustainable development - RCS – Help local communities plan for a sustainable future - Woady Yaloak – Exemplar Local and Regional collection and exchange.


AAcccceessss

A need to ensure that the linkages between knowledge and people are strong. The best available knowledge needs to be readily accessible and interpreted into a range of

appropriate formats.

Figure 6.5 The weighting of objectives under Access

Provide for

Personal Contact

Build Knowledge

Network Website

Develop

Local Nodes

Develop

Regional Centre

Encourage

Agencies to Provide

Appropriate Access/

Systems

Develop Protocols

and Organisation

Agreements

Access

41% 11% 14% 3% 8% 22%

Figure 6.5 highlights the importance of providing personal contact when accessing the Knowledge Network and the need for to develop a series of protocols and agreements for data collection, use and exchange. Figure 6.6 illustrates the breakdown of priorities for the Knowledge Network Website. The emphasis is on online networking tools such as email lists, bulletin boards and events calendars. Community members were interested in a portal website that links the user to a range of other relevant NRM websites. Considering the emphasis of the development of a website for the RCS communication strategy (Gateway Project), strong linkages/full integration is recommended.

Figure 6.6 The weighting of sub-elements under Website Development

Portal Existing

Sites

Existing

Systems

Online Mapping Build Network

Capacity

Build Knowledge Network Website

31% 7% 15% 4% 43%

The Strategic Objectives related to Access, some suggested/possible actions and the potential relationships to other initiatives and projects are presented below in order (higher to lower) of their weighting value.


AAcccceessss -- 11 PPrroovviiddee ppeerrssoonnaall ccoonnttaacctt ppooiinntt ffoorr ccoommmmuunniittyy

A need to ensure that there is a single personal contact point for the community to access

knowledge and information. [This was stressed in each engagement forum.]


• Develop Knowledge Network with people as the mainstay for access.

• Exploit potential of local nodes with co-investment.


- RCS – Build Human Interface between Governments and Community - RCS – Place facilitators in the interface between Government and Community

AAcccceessss -- 22 DDeevveelloopp pprroottooccoollss aanndd oorrggaanniissaattiioonnaall aarrrraannggeemmeennttss

A need to develop protocols and arrangements for the exchange and use of data,

knowledge and information in the region. [This is a very important underpinning activity

of implementation that will ensure ongoing trust regarding multi-lateral collection,

exchange, aggregation, disaggregation and use of information and data.]


• A consistent approach to all key stakeholders in the region.

• Begin developing protocols and agreements at the outset of implementation.

• Ensure NAP assists in the brokering of these arrangements.


- RCS – Develop relationship between communities - RCS – Take more time and care in developing partnerships - RCS – Delegate more authority to local government

AAcccceessss -- 33 DDeevveelloopp llooccaall nnooddeess

A need to develop local nodes of the Knowledge Network to assist in humanising

information systems that reflect localised contact and community networks appropriately.


• Trial local nodes with one council.

• Investigate other possible outlets of the Knowledge Networks


- RCS – Work with local communities and wider interests to set goals - RCS – Set targets for each landscape region - RCS – Help local communities plan for a sustainable future - RCS – Develop relationships between communities - RCS – Consult local communities in ways that capture their interest

AAcccceessss -- 44 BBuuiilldd KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk WWeebbssiittee

A need to build a Website that is concomitant with the goals and objectives of the

Knowledge Network. [A number of sub-elements were stressed regarding the style and


functionality of the website. The Audit of Knowledge Framework should assist in the focus

of some of the information on the website as will the RCS communication strategy.]

WWeebbssiittee -- 11 BBuuiilldd nneettwwoorrkkiinngg ccaappaacciittyy ooff tthhee rreeggiioonn

A need for the website to assist in networking the region by using bulletin boards, chat, question and answer sessions with specialists and thematic e-mail lists.

WWeebbssiittee -- 22 WWeebbssiittee aass PPoorrttaall

A need for the website to act as portal to a range of information access and exchange points.

WWeebbssiittee -- 33 LLiinnkkss ttoo eexxiissttiinngg ddaattaa mmaannaaggeemmeenntt aanndd ccaattcchhmmeenntt ttoooollss

A need for the website to provide links to existing systems that can assist in decision support regarding catchment processes and management.

WWeebbssiittee -- 44 LLiinnkkss ttoo eexxiissttiinngg iinnffoorrmmaattiioonn ssiitteess

A need for the website to link to a number of existing information sites

WWeebbssiittee -- 55 CCaappaacciittyy ffoorr oonnlliinnee mmaappppiinngg

A need for the website to provide online mapping is favoured. It is recognised that regional internet connections are slow and expensive. This should be stressed to centralised agency project managers who are developing such tools for regional use.


- RCS Communications – Gateway Project - DNRE – Victorian Resources Online etc. - RCS – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Communicate priorities at local catchment scale - RCS – Provide better information on the environment and policies - RCS – Consult local communities in ways that capture their interest - RCS – Market environmental management.

AAcccceessss -- 55 AAggeenncciieess ttoo pprroovviiddee aapppprroopprriiaattee aacccceessss//ssyysstteemmss

A need to ensure that community has appropriate access to systems developed by data

collection agencies and groups. [The Knowledge Network should work as a conduit for

improved relationships rather than just an access link between community and

government.]


• Sit on steering groups of systems developers.

• Constructively assist in design of access systems with providers.

• Make Regional Data Net and Other similar systems work for community.


- RCS – Ask for leadership from Government


- RCS Communications – Gateway Project - NAP Information – Integrate service delivery - DNRE – Catchment Decision Assistant - DNRE – Victorian Resources Online - DNRE – Improve access and interpretation of various information systems (Data,

Regional Data Net, FIS, Policies, regulations, projects and programs) - DOI – Regional strategies – eg Great Ocean Road.

AAcccceessss -- 66 DDeevveelloopp aa RReeggiioonnaall KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk CCeennttrree

A need to develop a real and virtual centre that is recognised as the face of the

Corangamite Knowledge Network. Examples are included in the current Audit of

Knowledge. [The centre will be a coordination point for a series of nodes rather than a

centralised control point. This could involve at some stage a “shop-front” approach,

although not as a priority.]


• Stepwise development of a Centre and/or Node concept.

• Consider detailed assessment of other experiences. (See Chapter Four and Audit of Knowledge).


- RCS Communications – Gateway Project - RCS – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Market environmental management.


CCoonntteenntt

A need to ensure that the best available information is integrated into the Knowledge Network

and that there is a consistent approach to maintaining and understanding what is being developed

and what is known.

Figure 6.7 The weighting of objectives under Content

Collect and

Collate Data,

Knowlege &

Information

Exploit Existing

Knowledge

Build & Maintain

Data Mangement

System

Integrate Assets

and Threat

Indicators

Intergrate Monitoring

and Evaluation of

RCS Outcomes

Interpret Knowledge

for Region

Content

7% 17% 28% 5% 6% 16%

The Strategic Objectives related to Content, some suggested/possible actions and the potential relationships to other initiatives and projects are presented below in order (higher to lower) of their weighting value.

CCoonntteenntt -- 11 BBuuiilldd aanndd mmaaiinnttaaiinn aa ddaattaa mmaannaaggeemmeenntt ssyysstteemm

A need for the Knowledge Network to build a system that houses knowledge of the region.

[This system will capitalise on a range of current and developing systems but it needs to be

firmly identified as a regional community focussed system.]


• Build data management framework

• Invest in capacity for CMA to run management system for Knowledge Network (GIS and Computing).


- RCS – Provide better information on the environment and environmental policies - RCS – Help local communities plan for a sustainable future - RCS – Support local innovation - RCS – Build up information on ecosystems - RCS Communications – Gateway Project - RCS – Integrate service delivery.

CCoonntteenntt -- 22 IInntteerrpprreett kknnoowwlleeddggee ffoorr tthhee rreeggiioonn

A need for the wide range of issues including specialist datasets, scale, purpose and

appropriate use leads to the need for a certain amount of interpretation of information and


knowledge. [Often the community asks how they can use certain types of information to

help them make decision regarding catchment processes.]


• Ensure that data and knowledge developed and collated is in a format that is understandable and directly usable for decision-making and action.

• Integrate community needs into knowledge delivery.


- RCS – Provide better information on the environment and environmental policies - RCS – Help local communities plan for a sustainable future - RCS – Support local innovation - RCS – Build up information on ecosystems - RCS Communications – Gateway Project - RCS – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Consult local communities in ways that capture their interest.

CCoonntteenntt -- 33 EExxppllooiitt eexxiissttiinngg kknnoowwlleeddggee aanndd ssyysstteemmss

A need to capitalise on existing knowledge and systems whereby the Knowledge Network

Management System is an integration of existing and developing systems.


• Liaise with key system creators to ensure delivery is relevant to Knowledge Network goals and objectives.

• Sit on steering groups of data management systems projects.


- RCS Communications – Gateway Project - RCS – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Ask for leadership from Government - NAP Information – Integrate service delivery - DNRE – Catchment Decision Assistant - DNRE – Victorian Resources Online - DNRE – Improve access and interpretation of various information systems (Data,

Regional Data Net, FIS, Policies, regulations, projects and programs) - DOI – Regional strategies – eg Great Ocean Road - RCS – Support local innovation.

CCoonntteenntt -- 44 CCoolllleecctt aanndd CCoollllaattee DDaattaa,, KKnnoowwlleeddggee aanndd IInnffoorrmmaattiioonn

A need to be an opportunistic repository of regional information. [Although a number of

agencies and groups are involved with collating, interpreting and developing knowledge,

there is a strong sense that this is information is not available from one place.]


• Collect, collate and regionalise data sets.

• Develop strong relationships with data developers and investor in knowledge to ensure provision of data and information to Knowledge Network is integral in any new data gathering exercise.



- RCS – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Ask for leadership from Government - NAP Information – Integrate service delivery - RCS – Take more time and care in developing partnerships - RCS – Develop relationships between communities - RCS – Support local learning - Woady Yaloak – Exemplar Local and Regional collection and exchange - DNRE – Improve access and interpretation of various information systems (Data,

Regional Data Net, FIS, Policies, regulations, projects and programs) - DOI – Regional strategies – eg Great Ocean Road - Local Government – Strategic Plans, Regulations etc. - National Land and Water Resources Audit - Atlas - RCS – Support local innovation - RCS Communications – Gateway Project

CCoonntteenntt -- 55 IInntteeggrraattee mmoonniittoorriinngg aanndd eevvaalluuaattiioonn ooff RRCCSS oouuttccoommeess

A need to integrate Knowledge Network implementation with the RCS program of

monitoring and evaluation and the communications strategy. [A requirement of NAP is

that the investment plan will remain on track and the Knowledge Network should be used

to assist in understanding the state of RCS implementation.]


• Liaise closely with RCS communication strategy

• Build monitoring and evaluation indicators into the management system.


- RCS Communications – Gateway Project - RCS – Monitoring, reporting and evaluation framework - NAP Information – monitoring and evaluation - DNRE – Improve access and interpretation of various information systems (Data,

Regional Data Net, FIS, Policies, regulations, projects and programs).

CCoonntteenntt -- 66 IInntteeggrraattee AAsssseettss aanndd TThhrreeaattss iinnddiiccaattoorrss

A need to integrate Knowledge Network implementation with the RCS program of

conserving protecting and enhancing the regional assets while minimising the threats.


• Integrate Assets and Threats database into system.


- RCS Communications – Gateway Project - RCS – Monitoring, reporting and evaluation framework - RCS – Indicators: Next Steps - NAP Information – Catchment Information - Catchment Management Council – Catchment Indicators Online - DNRE – Improve access and interpretation of various information systems (Data,

Regional Data Net, FIS, Policies, regulations, projects and programs).


66..22 SShhaarriinngg AAggrreeeemmeennttss aanndd PPrroottooccoollss

The arrangements by which the Knowledge Network shares and exchanges information will be drawn up as a set of “agreements and protocols”. There are many existing formats for these, depending on the information and data that is being made available and the options that are chosen for the implementation of the Knowledge Network. Protocols can range from a fee-based one-off licence through to simply a statement of the quality and appropriate use of the data (See Figure 1.4 in Chapter 1).

AAggeenncciieess

The National Land and Water Resources Audit (NLWRA) has a National Data Library Website (www.nlwra.gov.au) that uses a one-off licence at the front of each data transfer while basic interpreted information and online map production can be conducted by any user. This is similar in approach to the Victorian Resources Online Website (www.nre.vic.gov.au/vro). Specific data sets that are available to the CMA under service agreements with various State agencies will need to be extended to allow for community access. These adjusted service agreements should allow for the provision of 3rd party (use specific) licensing agreements by the CMA through the knowledge network. Details of licensees could be returned directly to the agency in question so they are in a position to monitor licensing. A possible issue with information and data supplied by agencies is the intellectual property associated with the development and the question of fitness of purpose. It is expected that the knowledge network would work to broker a better relationship regarding IP issues as well as assisting in the understanding of the appropriate use of the data and information. Privacy, scale, quality of base/input data sets and quantifiable confidence limits are essential points to discuss further when negotiating agreements and protocols for data sharing. An example of a data sharing agreement developed by Agriculture Victoria Services Pty Ltd for licensing third party use of data collected under a specific (non-public) project is attached as Appendix D. This license can be used to reiterate fitness of purpose and indemnity while not necessarily involving a fee. In some cases the configuring of data into specific formats and the cost of distribution may require resources and hence a fee is a reasonable option. Such a licensing agreement could be issued electronically if data were made available digitally.

LLooccaall GGrroouuppss aanndd LLaannddhhoollddeerrss

During the development of the Knowledge Network Strategy much discussion focussed on the issue of data ownership. A number of landholders argued that they provide access to and information regarding their property to researchers and data collection agencies, but often do not receive that information back in a form that is useful. Also, various groups in parts of the Corangamite Region collect and maintain their own sets of information. The supply and aggregation of such information to various local, regional and State agencies and industry groups would assist investment decisions greatly. At this stage, community members who supply information or assist in collection are rarely involved in any agreement or protocol. Future exploitation of such a valued resource as local knowledge will need to be conducted using a great degree of trust with assurances of appropriate use. One way of developing this is through the use of a service agreement with the community who is assisting with the collection of information.


WWOO AA DD YY YY AA LL OO AA KK

The Woady Yaloak Catchment Group developed a not-for-profit company that entered into a data service agreement with Land Victoria (DNRE) to provide regular updates of specific information. This is augmented by a licensing agreement that provides the group with mapping and satellite information for a fee. Negotiating the agreement took a substantial amount of effort due to the large amount of intellectual property involved in the data collection and management. The licensing agreement schedule is attached as part of Appendix D. Purchasers of the Landscapes for the Future Package become licensees of these data and therefore, as users are obliged to use them accordingly.

CC UU LL TT UU RR AA LL HH EE RR II TT AA GG EE DDAA TT AA AA NN DD II NN FF OO RR MM AA TT II OO NN

Issues associated with access to cultural heritage information are important to raise as they offer an example of how complexities and sensitivities about sharing information and knowledge need to be negotiated in a trustful and meaningful way. Aboriginal Affairs Victoria is considered an important manager and coordinator of information regarding the location and significance of registered aboriginal heritage sites. However it is also important to note that as little as a few percent of the significant aboriginal heritage sites in Victoria are registered. In order to really get a good assessment of the heritage value of a place, the development of a relationship with the local aboriginal community is needed to gain an understanding of any significant aboriginal sites in the area. In Victoria, this cannot simply be done by signing a license agreement. Also the provision of information once agreed needs to be mindful of the need to broaden the focus of the places with heritage sites on them. Providing data in grids protects specific site locations. For example, a grid of 500 metres is represented with an indication of what type of site, if any is located inside each square. This provides a generalised buffer that protects the site and also considers the highly likely possibility that other sites of significance are in the vicinity.

RReesseeaarrcchh OOrrggaanniissaattiioonnss aanndd SSuurrvveeyy GGrroouuppss

Often research is completed as part of a specific thesis or as part of a broader collection of information. During the research phase, community members are asked to contribute to the project or more often that not, information is gathered without their knowledge. Also researchers often have a desire to provide information to the community based on their findings but they don’t have the means to do it.

FFuuttuurree AArrrraannggeemmeennttss aanndd PPrroottooccoollss

The Knowledge Network will be significantly dependent on appropriate arrangements of access and sharing for its basic functions. Further development of the Corangamite Knowledge Network will need to include an articulated set of arrangements that allow collection, collation, aggregation and disaggregation and dissemination of information while maintaining privacy of the community. In fact example of the cultural heritage information can be transferred to salinity, weeds or any other potential sensitive information. Many data and knowledge acquisition and sharing arrangements should be treated in a similar manner. The challenge of the Knowledge Network is to assist providers and users in understanding the great range of protocols that are needed to get access to information and knowledge.


These issues should be precisely understood so that the ongoing updating of information in the network storage and access system is managed using the latest available information from the custodians of knowledge. Ensuring that these arrangements and protocols are in place and suitable to the users and the providers of information and data is crucial to the smooth implementation of the Knowledge Network.


CCHHAAPPTTEERR SSEEVVEENN

RREECCOOMMMMEENNDDAATTIIOONNSS FFOORR IIMMPPLLEEMMEENNTTAATTIIOONN –– IINNVVEESSTTMMEENNTT PPLLAANN AANNDD TTIIMMEELLIINNEESS

77..11 IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn tthhrroouugghh PPrroojjeeccttss aanndd AAccttiioonnss

Current practice in NRM agencies and organisations is shifting away from broad principled, program-based investment. While programs still define an umbrella of investment, there is a focus on individual projects that have a manageable definition, costs, outputs and outcomes. Each of these projects is directed toward the broader goal of the program. Implementation constitutes the ability to achieve determined outcomes after certain conditions

(for instance, securing funds) have been met. The key to implementation for the Knowledge Network is to develop a set of projects/actions. The following sections develop a set of guidelines for action over the period of implementation – 2002-2007. Early implementation phases (1 – 3 years) have been carefully developed and costed to enable a rapid and seamless beginning to implementation. Later phases (4 – 7 years) are drawn up as guidelines to action and investment. In this case, the Vision and Mission define the program of the Knowledge Network under the broader umbrella of the Corangamite RCS and NAP.

77..22 TThhee CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk –– PPrroojjeeccttss,, IInnvveessttmmeenntt aanndd TTiimmeelliinneess

KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk IImmpplleemmeennttaattiioonn FFrraammeewwoorrkk

The implementation of the Corangamite Knowledge Network will occur through the initial development of a Primary Implementation Project. The role of the primary project is to develop and manage a series of Key Projects that meet the needs of the region identified in the prioritised objectives. Figure 7.1 indicates how the primary project will implement and manage the Knowledge Network through key projects.

Figure 7.1 Corangamite Knowledge Network Implementation Framework

Corangamite Knowledge Network - Primary Project

Implementation and Management

1. Key Project 2. Key Project 3. Key Project 4. Key Project


CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk PPrriimmaarryy PPrroojjeecctt

This project is chiefly an umbrella project to ensure the proper and timely implementation, coordination and management of the Knowledge Network. A suggested set of actions that should take place over the implementation of the Knowledge Network is outlined below.

YY EE AA RR SS OONN EE AA NN DD TT WW OO –– KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE NNEE TT WW OO RR KK

–– CC RR EE AA TT II OO NN AA NN DD DDEE VV EE LL OO PP MM EE NN TT --$$ 115500 ,,0000 00 PP EE RR YY EE AA RR

• Create and Maintain Knowledge Network Steering Group

The CCMA should establish a steering group that will manage the implementation of the Knowledge Network. It is suggested that the members of the Focus Group would suitably fill the requirements of the Steering Group. Community members who are part of this steering group should be paid for their time on the Steering Group.

• Implement Strategy – Hand-over, Training, Continuity, Monitoring and Evaluation

It is suggested that the early phases of implementation will require skill project management and handover of the specifics of the strategy. This will mean that an appropriate consultant would act as a technical support for the implementation steering group forming the Knowledge Network Implementation Management Team. The 4 Key Projects should be implemented by sub-committees of the steering group that will report quarterly.

• Employ a Knowledge Network Officer (VPS 4 equivalent)

Key skills include environmental and natural resources management, community development in a regional setting, capacity to network and lobby at all levels of community and government and a very good understanding of regional organisational and institutional arrangements. The Knowledge Network Officer will be the major initial contact for the Knowledge Network and form the linkage between the 4 Key Projects for implementation. At this stage of implementation, the Officer should focus on finalising the key project details and develop a strong regional and local awareness of the project. With the aid of the steering group a number key service and licensing agreements will need to be developed. Also a range of cost-sharing approaches will need to be arranged to ensure that the key projects are built on meaningful partnerships.

• Create and Promote Knowledge Network Contact Point at CCMA

The early implementation phase will require the development of a contact point. A phased communication plan will need to be developed that moves interest from an initial phase of partner/collaborator discussions to a phase that informs and engages the broader community. This will relate strongly to the notion of a contact point that is limited in exposure until the local network nodes are undergoing implementation.

• Fully Develop and Implement Key Knowledge Network Projects Under NAP Investment Plan.

With the assistance of the implementation management team and the steering group, the details of the Key Projects will be developed to ensure maximum cost sharing and full benefits of potential partnerships are exploited.


• Develop ongoing Protocols, Service and Licensing Agreements

An ongoing role of the network officer will be to develop a series of agreements for knowledge network access to and use of a range of information sources. This will involve the maintenance of the knowledge audit (See Knowledge Audit Framework document) and the active brokering of sharing and exchange arrangements that benefit the knowledge network.

YY EE AA RR SS 33 AA NN DD 44 -- KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE NNEE TT WW OO RR KK

–– KK EE YY PPRR OO JJ EE CC TT SS AA NN DD OO TT HH EE RR CC OO LL LL AA BB OO RR AA TT II VV EE RR&& DD -- $$ 115500 ,,0000 00 PP EE RR YY EE AA RR

Alongside the demands of the earlier implementation phase, the full implementation of the Key Projects will occur in these years with the extension of local nodes across the region and the fuller integration of the knowledge network with the RCS/NAP, communication, monitoring and evaluation projects. Also at this stage, the Knowledge Network, through its localised nodes should be developing projects that integrate community into R&D and vice-versa. These projects should seek funding from relevant bodies and focus on collaboration and partnership between R&D and survey organisations and the community.

YY EE AA RR 55 –– KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE NNEE TT WW OO RR KK

–– OO NN GG OO II NN GG MMAA II NN TT EE NN AA NN CC EE AA NN DD OO NN GG OO II NN GG FF UU NN DD II NN GG SS UU PP PP OO RR TT -- $$112200 ,,0000 00

Much of the further development of the Knowledge Network will depend on the flexibility of the Steering Group and Management Team, which by this stage include the local node officers. These people will need to have a very proactive and opportunistic approach to funding arrangements. This final year of NAP will be an essential time to fully develop further project proposals based on the innovative direction of the Knowledge Network. This will probably require a more complex mix of funding support than in the implementation/ NAP period.


CCoorraannggaammiittee KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk KKeeyy PPrroojjeeccttss

The Vision and Mission Statements outline the expected status of the Knowledge Network by the end of 2007. Figure 7.2 represents the links between the prioritised objectives described above, other related regional projects and the key projects defined for the implementation of the Knowledge Network. Figure 7.3 includes the specific linkages between objectives and a series of actions/investments that are packaged as key projects. It highlights the need to develop partnerships and co-investment strategies with other related regional initiatives. The actions indicated are considered crucial to early implementation phases (Year 1 and 2) of the Knowledge Network. It is expected that the Knowledge Network Steering Group and the Knowledge Network Officer under the guise of the Primary Project will develop the details of key project proposals for consideration under the NAP Investment Plan. It is suggested that key projects would be broken down into sub-projects that could involve outsourcing to different specialists, cost sharing or other forms of co-investment.

Figure 7.2 The packaging of projects for manageable implementation

P e o p l e

C o n t e n t

A c c e s s

P r io r i t i s e d

O b j e c t i v e s



1 . C a p a c i t y

2 . N o d e s

3 . S y s t e m

4 . K n o w l e d g e


K n o w l e d g e N e t w o r k

I m p l e m e n t a t i o n

Related

Pro

jects


Figure 7.3 The Key Project Framework of the Corangamite Knowledge Network

People

Content

Access

Planned Engagement

Network Activities

Knowledge Champions

Training/Education

Community & R&D

Contact Point

Arrangements

Local Nodes

Website

Agencies - Provision

Knowledge Centre

M anagement System

Interpret

Exploit Existing

Collate & Collect

M onitor & Evaluate

Assets and Threats

3. System

4. Knowledge

2. Nodes

1. Capacity

Knowledge Network Projects

Priority Elements (Year 1 and 2)

Prioritised Objectives Related Projects

•Develop Arrangements- investment•Implement nodes/local contact point:

•1 Local Government,

•1 Catchment Group•Localise Knowledge - aggregate

•Build M anagement System•CCMA with node capacity

•hardware, software•GIS/GPS capacity•CD-Rom production capacity

•W ebsite - Gateway/Network elements

•Develop arrangements to exploit andextend existing systems to Network

•M aintain audit of knowledge•Develop knowledge arrangements for

storing and interpreting existingknowledge for local nodes•Collect/Collate data through localnodes (Use W oady Yaloak Exemplar)

•Assets, threats, RCS outcomes•Input R&D

•Develop Engagement Strategy -

Communications Links - activities,champions, local R&D, RCS•Develop Training/Education programwith existing education infrastructure

through local nodes

RCS

•Smaller Footprint

•Healthy Environment

•Cohesive Communities

•Planning Landscape

•Sustainable Use

•Partnerships

R&D, Data Agencies•Universities R&D

Local Government - Plans

•DNRE - Regional DataNet

•DNRE - Data

•CMA - Data

Other

•NAP- Information

•Landholders Projects

•CMCV - Indicators

•CAE - Programs


KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt OOnnee –– CCoommmmuunniittyy KKnnoowwlleeddggee aanndd CCaappaacciittyy

This key project focuses on the need of community building, networking, linkages between land managers, specialists and knowledge of local areas within the region. It builds on the traditional notion of extension and represents an investment in the social and cultural capital of knowledge within the Corangamite Region.


• A well connected, trusting community aiming for sustainability in the region.

• A confident community that is able to interrogate and respond to the complexities of catchment processes using range of information sources.

• A community that is able to identify knowledge assets and gaps to build a better understanding of assets and threats to their local area in the context of the region.

YY EE AA RR SS OONN EE ,, TT WW OO ,, TTHH RR EE EE AA NN DD FF OO UU RR -- CC AA PP AA CC II TT YY

–– $$2200 00 ,,00 0000 ((CC AA SS HH AA NN DD IINN KK II NN DD )) PP EE RR YY EE AA RR

((CC OO SS TT SS HH AA RR EE 7700 %% CC MMAA,, 3300 %% OO TT HH EE RR ))

• Develop a Phased Engagement Strategy

Begin engagement with potential collaborators and partners interested in building community capacity and improving community awareness and understanding of sustainable natural resource management. These include agencies, community development stakeholders, R&D organisations and community groups interested in sustainable resource management. Ongoing collaborative engagement will include field days/excursions that employ local experts in a specific theme, a series of agronomy and environmental expos focussing on key aspects of sustainable land and catchment management, forums on climate change, dryland salinity and other local and regional R&D projects and possibly a newsletter for members. The networking elements that are developed as part of the Knowledge Network website (Key Project 3) should be considered central to the community building aspects in this key project.

• Develop Training and Education Program

A cornerstone of community capacity will be vocational-like training for land managers and other stakeholders interested in the environmental assets of the region. This will include areas of community building, grant applications and understanding catchment processes – dryland salinity, water quality and biodiversity, pest management etc. Where possible, these should be developed within existing educational and extension networks. As in the case of the Woady Yaloak Catchment Group, and in order to meet the increasing need for local information collection, regular subsidised courses in GIS and GPS should be held at Local Nodes (Key Project 2). These should be built around real R&D projects that involve and support local stakeholders for their time and contributions. An example of this could be the implementation of 1:25,000 soil surveying framework in the region. It should be noted that a proportion of this project might be included in other community engagement elements of the CCMA. However, the fine difference between the goals of the Knowledge Network and the broader community engagement of the CMA should be understood.


YY EE AA RR 55 –– DD EE VV EE LL OO PP II NN GG OO NN GG OO II NN GG PP RR OO GG RR AA MM SS OO FF CC AA PP AA CC II TT YY BB UU II LL DD II NN GG

-- $$55 00 ,,00 0000 ((CC AA SS HH AA NN DD IINN KK II NN DD )) PP EE RR YY EE AA RR


Under this final phase of implementation, investment will largely be directed and continuing local node activities, with an emphasis on sharing costs. New projects that will offer ongoing capacity building in the key project areas of the Knowledge Network should be developed in collaboration with community, agencies and educational networks.

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt TTwwoo –– LLooccaall NNeettwwoorrkk NNooddeess

This Key Project develops a set of Local Knowledge Network Nodes that provide a set of localised entry points to NRM knowledge for the Corangamite Region. These nodes will have the capacity to inform and direct community members regarding the key elements of the Knowledge Network – the Audit of Knowledge and the Knowledge Management System. The local nodes will consist of a coordinator and a computer system that stores and maintains local and regional information (see Project 3). There are 4 local nodes catered for in this action plan.


• The community is able to access a local knowledge specialist that can direct and assist with information regarding catchment process knowledge at a regional and local level.

• There is a strong linkage between the local nodes and this is driven by key elements of the RCS implementation through NAP.

YY EE AA RR SS OONN EE AA NN DD TT WW OO –– LL OO CC AA LL NN OO DD EE SS



Initially, local nodes should be developed in 2 local areas in the CMA Region as demonstration (pilot) projects. It is suggested that the local nodes should be managed by a partnership arrangement with catchment/environmental groups and local councils, as these provide the most direct link to land use and resource management in the community. When deciding on which partners will be most appropriate in this early phase, the preparedness/readiness of the potential partners should play a major role. At this stage the Shire of Moorabool and the Woady Yaloak Catchment Group would be very suitable as they are in a position to provide substantial data and information at a local level. The first local nodes will involve a number of developmental phases that will require substantial investment to gain the interest of the node partners. The CMA should substantially meet the support of resources for employing, training and locating a local node officer and a local node data and information management system (in connection with Key Project 3). Cost sharing arrangements will need to be negotiated, with in-kind support being the most likely option for the network partner. Local nodes are high priority for the community as they will provide a contact point, a place for capacity/community building, a local data sharing and exchange mechanism and they will act as a important brokering conduit between R&D projects and the community. They will also allow for


an important link between RCS communication, monitoring and evaluation projects and local communities. Local node development should be firmly integrated with other catchment coordinator projects developed as part of the broader implementation of the RCS/NAP.

YY EE AA RR SS TT HH RR EE EE AA NN DD FF OO UU RR –– LL OO CC AA LL NN OO DD EE SS



During years three and four, 2 other local nodes should be developed. These should be implemented based on the lessons learnt from other experiences in the region.

YY EE AA RR FF II VVEE –– LL OO CC AA LL NNOO DD EE SS

––$$2200 00 ,,00 0000 ((CC AA SS HH AA NN DD IINN KK II NN DD )) PP EE RR YY EE AA RR


The fifth year of implementation will essentially be focussed on the development of local node capacity in line with the other Key Knowledge Network projects. The essence of this investment will be in human resources. An important message regarding the waxing and waning of funding for local coordinators often leads to a lack of continuity of local initiatives for sustainable natural resource management.

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt TThhrreeee –– KKnnoowwlleeddggee NNeettwwoorrkk DDaattaa MMaannaaggeemmeenntt SSyysstteemm

This key project provides the technical linkages between different sets of knowledge, data and information. It involves building a computer-based system that works as a set of tools for the community to access, understand, interpret, integrate and network information for sustainable development. Many of the elements/tools used within the systems will be developed through a series of protocols and arrangements with agencies and organisations. The system will operate on two levels:

• Knowledge Network Management – high level GIS, spatial analysis tools, mapping, knowledge database

• Community Access – Website and CD-Roms delivering networking capacity, interpreted information, data and access to a range of knowledge sources.


• The Knowledge Network officers are able to access, interpret and manipulate a range of information sources within a high-level GIS/mapping system. Tools are used regularly to describe and model catchment processes for a range of services that the Knowledge Network offers.

• Members of the community frequently access the system through its Website to query and to contribute to the Knowledge Network regarding catchment processes and sustainability in their local areas and the region.


YY EE AA RR SS OONN EE ,, TT WW OO ,, TTHH RR EE EE AA NN DD FF OO UU RR –– KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE NN EE TT WW OO RR KK SS YY SS TT EE MM



• Focus on Protocols and Agreements

The initial phase of this project should be on reaching agreements that aim to exploit existing systems as much as possible. It should be noted however, that this system is a cornerstone of the Knowledge Network. It should be implemented to a stage that can manage an information database, produce spatial and non-spatial outputs for local networks and provide reports and datasets on CDs to network members.

• Develop Computer Systems

The primary focus of the system in the early phases will be the development of a high capacity data management and manipulation system in the CMA to be used primarily as a Knowledge Network System. However, this will augment some of the spatial analyses required by the CMA business units. The system will contain:

• Data management capacity (spatial and non-spatial).

• Database management and interrogation (spatial and non-spatial).

• GPS for local data collection and training.

• GIS and interpretation tools that can be used to provide regional and local stakeholders with information in appropriate formats.

• Capacity for CD-Rom production. The system will include the linkage to local network nodes. The form of linkage will depend on the data and the information. An important factor is the regular interaction between local nodes – updating and maintaining databases and datasets. Investment in this system should be shared with regional and State agencies who have initiatives that are developing similar systems. Regional Data Net (reporting and server facilities) of DNRE is intended to provide similar approach to DNRE regional offices and the CMAs. This could be extended and supplemented to meet the needs of the Knowledge Network. This computer system will provide and excellent capacity for monitoring and evaluation and an ongoing store of best available information about the region.

• Training System Officers

A substantial amount of this period will involve training of local node officers as the system and the exchange mechanisms are developed.

• Develop a Knowledge Network Website

The development of a website for the Knowledge Network should augment the Gateway Project of the RCS/NAP. It should contain a range of regional, local and global linkages that specialise in sustainable development and other key aspects of natural resources management in the region. These have been explored to some extent in the Knowledge Audit.


YY EE AA RR FF II VVEE –– KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE NNEE TT WW OO RR KK SS YY SS TT EE MM

$$7700 ,, 000000 ((CC AA SS HH AA NN DD II NN KK II NN DD )) PP EE RR YY EE AA RR


Following initial investment in hardware and software and system installation and development, there will be a need for maintenance fees and upgrading of various elements of hardware and software.

KKeeyy PPrroojjeecctt FFoouurr –– NNeettwwoorrkk KKnnoowwlleeddggee

This Key Project forms an integral part to the foundation of the Knowledge Network. It involves sourcing, recording, collating, collecting and storing a range of catchment process information, data and knowledge across the region. This involves maintaining the Audit of Knowledge through the Local Knowledge Network Nodes and the development of a range of protocols and agreements with agencies and other community groups involved with the collection and interpretation of catchment process information. Strong linkage is required between this project and the development of Key Project Three.


• The Knowledge Network has a full understanding of the information, data and knowledge available in the Corangamite Region.

• There is a closer relationship between the developers and interpreters of information and the needs of the Knowledge Network

• A large range of local and region catchment process information, data and knowledge is recorded, stored and managed by the Knowledge Network.

YY EE AA RR SS OONN EE AA NN DD TT WW OO –– NNEE TT WW OO RR KK KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE



In the initial phase of implementation a two key elements will be essential for the ongoing collection and collation of regional and local knowledge in the region.

• Develop Protocols and Services Agreements

The knowledge network will need to initially only store and collate and interpret information produced by other projects of State and regional agencies. Specific service agreements will be required to ensure that regular updates of datasets are provided to the network. Issuing of information to third parties should also be included as part of these service agreements in connection with the development of specific licensing agreements.

• Maintain the Corangamite Audit of Knowledge

The Audit of Knowledge will become the main database of the knowledge network. It will include information about all the relevant datasets, community champions, consultants, community networks and key collectors, collators, providers and custodians of knowledge in the Corangamite Region. At present the framework of the Audit is sufficient to begin further development.

• Collect and Collate Datasets

Although a number of datasets will not be directly stored or maintained by the Knowledge Network System, the Knowledge Network should be pro-active in building a collection of


knowledge in the form of datasets. These should be stored in a secure format with a clear and accurate cataloguing system (metadata statements) that ensure they are able to be used for appropriate purposes and are updated as required. All of the data that are being created under NAP should be stored in this system.

• Localise Knowledge

A number of data and knowledge sets are created at a regional, state and national level. The interpretation of these may be limited by scale but some attempt should be made to provide information that is useful at a local level.

YY EE AA RR SS TT HH RR EE EE ,, FF OO UU RR AA NN DD FF II VV EE –– NNEE TT WW OO RR KK KK NN OO WW LL EE DD GG EE



• Identify and fill gaps in local knowledge

Following the collection and collation of data and knowledge in the region, a number of gaps should be identified. These should be filled by using R&D and community champion support so that local understanding and interpretation is possible for a range of catchment and community resources. The Knowledge Network is predicated on the notion that more knowledgable communities are more capable and responsive communities. Ownership of knowledge development projects and the local relevance of these projects are crucial to building the desire to improve sustainability at a practitioner level.

• Develop R&D and Survey projects with local communities

A number of agencies involved in the collection and interpretation of information at a regional level have recognised the need to improve the relevance of the information and datasets they produce to assist practitioners in management. The best way to do this is to incorporate local communities into the building of knowledge sets. In this phase of implementation specific projects should be developed in between the community and R&D organisations targeting the collection and interpretation of local information. This will improve trust and the community capacity to place themselves in the broader context of the catchment and the region.

77..33 AAccttiioonn tthhrroouugghh IInnvveessttmmeenntt

Implementation of the Knowledge Network will require sustained investment over the long-term. Initially, the CCMA through the RCS and NAP will need to provide the major share of investment. As discussed above, the weighting of the objectives are used to assist in targeting investment. Those with high weighting will require direct and early investment. Those with lower priorities will require partnership development, pro-active brokerage and/or vigilant opportunism with other agencies and organisations in the early stages of implementation. In many cases the most appropriate approach will be a collaborative one where the direct investment of the CCMA is centred on the key priorities defined above. Ensuring that the direct investment is targeted and coordinated well, will mean that the Knowledge Network creates a leverage niche to offer to its potential partners. For example, a catchment process education program could be directly invested in by the CCMA in 2003. However a more appropriate use of the Knowledge Network would be to actively build a


partnership with the Council of Adult Education to construct a suitable course within current education framework of the region. During annual review phases of the Knowledge Network all investment strategies should be reconsidered in light of other initiatives. Direct investment into the Knowledge Network may alter depending on the regional context and the implementation of the RCS.

DDiirreecctt,, CCoosstt--SShhaarriinngg aanndd SSeellff--FFuunnddeedd IInnvveessttmmeenntt

It is envisaged that once the framework is being implemented and a number of partnerships are developed a combination of investments - Direct, Cost Sharing and Self-funding- would finance the Knowledge Network.

DDiirr ee cctt IInn vvee ss tt mmee nntt – This form of investment requires direct funds to build resources that are essential to the ongoing implementation and maintenance of the Knowledge Network. They are not available through other means in the time-frame necessary. This is sometimes referred to as a full market failure.

CCooss tt SShhaarr iinngg – This form of investment requires partial funds or resources invested by the CCMA but due to the strong interest in the project by other parties, some of those funds can be offset through sharing and combining resources. This is best managed through partnerships or direct service agreements with cost sharers. This is referred to as partial market failure.

SSee ll ff -- FFuunnddiinn gg – This form of investment comes from fully offsetting the cost of a project to another fully interested party. The outcomes of the project are in the interest of the Knowledge Network but the investment is fully covered by an external interested party. This means that the resources of the Knowledge Network are highly valued in the NRM market place. It is expected that later phases of implementation and long-term maintenance of the Knowledge Network would rely to some extent, on this kind of investment as it ensures that the services provided are relevant to the Network Community

77..44 IInnvveessttmmeenntt FFrraammeewwoorrkk

The investment framework provides an indicative assessment of the costs of implementation and the likely forms of investment to ensure that the projects are satisfactorily completed. Table 7.1 indicates the overall level of investment required for each project with an estimated breakdown of costs for various phases. At this stage the phases are Initial (Years 1 and 2) dealing with the start-up trialing and development of the Knowledge Network, Regional (Years 3 and 4) expanding elements across the region and Maintenance (Year 5 and beyond) phases. Included in the table is an indication of likely strategic alliances and an estimation of the proportion of the cash investment required by the CCMA.


Table 7.4 Investment Framework for Knowledge Network Implementation.

Primary Project

1. Capacity

2. Nodes

3. System

4. Knowledge

Projects

Means

Investment Phases - (Total $) Strategic Alliances Investment Share


Regional Yrs 3 and 4- $300,000Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $100,000


Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $50,000


Regional Yrs 3 and 4 - $300,000Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $200,000


Regional Yrs 3 and 4 - $200,000Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $70,000


Maint. Yr 5 etc. - $200,000

•Steering Group

•Agencies- DNRE, DOI

•Local Government

•CMA = 100%

•RCS Communications•Agencies - DNRE, Education

•Education Networks•Community Groups

•CMA = 70%

•Other = 30%

•Agencies - DNRE, DOI

•Local Government

•Community Groups•Universities

•CMA = 70%•Other = 30%

•RCS Gateway•Agencies - DNRE

•Universities•Local Government

•CMA = 70%

•Other = 30%

•RCS - Indicators•Agencies - DNRE

•R&D Universities•Local Groups

•CMA = 50%

•Other = 50%

Total Estimated Value (Cash and In kind) - $3,020,000

Value - $700,000

Value - $450,000

Value - $800,000

Value - $470,000

Value - $600,000

CMA = ($) - 2,204,000Sub-total Estimated Value Year 1 = $600,000


77..55 MMoonniittoorriinngg aanndd EEvvaalluuaattiioonn

Continuing review and comparison of actual accomplishments with the intentions of the Strategy will be finally required. Following the formation of a Knowledge Network Steering Committee, that committee, in conjunction with the NAP committee and the CMA Board should agree on an appropriate set of performance indicators for the Primary Project and the various Key Projects as they become fully developed. As recommended above, a number of key related projects under NAP and other initiatives will need to have a substantial input to the Knowledge Network. Therefore, a monitoring and evaluation program should take into account the linkages between progress in implementing the Knowledge Network and progress in those other related projects. As well as reviewing the actual outcomes against the scheduled progress of implementation, the monitoring system would track time and other resources utilised against the resources allocated. In developing the Strategy, many assumptions have been made about the future environment. Obviously these assumptions will not always turn out to be correct. Hence it is important to identify which assumptions are critical for the Strategy and the criteria for evaluation, and periodically update the information required for these purposes. The monitoring and evaluation system will also underpin the information required for regularly reporting to NAP on the progress and achievements of the Network. Therefore it is suggested that the following framework be adopted: 1. Steering Committee – (based on Focus Group membership and key stakeholders (eg. Local

Node owners). This committee will:

• Meet quarterly

• Oversee and assist in implementation of the Knowledge Network

• Monitor and evaluation report submission to NAP and CMA Board 2. Annual Review

• Responds to key project timetable

• Timed to meet NAP review phases. 3. Knowledge Network Officer

• Be in charge of the day to day running of the Network, particularly Regional Centre Network

• Maintain suitable project management records

• Report to Committee.


RREEFFEERREENNCCEESS

ACC, (2002), Avon Knowledge Network - Strategic Plan. [Draft]. Avon Catchment Council. Ahern, J., (1999), Spatial Concepts, Planning Strategies, and Future Scenarios: A framework

method for integrating landscape ecology and landscape planning. in Landscape

Ecological Analysis - issues and applications., Springer, New York,. Arnott, R., (1999), Models for decision making, Latrobe University Press. Brown, G., (2000), Networks that work: Developing effective networks. in Changing Landscapes

- Shaping Futures, pp. 60-62, Landcare Australia, Melbourne. Edwards-Jones, E. S., (1997) The River Valleys Project: A participatory approach to integrated

catchment planning and management in Scotland. in J. Env. Planning and Management,

40(1) 125 - 141. Klopatek, J. M. and Gardner, R. H., (1999), (Eds.) Landscape Ecological Analysis - issues and

applications., Springer, New York,. O’Callaghan, J. R., (1995), NELUP: An introduction. in J. Env. Planning and Management, 38(1)

1 - 21. Vos, C. C., and Opdam, P., (1993), Landscape Ecology of a Stressed Environment. Chapman and

Hall, London. Walker, D., Lai, D., Leitch, A., and Johnson, A., (1999) Collaborativ Resource Information Centres: Guidelines for establishments and Management, CSIRO.


AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX BB

OOTTHHEERR EEXXPPEERRIIEENNCCEESS –– KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE NNEETTWWOORRKK


AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX CC

PPRROOTTOOCCOOLLSS AANNDD AAGGRREEEEMMEENNTTSS -- EEXXAAMMPPLLEESS

strategy: corangamite regional knowledge, data and information … · 2010-11-10 · page iii...

Documents