Phát triển bền vững là khái niệm nhằm chỉ sự phát triển về mọi mặt trong xã hội hiện tại. Đáp ứng nhu cầu của thế hệ hiện tại mà vẫn không làm tổn hại, vẫn đảm bảo sự tiếp tục phát triển. Và vẫn đáp ứng các nhu cầu đó trong tương lai xa và hiện là mục tiêu hướng tới của nhiều quốc gia trên thế giới và bảo vệ môi trường. Dựa theo tình hình phát triển và đặc thù của kinh tế, xã hội, chính trị, địa lý, văn hóa… Mà mỗi quốc gia sẽ hoạch định chiến lược phát triển bền vững phù hợp nhất.
Integrated biosystems for sustainable development Proceedings of the InFoRM 2000 National Workshop on Integrated Food Production and Resource Management Edited by Kev Warburton Usha Pillai-McGarry Deborah Ramage February 2002 RIRDC Publication No 01/174 RIRDC Project No MS001-14 i © 2002 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation All rights reserved ISBN 642 58393 ISSN 1440-6845 Integrated Biosystems for Sustainable Development Publication No 01/174 Project No MS001-14 The views expressed and the conclusions reached in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of persons consulted RIRDC shall not be responsible in any way whatsoever to any person who relies in whole or in part on the contents of this report This publication is copyright However, RIRDC encourages wide dissemination of its research, providing the Corporation is clearly acknowledged For any other enquiries concerning reproduction, contact the Publications Manager on phone 02 6272 3186 Researcher Contact Details Dr Kev Warburton School of Life Sciences, University of Queensland Phone: (07) 3365 2979 Fax: (07) 3365 1655 Email: KWarburton@zen.uq.edu.au RIRDC Contact Details Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Level 1, AMA House 42 Macquarie Street BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 02 6272 4539 Fax: 02 6272 5877 Email: rirdc@rirdc.gov.au Website: http://www.rirdc.gov.au Published in February 2002 Printed on environmentally friendly paper by Canprint ii Foreword Integrated biosystems, where connections are made between different food production activities, can take a wide variety of forms Such integrated systems offer many opportunities for increasing the efficiency of water and nutrient use, productivity and profit, and represent practical, creative solutions to problems of waste management and pollution Environmental pressures and economic drivers such as the rising costs of water, fuel and other inputs are stimulating growing interest in eco-efficient production options that minimise resource consumption and pollution Integrated biosystems satisfy these requirements Because they conserve soil and water, increase crop diversity and can produce feed, fuel or fertilizer on-site, integrated biosystems are relatively sustainable and resilient and can much to support local economies They can help farmers diversify or combine forces with other complementary operations Integration can be achieved over a range of scales and can assist in community, catchment and regional planning Biosystem integration therefore helps to achieve the economic, environmental and social aims of sustainable development Many examples of integrated design now exist worldwide and appropriate technologies for ecological engineering have been developed Given these advances, how can we apply such ideas to construct cost-effective, ecologically sensible solutions for Australia? What is our vision for the future? This book shows how integrated biosystems can contribute to sustainable development and includes a wide array of current examples drawn from different production sectors This publication was funded from RIRDC Core Funds which are provided by the Federal Government The InFoRM 2000 workshop was co-sponsored by the University of Queensland, RIRDC, Queensland Department of Primary Industries and the Queensland Environmental Protection Agency This book, a new addition to RIRDC’s diverse range of over 700 research publications, forms part of our Resilient Agriculture Systems R&D sub-program, which aims to foster agri-industry systems that have sufficient diversity, flexibility and robustness to be resilient and respond to challenges and opportunities Most of our publications are available for viewing, downloading or purchasing online through our website: downloads at www.rirdc.gov.au/reports/Index.htm purchases at www.rirdc.gov.au/eshop Peter Core Managing Director Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation iii Acknowledgements The editors would like to extend special thanks to: The University of Queensland, Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Queensland Environmental Protection Agency, for workshop sponsorship RIRDC, for workshop and publication support Peter Peterson, for invaluable help with workshop planning Eddie Chan, for extensive administrative assistance Andrew Gaines, for excellent workshop facilitation Roger Swift and Joe Baker, for their perceptive opening and closing comments George Wilson, for thought -provoking ideas Joe Baker, Bob Pagan, John Mott, Jacky Foo and Peter Peterson, for chairing workshop sessions The Bardon Centre, for providing an ideal workshop environment iv Contents (* indicates summary contribution) PREFACE VII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF INFORM 2000 IX Integrated biosystems and sustainable development, Kev Warburton and Usha Pillai-McGarry ix 1 INTRODUCTION What is an integrated biosystem? The InFoRM 2000 workshop Opening InFoRM 2000 address by Professor Roger Swift FUTURE TRENDS, OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS Catchment issues: land and water use, planning and regulatory frameworks, Scott Spencer Waste Management and Environmental Engineering, Paul Greenfield Sustainable Economics and Business, Mark Diesendorf 12 The Natural Step and Natural Capitalism, Andrew Gaines 15 Sustainability and integration: a farmer's perspective, Paul Ziebarth 17 Integrated systems and rural community development: possibilities for partnership Ingrid Burkett 19 Integrated Bio-Systems: A Global Perspective, Jacky Foo 37 Integrated Farming for Sustainable Primary Industry: Water and Nutrient Recycling through Integrated Aquaculture, Martin S Kumar 51 Israel Multiple Water Use and Aquaculture - Ten Lessons, Peter Peterson 65 Integrated Agri-Aquaculture in Australia: virtual industry or commercial reality? Gooley, G J.* and Gavine, F M 72 Integrating food production with urban consumption: some issues Rebecca Lines-Kelly 83 THE TECHNOLOGY OF INTEGRATION 88 Processing of Biomass and Control of Pathogens - Concept of a Bio-Refinery Horst W Doelle 88 Biofuel Generation, Horst W.Doelle 98 Cleaner Production and Integrated Biosystems, Robert Pagan and Marguerite Lake 103 Adopting Vermiculture Technology to Manage and Utilize Organic Waste Steve Capeness 111 v Processing of organic materials by the soldier fly, Hermetia illucens Kev Warburton1 and Vivienne Hallman2 115 Organic Production – a part of the Sustainable Future of Farming, Andrew Monk 127 Mobile Biodigester – a Platform Mounted Biogdigester for On-farm Demonstration David Tay and Phil Matthews 128 Biological Remediation of Aquaculture Waste, Dirk Erler 129 Biofilm Substrates in Integrated Biofiltration, Doug Pearson 130 Wetlands for production and purification, Vivienne Hallman 131 FURTHER EXAMPLES OF INTEGRATED SYSTEMS 133 Integrated Biosystems in Southern Australia, Paul Harris1 & Phil Glatz2 133 Integrating Multiple Water Use in Cotton and Grain Production, Paul McVeigh 139 Beef Feed Lot Integration, Ian Iker 141 Convergence is the Key, Geoff Wilson 143 Permaculture Approaches, Janet Millington 148 Eco-Efficient Settlements, Vivienne Hallman 153 Multi-use water systems –Environmentally sustainable aqua-agricultural farming system David Tay 159 159 A Community Development Model for Mixed Enterprise Land Development Beth Mitchell and Michael Rooney 160 160 FUTURE VISION AND ACTION FOR CHANGE 161 Future vision 161 Action for change: promoting integrated biosystem development in Australia 162 CONCLUDING COMMENTS 166 Address to InFoRM 2000 by Dr Joe Baker, Chief Scientist, Queensland Department of Primary Industries APPENDIX 166 171 A “wish list” for Australia’s future: comments from workshop participants 171 APPENDIX 176 WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 176 vi Preface This publication collates, summarises and reviews information relating to integrated biosystems presented at the InFoRM 2000 National Workshop on Integrated Food Production and Resource Management held in Brisbane on 9-10 November, 2000 The workshop was attended by more than 50 delegates representing government agencies, researchers, social scientists, planners, industry stakeholders and producers A list of workshop participants and their contact details is provided in Appendix The desired outcomes from InFoRM 2000 were: Documentation of current examples of integration in Australia and overseas Development of action plans, models and options for Australia A clearer framework for planning, research and demonstration Collaboration between stakeholders Papers were presented on future trends and opportunities for integrated biosystems, constraints on the development of these production systems, the technologies involved, and local and overseas examples of integrated biosystems Workshop sessions addressed issues relating to integrated systems such as resource use efficiency, economic viability, accreditation and quality control, and community development Participants also discussed prerequisites for the future development of integrated systems in Australia Priorities and recommendations The key themes identified in this book are: RESPONSIBLE RESOURCE USE Multiple use of water and nutrients, especially in agri-aquaculture systems Environmental protection, especially with respect to water quantity and quality COORDINATION More emphasis on systems-level thinking and interdisciplinary cooperation Development of policy, legislation and planning frameworks RESEARCH Increased funding for research and development National and international research collaboration INFORMATION Dissemination of research findings and information to stakeholders Development of communication, demonstration and education strategies vii Benefit-cost analyses that place value on the social and environmental benefits of integration This information builds on the RIRDC Research and Development Plan for Integrated AgriAquaculture Systems and describes many alternative and interchangable integrated options that promise to increase the diversity, flexibility and resilience of Australian production systems viii Executive Summary of InFoRM 2000 Integrated biosystems and sustainable development Kev Warburton and Usha Pillai-McGarry The University of Queensland Abstract Integrated biosystems make functional connections between agriculture, aquaculture, food processing, waste management, water use, and fuel generation They encourage the dynamic flows of material and energy by treating wastes and by-products of one operation as inputs for another In this way food, fertiliser, animal feed and fuel can be produced with the minimum input of nutrients, water and other resources Biosystem integration can help achieve sustainability objectives by: treating the management of wastes and residues as a central design feature rather than as something external to the main production function; specifying clear performance indicators and measures of efficiency; encouraging holistic, systems-level thinking in which the dynamics of interconnection and interdependence are as important as the components that are connected; providing a framework for flexible closed-loop applications over a wide range of contexts and spatial scales – e.g., in both rural and urban situations, and at single property, sub-catchment and catchment levels; allowing different specialist producers and neighbouring landholders to combine complementary expertise, equipment and other infrastructure to mutual advantage; increasing options for land use planning by placing the emphasis on the functional integration of complementary activities (e.g., by using vermiculture to process wastes from dairy/pig/fish farming, or by combining cane/grain growing with fuel generation), rather than just coexistence Sustainability objectives will be best served by the progressive introduction of carefully planned integrated systems capable of satisfying food production, fuel and fertiliser needs with near-zero environmental impacts To this end, operational initiatives by individual producers and others will need to be complemented by legislative and government-led incentives, coordinated research and development, and the incorporation of integrated biosystem principles in land use planning In this paper we consider how integrated biosystems (IB) can advance the sustainability agenda, and foreshadow some of the themes developed later in this volume The names of contributors are cited in bold font Over recent decades, growing problems of resource scarcity and environmental degradation have put pressure on conventional systems of food production and resource management Responses have included a shift in community concern and a re-evaluation of natural capital and its relationship to our quality of life In consequence, there is now widespread agreement as to the need for a long-term vision, increased community participation in resource management and a search for viable approaches to ecologically sustainable development ix At the same time, there have been increases in the costs of environmental non-compliance, advances in renewable and other environmentally benign technology, and growing consumer demand for product quality assurance These are fast making efficient, ”green” approaches to production and resource management economically viable The pace of change makes it imperative that the assessment of appropriate systems is based on careful analyses of future trends using principles of true cost accounting We tend to compartmentalize our thinking and assume that problems of resource use, environmental quality and community self-reliance require independent solutions But what if a single targeted approach can help to satisfy economic, ecological and social sustainability objectives simultaneously? This is the possibility offered by biosystem integration Integrated biosystems make explicit connections between agriculture, aquaculture, food processing, waste management, water use and fuel generation They are life-support systems based on the dynamic flow of material and energy, where wastes and by-products of one operation become inputs for another In this way food, fertiliser, animal feed and fuel can be produced with the minimum input of nutrients, water and other resources In biosystem integration, the management of wastes and residues is treated as a central design feature Thus, in contrast to other production systems where waste disposal and remediation are essentially treated as externalities, sustainable design features are intrinsic to integrated biosystems Such design features include the following: minimise resource inputs by redirecting "waste" outputs within the system; contain material flows within the system; treat production and consumption as a continuous cyclical process, rather than a linear one; tighten production-consumption loops to minimise losses, transport costs etc; maximise efficiency of natural conversion processes (e.g., microbial decomposition and trophic links) and of nutrient / water retention These design features make for increased system efficiency Further, integrated biosystems take advantage of natural ecological processes, and as a result some components of such systems can be low technology, requiring less management, less maintenance and less capital expense (Harris and Glatz) Integrated biosystems are scalable both in size and in technical complexity and can be developed in stages, possibly through joint enterprise arrangements These features help in the take-up of local farm-based systems At the same time, the range of integrated options is very broad, and Doelle's designs for biorefineries for processing biomass are good examples of how genetic, biochemical and other forms of biotechnology can be applied to produce a rich diversity of products A single integrated biosystem may produce biogas, microbial protein, mushrooms, compost, animal feed, biogas, ethanol, antibiotics, vitamins and acids With its emphasis on holistic, multi-component design, permaculture can contribute valuable insights relevant to biosystem development The overall design philosophy of permaculture, plus particular design principles such as sector/zonal planning, closed systems and species complementarity (Millington) can be applied when setting up many forms of integrated biosystem The overall aim of permaculture is to construct a balanced production system that mirrors a real ecosystem The aim is to minimise the amount of land under cultivation while maximising ecosystem services from the surrounding landscape, and in this respect permaculture systems represent good models of sustainable land use Because no designs are perfect there should be an openness to change, experimentation and improvement The relative advantages and efficiencies of different alternatives should be evaluated In line with this, Pagan and Greenfield propose that life cycle analyses and cleaner production x Training in aspects of biosystem integration can be carried out through TAFE, higher education and continuing education courses These can utilise fact sheets and other printed material, websites, video and CD technologies, and demonstration sites Films and TV documentaries (perhaps funded by government agencies) can be used for both training and publicity Video recordings of workshops and conferences featuring integrated systems represent a useful educational resource Integrated biosystems design can be used to introduce concepts of sustainable development There is also scope to include visits to demonstration sites in ecotourism programs School competitions, where students are challenged to design fully integrated systems in rural or urban settings, can be excellent ways of applying concepts from different subject areas and have the potential to attract attention from the broader community, especially if publicised through the news media One attraction of school-based projects is that they can elicit fresh and imaginative ideas uninhibited by traditional constraints Reference Gooley, G 2000 R&D plan for integrated agri-aquaculture systems 1999-2004 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Publication No 99/153 29 pp 164 165 ter p re ta tio n ic at io n CONVERGENCE m un Development of integrated biosystems: information flow and action in co m LOCAL STAKEHOLDERS t ppor & su k c a b fe ed Individuals Communities Schools Overseas Other Government & Industries INTEGRATED BIOSYSTEMS NETWORK KNOWLEDGE/ PASSION Internet & Media Network Coordination Workshops Discussion groups Internet / Media Field days Demonstration sites Extension officers Joint ventures Community partnerships Schools Case Studies EXPERTISE Scientific • government • private • universities OBJECTIVES IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Concluding comments Address to InFoRM 2000 by Dr Joe Baker, Chief Scientist, Queensland Department of Primary Industrie When the organisers approached me to chair a session at this Workshop I thought that it would be a great opportunity because I am really interested in this challenge of Integrated Food Production and in ensuring that we protect our natural resources so that future generations have equal opportunity to use them in a sustainable way, as we had them when our forefathers handed them to us That does not mean that we would expect exactly the same uses as we have today We have to be able to adapt to changing needs, demands, and other situations, but still be able to ensure that in that adaptation we not prejudice the habitat or food chains of species other than human When Kevin and Usha asked me if I would sum up on what I saw as critical issues arising from InFoRM 2000 again I readily accepted but as I have listened to the vital discussions that you have had in the last hour or so, it is almost an intrusion by me to come and try to put a single persons' perspective on the enormous range of issues that have been raised in these two days So what I am going to is concentrate on some lessons you have taught me and on some points or actions we may consider with respect to Integrated Food Production and Resource Management for the future I will use "agriculture" to embrace horticulture, pastoralism and aquaculture, and aquaculture will include mariculture and I will use the word "food" to cover fibre, flowers and aquatic species, such as fish and crabs and I will use the word "value" to include all steps in the value chain In the material which encouraged us to attend this workshop we were told that "integrated biosystems can take a wide variety of forms and that such integrated systems offer many opportunities for increased efficiency, productivity and product profit and represent practical creative solutions to problems of waste management and pollution" Further we were told that "by conserving soil and water, increasing crop diversity and producing feed, fuel or fertiliser on site, integrated biosystems are relatively sustainable and resilient, and can much to support local economies and communities" There was a final sentence to that section in the literature, that said "economic and environmental pressures are generating growing interest in integrated options" There is no doubt an intended pun on the word "growing" by Kev and his colleagues If we place these challenging statements alongside the numerous new technologies and new fields of endeavour such as ecological engineering and environmental accounting, we have the tools to construct cost effective ecologically sensitive solutions for sustainable food production in Australia? If we had those tools we have them organised in such a way that we can use them effectively and efficiently? My short answer is “I doubt it”, but the slightly longer answer is “with the combination of people that you have attracted to this workshop, -theoreticians, technologists, practitioners, environmentalists, administrators - there is a chance that ‘integrated human systems’, (that is us continuing to work together), can much to make integrated biosystems a reality As people have spoken throughout the two days I have been impressed by a question which I always ask because it makes direction-seeking more easy - What is our vision? Do we have a shared vision? Or even after our intensive discussions today and through the last two days we still have different impressions of what we would want to see from integrated biosystems, in say, twenty years time? 166 What integrated food production systems would you as an individual like to have in place by the year 2020? Will food security – covering both quality and quantity - be the key issue? It is unusual in a summing-up situation to use a slide that has not been used in any of the presentations However, I hope you will see it as both relevant and challenging When we were asked to discuss the significant aspects of sustainable agriculture, we were told that “the agricultural age was past” We were told that there were five Ages which could be readily accepted The first of these was the Agricultural Age followed by the Industrial Age, and then the Information and Communication Age and the Technology and Biotechnology Age which is with us at the moment Many people are pointing towards a Care of Planet Age where we are at last able to use our combined knowledge to take into account the needs of species, other than human, for sustainable development Your papers have provoked my thoughts on the integrated biosystems which take place in nature, the need for us to practice biomimicry and to ask ourselves how we can best use the different information sources we have to maximise the opportunity of developing integrated biosystems for human sustainability, while still allowing all other species a comparable opportunity for sustainable existence The figure below illustrates my belief that the Agricultural Age is not past, nor is the Industrial Age, and one can look almost everyday for examples of where new industries are being developed based on agricultural practices and where new technology is being applied to improve both productivity and nutrient value of agricultural crops and to strengthen new or exiting industries To be really effective in that we have to integrate the known and new technologies including the biotechnologies, we have to ensure that all people have equal opportunity to access the information and communication infrastructure (which currently favours the big cities) and if we can achieve all that type of integration I believe we have an opportunity to also achieve Care of Planet So I leave that diagram with you as a thought, looking backward to the extent of seeing what has been done and certainly using the most modern of technologies and biotechnologies and the most modern of information and communication technologies to develop new industries to make the use of our land more sustainable and to ensure that one of the outcomes is in fact Care of Planet Care of Planet Agriculture Information and Communication Technology/ Biotechnology Industry 167 There are two or three other aspects which really make the type of debate that you have had in the two days highly relevant to your local needs, yet equally important to the development of regional practices and to Australia becoming part of the Global Village Additionally, we have to recognise the unique advantages we have in Australia by the comparative political stability in our tropical and subtropical regions compared with those of the developing countries of many parts of the world We have had some wonderful presentations by people who are leaders of academic communities in Australia, such as Paul Greenfield and Mark Diesendorf - and yet I look at the universities of today and wonder whether they have they broken down the disciplinary boundaries to produce the graduates who will be skilled in a multi-disciplinary way to best practice integrated biosystems and to manage them accordingly In a paper that he wrote for the Canada Foundation for Innovation, David Strangway noted that "we realise today that important advances know no disciplinary boundaries and call for multi-disciplinary approaches It is increasingly obvious that knowledge in no longer the purview of any one country or of any one institution Widespread access to the internet has brought this home to us in so many ways It is not possible any more to be a passive recipient in a world in which information moves around the world at the speed of light" I have taken David Strangway's words into account in the construction of the diagram that I show on the interaction of the different ages and is really quite a modern concept to rejoin what people may regard as past ages into very present and significant practices But I ask the question “have our universities adapted in a suitable way to produce the graduates of the future who can best participate in integrated biosystem development and management.?” Coming back specifically to my task, I believe that the papers for the conference were very well structured in both sequence and content, to draw together the necessary information, to attack the challenges of the workshop of "addressing the issues and establishing priorities for planning research and development" Throughout the two days we have had both direct and indirect reference to the need for practices to be established which are economically sound, socially acceptable and ecologically considerate We used to talk about research and development but I now see more and more, that we need an integration of research and development, extension, innovation and commercialisation Commercialisation is not the only outcome of innovation Another outcome is better organisational practices, the saving of energy, the saving of material Innovation is for everybody but a lot of innovation does lead to commercial benefit I would like you to think holistically in any practices that you want to establish - from the type of research that is needed to fully understand them, to the development of those research ideas into a systematic band of knowledge, to the development of efficient extension methods to communicate that knowledge to user groups, using a combination of people to cooperate to ensure that -wherever practicable - we take the knowledge based on research through the technologies to innovation and, wherever possible, sustainable commercialisation All these steps are consistent in my mind with the concept and principles of ecologically sustainable development which again has been mentioned frequently in the talks and in discussion in these past two days Given that everything that we have discussed is essentially based on the fundamental natural resources of air, water, soil, vegetation and exploitable animals and plants, we are dealing with ecologically sustainable development of natural resources The political necessity to separate portfolios should not impede our ability to work together, to cross those interdepartmental boundaries in the same way that we ask the universities to cross its disciplinary boundaries and to achieve biomimicry in our development processes One of the simplest aspects of biomimicry is that the waste of one process is 168 the resource of another Biomimicry is essentially working together for mutual benefits in the same way that nature has achieved it In the papers Peter Peterson was to give the leading case studies analysis but there were technical difficulties, which he successfully side-stepped, and he left us a very clear message that the agricultural and aquacultural practices of Israel are those essentially of a type that generate no waste Similarly in our practices by integrating these sorts of activities we also should be able to achieve multiple use of water and land and a sustainable waste-free set of practices Scott Spencer highlighted the Queensland Government's priorities to work towards ecologically sustainable development Their attempts are not always met with public, media or even departmental cooperation or understanding We are left with different departments designating different regions of Queensland and very little agreement (at least to the public view) on river catchment or bioregionalisation as a preferred method of defining natural resource areas Paul Greenfield really challenged us on the very fundamental waste management and environmental engineering issues, stressing the human characteristics of first pretending something undesirable is not there, rather than try to understand how a particular situation arose and working out the components of the system that had caused, or were affected by, the occurrence Mark Diesendorf revealed why his Institute for Sustainable Futures is such a highly regarded institution, with its ability to offer practical integrated solutions to the challenges of achieving sustainable development His, like Paul’s, was a good sense approach, shifting from linear to cyclic flows of matters and this concept was reinforced in many of the subsequent papers He also introduced to us the term “natural capitalism” and the importance of a shifted emphasis from one on goods to one on services and to the importance of investing in natural capital He did propose that Australia would have the opportunity to carve out an economic niche that is clever, clean and green Many of you in the business sense have already carved out your own niche but the question is: can you make it stronger and more successful by interaction with the colleagues you have met and discussed problems with in these part two days? Many of the subsequent papers show how diverse are the opportunities to be "clever, clean and green" What appealed to me was the variety of ways that people have achieved those three objectives but still managed to be different in their approaches - to value-add, to communicate with the otherwise remote urban settlers and to expand the experience of native biodiversity Ingrid Burkett related the way in which the principles and practices of secure sustainable community development are themselves so closely related to those of sustainable integrated biosystems because in effect that is what they are I have drawn strength from each of the examples from different presentations There is a tendency to give greater emphasis to the Day papers which in many ways were scene-setting but there was not a single paper that did not attract questions and a lot of debate after the actual presentation I was impressed with the thought-provoking nature of many of the talks and I believe we were conditioned to be inquiring of presentations by the format of Day and in particular, by the emphasis on future trends, opportunities and constraints Topics on biomass processing, the control of pathogens, biofuel generation, the use of vermiculture are but a few examples of new technologies which are offering enormous opportunities for new industries, and for minimising waste Some of the talks built bridges between the technological opportunities and the commercial realities and the talks such as that by Paul McVeigh on integrated multiple water use in cotton and grain production were very important to allow us to think ahead of how we can responsibly contain any 169 adverse impacts of practices on our own land and not transfer them to another piece of land or to another body of water Several people spoke of multiple water use and everywhere I turn throughout the world, water use and reuse is a major topic and one that is going to demand the smartest use of the technologies including the biotechnologies We have had presentations which have challenged our thinking from such diverse areas as: consideration from the regional to the global perspective of integrated biosystems; to the theory and practice of integrated agri and aquaculture; and to the challenges and rewards of the avoidance of waste, whether through water and nutrient recycling, through permaculture, through urban agriculture, through the value of biofuels, through cleaner production, through cogeneration, through the redesign of community settlements and through convergence Perhaps the most important evidence of waste is that of inadequate interaction between people of like interest and the loss of benefits of interdisciplinary interactions Can we maintain the stimulation which we have enjoyed in these past two days? Can we in some manner avoid that aspect of intellectual waste by resolving to maintain contact and to share ideas in our individual fields, recognising the skills and experiences of the people who have spoken and contributed to discussion in these past two days? Sometimes we use the internet unwisely, even communicating electronically with the person next door, but if we were in Brisbane and Paul McVeigh is somewhere out beyond Dalby we can still communicate with him electronically, share ideas and ask questions Can we sensibly use the technologies accessible to us? You have shown remarkable enthusiasm for debate Undoubtedly there will be another InFoRM conference planned because Kev, Usha and their organising team have seen the advantages of your interaction You can identify the types of topics you would like to see in a future workshop But I can assure you that the concept of integrated biosystems, which to me must be very close to biomimicry, will become an increasing interest of governments as the challenges of sustainable food production become even more important to the world - where quality will be as important as quantity and where resource management will not be something separated by those concerned with the natural environment and those concerned with the economic returns of the commercial crops, but a closely integrated system of protection of native habitat and native species interwoven with commercial production, whether on the land or in the sea I hope that the enthusiasm that you have shown in the last two days will be maintained I hope that the interactions will grow and I believe that we in Australia have the benefit of comparatively low population densities We have the challenge of managing our fragile soils and what is the driest of the inhabited continents of the world We have the advantage of comparative political stability We have the advantage that our air, our waters and our lands are not irreversibly polluted Because of the combination of "good things" and "bad things”, Australia is in fact a very good position to record the outcomes of its research and commercial and practical applications of integrated biosystems and share those outcomes with the world, notably the developing countries of the world, noting that most of those are in tropical or subtropical regions I wish you well and thank you for the opportunity to be part of a very invigorating process 170 Appendix A “wish list” for Australia’s future: comments from workshop participants Integrated Biosystems Increase in mixed/integrated land development and promotion of these systems by government (including incentives to diversify and incorporate new systems) Integration of integrated system research and development and implementation activity Encourage integration of industries and strengthen networks Movement away from the “technology can fix all” mentality Technology had its place but can easily take valuable jobs and social belonging away from a community Sharing of concepts to the lay person is more valuable than removing them from the processes of integrated biosystems Zero organic waste disposal to landfills – all must be processed and used for agricultural production in either rural or urban systems Find a way to recover, recycle and reuse organic wastes from industries Agricultural practices based on sustainability principles and ecosystems We need to use new technology of agri- and aqua-biosystems – learning from the past is not enough Agroforestry solutions for rangelands Production systems focussed on “end user” needs, not just production Food production integrated with all urban effluent treatment systems Individuals taking responsibility for their own food production Communities working together with the aim of being self-sufficient and sustainable All non-farmers producing some of their own food, no matter how little Self-sufficient local communities De-urbanised communities Farmers providing community services eg on-farm composting Integrated biosystems regional programme in the south Pacific Maximum recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus inputs in food production Sustainable farming and environmental systems producing products required by the markets utilising proven research & development methodologies Natural ecosystems the model for agricultural production Strong lasting linkages between production and consumption (circular connection) Improving efficiency of resource use 171 Development of economically and environmentally sustainable farming systems through integration and multiple use of resources Multiple land and water use, resource reuse Maximising utilisation of water, energy and nutrients within farming systems Eco-farming joint ventures between farm business and input suppliers – share the risk and share the income More recycling of water by all local authorities before further extraction permits are issued Diversity of biological species in agricultural production (flora and fauna) Sustainable farming systems across Australian farm land: farm like nature, optimum soil management (no degradation), production limited by environment (eg rain), positive economics, minimum off-farm impacts, individual/community viability and services Commercial integrated biosystems linked with ecosystem services eg through the landscape construction industry which lead to the education of clients in the process A landscape model to underpin traditional commercial and private design that enables our cityscapes to absorb nutrients and pollutants in water released by engineered treatment units Information / Communication / Publicity / Education Dissemination of information on sustainable development (such as concepts/systems addressed in this conference) in a readily accessible format – plain English, not scientific Strategic development using demonstration and education networks We need a book of possible technologies linking “cans” and can’ts” for each to make the selection of a system easier This should be available on the web as widely as possible Communication and education strategy on holistic farming Process for multidisciplinary planning Publicity is important – what we can and why we must it Emphasis on developing visible models to improve mainstream perception of knowledge and sustainable development, and its place in their lives Promote awareness of new production techniques – particularly in aquaculture Highly organised “brand” distribution and marketing of Australian food products to global and domestic markets, which provides better returns and a stable future for farmers market mechanisms for biosystems Promote regional planning across farm, catchment, shire and regional levels International exchange on holistic farming systems Venture capital prospectus for holistic farming The University of Queensland should initiate a postgraduate diploma in urban agriculture It would draw students from Oceania, Asia, and around the world and would fit in well with current courses and resources 172 The opinions and presentations of this workshop should be available to a wider audience The ideas from this workshop should become accepted as popular opinion Broader community knowledge and understanding of urban agriculture and the use of integrated systems A clever country Development of cooperation between the international integrated biosystems and Australian integrated biosystems networks IBSnet international will provide internet facilities (eg mailing lists), and aim to develop joint internet activities to focus on work in Australia via e-seminars and e-conferences Consumers forming direct trade relationships with food producers The understanding of urban populations about food and fibre production Urban populations understanding the impacts of their food choices on the environment Urban understanding of agricultural practices Values of agriculture regarded highly by non-agricultural population Consumers achieve a greater understanding of production systems, costs and constraints in rural Australia so they can tailor their purchases and consumption in a way that will be beneficial to producers Improved understanding of urban society about agriculture and resource management Increased school-based awareness programmes and educational units highlighting the important role of agriculture and advances made in sustainability A solid connection between academic knowledge and layperson action, without the distorting effect of political presentation and its current lack of credibility with the layperson Pilot scale demonstration sites in urban regions showing selected self-contained and selfsustaining biosystems Publication of existing biodiversity stories eg Lake Eyre Basin Involvement of the next generation in the integrated systems debate (high school and under graduate forums) Filmed presentation developed into education material, project stimulation, material for schools and universities Research / Extension / Support A truly integrated research and extension system Greater field support for individuals and community groups implementing sustainable development projects More cooperative research between biologists, engineers, industry and the community to identify opportunities and systems for sustainable integration Practical/economical alternative to anaerobic ponds The integration of research organisation with political agendas and with the people on the ground 173 Flexible funding opportunities for research and venture capital Regional centres of biomass utilisation and bio-refinery concept Biomass produces electricity, biogas, and biofuels (eg ethanol, diesel) Ethanol production from local sugarcane to supplement fuel requirements Studies on the flow of nutrients from the country to the city and the sea, to find out where nutrient recycling can occur and reduce environmental pollution (eg methane output from urban-generated organic wastes) National and international research and development collaboration that is site specific Application of feasibility studies to commercial situations eg biogas production, freshwater fish marketing An exposé of organic foods Stability and continuity in funding/support incentives for people willing to take the “risk” of taking on new sustainable ideas A reallocation of funding and people towards sustainable research and development A RIRDC program or project (possibly including other RDCs eg LWRRDC) on integrated agriaquaculture systems and holistic farming Aquaculture / Fish Increased integration of intensive animal production systems with aquaculture through water and/or nutrient recycling Reduce/eliminate the need to import fish into Australia by increasing aquaculture production Minimise imports of food that can be produced in Australia Broad application of integrated agri-aquaculture systems Eat more fish Cooperative approach to diversification into aquaculture Integrated farming systems involving aquaculture, hydroponics, and agriculture and processing More vigorous promotion of aquaculture production and products Environmental Issues Awareness of environmental problems currently and in the future Australia is not an environmentally “lucky” country forever Stable or increasing biodiversity, distribution and abundances of species Targeting environmental research for 2010-2020 and not 2002 Optimum use of our valuable water resource whilst maintaining flow to coastal estuaries Acceptance by the community that the environment is theirs and therefore they need to pay Halt depletion of critical, limiting resources eg water, especially aquifers 174 Environmental stream flows Resolve resource use conflict eg water allocation, vegetation management Healthy balanced soils “Green” cotton Policy / Legislation / Planning Government and industry policy on holistic farming systems Streamlining of the regulatory system to make farm diversification simpler Integrated systems considered in regional and community planning agendas Legislation and policy frameworks that work and are equitable State government and local authority incentives for sustainable farming Fewer policy makers, more people doing Native Species Farming of native animals and birds Greater use of native species in agriculture Economics More information on the transport costs of fresh and other produce (in terms of % retail cost and % diesel energy used) so people can better judge their food choices in terms of energy consumption True cost accounting of food/fibre supply incorporating economic/social/environmental issues True cost-benefit analyses of integrated systems that recognise and quantify the value of social and environmental parameters of such systems Consumers paying the “real” price for food Develop mechanisms that allow farmers to put costs for “caring for the environment” on their sales prices 175 Appendix Workshop participants Name Baker Biala Bowyer Affiliation and Address Dr Joe Chief Scientist, QDPI, GPO Box 46, Brisbane 4001 Mr Johannes The Organic Force, 12 Pine Street, Wynnum, Qld 4178 Ms Jocelyn Buchanan Mr Jim Burkett Dr Ingrid Capeness Mr Steve Chan Mr Eddie Collins Dr Adrian Crocetti Mr Greg Diesendorf Prof Mark Telephone/Fax t 07-3239 6927 f 07-3221 4302 t 07-3396 2511 f 07-3396 2511 E-mail uebergG@prose.dpi.qld.gov.au biala@powerup.com.au Dept of Microbiology & Parasitology, t: 07-3365 1101 University of Queensland Chairman, Mary River Catchment t 07-5482 6383 Coordinating Committee 19 Johnstone Rd., f 07-5486 5288 Gympie, Qld 4570 bowyer@biosci.uq.edu.au School of Social Work & Social Policy, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072 Territory Representative, Vermitech Pty Ltd P.O Box 1804, Cleveland MC, Qld 4163 Qld 4011 Smallholder Agricultural Development Consultant, 47 Kaboora Crescent, Westlake, Qld 4074 QDPI Fisheries, P.O Box 2066, Woorim, Bribie Island, QLD 4507 t 07-3365 2316 f 07-3365 1788 t 07-3630 0102 f 07-3314 8015 i.burkett@mailbox.uq.edu.au t 07-3279 5824 f 07-3279 5824 chanelss@powerup.com.au t 07-3400 2024 f 07-3408 3535 collina@dpi.qld.gov.au Dept of Microbiology & Parasitology, University of Queensland t 07-3365 1101 crocetti@biosci.uq.edu.au Professor of Environmental Science, and Director, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, P.O Box 123, Broadway, NSW 2007 Director, MIRCEN-Biotechnology, Chairman, Int Org for Biotechology and Bioengineering,21 Belsize St, Kenmore, Qld 4069 QDPI/University of Sunshine Coast, P.O Box 2066, Bribie Island, Qld 4507 t 02-9209 4353 f 02-9209 4351 mark.diesendorf@uts.edu.au t 07-3378 3180 f 07 3878 3230 doelle@ozemail.com.au t 07-3400 2009 f 07-3408 3535 erlerd@dpi.qld.gov.au Coordinator, Intergrated Bio-systems Network, Intern Organization on Biotechnology, Arvikagatan 26, S 123 43 Farsta, Sweden QDPI (Futureprofit), P.O Box 96, Ipswich, Qld 4305 t 46-8-945959 foo@swipnet.se f 46-8-5982 229 t 07-3280 1905 f 07-3812 1715 frostm@prose.dpi.qld.gov.au t 02-9689 1480 againes@ecosteps.com.au townies@spiderweb.com.au steve@acenet.net.au Doelle Dr Horst W Erler Mr Dirk Fairlie Ms Lin Foo Mr Jacky Frost Ms Megan Anne Gaines Mr Andrew ECOSTEPS Sustainability Training Education Practices & Strategies, 9/96 Milson road, Mosman, NSW 2090 Gavine Ms Fiona M fiona.gavine@nre.vic.gov.au Goopy Mr John Aquaculture Program, Marine & Freshwater t 03- 5774 2208 Resources Institute, Private Bag 20, f 03- 57742659 Alexandra, Vic 3714 P.O Box 975, Ipswich, Qld Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research), University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072 p.greenfield@research.uq.edu.au Greenfield Prof Paul 176 t 07-3365 3917 f 07-3365 8521 Name Affiliation and Address Telephone/Fax E-mail Hallman Ms Vivienne Director, The Green Food Company, 789 Fig Tree Pocket Road, Fig Tree Pocket, Qld 4069 t 07-3378 6963 f 07-3878 8493 hallman@webtime.com.au Harris Mr Paul t 08-8303 7880 f 08-8303 7979 paul.harris@adelaide.edu.au Haug Mr Noel Lecturer, Dept of Agronomy and Farming Systems, Adelaide University Roseworthy Campus, Roseworthy, SA 5371 Manager, Administrative & Economic Services, Australian Agricultural Co Ltd., GPO Box 587, Brisbane 4001 t 07-3840 5516 f 07-3844 1974 nhaug@aaco.com.au Iker Mr Ian t 07-4984 5188 f 07-4984 5102 goonoo@aaco.com.au Jin Dr Bo General Manager, Farming & Backgrounding Operations, Australian Agriculture Co Pty Ltd Goonoo Station, Comet, Qld 4702 Advanced Wastewater Management Centre, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072 t 07- 3365 4479 f 07-3365 4726 bojin@awmc.uq.edu.au Kumar Dr Martin Lee Mr Warwick Senior Marketing Officer, Fishing Industry Development Services, QDPI, GPO Box 3129, Brisbane 4001 Ms Rebecca Wollongbar Agricultural Institute, Bruxner Highway, Wollongbar, NSW 2477 Mr Phil School of Agriculture & Horticulture, University of Queensland, Gatton LinesKelly Matthew Freshwater Aquaculture Sub-Program t 08-8200 2400 Leader, SARDI Aquatic Sciences, P.O Box f 08-8200 2481 120, Henley Beach, SA 5022 kumar.martin@saugov.sa.gov.au t 07-3239 3225 f 07-3239 0439 LeeW@dpi.qld.gov.au t 02-6626 1319 f 02-6628 3264 t 07-3365 0360 f 07-3365 1177 rebecca.lineskelly@agric.nsw.gov.au p.matthew@mailbox.uq.edu.au Mathews Mr Maurice EPA Queensland t 07-3225 1906 f 07-3227 8341 maurice.mathews@env.qld.gov au McPhee Mr John t 03-6421 7674 f 03-6424 5142 john.mcphee@dpiwe.tas.gov.au McVeigh Mr Paul Team Leader, (Sustainable & Profitable Industries), Vegetable Branch, DPI, Water and Environment, P.O Box 303, Devonport, Tas 7310 Cotton/Grain Grower, Member of Qld Food & Fibre Scientific Innovation Council and Cotton Industry Development Council, "Loch Eaton", MS 35, Dalby, Qld 4405 Lot Finley Road, Eumundi, Qld 4562 t 07-4663 3547 f 07-4463 3573 pmcveigh@bigpond.com t 07-5442 7200 f 07-5442 7300 miltech@bigpond.au Millington Mrs Janet Mitchell Miss Beth FOCUS Pty Ltd 128 Swensons Road, Mt Crosby, Qld 4306 t 07-3201 2218 f 07-3201 2012 bethmitchell@bigpond.com Mott Prof John t 07- 3365 6938 f 07- 3365 2965 jjmott@cirm.uq.edu.au Mulligan Mr Stefan Director, Consortium for Integrated Resource Management, c/- University of Queensland, St Lucia 4702 67 Boundary St P.O Box 834, Moree, NSW 2400 t 02-6754 3461 f 02-6754 3462 stefan.m@e-chem.com.au O'Sullivan Mr Mark Acting General Manager, Business Strategy t 07-3239 3964 Unit, QDPI, GPO Box 46, Brisbane 4001 f 07-3239 3685 osullim@dpi.qld.gov.au Pagan Mr Bob Technical Management Centre, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4702 t 07-3365 1594 r.pagan@mailbox.uq.edu.au Pearson Mr Doug PROAQUA, P.O Box 929, Hamilton, Qld t 07-3268 2727 4007 f 07-3289 2999 doug.pearson@bigpond.com Peterson Mr Peter PillaiMcGarry Dr Usha Sr Industry Development Officer, QDPI, GPO Box 46, Brisbane 4001 School of Agriculture & Horticulture, University of Queensland, Gatton 177 t 07-3224 2692 peterspi@prose.dpi.qld.gov.au f 07-3239 0439 t 07-3365 2251 u.pillaimcgarry@mailbox.uq.edu 07-5460 1319 au Name Pollock Mr Don Ramage Dr Deborah Rooney Mr Michael Spencer Affiliation and Address E-mail t 07-4982 4386 f 07-4982 4068 chdc-main@mail.com t 07-3201 0950 debramage@hotmail.com.au t 07-3201 2218 f 07-3201 2012 michaelrooney@bigpond.com Mr Scott Acting Deputy Director-General, DNR, 7th t 07-3224 8164 Floor Mineral House, 41 George St f 07-3224 2072 Brisbane 4001 scott.spencer@dnr.qld.gov.au Stephens Mr Alan QDPI, P.O Box 5165 SCMC, Nambour, Qld 4560 t 07-5430 4947 f 07-5430 4994 stephea@prose.dpi.qld.gov.au Streeten Mr Tim t 07-4688 1404 f 07-4881 1192 streett@dpi.qld.gov.au Swift Prof Roger Industry Manager (Environment Management), P.O Box 102, Toowoomba, Qld 4074 DPI, P.O Box 102 (203 Tor Street), Toowoomba, Qld 4350 Executive Dean, Faculty of Natural Resources, Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072 Sustainable Organic Solutions, 57 Blackett St Downer, ACT 2602 t 07-5460-1201 f 07-5460-1170 deannravs@uqg.uq.edu.au t 02-62489330 inbadlor@yahoo.com Dept of Zoology & Entomology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072 Exec Officer (hon.), The Urban Agriculture Network- Western Pacific P.O Box 2223, Mansfield, Qld 4122 Programs Manager, RIRDC, P.O Box 4776, Kingston, ACT 2604 51 Stonehaven Cres., Deakin 2600 t 0703365 2979 f 07-3365 1655 k.warburton@mailbox.uq.edu.au t 07-3349 1422 f 07-3343 8279 fawmpl@powerup.com.au t 02-6281 2160 f 02-6285 1196 gwilson@awt.com.au Chairman, Queensland Fruit and Vegetable t 07-3213 2444 Growers' Association f 07-3213 2454 pziebart@qfvg.org.au Totterdell Mr Paul Warburton Dr Kevin Wilson Mr Geoff Wilson Dr George Ziebarth Mr Paul Resource Officer (Food & Fibre), Central Highlands Development Corp., P.O Box 1425, Emerald, Qld 4720 Dept of Zoology & Entomology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072 FOCUS Pty Ltd 128 Swensons Road, Mt Crosby, Qld 4306 Telephone/Fax 178 ... capital support; First movers benefit, ie already ‘prosperous’ rural communities are likely to reap further benefits, marginal, poorer communities are less likely to benefit; competition between... as a rich carbon energy source and contains high densities of beneficial bacteria and useful quantities of non-leachable macronutrients, trace elements and rock minerals Iker and Monk similarly... purification, nutrient cycling, soil enhancement, pollination, carbon sequestration, nitrogenfixing), and of the need for improved awareness of ecosystem processes and their potential economic benefits