Australia has one of the largest networks of privately protected areas in the world, both in terms of number (more than 6,000) and area (over 10,000,000 hectares). This network comprises conservation covenants and land owned by non-government land conservancies.
Privately protected areas make important contributions to increasing the representation of bioregions and ecosystems in the protected area system, protecting threatened species habitat and increasing connectivity, especially in those dominated by private land.
Unfortunately, private land conservation still faces a significant range of barriers at all levels of government, and the incentives that do exist are not always well-calibrated, or are inaccessible in practice. Major growth of private land conservation through land acquisition has occurred historically during the period that the NRSP was operating but has slowed in subsequent years.
A dedicated federal fund remains a critical pathway for scaling up private land conservation in Australia. Through strategic design, this can also expand opportunities for First Nations ownership and co-management arrangements on privately held land.
Conservation covenant programs at the state and territory level currently provide the foundational funding and/or supporting frameworks for permanent private land conservation. However, the quality of the support provided varies by jurisdiction. Targeted support for covenanting has been shown to deliver outcomes for threatened species or ecological communities, and emerging covenant innovations are endeavouring to promote greater relevance and opportunities for First Nations ownership, access and management of Country.
In addition, conservation covenant programs are restricted in some states and territories. The Northern Territory does not have a conventional covenanting program leading to permanent protection outcomes. Conservation covenants are currently being frustrated within the pastoral estate of Western Australia and South Australia. Although conservation still occurs on a limited number of pastoral leases, the legal ambiguity and consequential risk creates a major deterrence to investing in conservation within these pastoral estates.
Privately protected areas on freehold land and pastoral leases across Australia may still be damaged by some forms of development such as mining. This risks their security and permanence. The Queensland Government addressed this risk by legislating Special Wildlife Reserves which have the same levels of protection as a National Park, with Pullen Pullen Reserve the first to be declared. This mechanism provides a model for other jurisdictions to adopt to strengthen protections for privately protected areas.
Read more in the dedicated report The private land conservation opportunity to deliver for 30 by 30, authored by the Australian Land Conservation Alliance.
Recommendations
The Australian Government should:
- provide direct support to state and territory conservation covenant programs with an explicit focus on expanding the protected area estate in under-represented bioregions and ecosystems;
- support states and territories to develop enhanced protection conservation covenants in their jurisdictions, in order to attract larger-scale private conservation investment;
- instigate a Treasury or Productivity Commission review into federal and state tax and financial incentives and barriers to private land conservation.
This support should focus on those states and territories identified as possessing significant potential uplift for the establishment of new conservation covenants, and to resolve legal ambiguity in the pastoral estates of South Australia and Western Australia.
The exclusion of extractive activities, such as mining, from within conservation covenants creates a substantial increase in the extent of protection available to conservation values and cultural significance. This more holistic protection is of critical benefit where substantial investments are required to establish, manage, and rehabilitate land of environmental and cultural significance.
Enhanced protection conservation covenants (such as Special Wildlife Reserves in Queensland) are also of great value to investors, especially major international philanthropic foundations. Some of these entities will likely only currently fund long-term conservation in Australia where there is a high level of protection assured (such as the ability to exclude mining). The funding from these entities also offers opportunities to dramatically leverage government and domestic conservation sector investment for more long-term protection of Australian biodiversity.
The role and impact of tax (and tax incentives) upon investment decisions and uptake of private land conservation – especially formal, durable, and in-perpetuity conservation – should not be underestimated. However, it should also be stressed that tax reform in isolation will not be sufficient to deliver the potential uplift available to private land conservation.
Current state and federal tax incentives for private land conservation are not effective and are insufficiently accessible, and the taxation of conservation activities is treated unfavourably compared to most activities that are undertaken for private gain. The taxation of land use can be a complex economic issue and there should be an opportunity for all stakeholder views to be listened to and incorporated. The 2020 Independent Review of the EPBC Act also supported this approach. This review should also provide advice on the tax settings required to support a successful Nature Repair Market.