A wetland odyssey – from ecology to ecosystem services and community

Max Finlayson

Institute for Land, Water and Society,

Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW 2640

This cameo comprises reflections from a working life (not yet a career) including two decades in northern Australia, a lot of travel and a fascination with aquatic ecosystems. At one stage in the 1980s I gave up on ‘ecological research’ and went to ‘conservation’ in despair at the gulf between research and policy – the need for linkages between ecology and policy and institutions is a reoccurring theme. These are expressed as vignettes, some covering international projects, but with relevance for Australian ecology.

On returning to ecology in the 1990s I eventually found myself in a team of 1300 authors who penned the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA 2005) with its analysis of the state and future of ecosystems globally.  The Assessment was not so much revolutionary as profound - ecosystems around the globe were shown to be in dire straits and part of the solution was to switch to an emphasis on ecosystem services that was variously seen as an economic thing. This amused me as I had been told at university that my career would be undermined if I persisted in doing an economics subject in my science degree.  Three decades later we have ecologists and economists delivering a global message about biodiversity and the inter-linkages with economics, and the need for changes in policy and institutions. These messages were strengthened in the subsequent Global Environment Outlook (UNEP 2007). An aside in this was the struggle to get agreement to present one chapter on water – from the inland to the marine – why would you combine them?

Another intriguing venture occurred when for the second time I went to work in an agricultural research institute – this was also fascinating and I was caught by surprise at finding that it was harder to get the ecological messages through to the agricultural researchers than in my many previous experiences with mining personnel; not that the latter was a stroll in the glen. We produced an analysis of water management in agriculture with key outcomes pointing to institutional failures as well as ecological constraints when trying to feed the world (Molden et al 2007). We had another case for establishing better linkages between ecology and policy and institutions, but some delightfully expressed reticence from scientists to do so.    

Back a bit and through a chance encounter behind the Iron Curtain in the early 1980s I came across the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands and discovered that Australia was the first to sign up and commit to making wise use of our wetlands – a big commitment and one that we are still struggling to meet in the Murray-Darling and elsewhere. Through the aegis of the Convention and its partners I have since been able to work with fascinating and, at times, nefariously interesting characters in many parts of the world. I learnt a lot from such people and places, including seeing many similarities with Australian ecosystems and ecology. I also again found a disjuncture between science and policy-related inputs to the Convention. This may take some time to explain, but I think it reflects our own spluttering efforts to base our policies on our ecological knowledge – the debate in the Murray-Darling may be an example that could be better informed by looking outward (Pittock et al 2010).

Being in northern Australia was a dream for an ecologist. The north had it all – an abundance of openness and madness and development proposals along with disdain for almost anything, including scientific theorising that did not seem to relate to the ecological patterns of the tropical world. But things were moving fast and it was possible to establish some wonderful sustainable collaborations.  And more importantly, we learnt to relate to local communities and to listen to them and to share our knowledge (before it came out in our journal articles, indeed, if it ever did – don’t get me wrong, I like writing and like to see things published, but how much hard won information just never got to the journal stage?) and not just visit them when we wanted something from them. This is one of the real advances that I have seen in our ecology and our ecologists. Nowadays you see community-related programs and processes sitting alongside the more traditional ecological pursuits and I love it.  Along with the incorporation of ecosystem services into our ecological thinking I see the establishment of relationships with local communities as a way forward for ecologists.   

But back to the north - it was pioneering stuff peppered with characters and surprises. A lot of ecologists visited. We did not know much about the ecology and this necessitated a lot of survey and descriptive work and taxonomy. For me the big initiatives came from the Fox Report of 1977 that generated an explosion of science in the Kakadu region, and in amongst the politics of uranium mining and social needs it heralded a landslide of ecological research and changed our understanding of tropical ecosystems, and provided opportunities for ecologists. The fate of the information they collected is an interesting aside – where is it all? There is a lot available in reports - while not in the primary literature it is available. But where is the rest? Is this something we can redress – is it available and accessible? This may be a downside. But the opportunity for ecological research was great and the information resource a boom. There were some ecological gems and I single out the research that underpinned the stream monitoring research done in Kakadu (Humphrey et al 1999).

My biggest impression about wetland ecology – we have moved beyond the necessary description of our ecosystems and we are better at engaging with local communities, and yet our ecosystems are in decline – we have come a long way with our ecology and still have a lot to do, including using ecology to influence policy and institutions.

As a finale - thanks to the many ecologists who have shared this journey – I look forward to the next instalments – and thanks those who got me involved and kept me moving – Arthur McComb, Dilwyn Griffiths, Tom Farrell and David Mitchell are four.  

References

Fox et al 1977. Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry. AGPS, Canberra, Australia.

Humphrey et al 1999. A model for assessing the health of Kakadu’s streams. Australian Biologist 12, 33-42.

MEA 2005. Island Press, Washington DC.

Molden, D 2007. Water for Food, Water for Life. Earthscan, London, UK.

Pittock et al 2010.  Changing character: the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands and climate change in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Environmental & Planning Law Journal, 27, 401-425.

UNEP 2007. Global Environment Outlook 4 – Environment for Development, UNEP, Nairobi.