The myth of Northern Australia becoming the “food bowl of Asia” has been dealt a crushing blow

In early February 2010, the Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce released a scientific report produced by the CSIRO that examined the future of development in Australia’s north from Cape York in Queensland across the Northern Territory and WA’s Kimberley. The report emphasized that massive irrigated development would face substantial natural constraints and severely impact on the region’s fragile ecosystems.

Northern Australia stands out as one of the largest natural areas remaining on Earth. Unlike much of southern and eastern Australia, nature remains largely intact and abundant in the North. Gunlom Falls, Kakadu. Photo: Glenn Walker

The Taskforce’s report recommends a more moderate development path, one that embraces Indigenous stewardship of the land, and capitalises on the spectacular natural and cultural values of the region, rather than eroding them.

Predictably, the champions of the “food bowl” myth, including Coalition Senators Bill Heffernan and Ron Boswell, Independent MP Bob Katter, and far right-wing commentator Andrew Bolt, have claimed that the science produced by the CSIRO is wrong and that the dream of an irrigated north must still be realised.

Rarely has the debate on the future of Northern Australia seen such national attention. And it is welcome. Northern Australia is one of the last great natural places on the planet, but many Australians are only just beginning to understand this, in part, due to recent media.

The nature of Northern Australia

In 2007, a group of scientists with extensive experience in Northern Australia released “The Nature of Northern Australia” report which examined the natural values, ecological processes and future prospects of Northern Australia. They found that Northern Australia has the largest and most intact tropical savanna remaining on Earth, as well as the largest expanse of intact rivers and catchments on the continent. The authors state that:

But where some find intrinsic value and global heritage significance, others see a vast empty landscape, a new frontier destined to be conquered and stamped with the indelible mark of intensive development, including dams and irrigation.

This latter perspective has deep roots in the British ideal of a verdant, wet, agricultural landscape – largely devoid of natural ecosystems – for the short term benefit of humankind. It echoes the sentiment of Australia’s first European settlers, who struggled to come to terms with the reality of the Australian landscape, and set about “improving” the land and rivers, with axes and dams, in turn displacing its Indigenous people.

Howard’s Taskforce

Senator Bill Heffernan was appointed by former Prime Minister John Howard as the original Chair to the Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce in 2007. Heffernan unashamedly promotes the potential for Northern Australia to become the “food bowl of Asia,” and has publicly mused that unless we populate the north, we will be invaded by people from Asia.

But the Heffernan-led Taskforce, which included Noel Pearson and Lachlan Murdoch, was short lived, interrupted by the 2007 Federal Election. The newly elected Rudd Government swiftly reformed the Taskforce, removing the politicians, appointing new members and expanding the terms of reference of the Taskforce beyond the narrow focus of pursuing irrigated development to examining a broader range of economic opportunities.

No food bowl

The core take-home message of the Taskforce’s latest report is that Northern Australia is an ecologically intact and globally significant place, and that the region would not and should never become an irrigated “food bowl.”

The first argument against the “food bowl” is its natural constraints. This essentially boils down to soils, water and climate: except for a few small areas, the ancient Northern Australian soils are nutrient poor, and highly fragile. Despite high river flows in the wet season, for most of the year it’s very dry and there are few options to store the water. In addition, the hot climate means very high evaporation rates, triggering cyclones which cause frequent flooding of vast areas.

The second argument against the “food bowl” is the enormous environmental and economic consequences that would result from attempting this form of development in spite of these constraints. We could see a host of environmental woes: polluted rivers, massive soil erosion, salinity and loss of species. This would be coupled with negative impacts on grazing, fishing and tourism industries, not to mention the substantial costs of environmental restoration.

A new development path

The Taskforce’s report findings suggest a new development paradigm for Northern Australia – one that is supported by the protection, promotion and restoration of nature. This is the real future of Northern Australia.

It includes keeping the destructive Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) industry and bauxite mining out of the world renowned Kimberley. It means halting the bulldozing of the Tiwi Island forests for failed plantation projects. The vision also entails protecting the free-flowing rivers of Cape York from mining, dams and invasive irrigation schemes.

Instead, industries such as land management, carefully managed tourism and cattle farming, the arts, service industries such as IT, and carbon farming (managing trees and fire to store more carbon), all combine as a diverse and viable alternative economic path to the “food bowl” myth. And within this framework, Indigenous people, the traditional custodians of the land, will be central, as they re-establish and assert their rights to Country.

Further reading

The Nature of Northern Australia: Natural values, ecological processes and future prospects (2007 ANU E Press)
Read the excellent report – by leading scientists John Woinarski, Brendan Mackey, Henry Nix and Barry Traill –on the natural values, ecological processes and future prospects of the North.

CSIRO science review
A good summary by the CSIRO on the findings from the 2010 science review conducted for the Northern Development Land and Water Taskforce.

Northern Australia Land and Water Taskforce
Visit the website of the Taskforce – find out more about the Taskforce workings and find links to the recent report.