National Drought Policy Research Articles

From Disaster Response to Risk Management: Australia's National Drought Policy

Geographical ResearchVolume 43, Issue 4 p. 439-441 From Disaster Response to Risk Management: Australia's National Drought Policy R.L. Heathcote, R.L. Heathcote Devon, UKSearch for more papers by this author R.L. Heathcote, R.L. Heathcote Devon, UKSearch for more papers by this author First published: 30 March 2006 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2005.00348.xCitations: 1Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume43, Issue4December 2005Pages 439-441 RelatedInformation

An income‐related loans proposal for drought relief for farm businesses

In 2004 the Commonwealth government is undertaking a review of its drought policy. This follows expenditure in excess of $1 billion on drought relief during 2002 and 2003 and comes only a decade after similarly large expenditure on support for farmers during the drought of the 1990s. Drought support for farm businesses has been provided within the framework of the National Drought Policy (NDP) agreed by Commonwealth and state governments in 1992 and at present is in the form of interest rate subsidies. This article suggests an alternative form of drought relief for farm businesses based on the Higher Education Contribution Scheme, which is more equitable between farmers, less regressive in its impact on tax payers and less open to politicisation.

Uncertain Climate: The Recent History of Drought Policy in Australia

In 2002 Australia experienced widespread drought, with over 70 per cent of the country experiencing serious to severe rainfall deficiencies for the period April to October. During this period images of parched landscapes were frequently shown on television, and the Farm Hand drought appeal launched, with the backing of business, to raise funds to assist drought–affected farmers. Since 1992, Australia has had in place a National Drought Policy based on principles of self–reliance and risk management. This policy reflects the neo–liberal economic policy approach, which has dominated Australian policy since the 1980s. Severe drought tests the will of policy makers to hold to this policy line as agrarian sentiments are stirred and political pressure is brought to bear to change policy settings. This article describes the history of drought policy in Australia and the challenges facing policy makers.

National Drought Policy and Program Update

This article discusses the National Drought Policy Act of 2002 that would put in place a comprehensive national drought policy that designates a lead federal agency, delineates duties and responsibilities of various federal entities, and ultimately provides advice, guidance, information, and project funding to assist farmers, urban and rural water users, tribal interests, environmental managers, and those engaged in fire protection and other similar activities.

Highlights of Drought Policy and Related Science in Australia and the U.S.A.

Patterns of water supply and use in Australia and the U.S.A. differ in many ways. This results in different perceptions concerning the nature of drought and policy approaches to its management. This paper discusses the differences and similarities and explores lessons that policy makers in both countries can learn from one another. A key difference between the two countries is that whereas drought is perceived in Australia essentially in terms of its impact on agriculture, in the U.S. both perceptions and policy are also heavily influenced by the impact of drought on urban communities. This has led to different policy emphases. In 1992 Australia established its National Drought Policy; the U.S. is presently considering the adoption of a national drought policy. These policies highlight drought being accepted as part of natural climate variability, rather than as a natural disaster. They also emphasize the protection of the natural resource base.

Working toward An Active National Drought Policy

This paper reports on the National Drought Policy Commission (NDPC), created by Congress in 1998 and charged with integrating federal, state, local, and tribal drought laws and programs into a comprehensive national policy. Through a series of public meetings, the commission heard firsthand from communities and individuals affected by drought and learned about solutions to help avoid or mitigate the effects of drought. On the basis of its findings, the NDPC advocated establishment of an ongoing national drought council and proposed a federal drought policy emphasizing preparedness and prevention rather than response after the fact. The commission also issued specific recommendations in the areas of planning; research on monitoring, prediction, and assessment; insurance and financial strategies; emergency response; and, coordination of drought programs.

Opportunities and roles for models to aid the management of agricultural and other natural resources within the variable climate of Australia

Australian rural producers and other land managers are being encouraged, under the National Drought Policy, to be more self-reliant in the way they cope with their highly variable climate. The roles of models in implementing this policy are described. These include using statistical and General Circulation Models as the basis of improved seasonal forecasting, hydrological and agronomic models to monitor regional changes in soil moisture and vegetative cover, and Decision Support Systems to estimate the value of adapting management to take advantage of seasonal forecasts or of climate variability per se. A national research program was undertaken to study how agronomic models could be used to estimate the impact of drought on crop and grassland production, since only in the most exceptional droughts would rural producers be eligible for government support. Such models proved effective for evaluating droughts in specific locations, and are now being integrated with remote sensing and other data into Geographic Information Systems to aid regional assessment of drought. It was concluded that these tools provided a sound basis for improving the management of agricultural and other natural resources.

Australia's National Drought Policy

Australia has a highly variable climate, giving it the reputation as a land of droughts and flooding rains. A National Drought Policy was agreed to by Commonwealth (Federal), State, and Territory Ministers in 1992, reaffirmed in 1994, and revised in 1997. It aims to encourage primary producers and other sections of rural Australia to adopt self-reliant approaches to managing for climatic variability, to maintain and protect Australia's agricultural and environmental resource base during periods of extreme climate stress, and to ensure early recovery of agricultural and rural industries, consistent with long-term sustainable levels. These aims can be met by providing research, extension, and education services to assist producers to plan for and cope with a variable climate and by ensuring that there are no financial incentives for inappropriate management practices. The extent to which these aims are being met is still a matter of debate. Given that a sequence of El Niño-based events that started in Queensland in 1991 culminated in much of Australia experiencing abnormally low rainfall throughout 1994 and into 1995, the commonwealth government needed measures to determine which areas had been exposed to exceptional drought so that financial assistance could be directed as effectively as possible. For an area to be declared as experiencing “drought exceptional circumstances,” (DEC) the extent and severity of drought had to be assessed as being beyond the bounds of normal risk management. In this paper we discuss our recent experiences in estimating the extent and severity of drought in the arid, temperate, and subtropical regions of Australia, and progress in developing methods and regionally sensitive indicators to aid assessments of “drought exceptional circumstances.”

A framework for estimating the extent and severity of drought, based on a grazing system in south-eastern Australia

The National Drought Policy of Australia was ratified by the Commonwealth, States and Territories in 1992. However, before it was fully implemented, one of the most severe droughts on record was already establishing itself across Australia. The Commonwealth government, therefore, devised measures to determine which areas had been exposed to exceptional drought so that financial assistance could be directed as effectively as possible. Six criteria were agreed to nationally, namely meteorological, agronomic, and environmental conditions, water supply, net farm income, and the spatial extent of the drought. Assessments during 1994–1995 had to account for the wide range of environments and farming systems. Useful data were often at a premium. In this paper we describe some of the ways in which these criteria have been estimated and assessed. Ways in which simulation models can be used to objectively estimate the extent and severity of drought are also demonstrated and discussed.

Objective criteria for estimating the severity of drought in the wheat cropping areas of Australia

The Australian National Drought Policy requires that exceptional droughts be determined in a consistent yet regionally sensitive way across different agro-climatic zones. Due to the inadequacy of rainfall deficits in assessing agricultural drought, this paper outlines a modelling approach that uniformly assesses the severity of drought through its impact on shire level production across the Australian wheatbelt. For a defined ‘cropping year’, an agro-climatic model (STIN) estimated winter-season wheat yields and an index of summer soil moisture conditions. These were added and weighted (by the proportion of crop grown in winter and summer) to form a yearly productivity index (YPI). Exceptional droughts were defined when sequences of low YPIs occurred in association with low rainfall. A summation of YPI (or yield) deviations below an acceptable threshold (40th percentile) formed a drought exceptional circumstance index (DECI). This index integrates drought duration and severity and utilizes the historical rainfall record to directly rank dry cropping years. The varying frequency of severe droughts in different regions was highlighted by this approach.

RESPONDING TO DROUGHT: COMMON THREADS FROM THE PAST, VISIONS FOR THE FUTURE

ABSTRACT: A number of studies conducted since the late 1970s have evaluated state and federal responses to drought in the United States. Each of these studies identified a number of key issues and impediments that needed to be addressed to improve the nation's ability to cope with and prepare for future episodes of drought. A content analysis of these studies was performed to identify common threads in their recommendations. The premise of this analysis was that the series of drought years that occurred between 1986 and 1992 and recurred between 1994 and 1996 increased awareness of our nation's continuing and apparent growing vulnerability to drought. This awareness has led to greater consensus among principal constituents and stakeholders, and also a greater sense of urgency to implement actions now to lessen vulnerability. The results of this analysis revealed that several themes recur: create an integrated national drought policy and plan; develop an integrated national climate monitoring (drought watch) system; incorporate drought in FEMA's National Mitigation Strategy; conduct post-drought audits of response efforts; establish regional drought forums; and encourage development of state drought mitigation plans.