A collaborative design to adaptively manage for landscape sustainability in north Australia: lessons from a decade of cooperative research

Approaches to manage for the sustainable use of natural and cultural resources in a landscape can have many different designs. One design is adaptive collaborative landscape management (ACLM) where research providers and users work closely together on projects to develop resources while adaptively managing to sustain or maintain landscapes in the long term. We propose that collaborative projects are more useful for achieving outcomes than integrative projects where participants merely join their separate contributions. To foster collaborative research projects to adaptively manage landscapes in northern Australia, a Tropical Savannas Cooperative Research Centre (TSCRC) was established in 1995. The TSCRC is a joint venture of major organizations involved in research and land management. This paper is our perspective on the four most important 'lessons learned' after using a ACLM-type approach for over 10 y. We learnt that collaboration (working in combination) not necessarily integration (combining parts into a whole) achieved sustainable outcomes. We found that integration across culturally diverse perspectives seldom achieved sustainable solutions because it devalued the position of the less empowered participants. In addition, positive outcomes were achieved when participants developed trust and respect for each other by embracing and respecting their differences and by sharing unifying concepts such as savanna health. Another lesson learned was that a collaborative organization must act as an honest broker by resisting advocacy of one view point over another. Finally, we recognized the importance of strongly investing in communication and networking so that people could adaptively learn from one another's experiences, understand each other's challenges and respect each other's choices. Our experience confirms the usefulness of the ACLM approach and highlights its role in the process of sustaining healthy landscapes.

New tools for management of phosphine resistance

Phosphine is the primary fumigant used to protect the majority of the world' s grain and a variety of other stored commodities from insect pests. Phosphine is playing an increasingly important role in the protection of commodities for two primary reasons. Firstly, use of the alternative fumigant, methyl bromide, has been sharply curtailed and is tightly regulated due to its role in ozone depletion, and secondly, consumers are becoming increasingly intolerant of contact pesticides. Niche alternatives to phosphine exist, but they suffer from a range of factors that limit their use, including: 1) Limited commercial adoption due to expense or slow mode of action; 2) Poor efficacy due to low toxicity, rapid sorption, limited volatility or high density; 3) Public health concerns due to toxicity to handlers or nearby residents, as well as risk of explosion; 4) Poor consumer acceptance due to toxic residues or smell. These same factors limit the prospects of quickly identifying and deploying a new fumigant. Given that resistance toward phosphine is increasing among insect pests, improved monitoring and management of resistance is a priority. Knowledge of the mode of action of phosphine as well as the mechanisms of resistance may also greatly reduce the effort and expense of identifying synergists or novel replacement compounds.