National Review of Environmental Regulation

Interim ReportA report outlining current and proposed reform activities for environmental regulation nationally and presenting opportunities for further consideration

Published: March 2015

ContentsContents............................................................................................................................................. 2

Executive Summary............................................................................................................................ 2

1. Introduction....................................................................................................................................2

2. Context and drivers for the Review................................................................................................2

3. Summary of current and proposed reforms...................................................................................2

Risk-based regulation and proportionate interventions.................................................................2

Harmonisation and removal of duplication....................................................................................2

Strategic and landscape scale approaches.....................................................................................2

Market based instruments and other innovative approaches........................................................2

4. Summary of Reforms Themes........................................................................................................ 2

Biodiversity (native vegetation reform, biodiversity offsetting, and intersection of biodiversity conservation with land use planning).............................................................................................2

Chemicals....................................................................................................................................... 2

Integrated waste management and product stewardship..............................................................2

5. Reform opportunities that warrant further investigation ..............................................................2

Australian Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Review....................................................................2

Strategic Assessments.................................................................................................................... 2

One-Stop-Shop Model for Environmental Approvals......................................................................2

Common Approach to Biodiversity Offsetting................................................................................2

Nationally Consistent Approach to Threatened Species.................................................................2

Improved environmental information and data sharing.................................................................2

Ongoing thematic investigations....................................................................................................2

6. Conclusion...................................................................................................................................... 2

2 | P a g e

Executive SummaryIn April 2014 Environment Ministers agreed to build on existing reform efforts and identify unworkable, contradictory or incompatible regulation and seek opportunities to harmonise and simplify regulations. Seven thematic areas have been identified for assessment of potential reform opportunities encompassing: threatened species listing processes; opportunities for better practice regulation; biodiversity regulation (including offsets); chemicals; integrated waste management; product stewardship; heritage listing, and simplification of environmental aspects of land use planning, including on Commonwealth lands.

The interim report has been prepared by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment in consultation with jurisdictions and represents a synthesis of work completed or underway across jurisdictions at a particular point in time. Recent elections in Victoria and Queensland have resulted in a change in government and these jurisdictions, like others, will be evaluating opportunities for national collaboration.

A stocktake of current reforms shows consistent trends across jurisdictions towards the adoption of better practice approaches to regulation. Examples include adoption of risk-based regulation focussed on proportionate interventions, policy harmonisation between jurisdictions, removal of regulatory duplication, and implementation of one-stop shop approaches.

Opportunities exist to expand the use of strategic and landscape scale approaches to better manage the in-tersection of biodiversity conservation and land-use planning regulations. Greater use of market based in-struments, conservation covenants, and engagement with regional communities could enhance delivery of environmental services and leverage more private investment to protect biodiversity at both the individual species level and a bioregional, landscape scale.

There is agreement about the need to develop a nationally consistent assessment approach to listing of threatened species, based on consistent adoption and application of the International Union for Conserva-tion of Nature categories and criteria, as relevant to the Australian context. Implementation of this reform will facilitate alignment of threatened species listing processes nationally.

Exploration of biodiversity conservation regulation, including threatened species assessment and listing processes, also highlighted inefficiencies related to information management and storage. Current limitations on our capacity to share and access environmental information are impeding our ability to accurately and cost effectively monitor trends in biodiversity, which in turn is diminishing our capacity to develop evidence-based policies.

The stocktake of existing reform activity shows significant work is underway in relation to the chemicals, waste and product stewardship themes, with reporting to Ministers on various matters scheduled to occur in 2015. Examination of these themes under this review, following completion and reporting around current reform activities, will enable appropriate consideration of outstanding activities or identification of new opportunities.

Following further discussions between senior officials, potential reform opportunities identified under the National Review of Environmental Regulation may be considered by Environment Ministers in future.

3 | P a g e

1. IntroductionIn April 2014, Environment Ministers agreed to the National Review of Environmental Regulation as an important next step in environmental regulation reform, building on existing regulation reform approaches currently underway across jurisdictions. Ministers supported the Review’s focus on identifying unworkable, contradictory or incompatible regulation and seeking opportunities to harmonise and simplify regulations.

Several thematic areas for investigation of potential reform opportunities have been identified, encompassing: threatened species listing processes; opportunities for better practice regulation; biodiversity regulation (including offsets); chemicals; integrated waste management; product stewardship; heritage listing; and simplification of environmental aspects of land use planning, including on Commonwealth lands.

This interim report provides a snapshot of the substantial environmental regulatory reform effort being undertaken by jurisdictions and identifies opportunities for further reforms to improve environmental outcomes that might benefit from inter-jurisdictional collaboration.

Section 2 provides the context for the National Review of Environmental Regulation, section 3 summarises reform activities by the strategic approaches being pursued, and section 4 details discussion of reform activities by subject matter theme. Further reforms that might benefit from inter-jurisdictional collaboration are discussed in section 5.

2. Context and drivers for the ReviewAustralian governments have had a focus on regulatory reform over a number of decades.1 The Council of Australian Governments first endorsed national principles and guidelines for standard setting and regulatory action in April 1995 in response to industry criticism that Australia’s regulatory system was unnecessarily complex, inconsistent, and imposed unnecessary costs for business.2 The regulatory approach proposed in these documents almost 20 years ago promoted the need for good policy design that first questioned the need for regulatory intervention, and that if regulation was needed, it should impose the least cost to implement and not impact on competition.

Nevertheless, research continues to highlight the need for governments to be vigilant in regard to regulatory efficiency. The 2014 Productivity Commission report into Public Infrastructure highlighted the important role governments have in creating a positive environment for investment, and recommended that public stocktakes of regulation be undertaken every 10 years or so, and that these stocktakes encompass regulations in all jurisdictions.3 The report also noted that ‘business can find it difficult to distinguish the jurisdictional source of regulatory problems, [and] often it is the accumulation of regulation that is the main problem’. The economic benefit to the national economy from ensuring regulatory systems are efficient and effective is substantial.4

1 Productivity Commission, 2011, Identifying and Evaluating Regulation Reforms, Research Report, Canberra2 Principles and Guidelines for National Standard Setting and Regulatory Action by Ministerial Councils and Standard-Setting Bodies, Council of Australian Governments, April 1995.3 Productivity Commission 2014, Public Infrastructure, Inquiry Report No. 71, Canberra.4 Productivity Commission 2012, Impacts of COAG Reforms: Business Regulation and VET, Research Report, Canberra; Productivity Commission modelling of the 17 competition reforms agreed under the COAG Agreement to Deliver a Seamless National Economy found that GDP could increase by around 0.4 per cent (over $6 billion) a year, including reduced costs to business of around $4 billion a year.

4 | P a g e

Recent examples of such programmes include the New South Wales Government’s red tape reduction target and ‘one on, two off’ policy, the broad red tape reduction program that has been operating in Victoria, the Queensland Government’s Greentape Reduction initiatives under the Environmental Protection (Greentape Reduction) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2012, the South Australian Government’s Red Tape Reduction Programme 2006-2012 and more recent establishment of a dedicated Simpler Regulation Unit within the Department of Premier and Cabinet, the Western Australian Government’s Reducing the Burden review of the Red Tape Reduction Group and the Australian Government’s Cutting Red Tape programme. The Australian Government has committed to reducing the total cost of unnecessary or inefficient regulation by a net $1 billion a year. In the year to October 2014 opportunities identified for national environmental regulation reform, once implemented, will contribute more than $500 million in burden reduction towards this annual target. Such deregulation agendas improve the consistency, efficiency and efficacy of environmental regulation throughout Australia.

New South Wales, Western Australia, Tasmania, South Australia and the Australian Government have established regulator performance evaluation frameworks, which impose new or update existing requirements to undertake regulation impact statements for new policy proposals. In Victoria, all regulators are expected to perform in accordance with a specific Ministerial Statement of Expectations, to improve clarity and accountability. In South Australia, all new or amended regulatory proposals require a regulatory impact statement (RIS). South Australia has identified reducing regulatory burden as one of its top ten economic priorities.

While noting the importance of environmental regulation, submissions to various Parliamentary and Productivity Commission enquiries identified the need for:

- Clear and simple environmental regulation.

- Streamlined and better defined Commonwealth and State/Territory roles and responsibilities.

- Transparency in the purpose of environmental standards and certainty in the requirements to comply.

- Proportionality in environmental regulations should be commensurate with the risks of environmental harm.

Australian governments and non-government organisations are adopting a range of new approaches to managing our environment. This Review is an opportunity for Australia to build on these experiences and identify further opportunities for reform that will maintain or improve environmental standards.

3. Summary of current and proposed reformsReform activities by governments can be categorised into one or a number of strategic approaches.

Types of reform activities include implementing greater flexibility in operational approvals to deal with unintended negative consequences of regulation, developing guidelines to clarify regulation, improving review processes, consolidating legislation, improving information requirements, and establishing regulator performance frameworks to enable ongoing monitoring that better practice regulation principles are being applied.

5 | P a g e

Jurisdictional reform activities across four strategic approaches are outlined in this section. The four strategic approaches include:

- Risk-based regulation and proportionate interventions

- Harmonisation and removing duplication

- Strategic and landscape scale approaches

- Market based instruments and other innovative approaches.

Detailed discussion of reform activities in terms of subject matter themes (e.g. biodiversity, chemicals, and waste) is provided in section 4.

Risk-based regulation and proportionate interventions

Risk-based regulation is designed to be implemented according to the level of risk associated with particular actions. For example, an activity or action that has been identified or assessed as a low risk of occurrence and low risk of environmental impact may not be required to be reported on or monitored, thus ensuring that low risk/impact activities are regulated with efficiency and allowing industry and regulators to concentrate on activities of higher risk of occurrence and impact.

The Australian Government Department of the Environment (the Department) is developing a policy framework to ensure conditions for environmental approvals under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) are guided by an outcomes and risk-based approach. This will result in conditions on approved projects being tailored, fit-for-purpose and proportionate to the level of environmental impact likely to result from the approved project. Such conditions provide business with more incentive to develop efficient solutions.

The Department also uses risk-based prioritisation tools to help focus regulatory resources towards achieving the greatest environmental benefit. In 2014, with the assistance of CSIRO, the Department implemented the National Environmental Significance Threat and Risk Assessment (NESTRA) tool. NESTRA ranks projects approved under the EPBC Act on the basis of relative risk of environmental impacts and the likelihood that approval conditions will be breached. Those rankings inform the type, scale and frequency of compliance monitoring responses. Investigations into serious non-compliance with national environmental law are also informed by a risk-based case-prioritisation model based on the practice used by the Australian Crime Commission. These are two examples of the way the Australian Government is targeting resources to achieve higher-value compliance and enforcement outcomes, increasing scrutiny of projects that pose a high risk to Australia’s environment and heritage and rewarding individuals and businesses who comply with Australia’s environmental laws.

The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Government has completed an environmental regulatory reform program in reviewing its primary Environmental Act in 2014. The 2014 review of the Environment Protection Act 1997 makes the legislation contemporary by aligning major provisions of the Act, creating a regulatory framework commensurate to those of other Australian jurisdictions, and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the regulatory and enforcement mechanisms. As a result of the review, the ACT Legislative Assembly passed the Environment Protection Amendment Bill 2014 in October 2014.

By making the legislation contemporary, the ACT is delivering its regulatory framework by focussing on and addressing current and emerging issues in protecting the ACT’s natural and built environment. Cognisant of the nature of the ACT’s environment, including limited heavy industry, the ACT has been able to utilise a more proactive approach to managing potential and actual environmental impacts.

6 | P a g e

The ACT also adopts a risk-based assessment method for authorised activities under the Act to improve the efficiency of the process by incorporating appropriate review intervals. The adoption of risk-based assessment for authorised activities has lifted unnecessary regulatory process from industry, businesses and the regulator.

The New South Wales (NSW) Government has a number of major environmental regulatory reforms currently underway. Many of these seek to introduce risk or outcomes-based regulation and more proportionate interventions that reduce unnecessary compliance burden, improve flexibility and adaptive responses, and increase stakeholder certainty and participation. Examples of reforms include: a comprehensive review of biodiversity legislation; the new Biodiversity Offsets Policy for Major Projects; coastal management reforms; marine estate management reforms; and the introduction of risk-based licensing for industrial activities. In NSW, this work is reinforced through implementing the Quality Regulatory Services Initiative (QRSI) which introduces five reforms agencies must comply with to make it easier for business and individuals to engage with NSW regulators and reduce the regulatory burden on compliant businesses and individuals. QRSI reforms require agencies to enable electronic transactions, provide clarity on processing timeframes and provide transparent appeal mechanisms to reduce administrative burdens. The reforms also require agencies to promote a risk based approach to compliance and enforcement and have a greater focus on regulatory outcomes to avoid unnecessary requirements being imposed.

The NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) review of its environment protection licensing framework led to the development and introduction of a risk-based licensing system for all premises that hold environmental protection licences under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Risk-based licensing will commence on 1 July 2015 and aims to ensure that all environment protection licensees receive an appropriate level of regulation based on the environmental risk of the activity. This will allow the EPA to better target regulatory efforts towards high risk and poor performing licensees. The regulatory framework also provides incentives for licensees to improve environmental performance and compliance as risk ratings are tied to licence fees.

The NSW EPA also conducted an extensive review of the waste regulatory framework and as a result, a remade Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2014 commenced on 1 November 2014 after extensive public consultation. The new regulation will modernise the NSW waste industry, establish a level playing field for legitimate businesses and prevent unlawful activities across the sector.

As part of the Queensland Government’s overarching commitment to reducing red tape for business and industry, the environment portfolio is implementing a comprehensive regulatory reform programme, the Greentape Reduction Project. The risk-based approach is a fundamental principle of this Project. Reforms are progressively being implemented for environmental licensing processes, heritage protection, waste management, contaminated land, offsets, and nature conservation permitting.

These reforms include: deregulating the lowest risk activities; introducing standard conditions that can apply ‘off the shelf’ for eligible activities; development of outcomes focussed model conditions for mining and petroleum activities, and composting and sewage treatment plants; removing public notification of environmental authorities for low-risk mining activities; regulation of only higher risk wastes with the potential to cause environmental harm; and streamlining processes for low risk or sustainable activities posing minimal threat to protected plants.

7 | P a g e

South Australia has undertaken considerable reform aimed at reducing regulatory burden. For example, leading practice regulatory impact assessment has been introduced and a whole of government red tape reduction program ran from 2006 – 2012. This was followed by the establishment of the Simpler Regulation Unit in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet to facilitate achievement of the State Government’s economic priority to make South Australia the best place to do business. The Simpler Regulation Unit works with the business community to remove unnecessary regulatory burden and to create a system of regulation that supports innovation, new investment and jobs. The Unit works in partnership with relevant line agencies to implement reforms and all government regulatory activities which impose significant costs or delays on business are in scope.

As part of this process South Australia is moving towards a standard risk-based approach to environmental assessment in all its environmental impact assessments. Already in place, the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Act 2000 incorporates a number of elements which apply risk-based approaches to regulation. This includes approving environmental objectives and assessment criteria for an activity to achieve and arisk-based assessment framework to determine the level of significance of a project. The compliance approach is based on an operator compliance standard.

The South Australian EPA is reviewing the Water Quality (Environment Protection) Policy under the Environment Protection Act 1993. The review will result in a more flexible policy that is risk-based and regulates based on potential or actual environmental harm. The outcome will be more flexible in the management of environments with a focus on continual improvement.

Tasmania is taking a comprehensive approach to its planning reform agenda and reviewing all elements of the planning system to ensure that planning decisions are appropriate, consistent and efficiently made through a single state wide planning system. The planning scheme will use standards which are appropriate and proportionate to the circumstances and community expectations. In a separate reform process, a Regulation Reduction Coordinator has been appointed to lead the red and green tape reduction programme which includes an annual regulation audit. The target is a 20 per cent reduction in red and green tape. The regulatory audit process will ensure that regulatory interventions are appropriate and proportionate to the degree of environmental risk to be managed. The Tasmanian EPA has reviewed its compliance policy and introduced a more systematic approach to risk-based regulation. It has also established an annual review cycle for guidance documentation to improve materials provided to development proponents.

In Victoria a risk-based approach to regulation has been applied to a number of reforms. For example, administration of coastal consents has been reviewed and streamlined to focus regulatory effort on those activities with higher risks. As a result, coastal businesses, communities and managers are able to carry out most lower risk activities and works on the coast without applying for individual consent, and regulatory burden for medium risk activities has also been reduced.

The formal introduction of a risk-based approach in Victoria’s native vegetation permitted clearing regula-tions has also streamlined the assessment process for the majority of clearing applications falling into the low risk pathway. The Victorian Government has announced a further review of the native vegetation per-mitted clearing regulations to ensure that the regulations sensibly protect sensitive native vegetation.

The review and amendment of the environmental regulatory framework for commercial timber harvesting on Public Land, under the Victorian Sustainable Forests (Timber) Act 2004, is another example, which has resulted in a flexible and tailored approach to matters of non-compliance that is proportionate to the environmental impact and culpability of the offender.

8 | P a g e

Western Australia’s Environmental Protection Authority has introduced a risk-based approach to environmental impact assessment based on the concept of environmental significance; minimising duplication in approval processes by deferring the consideration of factors to other decision-making processes where these deliver the same outcome; and application of outcome-based conditions through the approval process.

A program is being implemented to improve the consistency, quality and effectiveness of Western Australia’s industry regulation through the Re-Engineering for Industry Regulation and the Environment (REFIRE) process. REFIRE reform products include templates for licences, work approvals, decision documents and administrative process improvements.

Harmonisation and removal of duplication

Many existing regulatory reform processes have a focus on harmonisation and streamlining to remove duplication. This is occurring both within and between jurisdictions.

One-stop shop approaches

The Australian Government has committed to a one-stop shop policy for environmental approvals to reduce duplication between Commonwealth and State and Territory environmental legislation. This model is intended to provide equivalent environmental protection through a simpler, streamlined process.

This type of process, aimed at achieving at least equivalent environmental outcomes with less regulation, may be a model for a broad range of environmental measures in the future.

Threatened species assessment and listing

The 2013 Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications report Effectiveness of threatened species and ecological communities’ protection in Australia recommended that the Commonwealth, State and Territory governments prioritise work to reduce duplication and inconsistency between the EPBC Act list and State and Territory lists of threatened species. It also recommended that governments work to establish uniform and integrated processes for the future listing of threatened species and communities. The 2009 Report of the Independent Review of the EPBC Act included similar recommendations.

Differences between jurisdictions’ species listing legislative frameworks have resulted in the development of nine separate threatened species lists that do not align in relation to the taxa that can be listed, the capacity to list critical habitat, and the threat categories used. Different assessment methodologies are also adopted in each jurisdiction, including the range at which the species listing assessments occur (national versus regional), and the standard of evidence required in the assessment of conservation status.

These differences have contributed to substantial variation in the species (both number and diversity) that are listed in each jurisdiction. The total number of species listed under all State and Territory lists is difficult to quantify, however, it is estimated to be in the order of 5,000. The number of species listed as threatened under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 is 1,749. This disparity creates significant uncertainty about the overall scale of the problem and diminishes the ability to target limited resources effectively and efficiently to species and habitats of greatest concern.

9 | P a g e

This Review has considered and evaluated options to reform species assessment and listing processes, taking into account the administrative costs of implementing reforms and the environmental and regulatory burden reduction benefits. This initial evaluation indicates that while there is likely to be little regulatory burden reduction from reforming threatened species assessment and listing processes, there could be demonstrable benefits for the management of threatened species and ability to prioritise the allocation of resources to recovery actions for priority species and ecological communities.

There is agreement among all jurisdictions on the need to develop a common assessment methodology to underpin the listing of threatened species, based on consistent application and adoption of the Interna-tional Union for Conservation of Nature Red List categories and criteria, as relevant to the Australian con-text. Implementation of this reform will facilitate alignment of threatened species lists over time through harmonisation of assessment approaches and regulatory arrangements. Mutual accreditation of assessment and listing processes is anticipated to be an outcome of this reform and could be achieved through a range of mechanisms including, for example, bilateral agreements.

The ACT Legislative Assembly recently passed the Nature Conservation Act 2014. The Act builds upon the strong framework provided by the previous Nature Conservation Act 1980. New provisions for threatened species align threatened species listing more closely with the IUCN categories for threatened species. Criteria for listing of threatened species will be included in a statutory instrument. Over time, this will allow for harmonisation of the ACT list with those of the Commonwealth.

Other examples of regulatory harmonisation

The ACT is an active participant in the National Framework for Compliance and Enforcement Systems for Water Resource Management. This National Framework harmonises water licensing, trading and compliance processes across jurisdictions, and reduces costs to business and regulators. Another ACT initiative relevant to regulatory harmonisation is the Nature Conservation Act 2014, which explicitly allows for the adoption or incorporation of plans and strategies from other jurisdictions, for example recovery plans, as meeting requirements for action plans for threatened species in the ACT. This reduces unnecessary duplication.

The Northern Territory Government has committed to reducing red and green tape through a balanced approach that is sensitive to environmental issues and also promotes economic and social developments. Initiatives that will lead regulatory reform include a red tape abolition squad with a role to challenge all forms of legislative, regulatory and administrative red tape. The squad will be working closely with business, industry, government agencies and non-government organisations. A red tape reduction business advocate and hotline service provides a contact point and support service for anyone experiencing difficulties in obtaining decisions, licences, approvals or information from the Northern Territory Government.

The Northern Territory Government has also commenced a review of key legislation to ensure it is contemporary and adequate to deal with the challenges of delivering sustainable development. The review is broadly aimed at examining the effectiveness of existing regulation and identifying improvements to the regulatory framework. The review is being conducted with a view to: improve environmental outcomes; reduce green tape; remove duplication; and address gaps in the existing framework.

10 | P a g e

In Queensland a significant area of reform relates to offsets policy where five separate policies have been replaced with a single environmental offsets framework. The new framework is outcome-based and aligns offsets across all three levels of government. The new policy allows financial settlement, land-based offsets, and offsets delivered as actions in a Direct Benefit Management Plan or a combination of these approaches. The offsets reform provides greater opportunity for landholders to receive income in return for voluntarily agreeing to manage their land, or part of their land, as an offset.

Harmonisation and removal of duplication is the dominant reform approach being applied by South Australia. Consideration is being given to removing the threatened species schedules from the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 so they can be amended more frequently, thus ensuring that they reflect the current conservation status of the species listed. The intent will be to provide better alignment with other jurisdictions, as well as IUCN, which will deliver streamlining for businesses when considering impacts to threatened species under bilateral or cross border assessment processes.

In Victoria reform initiatives have also led to improvements in operational practice and streamlining of administration. For example, the Victorian EPA Business Services Reform process has streamlined administration through the ability for industry to lodge and view more information via an online portal, and improved internal workflows and information management.

The completed 2013-14 components of the EPA Audit Reform and EPA Approvals Reform are other examples of where improvements to administrative efficiency and greater stakeholder certainty are reducing regulatory burden.

In May 2012, the NSW Government announced a remake of the four Integrated Forestry Operations Approvals (IFOAs), which integrate the regulatory regimes for environmental planning and assessment, protection of the environment and threatened species conservation, into a single new IFOA for coastal NSW. The objectives of the coastal IFOA’s remake are to reduce the costs of implementation and compliance and to improve the clarity and enforceability of IFOA conditions. The NSW Government has committed to delivering these objectives with no net change to wood supply and maintenance of environmental values.

South Australia has been running a number of regulatory improvement projects as part of the Change@-SouthAustralia program coordinated through the Office for the Public Sector. The projects are aimed at im-proving productivity, citizen engagement and public benefits for South Australians within accelerated time-frames (90 days). More than twenty projects have so far been completed and included a project to reduce red tape for South Australia’s Tuna Industry. This project has significantly reduced the regulatory burden for South Australia’s Bluefin tuna industry by speeding up the time it takes to gain approvals for a tuna license each year and to reduce the cost to tuna farmers by aligning regulatory requirements with the annual fish-ing and farming cycle.

Western Australia has addressed duplication and harmonisation through the removal of unnecessary and duplicative appeals and streamline assessment processes in the Environmental Protection Act 1986; the revision of the Environmental Protection Authority’s administrative procedures in 2010 and 2012 to streamline and improve the environmental impact assessment process and reduce the number of levels of assessment from four to two; and, the introduction of the streamlined assessment on proponent information level of assessment.

11 | P a g e

Strategic and landscape scale approaches

In Australia a landscape scale approach to biodiversity conservation was first proposed in the 1999 National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity. It is reiterated in the current Aus-tralian Biodiversity Conservation Strategy: 2010-2030.

Landscape scale approaches to biodiversity conservation can be an effective scale at which to address threats to biodiversity values and to restore/rehabilitate ecological processes. According to Pressey (1996), the fundamental aim of a landscape approach is to provide connections and corridors between patches of remnant vegetation and to manage the ‘unreserved matrix’ and thus the need for mechanisms that provide for biodiversity conservation on private and public land.5 Landscape scale biodiversity programs are an im-portant element of a comprehensive approach to biodiversity management and complement management strategies that focus at the species or genetic level.

Cumulative impacts from development proposals can also be considered at the landscape scale.6 The in-creased use of landscape-scale planning and assessment mechanisms, particularly bioregional planning and strategic assessment, was identified as an opportunity in the Independent review of the Environment Pro-tection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

As part of the Australian Government’s One-Stop Shop, the Australian Government and the States and Ter-ritories have committed to the greater use of strategic assessments. Recent examples of successful stra-tegic assessments include:

the Melbourne Urban Growth Boundary, which will achieve an estimated saving to business of $542 million (over 20 years) and protection of over 15,000 hectares of new grassland reserves.

the Western Sydney Growth Areas, which will achieve an estimated saving to business and government of $1.63 billion and the conservation of priority woodlands on the Cumberland Plain.

the Molongolo Valley Urban Development in the ACT, which will achieve estimated savings to business and government of $253 million.

Opportunities also exist to undertake more strategic assessments in partnership with industry, for example the strategic assessments currently being undertaken with BHP Billiton and Hammersley Iron Ore Pty Ltd in the Pilbara region, Western Australia.

The NSW Government uses landscape scale assessment tools such as biodiversity certification and strategic assessments where appropriate to reduce regulatory burden, improve environmental outcomes and im-prove stakeholder certainty. For example, NSW is currently working with the Commonwealth on the Upper Hunter Strategic Assessment to improve the planning of new or expanded coal mines which have the po-tential to impact on biodiversity.

5 Pressey B, 1996, Bioregional planning for the conservation of biodiversity – putting theory into practice – past and present, in Breckwoldt R (Ed) Approaches to Bioregional Planning, Part 1, Conference proceedings, 30 October – 1 November 1995, Melbourne6 Pope and Moore, 2013, Planning and assessment for biodiversity conservation at a landscape-scale: an evaluation of current approaches and opportunities in Australia, NERP Landscapes and Policy Hub

12 | P a g e

The NSW Government is also conducting a two-stage coastal management reform process. Stage one fo-cused on regulatory relief to landowners and councils dealing with erosion impacts and is now largely com-plete. Stage two of the reforms is now underway and has a strategic focus that addresses three key areas: establishing a simpler and more integrated legal and policy framework for coastal management; improving support for councils to assist local decision making; and identifying sustainable funding and financing op-tions for coastal management. The coastal reforms are being developed in the context of the Government’s local government reforms and strategic approach to land use planning, to ensure an integrated approach to coastal management.

A number of reforms have been proposed to the Northern Territory Environmental Assessment Act 1982 to create a robust, contemporary environmental impact assessment framework. The proposed reforms in-clude adoption of strategic environmental assessments to provide for improved landscape scale analysis of potential environmental impacts. It is proposed that businesses save time and resources by being able to use the results of strategic assessments rather than completing individual project assessments. Strategic as-sessments will also provide certainty to businesses and other stakeholders as to the appropriate types of development within the strategic assessment area.

Queensland’s planning framework is currently undergoing a significant reform process which will generate substantial savings through reducing duplication and regulatory burden. Amendments to the Queensland Sustainable Planning Act 2009 have already contributed to these savings.

In South Australia landscape scale approaches are likely to be maintained and possibly modified under current land planning reforms. An Expert Panel on Planning Reform has been established to review the state’s planning system, its intersections with other relevant legislation and to propose options for system reform. The final report will outline a range of recommended changes to the state planning system so that it can better meet South Australia’s current and future land use and development challenges.

The Tasmanian Government’s planning reform agenda is also directed to providing a strategic approach to decision making in Tasmania to ensure that decisions are consistent and appropriate and are delivered through a simpler, cheaper, faster and fairer planning system. The development of new state policies will provide a strategic framework for the state wide planning scheme and inform regional land use strategies and the spatial application of zones.

The Western Australian Swan and Canning Rivers Management Act 2006 is being amended to amalgamate the roles and functions of the Swan River Trust with the Department of Parks and Wildlife and allow the management of the Swan Canning Riverpark to be integrated with the conservation, protection, and pro-motion of national parks, marine parks, and reserves already managed by Parks and Wildlife.

The Western Australian and the Australian Governments are progressing a strategic assessment of develop-ment within the Perth and Peel Regions, which are projected to increase to 3.5 million people by 2050. The strategic assessment provides an opportunity to undertake whole-of-government planning to integrate environmental, social and economic goals across the landscape.

13 | P a g e

Market based instruments and other innovative approaches

Market based instruments are tools that use market-like approaches to influence the behaviour of business to promote better environmental outcomes. These instruments utilise the economic principles of markets and can be an efficient way to mobilise investment in sustainable production and biodiversity conservation or drive behavioural change to achieve environmental outcomes. Biobanking, also referred to as conserva-tion, species or habitat banking, is a market based instrument that uses a formal market to facilitate the trade of biodiversity conservation. While this trade could include the sale and purchase of biodiversity con-servation for the purposes of regulatory offsetting, it could also include the sale and purchase of biod-iversity conservation for other non-regulatory purposes such as philanthropy.

The ACT Government has introduced a number of market based schemes to promote renewable energy and cost-effective energy saving activities, such as the Electricity Feed-in (Large-scale Renewable Energy Genera-tion) Act 2011 and the Energy Efficiency (Cost of Living) Improvement Act 2012. These market based mech-anisms are leading Australian initiatives.

The NSW Government has in place several innovative approaches to the management of pollution. These include the load-based licensing scheme which provides a financial incentive and price signal to go beyond compliance with licence conditions and use the best available actions to reduce pollution. This scheme is currently under review to improve its effectiveness, efficiency and ease of use by licensees. A second example is the Hunter River Salinity Trading Scheme, a World-leading cap and trade credit scheme, that reduces salinity in the Hunter River. The scheme is also currently under review to improve its effectiveness, efficiency and ease of use.

The NSW Government is using market based instruments in its biobanking scheme and as part of the new Biodiversity Offsets Policy for Major Projects. This policy aims to improve environmental outcomes, reduce regulatory burden, and improve flexibility and industry participation. The Biodiversity Offsets Fund, cur-rently being developed, will complement the offsets policy and further facilitate market based options.

Following a successful pilot project conducted in 2013, the Queensland Government has implemented a voluntary market-based mechanism for nutrient management which offers an alternative investment op-tion for regulated point source operators to manage their water emission requirements, while delivering water quality improvements. The pilot project used alternative nutrient reduction actions to manage addi-tional nitrogen discharges from a sewage treatment plant as a result of local population growth. The com-pany invested almost $1 million to repair 500 metres of eroded riparian corridors located close to the plant. The nitrogen savings will allow the plant to continue operating safely at its current capacity in the short-term—without undertaking expensive upgrades, which were estimated to cost $8 million.

In Tasmania, investors and development proponents invest in nature conservation through covenants, land management agreements, environmental offsets, species recovery or management programs and conservation research.

Victoria has made use of market based approaches to biodiversity regulations since the introduction of native vegetation clearing controls in 1989. Key features of the offset market in Victoria include scientific metrics for measuring the condition and extent of native vegetation and pre-defined rules for calculating offset requirements.

14 | P a g e

Reverse auctions are another innovative approach to biodiversity conservation that has been trialled for environmental purposes in Australia. Reverse auctions involve sellers competing to supply goods or services for sale to a single buyer enabling buyers to locate the most competitive sellers.

For reverse auctions where the goal is to purchase environmental goods or services, bids are specified in terms of cost per environmental outcome achieved and are then ranked from lowest to highest, allowing the administrators of the auction to determine which bids are most competitive.7 Benefits associated with reverse auctions include: cost reductions; encouragement of business efficiencies; and establishing a level playing field to enable participation of small suppliers. In markets with multiple sellers and a single buyer, reverse auctions are considered a mechanism to efficiently allocate a limited budget. According to the World Resources Institute the nature of reverse auctions makes them cost-effective as they allow auction administrators to identify and purchase the lowest cost environmental outcomes. The key concern associated with reverse auctions is the threat of collusion by tendering organisations/individuals.

The Australian Government has initiated the Reef Trust Wet Tropics Tender as part of its $40 million Reef Trust investment. The Reef Trust Tender – Wet Tropics is a $5 million Programme that provides in-centives to sugar cane farmers to improve their nitrogen use and efficiency and farm sustainability. A mar-ket-based competitive tender (or reverse auction) will be used to allocate funding through a procurement process. Tenders received from farmers will be assessed competitively and ranked in order of an Environ-mental Benefits Index. Those that offer the greatest value for money, the most cost-effective, will be prior-itised for funding. The acquisition of $3.1 billion in water entitlements for the Murray-Darling Basin is an-other example of a reverse auction implemented by the Australian Government.

4. Summary of Reform ThemesThis section provides information on existing reform processes under thematic areas identified for specific focus during this Review: biodiversity, chemicals, and waste.

Biodiversity (native vegetation reform, biodiversity offsetting, and intersection of biodiversity conservation with land use planning)

Despite significant regulatory capacity to impose conditions on developments to minimise harm and con-serve biodiversity, for example through the protection of threatened species and ecological communities and limits on land clearing, successive State of the Environment Reports have identified declining national biodiversity. Biodiversity continues to decline despite the considerable investment nationally in biodiversity conservation policies and programmes.

Over the past five years a number of reviews and audits of Commonwealth environmental policy and regu-lation have been implemented with many identifying opportunities for reform and/or streamlining. Re-views undertaken by Parliamentary Committees, the Australian National Audit Office, the Productivity Com-mission, and independent statutory reviews and internal departmental investigations have harnessed in-formation, expertise and opinion from all sectors to cover the breadth of the environment agenda.

7 Greenhalgh, S. Guiling, J, Selman, M, and St John, J. 2007, WRI Policy Note – Environmental Markets: Reverse Auc-tions No. 3, Paying For Environmental Performance: Using Reverse Auctions to Allocate Funding for Conservation, http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/pdf/pep_reverseauction.pdf - accessed 13 Nov 2014

15 | P a g e

Key reviews include:

House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment Inquiry into Australia’s biod-iversity in a changing climate (2013)

Senate Environment and Communications References Committee Inquiry into the effectiveness of threatened species and ecological communities’ protection in Australia (2013)

Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (2009)

Senate Inquiry into the history, appropriateness and effectiveness of the use of environmental off-sets in federal environmental approvals in Australia (2014)

Senate Standing Committee on Environment, Communications and the Arts Inquiry into the opera-tion of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (2009)

Productivity Commission Inquiry Report Major Project Development Assessment Processes (2013).

Many of these reviews have considered biodiversity issues and made recommendations to guide future biodiversity policy and regulation. Biodiversity issues covered by recommendations include landscape scale approaches to biodiversity conservation and management, threatened species and ecological community listing (see section 3 above), environmental assessments and approvals, strategic assessment approaches, environmental offsets, monitoring and evaluation and information management.

Many jurisdictions identified reform activities under the theme of biodiversity, with a particular focus on terrestrial biodiversity, native vegetation management, and biodiversity offsetting.

The One-Stop Shop reform to environmental assessment and approvals under the EPBC Act has progressed environmental regulatory reform, however there remains considerable scope for further biodiversity regu-lation reform across jurisdictions. This is particularly evident in areas such as landscape scale approaches, environmental offsets and information management where multiple reviews reach consistent conclusions about the need for reform or streamlining.

In 2015 the Australian Government will, in collaboration with States and Territories, review Aus-tralia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy. This review presents a vehicle through which future reform op-portunities may be identified and prioritised. Alternative policy instruments through which to implement Australia’s obligations and commitments will be considered as part of the review.

The ACT Nature Conservation Act 2014, referred to in section 3, provides a strategic focus on species and ecosystem management through a range of statutory provisions, including giving statutory effect to the Nature Conservation Strategy which must incorporate landscape scale approaches to biodiversity conserva-tion and explicitly consider landscape connectivity.

In December 2014, the New South Wales Government received the Independent Biodiversity Legislation Review Panel’s final report on the outcomes of its comprehensive review of biodiversity legislation, encom-passing the Native Vegetation Act 2003, Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and other Acts and reg-ulations that protect native animals and plants in NSW. The Panel’s report contains 43 recommendations for establishing a simpler, streamlined and more effective legislative framework that will facilitate the con-servation of biodiversity, support sustainable development and reduce red tape. If accepted, the panel’s re-commendations are likely to result in major reforms to the laws and their associated regulations.

16 | P a g e

Biosecurity SA, in partnership with regional Natural Resources Management Boards and the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, is leading a review of declared plants under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004. As a result, all declared plant policies will incorporate current best practice weed management and a risk management approach.

The outcomes will be increased effectiveness of weed management by NRM Boards, maximised benefits from investment in weed control by landowners and state agencies, and improved consistency in plant declarations at State and regional levels.

As discussed in section 3 above, Tasmania is implementing a comprehensive planning reform agenda which will result in streamlined processes for amending planning schemes, a review of major project approval processes, effective targeting of effort in accordance with risk to the environment, and better guidance for proponents on assessment expectations.

The Western Australian Government has committed to the replacement of the outdated Wildlife Conserva-tion Act 1950 with new biodiversity conservation legislation Including increased penalties; clearer standard-ised assessments, verification, and decision making, including timelines; a focus on encouragement for pos-itive conservation actions; enhanced special protection for whales, dugongs and dolphins.

Native vegetation reforms

Over the past 20 years or so, regulatory regimes have evolved in each State and Territory with an emphasis on continuous improvement. Regulatory approaches adopted in some jurisdictions have progressively strengthened the legislation controlling the clearing of native vegetation on private and public land. Re-form of native vegetation regulations has been an area of reform for a number of jurisdictions.

The Northern Territory has reduced approval time for land clearing applications. Since 2013 applications are processed within 8-14 weeks of lodgement, as opposed to the up to six months previously. This was achieved by ensuring matters outside the requirements of the relevant legislation were no longer con-sidered during internal assessment processes.

South Australia is conducting a ‘Review of Native Vegetation Regulations’. The current regulations are ex-piring which provides an opportunity to give broader consideration to how the regulations can be adjusted and improved in the future. South Australia’s longer term reform process has commenced with the aim of streamlining environmental regulations and providing clarity for businesses.

As previously mentioned, the Victorian Government has announced a further review of Victoria’s native ve-getation permitted clearing regulations to ensure that the regulations sensibly protect sensitive native ve-getation.

The Western Australian Government amended the Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegeta-tion) Regulations in 2013 to provide for greater flexibility for landholders through extensions to the exemp-tion time frame for maintaining previously cleared areas from ten years to twenty years and increasing the area of prescribed limited clearing from one to five hectares each year.

This has reduced costs for small businesses and helped to address the Government’s election commitment to remove regulatory barriers that inhibit progress for farmers. The Western Australian Government is pur-suing amendments to the clearing provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 to provide appropri-ate flexibility for dealing with trivial clearing without compromising environmental outcomes.

17 | P a g e

Biodiversity offsetting

Biodiversity offsetting seeks to protect and conserve environmental and biodiversity values. It has wide-spread appeal across the States as an instrument to ensure economic and social development can occur while supporting long-term environmental and conservation values. Most jurisdictions are implementing reforms to improve biodiversity offsetting by establishing new environment offset frameworks.

Released in October 2013, the ‘Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Environ-mental Offsets Policy’ outlines the Australian Government’s approach to the use of environmental offsets under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

The policy includes ten overarching principles that are applied when determining the suitability of offsets. The Offsets assessment guide gives effect to the requirements of the policy, utilising a balance sheet ap-proach to estimate impacts and offsets for threatened species and ecological communities.

The Environmental Offsets Policy provides for the use of advance offsets. The Department is developing an Advance Offsets Policy which will identify that advanced offsets can significantly improve the conservation benefit arising from an offset at the time of the impact. Prior information and confidence about the pro-posed offset may also streamline the assessment process under the EPBC Act for projects that require off-sets.

A draft ACT Environmental Offsets Policy and associated guidelines and draft Environmental Offsets Deliv-ery Framework will be finalised with commencement of changes to the ACT’s Planning and Development Act 2007 enacted through the Planning and Development (Bilateral Agreement) Amendment Act 2014. The approach to offsets is consistent with the EPBC Act offsets policy, and builds on the approach to assessment of offsets undertaken through the NSW Biobanking Scheme.

The NSW Biodiversity Offsets Policy for Major Projects seeks to clarify, standardise and improve biodiversity offsetting for major project approvals under its Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The policy aims to strike an effective balance between the needs of proponents, communities and the en-vironment by providing clear, efficient and certain guidance for stakeholders, improving outcomes for the environment and communities and providing a practical and achievable offset scheme for proponents. The policy is being phased in through a transitional implementation period, which commenced in October 2014, with implementation through legislation proposed in 2016. The Government has also commenced work on a Biodiversity Offsets Fund to complement the policy.

The Queensland Government introduced its Environmental Offset Framework in July 2014. The framework streamlined five existing policies into one, removing duplication, and aligning offsets across levels of gov-ernment.

The Western Australian Government’s Environmental Offsets Policy was released in September 2011. In line with Queensland and New South Wales, the policy provides a consistent application of environmental off-sets to protect and conserve environmental and biodiversity values. The WA Environmental Offsets Guidelines were published in August 2014 to complement the policy and ensure that the basis for decision-making on environmental offsets is understood and consistently applied. The guidelines apply to all biodiversity offsets required as a condition of Western Australian environmental approval processes. The Western Australian Government’s Environmental Offsets Register website was launched in August 2013 to provide a central public record of offsets in Western Australia, contributing to the broader objectives of transparency and accountability.

All States are working towards the same goals of:

18 | P a g e

Providing clear and efficient guidelines

Improving consistency at state and regional levels

Providing a practical and achievable offset scheme for proponents.

Simplification of environmental aspects of land use planning

Business, community organisations and individuals impacted by environmental regulation want more cer-tainty and reduced costs for development proposals in growth areas. This is reflected in submissions re-ceived by the 2014 House of Representatives Standing Committee on the Environment Inquiry into stream-lining environmental regulation, ‘green tape’ and one-stop shop described in section 2 above.

The Australian Government has committed to a One-Stop Shop policy for environmental approvals to reduce duplication between Commonwealth and State and Territory environmental legislation. Bilateral agreements with jurisdictions to support the One-Stop Shop are currently being negotiated.

The Queensland Government has already amended their Sustainable Planning Act 2009, with further amendments likely to support the Greentape Reduction Project and bilateral negotiations under the One-Stop Shop policy. As part of Tasmania’s environmental reform process discussed in section 3 above, a Planning Reform Taskforce was established in May 2014 with the aim of introducing legislative amendments in 2015.

As set out in section 3 above, South Australia has established an Expert Panel on Planning Reform which will propose options for system reform and recommend changes to the state planning system so that it can better meet South Australia’s current and future land use and development challenges.

Development pressure and associated activities are consistently identified to be key threats to biodiversity conservation. Development approvals and mitigation of environmental impacts arising from development activities contribute to some extent to addressing the impact of development activities on biodiversity out-comes. As discussed above, biodiversity offsetting schemes are one mitigation mechanism. Nevertheless; the separation of land use planning decisions and management of biodiversity conservation within jurisdic-tional agencies contributes to a fragmented approach and is failing to address adequately the cumulative impact of development on conservation values. In all jurisdictions, with the exception of the Northern Ter-ritory, land use planning and environmental regulation are the responsibility of different Ministers. An area of consideration identified under this Review is the need to establish arrangements that better coordinate biodiversity conservation outcomes into land use planning decisions, including considering opportunities for land use planning arrangements to contribute to them.

Common themes between jurisdictions related to land use planning reforms include:

Significant time and cost saving to the community and the regulators, including reducing assessment timings;

More strategic and streamlined planning and frameworks;

Economic growth;

Public consultation in conduct of reviews.

19 | P a g e

As discussed in section 3 above, the Australian Government is already partnering with state and territory governments and industry to undertake strategic assessments in many high growth areas. A strategic as-sessment can provide early regional level guidance on appropriate areas for development and conservation activities which further streamline the environmental approvals process. Strategic assessments could also allow a significant pooled investment that can protect some of the most vulnerable parts of the environ-ment.

The Australian Government will focus future work on developing a framework to identify and prioritise areas for strategic assessments. Further detail on the potential of strategic assessments is provided in sec-tion 5 below.

Chemicals

Chemicals and plastics have long been considered a ‘regulatory hotspot’ by the Council of Australian Gov-ernments (COAG). As highlighted by the Productivity Commission’s 2008 Research Report on Chemicals and Plastics Regulation the management of environmental risks from industrial chemicals across jurisdictions is fragmented and inefficient, and less effective than other chemical risk management regimes such as for poisons or workplace health and safety matters.

Industrial chemicals are assessed under the Industrial Chemicals (Notification and Assessment) Act 1989 for health and environmental risks. States and Territories are responsible for implementing the National Indus-trial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme (NICNAS) recommendations for managing the environ-mental risks of industrial chemicals in line with existing legislative frameworks. A significant amount of work is required to translate NICNAS recommendations into practical risk management actions. Consequently environmental risk management actions are often not implemented, or are only partially addressed on a jurisdictional basis. This regulatory complexity and inconsistency leads to confusion, gaps, duplication and increased costs and uncertainty for business.

To address this, COAG agreed to progress reforms related to the creation of a standards-setting body to make national risk management decisions. In April 2013, the former Standing Council on Environment and Water released a COAG Consultation Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) exploring three options for imple-mentation of this reform. Following stakeholder feedback, a Decision RIS is currently under preparation that proposes the establishment and implementation of a National Standard for environmental manage-ment of industrial chemicals.

Waste

Australian governments have a long history of collaboration on waste policy and actions and a number of nationally agreed regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives aimed at standardising and harmonising ap-proaches to waste policy to address market failures are in place or under development.

The National Waste Policy, agreed by all Australian environment Ministers in November 2009, provides a coherent, efficient and environmentally responsible approach to waste management and sets Australia's waste management and resource recovery direction to 2020. According to the Policy, between 2002 and 2006 waste generation increased by 31 per cent to 43.8 million tonnes and hazardous waste generation doubled from 0.64 to 1.19 million tonnes per annum. The Policy sets directions in six key areas and identifies priority strategies that benefit from a national or coordinated approach. These strategies focus work across individual jurisdictions, build on current directions and complement existing activity. They will also provide clarity and certainty for business and the community.

20 | P a g e

21 | P a g e

The National Waste Policy covers wastes, including hazardous wastes and substances, in the municipal, commercial and industrial, construction and demolition waste streams and covers gaseous, liquid and solid wastes.

The National Environment Protection Council Act 1994 (and mirror legislation in other jurisdictions) enables the making of National Environment Protection Measures about a variety of environmental matters pre-scribed under the National Environment Protection Council Acts including air quality, noise, estuarine and freshwater quality, and hazardous wastes. The Report of the Third Review of the National Environment Pro-tection Council Acts (Commonwealth, State and Territory) was delivered in December 2012.8

The Australian Government Department of the Environment will undertake a staged approach to the reform of Hazardous Waste (Regulations of Exports and Imports) Act 1989. It will initially focus on streamlining and deregulatory opportunities within the current scope of the legislation. The longer-term objective of the re-form process is to ensure that Australia meets its international commitments effectively and efficiently.

The Product Stewardship Act 2011 provides the framework to effectively manage the environmental, health and safety impacts of products, and in particular those impacts associated with the disposal of products. The legislation delivers on a key commitment by the Australian Government under the National Waste Policy. The framework includes voluntary, co-regulatory and mandatory product stewardship.

Regulatory reviews under this theme are ongoing in eight jurisdictions, with much work focussed on intro-ducing risk-based approaches to waste regulation and waste levy reforms.

The New South Wales Government introduced a series of regulatory reforms during 2013 and 2014 that has seen improvements in the effectiveness, efficiency and ease of use of the market-based waste levy which makes recycling cost-competitive against disposal of waste landfill and has driven significant improvements in recycling. This is supported by updated and targeted enforcement mechanisms and penalties. It is also strongly supported by a $465.7 million program, Waste Less, Recycle More, to drive investment in new or upgraded recycling infrastructure.

The Northern Territory EPA is currently reviewing the role and purpose of the Waste Management and Pol-lution Control Act 1998 and the Litter Act 1972 within the broader Northern Territory environmental man-agement framework. The aim is to identify improvements that can be made to the Acts to assist the North-ern Territory achieve ecologically sustainable development. The review is also considering non-legislative alternatives that could be adopted.

The Queensland Government is introducing a risk-based regulated waste list. To promote the recovery of useful waste materials and make them available for circulation back into the economy, Queensland has in-troduced changes to beneficial use approvals under the Waste Reduction and Recycling Act 2011. The changes streamline current application and assessment processes, give greater certainty about when a waste ceases to be a waste and therefore not subject to waste regulation, and encourages research by en-abling trials and proof of concept.

8 National Environment Protection Council – NEPC Acts Third Review and Response 2012-2013

22 | P a g e

In South Australia the Environment Protection Act 1993 provides for the payment of a solid waste levy for material disposed of to landfill. The levy provides a financial incentive for industry to seek alternatives to the disposal of waste products, encouraging reuse and recycling of materials. Further to this, South Australia has completed the staged implementation of the Environment Protection (Waste to Resources) Policy 2010. The Policy requires suitable waste produced in metropolitan Adelaide to be subject to resource recovery processes prior to being able to be disposed of to landfill. Certain materials are also generally banned from disposal to landfill under the Policy. This has provided further incentive for industry to seek alternatives to the disposal of waste products, encouraging reuse and recycling of materials.

The Tasmanian Government is streamlining reporting requirements for controlled waste movements to re-duce administrative burden for operators and regulators alike.

In Victoria, legislative changes in 2014 have embedded new arrangements for regional planning and deliv-ery and provided a strategic approach to state-wide waste and resource recovery infrastructure. A review of Victoria’s statutory policy framework for environmental protection under the Environment Protection Act 1970, undertaken in 2013, included recommendations relevant to State Environment Protection Policies and Waste Management Policies, including the need to clarify community and industry obligations, reduce com-pliance costs, and provide for innovation.

The Western Australian Government’s Waste Strategy, Creating the right environment, was launched in March 2012 to encourage waste avoidance, reduce landfill disposal and increase resource recovery across the state. Solid waste diversion targets have been set to help achieve the aims of the strategy. Diversion of waste from landfill has been Western Australian Government policy for over twenty years.

Like South Australia, in 1998 Western Australia introduced a landfill levy to provide an incentive to avoid disposal to landfill. From 1 January 2015, the landfill levy rate at putrescible landfills is proposed to increase by almost 97% (from $28 per tonne to $55 per tonne), and at inert landfills by 400% (from $12 per cubic metre to $60 per cubic metre), and progressively increase to 2018. By acting as an economic instrument to increase the price of landfill disposal relative to recycling and resource recovery, the increased landfill levy rates are expected to reduce waste to landfill. The levy also serves to generate funds for a range of waste initiatives and environmental purposes.

A statutory review of the Western Australian Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2007 is currently underway, with the release of a discussion paper for public comment. Reforms suggested in the review discussion paper include creating statutory waste groups in the Perth and Peel regions with compulsory local government membership; giving waste groups the authority to coordinate procurement of waste processing services to achieve least cost and to maximise competition; and waste infrastructure planning that requires regional and local plans to align to a State waste plan.

5. Reform opportunities that warrant further investigation Jurisdictions have identified a number of reform opportunities where potential benefits could be realised through the implementation of a more consistent national approach. Whilst many of these opportunities require further work and investigation, pursuing these opportunities will pave the way for a more comprehensive approach to reform of environmental regulation.

23 | P a g e

Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Review

A review of the Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy is proposed to further enhance the use of strategic approaches and engagement with regional communities and businesses. It will also provide for jurisdictions to further consider its implementation using market based instruments, conservation coven-ants, engaging with regional communities to deliver environmental services, and leverage private invest-ment to protect biodiversity at both individual species and landscape scale.

Strategic Assessments

There is scope for greater use of strategic assessments under the EPBC Act, as recommended by the Pro-ductivity Commission, to account for cumulative impacts and reduce the scale and cost of project-level as-sessment of major projects.9

Strategic assessments can potentially deliver greater savings for business than improvements to the effi-ciency of project-by-project assessments. In the medium-term there is scope for states and territories to in-crease the use of strategic approaches to planning and development processes to ensure decisions are taken at the landscape scale, rather than incrementally, thereby avoiding cumulative environmental im-pacts.

One-Stop-Shop Model for Environmental Approvals

The One-Stop Shop policy will streamline environmental assessment and approval processes, while main-taining the high environmental standards under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.The policy will remove any unnecessary duplication between the Australian Government and jur-isdictions and will be implemented through bilateral agreements between the Government and each state and territory.

Common Approach to Biodiversity Offsetting

Following the completion of a strategic assessment, priority actions to address threats at a landscape scale can be identified and funding directed to activities that will deliver the most effective outcome for biod-iversity conservation. A number of reviews have also identified the potential associated with developing a consistent methodology for assessing biodiversity offsets and scope for a national offsets market.

Nationally Consistent Approach to Threatened Species Assessment and Listing

There is also agreement about the need to develop a nationally consistent approach to listing threatened species, based on consistent adoption and application of the International Union for Conservation of Nature categories and criteria, as relevant to the Australian context. A nationally consistent assessment method will ensure, over time, alignment of listing decision outcomes and threatened species lists. The ability for jurisdictions to adopt regionally specific, targeted recovery actions will reflect regional and national species conservation objectives.

9 Productivity Commission (2013), Major Project Development Assessment Processes, p 316

24 | P a g e

Improved environmental information and data sharing

A further issue that could be explored during this Review is scope for reform relating to environmental information and data. According to the national Australian State of the Environment Report (2011) there are limited long-term data on trends in biodiversity, making it difficult to interpret the state or trends of major animal and plant groups in most jurisdictions and no standardised national set of biodiversity indicators, with different States and Territories using different indicators. As indicated in section 4 above, this issue has been identified in a number of previous reviews. For example, during discussion of harmonisation of species listing processes, the need for improved information and data sharing was identified. Improved coordination of and access to environmental data is being progressed through the One-Stop Shop reform. This will support better environmental outcomes by providing a better evidence base for regulations and investment decisions.

Further investigation of the benefits of improved sharing of and access to environmental information, beyond what has been achieved through the One-Stop Shop process, is warranted to explore its potential to address ongoing difficulties in monitoring trends in biodiversity and other environmental issues and enable jurisdictions to further develop evidence-based policy.

In addition to the public good benefit associated with more readily available environmental information, there may be regulatory burden savings to business and community organisations if existing (non-public) information is more widely accessible.

Ongoing thematic investigations

To date the focus of discussions on the National Review of Environmental Regulation has been on further opportunities for reform in relation to threatened species listing. Thematic issues to be considered in sub-sequent meetings of senior officials include: biodiversity regulation (including offsets); chemicals; integ-rated waste and product stewardship; heritage listing; and simplification of environmental aspects of land use planning.

Reform under the chemicals theme is being progressed through the Decision Regulation Impact Statement referred to in Section 4 (National Standard for Environmental Management of Industrial Chemicals). This Decision RIS is expected to be considered by Environment Ministers in mid-2015.

If agreed, this reform would facilitate a nationally consistent approach to environmental risk management of chemicals by jurisdictions. Reforms will also seek to deliver positive benefits for business through a more streamlined, transparent, efficient and predictable approach to environmental risk management of chemic-als.

In October 2014, COAG also agreed to consider changes to the regulatory framework governing chemicals to improve its efficiency and the Standing Committee on Chemicals recommended a reform pathway to COAG in December 2014.

One of the drivers behind development of the 2009 National Waste Policy was the need to review the frag-mented arrangements created by national, state and local waste policies and instruments. The Policy’s pur-pose states that it will: promote more consistent regulation; address market impediments; and provide the basis for collaboration among jurisdictions to deliver effective and efficient approaches to national waste is-sues and ensure their alignment with international obligations.

25 | P a g e

The National Waste Policy sets Australia’s waste management and resource recovery direction through to 2020 and annual reporting on progress towards implementation has been provided up to 2014. Collabora-tion is continuing on national waste data harmonisation and on packaging and stewardship priorities. The National Waste Policy provides a framework for progressing areas that may benefit from collaboration. Jur-isdictions may wish to identify further priorities to lead within this framework.

The Australian Government is leading work to harmonise waste data reporting, including development of an agreed national waste dataset. Ongoing work with states and territories aims to have new arrangements in place by the end of 2014-15 to streamline the collation of jurisdictional data and publish consolidated waste data at a national level. Once the new national waste data arrangements are in place, jurisdictions may wish to consider further opportunities to reduce burden and deliver better alignment in this area. For example, consideration could be given to streamlining the way data is collected from businesses in different areas to avoid duplication of effort and multiple reporting requirements.

The Report of the Third Review of the National Environment Protection Council Acts referred to in Section 4 above includes a number of recommendations, and the potential for reform of the NEPC Act to better streamline environmental regulation between the Commonwealth and State and Territory governments is an area that warrants further consideration.

6. ConclusionEnvironmental policies will continue to develop in response to changing priorities and new information. In Australia’s system of Federation all levels of government have an important role to play in regulating the impact of human activity on the natural environment.

Continued effort by governments is therefore needed to ensure that environmental regulations are effective at achieving better environmental outcomes for the nation and for communities, and are implemented in a manner that imposes least cost on business, non-government organisations and individuals. The reform op-portunities identified in this report have the potential to make a substantial contribution towards achieving these objectives.

26 | P a g e