Australia’s agricultural sector is a cornerstone of our national identity.  Our farmers feed our country, keep supermarket shelves stocked, support the vitality of our regional and rural centres, and make essential contributions to the Australian economy.

Farmers already well know how closely their businesses and livelihoods are intertwined with the health of the land. While agricultural production relies on natural assets and ecological systems to yield healthy crops and livestock, many conventional farming practices contribute to the degradation of the very ecosystems essential to a productive farm.

Agricultural activities are currently a leading cause of native animal habitat and biodiversity decline, accounting for 16.8% of net greenhouse gas emissions,74% of national water consumption and 55% of land use.

The urgency of implementing robust sustainability measures, for the sake of our planet and the Australian economy, is paramount. Future generations of Australian farmers—their children, and their children’s children—depend on these measures being implemented. Enhancing operational sustainability will not only boost the agricultural sector’s economic resilience, competitiveness, and long-term viability, but will also conserve our country’s invaluable natural resources, and ensure the legacies of Australian farming families live on.

With 70% of Australian agricultural products exported to neighbouring countries and beyond, our food systems need to align with rising global standards to secure ongoing market access and economic prosperity. As trade regulations on products linked to land clearing and biodiversity loss are progressively being imposed in the European Union, the United States, and other countries, Australia’s need to adapt is apparent.

Driving leadership in agricultural sustainability and boosting the resilience of Australian agriculture now and into the future, requires intention, information, incentives and investment. A

Intention

Until now, much of the ambition for sustainable practices has been driven by producers— particularly family-owned businesses who want to ensure the productivity of their land for generations to come. As the global dynamics shift, it’s time for the Australian Government to set more ambitious climate targets at a national level and to harmonise sustainability trajectories across the agricultural sector.

Information

Australia lacks an accurate, reliable and comprehensive foundation of environmental data—the very key to understanding the state of our land and the impact of farming practices. Quality information is critical for farmers, enabling them to set achievable goals and share techniques with one another to improve the sustainability of the industry into the future.

Although well-intentioned, the current sustainability reporting framework is fragmented, complex and time-consuming, preventing farmers from consistently showcasing their efforts to decarbonise and reduce their environmental footprint. As a result, players in the agricultural sector are losing motivation and trust in the transition process.

Strengthening our data capabilities will help the sector address the current lack of reliable environmental information. It is essential to have robust measurement, reporting and verification standards in order to move forward, maintain momentum, and encourage farmers to keep going. These standards will help give farmers credit for their efforts, improve understanding of the environmental impact of agricultural practices, and contribute to the development of new technologies and techniques for farmers to benefit from.

 Incentives

Our farmers understand the critical role of sustainable agriculture practices and see the impact up close and personal. But investing in new farming practices can be expensive, and weather related financial relief packages compensate farmers equally, irrespective of how climate resilient their business is. The Government needs to recalibrate its approach so that financial incentives encourage farmers to be proactive in responding to climate change and reward them for their efforts to adapt.

Investment 

Historically, sustainability efforts have been powered and funded by farmers themselves through sweat-equity. The tight-knit nature of farming communities sees farmers and Landcare groups trialling approaches, swapping insights, and floating ideas between themselves at local BBQs and town halls. But this approach to exchanging knowledge means that farmers in other geographies aren’t benefitting from insights which may be applicable in their businesses too. Farmers don’t have a lot of wiggle room to experiment with new approaches—each year brings new challenges exacerbated by changing climate conditions. Droughts and floods are a constant threat, and battling these very real and life-threatening challenges can significantly derail enthusiasm for innovation. In order to make real change, the Government and larger players must invest in research and development to bolster knowledge of sustainable practices across the country, including the identification and scaling up of approaches that are working. Put simply, more investment means more innovation, and more innovation means more solutions to climate challenges—solutions that the agricultural sector urgently needs. 

The energy sector is critical to the wellbeing of Australians and is going through major structural change.

Australia’s energy sector is facing a seismic shift, with the phase-out of coal and the integration of renewable energy sources transforming both Australia’s energy landscape and economy. To rise to the challenge and meet Australia’s bipartisan commitment to emissions reductions, large scale investment and fundamental changes in energy policy and systems are required.

Addressing these challenges is made more difficult by the complicated structure of energy policy governance and delivery in Australia, with responsibility inconsistently split between State and Commonwealth Governments and public and private providers. Given the high cost of inaction, there is an urgent need for a more coordinated, evidence-based approach to policymaking in the energy sector.

Our recommendations are as follows:

1. Improve transparency of energy policy decisions

Australian Energy Ministers should immediately publish businesses cases and supporting analysis of major State and Commonwealth energy policy and projects total investment on the Energy and Climate Change Ministerial Council (ECMC) website, or suitable equivalent public website.

2.  Improve energy sector governance in the medium-term

In the medium term, Australian governments should collaboratively reform the governance of the Australian energy sector to enable:

• an explicit role for the States and interjurisdictional policy coordination
• representation for energy consumers (business and residential)
• intergenerational and long-term considerations
• standardised, public analysis of State and Commonwealth energy policy and project proposals
• a common data collection system for energy systems and independent evaluation of all energy policy and projects
  

3. Improve the breadth of consultation and engagement

Australian Energy Ministers should immediately develop and commit to shared principles for consultation and engagement on State and Commonwealth energy policy and projects based on best-practice, and report annually on self-assessed compliance with principles on all major energy policy and projects.

4. Improve the regulation of lobbying

Australian governments should immediately adopt common minimum standards in regulation of
lobbying, including by publishing office-holder diaries (such as ministerial diaries), expanding the scope of lobbying regimes to cover all forms of lobbying, including by companies, and ensuring that lobbying regimes are properly enforced.

Our 2024–25 Budget Blueprint paper focuses on three areas critical for Australia’s long term success—system-wide tax reform, picking up the pace and impact of the climate and energy transition, and boosting Australia’s innovation and productivity.

This paper outlines the necessary immediate climate and energy priorities for a net zero and nature positive future at both the systemic level and the community level. 

This is part two of our three-part 2025 Blueprint Budget series. Paper one of this series outlines present challenges facing the Australian economy and addresses our need for substantive, wholesale tax reform. Paper three of this series outlines reforms in education and investment sectors to revitalise Australia’s productivity and competitiveness on the world stage. 

‘Protecting our future’ outlines fiscal priorities for climate and energy. The energy transition is lagging behind and in desperate need of updated system planning and technology-agnostic economic analysis to boost investment. Clear environmental and biodiversity standards  must be factored into these analyses, as the push for nature positive to be recognised alongside net zero as national objectives continues to gain momentum. Subsidies for fossil fuels should be redeployed into energy efficiency, transport decarbonisation, community rewards for hosting renewables, and nature repair.

There’s a lot more work to do as Australia moves to a cleaner economy. Our suite of recommendations focuses on how we future-proof Australia’s policymaking, pushing past the politicisation and short-term thinking, to embed the clear-eyed collaborative problem solving required to manage the transition.

We need to act now. 

Summary of recommendations

• Rethink and implement environmental standards
  • Fund the development of clear, technology-agnostic biodiversity and environmental standards
• Align understanding and incentives 
  • Reward communities for hosting renewables
  • Fund adult education and tackle mis- and disinformation on climate
• Fund the transition to net zero
  • Update energy grid system design modelling and approach
  • Accelerate energy efficiency programs
  • Redeploy fossil fuel subsidies
  • Speed up transport decarbonisation
  • Establish a public fund for nature repair

Australia is home to some of the world’s most ancient forests. These native forests are some of the most biodiverse environments on the planet, and are a valuable tool in the fight against climate change through their ability to capture and store carbon and regulate the water cycle.

This paper offers policymakers a blueprint for assessing the true value of our native forests. Recognising the inherent preferencing of the quantitative (particularly when it comes to Expenditure Review Committee processes), we conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of conserving Tasmania’s native forests, in particular those which are currently subject to logging by the state-run firm Sustainable Timber Tasmania (STT). This paper builds upon Blueprint’s previously published studies on the economic potential of alternate land uses of native forests in Victoria’s Central Highlands, and New South Wales’ North Coast.  

Using a cost-benefit analysis based on cash flows, we evaluate the economic potential of native forest conservation by modelling the value of carbon sequestration against continued logging. Our forecast shows that if STT ceased their native logging operations in FY2025 instead of FY2049, the use of this land for carbon sequestration would provide a net-benefit valued at $72 million in present day dollars. We find that a move to alternate land uses will result in a positive net present value, even when factoring in the estimated cost of providing a transitional package to the broader forestry industry to facilitate its move toward a more sustainable plantation-based future.

Our cost-benefit analysis incorporates a range of assumptions that were deliberately designed to overstate the costs and minimise the benefits of halting STT’s native timber logging. Were we to remove these assumptions from our cost-benefit analysis, we find a net benefit of $936 million in ceasing logging immediately. By including these favourable assumptions, we, methodologically speaking, have given the logging industry the benefit of the doubt—demonstrating that even when every conceivable dollar is counted in favour of STT’s native timber operations, it nevertheless shows itself economically uncompetitive against alternate land uses. 

The native forests of Tasmania have significant capacity to generate major alternate revenue streams that can replace that which is generated from logging—on the proviso that a robust carbon methodology is put in place, to enable the generation of Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) from a cessation of timber harvesting. In particular, we find that managing Tasmania’s native forests in a manner consistent with conservation principles would abate an average of one million tonnes of carbon annually. This equates to a net present value of $345 million at current ACCU spot prices. 

Lastly, we must comment upon the unusual and declining transparency in STT’s annual reports. Other state-run forestry corporations that we have studied were noticeably less opaque, particularly with respect to pricing information. The lack of publicly available pricing information likely acts as an impediment to private investment by increasing uncertainty, thus deterring private plantation-based competitors from entering the market.    

In light of our findings, we encourage the Tasmanian Government and Opposition to work in concert with the Federal Government to enact the following recommendations:

1. Immediately cease all government subsidies to STT.
2. Legislate the end of STT’s native forest logging operations in Tasmania by FY2025.
3. Implement a robust carbon methodology that would enable the generation of ACCUs through a cessation of native timber harvesting and a suite of conservation-based management practices.
4. Expand timber plantations to meet timber demand.
5. Incentivise private investment in timber plantations.
6. Improve STT’s transparency to match that of other state-run forestry corporations, particularly as it relates to the price of timber.
7. Create a ‘natural capital’ weighting that increases the value of native forests, thus ensuring that they have a higher Benefit Cost Ratio when Expenditure Review Committee decisions affecting them are made.
8. Support the development of environmental markets to channel private capital toward nature-positive biodiversity outcomes in Tasmania

Australia is home to some of the world’s most ancient forests. The benefits of native forests are extensive—they are efficient carbon sinks, they are amongst the most biodiverse environments on the planet, and they provide vast quantities of water (and preserve the quality of the water table).

This paper offers policymakers a blueprint for assessing the true value of our native forests. Recognising the inherent preferencing of the quantitative (particularly when it comes to Expenditure Review Committee processes), we conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of conserving the native forests of the Upper and Lower North East Regional Forest Agreement areas of New South Wales, also known as the North Coast. This piece of work builds upon Blueprint’s previously published cost-benefit analysis of alternate land uses versus logging in Victoria’s Central Highlands. We assess the economic potential of native forest conservation by modelling the value of carbon sequestration and tourism against continued logging. Our findings demonstrate conclusively that there is no economic case for continued logging of native forests on the North Coast of New South Wales. As in the Central Highlands of Victoria, logging of native hardwood forest on the North Coast is a loss making enterprise, subsidised by Forestry Corporation of New South Wales’ (FCNSW) profitable softwood plantation division, along with the taxpayer via periodic equity injections from the state government. Based on its own merits, we find that FCNSW’s native hardwood division is not commercially viable.

Using cost-benefit analysis modelling we find that ending native forest logging in 2023–24 instead of 2039-40 (the date that the North East Regional Forestry Agreement is currently scheduled to expire), and instead utilising the land for carbon sequestration and tourism will deliver a net benefit valued at $45 million in present-day dollars. This includes the estimated cost of providing transitional packages to the industry as it shuts down, as well as the cost of breaking wood supply agreements that extend to 2028.

The native forests on the North Coast have significant capacity to immediately generate major alternate revenue streams that can replace revenue generated from logging. In particular, we find that managing the North Coast region in a manner consistent with conservation would abate an average of 0.45 million tonnes of carbon annually. This equates to a net present value of $174 million. Our analysis also indicates that increased tourism to the region could, over 17 years, provide a net present value of $120 million. In totality, from present to FY2040, using the forests of the North Coast for purposes other than logging will generate at least $294 million in revenue.

The economic case for action on climate is clear. Over the past decade, the precipitous decline in the cost of renewable energy has opened a window of opportunity.

The race to decarbonise is gathering pace—future growth and prosperity will be determined by our ability to capture green capital and low-carbon industry. Countries that deny or delay this change will be left behind. Australian investors and business leaders know this and are desperate for the Federal Government to meet them on the same page.

This paper offers a suite of ‘low-hanging fruit’ policies for the 47th Parliament to consider and for the government, opposition, and crossbench to embed in their respective policy platforms. These policy recommendations are the result of extensive consultation with experts in the relevant fields and capture valuable lessons learned—from within Australia and abroad— from what has and has not worked in the past. They are actionable and ambitious, they can be implemented immediately, are affordable (in many cases revenue positive), and will have a beneficial impact in delivering emissions reductions.

Australia is home to some of the world’s most ancient forests. The benefits of native species forests are extensive—they are efficient carbon sinks, they are amongst the most biodiverse environments on the planet, and they provide vast quantities of water (and preserve the quality of the water table). 

This paper offers policymakers a blueprint for assessing the true value of our native forests. Recognising the inherent preferencing of the quantitative (particularly when it comes to Expenditure Review Committee processes), we conduct a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of conserving the wet forests in the Central Highlands of Victoria. The Central Highlands has been selected as the case study for this paper—but our general approach could be applied to any native forest area in Australia.

We model the value of carbon sequestration and tourism against continued logging. Our findings clearly demonstrate the economic benefit of an immediate halt to logging of native wet forest in 2022–23, as opposed to the status quo of a delayed exit by 2030. Specifically, we find that ending logging in 2022–23 will deliver a net benefit valued at $59 million in present-day dollars.

Yet these results have been slow to translate to policy action. Presently, the Victorian government has loosely committed to phasing out logging of native forests by 2030. However, this is not legislated—a significant (and intentional) oversight. In the meantime, the native logging industry is propped up by government to protect an ever-decreasing number of jobs and placate misguided pressure from vested interests. Economic protectionism is damaging and regressive at the best of times. This is amplified exponentially when it results in severe environmental degradation.

Our native wet forests are at high risk of collapse unless the right policy settings are put in place to protect them into the future. It is critical that policymakers take a more expansive view when assessing land value—that they move away from the ‘what’s in it, what’s on it, how do we sell it’ paradigm that has dominated land valuation methodologies to date.

In response to the findings from our modelling and research, Blueprint Institute calls on the Victorian Government to enact the following changes:

1. Commit to ceasing the logging of native wet forest in 2022–23 (as opposed to 2030),
2. Legislate the ending of native forest logging (to give weight to verbal commitments),
3. Amend or repeal The Forests (Wood Pulp Agreement) Act 1996,
4. Expand land valuation methodologies to include water, carbon storage, and tourism, and
5. Strengthen formal policy mechanisms designed to conserve ancient wet forests.

A new Blueprint institute series takes a deep dive into the regional realities of Australia’s shift to a clean energy future—and what that will mean for communities on the ground. Alongside the already released South-West Queensland paper, they examine Central Queensland, the Latrobe Valley of Victoria, the Central Coast of NSW, and the Collie region of WA. Across these five regions—home to all our remaining coal-fired generators, and most of our coal mines—Blueprint’s analysis finds that while opportunities are abundant (in renewable energy and more broadly), and significant prospective projects are underway, uncertainty caused by a lack of definitive policy direction is hampering their development. 

In the Latrobe Valley of Victoria:

• In the next eight years, renewable energy projects in the region could offer 3,160 positions in construction and installation, and 740 ongoing jobs in operations and maintenance.

This represents a significant opportunity, but also a stark reality check—government must do more to enable wider regional economic diversification in these communities.

Expecting renewables alone to compensate for the stable, high-paying jobs that coal has provided is unrealistic. But importantly, our analysis finds that all of the regions studied are full of untapped potential that the clean energy economy, broad diversification, private investment, and targeted government backing in vital areas can unlock. 

“Institutions set up to deal with Hazelwood’s sudden closure in 2017, such as the Latrobe Valley Authority, have shown us that locally led initiatives can spur economic diversification. As we look to the future, vast opportunities such as the Valley’s offshore wind resources, among others, can further support the region’s bright future,” said CEO David Cross.

A detailed outline of the opportunities available to the Latrobe Valley is available in the full paper.

A new Blueprint institute series takes a deep dive into the regional realities of Australia’s shift to a clean energy future—and what that will mean for communities on the ground. Alongside the already released South-West Queensland paper, they examine Central Queensland, the Latrobe Valley of Victoria, the Central Coast of NSW, and the Collie region of WA. Across these five regions—home to all our remaining coal-fired generators, and most of our coal mines—Blueprint’s analysis finds that while opportunities are abundant (in renewable energy and more broadly), and significant prospective projects are underway, uncertainty caused by a lack of definitive policy direction is hampering their development. 

In Central Queensland:

• From 2022 to 2027, current renewables projects alone could offer 11,040 jobs in construction, and 720 ongoing operations and maintenance positions.

This represents a significant opportunity, but also a stark reality check—government must do more to enable wider regional economic diversification in these communities.

Expecting renewables alone to compensate for the stable, high-paying jobs that coal has provided is unrealistic. But importantly, our analysis finds that all of the regions studied are full of untapped potential that the clean energy economy, broad diversification, private investment, and targeted government backing in vital areas can unlock. 

“Economic diversification is underway in Central Queensland—new opportunities in renewable energy and critical minerals mining exist in swathes, but more must be done to secure the region’s long-term future in a net-zero world,” said CEO David Cross.

A detailed outline of the opportunities available to Central Queensland is available in the full paper.

A new Blueprint institute series takes a deep dive into the regional realities of Australia’s shift to a clean energy future—and what that will mean for communities on the ground. Alongside the already released South-West Queensland paper, they examine Central Queensland, the Latrobe Valley of Victoria, the Central Coast of NSW, and the Collie region of WA. Across these five regions—home to all our remaining coal-fired generators, and most of our coal mines—Blueprint’s analysis finds that while opportunities are abundant (in renewable energy and more broadly), and significant prospective projects are underway, uncertainty caused by a lack of definitive policy direction is hampering their development. 

In the Central Coast region of New South Wales:

• Between 2022 and 2025, new renewable projects could offer 5,080 construction jobs, and 320 ongoing maintenance and operations positions.

This represents a significant opportunity, but also a stark reality check—government must do more to enable wider regional economic diversification in these communities.

Expecting renewables alone to compensate for the stable, high-paying jobs that coal has provided is unrealistic. But importantly, our analysis finds that all of the regions studied are full of untapped potential that the clean energy economy, broad diversification, private investment, and targeted government backing in vital areas can unlock. 

“As coal declines, New South Wales’ Central Coast has the opportunity to secure a sustainable future built around renewable energy and clean industry. But supportive state and federal policy must match local ambition,” said CEO David Cross.

A detailed outline of the opportunities available to New South Wales’ Central Coast is available in the full paper.