DoctorKaren Christie-Whitehead

Project Total: $7,937,062; We propose quantification and development of adaptations to drought and seasonal climate variability in rain-dependent viticulture and horticulture, with a focus on winegrapes, apple and cherry in the higher altitude regions of NSW, and southerly latitudes of Tasmania. Recent vulnerability assessments for NSW, using the NARCliM2.0 dataset, show these regions face a future of declining rainfall and increasing evaporation demand even under low emissions scenarios. This represents a significant threat as vineyards and orchards in these regions that already have high rainfall dependency, limited access to secure water sources for irrigation, and lack the experience and decision support tools to manage scarce water resources in an increasingly dry and variable climate. Under Criteria 2 we outline a strategic project design that will scientifically develop innovative practices to improve resilience, quantify water efficiency gains, adapt to climate variability such as heat waves, frost and/or drought. We will explore the viability of such adaptations under future climates (which in general comprise more volatile climates) using contemporary systems approaches. For the field trials, we will establish a network of long term industry based trials to test strategies that shift water balance in favour of the target crop, increase volume of soil water accessed by the root system, and deliver supplementary irrigation to the root-zone in the most effective manner. Additional treatments will extend to other climate risks such as heat damage to fruit that are accentuated by drought. We will work with producers to identify the key crop specific information they need to manage their water and plan in advance for drought, and explore opportunities for transformational practice change at the time of planting. A key objective of the project is the rainfall derived water component, which does not duplicate the larger body of research in warmer regions. For irrigation, our question will also cover best management practices associated with limited supplementary irrigation, which is often derived from multiple sources such as dams, bores and creeks, and the whole system approach to water management that this entails. To scale or findings, the project consortium brings together modelling expertise to quantify the impact of implemented practice change on water use and soil water dynamics, extend these findings forward in time to determine adaption capacity against long term climate projections, and then assess the implications of shorter term drought response treatments for longer term sustainability goals. The question of maintaining cash flow before, during and after drought, is complex and highly context dependent. We will first work with growers to document their experience of previous droughts, understand the vulnerabilities of their production systems, and opportunities to improve their preparation for future droughts. Along with data collection needed for economic analysis, including long term yield records, this will be done as a final step of the project that models scenarios to optimise revenue through cycles of historic or future droughts. Funded by: Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry - Grant; Charles Sturt University; University of Tasmania ($165,556).

Project Total: $6,330,626; Given a common set of experimental interventions conducted across four sites (e.g. interventions aimed at improving drought resilience), the Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture (TIA) proposes to synthesise experimental and modelled results across sites to examine the economic, environmental and biophysical potential of selected interventions across sites. The primary aim of this work is to examine the extent with which biophysical, economic and environmental indicators are impacted by a common set of drought adaptations across agro-ecological zones. Given a common set of experimental interventions across four sites (e.g. interventions aimed at improving drought resilience, such as new crop genotypes, reduced tillage practices, integrated crop-livestock management or application of regenerative agricultural practices), TIA will: 1. Contrast biophysical impacts using a range of integrated metrics (e.g. production per hectare, per DSE and/or per 100 mm rainfall) relative to conventional baseline systems in each region, Baselines will be assumed as controls. 2. Contrast economic impacts using a range of integrated metrics (e.g. gross margins per hectare, per DSE and/or per 100 mm rainfall) relative to conventional baseline systems in each region, Baselines will be assumed as controls. 3. Assess environmental impacts using a range of integrated metrics where appropriate (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions per hectare, per DSE and per unit product [emissions intensities]). 4. Synthesise findings from the previous steps across disciplines to identify drought adaptation potential at the landscape level. This step will compare experimental results across sites to identify drought adaptations that are win-win-win in terms of productivity, environment and farm prosperity. It is likely that relative benefit derived from any given intervention will depend on (1) baseline systems already in operation, (2) environment (climate x soil type interaction) and (3) difference proposed by the intervention in terms of (genotype x environment x management interaction). These aspects will be dissected to assess the extent to which an intervention has beneficial outcomes across agroecological zones. This work will be conducted in parallel with a similar Future Drought Fund (FDF) project funded by The University of Melbourne. Please note that TIA were co-applicants in the funding application with both the University of Melbourne and Charles Sturt University. Funded by: Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment - Future Drought Fund; Charles Sturt University; University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $7,204,015; Given a common set of experimental interventions conducted across four sites (e.g. interventions aimed at improving drought resilience), the Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture (TIA) proposes to synthesise experimental and modelled results across sites to examine the economic, environmental and biophysical potential of selected interventions across sites. The primary aim of this work is to examine the extent with which biophysical, economic and environmental indicators are impacted by a common set of drought adaptations across agro-ecological zones. Given a common set of experimental interventions across four sites (e.g. interventions aimed at improving drought resilience, such as new crop genotypes, reduced tillage practices, integrated crop-livestock management or application of regenerative agricultural practices), TIA will: 1. Contrast biophysical impacts using a range of integrated metrics (e.g. production per hectare, per DSE and/or per 100 mm rainfall) relative to conventional baseline systems in each region, Baselines will be assumed as controls. 2. Contrast economic impacts using a range of integrated metrics (e.g. gross margins per hectare, per DSE and/or per 100 mm rainfall) relative to conventional baseline systems in each region, Baselines will be assumed as controls. 3. Assess environmental impacts using a range of integrated metrics where appropriate (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions per hectare, per DSE and per unit product [emissions intensities]). 4. Synthesise findings from the previous steps across disciplines to identify drought adaptation potential at the landscape level. This step will compare experimental results across sites to identify drought adaptations that are win-win-win in terms of productivity, environment and farm prosperity. It is likely that relative benefit derived from any given intervention will depend on (1) baseline systems already in operation, (2) environment (climate x soil type interaction) and (3) difference proposed by the intervention in terms of (genotype x environment x management interaction). These aspects will be dissected to assess the extent to which an intervention has beneficial outcomes across agroecological zones. This work will be conducted in parallel with a similar Future Drought Fund (FDF) project funded by Charles Sturt University. Please note that TIA were co-applicants in the funding application with both the University of Melbourne and Charles Sturt University. Funded by: Department of Agriculture Water and the Environment - Future Drought Fund; University of Melbourne; University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $416,710; Through people-centric engagement with Australian wool farmers, this project aims to (1) benchmark and compare the effects of grazing and soil management, planting trees and holistic farm management across farms, (2) Document existing biodiversity and natural capital on Australian wool farms (3) Co-design regionally-appropriate adaptations that show HOW improvement in natural capital and biodiversity on wool farms impacts on long-term profitability, productivity and farm greenhouse gas emissions. Funded by: Australian Wool Innovation Limited ($416,710); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $4,185,917; Background: The CN30 Pathways Consortium is a coordinated, multi-party, multidisciplinary national collaborative effort designed to explore biophysical, economic, environmental and social pathways to a carbon neutral red meat sector by 2030. CN30 Pathways foci include carbon storage and sequestration, integrated management systems and leadership building to support growth in capacity and competency among individuals and organisations. Products: Through application of self-contained, nationally-distributed scalable Modules for research, development, extension, adoption and commercialisation (RDEA&C), the Consortium will develop Products including knowledge and practices required for (1) enhancing soil C and woody biomass sequestration through improved grazing management, (2) improving the accuracy and reducing the cost of measuring soil C on grazing lands, (3) restoring environmental stewardship through activities such as planting of trees, shelter belts and perennial legumes, (4) quantifying and enhancing on-farm natural capital and biodiversity, enabling co-benefits for livestock productivity, (5) establishing trade-offs between GHG emissions, carbon sequestration, profitability, liveweight and timber productivity in silvopastoral systems (SPS), and (6) determining the impacts of future climates including extreme events on pasture production, soil C and GHG emissions. One of the seven consortium Modules will be led by UTAS. Extension and adoption: Extension will be conducted across at least ten agro-ecological regions representing the majority of the national herd and flock through facilitated workshops, face-to-face training and industry publications to ensure international peer-review, scientific credibility, industry confidence in project outcomes and public recognition of CN30 research conducted by the Consortium. A series of adoption packages with practical steps to simplify user uptake will be developed and conducted to ensure research products achieve impact. Uptake of Consortium Products will be measured through a dedicated self-contained monitoring and evaluation program. Leadership and governance: The Consortium governance structure includes a Steering Committee (SC) for guidance and oversight, and a Consortium Leadership Group (CLG) responsible for implementation of component Modules, sharing project information across activities and for review of project progress, milestones and outcomes. Outcomes and impact: Key outcomes include improvement and implementation of management approaches and technologies for increasing soil C, woody biomass and biodiversity on farm across Australia, enhanced sustainability and animal welfare through environmental stewardship, greater understanding of the co-benefits of trees and shelter-belts on farm, advanced, low-cost scientific measurement and modelling approaches for GHG emissions mitigation through soil or woody C quantification, emissions mitigation or whole of farm system effects, predictions of pasture production and net farm emissions under future climates and a series of practical packages facilitating adoption by the industry. Collectively, these outcomes will maintain or increase profitability and sustainability while moving the industry towards net zero GHG emissions. Funded by: Meat and Livestock Australia - Grant ($4,082,641); Integrity Ag & Environment ($103,276); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $79,032; Since 1990, the Australian Federal Government has estimated the nation's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, via the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI), as part of their commitment to tackling climate change. More recently, the Australian government, along with 194 other countries of the world, agreed to adopt the first universal, legally binding global climate plan with the Paris Agreement in December 2015 (COP21). The dairy industry has a carbon footprint of approx. 2% of the nation's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The industry is also an important economic industry, the fourth highest ranked rural industry, with a farmgate value of AUD 4.4 billion in 2018/19, directly employing ~ 46,000 people. The Australian Dairy Carbon Calculator (ADCC) was developed to allow individual farms to assess their GHG emissions. A metric of emissions intensity (EI) is the best way of comparing individual farm GHG emissions, taking into consideration all aspects of the farm system. The ADCC reports total farm GHG emissions and the EI of milk production. The ADCC is also incorporated into Dairy Australia's online DairyBase tool to measure and compare farm business performance over time. The Australian government has set an economy-wide target to reduce total GHG emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2030. While there is currently no regulatory pressure in Australia for dairy farmers to reduce on-farm emissions, the industry has voluntarily developed a Dairy Sustainability Framework (DSF), with one of the targets of the framework being a 30% reduction in GHG emissions intensity across the whole industry (from a baseline of 2015). The ADCC and DairyBase are critical to enable farmers a relatively simple approach to estimate their GHG emissions. This is the first step in addressing their farm's GHG emissions and can assist in identifying inefficiencies in the system which will need to be addressed if a global target of carbon neutrality is to be achieved by 2050. Key deliverables of the project will include: *Review of the ADCC and DairyBase tools to ascertain if these remain currently fit-for-purpose. Activities will include: -updating estimations to align with pending changes to Australia's NGGI methodology, -incorporating updated data in terms of the GHG emissions offset potential of tree plantings, -review progress of the Australian dairy industry towards meeting their DSF target, -review potential areas of improvement to GHG estimates. * Provide expert engagement support to Dairy Australia's Lead, Climate and Energy, through activities such as; -promoting the key drivers of, and methods of reducing, EI of milk production, -training of DairyBase data entry personnel with respect to GHG emission estimates, -review the EI of the Australian dairy industry, relative to other countries, to ascertain areas to reduce on-farm GHG emissions, -input into training packages to assist dairy farmers to understand their GHG emissions. Funded by: Dairy Australia Limited ($79,032); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $1,240,510; This is a collaborative project that will investigate future integrated grazing system designs using a collaboration from three new partners to the LPP. It also offers the opportunity for collaboration and linkage with existing LPP partners. The outcomes will form the basis for future R&D priorities in grazing systems along the entire east coast of Australia for LPP, MLA, SAMRC and NABRC. The project will directly contribute to the planning and implementation of the MLA and industry driven CN30 initiative and the RMAC Sustainability Framework. The project will identify a range of options for future grazing systems that: - will identify ways to deliver up to 3% ROA for a range of grazing systems in Tasmania, Gippsland, NWQld and the Northern Territory with methodology linkages to the MLA funded project investigating farming system options in NVic, NNSW and Central Qld and work being conducted by the NSW DPI Climate Group. - will be conducted in the context of significant known and predicted changes to climate parameters including temperature, rainfall and frost (including emerging new patterns and the incidence of extreme events) - examine the opportunity to diversify income from carbon mitigation projects under the Emissions Reduction Fund using new grasses or legumes, new supplements, and the integration of grazing management within carbon projects - examine the opportunity to diversify income and integrate into grazing or carbon management the emerging market for eco credits - will be developed using reference groups from the relevant SAMRC and NABRC regional committees and regional consultants to advise on system options - are assessed for their effectiveness as adaptation options using a number of metrics, including farm scale production, profitability, economic risk, farm-scale greenhouse gas emissions and the ease of implementation. The work in Tasmania will first calibrate systems models using existing management of representative sheep and beef farms in Tasmania. The number and location of case study farms will be conducted in consultation with SAMRC committee members. Model files calibrated based on grower/industry feedback will then be used to explore adaptations for each farm. Adaptations (hereafter, 'development options') will be selected in consultation with the SAMRC committee and may include changes to pasture base, animal genotype and/or management (hereafter termed 'development options'). Development options in each region will be defined by a panel of producers to ensure they are regionally relevant. Examples of development options to be investigated could include: pasture (e.g. property scale integration of forage options, both existing and currently being investigated in feedbase research), animal (e.g. increased heat tolerance), management (e.g. integration of trees, increased livestock/live-weight throughput, optimising lifetime feed-use efficiency and selling strategies) and technology (e.g. virtual fencing). Following the approach conducted by the Uni Melb CC project, each development option will be evaluated in terms of profit targets, economic risk and farm-level greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity. The case study farm and development options will be analysed in historical and future climate scenarios based on projections for 2030. Funded by: Meat and Livestock Australia - Livestock Productivity Partnership ($1,170,292); University of Tasmania ($725,582).

Project Total: $14,000; Since 1990, the Australian Federal Government has estimated the nation's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, via the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI), as part of their commitment to tackling climate change. More recently, the Australian government, along with 194 other countries of the world, agreed to adopt the first universal, legally binding global climate plan with the Paris Agreement in December 2015 (COP21). This agreement included the plan of avoiding dangerous climate change by limiting global warming to below 2C, and if possible, below 1.5C. The Australian dairy industry is the third highest ranked rural industry, with a farmgate value of AU $4.3 billion in 2017/18. The dairy industry has a carbon footprint of approx. 2% of the nation's GHG emissions, based on NGGI methodology. The Australian Dairy Carbon Calculator (ADCC) was developed to allow individual farms to assess their GHG emissions. A metric of emissions intensity (EI) is the best way of comparing individual farm GHG emissions, taking into consideration all aspects of the farm system. The ADCC reports total farm GHG emissions and the EI of milk production (kg carbon dioxide equivalents (kg CO2e) per kg of fat and protein-corrected milk (kg FPCM) and per kg milksolids (MS)). The Australian government has set an economy-wide target to reduce total emissions by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2030. There is currently no regulatory pressure in Australia to reduce on-farm emissions. However, as we pursue global neutrality of GHG emissions, to meet the COP21 Agreement targets by 2050, there is increasingly likelihood that farmers will need to demonstrate their carbon footprint profile before supplying milk to processors and accessing markets. This project has a strong focus on working closely with the Dairy Australia Dairy Farm Monitor Project team and Program Development Manager- Land, Water and Climate, along with milk processors and other relevant industry stakeholders to estimate the carbon emissions intensity of Australian dairy production. This information is required to report against the Australian Dairy Sustainability Framework Environment Target, 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) intensity/unit of product by 2020 (baseline 2015). The scientific community if constantly researching mitigation options to reduce on-farm GHG emissions. While there are several currently available mitigations options (e.g. feeding dietary fats, improved reproductive performance, improved genetics to increase milk production per cow, strategic use of nitrogen fertilisers), in addition to promising future mitigation options (e.g. vaccination, methane-inhibiting feed sources). However, these mitigation options, in the medium term, are unlikely to deliver the complete removal of GHG emissions, and thus to the residual and unavoidable emissions will need to be offset through other avenues. There may be potential opportunities to sequester carbon, and thus generate carbon credits, through biodiversity/agroforesty plantings, to offset these residual emissions. Research reviewing potential sequestration options will form the basis of a new consultancy with Dairy Australia in the 2019/2020 financial year with new deliverables. The project has two key deliverables: * Estimation of the EI of milk production for farms participating in the 2015-16 and 2016-17 Dairy Farm Monitor Project (approx. 100 farms across the eastern states of Australia) to inform the baseline for the Aus Funded by: Dairy Australia Limited ($14,000); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $119,004; The productivity of livestock in the developing world is low, relative to its potential. There are significant opportunities to increase it via adequate mixtures of technologies, policies and investments in farms and product value chains. However, until recently, the baseline data needed to adequately characterize livestock productivity levels in different parts of the developing world was either not available, or not at a level of disaggregation necessary to make informed decisions on the upscaling potential of key interventions and their impacts on productivity and household nutrition and income. This is quickly changing due to new data sources but there is a significant need to study and synthesize the potential for productivity increases in smallholders systems for improved programmatic decision making and for targeting poverty and food security strategies. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and other donors and development agencies need to target investments in the livestock sector in ways that are likely to maximize the impacts for broad numbers of producers and consumers. Estimating and understanding how to measure and trigger productivity changes in livestock systems is essential for better defining the technological and investment needs in the livestock sector. Estimates of livestock yield gaps are not available and these are necessary for developing feasible scenarios of how the production of different livestock commodities might evolve in the future, how systems might change and what would be the resource use implications and their costs, both for donors and for public and private entities in target countries. Productivity and yield gap analyses will also help define the most appropriate technology entry points for different livestock species: health, nutrition, genetics, policy levers, others. This information will contribute to making informed investment decisions and target technologies in the livestock sectors of developing countries as part of the SEBI grant coordinated by the University of Edinburgh on behalf of the BMGF. Funded by: CSIRO-Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation ($119,004); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $357,035; This project aims to use farm system analysis and modelling capacity and capability to validate recommended nitrogen (N) best practice on dairy farms. NOTE: This is effectively a continuation of the project N0023752. Funded by: Department of Agriculture - Grant-Rural R&D for Profit program ($357,035); University of Tasmania ($45,000).

Project Total: $149,706; This project aims to use farm system analysis and modelling capacity and capability to validate recommended nitrogen (N) best practice on dairy farms. [This project was superseded by R0024746.] Funded by: Dairy Australia Limited - Grant-Research and Development; University of Melbourne; University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $14,292; The project aims to enhance existing dairy industry carbon calculators (Dairy Greenhouse gas Abatement Strategies (DGAS) and Carbon Offset Scenario Tool (COST). It will use these calculators to develop case studies for fact sheets, YouTube and other promotional material and to train dairy Extension and Outreach Extension Officers in the use of these abovementioned calculators as requested by Dairy Australia for their Australian Department of Agriculture- funded Carbon Farming Initiative project titled Profitable Dairying in a Carbon Constrained Future. Funded by: Dairy Australia Limited ($14,292); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $537,902; Funded by: Department of Agriculture - Grant-CarbonFarmingFuture-Filling the Research Gap; University of Melbourne; University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $50,000; Funded by: Meat and Livestock Australia - Grant-Strategic and Applied Research Funding ($50,000); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $50,000; Funded by: Meat and Livestock Australia - Grant-Strategic and Applied Research Funding ($50,000); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $35,000; Funded by: PE Australia Pty Ltd ($35,000); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $229,643; Funded by: Meat and Livestock Australia - Grant-Strategic and Applied Research Funding ($229,643); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $8,750; Funded by: Cradle Coast Authority ($8,750); University of Tasmania.

Project Total: $209,500; Funded by: Dairy Australia Limited - Grant-Research and Development ($209,500); University of Tasmania.