 Okay. The first thing I'm going to discuss today is the opportunity to present. So what I'll actually do is give a bullet talk and the data is given which sort of tries to move into a frame. Some of the issues to do with the first period environment sort of challenges that we've got over the next decades. Well, I'm beginning from a climate adaptation sort of perspective and I'll be giving this on behalf of my colleagues there. One of the key things here is, probably many of us know these things but it doesn't have to be great, is that as we know we've got a serious challenge in front of us in terms of combining food security with the range of other issues that exist including environmental conservation and maintenance and biodiversity in the system of conscience. And so generally speaking the challenge is characterized by this. You've got to have a 70% or maybe a doubling depending on which publication you'll be by 2050 in terms of food production. This is in large part driven by population growth but also in parts by consumption patterns. So it's the increased consumption of meat type products by the growing middle-class in parts of Asia. We also have a growing problem in terms of waste. So as we calculate the waste in the developed nations as we're finding out in fact a lot of our food goes to waste and that's an increasing proportion of the total. We have expectations as David was just talking about in terms of the need to adapt to climate changes that we're seeing in some parts of the world that actually might be positive in Australia on net. It's probably the neediest thing. At the same time we need to reduce agro-culture emissions. So agro-culture needs to be part of the global solution in terms of reducing emissions profile. Average across both Australia and across the globe. So although agro-culture and land use changes associated with agro-culture is about the total emissions profile to look to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without agro-culture taking part in that is not a reasonable proposition. We also have a situation where we could have increased input constraints. Fuel nitrogen phosphorus depending on your view is to repeat limitations. That might be significant in short term or in the long term but eventually it will come in. And as we've learned from David the issues to do with water and I'll show you an example of what that might look like for Australia in a few minutes. We're not starting from a law space which is pristine. We've actually got a significant amount of degradation in various systems both on land and in the ocean which underpin the production that we actually need to increase over the years. So it's not as though we're starting in from an open base in that sense. The exact nature and importance of that degradation again depends on the way it's been assessed but nevertheless I think there's a significant agreement that there is an issue there. At the same time we want to maintain biodiversity or at least many developed nations want to focus on this and threatening processes to that biodiversity which we want to reduce that very significant policy issue of mine. And we also have growing recognition of the value of environment services. I'm mostly involved in talking about that later. But that those environmental services through the system services actually remain a contribution to the economy in different ways and a significant contribution to buffering that economy from environment distresses. At the same time in agriculture across the globe we've seen low R&D expenditure particularly in the public sector in some ways growing in the private sector. And through a range of different factors increased volatility for food production and food crisis including the price spike which left many people around the world hungry. And some of that's due to production issues, some of that's due to government's issues, property governance is the main one. But this is the sort of challenge that's ahead of us and it's not about solving any one of these things it's actually about having progress on all of these things because there's significant interactions between them. I want to just focus on one of these today but just sort of as an illustration and sort of weave into a little bit of the other issues. A few slides here in terms of the challenge in terms of climate change for Australia. So looking at the IPCC numbers just to give you a couple of graphs here this is the observed temperature increase across Australia and this is what the global climate models say would have happened in the absence of greenhouse gas emissions so that's without further ado. This is what those models say would have happened with those that climate change signal from greenhouse gas emissions and in this case the modelled temperature and the variation of the temperature is fairly close to what's been observed. In terms of the future, that's the low-mission scenario that David put up before. This is the high-mission scenario and this is where we're heading at the moment. To put that into context, while at the end of the century at the upper end of that red sort of fan of possibilities of our six degree of change that effectively takes the rainfall from central Queensland and puts it down at the temperature of central Queensland and puts it down over in Melbourne so if you track the size of 600 millimetres or higher down in Australia, that's what that means. So these changes are far from insignificant. We know that the agriculture in central Queensland is very different from that in Victoria. We can say that if I agree with that as a function of climate change we will need to adapt to that sort of scale of a challenge. If we look at what's already been happening in Australia this is just a graph-stripe out of Bureau of Meteorology or data-stripe out of Bureau of Meteorology I've just removed the rainfall signal from the temperature trend here and then just put a 10-year running mean through that. And what you can see here is that there's just a steady increase in temperatures across southern Australia so that's what we must for the area that occurs in Australia that is without the extensive vertical in the north. There is no start-up with that slow down in the warming as you might hear from various sources. What it's doing is just increasing and increasing steadily. One of the other passions of this if you look at that graph is what's a cold year now is actually hotter than the hottest years that we might have experienced when I was a small child. And so in a sense we're already starting to emerge from the monologue of historical variation into a new situation. We don't have to wait 20, 30, 50 years for climate change and it's already changing. There's already a clear human impact on these changes. In terms of crops and the impacts on crops this is work from Scott Chapman and Bay New Zealand and this just looks at the time of the first hot day of the year so that's a day when the maximum temperature is above 35 degrees and this compares a baseline that's in the 1960s versus the first decade of this millennium. And you can see from that graph up in the north part of the cropping belt we've almost had a three week advance of that first hot day. If we're looking down around this region that's about one week and if you look over the west it's just a day or two change. So these changes that are already occurring in our cropping systems in terms of biologically important events. Scott's put together some data from the National Brighton Trials and met this rainfall versus your lean yield so it's essentially a French and short start relationship where you've got essentially a water use efficiency that's the diagonal line to the right and each of those dots is a value from the National Brighton Trials and the colour of those dots indicates high temperatures during the flowering period during that high vulnerability period. And what you can see from that is for a human rainfall amount so essentially removing the drought influence you can see that there's not only high amount of variation in yields so you get a big variation there but a lot of those four yield years happen at very high temperatures during the flowering and so I'm not suggesting that this is necessary this is necessarily a sign of climate change but simply those high temperature conditions are only associated with low yields in that trial and so in a sense we can save this and that information that high temperatures matter. We can get examples where say South Australia just a year or two ago really significantly event at a very long period the crop reduced crop yields by 30% on a farm basis so these are the things that are actually really hugging at different times. Now in terms of water the basic message is signals of reducing rainfall particularly in the spring in South Australia less certainty why it happens in North Australia so it couldn't be wet or it couldn't be dry although on average it tends to be really dry in most of the north as well when you translate that to runoff which integrates temperature and rainfall change this is a picture coming out of the IPCC analysis of pulling together different model results that's changing in runoff in millimetres from our main catchment areas so the top of Murray Island Basin system here this is the median estimate of rainfall change and you can see pretty much right across the board there's expected to be some reductions in runoff in those catchments the best conditions as a 90th percentile result is actually increased runoff in many of the catchments but you know in parts of Victoria even under the best scenario it's been reduction which doesn't look good for some of our irrigation systems under the worst case scenario it's the driest 10%ile result that is effectively drying everywhere and significant reductions in runoff the implications are obvious for the red markets down here but also if we're looking to develop the north so under these circumstances there's a fair chance of putting to these models that we actually get very dry conditions which would reduce the environmental liability of some of the suggested developments up in that area and the other part of this concerns me is these bottom models don't actually pick up the very actual rainfall we've seen in the northwest so they don't actually get that trend of significant increases in rainfall over the last decade in the northwest so their ability to simulate some of these things in the northwest question so significant uncertainty in terms of that now what do you do about that if you're a farmer well, adaptation is called business for a farmer regardless of whether it's in Australia or any other country if we actually start to think about climate change and climate variability if we don't adapt there's likely to be an increased gap between what are the realizable outcomes and what actually happens on the farm and if you're dealing with crops for example the consequences of actually not adapting to climate means you either run off the farm or you get that increase in risk than you otherwise would and both of those are undesirable if you're trying to double production in a reliable way so in consideration of the rationale for thinking of adaptation is extremely strong we don't want to under form or incur or risk risk so when I talk about adaptation it's essentially just changing what we do to get what we want it's just changing our practices to achieve goals which are set by farms groups and sometimes governments as well and always adaptation is done in the expectation of endless so there's always expectation and if I adapt to moving there off than you otherwise would be so in a sense adaptation is always about positive and about solutions just to pull this into a frame which resonates with what David was talking about sort of risk return sort of things, understanding tradeoffs this is just one way of presenting this it's a very simplistic way of presenting it too but if we have a situation where you've got increased risk on the excess increase in productivity you can get some sort of shape like this in many systems it's not shaped like this but just for the sake of the illustration I'll do this and we can say well if we are a farmer like that little pixel building down there often those farmers are well operating well below that risk return frontier so that risk return frontier is essentially the best you can do in any circumstance the bottom line is there's essentially a situation which says well this isn't inflexible it's going to be changed for a variety of reasons so if we're just dealing with say a hundred year view without climate change you're sitting in a way of risk return won't you actually risk return frontier what the agenda is is you improve your economy and to say you can actually move towards that frontier and you can move towards that frontier in different ways you can increase your production but the same risk or vice versa if you start to think about say the things that this centre is trying to do it's actually trying to change that risk return frontier this is the ANU centre and it's actually trying to push up that boundary of that frontier so that for any given risk you actually have a greater return and a greater productivity and so with that improved genetics there's one way of fundamentally changing these relationships and you can actually do that also through improved value change such as effective markets you can also increase that relationship say by CO2 so the things that they've been talking about improve quality of efficiency on our CO2 so this risk return frontier is not fixed in the change the environmental changes economic and environmental in Australia where we see climate change has generally been needed that's high temperatures so the return frontier on average will actually shrink but will actually move down so that for any given risk your production will increase or for any given production the risk will increase so the other part of this is that under climate change variability increases that's a big thing part of the GCN results is that a rational decision is in fact to move down that risk frontier so it's actually to to reduce your risk to reduce your investment to reduce your corruption so the challenge for us is how we actually do what those little blue arrows are doing which is actually push up that sort of change enforced on us by climate change and push that back up to where we are now or how it's above that and that's one of the challenges I think so to do that we've engaged with farmers over a long period of time so this is where from Steve Crenford Andrew Bourne who's done this as well so what we've done is we've actually been engaged with farmers and said given these sorts of climate changes what are the sorts of adaptations you undertake and we've actually done this progressively with the same groups over time so what we can actually say is that they come up with initially a whole series of very agronomic solutions some of these on this sheet are similar to what David presented in his presentation but what happens over time is as you engage with these people they move from an agronomic focus to a business-conditioned focus so they start to see the key things they need to change isn't the little things the incremental change to the right but it's in fact their whole approach to business and juggling the trade-offs and changing the goals in some cases and is this being translated into change well certainly there's intention to change so well I worked out in Victoria surveying farmers about the types of change that they're actually undertaking in part due to climate change and we see experience in different results here so over two years of studying in the survey which is I think 1200 farms so that is the precise sample but almost half of them are talking about changing their business structure and management almost over the third we're actually talking about changing enterprise mix of different climate changes they're seeing some are talking about changing starting new enterprises into diversification and others are looking at leasing land or changing locations so changing the land use and so when we actually look at this is that these farmers are really taking on board messages of adaptation even though if you survey them most of them are probably only about third of them most of them would say that climate change due to humans is not happening so they would actually say that there is an anthropogenic climate change and to sort of do this sort of change we've engaged in a whole stack of social science institutional analysis and started to understand one of the constraints in the labour factors that instigate change and what we find is that this change is very significantly depending on the sector you're working in and depending on the region you're working in and so we're both ahead now on some of the things that are needed to be done to actually get adaptation happening and there's a I think a pathway forward that we can design but that would need significant policy in that pathway forward Just again revisiting this risk return sort of view of life if we're just the energy stroking or production perspective these little hexagons are completely they're not real data points but just to make the point is that probably the biggest gains that we can have in the short term are through good capacity so it's through social science rather than through major genetic change and that's effectively moving that home of people who are down in the bottom part of it hexagons up towards that risk return frontier so the good firms in Australia are already pretty much maxed out in terms of where they are in terms of risk return that's actually about how you move the rest of the firms and there's a preferential sort of almost self-selection with research is to actually go and work with the best firms so when we go out and work with the firms we're almost always working up towards that frontier we're not working with the people but down the center of the spectrum so there's a really important bit of social science that's needed to be meshed into policy the other thing I would say about this is that when we look at risk return we don't necessarily take into account all of the dimensions of decision making so for example you could say well one of the reasons why people are performing well under that frontier is because they're making decisions which favor environmental outcomes of production outcomes so in a sense we need to have a multi-dimensional relationship here and I don't think we've actually done the work that allows us to really pin that down and having said that, at least in raising systems those farmers who tend to be right near the top of the risk return frontier are also in many cases those who are actually moving after the natural resources and the biodiversity of their property as well and so I don't think it's all a matter of that there's a hard trade-off in terms of production and environmental performance and even if there's different systems and just one of the key things that can happen in terms of increased production is you can either increase production at a site, so increase your yields which has been the focus so far today or you can increase your land area that you plant up so you can expand your crop area and by just putting a couple of graphs up here of what's been going on in this region in the higher rainfall zone of this upwards over the last several years so what we actually find is that this which was essentially used to be largely raising, higher rainfall raising we've actually found a significant increase in the cropping area so as the millennium drought cut in what used to be too wet for raising now actually for the cropping actually now became suitable rainfall for the cropping and this is not independent of changes in variety so we've actually brought in higher rainfall varieties but we can actually see that there has been an increase, not by a huge area but definitely an increase in the crop in this area and that's very consistent with what we've seen right around the high rainfall zones in Australia, West Australia, South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales in those high rainfall zones we've seen an increase in the cropping into what used to be the grazing land and whoops and if we look at the equipment side of the grazing we can actually see how the grazing goes up and the grazing goes down the importance of this from a broader perspective is that as you convert grazing land into cropping land you lose a lot of the carbon in the system so you can get a significant amount of time a significant amount of carbon and also various aspects of biodiversity in the ecosystem function that were related to the grass that actually get sacrificed so they become defined and there are ways to actually both have to calculate them too in these areas, using things like pasture cropping we can both maintain some of our own grass and grow a bit of cereal but they're still limited in their adoption so there are, and those pasture cropping systems often do have good biodiversity so you can actually go out there and see quite a lot of functional groups in this ecosystem so there are ways of managing these changes which actually can achieve multiple goals but they're not being adopted at the moment and just a flip to the importance of this maybe to change from a much broader perspective this is a graph from Brian Keating which shows the change on basis of an area index or an index of cereal there is from the baseline in about 1960 and an index of cereal and yields so it's comparing trajectories of area and yields in different regions so down here on the right-hand side there's lots happening in sub-Saharan Africa on the left-hand side there's Europe and up in the middle there's Asia and what we can see if you look at the European story is basically over that 50 years or so there's been a reduction in the area but a major increase in the yield and so a really great story in terms of the economy and development of agriculture and areas if you look at Asia there's been a small increase in the area and again a major increase in the production again that's the story but if we look over in Africa it's a very very different trajectory and so that's why we have been a major increase in the area the very little third area increase in yield and so what this is saying is that you can go on very very different trajectories they're not stable over time but these are the trajectories which are not set to just keep on going and it's one of the really important things I think here is actually to think about these trajectories and change their sub-Saharan Africa one to something which looks like more like the Asian or European experience and the sorts of genetic rates for these destructive technologies that they say may develop and will contribute to those sort of challenges it's not going to happen easily because those trajectories are very stable and lastly just a slide which just is about thinking about climate adaptation not from a little box around it which says we want to separate climate adaptation now from rule notes with the agricultural developments and innovation but rather seeing this as integrated into that development so I'd actually like to see climate adaptation be seen as a key source of agriculture innovation as a major functional change in the G by E by M relationship we're getting a big change in the E we're getting big changes in the M we're looking at big changes in the G and we need to reframe how we're going to respond to this and climate change is definitely part of that so the sort of things that can come out of having a focus on climate adaptation as part of that whole renovation system is ways to reduce risk ways to increase productivity ways to actually invest in technologies that may not otherwise be invested in and approaches to integration of systems including the cost of value chain and looking at ecosystem services as part of the solution, not the separate from the solution here if we do this well I think we can actually reinforce getting new, better and contextual options which can be put in place both in places like Australia and in the developing world including some of those transformational changes I haven't drawn on that today but thinking out of the box in terms of your agricultural systems and David mentioned that briefly before and if we're doing this again on adaptation I think can actually renew and revitalise some of our engagement processes because to do this well I think we'll actually have to really ramp up the two-way transfer of information because a lot of farmers and policy makers actually have that information which is very relevant to effective adaptation and lastly if we're going to do this successfully we're going to really work at integrating adaptation to climate change or comparability with other issues particularly in the irrigation challenge so we're going to do dumb things in terms of greenhouse gas emissions when we adapt to climate change and things like more resource management which I think are going to be increasingly challenging over the next few decades so we have to be aware of that sort of trade so we have to be able to to some sort of risk return relationship and to allow us to make informed judgments on what we want to do and what we don't want to do thank you very much we've got coffee and tea outside any questions you want or you're afraid Mark that you're at the end thing is that because as the area defined there are lower yielding areas that disappear out of the that you're starting that you're at the end thing that's it the left hand branch will be true that you've got area going down the yield going up I think there's a variety of things happening so on the back street the European experience but my understanding what's happened is that there's been a mass reduction in the aggregation of farms and much bigger farms and most of that's happened on a better farming land so that's just part of making good economic decisions at the same time is that you've had a lot of policy invention before with the CAF program and now the stewardship program which starts to put in other incentives into some of those decisions I couldn't comment on whether they're effective my own perception is that they're not very effective and so it's hard to say whether or not there's a structural way to divvy up the land in terms of high production or high production but I would respect you on that but I don't think it's a strong respect from this work that you've been doing here presenting do you have a list of do's and don'ts for trying to facilitate that invitation? Yeah well firstly there's speaking to people in the language they understand the aspirations that they have so you start to understand the values that they have and the goals that they have then it's actually about understanding the sensitivity of those systems that they need to achieve those aspirations the sensitivity to climate change the points we've mentioned to leave effectively the climate change in the system and then it's understanding how you can lose from the adoption process Okay and this you've got a line on this a little modern story or something I understand but not in various sort of pages etc which are available Thanks Well I'm going to take a little break outside I'll keep the conversation going