Search

Policy instruments—such as regulation, financial incentives, and agricultural extension—are commonly applied by governments to promote sustainable agricultural practices and tackle ecosystem degradation. Despite substantial investment, little data are available to gauge the impact of evolving policy mixes. We constructed a Bayesian network model to explore relationships between policy instruments, contextual factors, and adoption. Applying a series of scenarios, we present examples of how different instruments influence adoption and how their effectiveness is shaped by contextual factors. Scenarios highlight that the effect of policy instruments is often modest, and constrained by diverse practice and population characteristics. These findings allow us to reflect on the role of policy instruments, and the conditions necessary to support practice change. For example, our findings raise questions about the role of financial benefits versus financial capacity, and highlight the potential importance of concepts such as mental bandwidth in shaping both motivation and capacity to adopt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conservation and environmental management have been reported as offering opportunities to substantially improve the wellbeing of Indigenous people. Using the holistic wellbeing impact evaluation (W-IE) approach-well suited for use in Indigenous communities-we interviewed 190 Indigenous Australians across four communities. All communities were involved in the Indigenous land and sea management programs (ILSMPs). Our study explored the conceptualisation of 'wellbeing' by participants. In particular, we were interested in the aspects of wellbeing perceived to be affected by ILSMPs. Out of the 26 wellbeing factors explored, 'Health centres'; 'Language'; 'Schools'; and 'Safe community' emerged as being of highest importance to the largest percentage of the respondents. When grouped using principle components analysis (PCA), the 'Community and society' domain emerged as the most important; accounting for 52% of the overall importance of all wellbeing factors. The second most important domain was the 'Country and culture', contributing 31%. Lastly, 'Economic aspects' contributed only 17%. Respondents believed that ILSMPs have played a considerable causal role in improving wellbeing, by positively changing factors most important to them. Specifically, 73% of perceived causal links were related to improvements in the 'Country and Culture' and 23% to 'Community and Society' domain. We thus conclude that land management for Indigenous people is much more than ecological or environmental management with ILSMPs, perceived to cause a wide range of cultural and social benefits. We also propose ways in which the future design of such programs could be improved to further increase benefits.