WeRise · Policy platform
Water, Land & Farming
Key findings
- Drought, heat and extreme rainfall are increasing pressure on farming systems and water planning.
- Basin and irrigation policy determine which communities, crops and ecosystems remain viable.
- Soil health, pollination and ecosystem stability are productive assets, not optional extras.
- Farmers often operate in supply chains where large buyers hold disproportionate power over prices and terms.
Part 01
The Case for Change
Why Water, Land & Farming matters
Food security begins with living systems
Farming works best when water, soil and people are not treated as expendable inputs.
The first duty of land and farming policy is not to maximise short-run extraction. It is to keep the system alive long enough to remain productive. On a continent defined by climatic extremes, that means seeing water, soil, biodiversity and farming communities as core productive infrastructure. Degrade them and yields may persist for a while, but resilience collapses underneath.
Australian debate too often separates ecology from production. This is backwards. Healthy soils retain water and nutrients. Biodiversity supports pollination and pest control. Rivers and wetlands maintain wider ecological function that farming ultimately depends on.
Farmers also need fairer economic conditions. Many are squeezed by supermarket concentration, processor power, debt, input costs and export dependence. A transition to better land stewardship will fail if producers are expected to bear every cost while dominant buyers continue to capture the margin.
Water is the clearest case of the whole problem in miniature. It is ecological, economic and civic all at once. Bad allocation can enrich a few users temporarily while damaging towns, ecosystems and downstream viability. Good allocation accepts limits, prioritises integrity and makes the trade-offs explicit.
A WeRise approach should combine ecological repair with farm viability: better basin governance, soil-health and regenerative transition support, anti-concentration measures in supply chains, local and regional processing capacity, climate adaptation, labour protections and stronger public data on land and water outcomes.
Part 02
Evidence and Experience
Water, Land & Farming: what other countries show
Resilient farming is designed, not improvised
Netherlands · New Zealand · Israel · European Union
International comparisons show there is no single sustainable farming model, but there are recurrent lessons. The Netherlands illustrates both the productivity of high-tech agriculture and the political consequences of ecological overshoot. New Zealand shows how agriculture and export dependence shape environmental politics. Israel demonstrates the possibilities and limits of intense water-efficiency systems in arid conditions. The European Union shows how public payments and regulatory standards can be used, imperfectly, to influence farming outcomes at scale.
Netherlands
Modern high-productivity agriculture era
- Intensive agriculture with later environmental correction pressures. Key findings: high output can coexist with severe environmental strain; pollution and land-use limits eventually force political reckoning; productivity alone is not resilience.
Intensification without ecological boundaries stores up harder conflict later.
New Zealand
2000s–present
- Export-oriented agriculture under mounting water and emissions scrutiny. Key findings: farming systems become politically unstable when ecological costs mount; water quality and farm economics must be managed together; rural legitimacy depends on transition fairness.
Ecological reform must be paired with farm viability and regional trust.
Israel
Ongoing
- Arid-zone irrigation, water efficiency and reuse systems. Key findings: strong public water systems can support farming under scarcity; efficiency matters but does not erase ecological limits; technology must sit inside public governance, not replace it.
Water innovation should complement, not excuse, stricter integrity rules.
European Union
Common Agricultural Policy era
- Farm support tied in varying degrees to land and environmental conditions under the CAP. Key findings: public payments can shape land-use incentives; poorly designed subsidies can still entrench harmful practices; scale allows experimentation but complicates accountability.
Public money should buy public land and water outcomes, not simply subsidise extraction.
Part 03
Costs and Trade-offs
The cost of Water, Land & Farming
Repair is cheaper than collapse
Public investment should help farms transition while preventing ecological loss that costs more later.
Water, land and farming reform involves real fiscal decisions: catchment repair, irrigation modernisation, transition support, soil programs, regional processing, research, biosecurity, compliance and market reform. But the alternative is not free. River decline, salinity, soil loss, biodiversity collapse, climate shocks and rural economic attrition all carry escalating costs.
A first-stage WeRise costing is built around modules rather than one synthetic number. The main categories are basin and water integrity, regenerative and soil-health transition support, regional food-system infrastructure, market-power reform and climate adaptation.
| Item | Amount | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Water integrity and basin-repair package | To be modelled | Note: Environmental flows, monitoring, compliance, catchment repair |
| Soil-health and regenerative transition fund | To be modelled | Note: Farmer support, extension services, evidence and transition risk-sharing |
| Regional processing and food-resilience infrastructure | To be modelled | Note: Decentralised value-add and supply-chain resilience |
| Fair-farmgate and anti-concentration reforms | Regulatory/fiscal mix to be modelled | Note: Market rules, transparency and bargaining support |
| Net cost estimate | Requires defined package and jurisdiction split | Cost figures are indicative at this stage and require defined package scope and jurisdiction split before publication. |
The strongest objections to Water, Land & Farming
Stricter ecological rules will push up food prices or drive farms out of business.
This can happen if reform is abrupt, underfunded or badly targeted. That is why transition support and fair market reform are essential alongside ecological standards.
Regenerative or ecological farming claims are sometimes overstated.
True in some cases — the field attracts hype as well as evidence. Policy should therefore support practices with measurable outcomes and avoid treating every “green” label as proven.
Australia's export role limits how far domestic reform can go.
Export exposure is real, but it does not justify degrading the underlying resource base. The better question is how to maintain competitiveness while improving resilience and integrity.
Water and land conditions are too regional for national policy.
Correct — national policy therefore needs flexibility and place-specific design rather than one-size-fits-all slogans. The framework sets direction; implementation must be regionally adapted.
Part 04
The Australian Design
How Water, Land & Farming would work in Australia
Farm for the long term
Water integrity, ecological repair and fair production should be treated as one system.
A WeRise model for water, land and farming begins by accepting ecological limits as real. Water systems must retain enough integrity to sustain rivers, wetlands, communities and future production. That requires stricter basin governance, better monitoring, stronger compliance and a willingness to prioritise public ecological outcomes over short-term private extraction.
At the same time, producers need a viable transition path. Soil-health programs, regenerative support, extension services, low-emissions farming pathways, biodiversity incentives and climate adaptation must be practical and adequately funded. Supermarket and processor concentration also need attention, because no land transition will stick if farm margins remain structurally weak.
An Australian design should also value regional resilience: local processing, shorter supply chains where appropriate, stronger biosecurity, public R&D and community-level planning for drought, flood and land-use conflict.
Part 05
People and Transition
Part 06
Related policies
Water, Land & Farming sits within a wider set of WeRise policies.
- Planet & Future: more WeRise policies in this pillar
- WeRise: all 29 policies across seven pillars
Notes
Sources and Supporting Documents
- ABARES — Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics. www.agriculture.gov.au
- Murray–Darling Basin Authority. www.mdba.gov.au
- ACCC — Supermarkets and agricultural market reviews. www.accc.gov.au
- CSIRO — Soil and land research. www.csiro.au
- European Commission — Common Agricultural Policy. agriculture.ec.europa.eu
Record