Lower Cotter Catchment Draft Reserve Management Plan

Dr Kate Auty - Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment - 14 March 2017

Cotter River

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Lower Cotter Catchment Draft Reserve Management Plan (RMP) 2017.

My office has been directed by Government, based on the Auditor-General’s recommendation, to evaluate the restoration of Lower Cotter Catchment (LCC) against the goals of the Strategic Management Plan[i] (2007). This will be superseded by the RMP and, with appropriate Ministerial approval, my evaluation will be against the goals within the RMP. The evaluation will commence later this year and be completed by the end of 2018.

I provide comments at this stage of consultation to support the evaluation of the RMP and improve the ability to achieve restoration of the Lower Cotter Catchment.  The comments I make have emerged directly from scoping the evaluation in recent months. The 2018 review will provide further comment and, based on available information, an evaluation of the restoration efforts.

Standards for Evaluation

There are two main standards that I will be drawing on for the evaluation. These being:

  • The National Water Quality Management Strategy[ii] (2000) (NWQMS) and its Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (2000). These establish processes to develop target and trigger levels that underpin management plans for catchments and other water bodies. (see Attachment 1)
  • National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia[iii] (2016) issued by the Society for Ecological Restoration Australasia (See Attachment 2). These standards represent best available research and were developed by leading practitioners in the field. They provide a transparent, repeatable and thorough approach to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate ecological restoration projects. They also recognise the long-term nature of ecological restoration projects and the need to incorporate adaptive management.

The two frameworks have very similar critical elements:

  • They establish reference conditions or ecosystems to tailor goals relevant to the local environment and in consideration of current levels of degradation; and
  • They include measurable objectives that are underpinned by monitoring programs.

In fact the NWQMS might be considered a subset of the National Standards (the Standards) as they are focused purely on the aquatic environment.

Overall Comments on the RMP

I recognise the extensive work and consultation that has gone into the development of the RMP. The document is comprehensive in identifying the broad range of issues and challenges. In particular, the focus on ensuring resilience against climate change reflects the standards. The sections on Cultural Heritage and Community Engagement are also commendable.

I note that there are seven main chapters to the plan, containing 18 objectives and 66 actions. These are shown in the following diagram.

Diagram of contents of the Lower Cotter Catchment Draft Reserve Management Plan

As indicated by the diagram, the Plan’s focus is confused, subtle in its priorities, and siloed in it purpose against the 3 main management objectives on page 9.

For example on page 6, the RMP states its aim as: To actively promote regeneration of the Lower Cotter Catchment to a stable, fully functional natural ecosystem and protect it from activities that may have adverse impacts on water quality.

Yet onpage37 it states: The protection of water resources is the primary consideration for all decisions and activities occurring in the catchment.

This balance of purpose requires further clarification and rationale such as:

  • What is the baseline condition of the catchment?
  • What does a fully functional natural ecosystem look like in a catchment that is prioritised towards water supply and starting out in a state of degradation?
  • What and how will we measure progress towards it over time?

To summarise, the three main points proposed for consideration are:

  1. Applying a more comprehensive framework, as set out in the Standards, clearly identifying reference ecosystem(s) and its attributes, linking these through to the measurable and time linked objectives;
  2. Linking objectives explicitly through to the relevant operational management plans and action plans; and
  3. Strengthening the commitment and governance regarding research, monitoring and knowledge  management.

Clear Restoration Targets

It is not clear what the target outcome is in sufficient detail and appropriate priority to allow relevant indicators to be set and monitoring to be strategically employed to demonstrate management effectiveness.

Identification of an appropriate indigenous reference system is a fundamental principle of ecological restoration. A reference ecosystem describes the ultimate target for a restoration project.  This involves detail of composition (species), structure (complexity and configuration) and function (processes and dynamics) and transitional pathways to indicate decline or recovery.

It is acknowledged that the LCC includes several different ecosystems including riparian forests, montane forests and open grassy woodlands.

These ecosystem attributes are described somewhat in the RMP and may be included in more detail in other documents, operational management plans or action plans.

In relation to Water Resources whereby the National Water Quality Management Strategy (NWQMS) and associated guidelines is referred to, reference indicators and trigger levels need to be developed and a clear monitoring regime implemented. It is not clear in the RMP who is responsible for developing, monitoring and reviewing the application of the NWQMS to the local environment, yet it appears to be the primary objective.

Recommendation 1

The RMP should include better spatial information representing land use and ecosystem attributes. For robustness and clarity the reference ecosystem and indicators should be clearly articulated in the RMP and consistent throughout the document. They should be spatially mapped and linked to all management actions.

Recommendation 2

The responsibility for implementing, monitoring and reporting on the NWQMS for LCC should be clearly identified and resourced.

Clear Objectives

The RMP has a variety of objectives and outcomes. These include:

  • Management objectives (page 9);
  • Key outcomes over the 10 year life of the plan (page 26);
  • Primary management objectives at the start of each system chapter; and
  • Objectives within each aspect, such as hydrology and water management (page37); native vegetation (page 54) and pests and disease (page 66).

These various ‘objectives’ are not directly linked to one another and add confusion to purpose and priority. This ultimately adds a layer of difficulty in not only implementing appropriate actions in a cohesive and efficient manner, but also in being able to evaluate outcomes and therefore management effectiveness.

Recommendation 3

Mapping out how objectives link to a reference ecosystem and applying terminology consistent with the Standards would provide a clear picture of purpose and ensure actions are linked and effective.

Robust Objectives

Objectives need to be clear about the measure, the methodology for measuring and the target over time. Measurability is critical to facilitate monitoring and reporting.

Baseline measures must be available to make the objective purposeful. It is not always clear what the relevant point in time is for the baseline measure. Time based objectives should be included and monitoring against the objective must be undertaken. Although actions have been clearly allocated to a responsible entity, the monitoring and measurement against the objective is not explicit. Tracking actions alone will not ascertain whether they are achieving the actual objective and not support an adaptive management approach.

One example is the Landscape and Habitat Connectivity where the objective is that scenic quality is maintained and recovered, and connectivity value is enhanced. The baseline for scenic quality and connectivity and how will it be monitored needs to be clearly established.

Recommendation 4

Objectives should be reviewed to ensure they are measurable, have a clear methodology, baseline measure, time based targets and a monitoring program.

Operational Management Plans

The RMP is a high level strategic document that facilitates a range of operational plans. The linkage between these and the RMP is not clear. Without a clear identification of these plans and their ‘owners’ there is a risk that some objectives will be missed or on the other hand, inefficiency of efforts through potential duplication. It also make the long list of actions unnecessarily overwhelming, I expect it will crystallise several actions into a single plan, making the document more relevant for stakeholders (ie.  Parks and Conservation Service (PCS) Road and Fire Trail Network improvement plan).

Recommendation 5

Specific operational plans relevant to the actions should be included (perhaps within Appendix 1).

Knowledge management, research and monitoring

Knowledge management and appropriate monitoring is a common challenge for a wide range of environmental management projects. It was recognised in the Lower Cotter Catchment Strategic Management Plan (2007) (page 17) whereby it states:

“Management is guided by a program of environmental monitoring and research that supports and informs management activities and long-term restoration programs”.

In a broader context, it is a clear priority of Government to be able to inform, engage and connect with the community on all matters relating to Government operations. Using information leads to better outcomes, as shown in the figure overpage sourced from the Australia State of Environment Report [iv](2016).

Research and monitoring is critical in reviewing and adapting ongoing restoration efforts.  The importance of monitoring and assessment in restoration is unquestioned[v] yet there is a globally a lack of monitoring or evaluation of performance or outcome of restoration projects[vi]. Bernhardt (2005) undertook a study looking at the common elements of successful river restoration projects in the USA. Of the 37,099 river restoration projects assessed only 10% of project records indicated that any form of assessment or monitoring occurred. The current lack of monitoring is often a result of poor planning and lack of allocated funds[vii] .

The management of the LCC is of particular community interest as it relates to a range of competing interests including recreation, natural environment, fire management and water supply. It is critical to maintain sufficient information to inform and support Government actions in the LCC and allow effective community engagement.

Knowledge management for the LCC is a critical issue for all stakeholders and requires immediate focus. There has been significant research undertaken in the LCC over the years, particularly since the 2003 bushfire but it is fragmented and difficult to source. It is noted that PCS had been identified as custodian of all research projects (page 118) in the draft RMP.

Diagram showing how using information leads to better outcomes

Source: Australia State of Environment Report 2016

Previous Commissioner’s Reports

The 2015 ACT State of Environment Report[viii], produced by my office, identified this issue in relation to land, water and biodiversity.  Specifically:

  • Recommendation 5 – Land – That the ACT Government provides resources to fully implement priority action in the ACT Nature Conservation Strategy....(such as) Conservation Effectiveness Monitoring program
  • Recommendation 7 – Water -  That the ACT Government .... assess the need for collecting more information for indicators
  • Recommendation 8 – Biodiversity – That the ACT Government provides the necessary resources to complete the next phases of the Conservation Effectiveness Monitoring Program (CEMP)
  • Recommendation 9 – Biodiversity – That the ACT Government formalise biodiversity conservation data collection and storage... to integrate reports commissioned by different agencies....

The ACT Government responded to these recommendations as “Supported”.

This issue was also identified in previous reports by this office, namely the Report on Canberra Nature Park Reserves[ix] (2011), Recommendation 3 – Better direct and inform the management of nature reserves by:

  • Preparing a Nature Reserve Operational Plan, and
  • Developing and implementing a nature reserve monitoring strategy.

The ACT Government responded to these recommendations with Agreed in Principle and in Part, noting a need to prioritise and rationalise approaches.

Recommendation 6

The role of PCS should be expanded to include all monitoring, reporting and reviews for completeness. Given the current state of knowledge management, a committed resource needs to be allocated to this task to ‘catch up’ and develop processes and systems to facilitate efficient knowledge management into the future. This role should also provide guidance on monitoring gaps and have some delegation to endorse monitoring programs within various operational plans.

Recommendation 7

A budget must be allocated to ongoing research and monitoring, and include sufficient resources to implement the CEMP into the Lower Cotter catchment as a matter of priority.

Recommendation 8

All objectives and/or operational plans must include a requirement for monitoring and reporting. These should be linked to the CEMP.

I commend the work of Government in reaching this point and trust that you will consider the value in the recommendations I have put forward to assist in informing the ongoing efforts of the restoration of the Lower Cotter Catchment.

Thank you once again for the opportunity to comment on the Lower Cotter Catchment Draft Reserve Management Plan.

Attachment 1 – Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (2000) Framework

Diagram of Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality

Attachment 2 – National standards for the practice of ecological restoration in Australia



[i] ACT Government (2007): Lower Cotter Catchment Strategic Management Plan.

[ii] ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000): National Water Quality Management Strategy and Australian Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality.

[iii] SERA (2016): National standards for the practice of ecological restoration in Australia.

[iv] Australian Government, Department of Environment and Energy, 2016: Australia State of Environment Report.

[v] Aguiar F.C., Fernandes M.R. & Ferreira M.T. (2011): Riparian vegetation metrics as tools for guiding ecological restoration in riverscapes. Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems, 402, 21-33.

[vi] Wohl E., Angermeier P.L., Bledsoe B., Kondolf G.M., MacDonnell L., Merritt D.M., Palmer M.A., Poff N.L. & Tarboton D. (2005): River restoration. Water Resources Research, 41, 176-188; and

Bernhardt E.S., Palmer M., Allan J., Alexander G., Barnas K., Brooks S., Carr J., Clayton S., Dahm C. & Follstad-Shah J. (2005) Synthesizing U. S. river restoration efforts. Science, 308, 636-637; and

Kondolf G.M. & Micheli E.R. (1995) Evaluating stream restoration projects. Environmental Management, 19, 1-15; and

Erskine W.D. (2001) Geomorphic evaluation of past river rehabilitation works on the Williams River, New South Wales. Ecological Management and Restoration, 2, 116-128.

[vii] Purcell A.H., Friedrich C. & Resh V.H. (2002) An assessment of a small urban stream restoration project in northern California. Restoration Ecology, 10, 685-694.

[viii] Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment (OCSE) (2016): ACT State of Environment Report.

[ix] OCSE (2011): Report on Canberra Nature Park (nature reserves); Molonglo River Corridor (nature reserves) and Googong Foreshores Investigation.

Public Housing Proposal for Downer 

Dr Kate Auty - Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment - 20 December 2016

Photo of public housing

Photo: Wikemedia Commons


Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the public housing proposal for 79-85 Antill Street, dated 5th December 2016.

This submission will:

  • Note that ACT Government has various commitments under Action Plan 2, particularly relating to priority households (i.e. low-income households) and comment on their importance for public housing
  • Advocate for best practice in sustainable building design, materials and construction, along with energy efficiency measures and education for the proposed public housing residents
  • Acknowledge the role of negative public perception of public housing in perpetuating social exclusion
  • Identify a window of opportunity provided by new public housing to challenge the stereotypes associated with public housing tenants

Action Plan 2 – relevant actions for public housing

The ACT Government’s climate change action plan, Action Plan 2 (AP2), details a number of actions aimed at increasing the energy efficiency of residential housing:

  • Action 1 – The ACT Government’s Energy Efficiency Improvement Scheme will commence from 1 January 2013 requiring retailers to implement energy efficiency improvements to ACT homes with a focus on low-income households. The Scheme has been extended to 2020.
  • Action 3 - Subject to a regulatory impact assessment, the ACT Government will introduce legislation to require landlords to provide information to tenants on the energy efficiency of homes and fixed appliances and major energy uses. Regulatory impact assessment and stakeholder consultation will be completed in 2013.
  • Action 4 - The ACT Government will publish by 2015 a Pathway to Zero Emissions Buildings policy informed by a regulatory impact assessment and stakeholder consultation to be undertaken from 2013 covering residential and non-residential building types.
  • Action 5 - The ACT Government will continue to build on the experience of its successful ACTSmart programs to develop a comprehensive strategy to engage the community on climate change matters and to provide integrated information, advice and support to Canberra households on reducing energy bills and cutting emissions. This will be guided by a community engagement strategy to be published in early 2013.

The ACT Government should ensure that these actions, and the policy intent of these actions, are implemented within future developments including the Downer public housing proposal.

Best practice sustainable buildings

Climate change

Noting that while generally the contents of the draft Housing ACT Capital Program - Design Brief – Multi Unit Sites appears to provide a high standard of specification for design, it does not explicitly account for the expected impacts of climate change in the ACT region - the annual number of hot days over 35 degrees Celsius that Canberra experiences is expected to increase from 5 days to up to 10 days by 2030.[1] The expected rise in extreme heat days will cause an increase in the number of cases of heat stress in the ACT, and is likely to disproportionately impact low income households.

In keeping with the ACT Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, the ACT Government should actively consider how best to ensure its public housing stock is protected from such impacts through building design and material choices. Solar orientation should be optimised to access solar energy through photovoltaic whilst minimising summer heat into the living areas. Landscaping and use of appropriate shade trees should also be included as climate adaptation measures – in addition to providing visual amenity, trees can have a considerable impact on local ambient temperatures, with shade and evapotranspiration provided by trees on hot summer days helping to reduce localised temperatures by up to 5 degrees Celsius.’[2][3]

Education and user behaviour

In addition to design, user behaviour also plays a significant role in the overall energy consumption in buildings. As identified in Action 5 of AP2, the ACT Government should continue to develop its energy efficiency education programs (ie. ACTSmart) and ensure that they are promoted among public housing tenants.

Other opportunities for sustainable living

Noting that communal gardens may not be feasibly located within the proposed development, the ACT Government could provide an orientation package that includes information on local community gardens. Canberra Organic Growers Society (COGS) has a number of community gardens located throughout Canberra, with one being located nearby at Dickson College.

Public perceptions of public housing

Within Australia and elsewhere, public housing has progressively ‘moved from being a general needs tenure, in which a range of groups lived, to one containing a much larger proportion of high need and deprived tenants’.[4] Due to a number of factors, primarily a significant reduction in government funding over time, public housing is now perceived as a ‘last resort’ option amongst the general public. Widely held negative perceptions of public housing and its users, reinforced by sensationalist media and long-running political discourse on the issue, [5] has had the effect of perpetuating social exclusion. In addition to financial insecurity, social exclusion, the notion that ‘poverty is more than just material deprivation and includes social relationships, participation and access to services’, presents a considerable impediment to achieving self reliance for public housing users.[6] Continued negative perceptions clearly have profound implications for households living in public housing.

Opportunities to disrupt media stereotypes of public housing

With the establishment of a new public housing site the ACT Government will have an opportunity to disrupt local media discourse on the issue of public housing. The Downer development could be leveraged as a showcase for the community by demonstrating best practice policy, design and implementation for public housing.

The ACT Government should consider the development of a media strategy that;

  • has the aim of promoting a positive reception / perception of the Downer development by the local public
  • highlights the benefits of community engagement for both public housing users and the local community – noting specifically that engaged communities are happier, healthier and safer for all
  • showcases the buildings as examples of best practice sustainable design
  • encompasses regular print media, digital and social media channels
  • is timed to coincide with the opening of the site for habitation – early intervention is key to disrupting commonly held perceptions relating to public housing
  • seeks to establish lasting relationships with media personnel that enable public housing stakeholders (government, community groups, users) to convey positive news stories over time

Thank you once again for the opportunity to comment on the public housing proposal for 79-85 Antill Street.


[1] ACT Environmental and Planning Directorate, 'Draft ACT Climate Change Adaptation Strategy'.

[2] City of Melbourne, 'Urban Forest Strategy' (Victorian Government 2012).

[3] Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation, 'Responding To The Urban Heat Island: A Review Of The Potential Of Green Infrastructure' (Victorian Centre for Climate Adaptation 2012).

[4] Rowland Atkinson, Keith Jacobs, 2008, Public housing in Australia, stigma, home and opportunity, Housing and Community Research Unit, viewed 12 December 2016, <http://apo.org.au/node/311>.

[5] Jacobs, K. etc. (2011) The stigmatisation of social housing: findings from a panel investigation, AHURI Final Report No.166. Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

[6] Rowland Atkinson, Keith Jacobs, 2008, Public housing in Australia, stigma, home and opportunity, Housing and Community Research Unit, viewed 12 December 2016, <http://apo.org.au/node/311>.

Active Living 

Dr Kate Auty - Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment - 10 February 2017

Girl standing next to her bicycle

Photo: Pixabay


Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission in response to Incorporating Active Living Principles into the Territory Plan.

While the office welcomes the promotion of active living and active transport principles by the ACT Government, there is an opportunity to strengthen the rationale about why people should convert to these modes. It is also essential to outline the barriers that prevent people incorporating active living principles in their daily lives. The office is aware that this may not be within the scope of the current proposed Territory Plan Variation but our view is that it is essential for these principles to be embodied in the Territory Plan in order to reinforce their importance and assist ongoing uptake.

In the current document the reason for becoming more active is promoted primarily on a health basis – to reduce obesity and related diseases (refer to page 6 ‘The evidence for change’). Some economic benefits of active living are mentioned such as congestion reduction, health, vehicle operating costs and infrastructure savings. Other benefits such as increasing the surveillance of urban and suburban areas are also outlined.

However, active transport has other highly significant co-benefits like:

  • economic benefits such as reduced spending on car parking, increased retail space in terms of bicycle parking compared to car parking, reducing air and noise pollution,
  • reducing carbon emissions (in the ACT the transport sector contributes about 23% of total greenhouse emissions),[1]
  • fostering local businesses on the commute such as Sly Fox coffee on the Sullivans Creek cycleway, and
  • potentially enhancing relationships in the community, e.g. with the program CANwalk which assists people in Canberra find a walking activity to suit their needs.

These benefits are outlined in our Active Travel video that you can view here.

The 2015 State of the Environment Report, produced by our Office found that petrol consumption accounted for 5% of Canberra’s ecological footprint. Our overall footprint is 8.9 global hectares per person, three and a half times the global average.  More than 60% of our footprint is a product of our households.  The table below provides some insight into this environmental concern.

Table showing the top 10 commodities used in the ACT

Incorporating Active Living Principles into the Territory Plan makes only one mention of climate change on page 21. This requires elaboration. Hotter, drier summers as a result of climate change will have a significant impact on active living and active transport. Hot weather will be a significant barrier to people exercising and will also impact on people’s health. Climate change has the potential to increase expenditure on lighting for ovals as training sessions are pushed into the cooler evening hours. Climate change also has the potential to impact tourism – as we saw when heat prohibited play in the Australian Open.

The changes to the Territory Plan should address how climate change will be considered in urban planning. Some ways to help keep urban open space cooler include:

  • incorporation of shade trees – they can reduce the local micro-climate in summer by at least 2 degrees Celsius. Research undertaken by Melbourne City Council has found that the average temperature in Melbourne’s CBD is up to 4 degrees higher than the surrounding suburbs and during the evenings, this difference can be as high as 12 degrees.[2] Director of CSIRO Land and Water, Paul Hardisty, has said climate change is already affecting our daily lives and we need to increase green coverage such as tree canopies, gardens, parklands and green roofs to mitigate summer heat stress and mortality rate, [3] and
  • the use of water sensitive urban design measures – directing stormwater via permeable surfaces into the soil profile, rain gardens/reed beds, wetland and food gardens. This reduces the amount of concrete and hard surfaces we have in our cities, therefore reducing the urban heat island effect.

A great deal of work has now been done on the value of the urban forest and it could be usefully referenced in any response to this call for submissions. A link to a short video that our office produced about Canberra’s urban forest is here.

The active living principles outlined in the document are a useful goal to aim for but it is vital that barriers to active living are acknowledged in order to determine the areas to focus on to increase the number of people using active living in their daily lives. Barriers to active living include:

  1. Gender – while cycling in the ACT is higher than the national average,[4] men (65%) were nearly twice as likely to be bicycle riders as women (35%).[5] the requirement to wear helmets, safety concerns and riding confidence are associated with this.

    Percentages of males and females riding their bicycles

    Cycling rates for women are high in Germany (49%) and very high in Denmark and the Netherlands (55%) compared to the United Kingdom (27%). In the UK, this lower participation rate is due to the “hostile road environment for cycling” according to sustainable transport consultant Alix Stredwick.[6] This research demonstrates that improving cycling infrastructure should increase the number of women cycling.

    Woman riding on bicycle, Milan

    Woman cycling in Milan, Edwina Robinson

  2. Socioeconomic – Vampire Index (vulnerability assessment for mortgage, petrol and inflation risks and expenditure) assesses the risk to Australian households arising from the combined impact of rising mortgage costs, high fuel prices and the pressures from inflation. The pattern identified in this research is that people who live further from city centres have restricted access to public transport which means they are much more likely to use their personal cars to drive further distances. The recommendations are that public transport networks be improved.[7] This is relevant for promoting active living as people who use public transport have higher rates of incidental exercise than those driving their own cars.
  3. Age – older people may have limitations to their ability to participate in activity. Investment in targeted infrastructure to support the physical activity of ageing Canberrans is important to help address this issue. Also, the cycling participation rate among children aged under 10 is below the national average so this is an age group that can be targeted.
  4. Distance – this is a major barrier in Canberra for active travel. In answer to the question: “why have you not used a bicycle for travel to work in the past year?” 41% of participants responded that it was too far.[8] This is reflected by the fact that the greatest percentage of people in the ACT (35.5%) travel an average distance of 10-20km to work and full-time study, the highest proportion of all the States and Territories.[9] A great initiative in the ACT has been the construction of infrastructure to allow people to use mixed modes of transport. An example is the installation of bike rails, bike lockers and bike cages at bus stops to allow people to cycle to the bus stop and park their bicycle securely while they catch the bus.
  5. Appropriate infrastructure, e.g. separate cyclists from the rest of the traffic so that their safety is improved. An example of this is the Civic Cycle Loop.

Showing separated on-road cycle path

Separated cycleway, Wikimedia Commons, Paul Krueger

As to the benefits of cycling, Albert Einstein summed it up accurately when he said, in relation to the Theory of Relativity:

“I thought of that while riding my bicycle”.

Our office acknowledges the many other initiatives and endeavours that are currently being pursued by the ACT Government in relation to climate change adaptation and mitigation, and we look forward to commenting on these at an appropriate time in the future.


[1] ICRC, 2011, ACT Greenhouse Gas Inventory, ACT Government, Canberra.

[2] Australian Institute of Landscape Architects, 2015, Cooling Cities – Urban Heat Island Effect, Draft PS for member consultation, AILA Position Statement, Liveable Cities.

[3] Hardisty, Paul, 2016, A new climate adaptation landscape, CSIRO, Canberra.

[4] Munro, Cameron, 2015, National Cycling Participation Survey 2015: Australian Capital Territory, Austroads Ltd, Sydney, Australia.

[5] ACT Government 2011, Draft Report on Telephone Survey About Cycling in Canberra, by Winton Sustainable Consultants, dated 21 Nov 2011. Phone survey of 1000 adults, in ACT Government 2015, Building an Integrated Transport Network: Active Travel, Canberra.

[6] Stredwick, Alix, 2015 quoted in ‘If there aren’t as many women cycling as men...you need better infrastructure’, The Guardian.

[7] Dodson, Jago and Sipe, Neil, 2006, Shocking the Suburbs: Urban Location, Housing Debt and Oil Vulnerability in the Australian City, Griffith University, Brisbane.

[8] Munro, Cameron, 2015, National Cycling Participation Survey 2015: Australian Capital Territory, Austroads Ltd, Sydney, Australia.

[9] ABS, 2012, Environmental Issues: Waste Management, Transport and Motor Vehicle Usage March 2012, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra.

living sustainably

Click to expand sitemap