ON THE continent with the world’s most variable climate, where dry spells are inevitable - and may become more frequent - is the term “drought” still relevant?
National drought policy has recently been reframed to banish the word “drought” in favour of “dryness”, but Dr Lauren Rickards of the Primary Industries Drought Adapatation Research Network (PIARN) thinks “drought” still has currency.
The Drought Policy Review Expert Social Panel that advised Agriculture Minister Tony Burke during the reshaping of National Drought Policy argued that “drought” indicates an exceptional event, something out of the norm, when in fact dry spells of varying degrees are a persistent fact of farming in Australia.
“Rather than providing crisis-framed assistance in times of difficulty, government policy should be focused on early intervention to counteract the worst effects of dryness and to provide incentives in better times which encourage commercially and environmentally responsible management under variable seasonal conditions,” the panel said in its 2008 report.
Dr Rickards agreed with the sentiment, but argued that the baby shouldn’t be thrown out with the bathwater.
Farmers and policy makers should not ignore the reality of recurrent dryness, she agreed, but there must also be recognition of the “absolute hardship” of drought: the point when water was so scarce for so long that no adaptative measures could counter the hardshp it caused.
For instance, Dr Rickards told the recent Climate Adaptation Futures conference, the “Big Dry” that had gripped south-eastern Australia since 2002 had left many farming families with such limited resources that they were highly sensitive to further water deficits.
“Their physical, financial, social and emotional reserves are eroded by coping with the drought to date, among other exacerbating pressures.
“It is this sensitivity to ongoing dryness that is being experienced as exceptional, rather than the degree of water deficit at any one time.”
Dr Rickards acknowledged that the new drought policy was trying to juggle several factors.
On the one hand, some farmers were too passive and expectant of government support in times of drought to take pre-emptive measures.
On the other, farmers could also be overly-optimistic about the end of a drought, and fail to act on the expectation that it would end “soon”.
In addition, policy makers were trying to factor in forecasts that drought would be more frequent and drier under climate change.
“While we need to ensure that we do not fall into what the US National Drought Mitigation Centre calls the ‘hydro-illogical’ cycle of forgetting about drought when rain appears and being shocked and ill-prepared when it occurs again, we also need to be careful not to deny the significance and relevance of drought within our increasingly ‘drought like’ average conditions,” Dr Rickards said.
“It is important that people are prepared for long term changes under climate change, but it is unhelpful to try to communicate this through a simple shift in terminology from drought to dryness.
“While we may be aiming for a long term and linear learning process, to do so by denying the occurrence of episodic extreme dryness denies the parallel need for the cycle of preparedness, response and recovery that is core to good disaster management.
“The notion of drought and cyclical adaptation responses will be of increasing significance and relevance, not less, as we experience more frequent and severe drought events.”
Email a friend