New publication: Integrating social measures into land sector carbon abatement investment decisions
As the climate and biodiversity crises intensify, land sector carbon abatement projects have become central to Australia’s emissions reduction strategy. Investments in projects that aim to capture and store carbon in vegetation and soils are often solely based on the potential cost-effectiveness. That approach can overlook the people and communities who live where these projects happen – the very people whose participation and support determine whether initiatives succeed.
A new open access paper led by CSIRO Research Scientist Dr Nikki Dumbrell, published in Sustainability Science, shows how social measures could help inform carbon abatement investment decisions. The paper describes work from a partnership between a project team in CSIRO’s Valuing Sustainability Future Science Platform (FSP) and the Queensland Government’s Land Restoration Fund (LRF).
“LRF’s aim is to invest in carbon abatement projects that also deliver environmental and social co-benefits,” says Dr Dumbrell.
“There are an increasing number of methodologies, tools and datasets that focus on carbon abatement and environmental co-benefits, but comparatively little on the social dimension. That prompted our team to consider how we might help in that space.”
Partnering from the start
From the very outset, the project was built on close collaboration between CSIRO and the LRF, ensuring that research priorities were shaped jointly.
“We sat down together and asked what the partnership might look like; what were the challenges we could address together; what was the data or analyses we could bring together to address key challenges,” Dr Dumbrell explains. “The published paper tells the story of our multi-year effort and the ways we worked together to create impact.”
However, conducting research in the real world, rather than in controlled laboratory conditions, meant the team had to be mindful of many contextual factors. These included recognising opportunity windows, responding to developments in local communities, and adapting the research pace to fit multiple timelines.
Despite these complexities, the partnership was ultimately deeply rewarding. “By sharing knowledge and taking joint responsibility for driving change, we demonstrated how co-designed research can be an effective way of achieving sustainability goals now and in the future,” says Dr Dumbrell.
Why social context matters
The work the CSIRO project team did in partnership with the LRF focused on examining ways to integrate social information that paints a picture of regional contexts into carbon abatement investment decisions.
Carbon abatement projects don’t happen in isolation. They take place on land owned and managed by farmers, Indigenous communities, and other regional landholders.
“If we want those people to come on board and do that work, we have to be very aware of why they might want to do that, or how they might want to do that,” says Dr Dumbrell. “We can’t make decisions based purely on soil type and climate type and then wonder why there is low participation.”
Dr Dumbrell stresses that cost-effectiveness remains a valid and crucial goal for carbon abatement investments, but notes that ignoring social factors can undermine both environmental outcomes and investment value. Integrating social understanding alongside economic and environmental criteria broadens the decision-making framework, helping to ensure investments are efficient, equitable, and sustainable.
“Our assumptions about how cost-effective an environmental outcome might be are undermined if we don’t also consider the social environments in which they are in,” she explains.
“We might not meet those optimum outcomes if people aren’t on board, or if people aren’t included in those processes or sharing benefits of those processes.”
Queensland as a case study
The research team identified five types of social measures that could be applied in carbon abatement investment decisions:
- Regional access to economic resources and services
- Socio-economic (dis)advantage
- Workforce specialisation and skills
- Regional aspirations and concerns
- Access to local institutions and expertise
By mapping these measures against existing carbon abatement projects in Queensland, the study showed that the location of investments can shift when social context is considered alongside cost-effectiveness.
Analysis revealed that when the focus is purely on least cost carbon abatement, projects are more likely to be in remote or very remote areas. In contrast, when environmental and social co-benefits are included alongside carbon goals, projects are more likely to be located where regional aspirations align with investment program objectives.
As part of the process, the team developed a Social Intel for Sustainable Investment Decisions dashboard to explore these insights practically. Dr Dumbrell emphasises that the dashboard wasn’t intended as a final product but a tool to spark dialogue with partners around data insights.
“A key part of the dashboard that was of interest was how we turned a lot of qualitative information – text from reports and written documents – into something that could be easily engaged with,” she says. “Unfortunately, those reports and plans often spend too much time sitting on bookshelves and not being repurposed for other uses. They have a purpose, and they’re written for specific things. But what if we could use them for other or different purposes? That’s what we experimented with here, and it was quite fun.”
She continues, “When you put those dashboards in front of people, they spend a lot of time engaging with that information because it’s much easier to interact with than opening a 20- or 50-page report and reading it all. The dashboard is one of many tools you can use: maps, photos, and other visuals can all help. For us, the dashboard was an interesting way to explore conversations and shared understanding.”
This interactivity encouraged effective conversations, helping partners decide together what to explore next. The dashboard demonstrated that maps, visuals, and other tools can enrich decision-making, not by providing answers, but by enabling joint exploration and understanding.
Scaling up with people in mind
The implications of this study reach far beyond Queensland. As sustainability efforts scale up, interventions must reach diverse communities, including those less obviously prepared for them.
Dr Dumbrell points out that if environmental programs optimise for cost per outcome without considering social context, they risk missing opportunities. While willing participants may readily adopt projects, broad scale-up may require working in areas where buy-in is not automatic, requiring trade-offs and awareness of delivery risks and contextual differences. For regions that are remote or socially distinct, she says, it’s crucial to invest with an awareness of what that means for how a project can be delivered.
Dr Dumbrell also sees the partnership method itself as a significant contribution: “Continuing to experiment or play with these methods of how we partner with people is going to be really important. Doing science differently is necessary for achieving our goals.”