| SIF3 home page | SIF3 papers & reports | Regional pilots | Regional capacity | -What's new? | News & activities |
|
SIF3: Salinity Investment Framework III |
|
Precursors to SIF3 |
SIF3 is an evolution from the Salinity Investment Framework that was established by the State Salinity Council of WA in 2000. We are grateful to the many people who have contributed to SIF Phases 1 and 2. The papers below relate to SIF1 and 2. See the SIF page at the Department of Water here.
|
Report |
Authors |
|
Resource Science Division, Department of Environment (Damien McAlinden, Tim Sparks, Don Burnside, Louise Stelfox), supported by SIF Steering Committee (Rachel Siewert, Barbara Morrell, Neil Young, Bob Nulsen, Ken Wallace, Janette Hill-Tonkin, David Pannell, Don Crawford, John Ruprecht) |
|
|
Tim Sparks, Richard George, Ken Wallace, David Pannell, Don Burnside and Louise Stelfox |
|
|
Report by Department of Agriculture on analysis that fed into the above two reports (508K pdf) (2005) |
Richard George, Ross Kingwell, Janette Hill-Tonkin and Bob Nulsen |
|
Comparison of SIF1, SIF2 and SIF3 |
This table provides a brief overview of the differences between the different phases of SIF. Basically, SIF1 and SIF2 focus almost solely on key assets, and provide a process for evaluating which assets should be the highest priority based on a set of agreed principles. SIF3 broadens the focus to provide guidance about investment in technology development, helps the user select which policy tool to use for a given asset, and embeds a large body of existing research and analysis in the form of decision rules, to make the job much easier for users.
|
|
SIF1 |
SIF2 |
SIF3 |
|
Decision framework |
|
|
|
|
Asset-based approach |
ü |
ü |
ü |
|
Used key criteria to identify priority assets |
Partial |
ü |
ü |
|
Handles priority of industry development/technology development |
|
Partial |
ü |
|
Includes detailed public benefit/private benefit framework, accounting for likely landholder behaviour |
|
|
ü |
|
Shows how to combine key criteria into an overall recommendation |
|
|
ü |
|
Recommends case-specific policy mechanisms (e.g. extension vs incentives vs R&D) |
|
|
ü |
|
Uses GIS to consider multiple assets |
|
|
ü |
|
Embeds a large body of research and analysis to inform the decision rules |
|
|
ü |
|
Application |
|
|
|
|
Piloted at state level |
ü |
ü |
|
|
Piloted at regional level |
ü |
|
ü |
|
Dedicated project team |
|
|
ü |