There has been recognition for more than a decade of the ageing of the farm workforce in Australia. As most reports point out, this is not simply because of an increased number of older farmers, but, importantly to our discussion, it is a result of decreased numbers of younger people entering or remaining in agriculture. The transition of farms and land management has a long history—for example, Foskey (n.d.:3) found evidence of intergenerational arrangements among landholders dating back to the Middle Ages. Barr et al. (2005), in their report to Land and Water Australia, point to the ‘pattern of agricultural adjustment for many generations’. This chapter suggests that the issue has a more powerful difference as the whole Australian population ages.

There is also the important link with NRM policy in Australia.^[1] While risk assessments might highlight the NRM environment risks, they ignore risks associated with demography. For example, the major NRM regional strategy on the south coast of Western Australia (see below) identifies population decline and ageing as a threat on one page (p. 48) and it is never mentioned again.

This chapter is based not on empirical research (which has yet to be undertaken in detail in the region) but on personal involvement in NRM governance and on a close reading of policy documents for the region’s future strategic planning. In other words, what I am highlighting here are preliminary signposts for the future, and I am calling for more detailed research. As a nation, we can no longer ignore the demographic trends, nor can we just hope that things will turn out for the best. While there has been a variety of risk assessments undertaken in rural Australia, at the time of writing, a risk assessment as to the impact of the ageing of the rural workforce^[2] on rural futures, or to the imminent intergenerational transfers of knowledge and power that are essential to enable a sustainable future, is not under way.

By transition here I am not so focused on the land transfer (this is where Voyce’s 1999, 1996 work on inheritance sits), but rather on the experience, knowledge, social and cultural capital associated with the passing of one generation and the taking up of future challenges by other generations. Nowhere is this more evident that in the NRM ‘sector’. Governance of NRM remains essentially in the hands of the older generation (very evident in my own region) and there is no evidence yet from a detailed literature review that any strategic thinking has taken this matter up as a key issue. There has, however, been much discussion about farm transfers, succession planning that focuses on the transition of the business, technology, stock, equipment and housing—in other words, an instrumental approach as follows:

Such a typology captures the essence of the literature to date, specifically the practical and productive nature of any transition. My current research is highlighting a little-explored aspect of the intergenerational shift—the transition of knowledge in governance—an aspect that is crucial for our deeper understanding of rural futures, and the potential impact of the ageing of Australia’s population on NRM and food safety into the future.

Four years ago, in its submission to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) on ‘Agriculture Advancing Australia’ (AAA), the National Farmers Federation (NFF) stated that as the average age of farmers was now close to sixty years, to ensure the long-term prosperity and sustainability of Australian agriculture, effective intergenerational transfer was essential. The report, Australia’s Farmers: Past, present and future (Barr et al. 2005), examines trends in the demographic structure of Australia’s farmer population throughout the period 1976 to 2001 and concludes that there is no looming crisis with Australia’s food production capacity, despite the expected continued decline of farmers in broadacre farming regions. The report conceptualises intergenerational transfer as related to farm size and this is explored from the perspective of farm development, innovation and how technology can impact on levels of production. The report argues that protection of the rural environment through farming practices is anticipated to be continued as long as the activities are labour efficient and profitable or if they are required by regulation.

Argent (1999) suggests that the established gender order within Australian farming households is undergoing gradual and uneven change as a familial ideology—in which the maintenance of family living standards is considered more important than the preservation of the family’s ties with the land—assumes importance in some young families’ adjustment responses. Voyce (1999) explores issues of farming succession with particular reference to the Social Security and Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Retirement Assistance for Farmers) Act 1998.He outlines that this legislation seeks to: 1) maintain political and social control in the rural sector; and 2) foster intergenerational continuity of family farms. He argues that the State’s involvement is in ‘facilitated and ordered controlled successions’ tending to be through the establishment of rural norms or ‘responsibilities’ between an inheriting son and father (Voyce 1999:22). Foskey (n.d.) discusses two main but opposing trends within agriculture in Australia—farming as a lifestyle and farming as a business—both of which are linked to rural ideology.^[3] The ageing of farm populations is a worldwide trend, with the highest rates in the United States, Canada, Europe and Japan. Foskey concludes by highlighting the need to support ageing farmers as they make the transition into retirement and the challenges they face in this, as well as utilising their skills and experience to further enable younger farmers. Errington’s 2002 review of the topic in the United Kingdom, France and Canada concludes that there is a sequencing of transition, including major decision making along the process, although in France this seems to be more rapid than in the United Kingdom (<http://www.management.edu.ru/images/pubs/2003/11/29/ 0000135240/075-067-errington.pdf>).