Soil has a profile in Australian policy at the Commonwealth-level, with Australia’s National Soil Strategy published in 2021, and the associated National Soil Action Plan 2023–2028. There is, however, some way to go to ensure soils attract appropriate recognition and are reflected in across state and local government, Research and Development Corporation and industry-body strategy and policy documents. An ‘Institutional Scan’ undertaken by Australia’s Regional Soil Coordinators (RSCs) indicates more attention needs to be given to soils in strategic documents published by stakeholders to address one of the key findings from the 2021 State of the Environment report, that ‘soils are in poor condition and are deteriorating’.
In this article, Cameron Leckie, RSC for southern Queensland and northern NSW provides an outline of the Institutional Scan and its results.
About the Institutional Scan
Over the past two years, each of the RSCs have completed a Soil Capacity Gap Analysis for their respective regions. Lucy Porter, RSC for South Australia, incorporated an industry scan in her report, which examined the extent to which soil is incorporated in strategy documents published by South Australian industry associations and bodies.
The RSCs have since extended this concept into a nationwide ‘Institutional Scan’, reviewing relevant public-facing strategy documents from state governments, Natural Resource Management (NRM) bodies, Research and Development Corporations, and industry bodies. The aim was to identify how important soil is viewed at an institutional level.
Components of the scan, approach taken and results
The scan consisted of four questions and 107 strategy documents were reviewed. The latest identified strategy document from each institution was reviewed, with release dates ranging from 2009 to 2025. Fifty three per cent of the strategy documents have been published since the National Soil Strategy was released.
The first three areas of the scan identified how many times soil is mentioned, whether soil-related objectives were included, and whether methods and resources required to achieve objectives were referenced.
These questions were asked based on the logic that if the condition of soil is to be improved, its importance must first be recognised, soil-related objectives must be defined, and resources should be assigned/methods implemented to achieve the objectives.
The fourth area of the scan focused on whether the National Soil Strategy was referred to in the strategic documents that were examined. This question was only applied to documents published since the release of the Strategy in 2021.
How often is soil mentioned?
This question explored the visibility of soil in the publicly-available strategy documents that were reviewed. Frequent mentions of soil suggest a level of awareness and recognition of its importance within an organisation’s scope of work.
NRM bodies showed a higher frequency of soil references, suggesting a stronger connection to land and resource management priorities. In contrast, strategies from other stakeholders featured fewer mentions, with soil often included in only general environmental statements, or not at all.
The above graph depicts the median number of mentions grouped by institution type. The numbers atop each column reflect the number of documents reviewed. The median has been used due to a small number of documents having very large soil mentions which skewed the results.
Are soil objectives defined?
This question assessed whether documents set clear and specific goals related to soil health, function, or management. Having defined objectives is a critical step toward targeted action and measurable progress.
Examples of soil-related objectives include commitments to increase soil carbon levels, reduce erosion, support landholder soil stewardship, or improve soil monitoring capacity. Where present, these objectives demonstrate a proactive approach to addressing soil issues.
Many strategies did not include soil-specific goals, or included broader land or environmental goals, making it difficult to determine whether soil is truly prioritised within the broader strategy.
The above graph shows percentage observations of soil related goals and objectives by institution type. The observation categories are No (no soil related objectives specified), Indirect (land or environmental related objectives identified), or Yes (soil related objectives identified).
Are approaches to achieve soil objectives defined?
This question examined whether the strategies outlined specific actions, programs, or resourcing to support soil-related objectives. It also considered whether implementation pathways were clearly articulated.
Examples of defined approaches include delivery of extension programs, funding for soil monitoring or trials, capacity building, or investment in decision-support tools. The presence of clear methods and resource allocations shows that the organisation is prepared to act on its soil objectives.
While some documents did include this level of detail, others were limited to broad statements without clear direction or commitment. This highlights a gap between intent and implementation.
Is the National Soil Strategy referred to?
This question was applied only to the fifty three per cent of strategy documents published after the release of the National Soil Strategy in 2021. It assessed whether organisations had acknowledged or aligned their strategic direction with the National Soil Strategy.
Reference to the National Soil Strategy demonstrates awareness of national priorities and an intent to contribute to a coordinated national effort. These priorities include improving soil data and monitoring, increasing soil literacy, and promoting sustainable soil management practices.
The scan found that only a small number of documents referenced the National Soil Strategy, and these were mostly from NRM bodies. Most documents made no mention of it. This may represent a missed opportunity to align strategies with national objectives.
Overall findings
Overall, the NRM bodies had, by a clear margin, the greatest emphasis on soil in their respective strategic documents.
Results also indicate that soil requires greater institutional focus in order to halt its continued deterioration in Australia. In addition, the findings reinforce the vital importance of soil advocacy to ensure soil is high up on the agenda—and to keep it there.
The Institutional Scan provides an opportunity for the many organisations that have a role in supporting improved soil management to review their strategies and identify opportunities where they can support the vital work necessary to restore soil condition as a critical enabler of Australia’s future economic, social and environmental wellbeing.
The Regional Soil Coordinators are based in the Drought Resilience Adoption and Innovation Hubs throughout Australia. They are members of the Smart Soils Community of Practice, which is part of the broader Smart Soils project, managed by Soil Science Australia.
To contact the Regional Soil Coordinator in your region, visit Get Help in Your Region.
Our Smart Soils project and the Regional Soil Coordinators are supported by the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry through funding from the Climate-Smart Agriculture Program under the Natural Heritage Trust.
Want to Know More?
Contact your Regional Soil Coordinator or visit the National Soil Strategy website for resources and engagement opportunities.
The activities of the Regional Soil Coordinators and Soil Science Australia’s National Soil Science Extension Team are funded by the Australian Government’s Natural Heritage Trust.