Agriculture, Food Security and Science Diplomacy Put Forward as Frontline Tools to Prevent Conflict
CANBERRA — Agricultural research, food security and science diplomacy should be viewed as core elements of Australia’s conflict prevention strategy rather than simply development assistance, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) told a parliamentary committee today during a public hearing examining Australia’s international development program. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Appearing before the Foreign Affairs and Aid Subcommittee of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Acting Chief Executive Officer Dr Nick Austin argued that sustainable agricultural development addresses many of the underlying drivers of instability across the Indo-Pacific, including food insecurity, poverty, environmental degradation and competition over scarce natural resources. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
The hearing forms part of Parliament’s broader inquiry into how Australia’s international development program can better prevent conflict before military or humanitarian interventions become necessary.
Agriculture as strategic policy
Rather than presenting agriculture as a humanitarian issue alone, ACIAR positioned it as a strategic investment in regional security.
Dr Austin told the committee that where agricultural productivity stagnates, markets fail and natural resources come under pressure, tensions can escalate into displacement and conflict. Conversely, stronger farming systems, improved technologies and better market access can strengthen social cohesion and confidence in institutions. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
ACIAR outlined three principal ways its work contributes to conflict prevention:
- improving rural livelihoods through increased agricultural productivity;
- strengthening institutions governing land, water and markets; and
- using scientific collaboration as a form of regional diplomacy to build trust between nations. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Committee members repeatedly returned to the question of whether Australia’s aid program should explicitly incorporate conflict prevention into all development projects rather than treating peacebuilding as an indirect outcome.
Conflict-sensitive development
One of the strongest themes emerging from the hearing was the importance of “conflict sensitivity” when delivering aid.
Committee members questioned how agricultural programs ensure they do not unintentionally worsen local tensions by favouring particular groups or reinforcing existing inequalities.
Dr Austin acknowledged that every intervention creates winners and losers.
Rather than measuring only benefits, ACIAR increasingly evaluates who bears potential costs when new farming technologies, land management systems or market reforms are introduced.
He pointed to examples where agricultural mechanisation can reduce employment opportunities for landless labourers, while increased herbicide use may create environmental and health consequences if broader impacts are ignored. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
The committee indicated this area deserves greater scrutiny as Australia’s development programs increasingly operate in fragile states.
Australia’s whole-of-government approach
A recurring issue throughout the hearing was coordination between Australia’s diplomatic, defence and development agencies.
Members questioned how conflict risks are identified and shared across government rather than remaining isolated within individual agencies.
ACIAR representatives described an integrated model operating through Australian embassies, particularly highlighting the Philippines, where country staff work alongside DFAT, Defence and other agencies under a whole-of-government development partnership plan negotiated with the host government. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Officials said agricultural research projects are selected specifically where science can complement broader diplomatic and security objectives without duplicating them.
Water emerging as future flashpoint
Water security emerged as another significant topic.
Witnesses warned that competition for water resources is becoming an increasingly important source of regional instability, particularly as climate pressures intensify across Asia.
ACIAR highlighted work involving:
- shared fisheries management between Indonesia, Timor-Leste and Papua New Guinea;
- fish passage projects along the Mekong River;
- groundwater management;
- irrigation efficiency;
- catchment rehabilitation; and
- policy development around water sharing. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Officials argued Australia possesses valuable expertise from managing one of the world’s driest inhabited continents that can assist neighbouring countries facing similar pressures.
Fertiliser shortages and geopolitical risk
The committee also explored how current international instability is affecting food production across the Indo-Pacific.
Officials confirmed that rising fertiliser and fuel costs are already placing significant pressure on farmers in countries including Cambodia, Laos and the Philippines.
Witnesses warned that some regions have established substantially smaller crop areas this season because many smallholder farmers cannot afford necessary agricultural inputs.
The Philippines Government has specifically requested further Australian assistance with soil management and more efficient fertiliser use, including technologies developed through Australian universities. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Rather than relying solely on imported synthetic fertilisers, ACIAR highlighted research into soil biology, crop rotations using legumes and integrated livestock systems to improve soil fertility while reducing costs for poorer farmers. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
A changing global aid landscape
Dr Austin also acknowledged significant changes in international agricultural research funding following reductions by major international donors.
He warned that cuts to global agricultural research will likely have delayed but significant consequences for food security and resilience across developing nations.
While ACIAR itself operates with comparatively modest funding, officials argued its role is to generate evidence that informs much larger aid investments undertaken by DFAT and other development partners. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Committee praises ACIAR’s model
The hearing concluded with unusually strong bipartisan praise for ACIAR’s work.
Committee members described the organisation as one of Australia’s most effective international development programs, noting its reputation among partner countries and suggesting it delivers exceptional value within Australia’s overseas aid portfolio.
The inquiry is expected to continue examining how Australia’s development program can strengthen conflict prevention across the Indo-Pacific before reporting its recommendations to Parliament. ACR_ Agri & Conflict.pdf
Editorial note: While much public discussion around Australia’s aid program focuses on humanitarian assistance or major infrastructure projects, today’s evidence highlighted a less visible aspect of Australian statecraft: the use of agricultural science as a strategic instrument of regional stability. As geopolitical competition intensifies across the Indo-Pacific, the committee appeared increasingly interested in whether food security, resource management and scientific partnerships should be treated not simply as development policy, but as part of Australia’s broader national security architecture.