What Will It Take to Scale Conservation Covenants in Australia?

by BDL Team | Feb 17, 2026 | Land protection, Partnerships and collaborations

In Part 2 of our series exploring landholder motivations for conservation covenants, we speak with leading researcher Dr James Fitzsimons about how covenants can be strengthened and scaled to deliver greater conservation impact across Australia.

As a values-aligned organisation, BioDiversity Legacy regularly attends Land Covenantors Victoria’s quarterly lecture series which, most recently, has invited prominent academics to provide insights into their research on covenanting in Australia – and what can be done to support more landholders to get involved.

As a values-aligned organisation, BioDiversity Legacy regularly attends Land Covenantors Victoria’s quarterly lecture series. The most recent events have featured prominent academics sharing insights from their research on covenanting in Australia — and outlining what can be done to encourage more landholders to take part.

In Part 1, we covered Deakin University researcher Dr Carla Archibald’s presentation on landholder motivations for covenanting. In this second instalment, we reflect on an important lecture by The Nature Conservancy Senior Advisor, Global Protection Strategies, Dr James Fitzsimons, examining the current state of covenanting in Australia and the critical role covenantors can play in securing the nation’s environmental future.

About the speaker

Dr Fitzsimons has spent over 27 years designing and researching the policy and governance settings that underpin effective private land conservation. A long-time covenantor who stewards land in Central Victoria, Dr Fitzsimons, has held roles with the Victorian Government, The Nature Conservancy, as well as adjunct research positions at Deakin University and the University of Tasmania.

During the lecture, Dr Fitzsimons placed covenants within a broader Victorian, national and international context, highlighting both their potential and the role governments must play if privately protected areas are to meaningfully contribute to Australia’s national biodiversity targets. Here are his insights.

Australia’s 30×30 target – and the looming gap

Australia has committed to protecting 30% of lands and fresh waters and 30% of its oceans by 2030, under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Currently, around 24% of land is protected – up from just 7% in the mid-1990s. This growth came from:

• State and territory reserve expansion
• The National Reserve System’s targeted land acquisition program (now discontinued)
• The globally recognised Indigenous Protected Area program
• Private land trusts and covenanting programs

However, to reach 30% by 2030, Australia needs to protect an additional 6% of land within five years. “There’s still a lot of work to do,” Dr Fitzsimons said. “Private land conservation will be essential if we’re going to get there.”

The role – and growth – of conservation covenants

Conservation covenants form the backbone of Australia’s privately protected area network. New data presented by Dr Fitzsimons, undertaken by PhD student, Sarah Burgler, shows:

• Victoria has the most covenants numerically
• Queensland has fewer covenants, but a very large area is protected
• NSW is the fastest-growing state, thanks in part to a major policy shift
• South Australia has grown slowly since an initial surge in the early 2000s
• Western Australia is growing more slowly than other states

Why NSW is surging

NSW’s growth is strongly linked to a shift from a government-run program to a trust-based model (similar to Trust for Nature) and the introduction of stewardship payments – annual, guaranteed payments attached to covenant obligations. This model has proven especially attractive to farmers who gain:

• A stable income stream
• Predictable financial support in variable climate and market conditions
• Recognition of conservation as part of a working property

Challenges on the horizon: climate change, complexity and competing land uses

Dr Fitzsimons outlined several emerging challenges and opportunities.

1. Covenants must adapt to climate change

Climate impacts – heatwaves, wildfires, sea-level rise – will reshape ecosystems. This raises questions:

• Should covenants include rolling boundaries to allow habitats to shift?
• How can landholders be supported as vegetation quality changes?
• What will climate-resilient covenants look like in practice?

2. The landscape of incentives is growing more complex

Landholders now face multiple programs:

• Carbon markets
• Biodiversity markets
• Nature Repair Market projects
• Land for Wildlife
• Covenants

Choosing the right model – or combination – requires clearer guidance and careful sequencing; in other words, getting the sequencing wrong may preclude eligibility for some of these if others have already been implemented.

3. Second-generation covenantors will have different needs

Many covenants were signed by passionate, first-generation owners. Future owners may:

• Have different motivations
• Have different financial situations
• Require more support to maintain covenant obligations

4. Restoration covenants will become more important

Protecting high-quality remnants is no longer enough. Australia needs large-scale restoration. However, restoration:

• Is more complex
• Requires more oversight
• Requires different policy settings and incentives

5. Land-use competition is intensifying

Renewables, critical minerals, housing and agriculture are all placing pressure on land availability. Strategic planning will be essential.

Bringing the insights together

Across both Dr Archibald’s and this talk, a shared message emerged: Private landholders are essential to Australia’s conservation future. According to Dr Fitzsimons:

• They are already caring for vast areas of the country.
• They are motivated by a mix of passion, purpose and stewardship.
• They need supportive, fair and flexible policy settings.
• They play a crucial role in connectivity, refugia, climate adaptation and ecosystem services.

Covenants remain one of the most powerful tools available to secure biodiversity forever. But for covenants to fulfil their potential, Australia needs:

• Better financial and non-financial incentives.
• Strong national recognition of covenantors.
• Simplified and equitable tax and rate frameworks.
• Support for future covenant owners.
• Policies aligned with climate adaptation and restoration needs.

The role of LCV

Land Covenantors Victoria is uniquely positioned to:

• Advocate for equitable incentives.
• Represent covenantors to government and agencies.
• Share knowledge, science and peer support.
• Strengthen the recognition of covenantors as essential contributors to Australia’s biodiversity goals.

With member leadership and growing research partnerships, LCV is helping shape the next generation of policy and practice for private land conservation.

*LCV holds guest speaker events quarterly in its ‘home base’ at the Royal Society of Victoria in Melbourne CBD. They are always interested in hearing from conservation and covenanting leaders. Please reach out if you wish to become a member, friend or presenter.

Private land covenants: why landholders act — and why it matters

by BDL Team | Feb 7, 2026 | Land protection, Partnerships and collaborations

Across Australia, private landholders are playing an increasingly active role in restoring and protecting habitat, using covenants as a protection mechanism, but what motivates them to do so?

At BioDiversity Legacy, we work closely with people who may already have conservation covenants on their land or are deciding whether to do so. Alongside this, our Local Landholding Entity (LLE) model offers another pathway to permanent protection, transferring land into a dedicated, community-led not-for-profit structure. These approaches are not competing solutions. Rather, we see conservation covenants as complementary to the protections enabled through the LLE model, together strengthening Australia’s private land conservation estate.

Understanding what motivates landholders to choose these pathways – and what supports them to care for land over the long term – is essential if Australia is to meet its biodiversity commitments.

To help inform our work, we regularly engage with sector partners, including the Australian Land Conservation Alliance and Land Covenantors Victoria (LCV). Recently, LCV hosted two leading researchers, Dr Carla Archibald and Dr James Fitzsimons, who shared local and global insights into landholder motivations for covenanting and the policy settings needed to scale impact.

This two-part blog series explores those insights. In this first piece, we focus on Dr Archibald’s research into why landholders adopt conservation covenants and what drives long-term stewardship. A second article, to be published in March 2026, will examine Dr Fitzsimons’ research on the urgent role governments must play if conservation covenants are to help Australia meet its national biodiversity goals.

What are covenants?

Before we delve into this exploration, let’s start with the basics. What is a covenant?

A conservation covenant is a voluntary, legally binding agreement between a landholder and an authorised body to protect and care for land with important natural, cultural and/or scientific values. The landholder retains ownership and can continue to live on and use the land, while agreeing to manage all or part of it in ways that conserve its identified values, in partnership with the authorised body.

Authorised bodies (often called covenant scheme providers) may include not-for-profit organisations, government agencies or local councils that have the authority to enter into conservation covenants with landholders; for example, Trust for Nature in Victoria, Biodiversity Conservation Trust in NSW and the Tasmanian Land Conservancy (TLC).

Why landholders choose conservation covenants – insights from Dr Archibald

For more than a decade, Dr Carla Archibald has studied private land conservation and the social dynamics behind environmental behaviour. Her recent research – based on a survey of 475 landholders in New South Wales – asked a simple but powerful question: What drives someone to commit their land to long-term conservation?

Conservation is already happening quietly, everywhere!

One of the most striking findings of the survey is just how widespread voluntary conservation already is in NSW. Over 80% of surveyed landholders were actively undertaking conservation management – weed control, revegetation, pest and feral animal control – independent of any formal agreement.

Only 15% of those surveyed had a legally binding conservation covenant, but another 39% were involved in programs such as Land for Wildlife. This suggests an enormous, untapped pool of landholders who are already engaged but may need additional support, confidence or incentives to take the next step.

The four key influences on covenant adoption

Dr Archibald’s research identified four key drivers:

1.Existing conservation engagement

Landholders already actively caring for their land were eight times more likely to adopt a covenant. This points to a progressive pathway: care – commitment – covenant.

“People who are passionate about conservation are the ones willing to make a permanent commitment,” said Dr Archibald.

2. Time and capacity

Those with more time to undertake stewardship were 1.6 times more likely to covenant their land. Surprisingly, retirement status did not influence adoption, suggesting time, not age, is the real barrier.

3.Suitable land available

Landholders who knew they had ecologically valuable or suitable areas were twice as likely to adopt. Property size itself didn’t matter. Agencies could therefore target properties with high conservation potential – focusing on ecological fit, not acreage.

4.Income and incentives

Financial incentives ranked lower than expected. However, landholders earning income from their land were more likely to adopt covenants. This shows:

• Conservation can co-exist with primary production
• Environmental markets in NSW are making conservation a sound business proposition
• Conservation actions can enhance farm productivity and ecosystem services

A pathway that supports livelihoods and landscapes

The overarching message from Dr Archibald’s research is clear – covenants are most successful when they align biodiversity outcomes with the social and economic realities of landholders.

Programs that acknowledge landholder capacity, income reliance and ecological assets have the best chance of expanding uptake.

She noted that policymakers are increasingly recognising this and praised LCV’s successful advocacy work – particularly the push for land tax exemptions for covenantors.

Looking ahead, Dr Archibald hopes to explore how sustainable finance mechanisms could underpin long-term conservation and community resilience.