Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

How to give your report template a High Reader Impact

1,057 views

Published on

Time-poor readers need high reader impact reports. Here's how to change a low reader impact report to a high reader impact.

  • Writing a good research paper isn't easy and it's the fruit of hard work. For help you can check writing expert. Check out, please ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ I think they are the best
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

How to give your report template a High Reader Impact

  1. 1. Page 1 of 6 Give your report template a High Reader Impact by tracking ✐ Your Work Writing Adviser ✐ info@arosact.biz
  2. 2. Page 2 of 6 This means too much key analysis and opinion sits at the end of the template. Time-poor readers have to tolerate less important material before getting to key issues and the recommendation. TOPIC: Emissions Intensity Benchmarking in Australian Agriculture Background 1. On 10 February 2011, the CoAG agreed on a Plan for Collaborative Action on Climate Change. Part of the Plan asks the NRMMC: “to report on the potential for development of emissions intensity benchmarks in agriculture and associated environmental management systems.” (AGO 2006a) An AGO-led consultation showed there is broad support for an emissions intensity benchmarking system (EIB), and identified necessary features for successful implementation. 2. Submissions were received from all state governments (not ACT or NT), national, state and sector peak industry bodies, the research community, relevant Federal government agencies, and multi-stakeholder committees. Policy implications and outcomes 1. EIB is consistent and will be part of other government initiatives in agriculture such as: Greenhouse Action in Rural Australia (GARA), Greenhouse Challenge Plus, Environmental Management Systems, National Action Plan for Salinity and Water. 2. EIB will facilitate targeted, industry-driven research consistent with the government’s research priorities including the National Research Priorities and Rural Research and Development Priorities. This will facilitate ownership and adoption by industry, and position EIB for successful implementation. Options for further funding will be in the EIB framework. Potential sources of funding are through existing programs and from the greenhouse budget allocation. Australia is on track to meet its Kyoto target by reducing both land clearing and agricultural production due to drought. Emissions Intensity Benchmarking in Australian agriculture could have many benefits in further reducing emissions, increasing productivity and profitability for primary producers, and improving environmental outcomes in sustainable land management. The Ministers should authorise the AGO to spend around $800 000 to develop an implementation plan and EIB framework. Low Reader ImpactRating
  3. 3. Page 3 of 6 3. An EIB system must:  provide practical and verifiable emissions reductions  deliver real and tangible benefits  not increase regulatory or financial burden,  be used with existing farm management systems. Key Issues 1. Australia’s emissions projections are 127% of 1990 levels in 2020. Other developed countries have committed to 20% reduction by 2020. A gap of 47% is untenable and needs creative action to reduce emissions. 2. Methane and nitrogen losses affect production from agricultural systems. Agriculture is Australia’s second highest emitter, contributing 16% of Australia’s emissions and is the biggest national source of methane and nitrous oxide. 3. Costing close to $800,000, EIB would encourage innovation, developing and using best management practices. The agricultural sector is highly innovative and will adopt practices that improve profitability. It has averaged strong growth of almost 3% a year from 1974-75 to 2003-04, considerably stronger than the rest of the economy. 4. Developing an EIB framework will be collaborative, and industry led. The NFF believes there should be support when governments require farmers to provide public good environmental services to benefit the broader community at a cost to the farmer. EIB is a chance to reward farmers for using sustainable land management practices. After the ET Report, EIB may be able to assess developing tradable carbon credits from agriculture. Recommendation That the Ministers authorise the AGO to develop an implementation plan and EIB framework for an NRMMC review in December 2012.
  4. 4. Page 4 of 6 This means key analysis and opinion now sits at the top of the report. Your time-poor readers will rejoice! TOPIC: Emissions Intensity Benchmarking in Australian Agriculture Recommendation That the Ministers authorise the AGO to develop an implementation plan and EIB framework for an NRMMC review in December 2012. Key Issues 1. Australia’s emissions projections are 127% of 1990 levels in 2020. Other developed countries have committed to 20% reduction by 2020. A gap of 47% is untenable and needs creative action to reduce emissions. 2. Methane and nitrogen losses affect production from agricultural systems. Agriculture is Australia’s second highest emitter, contributing 16% of Australia’s emissions and is the biggest national source of methane and nitrous oxide. 3. Costing close to $800,000, EIB would encourage innovation, developing and using best management practices. The agricultural sector is highly innovative and will adopt practices that improve profitability. It has averaged strong growth of almost 3% a year from 1974-75 to 2003-04, considerably stronger than the rest of the economy. 4. Developing an EIB framework will be collaborative, and industry led. The NFF believes there should be support when governments require farmers to provide public good environmental services to benefit the broader community at a cost to the farmer. EIB is a chance to reward farmers for using sustainable land management practices. After the ET Report, EIB may be able to assess developing tradable carbon credits from agriculture. Australia is on track to meet its Kyoto target by reducing both land clearing and agricultural production due to drought. Emissions Intensity Benchmarking in Australian agriculture could have many benefits in further reducing emissions, increasing productivity and profitability for primary producers, and improving environmental outcomes in sustainable land management. The Ministers should authorise the AGO to spend around $800 000 to develop an implementation plan and EIB framework. High Reader ImpactRating
  5. 5. Page 5 of 6 Policy implications and outcomes 1. EIB is consistent and will be part of other government initiatives in agriculture such as: Greenhouse Action in Rural Australia (GARA), Greenhouse Challenge Plus, Environmental Management Systems, National Action Plan for Salinity and Water. 2. EIB will facilitate targeted, industry-driven research consistent with the government’s research priorities including the National Research Priorities and Rural Research and Development Priorities. This will facilitate ownership and adoption by industry, and position EIB for successful implementation. Options for further funding will be in the EIB framework. Potential sources of funding are through existing programs and from the greenhouse budget allocation. 3. An EIB system must:  provide practical and verifiable emissions reductions  deliver real and tangible benefits  not increase regulatory or financial burden,  be used with existing farm management systems. Background 1. On 10 February 2011, the CoAG agreed on a Plan for Collaborative Action on Climate Change. Part of the Plan asks the NRMMC: “to report on the potential for development of emissions intensity benchmarks in agriculture and associated environmental management systems.” (AGO 2006a) An AGO-led consultation showed there is broad support for an emissions intensity benchmarking system (EIB), and identified necessary features for successful implementation. 2. Submissions were received from all state governments (not ACT or NT), national, state and sector peak industry bodies, the research community, relevant Federal government agencies, and multi-stakeholder committees.
  6. 6. Page 6 of 6 ✐ Your Work Writing Adviser ✐ info@arosact.biz

×