Hotter, drier, riskier: where climate change hits Australian farming hardest by 2050 - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Climate change has already cut average Australian broadacre farm profits by around 23 per cent since 2001, hitting south west and south east regions hardest.1 By 2050, hotter conditions and less cool season rain are expected to increase drought risk across the Wheatbelt and Murray–Darling Basin, especially under high emissions scenarios.2 ABARES modelling suggests farm profits could fall by up to about 50 per cent nationally by 2050 in severe climate scenarios without further adaptation.3 Wheat, barley and canola face higher heat and drought stress in low rainfall zones, with production likely to keep shifting toward higher rainfall fringes and some southern regions.4 Irrigated cotton and key horticulture industries are highly exposed to tighter water allocations and more variable inflows in the Murray–Darling Basin.5 Governments have statements and strategies, yet gaps remain in land use planning, water governance, rural infrastructure and transition support for affected communities.6

Across Australia’s vast farm belt, the climate story that once sounded like a distant warning is now running through balance sheets, crop maps and town main streets.

The country has already warmed by around 1.5 degrees since 1910, with more hot days and fewer cold nights, and the trend is projected to intensify by mid century.²

Cool season rainfall has fallen markedly across southern Australia, especially in the south west and parts of the south east, cutting inflows to dams and soil moisture that broadacre cropping relies on.²

ABARES estimates that changes in seasonal conditions since 2001 have already reduced average broadacre farm profits by about 23 per cent or $29,200 per farm each year, with the biggest hits in cropping regions of Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales.¹

Looking ahead to 2050, national projections point to more intense heat extremes, longer periods in drought and further declines in winter and spring rainfall across much of the main grain and livestock zones.²

These shifts will not fall evenly, leaving some regions facing escalating production risk, others relatively buffered, and some seeing new crop opportunities as climate bands move.

Major crops such as wheat, barley, canola and cotton are expected to face higher heat and water stress in lower rainfall and northern fringes, while parts of southern and coastal regions may retain or even gain comparative advantage under some scenarios.⁴

At the same time, more variable inflows and hotter temperatures threaten the reliability of irrigation that underpins high value horticulture in regions such as the Murray–Darling Basin, Sunraysia and the Riverland.⁵

Yet while governments have begun to recognise these risks in national statements and adaptation plans, key gaps remain in how land use, water, infrastructure, insurance and community support are aligned with the climate that farmers are likely to face by mid century.⁶

For regional planners and policymakers, the next five years will be critical in deciding whether Australia’s farm regions arrive in 2050 as controlled landing zones or hard hit frontlines.

High risk regions by 2050

By the 2041–2060 period, climate models assessed by the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO indicate continued warming across all of Australia and further declines in cool season rainfall for large parts of the southern and eastern mainland, especially under higher emissions scenarios.²

These changes line up with ABARES modelling that shows the greatest climate related pressure on farm profitability in broadacre regions of south west Western Australia, the Murray–Darling Basin and other southern grain belts.¹

South west Western Australia, including much of the WA Wheatbelt, has already seen around a 16 per cent drop in April to October rainfall since 1970, and projections point to further drying and more time spent in drought, putting rainfed wheat, barley and canola systems at high risk.²

In the Murray–Darling Basin, a combination of higher temperatures, lower average cool season rainfall and more intense droughts is expected to reduce surface water availability and increase competition between irrigation, towns and the environment, raising risks for irrigated cotton, rice, grapes and fruit production.²

ABARES projections suggest that under more severe future climate scenarios, without further adaptation, average farm profits could decline by up to around 50 per cent nationally by 2050, with the largest proportional falls in already marginal and drier regions on the northern and western edges of current cropping zones.³

For many towns in these belts, the combination of lower average yields, more frequent poor seasons and higher operating costs will test the viability of smaller farms and related local businesses.

Medium and lower risk regions

Not all agricultural regions face the same level of exposure, and projections suggest some coastal and higher rainfall zones may be relatively less affected in terms of water availability, at least under moderate emissions pathways.²

Parts of Tasmania and some higher rainfall fringes of south east South Australia and south west Victoria are projected to see smaller reductions or even slight increases in cool season rainfall in some seasons, leaving them better placed to support rainfed grains, pastures and horticulture as conditions deteriorate elsewhere.²

Northern Australia presents a more mixed picture, with evidence of increased rainfall and streamflow in some monsoonal regions since the 1970s and low confidence in the direction of future rainfall change, though higher temperatures and evaporative demand are likely to challenge extensive grazing systems and any future expansion of irrigated cropping.²

These medium and lower risk regions are not immune to heat extremes, fire weather and market shocks, yet they are comparatively better placed to host some of the crop and livestock production that may migrate away from the most drought exposed areas.²

Crop futures: wheat, barley, canola and cotton

Australian grains research points to a long term trend of wheat, barley and canola production shifting towards higher rainfall and more reliable parts of the Wheatbelt and away from drier margins, partly in response to climate pressures since the 1990s.⁴

Analyses cited by ABARES indicate that climate change has already reduced Australian wheat yields by in the order of a quarter since 1990 relative to a stationary climate, with notable impacts in drier south western and south eastern cropping regions, although improved management and technology have offset some of these losses.⁴

By mid century, higher average temperatures, more hot days during critical flowering and grain filling stages, and reduced cool season rainfall are expected to increase yield variability for dryland cereals and oilseeds in low rainfall zones such as the northern edge of WA’s cropping belt, parts of inland New South Wales and central Queensland.⁴

Conversely, some modelling suggests that under moderate warming, shorter season wheat and barley varieties combined with improved water use efficiency could maintain or modestly increase average yields in higher rainfall southern and coastal zones, although this depends on emission pathways and adaptation investment.⁴

For cotton, which is heavily concentrated in the Murray–Darling Basin and northern New South Wales and Queensland, the main climate risks are tighter, more volatile water allocations and extreme heat, which can damage bolls and shorten growing windows.⁵

Under scenarios where inflows into key Basin storages decline and competition for water intensifies, irrigated cotton production is likely to face more frequent cutbacks and pressure to shift toward more water efficient systems or alternative crops.⁵

Horticulture and water security

The horticulture sector, which includes fruit, vegetables, nuts and vines, is particularly sensitive to both short term climate variability and long term trends, given its reliance on secure irrigation and narrow temperature bands for quality and timing.⁷

Studies coordinated through the Climate Change Research Strategy for Primary Industries note that Australia’s increasingly variable climate and water constraints make horticulture inherently vulnerable, especially in irrigation dependent regions such as Sunraysia, the Murrumbidgee, the Goulburn Valley and parts of Queensland and Western Australia.⁷

Projected declines in cool season rainfall and streamflows across much of southern Australia are expected to increase competition for water between high value horticulture, other irrigated crops, town supply and environmental flows, raising the stakes for water sharing rules and infrastructure performance.²

In some coastal and Tasmanian regions where water availability may be less constrained and temperatures more moderate, there may be opportunities for expanded horticultural production, although this will require careful planning to avoid new environmental and biosecurity pressures.²

Uncertainty and climate scenarios

Climate projections for Australia to mid century are not a single forecast but a range of plausible futures that depend on global emissions pathways and how sensitive regional rainfall is to warming.²

There is high confidence that temperatures will continue to rise, bringing more heat extremes and higher evaporative demand, and that cool season rainfall will decline on average across much of southern Australia, although the exact size of the rainfall change varies between models.²

For northern Australia, there is low confidence in the direction of long term rainfall change by late century, meaning that mid century planning must accommodate both wetter and drier possibilities while recognising that hotter conditions will increase water stress in any case.²

ABARES emphasises that its estimates of potential profit declines by 2050 in severe scenarios do not factor in further adaptation, so realised outcomes will depend heavily on how rapidly farmers, industries and governments invest in new practices and risk management tools.³

Policy gaps: land, water, infrastructure and insurance

Despite clear evidence of emerging climate risks, Australian policy on climate change and agriculture remains a patchwork of federal, state and commodity based initiatives rather than a coherent national adaptation framework for farm regions.⁶

The Productivity Commission has previously identified regulatory and policy barriers to effective climate adaptation, including land use planning rules that do not adequately account for changing hazards, fragmented responsibilities and weak signals about who bears climate risks.⁸

In land use planning, zoning and development assessment often lag behind emerging climate risk maps, allowing new housing, intensive agriculture and infrastructure to be placed in areas likely to face more frequent drought, fire or flood stress over coming decades.⁸

Water governance in the Murray–Darling Basin and other systems has improved transparency, yet climate change is expected to reduce the reliability of historic allocation rules, and there is ongoing debate about how to share increased shortfalls between irrigation, towns and the environment.⁵

Rural infrastructure, from roads and bridges to digital networks and energy supply, is under pressure from more extreme weather, and current investment pipelines do not always prioritise projects that would enhance climate resilience in high risk farm regions.⁵

Insurance markets are also adjusting, with evidence that premiums for some climate exposed assets are rising or coverage is being restricted, which can leave smaller farm businesses and regional councils carrying more residual risk unless public risk sharing mechanisms are updated.⁵

Economic and social consequences for regions

Climate change is already affecting the economic performance of regional Australia, with estimates that changes in climate since 2000 have reduced average broadacre farm profits and contributed to slower agricultural productivity growth.¹

Research on past droughts suggests that prolonged dry periods can cut agricultural income significantly and reduce employment in affected regions by thousands of jobs, with flow on impacts to local services, population and social cohesion.⁹

As climate pressures intensify, there is a risk that some already vulnerable communities in the most exposed belts will experience a slow erosion of farm numbers, youth out migration and a shrinking rates base, complicating councils’ ability to maintain infrastructure and services.

At the same time, regions that can combine relatively favourable climate exposure with new investment in renewable energy, value added agriculture and climate resilient infrastructure may be better placed to attract people and capital, widening disparities between districts.²

What governments can do now

Experts across ABARES, the Productivity Commission and state adaptation programs point to practical measures that can be taken in the 2020s to reduce long term agricultural risk rather than waiting for impacts to fully unfold.¹

First, governments can embed latest climate projections into statutory regional plans and zoning schemes, steering new intensive agriculture, housing and critical assets away from areas projected to face the most severe declines in water availability and the highest hazard exposure.⁸

Second, water reform can be updated to test allocation frameworks against mid century dry scenarios, invest in modernising irrigation infrastructure where it delivers clear efficiency and environmental gains, and strengthen mechanisms for trading and sharing risk within and between valleys.⁵

Third, targeted extension and whole farm planning support can help producers adopt climate smart practices and technologies, with studies showing that integrated planning can raise profits even under more variable and warming conditions when combined with suitable crop choices and risk management tools.¹⁰

Fourth, rural infrastructure programs can be refocused to prioritise projects that enhance climate resilience, such as all weather freight routes, resilient power systems, communications and community facilities in high risk regions identified by climate and economic analysis.⁵

Finally, governments can work with industry and communities to design transition support for places likely to see structural adjustment, including retraining, regional diversification strategies and mechanisms to manage the social impacts of farm consolidation and changing water use.⁶

The next five years

Over the next five years, regional planners and policymakers need to lock in climate informed land use plans, stress test water and infrastructure systems against mid century scenarios, and scale up on farm adaptation support in the most exposed regions so that by 2050 Australian agriculture is operating within, rather than being overwhelmed by, the realities of a hotter, drier and more variable climate.¹

References

1. ABARES – Climate change impacts and adaptation on Australian farms
2. CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology – State of the Climate 2024
3. ABARES – Climate change research and future farm profitability scenarios
4. ABARES – Simulating the effects of climate change on the profitability of Australian farms
5. Climate Council – How climate change is damaging Australia’s economy
6. Australian Government – National Statement on Climate Change and Agriculture
7. CCRSPI – Climate change and the Australian horticulture industry
8. Productivity Commission – Barriers to Effective Climate Change Adaptation
9. Climate Council – Economic impacts of droughts and extreme weather on regional Australia
10. Scientific Reports – Whole farm planning raises profit despite burgeoning climate risk

Back to Top

Climate change is remaking what Australia eats - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Climate change is already disrupting Australian food production and prices, with risks expected to escalate by 2030, 2050 and 2100.1 Heat, drought, floods and supply-chain failures will hit horticulture, livestock, grains and fisheries differently across regions.3 Remote, Indigenous and low-income communities face the highest risks to food access and affordability.5 National risk assessments warn that primary industries and food are among Australia’s most climate‑exposed systems.6 Adaptation will demand new water, land and biosecurity management, alongside shifts in what is grown where.2 Urban farming, local food hubs and diversified supply chains can improve resilience and food security in cities and regions.8

Within a generation, the climate will change what Australians grow, how much it costs and who can afford to eat well.⁵

Short term shifts to 2030 are already visible on farms in heat‑stressed livestock, more volatile harvests and higher food prices after floods and droughts.⁷

By mid‑century, without strong global emissions cuts and rapid adaptation, staple crops such as wheat and barley are projected to suffer falling yields in many grain regions, while horticulture and irrigated agriculture face tightening water constraints.⁴

By 2100, higher warming scenarios point to deep risks for national food production, labour capacity and supply chains, with flow‑on effects for prices and diet quality.⁵

These impacts will not be felt evenly, with northern Australia, inland drylands, river‑dependent irrigation districts and coastal fisheries among the most exposed systems.²

Remote, Indigenous and low‑income communities, already facing higher rates of food insecurity, are expected to be hit hardest by climate‑driven shocks to availability, access and food quality.⁵

Australia’s first National Climate Risk Assessment has now placed primary industries and food among the nation’s priority climate risk systems, highlighting escalating threats from heat, drought, bushfires, storms and floods to 2100.⁶

Agricultural groups warn that without accelerated adaptation, climate change will drive higher on‑farm costs, more frequent supply disruptions and long‑term pressure on supermarket shelves and household budgets.⁷

Experts argue that the response must reach far beyond the farm gate, combining policy reform, new technologies, land‑use change and a rapid build‑out of urban and peri‑urban food systems to keep Australia fed in a harsher climate.¹

Short, medium and long‑term pressures

In the near term to 2030, Australian farms are already experiencing more frequent heatwaves, changed rainfall patterns and a higher risk of concurrent droughts and floods, which drive production losses and price spikes after extreme events.²

Analyses of the food supply chain suggest that climate‑related disasters will make temporary shortages and disrupted supermarket deliveries more common, even when national production is sufficient overall.⁸

By around 2050, climate projections for temperate Australia point to continued warming, less cool‑season rainfall and more intense droughts, with modelling for parts of the wheat–sheep belt indicating declines in wheat yields of up to several tens of per cent by 2080 without adaptation measures.⁴

Higher temperatures and changing water availability are expected to erode productivity in many irrigated and rain‑fed systems, unless farmers can shift planting dates, varieties, irrigation efficiency and farm layouts at scale.¹

Looking to 2100, global assessments warn that under high‑emissions scenarios, climate change could significantly reduce agricultural and fisheries productivity in countries that are home to the bulk of the world’s population, including Australia, with impacts on food supply, prices and nutrition.⁵

Heat stress on outdoor work is also projected to cut labour capacity in hot regions, which can increase production costs and crop prices, adding another channel through which climate change affects what consumers pay for food.⁵

Which foods and regions are most at risk

The national climate risk assessment and sector reports highlight livestock, horticulture, broadacre cropping and irrigated agriculture as among the most exposed parts of Australia’s food system.³

Livestock are vulnerable to extreme heat that harms animal welfare and reduces productivity, while pasture growth and feed quality are affected by hotter, drier conditions and more frequent droughts.³

Horticultural industries, including fruit and nuts, face rising risks of sunburn damage during heatwaves, alongside reduced winter chilling in temperate regions and altered flowering and yields in both temperate and tropical crops as cool‑season temperatures increase.³

Studies of Australian mixed crop–livestock systems show that warming of around half to more than one and a half degrees by 2030 can shift the optimal balance between cropping and grazing, encouraging more land to be allocated to pasture in drier regions as an adaptation strategy.¹

South‑eastern grain belts including parts of South Australia have been identified as facing potential wheat yield declines without adaptation by late century, although elevated carbon dioxide can partially offset some losses in some conditions.⁴

Coastal and river‑dependent regions are exposed to compounding pressures from sea‑level rise, ocean warming and changes in runoff, which can affect fisheries, aquaculture and irrigated crops that depend on reliable water flows.²

Who will feel the pain first

Climate change does not affect all households equally, and food security research shows that vulnerable groups typically include small‑scale producers, Indigenous communities and low‑income urban residents.⁵

In Australia, remote and regional communities already face higher food prices and fewer options, so climate‑driven disruptions to roads, freight and local production can quickly translate into shortages and sharp price rises in local shops.⁷

National climate risk assessments identify Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, communities and primary industries as systems that are particularly exposed to worsening climate hazards, including temperature extremes, drought, bushfires and floods.⁶

When extreme events hit multiple regions or happen alongside other shocks, such as pandemics, even robust supply chains can struggle, increasing the risk that remote communities see empty shelves while food remains available elsewhere in the country.⁸

Low‑income households, which already spend a higher share of their budgets on food, are particularly exposed when climate‑related events push up prices for fresh produce, meat and basic staples for months at a time.⁷

Heat, drought, floods, pests and broken links

Australia’s first National Climate Risk Assessment lists rising temperatures, drought, bushfires, storms, flooding and ocean warming among the priority hazards that will intensify under all plausible climate futures, with direct implications for food and agriculture.⁶

More frequent and severe heat extremes can damage crops, reduce livestock productivity, increase irrigation demand and raise the risk of heat stress for workers across the food system.²

Prolonged droughts reduce soil moisture and streamflows, cut yields and lead to higher input costs, especially for irrigation water, while intense rainfall and floods can cause severe soil erosion, nutrient loss and direct losses of crops and livestock.¹⁰

Climate change is also expected to increase some biosecurity risks, as changing rainfall and temperature patterns alter the survival, reproduction and spread of pests and diseases that affect crops, livestock and fisheries.³

Beyond the farm gate, climate‑driven disruptions to critical infrastructure and supply chains, such as road and rail closures during floods or fires, have already caused local food shortages and are projected to become more frequent as hazards worsen.⁸

Policy, technology and land management

Experts emphasise that limiting global warming through deep emissions cuts is essential to reduce long‑term risks to food systems, but that substantial adaptation is still required to manage the changes already locked in.⁵

International assessments of food, fibre and ecosystem products describe a suite of adaptation options for agriculture, including crop diversification, improved water management, climate‑resilient varieties, agroforestry and more flexible land‑use planning to strengthen resilience.⁵

Australian studies of mixed crop–livestock systems suggest that reallocating land towards livestock and pasture can improve farm profitability in some drier regions under moderate climate change, although this will not be feasible or desirable everywhere.¹

Horticulture reports highlight the need for better soil and water conservation, protection from extreme heat, and infrastructure and management practices that can cope with more intense rainfall and flooding, alongside investments in forecasting and decision tools for farmers.¹⁰

The National Adaptation Plan framework signals that governments are beginning to integrate climate risk into planning for primary industries and food, including actions on water security, infrastructure protection, trade, finance and community resilience.⁶

Urban and peri‑urban food lifelines

While most food is still produced in rural Australia, urban and peri‑urban agriculture is emerging as an important part of climate resilience strategies in cities worldwide, helping diversify supply, shorten supply chains and provide fresh food during disruptions.⁵

Climate risk assessments of food systems underline how concentrated many supply chains have become, with limited storage and few alternative routes, which makes local and regional production hubs more valuable when disasters cut off major transport corridors.⁸

Urban farming technologies such as rooftop gardens, protected cropping, vertical farms and community market gardens can help produce vegetables, herbs and some fruits closer to consumers, reducing transport exposure and, in some cases, providing more controlled growing environments under heat and rainfall extremes.⁵

Peri‑urban food bowls on the fringes of cities, if protected from urban sprawl and supported with water‑efficient infrastructure, can play a key role in buffering metropolitan areas against short‑term shocks and supporting local food hubs and markets.⁸

Building climate‑resilient food systems will also require stronger governance for land use around cities, support for community‑run food projects and better integration of urban and regional planning with national adaptation policies for agriculture and food security.⁶

References

1. Ghahramani A. et al. (2020), Land use change in Australian mixed crop–livestock systems under climate change
2. IPCC AR6 WGII, Chapter 11: Australasia (final draft chapter)
3. Farmers for Climate Action (2025), Time for Action: Climate Risk Assessment Report released
4. Meat & Livestock Australia, Wheat and sheep production in a changing climate
5. IPCC AR6 WGII, Chapter 5: Food, Fibre and Other Ecosystem Products
6. Australian Government, Dashboard – Climate risks to primary industries and food (National Climate Risk Assessment)
7. Farmers for Climate Action (2022), Impacts of climate change on our food supply
8. Climate Council, Feeding a Hungry Nation: Climate change, food and farming in Australia
9. Clayton Utz (2025), Australia’s first National Climate Risk Assessment report and National Adaptation Plan
10. Hort Innovation, Australian horticulture’s response to climate change and variability

Back to Top

On the frontline twice: how climate change is deepening health, cultural and economic scars for Indigenous Australians - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Climate change is already harming Indigenous Australians’ health, culture and livelihoods, compounding the impacts of colonisation and systemic inequality.1 Rising heat, fires, floods and sea level rise are driving acute illness, climate distress and disruption to caring for Country.2 Damage to sacred sites, ecosystems and food and water systems threatens cultural continuity and social and emotional wellbeing.3 Structural racism, poor housing and under-resourced services increase vulnerability and limit adaptive capacity in many communities.4 Indigenous-led adaptation, including caring for Country, cultural fire management and community-controlled planning, is already strengthening resilience.5 Climate justice for Indigenous Australians means centring self-determination, cultural rights and on‑Country leadership in national climate policy.6

Across Australia Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are warning climate change is a present reality reshaping health, culture and economic security on Country.²

From remote desert homelands to Torres Strait islands and outer suburban fringes, more frequent heatwaves, fires, floods and sea level rise are colliding with the unfinished business of colonisation and entrenched disadvantage.²

Indigenous leaders describe climate change as an extension of a long colonial process that has already severed lands, languages and kinship, and now threatens to intensify poverty, ill health and cultural loss across generations.²

Evidence shows that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are more exposed to climate hazards, more likely to live in poor housing and energy poverty, and less likely to have access to responsive health and emergency services when disaster strikes.¹

At the same time, climate damage to Country, from burnt rock art and shell middens to drying waterholes and eroding islands, is tearing at the core of identity, spirituality and social and emotional wellbeing.³

Researchers and communities report rising climate distress, grief and “homesickness while still at home” as landscapes change and cultural obligations to look after Country become harder to fulfil.⁷

Health services are already straining under new waves of heat stress, respiratory illness, food and water insecurity and infectious disease, with staff in some regions considering leaving because conditions are becoming unliveable.²

Yet Indigenous-led initiatives, from cultural fire management in Arnhem Land to climate justice advocacy and digital climate story platforms, are demonstrating powerful, place-based pathways to adaptation, resilience and emissions reduction.⁵

The policy question is whether governments will move fast enough to embed these approaches, and the rights and authority of First Peoples, at the centre of Australia’s climate response.⁶

Unequal heat, extreme weather and health risks

Climate projections show rising average temperatures across all regions of Australia, with heatwaves becoming longer and hotter, particularly in northern and inland areas where many Aboriginal communities are located.²

In Darwin, for example, the annual number of days above 35°C could reach between 52 and 265 by 2090 depending on global emissions, a shift with profound implications for remote communities, outdoor workers and people with chronic disease.²

For Indigenous Australians, existing high rates of cardiovascular and respiratory disease, overcrowded and poorly insulated housing, unreliable power and limited access to cooling make dangerous heat far harder to survive safely.¹

Researchers have warned that hotter days and nights will increase heat stress and deaths in remote areas, and that conditions of poverty and poor diet reduce people’s ability to physiologically adapt to heat over time.⁸

More intense cyclones, extreme rainfall and floods, combined with sea level rise, are threatening coastal and island communities, damaging houses, roads and clinics, and forcing traumatic evacuations such as the prolonged displacement of the Kiwirrkurra community in Western Australia after flooding.²

Black Summer bushfires and more frequent fire weather are also destroying cultural sites, worsening air pollution and contributing to respiratory and cardiovascular illness in Aboriginal communities, especially where services are already stretched.²

Physical health: heat, smoke and infectious disease

The health impacts of climate change on Indigenous Australians are already visible in rising burdens of heat-related illness, injuries in disasters, smoke-related respiratory problems and climate-sensitive infectious diseases.¹

Studies suggest that diarrhoeal disease in places such as Alice Springs could increase with even moderate temperature rises, given the relationship between hot, dry conditions, overcrowding and inadequate water and sanitation infrastructure.¹

Scoping reviews highlight growing risks from mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue, Ross River and Barmah Forest virus as warmer temperatures and changed rainfall create new breeding sites, particularly in northern and coastal regions already facing health service gaps.²

Other threats include melioidosis, leptospirosis and food-borne infections linked to flooded or contaminated water systems and unsafe food storage when power fails or supply chains break during fires and floods.²

Water insecurity is emerging as a critical pressure point, with some communities already reporting drying waterholes, concerns about aquifer recharge, and reliance on costly desalination in parts of the Torres Strait, all of which undermine safe drinking water and hygiene.²

Without rapid investment in safe housing, reliable energy, clean water and culturally safe primary care, these physical health impacts are likely to widen already unacceptable life expectancy gaps.⁴

Mental health, climate distress and social and emotional wellbeing

For many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, health is understood holistically, encompassing body, mind, spirit, family, community and Country, so climate disruption resonates across multiple dimensions of social and emotional wellbeing.¹

First Nations psychologists and researchers describe climate change as part of a continuum of colonisation, contributing to intergenerational trauma alongside dispossession, racism and the ongoing loss of language and culture.⁹

International reviews of First Nations experiences point to heightened risks of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, suicide and emerging forms of “eco-grief” as people witness damage to cherished places, food systems and cultural practices.⁷

Aboriginal authors in fire- and flood‑affected regions have written about solastalgia, a sense of homesickness while still at home, as Country becomes unrecognisable due to repeated disasters and slow‑onset changes like prolonged drought.¹⁰

At the same time, research shows that caring for Country activities, including ranger programs and cultural land management, are linked with better mental health, lower levels of psychological distress and high life satisfaction, underscoring the protective power of cultural connections in a destabilising climate.⁵

Despite this, most mental health systems still rely on Western diagnostic frames that often fail to capture holistic social and emotional wellbeing, making it harder to design responses that reflect Indigenous worldviews of climate impacts.⁹

Country, culture and intergenerational knowledge

Country, encompassing land, waters, skies and more‑than‑human relatives, is central to identity, law, language and culture for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and its “health” is inseparable from human health.¹

When ecosystems are degraded by drought, fire, erosion or coral bleaching, or when people are prevented from visiting or managing sacred places, many describe feeling that Country is “sick” and that this sickness is mirrored in their own wellbeing.¹

In New South Wales, the 2019–20 fires scorched vast areas of Aboriginal cultural value, including rock art sites, while coastal erosion is threatening shell middens and burial grounds, undermining cultural responsibilities and connections to ancestors.³

Sea level rise and storm surges in the Torres Strait are already inundating graveyards and cultural sites and prompting fears of future relocation, raising profound questions about how to maintain cultural continuity when Country itself is reshaped or submerged.²

Disruption to seasonal cycles, species distribution and access to traditional foods also threatens the transmission of intergenerational knowledge, from hunting, fishing and burning practices to ceremony and language tied to specific places and ecologies.²

These emerging and intergenerational impacts mean that children and young people are inheriting not only a hotter, more volatile climate, but also a landscape of damaged Country that complicates their ability to learn, practise and evolve culture on their own terms.⁹

Food, water, livelihoods and inequality

Climate‑driven changes in rainfall, temperature and extreme events are destabilising food and water security for many Indigenous communities, both through direct ecological impacts and through disrupted supply chains.²

In arid regions, more severe drought and dust storms degrade country used for hunting and gathering, while in northern and coastal areas, cyclones and floods can wipe out crops, contaminate water and interrupt deliveries of affordable, healthy food for months.²

As local food sources become less reliable, communities are pushed towards store‑bought foods that are often expensive and of poorer nutritional quality, worsening diet‑related disease and increasing dependence on fragile logistics systems.²

Housing that is poorly designed for extreme heat, combined with high power costs and pre‑payment meters, has created “power poverty” in some remote areas, where families must choose between electricity, food and medicines, with serious health consequences.²

At the same time, climate threats to industries such as tourism, fishing, art and land management jeopardise livelihoods and local economies, while opportunities from renewable energy projects risk bypassing communities unless governance and benefit‑sharing arrangements are designed to uphold rights and self‑determination.²

Without structural change, climate change is likely to deepen existing gaps in income, employment, housing and health outcomes between Indigenous and non‑Indigenous Australians, turning a hazard into a driver of long‑term inequality.⁴

Systems, structures and the limits of adaptation

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ vulnerability to climate change is not rooted in culture, it is produced by structural and systemic inequities embedded in housing, health, emergency management, energy and land governance systems.⁴

Decades of under‑investment in basic services, combined with discriminatory policies and limited recognition of cultural authority, mean many communities enter the climate crisis with fewer resources, weaker infrastructure and less influence over decisions that affect their lives.⁴

Emergency management has often been done to, rather than with, Aboriginal communities, resulting in evacuation plans that ignore cultural obligations, language needs and the historical trauma of forced removals, and in some cases leaving communities without adequate preparedness at all.²

Health systems in remote regions face chronic staff shortages, inadequate infrastructure and growing climate‑related disruptions to power, water, transport and supply chains, with surveys suggesting some clinicians already view parts of the Northern Territory as becoming uninhabitable.²

Climate policy and risk assessments have historically sidelined Indigenous knowledge and data, with major scientific processes acknowledging that they struggle to integrate Indigenous and local knowledge into their findings, despite its centrality to understanding impacts on Country.²

These systemic patterns mean that adaptation is not only a technical challenge of better levees or clinics, but a political challenge of shifting power, recognising rights and addressing racism so that First Peoples can lead climate responses for their own communities.

Indigenous-led solutions and climate justice

Across the continent, Indigenous organisations, ranger groups and community‑controlled health and legal services are advancing climate solutions grounded in Country, culture and self‑determination.⁵

Programs such as Arnhem Land Fire Abatement use cultural burning to reduce late‑season wildfires and greenhouse gas emissions, generating income through carbon markets while protecting biodiversity and cultural sites, and strengthening local governance and employment.⁵

Indigenous‑led initiatives like the Lowitja Institute’s climate and health roundtable and the National First Peoples’ Gathering on Climate bring together Elders, youth and researchers to frame climate change as both a health emergency and an opportunity for redress and empowerment.²

New projects, including Indigenous‑led digital climate story platforms and co‑designed research under the National First Peoples Platform on Climate Change, are building Indigenous data sovereignty, documenting lived experience and shaping national and international climate processes.¹¹

Climate justice advocates insist there can be no climate justice without First Nations justice, arguing that restoring rights to land and water, investing in adequate housing and energy, and embedding Indigenous decision‑making in climate governance are prerequisites for fair adaptation.²

For policymakers, that means aligning the National Adaptation Plan and risk assessments with Indigenous‑led research, funding community‑controlled climate and health programs, and supporting Indigenous‑led litigation and rights‑based strategies that hold governments and corporations to account for climate harm.¹²

Immediate, emerging and intergenerational stakes

In the short term, the most visible impacts for Indigenous Australians are escalating heatwaves, smoke and disasters that strain physical and mental health, disrupt housing and livelihoods, and damage cultural sites and infrastructure.¹

Over the medium term, compounding shocks to water, food systems, labour markets and service delivery are likely to deepen health inequities, drive internal displacement and intensify climate distress as people navigate more frequent crises and slow‑onset losses.²

Looking across generations, permanent landscape changes, sea level rise and ecosystem collapse threaten to erode languages, ceremonies and knowledge tied to specific places, unless there is sustained support for cultural adaptation, repatriation of authority and on‑Country education led by Elders and communities.³

Indigenous‑led research emphasises that climate action which centres First Peoples’ rights, knowledges and leadership can simultaneously reduce emissions, strengthen resilience and heal some of the harms of colonisation, but that delay risks locking in avoidable suffering and loss.²

The choice now facing governments is whether to continue treating Indigenous communities as vulnerable recipients of emergency response, or to recognise them as rights holders and partners whose leadership is essential to any credible national climate strategy.⁶

References

1. Disproportionate burdens: the multidimensional impacts of climate change on the health of Indigenous Australians
2. Climate Change and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health: Discussion Paper (Lowitja Institute)
3. Climate change impacts on our cultural values (AdaptNSW)
4. Climate change, structural inequity and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health
5. Caring for Country and health: Aboriginal land management for health and wellbeing
6. Climate justice and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
7. Indigenous mental health and climate change
8. Consequences for Indigenous Physical and Mental Health of climate change
9. Climate change, social and emotional wellbeing, and mental health for First Nations people
10. The impact of climate change on Country and community: an Aboriginal perspective on solastalgia and wellbeing
11. Indigenous-led Digital Climate Stories Platform (CSIRO)
12. Indigenous-led rights‑based approaches to climate litigation

Back to Top

Canberra’s Food Security in a Warming World - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Canberra is not self‑sufficient in food and relies on imports for most of its supply, especially fresh produce and grains.1 Around 90% of Canberra’s leafy greens and fruit are estimated to come from the Sydney region.2 Climate change threatens food security through more frequent droughts, heatwaves, bushfires, and supply chain disruptions.3 Canberra’s food system is vulnerable because it depends heavily on long supply chains from drought‑prone regions.4 The ACT government’s local food strategy aims to boost local production and shorten supply chains to improve resilience.5 Low‑income households are most at risk of food insecurity as prices rise and supply chains become less reliable.6

Australia's Capital, Canberra, is not self‑sufficient in food and depends heavily on supplies from outside its surrounding Territory, the ACT.¹

Most of the city’s food, especially fresh produce, grains and meat, is brought in from regional NSW, Victoria, and interstate supply chains.¹

Estimates suggest that around 90% of Canberra’s leafy greens and fruit come from the Sydney region, highlighting a high reliance on distant production zones.²

Under climate change, this dependence on long, fragile supply lines increases the risk of shortages, price spikes and reduced access to fresh food.³

Extreme weather, drought, and heat stress in Australia’s key food bowls threaten the stability of the food that reaches Canberra’s supermarkets and pantries.⁴

Government strategies now aim to strengthen local food production and shorten supply chains to build resilience against climate shocks.⁵

But gaps remain in data and policy, particularly on how climate change will affect food access for low‑income and vulnerable Canberrans.⁶

Without stronger action, Canberra’s food system will remain exposed to the growing volatility of a hotter, drier climate.⁷

Is Canberra self‑sufficient in food?

Canberra is not self‑sufficient in food production and cannot feed its population from within the ACT alone.¹

Less than 5% of food consumed in the ACT is produced within the Territory, making Canberra a “food vulnerable” city in terms of local production.¹

The ACT’s rural land is used mainly for wool, beef and lamb, with only a small amount of vegetables, fruit, poultry, and eggs grown locally.¹

Most of the ACT’s food is imported from surrounding regions in NSW and Victoria, and from interstate supply chains that link to national distribution hubs.¹

Where does Canberra’s food come from?

There is no single, up‑to‑date breakdown of Canberra’s food supply by category, but available evidence points to heavy reliance on external sources.¹

For fresh produce, it is estimated that about 90% of Canberra’s leafy greens and fruit come from the Sydney region and its hinterland.²

Grains and cereals are largely sourced from the Murray–Darling Basin and other major grain‑growing regions in NSW, Victoria, and Queensland.⁴

Meat and dairy are supplied from a mix of local ACT farms, nearby NSW producers, and larger interstate processors and distributors.¹

Processed foods, packaged goods, snacks, and beverages are mostly brought in through national and international supply chains, with many items imported from overseas.⁸

Climate change and food security risks

Climate change is expected to increase the frequency and severity of droughts, heatwaves, bushfires, and floods in Australia’s key food‑producing regions.³

These extreme events can damage crops, reduce yields, kill livestock and disrupt water supplies, leading to lower production and higher food prices.³

Canberra’s heavy reliance on food from drought‑prone regions like the Murray–Darling Basin makes its supply chain especially vulnerable to climate shocks.⁴

Transport disruptions from floods, fires or extreme heat can delay or block the movement of food into Canberra, causing temporary shortages on shelves.³

As climate change progresses, the stability of food availability, access, and affordability in Canberra is likely to decline, particularly for fresh and perishable items.⁷

Government and academic analysis

The ACT government’s Canberra Region Local Food Strategy 2024–2029 explicitly recognises that Canberra is reliant on food produced elsewhere.¹

This strategy identifies food security as a key concern and aims to increase local food production, shorten supply chains and improve access to healthy, affordable food.¹

The ACT’s climate change and circular economy policies also acknowledge that food systems are vulnerable to climate impacts and need to become more resilient.¹

Academic and policy research on Australian cities notes that urban food security depends on stable regional and national supply chains, which are increasingly at risk from climate change.³

Studies have highlighted gaps in data on local food flows, the resilience of regional supply chains, and the specific impacts of climate change on food access for low‑income households.⁶

Policy gaps and proposed solutions

Current policy identifies several vulnerabilities: over‑reliance on distant food sources, limited local storage and distribution infrastructure, and weak support for small producers.¹

Proposed strategies include expanding urban agriculture, supporting local farmers’ markets, and developing a regional “food hub” to improve packaging, storage and distribution.¹

There is also a push to use public land for community gardens and urban farms, and to strengthen food rescue and redistribution networks.¹

For vulnerable households, recommendations include more stable funding for food relief services, better access to affordable, nutritious food, and targeted support during price spikes and supply disruptions.⁶

However, there is still no comprehensive, city‑wide food security plan that fully integrates climate risk, equity, and long‑term resilience.⁶

Uncertainties and research needs

Key uncertainties remain about the exact proportion of each food category (fresh produce, grains, meat, dairy, processed foods) that comes from inside versus outside the ACT.¹

There is limited data on how climate change will affect the reliability and cost of food imports into Canberra over the next 20–30 years.³

More research is needed on the resilience of regional supply chains, the capacity of local producers to scale up, and the impact of climate‑driven price rises on low‑income Canberrans.⁶

To properly assess Canberra’s food security under climate change, authorities would need detailed food flow mapping, climate risk modelling for key supply regions, and regular monitoring of food affordability and access.⁶

Without this evidence base, it will be difficult to design targeted, effective policies that ensure all Canberrans can access safe, nutritious food in a hotter, more volatile climate.⁷

References

1. ACT Government, Canberra Region Local Food Strategy 2024–2029, ACT Government, Canberra, 2024.
2. ACT Government, Draft Canberra Region Local Food Strategy – Goal 3: Production, YourSay ACT, 2023.
3. Australian Government, House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, Strengthening and safeguarding Australia’s food security, Parliament of Australia, Canberra, 2023.
4. Climate Council, Feeding a Hungry Nation: Climate change, food and Australia’s future, Climate Council, Sydney, 2015.
5. ACT Government, Canberra Region Local Food Strategy 2024–2029, ACT Government, Canberra, 2024.
6. VolunteeringACT, Food Insecurity in the Canberra Region: A Strategic Picture, February 2025.
7. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition – Climate Change and Food Security, FAO, Rome, 2012.
8. Australian Food and Grocery Council, Food and Grocery Industry in Australia, AFGC, Sydney, 2023.

Back to Top

Climate Change's Hidden Toll: Health Crisis Grips Canberra - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Bushfire smoke caused 31 excess deaths and over 200 hospitalisations in ACT during 2019-20.1 Climate change projected to bring 40 days above 35°C yearly in Canberra.2 Eco-anxiety prevalent among regional Australian youth post-disasters.3 Heatwaves strain emergency departments with rising admissions.4 Outer Canberra suburbs vulnerable due to low tree cover.2 Low-income households face energy-inefficient homes in heat.5

Canberra's pristine image masks a growing health crisis fuelled by climate change.

Bushfire smoke from the 2019-20 season alone caused 31 excess deaths in the ACT, alongside over 200 hospitalisations for cardiovascular and respiratory issues.¹

Projections warn of up to 40 days above 35°C annually, with severe heatwaves reaching 44°C for 10 days, overwhelming hospitals.²

Eco-anxiety surges among youth, blending acute stress from fires and floods with chronic hopelessness about the future.³

Emergency departments see spikes in mental health presentations during extreme weather, as services strain under shorter recovery windows.⁴

Vulnerable outer suburbs like Tuggeranong lack tree cover, exacerbating risks for elderly and low-income residents in inefficient homes.²

Respiratory illnesses from smoke inhalation fill wards, while cardiovascular events rise hours after pollution peaks.⁶

Mental health burdens deepen, with climate distress hitting regional youth hardest amid repeated disasters.³

Hospitals face disaster fatigue as bushfires, heatwaves, and storms strike with less respite.

Low-income households endure unsafe heat in energy-poor dwellings, amplifying inequities.⁵

Physical Health Under Siege

The 2019-20 bushfires blanketed Canberra in hazardous smoke for weeks.

This pollution triggered 31 premature deaths in the ACT.

Over 200 excess hospital admissions followed for heart and lung problems.¹

Emergency visits for asthma reached 89 cases linked to smoke.¹

PM2.5 particles from fires enter the bloodstream, sparking inflammation.

Sudden cardiac arrests spike 8-10 hours after exposure surges.⁶

97% of surveyed Canberrans reported physical symptoms like eye irritation and coughs.¹⁴

Climate-driven longer fire seasons promise more such episodes.

Heatwaves compound risks, with rising temperatures hindering outdoor activity and exacerbating chronic conditions.⁷

Mental Health in Crisis

Eco-anxiety grips young Canberrans, manifesting as helplessness and hopelessness.

Regional youth link bushfires and floods directly to climate change, triggering acute stress.³

Disasters evoke depression over future prospects, clinicians note.

Over two-thirds of Australians aged 16-25 report climate-related distress.⁹

26% of ACT residents relived trauma during smoke events.¹¹

Extreme weather disrupts mental health services while demand soars.⁴

Youth feel dismissed by leaders, fuelling burnout among activists.¹³

Validation from professionals eases distress, yet access lags.

Healthcare Systems Overwhelmed

Hospitals in the ACT bore heavy loads from 2019-20 smoke.

Prolonged poor air quality amplified urban health burdens.⁶

Heatwaves drive mental health emergencies, presentations rising with temperature.⁴

Shrinking intervals between events breed disaster fatigue in staff.

Climate models predict inundated facilities from extreme heat alone.²

Emergency departments log more admissions during prolonged heat.¹⁷

Resource strains hinder recovery, threatening care quality.

Vulnerable Groups Exposed

Outer suburbs like West Belconnen and Tuggeranong top risk lists.

Scarce tree cover fails to buffer scorching heat.²

Elderly residents suffer most from heat exhaustion and dehydration.⁵

Low-income households crowd energy-inefficient rentals.

These dwellings trap heat, becoming hazardous in extremes.¹⁵

Socio-economic disadvantage correlates with poor cooling access.

First Nations people and renters face compounded risks.⁵

Without cars or air-conditioners, escape proves difficult.¹²

References

1. Human Effects of the 2019-20 Bushfire Season on the Community of the Australian Capital Territory
2. Outer Canberra Most Unprepared for Climate Disaster
3. Eco‐anxiety among regional Australian youth with mental health problems
4. Health professionals go to Canberra to call for action on summer of anxiety
5. Using heat refuges in heatwave emergencies
6. Bushfire smoke from 'Black Summer' killed hundreds: Inquiry
7. 6.2 ACT trends - Environment for Youth
8. Eco-anxiety affecting more than two-thirds of Australians
9. Bushfire Smoke and Air Quality Strategy 2021-2025
10. Risk factors of direct heat-related hospital admissions
11. Youth Eco-Anxiety: A Catalyst for International Action
12. Physical and Mental Health Effects of Bushfire and Smoke in the Australian Capital Territory 2019–20
13. HEAT IN HOMES
14. Impact of extreme heat on health in Australia: a scoping review

Back to Top