How do we ensure regional voices are not only heard, but acted on, throughout the great transition?

This was one of the strongest themes from Sustain Queensland 2026. Across contributions from business, finance, government, research, agriculture and regional communities, a connected argument emerged: the transition must proceed, but how it proceeds matters.

Professor Belinda Wade asked us to consider who will bear its costs. She called for change that is well planned and ethical, rather than imposed in ways that create unnecessary disruption.

Mark Hutchinson, former CEO of Fortescue Energy, expressed the test of success particularly clearly: “The poor should be better off if we get the transition right.”

For me, this is not a peripheral consideration. A transition cannot be considered successful if the communities hosting the change carry a disproportionate share of its costs while the benefits accumulate elsewhere.

Kylie Porter brought the experiences and concerns of Queensland Farmers’ Federation members into the discussion. Farming communities are acutely aware of changes in climate and of the need to respond. They are also more directly exposed than many metropolitan communities to the resulting economic and environmental effects—and to the land-use and infrastructure changes associated with transition.

Action is necessary, but it must be undertaken in a way that benefits more people. Western Downs Regional Council Mayor Andrew Smith spoke about both the challenge and the opportunity of creating regional uplift so that the benefits extend across the community. If major investment is reshaping a region, it should also help strengthen that region.

Other speakers identified some of the mechanisms that could support this ambition. Paul Greenop described how the Clean Energy Finance Corporation is encouraging new initiatives, while Andrew Petersen identified opportunities to pursue applied research and innovation through Horizon Europe.

Professor John Cole OAM brought these threads together through his emphasis on integrating different sectors of the economy. Transition does not occur within the boundaries of a single industry, policy portfolio or project. It requires a holistic approach.

Taken together, the central message was not simply that regional communities should be consulted. It was that their knowledge, needs and aspirations must help shape coordinated planning, investment and implementation. Listening is the starting point. Integrated planning is how regional voices are turned into better outcomes.

Regions face both opportunity and exposure

Much of the physical transformation associated with transition will occur in regional Australia.

Regions will host renewable energy generation, transmission infrastructure, new industrial facilities and changes in agriculture and land use. They will also experience greater demand for workers, housing, transport, water and community services.

This creates substantial opportunities. Transition investment can diversify regional economies, strengthen existing industries, create employment and build capabilities that remain in communities beyond an individual project.

Regions however, also carry considerable exposure. Poorly coordinated development can intensify housing shortages, compete for scarce workers, place pressure on infrastructure and services, disrupt agricultural production, affect natural environments and generate community conflict.

It is fundamentally unfair to expect regional communities to absorb these pressures without ensuring that they share substantially in the benefits. As Professor Cole reflected after the event, when transition is done badly, it can generate local disruption, anxiety, uncertainty and resentment.

Done well, investment can become a catalyst for broader regional development and more resilient communities.

Why consultation alone is insufficient

Listening to regional communities is essential, but listening is not the same as acting.

Consultation often occurs after the fundamental parameters of a project have been established. Communities may be asked about impacts and mitigation without having had a meaningful role in shaping the larger opportunity.

Fairness requires more than giving people an opportunity to comment. It requires regional knowledge and aspirations to influence:

• where and how development occurs
• the sequence and timing of investment
• the infrastructure and services provided
• workforce and housing responses
• environmental and land-use decisions
• the benefits that remain within the region

Communities should not be limited to negotiating how disruption will be managed. They should have a genuine role in shaping what development contributes and leaves behind.

The objective should not be limited to making an individual project more acceptable. It should include using the combined investment associated with transition to strengthen the region over the long term.

What integrated planning looks like

No single organisation controls all the systems affected by transition.

Economic development may sit with councils and regional organisations. Energy, transport and water infrastructure involve government agencies and private providers. Workforce development spans employers, education providers and government. Housing, agriculture, conservation and community services each have their own plans, responsibilities and decision-making processes.
Yet these systems interact in the same place—and their combined effects are experienced by the same communities.

Integrated planning brings them together around a shared understanding of the region. It asks how proposed developments affect existing industries, workforce availability, housing, infrastructure, natural assets and community aspirations—and how decisions in one area might support or constrain another.
This could mean:

• aligning training with both emerging and established industries
• planning housing that provides a lasting regional asset
• coordinating infrastructure so it supports wider economic development
• protecting productive agricultural land and important ecosystems
• identifying opportunities for local procurement and business participation
• sequencing projects to avoid overwhelming regional capacity
• creating regional prospectuses that define what developments sought, where and how they should benefit the region

Integration does not require one organisation to assume responsibility for everything. It requires greater visibility across the system, shared priorities and practical ways to coordinate action.

Moving from reaction to readiness

Regions cannot control every policy decision, investment cycle or global market shift.

They can, however, improve their ability to anticipate and shape what happens next. This starts by assessing the region’s current position: its economic strengths, transition pressures, emerging opportunities, institutional capacity and readiness to act. It also means appreciating what is already in place.

Many regions are already working on resilience, diversification, workforce development, infrastructure, housing and natural resource management. They may not yet see these activities as connected parts of a broader transition. Bringing that work together helps reveal where the region is well positioned, where gaps remain and where stronger coordination could unlock value. It allows regional leaders to engage with investors and governments with clearer priorities before projects and funding decisions are fixed.

The progression is practical: assess the current position, appreciate existing strengths and accelerate coordinated action.

A planned—not accidental—transition

The great transition will not produce fair regional outcomes by default.

If we fail to coordinate economic, workforce, infrastructure, housing, land-use and environmental planning, we risk transferring disproportionate costs to regional communities while allowing much of the value to flow elsewhere.

That is neither fair nor necessary.

A proactive, integrated approach offers a different trajectory. It can help regions anticipate change, influence investment and retain more of the economic, social and environmental benefits.

This is the focus of my work: helping regions see more of the bigger picture, assess their readiness and translate transition pressures and opportunities into coordinated action.

If we get the transition right, success should not be measured only by emissions reduced, capital invested or infrastructure constructed. It should also be measured by whether regional economies are stronger, communities are more resilient, natural systems are protected—and people who could otherwise bear the greatest disruption are genuinely better off.

Those outcomes will not happen accidentally. They must be planned for—strategically, intentionally and locally.