Reflections on Committee for Economic Development's State of the Nation 2026

I congratulate the Committee for Economic Development's (CEDA) for delivering the State of the Nation. I particularly appreciate that they have provided an opportunity to step back from the day-to-day work of delivering projects and responding to immediate priorities, to reflect on how we are or as the case maybe, not progressing.

Reading CEDA's latest assessment of Australia's climate transition and adaptation, three things jumped out at me that I had to raise with my colleagues and clients.

1. We are making progress, but will not meet our targets

Australia is undoubtedly making some gains. It is true that renewable generation is increasing, emissions are falling and significant investment has been made. However, as their analyses state, despite the considerable effort and investment being made, we are unlikely to achieve our renewable energy and circular economy targets on our current trajectory.

Having spent many years working with regions through what I often describe as the great transition, it is not a surprise.

While there is great effort being made it is not always in concert. The layers of government, industry players and stakeholders may not always be pulling in the same direction. Equally, I've often seen places doing many of the right things and still falling short of the outcomes they were seeking.

The abundance of good intent and effort are not question. Rather, it suggests there are material issues influencing successful delivery that we do not yet fully understand or have not yet adequately addressed.

If we genuinely want to accelerate transition, perhaps our greatest opportunity now lies in better understanding the material conditions that enable successful delivery.

2. Regional readiness is increasingly important

The industry experts involved in CEDA’s report indicate that many of the constraints are no longer primarily technical. They relate to the readiness of regions, organisations and institutions to deliver change.

This is not surprising to me or my regional, economic development colleagues. In fact, working in regional, economic development, green growth and climate resilience this feels very familiar.

Projects rarely succeed or stall because of technology alone. They succeed or stall because of workforce capability, planning systems, governance, transmission, local businesses, community confidence, institutional capability and many other interconnected conditions that determine whether good ideas become successful outcomes.

These each have their relevance to different stakeholders, communities, businesses levels of government and bigger industry players. The issues material to these actors are vitally important. It is not just identifying what is financially material, but understanding what is genuinely material to the people, organisations and communities involved in transition.

The hurdles in adaptation and renewable roll-outs also show that transition depends on much more than financial investment. It depends on how well we strengthen and connect financial, manufactured, human, intellectual, social and relationship, and natural capital. When one of those forms of capital is underdeveloped, it often becomes the constraint that limits progress on other fronts.

Perhaps once we better understand the material conditions influencing successful delivery—and strengthen these forms of capital together—we will begin to change the trajectory.

3. Regional transition mirrors climate disclosure challenges

Overall, our transition issues remind me of what we are finding out from organisational, sustainability reporting, especially climate disclosures.
Increasingly, boards and those genuinely invested in sustainability make comments like:

“We understand the risks. We've established governance. We have plans. We're making progress but getting results is proving more complex and difficult than we thought.”

The observations on climate disclosures are that the more helpful ones are those that are dealing with the material risks. Australia's transition is much the same.

While many are trying hard they are discovering there are important issues we still need to work through.

While initially this might be disheartening, the reality is we are getting closer to our goals by knowing what issues we still need to solve.
We are moving from the less informed ambition state, towards understanding the conditions that will enable successful implementation.

Perhaps one of the most valuable lessons emerging from climate disclosures is that materiality is not simply a reporting step. It is becoming a practical discipline for understanding what genuinely influences successful delivery.

I wonder whether the same thinking has something to offer regional and national transition.

Rather than asking whether we are progressing, organisations are advised to ask:
have we identified the issues that are genuinely material to achieving the outcomes we want?

Similarly, at a regional level, we can ask:
are all forms of capital and aspects of regional readiness being addressed?

How we make more progress

The real value of reports like CEDA's is to help us understand why or why we are not progressing. Having a State of the Nation report encourages us to think about what is working and what is not plus how to make things better.

Working with regions has convinced me that successful transition is rarely about finding one more project or one more policy. It is about understanding the material issues, delivery conditions and how to support all forms of capital for regional readiness. that enable places to adapt, prosper and remain resilient through change.

The next phase of Australia's transition is not simply about doing more. It requires better understanding the material conditions that allow the solutions we already have to succeed.