Victorian landcare groups are increasingly seen as the key element of an emerging Australian success story. The assumptions underlying landcare are that limited funding of group activity will produce more aware, informed, skilled and adaptive resource managers with a stronger stewardship ethic, will increase the adoption of sustainable practices, and will assist the move to more sustainable resource use. A survey of all landholders in 12 subcatchments of north-east Victoria was undertaken in 1993 to assess the impact of landcare participation upon key programme outcomes. Information from the northeast survey indicated that landcare participation had a significant impact upon landholder awareness of issues, level of knowledge and adoption of best bet practices. This information, and earlier research by the authors, suggests that landcare group activity has made an important contribution towards sustainable resource management. However, research findings also suggested a number of flaws in programme logic. Given the low levels of profitability amongst landholders, the vast scale and intractable nature of key issues and the considerable off-site benefits of remedial action, it is problematic whether limited funding of a community development process will effect behavioural changes that are sufficient to make a difference at the landscape level. Programme emphasis upon developing landholders' stewardship ethic also appears misplaced in that there was no significant difference in the stewardship ethic of participants and non-participants. Indeed, to the extent that landcare focuses upon changing individual behaviour rather than societal barriers to rural development, landcare is open to the criticism that it places too much responsibility upon individual landholders.