Analysing industry needs to fine tune IPM project activities

As a first step to better targeting the activities of a project for improving management of western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentialis, (WFT) in field grown vegetable crops, we surveyed growers, consultants and other agribusiness personnel in two regions of Queensland. Using face-to-face interviews, we collected data on key pests and measures used to manage them, the importance of WFT and associated viral diseases, sources of pest management information and additional skills and knowledge needed by growers and industry. Responses were similar in the two regions. While capsicum growers in one northern Queensland district had suffered serious losses from WFT damage in 2002, in general the pest was not seen as a major problem. In cucurbit crops, the silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia tabaci biotype B) was considered the most difficult insect pest to manage. Pest control tactics were largely based on pesticides although many respondents mentioned non-chemical methods such as good farm hygiene practices, control of weed hosts and regular crop monitoring, particularly when prompted. Respondents wanted to know more about pest identification, biology and damage, spray application and the best use of insecticides. Natural enemies were mentioned infrequently. Keeping up to date with available pesticide options, availability of new chemicals and options for a district-wide approach to managing pests emerged as key issues. Growers identified agricultural distributors, consultants, Queensland Department of Primary Industries staff, other growers and their own experience as important sources of information. Field days, workshops and seminars did not rank highly. Busy vegetable growers wanted these activities to be short and relevant, and preferred to be contacted by post and facsimile rather than email. In response to these results, we are focusing on three core, interrelated project extension strategies: (i) short workshops, seminars and farm walks to provide opportunities for discussion, training and information sharing with growers and their agribusiness advisors; (ii) communication via newsletters and information leaflets; (iii) support for commercialisation of services.

Adoption of environmental assurance in pastoral industry supply chains - Market failure and beyond

This paper describes adoption rates of environmental assurance within meat and wool supply chains, and discusses this in terms of market interest and demand for certified 'environmentally friendly' products, based on phone surveys and personal interviews with pastoral producers, meat and wool processors, wholesalers and retailers, and domestic consumers. Members of meat and wool supply chains, particularly pastoral producers, are both aware of and interested in implementing various forms of environmental assurance, but significant costs combined with few private benefits have resulted in low adoption rates. The main reason for the lack of benefits is that the end user (the consumer) does not value environmental assurance and is not willing to pay for it. For this reason, global food and fibre supply chains, which compete to supply consumers with safe and quality food at the lowest price, resist public pressure to implement environmental assurance. This market failure is further exacerbated by highly variable environmental and social production standards required of primary producers in different countries, and the disparate levels of government support provided to them. Given that it is the Australian general public and not markets that demand environmental benefits from agriculture, the Australian government has a mandate to use public funds to counter this market failure. A national farm environmental policy should utilise a range of financial incentives to reward farmers for delivering general public good environmental outcomes, with these specified and verified through a national environmental assurance scheme.