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.

Implementation costs of Agricultural Management Practices for Water Quality Improvement in the Great Barrier Reef Catchments. CSIRO: Water for Healthy Country National Research Flagship

Executive summary. In this report we analyse implementation costs and benefits for agricultural management practices, grouped into farming systems. In order to do so, we compare plot scale gross margins for the dominant agricultural production systems (sugarcane, grazing and banana cultivation) in the NRM regions Wet Tropics, Burdekin Dry Tropics and Mackay Whitsundays. Furthermore, where available, we present investment requirements for changing to improved farming systems. It must be noted that transaction costs are not captured within this project. For sugarcane, this economic analysis shows that there are expected benefits to sugarcane growers in the different regions through transitions to C and B class farming systems. Further transition to A-class farming systems can come at a cost, depending on the capital investment required and the length of the investment period. Obviously, the costs and benefits will vary for each individual grower and will depend on their starting point and individual property scenario therefore each circumstance needs to be carefully considered before making a change in management practice. In grazing, overall, reducing stocking rates comes at a cost (reduced benefits). However, when operating at low utilisation rates in wetter country, lowering stocking rates can potentially come at a benefit. With win-win potential, extension is preferred to assist farmer in changing management practices to improve their land condition. When reducing stocking rates comes at a cost, incentives may be applicable to support change among farmers. For banana cultivation, the results indicate that the transition to C and B class management practices is a worthwhile proposition from an economic perspective. For a change from B to A class farming systems however, it is not worthwhile from a financial perspective. This is largely due to the large capital investment associated with the change in irrigation system and negative impact in whole of farm gross margin. Overall, benefits will vary for each individual grower depending on their starting point and their individual property scenario. The results presented in this report are one possible set of figures to show the changes in profitability of a grower operating in different management classes. The results in this report are not prescriptive of every landholder. Landholders will have different costs and benefits from transitioning to improved practices, even if similar operations are practiced, hence it is recommended that landholders that are willing to change management undertake their own research and analysis into the expected costs and benefits for their own soil types and property circumstances.