Productivism, culture and the challenges of sustainable beef production in Australia

Beef has become an important part of the South Korean diet. Rapid modernization and economic development since the 1960s has led to an increase in meat consumption, especially beef. Indeed, per capita beef consumption per year increased from 0.5kg in 1960 to 8.8kg in 2010, representing an 18-fold increase. The increasing demand for beef in Korea has been met by the development of intensive domestic meat production systems, along with a sharp increase in imports from meat exporting countries, most importantly Australia and the US.

Beef production and the environment : is it really 'hard to be green when you are in the red'?

The statement. 'it is hard to be green when you are in the red' is commonly used by primary producers to explain the necessity of placing a greater emphasis on financial survival rather than longer term environmental sustainability. The subject of environmental sustainability on pastoral properties was explored during face-to:face interviews with cattle grazers in the Fitzroy Basin area of Central Queensland. Findings from the study suggest that while economic factors are important, they are not the only determinant in whether a landholder priorities environmental sustainability, Rather. social factors such as knowledge claims. beliefs, attitudes. values, peer pressure and social sanctioning, constructed and enacted within the productivist paradigm of primary production. play a crucial role in how landholders manage their natural assets. This suggests that the edict that 'It is hard to be green when you are in the red' is inaccurate and does not explain why conservation-focused pastoral management is not yet occurring on a large scale.

A life cycle assessment approach to quantifying greenhouse gas emissions from land-use change for beef production in eastern Australia

In life cycle assessment studies, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from direct land-use change have been estimated to make a significant contribution to the global warming potential of agricultural products. However, these estimates have a high uncertainty due to the complexity of data requirements and difficulty in attribution of land-use change. This paper presents estimates of GHG emissions from direct land-use change from native woodland to grazing land for two beef production regions in eastern Australia, which were the subject of a multi-impact life cycle assessment study for premium beef production. Spatially- and temporally consistent datasets were derived for areas of forest cover and biomass carbon stocks using published remotely sensed tree-cover data and regionally applicable allometric equations consistent with Australia's national GHG inventory report. Standard life cycle assessment methodology was used to estimate GHG emissions and removals from direct land-use change attributed to beef production. For the northern-central New South Wales region of Australia estimates ranged from a net emission of 0.03 t CO2-e ha-1 year-1 to net removal of 0.12 t CO2-e ha-1 year-1 using low and high scenarios, respectively, for sequestration in regrowing forests. For the same period (1990-2010), the study region in southern-central Queensland was estimated to have net emissions from land-use change in the range of 0.45-0.25 t CO2-e ha-1 year-1. The difference between regions reflects continuation of higher rates of deforestation in Queensland until strict regulation in 2006 whereas native vegetation protection laws were introduced earlier in New South Wales. On the basis of liveweight produced at the farm-gate, emissions from direct land-use change for 1990-2010 were comparable in magnitude to those from other on-farm sources, which were dominated by enteric methane. However, calculation of land-use change impacts for the Queensland region for a period starting 2006, gave a range from net emissions of 0.11 t CO2-e ha-1 year-1 to net removals of 0.07 t CO2-e ha-1 year-1. This study demonstrated a method for deriving spatially- and temporally consistent datasets to improve estimates for direct land-use change impacts in life cycle assessment. It identified areas of uncertainty, including rates of sequestration in woody regrowth and impacts of land-use change on soil carbon stocks in grazed woodlands, but also showed the potential for direct land-use change to represent a net sink for GHG.

Adaptation and change in Queensland’s rangelands : cell grazing as an emerging ideology of pastoral-ecology

Does the current global political economic framework, or more specifically, the cost-price squeeze associated with primary production, restrict the choices of Australian cattle graziers in moving to more sustainable practices? It has often been argued by primary producers and academics, alike, that current terms of trade have resulted in reduced profitability at the property level, and as such, have made it difficult for landholders to shift to practices which are environmentally sustainable. Whilst there is mounting evidence that this is case, there is also evidence that some graziers have been able to adapt to the prevailing market conditions through an ideological as well as ‘practice’ shift. Findings from qualitative research in Central Queensland, Australia has highlighted how ‘cell grazing’ departs from the traditional or conventional aspects of grazing which can be described as productivist, to an approach closely approximating Lang and Heasman’s (2004) ‘ecologically integrated paradigm’. It is argued that cell grazing is, at present, a marginal activity that requires an ideological and cultural shift, as well as an investment in new infrastructure, however, current cell grazing activities may also demonstrate that beef grazing has the potential to be both economically and environmentally sustainable.

Multi-criteria assessment of innovative technology in the beef industry

In Australia rural research and development corporations and companies expended over $AUS500 million on agricultural research and development. A substantial proportion of this is invested in R&D in the beef industry. The Australian beef industry exports almost $AUS5billionof product annually and invest heavily in new product development to improve the beef quality and improve production efficiency. Review points are critical for effective new product development, yet many research and development bodies, particularly publicly funded ones, appear to ignore the importance of assessing products prior to their release. Significant sums of money are invested in developing technological innovations that have low levels and rates of adoption. The adoption rates could be improved if the developers were more focused on technology uptake and less focused on proving their technologies can be applied in practice. Several approaches have been put forward in an effort to improve rates of adoption into operational settings. This paper presents a study of key technological innovations in the Australian beef industry to assess the use of multiple criteria in evaluating the potential uptake of new technologies. Findings indicate that using multiple criteria to evaluate innovations before commercializing a technology enables researchers to better understand the issues that may inhibit adoption.

The Impacts of Climate Change on Australia’s Food Production and Export

The global food system is undergoing unprecedented change. With population increases, demands for food globally will continue to rise at the same time that agricultural environments are compromised through urban encroachment, climate change and environmental degradation. Australia has long identified itself as an agricultural exporting nation—but what will its capacity be in feeding an increasing global population as it also comes to terms with extreme climatic events such as the floods, fires and droughts, and reduced water availability, experienced in recent decades? This chapter traces the history of Australian agricultural exports and evaluates its food production and export capacity against scientific predictions of climate change impacts. With the federal government forecasting declines in the production of wheat, beef, dairy and sugar, Australia’s key export commodities may well be compromised. Calls to produce more food using new technologies are likely to generate significant environmental problems. Yet, a radical reconfiguration of Australian agriculture which incorporates alternative approaches, such as agro-ecology, is rarely considered by government and industry.