Global Competitiveness - RIRDC Completed Projects in 2006--2007 & Research in Progress as at June 2007

|| Home || SEARCH|| Contact || Free Research Publications || Eshop || Privacy Statement ||

RIRDC Completed Projects in 2006-2007 & Research in Progress as at June 2007
BACK TO INDEX

To Global Competitiveness Research in Progress

3.5 Global Competitiveness – Completed Projects

Project No Project Title Researcher Phone Organisation

3. Trade policy reform

AEC-5A Improving the GTAP database for modelling agricultural trade liberalisation Stephen Brown and Jiao Wang 02 6273 1222 Access Economics Pty Ltd

CIE-24A Liberalising world agricultural trade: an expert group’s report Dr Andrew Stoeckel 02 6245 7800 Centre for International Economics

CIE-28A Role of transparency in liberalising agricultural trade Dr Andrew Stoeckel 02 6245 7800 Centre for International Economics

DAH-3A Food aid and agricultural trade reform David Harris 03 9889 9879 David Harris & Associates

5. Supply chain linkages

UQ-120A Unlocking successful new rural industries: Monitoring three Australian native flower supply chains Lilly Lim-Camacho, Tony Dunne, Ray Collins 07 5460 1328 The University of Queensland

6. Policy and institutional analysis

LWR-6A Rural industries and carbon trading: opportunities, barriers and risk management (RDC collaborative) New Forests Pty Ltd 02 6263 6088 (Laura Harris, Program Officer, LWA) The paper was developed by Land & Water Australia

UTS-8A Managing intellectual property rights in plant varieties Dr Rocque Reynolds 02 9514 3165 University of Technology, Sydney

7. Communications

UMO-34A Annual awards for excellence in agribusiness III Dr Lawrie Dooley 03 9903 2757 Monash University

Completed Projects – 3. Trade policy reform

Project Title: Improving the GTAP database for modelling agricultural trade liberalisation

RIRDC Project No.: AEC-5A

Researcher: Stephen Brown and Jiao Wang

Organisation: Access Economics Pty Ltd
PO Box 6248
Kingston ACT 2604

Phone: (02) 6273 1222

Fax: (02) 6273 1223

Email: steve.brown@accesseconomics.com.au; jiao.wang@accesseconomics.com.au

Objectives The main objective of this project is to critically review and re-estimate, where appropriate, the agricultural protection data in the GTAP database. This will greatly enhance the capacity of Australian trade researchers to analyse the economic impacts of international agricultural trade policy and, therefore, better informed policy making.

Background One of the standards to emerge in the area of international trade policy analysis is the global trade analysis project (GTAP) database. Following the release of the latest GTAP database (Version 6), it was felt appropriate to conduct a thorough review of a key area of the database: the estimates of agricultural protection by each country.

Research The review shows that the Version 6 GTAP database is an improvement on the previous release. However, there are still many potential pitfalls for trade modellers to over or under-estimate the impacts of agricultural trade reform, depending on how data are calculated.

Outcomes An inherent problem with detailed tariff rate databases such as MAcMap/GTAP is the use of import weights to average tariffs across products. As an example, Japanese imports of dairy are estimated to have a 46 per cent average of import value using simple import weights. However, using the reference group weighting, as suggested by MAcMap, produces a 73 per cent AVE. It was also considered that mixed or compound tariffs or TRQs are likely to be problematic.

Implications Based on this analysis, trade modellers are urged to go beyond the GTAP database for modelling trade policy. It is essential that, on a case-by-case basis, the import protection data be thoroughly reviewed, assessed, re-estimated where appropriate and sensitivity tests conducted.

Publications Hertel TW, eds (1997) Global Trade Analysis Project: Modelling and Applications, Cambridge University Press.
Bouet, A., Decreux, Y., Fontagne, L., Jean, S. and Laborde, D. (2004) "Computing An Exhaustive and Consistent, ad-valorem Equivalent Measure of Applied Protection: A Detailed Description of MAcMap-HS6 Methodology," World Bank (http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTRANETTRADE/Resources/239054-1101918045494/Bouet-et-al(2004).pdf)

Completed Projects – 3 Trade policy reform

Project Title: Liberalising world agricultural trade: an expert group’s report

RIRDC Project No.: CIE-24A

Researcher: Dr Andrew Stoeckel

Organisation: Centre for International Economics

Phone: (02) 6245 7800

Fax: (02) 6245 7888

Email: astoeckel@thecie.com.au

Objectives To enhance liberalisation of world agricultural trade and represent Australia’s interests by participating in an international expert group on reform of the WTO trading system.

Background The Doha negotiations to liberalise trade is a ‘moveable feast’. Circumstances and the negotiating stance adopted by countries change over time as countries’ jockey for negotiating power. One of the most recent arguments blocking progress, advanced by developing countries, is that rich countries’ actions are hurting those of poor countries, therefore rich countries need to liberalise agricultural trade but poor countries need not do likewise. That argument is mostly not true: developing countries’ restrictions on trade primarily hurt themselves. This paper set out the arguments. It shows how the Doha Round of multilateral trade talks has been arduous. Talks were temporarily suspended in July 2006. Although talks have since restarted, the challenge remains to secure a good outcome for trade liberalisation.
Developing countries now comprise over two-thirds of the WTO’s membership. Their greater presence and the continuing economic plight of developing countries have placed development issues at the heart of negotiations. However, a pro-poor outcome does not look likely. To achieve a pro-poor outcome the negotiating game needs to be played differently.
This study goes back to basics — the fundamental case for free trade. The options for pursuing more liberal trade are explored. The best way forward for developing countries to achieve greater economic growth through trade liberalisation, is for them to win the argument at home that the gains come from unilateral liberalisation. If that is more widely appreciated, a better outcome from the multilateral talks is possible.

Research To investigate the size, potential and barriers to trade in Australian agricultural services.

Outcomes This publication was launched at a cocktail reception at the Westin Hotel, 3 July 2007. Honourable Warren Truss, Minister for Trade launched the publication. The paper was well received and noted by some of the senior officials and academics dealing with trade policy and agriculture today.

Publications Trade Policy and Developing Countries: Where to Now?

Completed Projects – 3 Trade policy reform

Project Title: Role of transparency in liberalising agricultural trade

RIRDC Project No.: CIE-28A

Researcher: Dr Andrew Stoeckel

Organisation: Centre for International Economics

Phone: (02) 6245 7800

Fax: (02) 6245 7888

Email: astoeckel@thecie.com.au

Objectives ·1 Examine role of transparency in liberalising trade in agricultural commodities.
·2 Prepare a paper for submission to the International Conference of Agricultural Economists, August 2006.

Background This paper was presented at the 26^th Conference of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE): Contributions of Agricultural Economics to Critical Policy Program on Wednesday, 16 August 2006.

Research The paper demonstrated the potential for better transparency of trade policy to liberalise world agricultural markets.

Outcomes The paper was well received and noted by some of the senior officials and academics dealing with trade policy and agriculture today.

Implications If countries adopted better transparency processes of their trade policies, protection would fall, trade would expand and incomes would rise, including those of Australian farmers. The ideas need promulgating widely and the specifics behind transparency of trade policy need developing. A follow up RIRDC project, CIE-30A: Pursuing trade liberalisation by enhancing the WTO’s transparency of trade policy, expands on this topic.

Publications CIE report Transparency, Australian Policy Processes and International Trade prepared for 26^th Conference of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE): Contributions of Agricultural Economics to Critical Policy Program, Gold Coast, Australia, Wednesday, 16 August 2006.

Completed Projects – 3 Trade policy reform

Project Title: Food aid and agricultural trade reform

RIRDC Project No.: DAH-3A

Researcher: David Harris

Organisation: DN Harris & Associates

Phone: (03) 9889 9879

Fax:

Email: dnharris@hotkey.net.au

Objectives To investigate the food aid activities of the major developed markets and examine issues related to the impact on global commodity markets, the effect on industry developments in LDC’s and the implications for WTO trade reform.

Background WTO notifications on export subsidy commitments suggest some countries are using food aid to support domestic market returns. There have been large fluctuations in the volume of food aid since the WTO Agreement on Agriculture was introduced in 1995. For some commodities, the supply of food aid coincides with periods of low commodity prices and high stocks in the major developed economies.
Wheat, rice and skim milk powder (SMP) are three products often used as food aid. They are also products supported by Government policy interventions in some of the major donor countries. There are no international disciplines on the use of food aid and donors can distribute as much food aid as they wish. Concerns have been raised about the impact of fluctuations in food aid on commodity markets in the recipient countries.

Research Food aid is often seen to be a humanitarian response to food shortages or malnutrition. This view ignores the economic impact on market conditions in recipient countries and on world trade. Global aid flows were reviewed to establish the major donors and to identify linkages between domestic support policies and changes in the level of food aid. Three products by selected donors were analysed in some detail – US wheat, Japanese rice and US SMP. The effect of food aid on industry development in recipient countries was reviewed and a quantitative assessment of the impact of US wheat food aid on world wheat trade was prepared.

Outcomes The investigation revealed discretionary food aid for wheat, rice and SMP increased in periods of low prices and/or high stock levels. Changes in food aid were linked to market support activities and the competitive pressures of increased market access for imports. The US is the largest supplier of food aid and the major cause of global fluctuations in food aid. A lot of aid is provided in ways that distorts world trade and disrupts industry development in recipient countries. Monetized food aid is highly distortionary because it is sold commercially in the recipient countries. It reduces trade and works against the efforts of other aid measures to reduce rural poverty in developing countries.

Implications Donors will take advantage of the absence of WTO disciplines on the use of food aid if there are pressures on domestic market returns. WTO disciplines are required because of the potential for food aid to weaken the benefits of trade liberalisation in other areas. A WTO agreement will need to ensure humanitarian relief for legitimate emergencies is still provided. But rules are required to minimise the distortion effect on world trade and industry development in the recipient countries.

Publications Harris, D 2007, Food aid and agricultural trade reform, forthcoming report prepared for RIRDC, Canberra.

Completed Projects – 5 Supply chain linkages

Project Title: Unlocking successful new rural industries: Australian wildflower chains to the Japanese market

RIRDC Project No.: UQ-120A

Researcher: Lilly Lim-Camacho, Tony Dunne and Ray Collins

Organisation: School of Natural and Rural Systems Management
The University of Queensland

Phone: (07) 5460 1025

Fax: (07) 5460 1324

Email: lilly.lim@uq.edu.au; t.dunne@uq.edu.au; ray.collins@uq.edu.au

Objectives Evaluate three Australian native flower supply chains and identify how supply chain management strategies impact on the way these firms meet their customers' needs.

Background In ‘Unlocking successful new rural industries: Is supply chain management the key?’ three types of supply chains were identified – Achievers, Operators and Idealists. This research was based on data over an 18-month period, and was limited to firms within Australia. With major markets for Australian flowers located overseas, this research was not able to investigate the customer and consumer side of the supply chains. In addition, In 2004, preliminary research on new product development and market research in the Australian native flower industry showed that efforts in introducing new cut flowers are not in tune with what the market needs. New product development in the Australian native flower industry is relying on signals different to those that the market sends and is therefore not market-led.

Research Market segmentation of the Japanese floral market was conducted through florist surveys administered through auction markets and a wholesaler. Results were analysed using data mining and statistical packages investigating several variables that relate to their use of Australian products. In addition, three case study supply chains featured in a previous RIRDC study were revisited, this time identifying changes in supply chain management to include their customers in Japan. In depth interviews were used in data collection, with data analysed against an existing supply chain framework to identify their current supply chain type.

Outcomes Three segments of the Japanese market were identified on the basis of their purchasing behaviour. Auction loyals prefer to purchase through the auction. Nakaoroshi loyals prefer intermediate wholesalers. Trailblazers purchase from various outlets including the internet. The segments are further differentiated by several characteristics such as size of their business and where they purchase Australian flowers. On the other hand, supply chain analysis showed that the three chains have changed significantly since 2001.
The most common form of change is that of a new customer or supplier, which results in a shift in the type of relationships in the chain. One of the chains maintained their status as Achiever, continuing to sustain their competitive advantage with the assistance of good relationships.
Another chain had split into two channels, one of which was an Idealist while the other an Operator. The third chain had the same typology. Idealist chains are characterised by having a supply chain orientation, but lacking the ability to implement. Operator chains are made of firms who do not intend to collaborate because there is no need to do so.

Implications The study shows how each chain featured is able to meet the needs of their markets, given the level of supply chain management practices they have in place. It illustrates the importance of information management, relationship management and creating value in meeting the needs of the market. It also supports the idea that the Japanese market can still be developed by meeting the needs of the different segments within it.

Publications Final report submitted to RIRDC.

Completed Projects – 6 Policy and institutional analysis

Project Title: Rural industries and carbon trading: opportunities, barriers and risk management (RDC collaborative project)

RIRDC Project No.: LWR-6A

Researcher: New Forests Pty Ltd

Organisation: The project was coordinated through Land and Water Australia (LWA).

Phone: (02) 6263 6088 (Laura Harris, Program Officer, LWA)

Fax: (02) 6263 6099

Email: laura.harris@lwa.gov.au

Objectives 1. To review and provide a synthesis of relevant existing literature, studies, reports and models in the form of a Background Paper identifying key issues for consideration at a workshop
2. To design a workshop of relevant experts and stakeholders, structured around the key issues in the Background Paper and identification of appropriate participants;
3. To facilitate the conduct of the workshop over 1 day with appropriate presentations and discussion inputs, and to make record of the discussions and key outcomes, including identification of key knowledge gaps;
4. To draft a possible submission to the Prime Minister’s Task Group, addressing key issues flagged in the Task Group’s Discussion Paper, drawing on the project Background Paper and discussion at the Workshop. This will be for consideration and any necessary approvals by the individual participating organisations;
5. To prepare a final report of the project, including a preliminary research agenda drawing on the above inputs, as the basis for a possible ongoing program of research for investment consideration by LWA and its partners.

Background The project was commissioned by Land and Water Australia (LWA) in partnership with other Research and Development Corporations (RDC) and non-government organizations (NGO) to inform the work of the Prime Minister's Task Group on Emissions Trading. Agriculture and rural industries in general, including forestry, as suppliers of carbon credits, have the potential to participate in an emissions trading market. This opens up a potentially new income stream for farmers and other landholders as well as potentially significant risks.
The short time frame did not permit the commissioning of any new research at this stage, so the focus was on the synthesis of existing knowledge and identification of knowledge gaps.

Research As above, under ‘Objectives’, based on a literature review and workshop processes involving selected research experts and RDC representatives.

Outcomes A range of RDCs, including RIRDC and NFF, participated in the workshop and review of the report and R&D needs. An Emissions Trading Scheme Issues Paper was forwarded to the Prime Minister’s Task Group on Emissions Trading, on behalf of a number of RDCs. This paper focused primarily on the issues concerning agriculture and forestry.

Implications An emissions trading scheme would have major implications for agriculture and forestry in Australia. If they were left out of such a scheme, their costs would still rise through the increase in energy prices that would be expected from such a scheme. Only by their inclusion in any emissions trading scheme could their potential to deliver low-cost abatement be identified and maximised.
However, significant research and development of standards, methodologies, protocols, and management practices are needed before agriculture can engage fully with an emissions trading scheme. A phased approach which included the development and implementation of the necessary research program could allow agriculture and forestry to become full participants in an emissions trading system over time to ensure the continued sustainability of agriculture and forestry in Australia. This will require business, government and the research community working together.

Publications Issues paper: ‘Agriculture, Forestry and Emissions Trading: How do we participate?’
The paper was developed by Land & Water Australia and released on behalf of the following RDCs:
·1 Australian Pork Limited (APL)
·2 Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC)
·3 Forests and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation (FWPRDC)
·4 Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC)
·5 Horticulture Australia Council (HAC)
·6 Land & Water Australia (LWA)
·7 Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA), and
·8 Sugar Research and Development Corporation (SRDC)

Completed Projects – 6 Policy and institutional analysis

Project Title: Managing intellectual property rights in plant varieties

RIRDC Project No.: UTS-8A

Researcher: Dr Rocque Reynolds

Organisation: Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney

Phone: (02) 9514 3165

Fax: (02) 9514 3400

Email: rocque.reynolds@uts.edu.au

Objectives The objective of this project is to prepare a report on the management of intellectual property rights in plant varieties, including plant breeder's rights, patents, trade marks, copyright, passing off and confidentiality agreements in the grain and seed industries. In particular the report will focus on the incidence, status and content of IP contracts and licensing agreements, including growing agreements, and the exhaustion of IP rights under IP sales agreements. The report will analyse existing standard contracts in these industries and comment on the legality of effectiveness of existing industry practices.

Background This research grew out of a paper presented at the 2003 Agribusiness Conference, which looked at strategies for managing plant breeders’ rights (PBR). It considered cascading royalties whereby breeders would seek royalty payments not just from growers but also from seed conditioners, retailers, exporters and storage facilities. It considered how end point royalties were being introduced and urged conference participants to look to the Copyright Act (6th) 1968 as a possible template for the future management of PBR. On the basis of this paper and my past work in managing intellectual property rights, RIRDC provided funding to consider how intellectual property was being managed in the pasture seeds industry. The research was to focus on the impact of plant breeders’ rights on growers.

Research From the beginning the research took a very clear direction. From discussion with industry leaders, growers, breeders and the Steering Committee, it quickly emerged that from the grower’s point of view, the most important issue to consider in relation to managing plant breeder’s rights in the pasture seeds industry was contract growing.
We therefore sought to establish how contract growing was related to the introduction of plant breeders’ rights; the role which contract growing played in managing intellectual property in pasture seeds; grower attitudes to contract growing and whether, from a legal point of view there were particular problems with growing contracts.

Outcomes We determined that the introduction of PBR had facilitated the separation of farming and marketing in the pasture seeds industry; that this new specialist marketing industry relied on contract growing to supply its distribution networks; that growers who had experience of contract growing were, on the whole, favourably disposed towards it but that growers who did not have contract growing experience were suspicious. We determined that existing contracts were poorly drafted and that the introduction of a standard contract would be desirable.

Implications The report has challenged the popular view that contract growing is oppressive, and instead suggests that the enterprise of contract growing is a joint venture between marketing and growing partners who together are creating a modern pasture seed market.

Publications R Reynolds, ‘Plant breeders, growers and the transformation of a market’, Conference Paper, 2006
Cornwall J, Nature’s Capital. The history of pasture plants in Australia, 2005, (forthcoming).

Completed Projects – 7 Communications

Project Title: Annual awards for excellence in agribusiness III

RIRDC Project No.: UMO-34A

Researcher: Dr Lawrie Dooley

Organisation: Department of Management
Monash University
PO Box 197
Caulfield East VIC 3145

Phone: (03) 9903 2757

Fax: (03) 9903 2718

Email: lawrence.dooley@buseco.monash.edu.au

Objectives The Agribusiness Awards for Excellence were established to recognise and reward companies and individuals with outstanding achievements in Australia's Agribusiness industry. Award sponsorship provides the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC) with an opportunity to present their corporate image to the Agribusiness industry. By supporting this prestigious event RIRDC is able to show its commitment to promoting excellence in the Australian Agribusiness industry.

Background In 1996 the Faculty of Business and Economics at Monash University, initiated the first national awards in excellence for Australian Agribusiness. Since their inception, the awards have grown and are now nationally and internationally recognised as the premier awards in Australian Agribusiness, with sponsored support for awards in leadership, export, value adding, technology and innovation, environment and energy management, rural enterprise, primary production, employer of choice and risk management.

Research Members of the Australian Agribusiness community are invited to nominate organisations or individuals for awards in the various categories. We currently have a mailing list of 5,000 companies and organisations and conduct mass marketing through advertisements in selected media including electronic newsletters and web pages of supporting organisations. Telemarketing is conducted to invite companies to consider applying for the awards.
Prospective applicants are obtained from sponsors and articles of interest collected from BRW, Financial Review, The Age, The Australian, Stock and Land, Weekly Times, Australian Farm Journal and Queensland Country Life. Applicants have to address key selection criteria and the winners are selected by a judging panel with representatives from all sponsors and chaired by Dr. Lawrie Dooley, Food and Agribusiness Programs Director, Monash University.

Outcomes Winners for the last three years of the RIRDC Value Adding Award are presented as case studies of Sunrice, Australian Agricultural Company and Bellata Gold. These case studies illustrate that it is possible to successfully compete through adding value to Australian agricultural commodities.

Implications Australian agriculture has developed an internationally competitive production base for agricultural commodities. The future challenges us to add value to these commodities in global markets for food ingredients, food service inputs and branded food products.
These case studies of successful Australian agri-food companies demonstrate the potential to value add to our commodities if we can maintain a strong customer focus, produce differentiated branded products and develop partnerships and traceability throughout the supply chain.

Publications Agribusiness Award Winners Booklet 2005, 2006.

Site map Contact us Feedback Links Disclaimer Privacy Statement

Last updated: October 2007 Copyright © RIRDC 2007
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/comp07/glc1.html

3.5 Global Competitiveness – Completed Projects
Project No	Project Title	Researcher	Phone	Organisation

AEC-5A	Improving the GTAP database for modelling agricultural trade liberalisation	Stephen Brown and Jiao Wang	02 6273 1222	Access Economics Pty Ltd
CIE-24A	Liberalising world agricultural trade: an expert group’s report	Dr Andrew Stoeckel	02 6245 7800	Centre for International Economics
CIE-28A	Role of transparency in liberalising agricultural trade	Dr Andrew Stoeckel	02 6245 7800	Centre for International Economics
DAH-3A	Food aid and agricultural trade reform	David Harris	03 9889 9879	David Harris & Associates

LWR-6A	Rural industries and carbon trading: opportunities, barriers and risk management (RDC collaborative)	New Forests Pty Ltd	02 6263 6088 (Laura Harris, Program Officer, LWA)	The paper was developed by Land & Water Australia
UTS-8A	Managing intellectual property rights in plant varieties	Dr Rocque Reynolds	02 9514 3165	University of Technology, Sydney

Project Title:	Improving the GTAP database for modelling agricultural trade liberalisation
RIRDC Project No.:	AEC-5A
Researcher:	Stephen Brown and Jiao Wang
Organisation:	Access Economics Pty Ltd PO Box 6248 Kingston ACT 2604
Phone:	(02) 6273 1222
Fax:	(02) 6273 1223
Email:	steve.brown@accesseconomics.com.au; jiao.wang@accesseconomics.com.au
Objectives	The main objective of this project is to critically review and re-estimate, where appropriate, the agricultural protection data in the GTAP database. This will greatly enhance the capacity of Australian trade researchers to analyse the economic impacts of international agricultural trade policy and, therefore, better informed policy making.
Background	One of the standards to emerge in the area of international trade policy analysis is the global trade analysis project (GTAP) database. Following the release of the latest GTAP database (Version 6), it was felt appropriate to conduct a thorough review of a key area of the database: the estimates of agricultural protection by each country.
Research	The review shows that the Version 6 GTAP database is an improvement on the previous release. However, there are still many potential pitfalls for trade modellers to over or under-estimate the impacts of agricultural trade reform, depending on how data are calculated.
Outcomes	An inherent problem with detailed tariff rate databases such as MAcMap/GTAP is the use of import weights to average tariffs across products. As an example, Japanese imports of dairy are estimated to have a 46 per cent average of import value using simple import weights. However, using the reference group weighting, as suggested by MAcMap, produces a 73 per cent AVE. It was also considered that mixed or compound tariffs or TRQs are likely to be problematic.
Implications	Based on this analysis, trade modellers are urged to go beyond the GTAP database for modelling trade policy. It is essential that, on a case-by-case basis, the import protection data be thoroughly reviewed, assessed, re-estimated where appropriate and sensitivity tests conducted.
Publications	Hertel TW, eds (1997) Global Trade Analysis Project: Modelling and Applications, Cambridge University Press. Bouet, A., Decreux, Y., Fontagne, L., Jean, S. and Laborde, D. (2004) "Computing An Exhaustive and Consistent, ad-valorem Equivalent Measure of Applied Protection: A Detailed Description of MAcMap-HS6 Methodology," World Bank (http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTRANETTRADE/Resources/239054-1101918045494/Bouet-et-al(2004).pdf)

Project Title:	Liberalising world agricultural trade: an expert group’s report
RIRDC Project No.:	CIE-24A
Researcher:	Dr Andrew Stoeckel
Organisation:	Centre for International Economics
Phone:	(02) 6245 7800
Fax:	(02) 6245 7888
Email:	astoeckel@thecie.com.au
Objectives	To enhance liberalisation of world agricultural trade and represent Australia’s interests by participating in an international expert group on reform of the WTO trading system.
Background	The Doha negotiations to liberalise trade is a ‘moveable feast’. Circumstances and the negotiating stance adopted by countries change over time as countries’ jockey for negotiating power. One of the most recent arguments blocking progress, advanced by developing countries, is that rich countries’ actions are hurting those of poor countries, therefore rich countries need to liberalise agricultural trade but poor countries need not do likewise. That argument is mostly not true: developing countries’ restrictions on trade primarily hurt themselves. This paper set out the arguments. It shows how the Doha Round of multilateral trade talks has been arduous. Talks were temporarily suspended in July 2006. Although talks have since restarted, the challenge remains to secure a good outcome for trade liberalisation. Developing countries now comprise over two-thirds of the WTO’s membership. Their greater presence and the continuing economic plight of developing countries have placed development issues at the heart of negotiations. However, a pro-poor outcome does not look likely. To achieve a pro-poor outcome the negotiating game needs to be played differently. This study goes back to basics — the fundamental case for free trade. The options for pursuing more liberal trade are explored. The best way forward for developing countries to achieve greater economic growth through trade liberalisation, is for them to win the argument at home that the gains come from unilateral liberalisation. If that is more widely appreciated, a better outcome from the multilateral talks is possible.
Research	To investigate the size, potential and barriers to trade in Australian agricultural services.
Outcomes	This publication was launched at a cocktail reception at the Westin Hotel, 3 July 2007. Honourable Warren Truss, Minister for Trade launched the publication. The paper was well received and noted by some of the senior officials and academics dealing with trade policy and agriculture today.
Publications	Trade Policy and Developing Countries: Where to Now?

Project Title:	Role of transparency in liberalising agricultural trade
RIRDC Project No.:	CIE-28A
Researcher:	Dr Andrew Stoeckel
Organisation:	Centre for International Economics
Phone:	(02) 6245 7800
Fax:	(02) 6245 7888
Email:	astoeckel@thecie.com.au
Objectives	·1 Examine role of transparency in liberalising trade in agricultural commodities. ·2 Prepare a paper for submission to the International Conference of Agricultural Economists, August 2006.
Background	This paper was presented at the 26^th Conference of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE): Contributions of Agricultural Economics to Critical Policy Program on Wednesday, 16 August 2006.
Research	The paper demonstrated the potential for better transparency of trade policy to liberalise world agricultural markets.
Outcomes	The paper was well received and noted by some of the senior officials and academics dealing with trade policy and agriculture today.
Implications	If countries adopted better transparency processes of their trade policies, protection would fall, trade would expand and incomes would rise, including those of Australian farmers. The ideas need promulgating widely and the specifics behind transparency of trade policy need developing. A follow up RIRDC project, CIE-30A: Pursuing trade liberalisation by enhancing the WTO’s transparency of trade policy, expands on this topic.
Publications	CIE report Transparency, Australian Policy Processes and International Trade prepared for 26^th Conference of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE): Contributions of Agricultural Economics to Critical Policy Program, Gold Coast, Australia, Wednesday, 16 August 2006.

Project Title:	Food aid and agricultural trade reform
RIRDC Project No.:	DAH-3A
Researcher:	David Harris
Organisation:	DN Harris & Associates
Phone:	(03) 9889 9879
Fax:
Email:	dnharris@hotkey.net.au
Objectives	To investigate the food aid activities of the major developed markets and examine issues related to the impact on global commodity markets, the effect on industry developments in LDC’s and the implications for WTO trade reform.
Background	WTO notifications on export subsidy commitments suggest some countries are using food aid to support domestic market returns. There have been large fluctuations in the volume of food aid since the WTO Agreement on Agriculture was introduced in 1995. For some commodities, the supply of food aid coincides with periods of low commodity prices and high stocks in the major developed economies. Wheat, rice and skim milk powder (SMP) are three products often used as food aid. They are also products supported by Government policy interventions in some of the major donor countries. There are no international disciplines on the use of food aid and donors can distribute as much food aid as they wish. Concerns have been raised about the impact of fluctuations in food aid on commodity markets in the recipient countries.
Research	Food aid is often seen to be a humanitarian response to food shortages or malnutrition. This view ignores the economic impact on market conditions in recipient countries and on world trade. Global aid flows were reviewed to establish the major donors and to identify linkages between domestic support policies and changes in the level of food aid. Three products by selected donors were analysed in some detail – US wheat, Japanese rice and US SMP. The effect of food aid on industry development in recipient countries was reviewed and a quantitative assessment of the impact of US wheat food aid on world wheat trade was prepared.
Outcomes	The investigation revealed discretionary food aid for wheat, rice and SMP increased in periods of low prices and/or high stock levels. Changes in food aid were linked to market support activities and the competitive pressures of increased market access for imports. The US is the largest supplier of food aid and the major cause of global fluctuations in food aid. A lot of aid is provided in ways that distorts world trade and disrupts industry development in recipient countries. Monetized food aid is highly distortionary because it is sold commercially in the recipient countries. It reduces trade and works against the efforts of other aid measures to reduce rural poverty in developing countries.
Implications	Donors will take advantage of the absence of WTO disciplines on the use of food aid if there are pressures on domestic market returns. WTO disciplines are required because of the potential for food aid to weaken the benefits of trade liberalisation in other areas. A WTO agreement will need to ensure humanitarian relief for legitimate emergencies is still provided. But rules are required to minimise the distortion effect on world trade and industry development in the recipient countries.
Publications	Harris, D 2007, Food aid and agricultural trade reform, forthcoming report prepared for RIRDC, Canberra.

Project Title:	Unlocking successful new rural industries: Australian wildflower chains to the Japanese market
RIRDC Project No.:	UQ-120A
Researcher:	Lilly Lim-Camacho, Tony Dunne and Ray Collins
Organisation:	School of Natural and Rural Systems Management The University of Queensland
Phone:	(07) 5460 1025
Fax:	(07) 5460 1324
Email:	lilly.lim@uq.edu.au; t.dunne@uq.edu.au; ray.collins@uq.edu.au
Objectives	Evaluate three Australian native flower supply chains and identify how supply chain management strategies impact on the way these firms meet their customers' needs.
Background	In ‘Unlocking successful new rural industries: Is supply chain management the key?’ three types of supply chains were identified – Achievers, Operators and Idealists. This research was based on data over an 18-month period, and was limited to firms within Australia. With major markets for Australian flowers located overseas, this research was not able to investigate the customer and consumer side of the supply chains. In addition, In 2004, preliminary research on new product development and market research in the Australian native flower industry showed that efforts in introducing new cut flowers are not in tune with what the market needs. New product development in the Australian native flower industry is relying on signals different to those that the market sends and is therefore not market-led.
Research	Market segmentation of the Japanese floral market was conducted through florist surveys administered through auction markets and a wholesaler. Results were analysed using data mining and statistical packages investigating several variables that relate to their use of Australian products. In addition, three case study supply chains featured in a previous RIRDC study were revisited, this time identifying changes in supply chain management to include their customers in Japan. In depth interviews were used in data collection, with data analysed against an existing supply chain framework to identify their current supply chain type.
Outcomes	Three segments of the Japanese market were identified on the basis of their purchasing behaviour. Auction loyals prefer to purchase through the auction. Nakaoroshi loyals prefer intermediate wholesalers. Trailblazers purchase from various outlets including the internet. The segments are further differentiated by several characteristics such as size of their business and where they purchase Australian flowers. On the other hand, supply chain analysis showed that the three chains have changed significantly since 2001. The most common form of change is that of a new customer or supplier, which results in a shift in the type of relationships in the chain. One of the chains maintained their status as Achiever, continuing to sustain their competitive advantage with the assistance of good relationships. Another chain had split into two channels, one of which was an Idealist while the other an Operator. The third chain had the same typology. Idealist chains are characterised by having a supply chain orientation, but lacking the ability to implement. Operator chains are made of firms who do not intend to collaborate because there is no need to do so.
Implications	The study shows how each chain featured is able to meet the needs of their markets, given the level of supply chain management practices they have in place. It illustrates the importance of information management, relationship management and creating value in meeting the needs of the market. It also supports the idea that the Japanese market can still be developed by meeting the needs of the different segments within it.
Publications	Final report submitted to RIRDC.

Project Title:	Rural industries and carbon trading: opportunities, barriers and risk management (RDC collaborative project)
RIRDC Project No.:	LWR-6A
Researcher:	New Forests Pty Ltd
Organisation:	The project was coordinated through Land and Water Australia (LWA).
Phone:	(02) 6263 6088 (Laura Harris, Program Officer, LWA)
Fax:	(02) 6263 6099
Email:	laura.harris@lwa.gov.au
Objectives	1. To review and provide a synthesis of relevant existing literature, studies, reports and models in the form of a Background Paper identifying key issues for consideration at a workshop 2. To design a workshop of relevant experts and stakeholders, structured around the key issues in the Background Paper and identification of appropriate participants; 3. To facilitate the conduct of the workshop over 1 day with appropriate presentations and discussion inputs, and to make record of the discussions and key outcomes, including identification of key knowledge gaps; 4. To draft a possible submission to the Prime Minister’s Task Group, addressing key issues flagged in the Task Group’s Discussion Paper, drawing on the project Background Paper and discussion at the Workshop. This will be for consideration and any necessary approvals by the individual participating organisations; 5. To prepare a final report of the project, including a preliminary research agenda drawing on the above inputs, as the basis for a possible ongoing program of research for investment consideration by LWA and its partners.
Background	The project was commissioned by Land and Water Australia (LWA) in partnership with other Research and Development Corporations (RDC) and non-government organizations (NGO) to inform the work of the Prime Minister's Task Group on Emissions Trading. Agriculture and rural industries in general, including forestry, as suppliers of carbon credits, have the potential to participate in an emissions trading market. This opens up a potentially new income stream for farmers and other landholders as well as potentially significant risks. The short time frame did not permit the commissioning of any new research at this stage, so the focus was on the synthesis of existing knowledge and identification of knowledge gaps.
Research	As above, under ‘Objectives’, based on a literature review and workshop processes involving selected research experts and RDC representatives.
Outcomes	A range of RDCs, including RIRDC and NFF, participated in the workshop and review of the report and R&D needs. An Emissions Trading Scheme Issues Paper was forwarded to the Prime Minister’s Task Group on Emissions Trading, on behalf of a number of RDCs. This paper focused primarily on the issues concerning agriculture and forestry.
Implications	An emissions trading scheme would have major implications for agriculture and forestry in Australia. If they were left out of such a scheme, their costs would still rise through the increase in energy prices that would be expected from such a scheme. Only by their inclusion in any emissions trading scheme could their potential to deliver low-cost abatement be identified and maximised. However, significant research and development of standards, methodologies, protocols, and management practices are needed before agriculture can engage fully with an emissions trading scheme. A phased approach which included the development and implementation of the necessary research program could allow agriculture and forestry to become full participants in an emissions trading system over time to ensure the continued sustainability of agriculture and forestry in Australia. This will require business, government and the research community working together.
Publications	Issues paper: ‘Agriculture, Forestry and Emissions Trading: How do we participate?’ The paper was developed by Land & Water Australia and released on behalf of the following RDCs: ·1 Australian Pork Limited (APL) ·2 Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC) ·3 Forests and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation (FWPRDC) ·4 Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) ·5 Horticulture Australia Council (HAC) ·6 Land & Water Australia (LWA) ·7 Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA), and ·8 Sugar Research and Development Corporation (SRDC)

Project Title:	Managing intellectual property rights in plant varieties
RIRDC Project No.:	UTS-8A
Researcher:	Dr Rocque Reynolds
Organisation:	Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney
Phone:	(02) 9514 3165
Fax:	(02) 9514 3400
Email:	rocque.reynolds@uts.edu.au
Objectives	The objective of this project is to prepare a report on the management of intellectual property rights in plant varieties, including plant breeder's rights, patents, trade marks, copyright, passing off and confidentiality agreements in the grain and seed industries. In particular the report will focus on the incidence, status and content of IP contracts and licensing agreements, including growing agreements, and the exhaustion of IP rights under IP sales agreements. The report will analyse existing standard contracts in these industries and comment on the legality of effectiveness of existing industry practices.
Background	This research grew out of a paper presented at the 2003 Agribusiness Conference, which looked at strategies for managing plant breeders’ rights (PBR). It considered cascading royalties whereby breeders would seek royalty payments not just from growers but also from seed conditioners, retailers, exporters and storage facilities. It considered how end point royalties were being introduced and urged conference participants to look to the Copyright Act (6th) 1968 as a possible template for the future management of PBR. On the basis of this paper and my past work in managing intellectual property rights, RIRDC provided funding to consider how intellectual property was being managed in the pasture seeds industry. The research was to focus on the impact of plant breeders’ rights on growers.
Research	From the beginning the research took a very clear direction. From discussion with industry leaders, growers, breeders and the Steering Committee, it quickly emerged that from the grower’s point of view, the most important issue to consider in relation to managing plant breeder’s rights in the pasture seeds industry was contract growing. We therefore sought to establish how contract growing was related to the introduction of plant breeders’ rights; the role which contract growing played in managing intellectual property in pasture seeds; grower attitudes to contract growing and whether, from a legal point of view there were particular problems with growing contracts.
Outcomes	We determined that the introduction of PBR had facilitated the separation of farming and marketing in the pasture seeds industry; that this new specialist marketing industry relied on contract growing to supply its distribution networks; that growers who had experience of contract growing were, on the whole, favourably disposed towards it but that growers who did not have contract growing experience were suspicious. We determined that existing contracts were poorly drafted and that the introduction of a standard contract would be desirable.
Implications	The report has challenged the popular view that contract growing is oppressive, and instead suggests that the enterprise of contract growing is a joint venture between marketing and growing partners who together are creating a modern pasture seed market.
Publications	R Reynolds, ‘Plant breeders, growers and the transformation of a market’, Conference Paper, 2006 Cornwall J, Nature’s Capital. The history of pasture plants in Australia, 2005, (forthcoming).

Project Title:	Annual awards for excellence in agribusiness III
RIRDC Project No.:	UMO-34A
Researcher:	Dr Lawrie Dooley
Organisation:	Department of Management Monash University PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145
Phone:	(03) 9903 2757
Fax:	(03) 9903 2718
Email:	lawrence.dooley@buseco.monash.edu.au
Objectives	The Agribusiness Awards for Excellence were established to recognise and reward companies and individuals with outstanding achievements in Australia's Agribusiness industry. Award sponsorship provides the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC) with an opportunity to present their corporate image to the Agribusiness industry. By supporting this prestigious event RIRDC is able to show its commitment to promoting excellence in the Australian Agribusiness industry.
Background	In 1996 the Faculty of Business and Economics at Monash University, initiated the first national awards in excellence for Australian Agribusiness. Since their inception, the awards have grown and are now nationally and internationally recognised as the premier awards in Australian Agribusiness, with sponsored support for awards in leadership, export, value adding, technology and innovation, environment and energy management, rural enterprise, primary production, employer of choice and risk management.
Research	Members of the Australian Agribusiness community are invited to nominate organisations or individuals for awards in the various categories. We currently have a mailing list of 5,000 companies and organisations and conduct mass marketing through advertisements in selected media including electronic newsletters and web pages of supporting organisations. Telemarketing is conducted to invite companies to consider applying for the awards. Prospective applicants are obtained from sponsors and articles of interest collected from BRW, Financial Review, The Age, The Australian, Stock and Land, Weekly Times, Australian Farm Journal and Queensland Country Life. Applicants have to address key selection criteria and the winners are selected by a judging panel with representatives from all sponsors and chaired by Dr. Lawrie Dooley, Food and Agribusiness Programs Director, Monash University.
Outcomes	Winners for the last three years of the RIRDC Value Adding Award are presented as case studies of Sunrice, Australian Agricultural Company and Bellata Gold. These case studies illustrate that it is possible to successfully compete through adding value to Australian agricultural commodities.
Implications	Australian agriculture has developed an internationally competitive production base for agricultural commodities. The future challenges us to add value to these commodities in global markets for food ingredients, food service inputs and branded food products. These case studies of successful Australian agri-food companies demonstrate the potential to value add to our commodities if we can maintain a strong customer focus, produce differentiated branded products and develop partnerships and traceability throughout the supply chain.
Publications	Agribusiness Award Winners Booklet 2005, 2006.