|| Home || Search || Contact || Publications Eshop || Privacy Statement ||

EcoRange:
Market-Oriented Environmental Certification for Rangeland Pastoral Industries -
4. Australian rangeland grazier survey
Part of the EcoRange project report series

Edited by Lester Pahl

November 2003

RIRDC Publication No 03/130  RIRDC Project No DAQ-276A

Executive Summary
Background
There is a desire in government, industry and consumers to see pastoral enterprises achieve and demonstrate ecologically sustainable use of natural resources. Environmental marketing schemes such as environmental management systems (EMS) and environmental labelling may be market mechanisms for achieving these outcomes.

MarketSense was commissioned by the Department of Primary Industries, Queensland (DPI) to conduct two grazier focus groups with the objectives to:
 

• identify graziers’ views, concerns and language in relation to environmentally friendly foods and fibre and their production;
• determine the level of understanding, motivation and commitment among graziers to certifying such products; and
• provide a basis for the development of a formal survey instrument.


Environmental accreditation was used in the phone survey as graziers were familiar with the term accreditation due to its use in widely recognised quality assurance schemes, which enabled them to apply the same concept to environmental management. Consequently, accreditation is used throughout this report.

The term environmental accreditation is used in the context of this report to portray a range of environmental management and marketing schemes, including environmental management systems, environmental labelling and eco-labelling schemes.

ACNielsen was then commissioned by DPI to conduct a national survey of graziers that will inform the development of an appropriate accreditation scheme of benefit to both graziers and consumers as well as the environment.

 The results of this grazier survey will provide:
 

• an informed basis for market development;
• the communication needed to make these schemes attractive to graziers; and
• an understanding of the elements of an environmental accreditation program that are essential to grazier adoption.


The results presented are based on a national survey of 300 rangeland graziers, accurate to within 5%. Graziers were surveyed from all states containing semi-arid rangelands, including Western Australia, South Australia, New South Wales, Northern Territory and Queensland.

Summary of findings

Grazier attitudes to environmental issues
The three most significant environmental issues for rangeland graziers are perceived to be: weeds/pests/disease, the decline in water quality/quantity and overgrazing. These issues are consistent across all states and property sizes/types. There is also some overlap with consumer concerns which highlights potential communication points for marketing an environmental accreditation scheme, provided that the issues can be condensed into a clear, meaningful message.

Environmental issues need to be tackled at many levels and, while graziers acknowledge their own role in this process, they also see a significant role for government and industry bodies. Graziers acknowledge that there is scope for some improvement of their environment-friendly practices and see this as becoming increasingly important in the future.

Environmental accreditation: existing knowledge
Four out of ten graziers are aware of the term environmental accreditation although significantly more are aware of schemes such as Flockcare and Cattlecare (91% awareness), organic certification (86%) and EU Accreditation (70%).

Three-quarters of graziers can see potential benefits from environmental accreditation, these being a mix of environmental and economic advantages. Highest mentions are given to: an improved natural environment, higher prices, higher quality and improved access to export markets. Although the intrinsic benefit of an improved natural environment may act as a motivator for some graziers, the potential economic benefits must not be neglected. Graziers will need to see that the scheme offers them a viable business proposition and commercial advantage.

There is also acknowledgement that such a scheme may have disadvantages, particularly in terms of cost . both monetary and opportunity costs. Graziers are also concerned with the potential for increased regulations and scrutiny on their core business. The most frequently mentioned concerns are: increased costs, more regulations and less flexibility in managing grazing.

Environmental accreditation: attitudes and likely take-up
There is strong support for a well-branded and easily identified environmental accreditation scheme, for example:
 

• 73% of graziers indicate interest in the scheme with most wanting to find out more;
• 12% of graziers would be willing to implement the scheme without knowing more details; and
• 61% would consider implementation based on finding out more about it.


Almost all graziers see the need to have a unique label or logo as a brand identifier for the scheme.

In terms of who should play a part in developing and running the scheme, graziers see the need for involvement from many agencies in addition to themselves. This includes industry groups, government, retailers and consumer groups. From a lead role perspective, graziers believe this responsibility should fall on their shoulders.

Auditing of the scheme is highly desirable with a strong preference to see this administered by a licensed independent auditor. This is the preferred situation, however, no mention was made of the auditing costs involved.

There are two key requirements graziers would need to see before they would consider implementing an environmental accreditation scheme: clear demonstration of the scheme’s benefits and details of what is required of them to implement the scheme. Essentially, graziers want to know what is in it for them, and what will it cost.

Finally, in terms of incentives to encourage adoption of the scheme, demonstrating substantial consumer demand is likely to have greatest effect:
 

• 82% of graziers would consider implementing the scheme on this basis;
• 60% would be influenced by assistance with training and work materials; and
• 49% would be influenced by a $3,000 government incentive.


Those who access external advice are more likely to be motivated by each of the three incentives.

There are also differences by property type and geographic area. South Australian graziers are more highly motivated by each incentive as are sheep producers. The offer of assistance is attractive to those who employ help on their properties.
 

Site map Contact us Feedback Links Disclaimer Privacy Statement

Last updated: 16 January 2004
Copyright RIRDC
http://www.rirdc.gov.au/reports/Ras/03-130sum.html