PROJECT NUMBER
•
2020-095
PROJECT STATUS:
CURRENT
ORGANISATION:
University of Tasmania
SPECIES
126,240 results
Improving the availability of safe and effective veterinary medicines for Australia's seafood industry
Project number:
2020-094
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure:
$302,185.91
Principal Investigator:
Matthew S. Bansemer
Organisation:
University of Adelaide
Project start/end date:
31 May 2021
-
27 Jun 2024
Contact:
FRDC
Globally, disease is the major limiting factor restricting growth in aquaculture (Stentiford et al 2012; Jennings et al 2016), with impact of aquatic diseases exceeding $6 billion per annum. Aquaculture is the fastest growing livestock industry in Australia, and is expected to double in value to $2 billion by 2027 to meet global seafood demand (National Aquaculture Strategic Plan). Therefore access to safe and effective veterinary medicines is critically import to support the current industry and its expansion.
Australia’s aquaculture industry must have access to safe and effective veterinary medicines for disease management, industry productivity and animal welfare. This need is highlighted in Australia’s national strategic plan (www.agriculture.gov.au/animal/aquatic/aquaplan) and FRDC’s strategic plan (2015-2020 and 2020-2025) including supporting the future sustainable expansion of aquaculture.
Veterinary medicines are required for prevention (for example, vaccines), therapeutic treatments (for example, antibiotics, anthelmintics and antimycotics) and husbandry (for example, hormones for reproduction and anaesthetics for animal handling). Currently there is a substantial lack of access to permitted or registered products.
There is a clear need for national coordination of applications for permits and registrations for aquatic veterinary medicines that replaces the duplication, disjointed efforts, poor permit applications and restrictive minor use permits and generally wasted resources occurring in the seafood industry.
There is a need to coordinate seafood industry prioritisation and application for access and use of agvet chemicals and to establish effective relationships between the seafood industry and APVMA to progress this important issue.
A model to support the resourcing of this service to industry and regulators needs to be devised to maintain this activity after completion of this project.
1. Document a safe and effective process for the off-label use of veterinary medicines aimed at supporting fish health, welfare and production while managing environmental risks and enabling data generation.
2. Coordinate a national effort to facilitate the progress of priority aquatic veterinary medicines in the seafood industry through to permitting or registration with the APVMA
3. Determine options for a system, framework and / or business case to effectively coordinate national data generation and applications to the APVMA into the future, and maintain current permits and registrations in the seafood industry.
4. Develop and implement a communication and awareness strategy for industry on safe and effective veterinary medicine use
Final report
ISBN:
978-1-876007-55-3
Authors:
Jessica Jamuna Buss
Shane David Roberts
Jo-Anne Ruscoe
Marty Robert Deveney and Matthew Scott Bansemer
Final Report
•
2024-09-30
2020-094-DLD
In this project we documented how off-label use in aquaculture can be efficiently and effectively regulated. We did this by describing South Australia’s off-label regulatory framework (the off-label framework) used by the Department of Primary Industries and Regions (PIRSA). PIRSA uses the off-label framework to assess aquaculture agvet product use requests (when no permitted agvet products exist), whilst considering risks to environment, aquatic animals and human health. Veterinarian authority to prescribe off-label products to treat animals (including aquaculture stock) provides aquaculture access to off-label treatments. The off-label framework is an additional regulatory tool to ensure off-label agvet product use in aquaculture is conducted responsibly and safely.
Discussion Papers on seafood traceability and labelling
Project number:
2020-093
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure:
$33,000.00
Principal Investigator:
Meaghan Dodd
Organisation:
Intuitive Food Solutions
Project start/end date:
13 Dec 2020
-
7 Feb 2021
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
FRDC have identified this topic is gaining momentum across the food industry including seafood, and this proposal will support FRDC to be prepared for future discussions and potential industry changes and support.
1. What is traceability
2. Understand the current Australian legal requirements for seafood traceability and labelling
3. Understand current seafood traceability methods available including any in development
4. Traceability impacts on product categories
5. Identify improvement areas
Report
Author:
Ewan Colquhoun
Report
•
2021-10-25
All food sold in Australia must comply with the Food Standards Code. Food label claims are subject to Australian Consumer Law, prohibiting false, misleading or deceptive behaviour.
Australian seafood consumers face existing risks and confusion regarding species, nomenclature, and product misrepresentation.
The imminent launch of cellular meat and seafood, now being debated globally by producers and regulators, will offer new benefits to consumers. But there are risks. If the Australian seafood industry mishandles these challenges, we will compound existing product misrepresentation and seafood fraud. A Senate Committee is currently assessing the risks and options across meat and seafood consumer products.
This discussion paper updates the issues, challenges and relevant laws, to suggest options and risks going forward. It is a living document which attempts to reflect a very dynamic food labelling environment. This report is to be used as a first version working document, with further updates to occur every 12-18 months.
Project products
PROJECT NUMBER
•
2020-092
PROJECT STATUS:
CURRENT
ORGANISATION:
University of Tasmania (UTAS)
Energy use and carbon emissions assessments in the Australian fishing and aquaculture sectors: Audit, self-assessment and guidance tools for footprint reduction
Project number:
2020-089
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure:
$98,500.00
Principal Investigator:
Robert A. Bell
Organisation:
Blueshift Consulting
Project start/end date:
21 Feb 2021
-
23 Jul 2021
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
As identified in the EOI scope and from previous FRDC and other research, there are multiple needs for further information on energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the Australian fisheries and aquaculture sectors (F&A).
Firstly, at the top-level, a national account of these sector’s performance is necessary to provide a clear determination of the overall F&A contribution within the Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing Industry classification (AFF Industry) classification within National Inventory Data. The AFF Industry is second largest emissions sector and there is a need to disaggregate the F&A sector from the broader agricultural data, and to also develop industry baselines against which further performance can be measured (and potentially benchmarked against other sectors).
Second, there is a need for sub-sectors (specific managed fisheries or industry groups) as well as individual companies to be able measure, assess and then potentially manage their own energy use and emissions.
Finally, once companies, subsectors and the F&A sectors have data, there is a need for education and tools to assist them to improve energy efficiency and profitability, lower emissions and related risks but also importantly how to create positive engagement with stakeholders, particularly customers becoming more discerning in product selection based on carbon footprint, to maintain competitiveness in consumer protein selection decision-making.
1. Program 1: Establish energy use and GHG profile of Australian F&A sectors
2. Program 2: Develop and self-assessment tool for Australian F&A sectors energy efficiency and GHG
3. Program 3: Develop a toolbox and examples for emissions reduction opportunities in the fisheries & aquaculture sectors
Final report
ISBN:
978-0-646-86114-2
Author:
Robert A. Bell
Final Report
•
2022-05-31
•
2.58 MB
2020-089_DLD.pdf
This project is the first examination of the total carbon emissions of the Australian fishing and aquaculture (F&A) sectors and component seafood production industries. To date, some work had been done on energy consumption and efficiency improvements, but the carbon emissions of the Australian F&A sectors had never been calculated.
In Australia’s National Greenhouse Accounts, emissions from the F&A sectors are currently included within the aggregated ‘agriculture, forestry and fishing’ segment. This segment is the third largest in Australia’s inventory, and the ‘fishing industry’ data is overwhelmed within the large, aggregated datasets of these combined sectors and therefore often unintentionally overlooked.
However, measuring the carbon footprint of the F&A sectors was a complicated task that required an account of all the emissions generated directly and indirectly by the sectors. This included fuel burnt directly to power fishing vessels, to purchased electricity, refrigeration emissions and the emissions from services and products bought from external suppliers such as bait and aquaculture feed. The study measured the carbon emissions and energy use of Australia’s largest F&A producer industries, which together constitute about 82% of Australia’s domestic seafood production by gross value of production (GVP). While some of the other industries that make supply chain inputs to the F&A sectors are discussed (such as aquaculture feeds and fishing bait), the project focus is on the Australian seafood primary producers.
The information is a vital step in providing a competitive advantage for seafood as a low- emissions protein. Seafood consumers are increasingly wanting to know the stories behind the products they’re buying, including efforts by fishers and farmers to reduce their carbon footprint. It also highlights how seafood production may need to adapt in the future.
As part of the project work, three GHG emissions calculator tools were developed to help fishers and farmers better understand what drives their GHG emissions and how to measure them. And once they have been measured, what can be done to better manage emissions, and utilise the information in their operations and customer discussions.
The project has identified five recommendations and opportunities for government departments and agencies to update and improve their GHG emissions reporting methodologies for the fishing and aquaculture sectors.
Project products
Quantifying inter-sectoral values within and among the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors
Project number:
2020-088
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure:
$92,972.00
Principal Investigator:
Buyani Thomy
Organisation:
Natural Capital Economics
Project start/end date:
10 Jan 2021
-
29 Jun 2021
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
In developing the 2020-25 Strategic Plan, FRDC identified five outcomes and associated enabling strategies, including Outcome 4: Fair and secure access to aquatic resources. In developing Outcome 4, FRDC realized that it did not have a shared appreciation of the different beliefs and values that underpin perceptions of fairness and security. Furthermore, it was acknowledged that such values differ within and between different sectors of the fishing and aquaculture sector and can be the source of tension and conflict.
The FRDC is therefore seeking to understand contrasting and complementary values among Indigenous, commercial, and recreational fishing sectors. The proposed project will provide valuable information towards building trust across the industry through an improved understanding of the social, economic and ecological values within and among the three sectors. It will also provide FRDC with the basis for monitoring progress towards the achievement of Outcome 4.
The primary objective of the project is to collect, analyse and report on the values held by the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors. Findings from the project will be used to inform resource management and support for fair and secure access to aquatic resources. The findings will also be valuable to regulators’ through an enhanced understanding of values across the different sectors leading to more efficient and effective consultation processes.
1. To collect, analyse and report on the values held by the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors using a robust and systematic methodology that is repeatable (i.e., using Q-methodology).
2. To identify complementary and contrasting values among Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors through an extensive survey.
3. To report findings and provide recommendations for efficient and practical data collection mechanisms to FRDC. Findings from the project will be used to inform resource management and to support fair and secure access to aquatic resources. The findings will also be valuable to regulators’ through an enhanced understanding of values across the different sectors leading to more efficient and effective consultation processes.
Final report
ISBN:
978-0-6489972-1-4
Authors:
Schultz
T.
Thomy
B.
Hardaker
T.
Perry
M.
Faranda
A.
Gustavsson
M.
Chudleigh
P.
and Binney
J.
Final Report
•
2022-03-31
•
1.91 MB
2020-088-DLD.pdf
This study explored the extent to which values are shared (or not shared) by fishers across three key sectors (i.e., Indigenous, commercial and recreational). The study was run online using Q-Method Software (https://qmethodsoftware.com), a semi-quantitative technique used to explore human perspectives in a systematic and repeatable manner.
Fishers across the three sectors were required to sort and rank the pre-listed value statements. Participants were recruited through emailed invitations, social media posts and newsletters from key fishing sector representative bodies as well as snow-ball sampling. In response to a very low response rate from the Indigenous sector, additional participants (n = 6) were recruited by a member of the project team at a conference held in Far North Queensland. A total of 116 fishers completed the Q study. The collected data was analysed using inverted factor analysis to allow for the identification of distinct sub-groups of people whose responses are highly correlated. Through examining the Q-methodology outputs, five distinct sub-groups emerged: Sub-group A – “social-value fishers” (n = 39); Sub-group B – “economic-value fishers” (n = 19); Sub-group C – “environmental-value fishers” (n = 24); Sub-group D – “traditional-value” fishers (n = 10); and Sub-group E – “fish-focused” fishers (n = 15). Each subgroup comprises fishers who ranked the value statements similarly in terms of those statements they felt were very important to them and those that were less important to them. As such, the analysis provided information about complementary and contrasting values among different groups of fishers.
This study indicated that values (i) do not “neatly” align to the different industry sectors; and (ii) do not differ based on the different industry sectors. However, the Q-methodology analysis indicated that there were five distinct groups based on how values were ranked.
Across the five distinct groups the top four complementary values were: (1) fishing is environmentally sustainable, (2) accountability for industry participants who break the rules, (3) having access to fish and fishing, and (4) access to the ocean/sea. Environmental sustainability was the highest ranked value even among the sub-group that was dominated by economic type values (sub-group B), suggesting that even for productivity-based research and development (R&D), the focus should be on R&D that drives productivity and/or profitability improvements without reducing/ compromising environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability is also key driver of production and there seem to be general appreciation of its importance across the fishing sectors.
This study indicated that values (i) do not “neatly” align to the different industry sectors; and (ii) do not differ based on the different industry sectors. However, the Q-methodology analysis indicated that there were five distinct groups based on how values were ranked.
Across the five distinct groups the top four complementary values were: (1) fishing is environmentally sustainable, (2) accountability for industry participants who break the rules, (3) having access to fish and fishing, and (4) access to the ocean/sea. Environmental sustainability was the highest ranked value even among the sub-group that was dominated by economic type values (sub-group B), suggesting that even for productivity-based research and development (R&D), the focus should be on R&D that drives productivity and/or profitability improvements without reducing/ compromising environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability is also key driver of production and there seem to be general appreciation of its importance across the fishing sectors.
The three lowest ranked values across the five distinct groups were cultural values: (1) fishing’s support of cultural practices and requirements, (2) fishing provides a connection to ancestors/previous generations, and (3) opportunity to barter and trade goods. Some of the social values not considered to be important by any of the sub-groups included catching lots of fish or large fish, and spending time fishing alone.
In terms of contrasting values across the five sub-groups, economic type values were generally not highly ranked except by one group which was dominated by commercial fishers (sub-group B). Statements like fishing’s economic returns and employment/income from fishing, industry innovation and advancement, fishing’s contribution to the local economy were not considered to be important by the remaining groups.
The use of Q-methodology to identify values for the different sectors revealed that online survey may not also be practical and effective. For example, there was very limited responses to the online survey by Indigenous sector participants and further effort was required to capture their values in a face-to-face approach. It is recommended that future research should seek to include face-to-face data collection methods to improve efficiency in capturing views of diverse groups.
Values play a key role in decision-making and in creating public policy. One of the primary implications of the current study is that it would likely be ineffective and inefficient to make decisions or set policies based on sectoral classifications in the fishing industry such as Indigenous, commercial and/or recreational. The project findings strongly demonstrate that the values held by fishers cannot be neatly delineated into standard industry sector classifications. However, the project findings also show that there are a number of values shared by all fishers across sectors that may provide ‘common ground’ and ‘common language’ that in turn would provide a basis for better engagement and communication both between the sectors and between researchers, fisheries managers, Government and Australian fishers.
Dissemination of the findings that all sectors have several complementary values will help improve engagement and communication between the sectors and enhance effective and efficient implementation of future fisheries policies. Notably, the dissemination of the findings of this study is a step towards building a shared understanding of complementary values among different sectors and contrasting values within individual sectors. The shared knowledge will help improve trust among the sectors and between regulators and resource users. The improvements in trust among the various stakeholders will further enhance effective decision-making processes, particularly co-management and resource access.
An audit of plastic use in the fishing and aquaculture sectors
Project number:
2020-084
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure:
$66,200.00
Principal Investigator:
Damien Wigley
Organisation:
Equilibrium OMG Pty Ltd
Project start/end date:
12 Feb 2021
-
29 Jun 2021
Contact:
FRDC
Circular Economy Opportunities for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Australia
Project number:
2020-078
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure:
$158,000.00
Principal Investigator:
Kate Barclay
Organisation:
University of Technology Sydney (UTS)
Project start/end date:
16 Mar 2021
-
29 Sep 2021
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Current resource use challenges sustainability and resilience of industries. Circular value chains allow management of waste losses and maximise resource recovery. A circular economy (CE) mimics the cycles in nature in which there is no waste. Maximum value and utility of products and materials is maintained in CE through a combination of extending product lifetimes, increasing resource use intensity, and end-of-life material recycling. CE includes the idea of regenerative development, i.e. as the earth’s resources cycle as materials through the economy they restore and enhance, rather than deplete, natural capital.
Economic opportunities of circularity are well identified, the World Economic Forum estimates global adoption of CE principles would deliver cost savings of US$1trillion dollars per annum by 2025. A recent UTS:ISF study estimated an Australian CE could be worth AU$2 billion by 2025. However, current knowledge gaps constrain how CE may develop, at what scale it makes sense to close loops, and the strategies, policy mix and incentives needed to promote circularity.
For fisheries and aquaculture, CE adoption addresses waste challenges through the creation of new value chains for fish/shell waste and substitution or recycling plastics and provides co-benefits of resource efficiency, contributions to healthy aquatic eco-systems and creation of added value and new employment. Frameworks to guide ‘CE thinking’ exist e.g. Ellen Macarthur Foundation’s 10R’s and ReSOLVE (see Supplementary Material), but have not been explored, are often omitted in food innovation debates (Pagotto and Halog 2015), and opportunities for implementation within the sector are still emerging (e.g., replacement of fish-feed for abalone with wine production waste or repurposing mussel shells as high-nutrient fertiliser). The need to understand the context, opportunity and benefit of CE innovations and to identify strategic approaches to sectoral circularity at scale are apparent.
1. Develop increased knowledge of how the concept of circular economy relates to fishing and aquaculture, including downstream activities such as post-harvest processing and packaging.
2. Develop increased knowledge of how circular practices being applied in other sectors and industries relate to the fishing and aquaculture sectors and could be adopted by fishing and aquaculture businesses. This includes opportunities for fisheries/aquaculture industries to develop circular linkages with other marine and land based sectors.
3. Identify opportunities that are available and areas for exploration in the short, medium and longer term to progress a circular economy for fisheries and aquaculture.
4. Identify barriers to adopting circularity within the fisheries/aquaculture sector, and known strategies for addressing those barriers.
Final report
ISBN:
978-0-9953662-6-8
Authors:
Rebecca Cunningham
Kate Barclay
Brent Jacobs
Samantha Sharpe and Nicholas McClean
Final Report
•
2022-09-30
•
7.78 MB
2020-078-DLD.pdf
The aim of this project was to understand current circular economy (CE) activities, opportunities and barriers in the fisheries and aquaculture sector in Australia through extensive stakeholder engagement. This research and consultation project has found that there are many CE activities occurring throughout the sector at a range of scales. However, there are significant barriers to overcome to fully realise the opportunities that CE presents. One finding is that the scale of the enterprise plays a role in the ability of any business to absorb elements of the supply chain and optimise the reprocessing of their waste streams.
Those businesses working on developing new and niche products may require additional collaborations to meet their circular goals. There is also a balance to be struck in terms of gathering the appropriate volumes of waste or reuse materials for a business to be economically viable, while ensuring that the transport and storage (e.g. freezing) of those materials does not invalidate a company’s existing carbon footprint.
Project products
PROJECT NUMBER
•
2020-074
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED
ORGANISATION:
AusVet Pty Ltd
TAGS
SPECIES
PROJECT NUMBER
•
2020-073
PROJECT STATUS:
CURRENT
ORGANISATION:
University of Tasmania
TAGS
View Filter
