Australasian Aquaculture 2010 to 2014
Conferences still remain the primary method of knowledge transfer between stakeholders of the aquaculture industry, whether they are industry, government, researchers or NGO’s. However they need to be structured correctly for the benefit of the industry. There needs to be opportunities for industry to talk and listen to each other, as well as industry to talk to and listen to researchers and government and vice versa. The Australasian Aquaculture Conferences provide these opportunities.
The Australasian Aquaculture Conferences of 2004-06-08 have been learning curves for the industry and the NAC in running events of this size. The FRDC were rightly cautious in sponsoring the conference on a conference by conference basis. However, NAC has proven it is a competent conference convener and the industry have shown their support through excellent conference attendances. Given this track record the FRDC should feel confident in signing up as a conference sponsor on a long term basis, i.e. for the next 3 conferences 20010-12-14. Having the long term support of the FRDC will mean a large proportion of the conference sponsorship will be secured. This will allow the NAC to pursue other sponsorship using the FRDC’s commitment as both a surety of the conference and as leverage for attracting other sponsors to the conference. This will have significant flow on benefits to the Australian aquaculture industry. It will flow through to the quality of the conference program, trade show, the facilities and hospitality. Ultimately, the conference will generate significant profit that will eventually lead to little or no reliance on the FRDC for future underwriting. Further, conference profits will be used by the NAC on behalf of its members to provide better services.
People development program: FRDC visiting fellows program - Dr. Alyssa Joyce
The Australian government biosecurity committee structure has recently undergone a major change with the development of AusBioSec (http://www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/pests-diseases-weeds/biosecurity/ausbiosec). As part of this restructure, as of July 2009 Aquatic Animal Health Committee (AAHC) will cease to exist and it’s roles and responsibilities will be subsumed into Animal Health Committee (AHC). AAH technical expertise to AHC will continue to be provided by the National Aquatic Animal Health Technical Working Group (NAAHTWG). However, while AAHC included industry representation, AHC does not. For terrestrial animals, and plants, industry representation comes with membership to Animal Health Australia (AHA) and Plant Health Australia (PHA), respectively. However, there is no such entity for aquatic animal industries. This lack of industry input into AAH policy development has not been lost on AHC and it has advised that it would consider advice from an industry reference group (IRG). AHC has provided some advice on the terms of reference and priority issues for the IRG.
In order to be able to provide this advice industry must first decide whether or not there is sufficient resolve in each sector to commit to self-funding participation in an “National Aquatic Animal Health Industry Reference Group” (NAAHIRG).
It is this last point for which this application is based. The four sectors (wild-capture, aquaculture, ornamental and recreational) are seeking seed funding from FRDC to support a face-to-face meeting for industry representatives to discuss formation of an AAHIRG.
The need and urgency that has prompted this TRF application revolves around the threat of policy development without industry input. This point gains more significance upon release of the Beale report on Australia’s biosecurity arrangements and the Government’s response agreeing ‘in-principle’ to all the recommendations. Industry has to decide sooner rather than later whether it wishes to be a part of future AAH policy development.
Final report
Australasia Aquaculture 2008
For aquaculture in Australia to remain internationally competitive farmers need to hear about the latest technology and issues that will govern how they operate and expand. Scientists and technicians need to share their data and ideas and hear first hand from industry what their priorities are. Policy makers need to understand the industry they regulate. All groups benefit from understanding Australian aquaculture in the context of international developments. There are many lessons to be learnt from aquaculturists overseas. An international aquaculture conference will meet these needs. Industry needs to learn of research outcomes occurring internationally and developments in new technology demonstrated at the trade show. It is a costly exercise for industry to tour overseas, however, a conference and trade show offers the opportunity to expose Australian industry to new ideas ensuring the industry remains informed and can exploit new opportunities and/or adapt to remain competitive.
Many events such as these fail to meet the needs of industry because industry is not involved with the planning and organisation of the conference. The organisation of Australasia Aquaculture 2008, will be carried out by the National Aquaculture Council (NAC) of Australia, the Asian Pacific Chapter of the World Aquaculture Society (WAS) and lcoal industry organisations. The NAC will ensure the conference is strongly focused to Australian aquaculture industry needs.WAS will assist in ensuring the event is attended by international experts and equipment suppliers.
This conference will be the premium aquaculture conference to be held in Australia in the Asia Pacific region and replaces the previous Tasmanian biennial aquaculture conference.
Final report
Development of the Australian Pavilion - ESE
Integration of socio economic sustainability criteria into a reporting framework for the Australian aquaculture industry
Substantial resources and funding have been provided into developing EMS and ESD programs and providing facilitators through areas such as the Aquaculture Action Agenda, the Department of Environment and Water (DEWR) funded EMS Pathways projects and FRDC funded projects. Satisfactory extension of the benefits of EMS to aquaculturists, regulators or the community has not occurred due to the lack of socio-economic data to substantially support the claims of sustainability through environmental responsibility. The industry needs to develop appropriate environmental, social and economic indicators and collect appropriate data to address these indicators. To achieve this, industry needs to know what information to collect, how to provide measurable indicators, appropriate storage and evaluation mechanism for the data, extension mechanisms to industry, regulatory agencies and the community and presentation in an appropriate reporting framework.
This project is not focused on extension but on the development of social and economic elements of ESD that will be integrated with the exiting environmentl indicators. It does however have an element in developing a reporting framework that incorporates the data collected on these social and economic elements so that it can be presented to stakeholders to substantiate the industry’s ESD credentials.
This project will be targetd at the regional and industry level and not specifically at the farm level. This will consistent with the exisitng ESD risk assessment framework developed by Fletcher This will require the development of a set of indicators for each industry/region. Whilst some of the ecological elements have been identified and have been the subject of previous research there is limited information on what social and economic elements should be measured. This require further research to see if these gaps can be filled.
Final report
This study has tested and refined the indicators and potential data collection questions that may be implemented by individual aquaculture enterprises, and subjected to basic interpretation by the industry, to inform ESD reporting. Some of the economic and social data also has the potential for use, beyond ESD, in regard to identifying industry development and community collaboration opportunities.
Discussions with industry at the final workshop identified both willingness and the potential vehicles with which to undertake annual collection of the data identified here, at the individual business level. This is an important and essential factor in the long term use of the tools and implementation of the framework identified here.
There is a need to remain cognisant of the cost effectiveness of different approaches to data acquisition. Though utilising existing data in the economic domain and to integrate the collection of social indicator data with other benchmarking and regular data collection activities, it is reasonable to aim for ongoing collection of data to inform ESD performance.
The collection and integration of both economic and social indicators appropriate to national collection, but not currently broadly or consistently collected, is essential to future successful implementation of ESD reporting. Negotiations regarding the ways in which to collect data to inform nationally applicable indicators, with agencies such as ABARE or State NRM Government agencies, needs to occur. This is, however, outside the scope of this project. This project has identified recommended indicators and the associated data for the aquaculture industry that needs to be addressed in such negotiations.
Keywords: Sustainability; Aquaculture; Social; Economic; Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD); Indicators.
Developing and implementing a business model for marketing and branding Australian seafood
The industry is currently suffering extreme pressure on both the domestic and international markets. It is under pressure from the strength of the Australian dollar and the increased availability of cheap seafood imports from various Asian and developing countries.
The seafood industry is also coming under increased pressure from other available food commodities due to the concerted, well-funded, sophisticated marketing and promotions campaigns conducted by industries such as chicken, beef, lamb, etc. There is clearly a need to look at opportunities to better position Australian seafood.
It has been generally agreed by industry that the most effective strategy will be to position Australian seafood at the premium end of food products. It has generally been agreed that this can best be achieved through recommendations outlined in in the consultancy reports. Industry has supported the proposal in principle that has been put forward by the consultants but reserve the right to change the recommended programme. It will be up to those driving the entity that results from the modeling project to determine the most appropriate strategy
The entity to be developed through this application will need to focus on close liaison with the various sectors to develop standards that will apply and ensure its integrity is maintained. A key task the consultants will undertake is to ensure the business model presents a justifiable case for industry to participate in the programme.
This project needs to be funded through the FRDC where leadership can be provided to assist the industry establish future marketing strategies that are realistic and sustainable. The administration of the business entity that will ultimately be responsible for the positioning of premium Australian seafood will determine the most appropriate positioning strategy to adopt. It may decide to simply implement those strategies that are proposed by the consultants. The vehicle by which Australian seafood can be successfully marketed domestically and internationally will depend upon a business model that has the wide support of industry.
The development of the vehicle to take this initiative forward must be carefully and thoughtfully considered. It will require widely experienced consultants in this area to deliver the most effective vehicle to take responsibility for the generic positioning of the Australian seafood industry. The consultants will require a high-level of industry credibility. It will need to attract the industry to buy on to what will be the most significant project that will assist in uniting the Australian seafood industry.
It is anticipated that the business model agreed upon will be able to be incorporated into business operations of a model such as the entity proposed by SEA, an Australian Seafood Marketing and Promotion Corporation, if ASIC and NAC determine that this has the appropriate structural resources.
The industry has agreed that the momentum generated by the current project from the Action Agenda must be continued if this project is to achieve the necessary success.
The NAC has consensus from seafood industry leaders involved in this project to approach the FRDC to complete the business modelling, develop a strategy to obtain industry resolution on the most appropriate entity and then obtain industry buy on through financial contributions.
This application will also identify the most appropriate financing strategies that the successful business model should adopt. Other key aspects relating to corporate structure and administration will also be addressed.
For the larger task ahead, wider involvement and a commitment to achieve the outcomes is needed. Some of the true visionaries in the industry and those with more extensive marketing experience have already indicated their willingness to participate.
Final report
Identification of the role and long term support of a peak industry body for the Australian aquaculture industry, and its role to ensure the implementation of an industry driven National Aquaculture Action Agenda
The National Aquaculture Council currently comprises representation from all major Aquaculture species Associations and active State Aquaculture Councils, and has close links with the Australian Seafood Industry Council, which clearly justifies the decision of the Aquaculture Round Table.
However, for the NAC to fulfil its role not only as the peak industry body to drive the industry forward, but also to implement the relevant industry sections of the Action Agenda, significant work needs to be done between now and July 1st 2003.
The NAC must identify an appropriate structure and operational capacity to be in a position to undertake these critically important roles. To achieve this, it must also undertake key stakeholder consultation (industry & Government) throughout Australia for them to fully commit to this process and to ensure ownership.
The NAC identified that a consultant would have to be engaged to prepare this on its behalf, and firmly believes that the profile, experience and expertise of Dr Wendy Craik is essential, particularly given the diverse nature of the Australian Aquaculture industry.
This will be particularly important for Federal government to be reassured that the NAC will be in a position to deliver and meet performance criteria on the relevant sections of the Action Agenda, with these sections to be outlined in the next section.
A recent meeting of AFFA and NAC Representatives resolved a range of issues surrounding the implementation of the Action Agenda, and that the NAC would be directly involved in implementing the following recommendations:
1) Strategic Initiative 2: Promoting a regulatory and business environment that supports aquaculture.
2) Strategic Initiative 3: Implementing an industry driven Action Agenda
3) Strategic Initiative 4: Growing Aquaculture within an Ecologically Sustainable Framework.
4) Strategic Initiative 5: Protecting the aquaculture industry from aquatic diseases and pests.
5) Strategic Initiative 6: Investing for Growth
6) Strategic Initiative 7: Promoting aquaculture products in Australia globally.
7) Strategic Initiative 8: Tackling the Research & Development challenges.
8) Strategic Initiative 9: Making the most of Education & Training opportunities