Insight into the attitude of agribusiness regarding the Sheep Industry Business Innovation Project activities
Agribusiness Survey 2016
Anne Jones and Mandy Curnow, March 2017
The Sheep Industry Business Innovation (SIBI) Project utilises the agribusiness consultant sector as its extension pathway; to channel information to, and build capacity of, sheep producers.
Over November and December 2016 the SIBI project invited Western Australian farm business, sheep and cropping consultants to participate in a survey.The survey included questions regarding where they source sheep management information and how they use such information from the Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia(DAFWA), what key SIBI messages and best practice behaviours they recommend to their clients, and their observations and attitude toward the state and future of the Western Australian (WA)sheep industry. Thirty eight (roughly 50% of) invitees, representing 853 combined years’ experience in the agricultural industry, generously contributed their thoughts.
The SIBI project is made possible through funding from Royalties for Regions.
Contents
Methodology
Information about the respondents
Geographic divide
Length of service to the sheep industry
Diversity in experience and services provided by respondents
Respondent attitude to sheep in a farming system
Source of information
Where consultants get their sheep management information from
Use of DAFWA information
Scrutiny of responses regarding non-use of DAFWA information
Knowledge of SIBI
Attitude to SIBI outcomes
The future of SIBI
Summary of this section
Willingness to advise clients on key SIBI messages
Sheep management practices
Business-focused practices
Observed trends and future of the sheep industry
Sheep producer commitment to the sheep industry
Inclusion / exclusion of sheep in the system
Decline of the WA sheep flock
Motivation to increase sheep numbers
Consultants view of the value of sheep to an enterprise
Summary of findings
Appendix 1 – Responses to open questions
Methodology
This survey was conducted using online technology (Survey Monkey). An email was sent to nearly 80 farm consultants, whether they were specifically involved in sheep production or not. The consideration was that sheep consultants would have a good understanding of why producers do or don’t have sheep, but that cropping specialist consultants could have some insights into this as well. If a respondent indicated that they had not consulted to any sheep producers in the previous year we assumed that they were likely cropping specialist consultants and skipped them past the sheep management related questions.
Emails were sent to directly to consultants and to the Australian Association of Agricultural Consultants with the request to forward to all of their consultant members, with a link to a Survey Monkey questionnaire. The survey was available for consultants to access from 31 October to 19 November 2016.
Information about the respondents
Geographic divide
Respondents were asked: which rainfall zone do you work in most of the time? The response options were: Cereal Sheep Zone - <400 millimetres (mm)/year, or the Medium Winter Rainfall Zone - 400 to 600mm/year, with the option to tick both. A map was provided to assist respondents to answer this question.
The majority of consultants (47%) work in the Cereal Sheep Zone (CSZ) while 32% work in the Medium Rainfall Zone (MRZ) and 21% work in both.
Length of service to the sheep industry
Respondents were asked “How long (in years) have you been working as an agricultural consultant, including time in the public and private sectors?” The responses were grouped into ten-year spans.
Figure 2Number of years that respondents reported they have been working as a consultant - grouped into ten-year brackets
The responses fall into a slightly left-skewed normal distribution pattern with a strong dominance in the middle ‘21 to 30 year’ bracket (39%).
Diversity in experience and services provided by respondents
Respondents were asked to “briefly describe your position and the services that you provide to producers”. This was an open question, which means that the respondents could type in whatever answer they wanted to provide. To manage the data, these responses were given a code that reflects generally, what the consultants said that they did. The results are shown in Table 1 below. Further, the raw responses provided on how many years they have worked in the industry have been used to calculate average years in the industry for each group.
Table 1Number of years that respondents reported they have been working as a consultant - grouped into ten-year brackets
Categorised responses / # (%) consultants / Average yrs expFarm business consultant / 20 (53%) / 26.2 (+/-14.3)
Sheep production / research / 7 (18%) / 14.5 (+/-8.8)
Financial / Economist / Analyst / 7 (18%) / 14.5 (+/-9.8)
Agronomist / 3 (8%) / 12.5 (+/-7.5)
Unspecified / 1 (3%) / 24.0 (+/-0)
Respondents were asked: approximately how many sheep producers did you personally consult to last calendar year? Respondents were given multiple answers which they could choose one of. The responses, by consultant group, are shown in Diagram 3 below.
Figure 3Volume of clientele for respondents in each service delivery category
The three respondents that said they didn’t consult to any sheep producers last year skipped ahead after this question to the questions about development of their clients’ business skills and barriers to the development of the sheep industry. The remaining 35 respondents will be referred to as ‘sheep consultants’.
Respondent attitude to sheep in a farming system
Each of the respondents answers were looked at and assessed to see if they were ‘generally positive’, ‘generally negative’ or ‘neither positive nor negative’ to the inclusion of sheep in a profitable farming system. The key questions informing this assessment were
- Why do farmers include / exclude sheep in their business?
- Why do you think sheep numbers in WA are in steady decline and is it a concern?
- What would motivate farmers to increase sheep numbers and is the motivation different in different areas?
- How much value does a sheep enterprise contribute to the cropping enterprise?
- Please rate your willingness to… invest in maintaining or improving infrastructure / Invest in installing new sheep management related technology? (concatenation of two larger questions)
- How would you describe the commitment among your clients to their future in the sheep industry?
The language used in the responses to these questions often clearly indicates the consultant position on sheep in the farming system. For example, if a respondent stated ‘sheep compromise crop in every single way’ then they would be classified as being ‘generally negative’ to the inclusion of sheep in the system. If the respondent used balanced, basic facts or unemotional language in their responses then they were categorised as ‘neither positive nor negative’.
The majority of respondents (24) were considered to be ‘generally positive’ toward the sheep enterprise. Three were ‘generally negative’ and 10 were somewhere in between. Due to the small number of respondents it is difficult to compare collective responses of each group. The three considered to be ‘generally negative’ are even within themselves a diverse group across zones, years in industry, number of clientele, etc. The only apparent consistency is that two of them describe themselves generally as a ‘consultant’ and one as an ‘advisor, management consultant’. Two of them described 100% of their clientele as primarily wool producers. They described their clients’ commitment to the sheep industry as ‘maintaining’ or ‘stable’. Despite negativity, two of them were still very willing to recommend clients invest in infrastructure and technology and one was unsure.
Source of information
Where consultants get their sheep management information from
Sheep consultants were asked “Where do you get sheep management information to provide to your clients?” and provided with a list of options (including “other”).
Table 2Number (#) and percent (%) of respondents that get sheep management information from the sources listed (in order of popularity)
Information source / # (%)respondentsMeat & Livestock Australia (MLA) / 29 (76%)
DAFWA / 27 (71%)
Own / 20 (53%)
Australian Wool Innovation (AWI) / 17 (45%)
Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs) / 15 (39%)
Australian Association of Agricultural Consultants (AAAC) / 14 (37%)
Universities / 9 (24%)
Private research / 7 (18%)
MLA is the most popular source of sheep management information, followed closely by DAFWA.
The responses offered under “other” sources included literature searches of refereed scientific publications, research papers and reports, industry hardware and software providers, Ovine Observer, farming press, historical Ag department notes and other sheep specialist consultants. The fact that two of these ‘other’ sources are actually DAFWA publications is curious. Perhaps respondents feel that these publications can’t really be attributed to DAFWA or that they somehow can’t be associated with the current DAFWA suite of publications.
Use of DAFWA information
Sheep consultants were asked “To what extent has information from DAFWA products and events (such as Sheep Updates, Feed-lotting workshops, feed budget calculators) influenced your recommendations to sheep production clients?” The majority of sheep consultants (74%) recommend DAFWA information to clients often or occasionally.
To add depth to this response, the average years’ experience of the respondent is included in Table 3. Many consultants with less than 10 years’ experience are unaware of DAFWA recommendations. Those that are aware of DAFWA recommendations are most likely to recommend DAFWA information occasionally, regardless of years of experience.
Table 3Number (and percent) of sheep consultant respondents that use DAFWA information, broken down into ‘average years’ experience’ groups (0-10, 11-20, 21-30, 31-40, 41+ average years’ experience)
Frequency of use of DAFWA information / 0 - 10 / 11 - 20 / 21 - 30 / 31 - 40 / 41+ / Total # (%) respondentsI often recommend information and tools from DAFWA / 1 / 2 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 6 (18%)
I occasionally recommend DAFWA information and tools to clients / 2 / 5 / 7 / 3 / 2 / 19 (56%)
I do not recommend DAFWA information as I do not find it to be of value / 0 / 2 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 5 (15%)
I am unaware of DAFWAs recommendations on sheep management / 3 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 4 (12%)
Of those that are unaware of DAFWAs recommendations, two from the least experienced group are financial/marketing advisors to industry professionals and one is an agronomist.
Scrutiny of responses regarding non-use of DAFWA information
There were seven respondents that, when asked “Where do you get sheep management information to provide to your clients?” did not select DAFWA as a source. While two of them went on to say that they were unaware of DAFWA recommendations, and a further two that stated that they did not find DAFWA information to be valuable, three responded that they occasionally recommend DAFWA information to clients. Two of these three commented that they use Ovine Observer and historical DAFWA publications.
Table 4Additional comments on response to the question regarding use of DAFWA information
Frequency of use of DAFWA information / Additional commentsI often recommend information and tools from DAFWA /
- Condition score app, feed budget information,
I occasionally recommend DAFWA information and tools to clients /
- Farmnotes of old and the on line resources are useful, the above question is navel gazing
- I use info from DAFWA amongst that which is provided to students as sources for them to use or reference material for teaching
- Mainly use Feed Budgeting tools
- Most of the information I use is provided by the organisations I train for and I use Sheep Genetics data bases a great deal.
- Mostly use personal communications with DAFWA staff as a source of information.
- If information likely to be helpful to client then will recommend DAFWA source
- Where appropriate
- Information needs dream lining and focusing as is to diverse across organisation, needs to be more current a lot is old hat
- The good food guide for sheep is fantastic
I do not recommend DAFWA information as I do not find it to be of value /
- I find research information from Murdoch fabulous, MLA Friday Feedback and other national consultants more useful for clients. This is more up-to-date than DAFWA information.
- I find it basic information for the low level farmer, not for where farmers could be.
I am unaware of DAFWAs recommendations on sheep management /
- DAFWA no longer at forefront of good research
This feedback could be summarised to say that, while the Lifetimewool products (Condition scoring and feed budgeting,) are still very useful, much of DAFWA’s information is considered to be basic information. DAFWA is not now considered to be at the forefront of research in sheep production and generally lacking in progressive thinking.
Knowledge of SIBI
Respondents were asked: “The Sheep Industry Business Innovation project (SIBI) is a Royalties for Regions project being run by DAFWA. Which one of the following statements best describes your current level of knowledge of SIBI?”; with the following options and responses described in the following table.
Table 5Number (and percent) of respondents and their level of familiarity with SIBI activities
Knowledge of SIBI / # (%) respondentsI am quite familiar with SIBI's activities and have a good understanding of the objectives of the project / 7 (19%)
I am familiar with many of SIBIs activities / 19 (51%)
I have heard of SIBI but am unaware of its activities / 7 (19%)
I have never heard of SIBI / 4 (11%)
Attitude to SIBI outcomes
This survey aimed to test consultants’ attitude to the outcomes SIBI is responsible for achieving. Respondents were asked: “The following list outlines some of the outcomes or focus of the SIBI project to support and strengthen the Western Australian sheep industry. Please rate the importance of these to the OVERALL SHEEP INDUSTRY.”
Respondents were provided with the following scale to assist in responding to this question:
- No importance = I don’t believe this activity will assist industry
- Somewhat important = this activity may result in small improvements in the industry but limited resources should be allocated
- Quite important = this activity needs to be undertaken and could result in much needed improvements in the industry
- Very important = this activity is a priority as it is likely to result in significant or essential improvements in the industry
- I am unsure = I am not familiar enough with the topic or industry to make a judgement
Figure 4 shows how respondents answered the question for each SIBI outcome.
Figure 4Proportion of respondents that consider SIBI activities to be very or quite important to the sheep industry
Generally, the most popular outcomes were those focusing on improving the production skills of producers, although developing their business skills and providing support and mechanisms for producers to better access markets was also seen to be very important. Around 50% of consultants could see the value in developing new sheep meat products and value chains.
The outcomes that fewer consultants felt had value were the development of new meat trade specialists and improving the understanding of the whole value chain. There may be two reasons why these options did not rate well. Firstly, these outcomes could be considered to be of benefit to very few people rather than the whole of industry. Secondly, respondents may be unclear as to what those outcomes mean to industry, let alone their priTablmary clientele, the producers.
Consultants were given the opportunity to add more to their responses via the follow-up question: “Do you have any comments relating to your responses to the question above?”. Generally, comments revolved around how Government should stick to research and on-farm production improvement (not value chain development), which is the driver of profitability and even industry development. Access to market and production information would be of benefit (although one consultant said that benchmarking is a complete waste of time for “individual producers”). There was one other comment on the importance of [industry’s] business, marketing, strategic and succession planning. The full list of responses can be seen in Appendix 1 (Q. 22).
The future of SIBI
Respondents were then asked, “What other activities should be considered by SIBI in the two years remaining of the project?”
Seven consultants proposed that SIBI should be doing some combination of research and extension on production issues (specifically crop/sheep balance, feeding, pasture and labour issues and the profitability of improving genetics), with a further two specifically focusing on rangelands sheep production.One also commented that DAFWA sheep extension is too focused on “the Albany to Perth line”. Three responses focused on SIBI providing or promoting production training opportunities for producers and young staff. Tworespondents felt that developing new products (hogget) or promoting a WA brand to be important activities. I respondent also expressed support for closer ties between DAFWA and the Sheep Alliance for a more cohesive industry.
The full list of comments submitted at this question can be read in Appendix 1 (Q. 23).
Summary of this section
The responses in this section show comprehensive support for the producer capacity raising aims of the SIBI Project, strong support for product development and marketing, but very little support for value chain development (including specialists and study tours).
Willingness to advise clients on key SIBI messages
Sheep management practices
Respondents were asked to “Please rate your willingness to advise your clients to use the following sheep management practices”, with these scale notes:
- Not willing = I don’t believe this activity will assist any of my clients
- Somewhat willing = I will promote this activity to some of my clients if relevant
- Quite willing = I will promote this activity to many of my clients
- Very willing = I regularly advise most or all of my clients to undertake this activity
- Unsure = I need more information about the practice before deciding to advise
This question was only asked of those respondents that consult to sheep producers. The full results are shown on the table below.
Table 6Number of sheep consultants that are not, somewhat, quite and very willing (or unsure) to advise on key SIBI messages
Practices / Unsure / Not / Somewhat / Quite / VeryDevelop a clearly defined breeding objective / 2 / 3 / 5 / 7 / 17
Purchase rams from breeders that focus on the traits important to your client / 3 / 3 / 5 / 6 / 17
Purchase rams with ASBVs that progress their flock toward their breeding objective / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 20
Monitor the health of ewes through condition scoring / 1 / 2 / 3 / 6 / 22
Conduct pregnancy scanning of ewes to determine litter size (i.e. dry, single, twin) / 1 / 2 / 3 / 9 / 19
Group and manage ewes according to their nutritional requirements during pregnancy and lambing / 1 / 2 / 1 / 13 / 17
Provide extra shelter for twin lambing ewes / 4 / 5 / 7 / 10 / 8
Select genetics for higher reproduction / 1 / 4 / 7 / 9 / 13
Include selection for flystrike resistance into their breeding program using ASBVs for wrinkle, breech cover, dag score or Faecal Worm Egg Count (FWEC) / 2 / 4 / 8 / 7 / 13
Use alternative methods to mulesing to control flystrike / 4 / 10 / 7 / 7 / 6
Renovate pastures or feedbase systems / 1 / 1 / 3 / 6 / 23
Run a higher stocking rate or increase pasture utilization / 1 / 1 / 3 / 10 / 19
Enrol in a Lifetime Ewe Management course / 2 / 3 / 4 / 8 / 17
Enrol in a RamSelect workshop / 3 / 6 / 5 / 10 / 10
The top five practices that have more consultants very or quite willing to recommend them are: