Celebrity punch needed to safeguard live exports ‘social license’

The analysis was conducted by the independent national farm policy think-tank for LiveCorp and Meat and Livestock Australia and is contained in the newly released report, ‘Enhancing the competitiveness of the Australian livestock export industry’.

The report provides a specific segment on social license which was ultimately tested when the former Labor government banned live cattle exports to Indonesia in mid-2011 following the broadcast of horrific animal cruelty images taken in selected abattoirs.

That video footage, originally obtained by animal rights activists as part of a strategic political campaign to try and ban the live trade, ignited unprecedented public outrage via an emotion-charged social media campaign demanding the trade’s permanent ban.

But the suspension for over one month saw the Exporter Supply Chain Assurance System (ESCAS) developed between government and industry which has been rolled-out in all live export markets, to enhance supply chain traceability.

“To a greater extent than almost any other agribusiness sector, livestock exporters have been the subject of intense scrutiny by activists and the media, and have on several occasions had the sectors’ ‘social licence to operate’ revoked,” the AFI report said.

“One of the challenges associated with such situations in the past has been the difficulty in having participants in the sector decide on an appropriate response, and also in identifying the person or persons who will articulate that response to the Australian community and to policymakers.

“The sector appears to have addressed this shortcoming in recent years, with improved responses and clearer communication strategies.

“This has been an important step in redeveloping the social licence afforded to the sector, but it by no means guarantees that the industry has greater freedom to operate in the future.”

The AFI report said the process of developing a more robust ‘social licence to operate’ over the longer term required a “multi-faceted strategy” of engagement and communication, in addition to actions that aimed to ensure required industry standards were upheld.

“Such a strategy invariably involves engagement at local community level, with the media, with policymakers, and with influential opinion leaders,” it said.

“It will of necessity include information in a range of different formats and media that is regularly updated and made available.

“It also should involve routine contact with senior policymakers, to establish connections and networks in the absence of a crisis, so that they can then be better utilised when situations dictate.

“It is also often considered useful in such strategies to have direct engagement with groups that are strongly opposing the trade, or at least a selected sample of these that are amenable to engagement and discussion.

“In relation to influential opinion leaders, there is value in cultivating a group of influential individuals not directly involved in the live export trade, but who are familiar with the benefits the trade brings, and are sufficiently well-informed to speak authoritatively on these matters.”

The report said such opinion leaders may include regional community leaders and businesspersons, or nationally prominent people in the media or other roles who have their origins in regional communities, or a strong personal connection for various reasons.

“It is notable that activists opposed to the live export trade employ this strategy regularly and to good effect to encourage community support for their position, yet the live export sector has not to date taken a similar approach,” it said.

The research project identified other strategies to assist and improve the $1.75 billion trade’s competitiveness in response to growing competition in international livestock markets.

It said the global trade in livestock was growing rapidly and was now valued in excess of $US18 billion per annum, having more than doubled in value over the past decade.

“One reason has been the removal of restrictions on international agricultural trade which has facilitated the development of integrated multi-national supply chains, in which livestock and livestock products cross international boundaries on multiple occasions while being transformed into consumer products,” it said.

“The live export of Australian cattle, sheep and goats constitutes a relatively small part of the total market for each of these livestock groups, varying from approximately 5 to 10 per cent of total annual Australian turnoff.

“However, at a regional level and for specific classes of livestock, the live export trade provides a very important market outlet, and in the absence of that market the financial viability of many regional livestock industries would be severely challenged.

“The need to maintain and improve competitiveness has become more acute over recent years, as new competition has emerged in key export markets.

“This includes livestock exporting nations located in North Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia and South America.

“In almost all instances, these competitors operate off a lower cost base than is the case for Australian livestock businesses.”

In recommending strategic priorities, the report also said Australia had implemented world-leading standards for animal welfare including exporters being responsible for livestock welfare through the entire supply chain to the point of slaughter.

But it said no other livestock exporting nation had adopted similar standards that impose a “significant cost” on Australian livestock exporters and producers.

It is important to ensure that current standards are implemented as efficiently as possible, and that Australia is at the forefront in seeking the adoption of similar standards internationally, the report stated.

“The livestock export sector should engage closely with the Australian government in order to identify ways to achieve effective regulation at minimal cost,” the report said.

“Australian livestock exporters have a range of common interests with the meat processing sector, and in many instances the two sectors are complementary.

“Efforts are needed to identify issues of common interest and to engage in advocacy and other activities to advance these common interests.

“Whilst easily overlooked, the support of the broad livestock industry in Australia is an important element of the potential future success of the sector.

“For many livestock producers in southern Australia, the impact that the livestock export sector has on their enterprise profitability is not readily apparent.

“There are steps the livestock export sector should take to improve recognition of its role in livestock markets.

The AFI research also said while Australia wasn’t involved in trading live pigs, there had been “substantial growth” in the annual value of that trade over the past decade, paralleling developments in other livestock industries.

The report said much of live pig trade appeared to be between neighbouring nations, rather than over long distances.

The global value of live pig exports in 2013 was approximately $US 5.5 billion, the report said, with leading exporting nations including the Netherlands, Denmark, China, Germany and Canada.

“In the case of the major European live pig exporters, a large proportion of the exports are from nations with very limited and high value agricultural land, to nations in Eastern Europe which have lower cost structures and plentiful supplies of grain for finishing livestock,” it said.

“In the case of Canada, live pig exports are destined for feeding and finishing piggeries in the USA.

“Major national live pig importers include Germany, Poland, China and the USA.

“The growth in imports by Germany has been particularly notable in recent years, with many of these imports sourced from The Netherlands and Denmark.”