Evidence alone won't cut it in modern ag advocacy: AFI conference

That idea was debated at a major agricultural event in Sydney yesterday, where some powerful examples of advocacy campaigns that have both worked against, and for, agriculture were discussed.

The Australian Farm Institute's 'Where To Next for Ag Advocacy' conference heard that while evidence was a critical component of any advocacy campaign, alone it just won't cut it in a world where 'noise' is becoming louder and policy making is becoming less objective.

Andrew McConville, chief executive officer of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, said evidence was only ever one presentation of facts.

For every piece of evidence a farming body might put forward, others could produce evidence saying the opposite, he said.

"To simply say, 'if only they understood the facts, my argument would carry' doesn't work," he said.

"At the end of the day, we are dealing with human behaviour.

"Decision making is an inexact science. Evidence is necessary but it's not sufficient."

ALSO READ:

NSW Farmers' president James Jackson used the example of the Gillard Government's ban on live cattle exports to Indonesia in 2011 as an example of a campaign - on the part of animal rights groups - that was not evidence-based in any way but entirely emotion-driven.

He described it as 'ambush-like advocacy that changed rules' to the extreme detriment of the Australian cattle industry.

The Four Corners show that started the campaign was not based on fact - it was more an advertisement for the work of animal rights groups, he said.

The soft focus work on the Animals Australia spokeswoman against the industry representative sweating under lights played only to emotions, Mr Jackson said.

"It resulted in a poll firing up the 'noise' and the government banned the live export business overnight, causing an extraordinary dislocation for the northern cattle industry," Mr Jackson said.

The reality, and evidence, was in stark contrast.

"There was some great defense work involved by the industry - a genius effort by the likes of Luke Bowen drawing back the debate with evidence," he said.

"But still, around $16 million was collected on the back of that show for organisations like PETA and the RSPCA."

While no one was arguing evidence and facts were not important, speakers agreed understanding emotion and empathy as a driver of outcomes was just as critical.

So too seizing the moment, Mr Jackson argued.

It was possible to procrastinate too long with developing a case, he said.

"If you want a bullet-proof case in every situation you're faced with, you may lose the moment," he said.

For all the big news in beef, sign up below to receive our Red Meat newsletter.