GRDC Organisational Performance Research

Transcription

1 GRDC Organisational Performance Research 2010 Grower Survey Final Report Date: December 2010 Ipsos Consultants: Jodi Coppin Jenn Fowler Poppy Wise Project number:

2 Contents Executive Summary Background Research Findings Overall Grower Mood and Profile GRDC Corporate Measures Varieties Cereals Pulses and Oilseeds Practices New Farm Practice Adoption Crop Protection Sustainable Farming New Products On-Farm Storage Feed Grain Communication & Capacity Building Influential Sources Information needs and preferred formats Appendices Appendix 1 Questionnaire Appendix 2 Nets for Q21F Appendix 3 Summary tables Pg 3 Pg 12 Pg 15 Pg 16 Pg 17 Pg 34 Pg 60 Pg 61 Pg 72 Pg 82 Pg 83 Pg 91 Pg 102 Pg 111 Pg 112 Pg 120 Pg 122 Pg 123 Pg 129 Pg 138 Pg 139 2

3 Executive Summary 3

4 Executive Summary General Grower Mood In 2010 growers felt more pessimistic about the current state of the Australian grains industry than in Less than half (44%) described the industry as being in extremely good, good or fair shape, while 56% felt the industry was under some or considerable threat (up from 30% in 2008). Furthermore, growers remain confident that grains R&D is addressing on-farm long-term threats (70%, slightly down from 73% in 2008). Importantly, the majority of growers (67%) feel they are directly benefitting from grains industry R&D and extension activities (down from 76% in 2008), and believe that investment in R&D is critical for their farm business (82%) Grower Profiling (national figures) Farm Related: 88% have internet connection (steady with 2008). Nearly three quarters (63%) of growers are satisfied with their internet speed and how it affects their ability to use it for their farm business, significantly higher than last wave, up from 56%. (Q103 and Q103e) 82% see investment in R&D as critical to their farm business. (Q108) 61% of total farm income is from crops on average (in line with last wave), primarily winter cereals at 45%, and on average, 27% is from livestock/wool. (Q5) 59% have attended a grain related learning or information exchange in the last 12 months (up 10% from 2008). (Q100e) 48% claim a farm household member has undertaken formal or informal training in the past 12 months. (Q108) 37% are members of a formal or regular farm discussion group (down 5%). (Q96) 11% stopped growing oilseeds in the past two years (no change) 7% also stopped growing pulses (down 4%). (Q56) GRDC Related: 21% had attended a GRDC crop research update seminar in last 12 months (up by 1%) (Q100e) 24% had accessed the GRDC website in the last 12 months up 4% points from 2008 (Q100e) 4

5 Executive Summary KPI Targets GRDC has set a number of KPI targets as part of its Strategic Research and Development Plan The 2010 Organisational Performance Measures Study was used to measure performance against a number of these KPIs as covered in this executive summary. The majority of these targets have been set by GRDC for the period , so it is expected that they will be gradually achieved by In addition, this document covers KPI targets set prior to 2007, which are not a part of the targets this is to provide a richer and more comprehensive picture of GRDC s organisational performance. In summary, the 2010 study (as with the 2008 study) shows that most KPI targets to 2012 have not yet been met, with some again recording declines, as well as some areas of improved performance. These results continue to suggest that GRDC cannot afford any complacency and needs to invest considerable effort in the next two years to improve ratings and achieve the set targets. Highly performing indicators include the uptake of key farming practices such as the use of climate risk management tools, improved confidence in managing weeds, pests and diseases, soil condition improvement (using lime) and nutrient budgeting. Particularly low performing indicators against the set targets are in the areas of communication and capacity building, and organisational performance specifically, awareness and knowledge of GRDC, overall performance, and perceived direct benefits from GRDC activities. 5

6 Executive Summary Communication and capacity building Overall, most communication and capacity building KPIs have remained stable over time, but are still below the set targets. The majority of growers participating in the 2010 survey were spontaneously aware of GRDC and have used Ground Cover as a source of information (67% and 77%, respectively) Meanwhile, growers still don t feel quite as well informed about what GRDC does, with just over half (54%) claiming to know a fair or considerable amount (vs. 53% in 2008, and 58% in 2006). This suggests that increased efforts to communicate GRDC s activities are needed and would be most welcome. Agronomists remain an important source of information and influence on-farm, yet continuing the trend from 2008 few are strong advocates for GRDC. This represents an important and continuing challenge for GRDC to strengthen ties and propensity for agronomists to advocate and promote GRDC. Communication and Capacity Building Recommended Key Performance Indicators KPI Target 2010 Result 2008 Result 2006 Result 2005 Result 2004 Result % aware of GRDC unprompted ( target) (Q6) 90% 67% 66% 68% 63% 59% % claiming to know fair/considerable amount about what GRDC does (2005) (Q8) % significantly valuing Ground Cover supplements as credible ( ) % aware of the GRDC s regional panels ( target) (Q11) % accessing the GRDC s website ( target) (Q100e) 70% 54% 53% 58% 50% 48% 50% 40% 32% 25% % 60% 55% 58% 50% 42% 50% 25% 20% 14% - - 6

7 Executive Summary Perceived performance, benefits and influence of changes Mixed results are observed for GRDC performance indicators against 2010, although measures are still lagging behind the set KPI targets. In order to achieve these targets, GRDC would need to focus its efforts on consistently improving indicators such as overall performance, perceptions of directly benefitting from GRDC activities, adoption of actions to ensure longer term sustainability, and GRDC influence of farm changes. Considerable gains continue to be made in terms of the proportion of growers stating that GRDC information has had a major influence on their farm changes in the last two years (at 42%). This is a result to celebrate as it now exceeds the target of 33%. Perceived performance, benefits and influence of changes Recommended Key Performance Indicators KPI Target 2010 Result 2008 Result 2006 Result 2005 Result 2004 Result % rating GRDC performance very or fairly high (Q13) 80% 69% 68% 71% 72% 68% % directly benefiting from GRDC activities or initiatives (Q18) Of those who have adopted new or improved farming practices in the last two years % who did so as a direct result of GRDC activities or initiatives (Q24A3) % adopting actions to ensure longer term sustainability of farm as a result of GRDC activities or initiatives (Q31) % influenced in a major way by GRDC information in motivating change on farm (Q95Y_3) 80% 55% 61% 68% 66% 67% 33% 31% 34% 29% 30% 26% 60% 42% 40% 45% 40% 40% 33% 42% 30% 18% 21% 21% 7

8 Executive Summary Uptake and management of key farming practices GRDC has set targets for a number of key farming practices Five of which are very close to or exceed their target, including taking up precision agriculture and related practices, improved confidence in managing weeds and diseases, improving soil condition by use of lime, and climate risk management tools usage. The remainder of the practices are still in need of improvement including: improved confidence in managing pests, improving soil condition by use of gypsum or controlled traffic, and managing nutrients and minimising loss through nutrient budgeting and variable rate technology. Uptake and management of key farming practices Recommended Key Performance Indicators % taking up precision agriculture and related practices (Q83) 60% 77% 63%* 48% 44% 36% % with improved confidence in managing pests, weeds and diseases (Q67): Weeds Pests Diseases KPI Target 90% 90% 90% 2010 Result 84% 70% 82% 2008 Result 86% 70% 78% 2006 Result 86% 79% 82% 2005 Result 81% 71% 78% 2004 Result 84% 73% 78% % improving soil condition as indicated by the increased use of (Q83): Lime Gypsum Controlled traffic % managing nutrients and minimising nutrient loss increases, as indicated by the increased use of (Q83): Nutrient budgeting Variable rate technology % using climate risk management tools to actively manage climate variability (Q85J) 45% 55% 30% 60% 30% 48% 44% 22% 50% 20% 42% 53% 30% 59% 20% 39% 49% 20% 54% 20% 41% 48% 24% 63% 16% 40% 51% 15% 66% 16% 40% 60% 64% 53% - - *Note this figure is different to that reported in the 2008 report. During the analytical phase of this project it was discovered that an error occurred in 2008 (including Direct Drilling in precision agriculture). The analysis has been re-run and the correct figure is reported here. 8

9 Executive Summary - Strategic Implications Ipsos considers the following to be the key strategic findings and implications from the 2010 Grower Survey. We also highlight areas worthy of attention or specific action Almost all growers are now aware of GRDC, however the extent to which they know about GRDC varies and has remained constant Overall, a high level of importance is placed on regular updates to growers Growers continue to access information from a wide range of sources this should be utilised where possible The internet, while an important resource, should be used in conjunction with other communication methods due to consistently low grower ratings Ground Cover remains the key information source on GRDC Although use has slowly increased over the last two waves, the GRDC website s profile and relevance continues to need lifting among growers Local contacts and support networks (agronomists, other growers, etc) are the most trusted sources of information and advice, and are highly influential in growers farm management decisions Few paid agronomists regularly make reference to GRDC information and 41% never do, so there s an opportunity to improve these relationships A total of 60% of growers are aware of GRDC Regional Panels (up from 55% in 2008), and the proportion of growers who had direct contact remained steady at 23% GRDC information is rated as highly credible by most growers, however less feel that it adds high value to their farm businesses There is a great opportunity to better utilise the local network (Regional Panels) to disseminate GRDC information 9

10 Executive Summary - Strategic Implications Expectation that GRDC plays a diverse investment role addressing many and varied areas The overall performance of GRDC continues to rate highly more so among growers who feel they have directly benefited Growers want evidence that GRDC investment is helping them to manage their issues, and a number of factors outside their control (e.g. fuel costs, climate) The idea of selling grain online appeals to many growers and presents an opportunity worth exploring further certainly as a means to direct more growers to the website Climate change is an increasingly salient topic, with almost two thirds of growers having taken action to adapt However, there are still a number of growers not convinced or aware of the impact climate change is or will have on their farm business especially older growers Climate change messaging could be improved as nearly half still do not factor in climate change issues in farm decision making, half do not believe that climate change is posing a real threat to their farm business, and 12% are unsure. While the majority have adopted new management practices to deal with climate variability, many have yet to address this 10

11 How to read this report Insight, key take-out / implication from results Findings in written form Tables and charts showing results Sample base (n= value), filter/ skip parameters and actual survey question Page number Statistical significance indicators: Arrows are used to identify significant differences compared to other regions, and/or compared with the previous wave. 11

12 Background 12

13 Background Project Aim Implementation of a valid and reliable survey tool for tracking GRDC performance measures, addressing corporate and program specific KPIs Research Process Year 4 (2008) survey revamped: Core questionnaire remained intact for comparison purposes GRDC program managers/personnel consulted extensively for new issues included Conduct of 1,201 telephone interviews nationally with growers in 2010: Representative spread of interviews across the three regions, covering all key agroecological zones Randomly generated using GRDC database, topped up with sample left from previous survey waves in order to reach 2010 targets Average interview length 30.4 minutes Not all questions asked to all growers rotation of program specific survey questions Survey results adjusted at data processing stage to more accurately reflect total farm population estimates in each State (source: 2010 ABARE data) 13

14 NOTE: Survey results in this report represent the proportion of all growers, unless clearly stated otherwise. Comparisons with 2008 survey results are highlighted where similar questions were asked. Differences between agro-ecological zones should be viewed with caution due to small base sizes. 14

15 Research Findings 15

16 OVERALL 16

17 Grower Mood and Profile 17

18 Grower profile Under 30 3 Age groups Gender Female 11% Male 89% North 0 % 40 Location 35 South 32 Note: More detail on grower profile can be found in Appendix 3. Base: All respondents (n=1201). Note: Unweighted data shown. 0 % 40 Q106. Record gender. Q105. And just for classification purposes, into which of the following age groups do you belong? Q2. Could I just have the postcode of your farm? West 33 18

19 Farm characteristics Mean farm size in 2010 is 2683 hectares, down slightly from a mean farm size of 2724 hectares in 2008: The proportion of smaller farms (up to 1000 hectares) has significantly increased since 2008 (37% vs.30% in 2008). This growth is due in part to a significant growth in farms sized 201 to 400 hectares (from 5% in 2008 to 8% in 2010). The proportion of farms sized between 1001 and 2500 hectares is 33% and farms sized over 2500 hectares is 30%. Farms up to 1000 hectares are more likely to be run by an older farmer (60+ years), while farms of hectares are more likely to be run by a farmer aged 40 years or under. Farm size peaks in the North at 3464 hectares, with the South representing the smallest average at 1787 hectares. On average, farms in 2010 sowed 1301 hectares of grain: Reflecting the increased number of smaller farms, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of farms sowing up to 300 hectares of grain (23%, up from 17% in 2008). Like 2008, farmers considering themselves to be innovative have sown significantly more grain than those that do not (1512Ha vs. 886Ha). Base: All respondents (n=1201). S1. Taking all grains into account, how many acres, not hectares, did you sow last season? Q1. Can you tell me your total farm area in acres, not hectares? 19

20 Grower mood has darkened since % 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Grower Mood Towards State of Australian Grains Industry Extremely good shape Good shape Fair shape Under some threat Under considerable threat Growers were also asked the extent to which they agreed with the statement, I am optimistic about the future of the Australian grains industry (where 0 is strongly disagree and 10 is strongly agree): The mean score was Growers were more likely to provide a higher score if they knew a considerable or fair amount about the GRDC and gave GRDC a net high performance rating. = Significant difference from 2008 Base: All respondents (n=1201). (at 95% confidence) Q109. Which of the following best describes how you feel about the current state of the Australian grains industry. Would you say it s in Q109A. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement, I am optimistic about the future of the Australian grains industry 20

21 Less than half of growers are growing pulses 100% Crops Grown in Last 12 Months 99% 97% 99% 99% 100% Triticale, canola and lupins stand out as crops in the South, barley, canola and lupins in the West and chickpeas and sorghum in the North. 50% 47% 47% 46% 51% 46% Crop Region North % 21 36% 39% 30% 33% 39% Oilseeds South West % Oilseeds Pulses Cereals Pulses Winter Cereals North South West North South West Base: All respondents (n=1201). Q3. Can you tell me all of the grain crops you have grown in the last 12 months? (Multiple response). 21

22 Significant increases in wheat, oats, barley, lupins, chick peas and canola as main crop Cereals % /- % Pulses % /- % Wheat 75 5 Lupins 2 2 Oats 7 4 Lentils 1 1 Barley 22 7 Chick peas 2 2 Triticale 1 1 Faba beans 0 - Sorghum 6 - Mung beans 0 - Maize 1 1 Navy beans 0 - Oilseeds % /- % Canola/ Rape Seed 9 7 Linseed 0 Safflower Seed 0 Soybeans 0 Sunflower Seed 0 Peanuts 0 Base: All respondents (n=1201). Q4. Can you tell me which crops you regard as your main crops over the last 2 seasons? = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 22

23 Over half of all growers have an off-farm source of income 2008/ /2007 Proportion of Total Income from Offfarm Activities 8 11 A total of 52% of farmers have some income from off-farm activities: Peaks in the Western region at 55% compared to 46% in the Northern region and 45% in the Southern region Sources of Off-farm Income I work off-farm Investments My partner/spouse works off-farm Superannuation Other Base: All respondents (n=1201). Q5. Thinking about your total income over the last 12 months, what proportion of your total income currently comes from off-farm activities. Base: Growers with off-farm income (n=618). Q5a1. Thinking about your off-farm income, what activities does this include? Base: All respondents (n=1201). Q5a2. What percentage of your total income was generated by off-farm activities? ( 2) ( 6) ( - ) ( - ) ( 1) The proportion of total off-farm income has increased significantly compared to 2008 s results (from 8% to 11%). Not surprising, given the Global Financial Crisis, the proportion of farmers indicating investments are a source of off-farm income has declined (41% compared to 47% in 2008). = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 23

24 Crops continue to comprise nearly two thirds of growers income On average, crops make up nearly two thirds (61%) of total farm income, which is steady compared to 2008 (62%): Winter cereals continue to be the top income source at 45% on average, steady compared to 2008 (46%); In line with the last survey, winter cereals peak in the West at 58% of total income, down from 62%. Livestock and wool is 27%; Highest in the South at 29%. Following these sources there is a significant drop off; Off-farm activities (11%), summer coarse grains at 4% (5% in 2008), pulses and legumes 5% (up from 4%), oilseeds 4% (up from 3%) and other crops 3% (no change from 2008). Peak farm income sources by agro-ecological zone: Winter cereals WA Eastern (75%) lowest in NSW North East (32%). Summer coarse grains - QLD Central (35%). Pulses/legumes NSW NW/QLD SW and QLD Central (11%) lowest at 1% NSW Central. Oilseeds WA Sandplain (13%). Net crops range from 50% to 84% across the zones. Base: All respondents (n=1201). Note: Q5. Thinking about your total income over the last 12 months, what proportion of your total income currently comes from 24

25 Over a third of growers are members of a formal discussion group % Member of a Formal or Regular Farm Related Discussion Group Nationally Northern region (A) Southern region (B) Western region (C) 23 Base: All respondents (n=410) Note: Split sampling Q96. Are you a member of a formal or regular discussion group, which meets to discuss cropping practices, farm systems or soil conservation? Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted ( 5) ( 5) ( 10) ( 1) B, C Membership of a formal discussion group has declined over time: Peaks at 46% in SA, lowest at 21% in QLD. Who are more likely to be members? Those that claim to know a considerable amount about GRDC (58%) compared to those that know a little (21%), or nothing at all (20%). Members are involved in a variety of groups, including: Grain grower association (49%) State farming association (39%) Farming systems group (35%) Landcare group (38%) Catchment Management Authority (CMA) at 11% Private agribusiness (20%) Partners in grain (6%). = Letters next to arrows indicate significant difference between regions (at 95% confidence) 25

26 Nearly half of all growers are members of a Grain Grower Association Professional Industry Groups or Associations Grain Grower association 49 ( 2) Membership of Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) has declined significantly since 2008 (11% vs.27% in 2008). State farming association Landcare group Farming Systems group ( 7) ( 6) ( 10) Private Agribusiness Catchment Management Authority ( - ) ( 16) Partners in Grain 6 ( - ) Other 7 ( 13) 0 % 100 Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) Base: Q96D. Respondents who are members of a formal group (n=148). Note: split sampling. Top mentions only. Which professional industry groups or associations are you currently a member of, if any? 26

27 Internet access remains stable, and almost twothirds are satisfied with their internet speed Internet Access Proportion of growers with Internet access stable at 88%. 100% 56% 47% 74% 71% 89% 88% 78% 83% Nationally, just over half of growers have some form of broadband (55%), followed by satellite (38%) and dial-up (5%). 0% 8% 11% 19% 32% Base: All respondents (n=410). Q103. Do you currently have internet access on your farm? Note: Slight wording change in Q103 in 2006 Are you currently connected to the internet? 63% are satisfied with their Internet speed (19% very satisfied and 44% fairly satisfied). 27

28 The proportion of growers paying for agronomic advice is steady on 2008 results 100 % Currently Pay for Agronomic Advice A total of 44% of growers pay for agronomic advice: Peaks in WA at 59%, with all other states significantly less likely to pay for advice. Growers who consider themselves innovative are more likely to pay for advice (49% vs.35% of those who do not consider themselves innovative). % The mean value of information and advice is $4,346 (peaks in the Northern region at $4,909): 21% pay between $1-$1,000 50% pay between $1,001-$5,000 21% pay more than $5,001 (7% don t know) Base: All respondents (n=410). Note: split sampling. Q95A4. Do you currently pay for any general agronomic advice or related services? Q95A5. Approximately, how much do you pay per year for general agronomic advice or related services? Q95C. Does your paid agronomic adviser make reference to GRDC information that is available? A total of 13% of paid agronomic advisers refer to GRDC materials regularly (16% in 2008), and 47% refer to these materials occasionally (46% in 2008). 28

29 And those who charge a fee for information or advice has not changed since 2008 % Charge a Fee for Information or Advice Private agronomist/farm adviser (n=172) Grower groups (n=124) ( - ) ( 5) For those who use a retail agronomist: Growers in the Northern region are significantly more likely than the Western region to pay a fee (38% vs.13%). Growers under 40 are also more likely to be paying a retail agronomist a fee vs. older growers (49% compared to 22% for growers aged and 15% for growers aged 60+). Retail agronomists (n=129) 25 ( 2) Department of Agriculture (n=110) State based extension officers (n=55) 4 7 ( 1) ( 3) 0 % 100 Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted Base: Q95B. Those who currently pay for agronomic advice (n= as charted) Does the you use charge you a fee for information or advice? 29

30 Fee for service agronomists appear to be providing less information on GRDC and its activities Fee for Service Agronomist Assisted With? Information on integrated pest, weed or disease management Action, initiatives or changes to improve production and quality Adoption of new or improved farming practices, techniques or methods Activities or initiatives to ensure the long-term sustainability of your farm (Prompted responses) ( 1) ( 1) ( 1) ( 3) The information fee for service agronomists are assisting growers with has largely remained steady compared to 2008: They are assisting with information on precision agriculture significantly less compared to 2008 (52% and 64% respectively). Highlighting the need to further develop relationships with these agronomists, they are also assisting less with information on GRDC and its activities (21% and 32% respectively). Adoption of new winter cereal varieties Adoption of new pulse and oilseed varieties Information on precision agriculture ( - ) ( - ) ( 12) Thinking about the role these agronomists play in growers farming systems, nearly two thirds (63%) say they provide tactical advice, 31% indicate they validate ideas/plans and 23% say they provide variety choices (top mentions only). Information on GRDC and its activities Base: Those who currently pay for agronomic advice (n=187). Q95A6. Which of the following has your fee for service agronomist assisted you with? Q95A7. And what role does your paid agronomic adviser play in your farming system? Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted % ( 11) = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 30

31 Most regard investment in R&D as critical for their farm business Regard investment in R&D as critical for my farm business Now place high importance on using decision support tools Always keen to adopt the latest technology Consider myself an innovative grower Heard of Pulse Breeding Australia (PBA) Key Descriptors (Prompted Responses) ( 3) ( 4) ( 3) ( 6) ( 2) These key defining attitudinal characteristics of growers have remained very steady since 2008, with no significant differences. Among those that consider themselves to be an innovative grower (66%), these growers are more likely to indicate they know a considerable amount about the GRDC (74%). Unsurprisingly, growers aged under 40 are more likely to be interested in selling their grain online (70% vs.56% total sample). Interested in being able to sell my grain directly online Household member undertaken formal or informal training in past 12 months Base: All respondents (n=1201). Note: Top responses only. Q108. Which of the following applies to you or your farm? Please say yes or no after each item. (Multiple response) % 100 Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted ( 5) ( 2) 31

32 Innovative growers tend to adopt the latest technology, use decision support tools and pay a fee for advice Similar to 2008 results, growers who believe they are innovative or progressive tend to have a specific set of traits. They are more likely to: Currently pay for agronomic advice or related services (49% vs. 35%). Have attended a GRDC crop research update seminar in the past year (27% vs. 11%). Say they place high importance on using decision support tools for running their farm enterprise (75% vs. 53%). Say they are always keen to adopt the latest technology wherever possible (75% vs. 53%). Indicate they visit the GRDC website regularly to keep up to date (14% vs. 5%). Base: All respondents (n=1201) Q95A4: Do you currently pay for any general agronomic advice or related services? Q100E: Which of the following apply to you? Q108. Which of the following applies to you or your farm? Please say yes or no after each item. I consider myself to be an innovative grower 32

33 Nearly three quarters of growers usually read the GRDC factsheets Key Information Sources (Prompted Responses) Usage of key information sources by growers remains steady compared to 2008 results. Usually read the Ground Cover supplement inserts 81( 6) Encouragingly, nearly three quarters of growers (72%) usually read the GRDC factsheets (a new measure in 2010). Usually read the GRDC factsheets Attended an event or activity on grain production in the last 12 months (NEW) ( 10) Males are significantly more likely (85%) than females (63%) to usually read the Ground Cover supplement inserts. Accessed the GRDC website in the last 12 months Attended a GRDC crop research update seminar in the last 12 months ( 4) ( 1) Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted Base: All respondents (n=395). Note: split sampling. Q100E: Which of the following apply to you? 33

34 Corporate Measures 34

35 Unprompted awareness of the GRDC remains constant 100 % Awareness of GRDC Total awareness Unaided awareness 91% 67% Unprompted recall highest in the West (71%) followed by the South (67%) and lowest in the North (63%): Highest amongst members of a formal discussion group (81%), those aged under 40 years (73%), those who pay for agronomic advice (72%), and those with the internet (69%). Total GRDC awareness peaked in the Western region (92%): Slightly higher among females (92%) than males (90%). Base: All respondents (n=1201) Q6. Do you know the name of the organisation responsible for making investment across Australia for grains research and development projects? Q7. Before this interview had you heard of the Grains Research and Development Corporation or GRDC? 35

36 Knowledge of GRDC has remained constant How Much Growers Claim to Know About GRDC 100% 0% Considerable amount 50 Very little amount 58 Fair amount Nothing at all Small amount The proportion of growers claiming to know a considerable or fair amount about the GRDC has remained fairly steady at 54% (was 53% in 2008): Peaking in SA (63%). Higher amongst those who consider themselves innovative (61%) versus those who do not (42%). Higher amongst those rating GRDC s overall performance high (68%) versus those rating it low (39%). The proportion who know nothing at all has fallen slightly to 5%: Highest for those aged 60+ (8%). Base: All respondents (n=1201) Q8. How much would you say you know about what the GRDC actually does? 36

37 GRDC s core role is still considered R&D into new/better grain varieties Understanding of GRDC Core Role R&D into new/better grain/crop breeds/varieties Research and Development (no further information) Allocates/directs funding into research projects/grain research R&D into grain diseases/disease/rust resistant plants/grains R&D into new/improved farm/sowing methods/practices/agronomy/management Keep growers informed/provide research results R&D into improve/develop/promote grains industry Marketing of grains/developing new markets/market requirements Conducts trials/field days/workshops/seminars Research organisation funded through grower levies 11 Base: All aware of GRDC (n=1145). Note: Top mentions only. Q9. What is your understanding of the GRDC s role? What are its functions or areas or responsibility? (Multiple response). 54% 4% Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) % Mentioning 30% 13% 12% 11% 9% 8% 8% 5% (-) The majority of growers believe GRDC undertakes R&D into new and better grain varieties at 54%. A larger proportion said research and development (no further information) compared to last survey (30%, up from 23%), followed by allocates/directs funding into research projects/grain research at 13%. There have been decreases across many areas, most notably, R&D into new/improved farm/sowing methods/ practices/ agronomy /management and R&D into grain diseases/ disease/rust resistant plants/grains (down 11% and 7% respectively). A small proportion still believe that GRDC s core role is marketing of grains/developing new markets/market requirements at 8%. 37

38 Ground Cover remains critical in generating awareness of GRDC GRDC website continues to grow in importance Source of Awareness of GRDC (Top Five Unprompted Responses) Ground Cover newspaper Rural Weeklies GRDC Website Grower groups / forums Farm journals % Base: All aware of GRDC (n=1145). Q10. In what ways or via what sources do you find out about the Grains Research and Development Corporation and its activities? (Multiple response). 77 Ground Cover remains the major source of (unprompted) awareness of the GRDC (77%): Highest in the North (79%). Rural weeklies continue to be an important medium (34% down from 39%): Peaking at 43% in the West. For farm journals, less than 1 in 10 now mention this as a source of awareness (8%). Consistent with 2008, 13% mention the GRDC website: Most commonly mentioned in the West (15%) compared to the North and South regions (both at 12%). = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 38

39 Awareness of GRDC s Regional Panels on the rise Nationally Northern region (A) Southern region (B) Western region (C) GRDC Regional Panels % Aware GRDC panels in place ( 5) ( AB) ( 2) Base: All respondents (n=1201). Q11. Are you aware that the GRDC has regional panels in place, comprising of growers and researchers, or advising on the allocation of investment priorities? Q12. Have you interacted or had any direct contact with any of the panel members in your region? ( 6) ( 1) 0 % 100 % Having direct contact with panel members ( 5) ( 5) Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted (-) (-) Awareness of GRDC Regional Panels has increased significantly since 2008 at 60% Significantly higher among: Growers who consider themselves innovative (64%), and those who claim to know a considerable/fair amount about GRDC (79%) Male growers (62%) Those with internet access (60%). Although awareness has increased, the proportion of growers who have had direct contact with Regional Panels remains steady Significantly higher among: Growers who consider themselves innovative (27%), and those who claim to know a considerable/fair amount about GRDC (35%) Member of a formal group (36%) Have benefitted from GRDC activities in the last 5 years (32%) Those with internet access (25%). = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 39

40 Rating of regional panels Overall Rating of the value of GRDC Regional Panels 100% 0% C National 70 Northern Region (A) Southern Region (B) Western Region (C) 69 Nearly three quarters (71%) of growers aware of GRDC s Regional Panels thought they were of high value (net very high/fairly high): Highest in SA and QLD (81% and 78% respectively). Peaks for growers who have benefitted from the GRDC in the past 5 years and those claim to know a considerable /fair amount about the GRDC (both 79%). Can t say/don t know Not high at all Not too high Fairly high Very high = Letters next to arrows indicate significant difference between regions (at 95% confidence) Base: Q12C. All aware of GRDC s regional panels (n=733). Overall, how would you rate the value of the GRDC regional panels? 40

41 Overall performance remains reasonably high Rating of GRDC as Investors in Grains Research Not high at all % Not too high Fairly high Very high Growers rating the performance of GRDC as investors in grains research as high (fairly high and very high) has remained consistent with 2008 at 69%: This is significantly lower in the North at 64%. Higher for growers who claim to know a considerable to fair amount about the GRDC (83%) compared to those who know little (50%). Peaks for those who have benefitted from GRDC activities in the last 5 years (82%). More likely to be growers under 40 years of age (76%) and male (70%). The proportion of people rating the GRDC not high has increased significantly from 14% in 2008 to 20% in 2010: Peaks in WA (24%), lowest in SA (14%). Those unable to rate the performance of the GRDC decreased from 18% in 2008 to 11% in = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) Base: All aware of GRDC (n=1145) Q13. Overall, how would you rate the performance of GRDC as investors in grains research? 41

42 Vast majority of growers continue to rate GRDC highly on providing credible information Credibility of information Allocating sufficient funding to important R&D issues Engaging with growers Communicating plans and future strategy Rating of GRDC ( 2) ( 1) ( 4) ( 5) Positive ratings for all measures have remained fairly steady since the 2008 survey, with credibility of information receiving the highest favorable ratings at 87% (net very high/fairly high): Peaks for those who claim to know a considerable/fair amount about GRDC (93%) and growers under 40 (94%). Significantly more likely to be male (89%) than female (77%). Net high ratings for communicating plans and future strategy, saw a significant increase since last survey. Adding value to your farm business activities Investing in activities for the public good ( 1) ( 4) The area for the biggest improvement is working with relevant parties in your region to address important issues which could be addressed through Regional Panels. Working with relevant parties in your region to address important issues ( 2) Not at all high Not very high Fairly high Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted Base: All aware of GRDC (n=1145) Q13B. How would you rate GRDC on the following % Very high = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 42

43 The majority of growers are comfortable paying the GRDC levy Comfort with GRDC levy Extremely comfortable 14 Comfortable 59 Makes no difference 14 Uncomfortable 9 Extremely uncomfortable 3 Overall, almost three-quarters of growers are comfortable paying the GRDC levy (74%): Peaks in SA (84%). Lowest in WA and QLD (70%). Males significantly more likely to be comfortable paying the levy than females (75% vs. 66%). Less than 1% responded don t know or can t say. 0 % 100 Base: All aware of GRDC (n=1145) Q13C. A GRDC levy is collected on 25 different crops produced in Australia. The levy provides funding for grains research and development projects managed by the GRDC. How comfortable are you paying this levy? 43

44 Declining proportion of growers who feel they have directly benefited from grains industry R&D and extension activities Growers Who Have Directly Benefited from Grains R&D Activities in Past 5 Years Nationally Northern region Southern region Western region General activities % 100 Net GRDC played role Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted ( 9) ( 6) ( 8) ( 5) ( 9) ( 9) ( 13) ( 5) Base: All respondents (n=1201). Q17. Do you feel you have directly benefited from any research and development project or extension activities or on-farm trials undertaken in the grains industry, in the past 5 years? Q18. Did the GRDC play a role in achieving any direct benefits? In 2010, significantly less growers claim they have benefitted directly from grain industry R&D and extension activities than in The proportion of growers saying GRDC played a role in achieving these direct benefits also decreased significantly from 61% to 55%: 35% said significant role and 20% a minor role. Other important sources identified: Grower groups/forums (18%) Farm adviser/agronomists (12%) Private consultants (11%) Other growers (9%) Seed suppliers/plant breeders (5%). = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 44

45 GRDC involvement in new grain varieties the largest benefit to growers in the last 5 years Benefits GRDC Played a Role In Achieving New grain varieties available to growers 40 Other GRDC information delivered to growers Agronomy and crop protection information made available to growers New technologies available to growers (e.g. precision agriculture technologies, or on-farm soil or grain quality testing etc.) Funding research / trials National Variety Trial (NVT) information GRDC validation and integration (i.e. extension) activities (e.g. Grower Groups, Grower Updates, workshop or event) New farm products and services available to growers % Base: All respondents who benefitted from GRDC R&D activities in the past 5 years (n=650). Q18A. In what ways did the GRDC play a role in achieving these direct benefits? 45

46 Importance placed on GRDC playing an investment role in specific activities Activity Fairly Important Very Important Net % Integrated pest, weed and disease management strategy (NEW) Developing new varieties ( 1) Herbicide resistance management (-) Soil health and biology ( 2) Cereal rust management ( 4) New grain products with food or industrial uses ( 2) Improving the profitability of farm enterprises as a business (NEW) Developing research partnerships with end-users of Australian grain ( 3) Collaboration with international R&D organisations (NEW) Precision agriculture techniques (NEW) Agricultural engineering technology (-) Long term investment in trait development (NEW) Addressing declining terms of trade (NEW) GM technologies ( 3) On-farm soil management ( 1) Developing farm business management skills ( 3) Segregation of grain Responding to climate change On-farm storage ( 2) ( 13) ( 2) Note: Movement in percentage points since 2008 survey highlighted Base: Split sampling Q s 1-10 (n=605) and Q s (n=596). Q21A. How important is it that the Grains Research and Development Corporation plays an investment role in the following activities? (Multiple response). 46

47 Highest importance placed on integrated pest, weed and disease management GRDC is expected to play a diverse R&D investment role, which is in line with previous waves. In 2010 greatest importance was placed on: Integrated pest, weed and disease management strategy Developing new varieties Herbicide resistance management Soil health and biology. 70% of growers feel GRDC should be responding to issues surrounding grain segregation, which is slightly down from 72% in There is significantly less expectation that GRDC play a prominent role responding to climate change, down 13 percentage points since last survey: Growers suggested that GRDC could also be investing in (net results) : New varieties with particular attributes GM information / technology Assistance with grain prices / rising input costs Grain marketing programs. Base: Q21A. Q21F. (Note: For a full breakdown of Q21F nets please see Appendix 2). All aware of GRDC (n=1145). How important is it that the Grains Research and Development Corporation plays an investment role in the following activities? (Multiple response). What other activities should GRDC be investing in that would benefit your farm business? 47

48 Growers seek information on new crop varieties to assist with variety selection Information, Training, Advice or Materials That Would be Helpful to Farm Household Information on new crop varieties to assist with variety selection Information on new farm practices / techniques and / or technologies Information on new farm products and services to facilitate awareness and adoption Assistance with grain marketing / trading Information on climate / weather to assist in management decisions Information on rotations / crop sequencing 2 Don t know 10 Base: Q21G. All respondents (n=1201). Note: Top responses only. In order to help your farm business to be more successful, what specific information, training, advice or materials would be most helpful to you or other members of your farm household? This could be anything at all that you think would improve or develop your operations. (Multiple response). %

49 Growers trust fee for service agronomists, farm advisors or consultants in operating their farm business, although trust has eroded since 2008 Trusted Information or Support Sources Relating to Operation of Farm Business Base: Q21H. Fee for service agronomist, farm adviser or consultant Department of Primary Industry = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) Retail agronomist Other growers Rural weeklies Grower groups/forums Department of Agriculture Ground Cover Accountant No-one All respondents (n=1201). Note: Top responses only. Who or what sources do you trust the most for accessing information or support for helping you operate your farm business? Any other sources? (Multiple response) ( 1) ( 6) ( 5) ( 6) ( 6) ( 3) (-) ( 4) ( 4) ( 2) 0 %

50 Agronomists most trusted in regards to information about farm operation In line with 2008, the top sources for accessing information or support for operating their farm business were a fee for service agronomist, farm adviser or consultant and a retail agronomist (38 and 31% respectively): Fee-for-service agronomist: Significantly higher in the West (46%) Retail agronomist: Significantly higher in NSW (35%), compared to 25% in WA Ground Cover was mentioned by 7% of growers: 3% mentioned GRDC 5% mentioned GRDC magazines/publications (no further information) 5% mentioned GRDC - General information/enquiries Base: Q21H. All respondents (n=1201). Note: Top responses only. Who or what sources do you trust the most for accessing information or support for helping you operate your farm business? Any other sources? (Multiple response). 50

51 Many growers still undecided on adoption of GM varieties Grower Sentiment Regarding Adoption of GM Varieties (if and when becomes available) 100% % Not sure/don't know No, would not adopt Depends on a number of factors Yes, would adopt Base: All respondents (n=393). Note: Split sampling Q46. Thinking about genetically modified or GM crops, if and/or when GM varieties become available, will you be adopting them? 51

52 One third of growers say they would adopt GM varieties, but majority undecided While 33% of growers said they would adopt GM varieties if and/or when they become available, a high proportion said it would depend on a number of factors or they don t know (16%). There is still clear indecision around GM crops. Of those who said yes: Peaks in QLD at 49%, compared to 19% in Victoria Highest among growers who rely less on off-farm income than 12 months ago (50%) 46% feel they will be worse off in the long-term if they don t adopt GM varieties (up from 45% in 2008). Base: All respondents (n=393). Note: Split sampling Q46. Thinking about genetically modified or GM crops, if and/or when GM varieties become available, will you be adopting them? Q46A. Do you feel Australian farmers will be worse off in the long term if they don t adopt GM varieties? 52

53 Grower sentiment has shifted from uncertainty to consideration with regards to growing GM wheat Grower Sentiment Regarding Adoption of GM Wheat 100% Base: Q46B. 0% Don't grow wheat crop Not sure/don't know Not at all Maybe Probably Definitely All respondents (n=393). Note: Split sampling Thinking specifically about wheat, would you grow GM wheat if it were available? = Significant difference from 2008 (at 95% confidence) 53

54 More growers considering GM wheat varieties When asked if they would grow GM wheat if it were available, the biggest shift in sentiment was the proportion of growers who said maybe, significantly up from last wave at 31% (was 22% in 2008): Significantly higher for growers who pay for agronomic advice verses those who don t (43% and 18% respectively). In line with 2008, 13% said they definitely would (down slightly from 15%): Peaks in QLD at 24%. Also steady with last wave was the proportion that stated they would not grow GM wheat (22%, down from 24% in 2008): Significantly higher in Victoria and NSW (26% and 24% respectively) compared to QLD (11%). Significantly more likely to be female (35%) and growers aged 60+ (30%). Base: All respondents (n=393). Note: Split sampling Q46B. Thinking specifically about wheat, would you grow GM wheat if it were available? 54

55 A similar proportion of growers considering take up of GM canola in 2010, where varieties are currently unavailable 100% Grower Sentiment Regarding Adoption of GM Canola (SA and Tas only) % Not sure/don t know Not at all Maybe Probably Definitely Note: Only respondents where GM canola is currently unavailable were asked this question. Base: All respondents in SA and Tas only (n=45). Note: Split sampling. *CAUTION, small sample size Q46F. Now thinking specifically about canola, would you grow GM canola if it were available? 55

56 A small proportion have already adopted GM canola Reasons for Adopting GM Canola Varieties Expect better weed control 91 Where GM canola is currently available only 6%* (n=11) have adopted these varieties. The top reasons given for adoption was that growers expect better weed control at 91%*. Expect higher yield compared to conventional canola 27 Like to adopt new technology on farm 9 0 % 100 Note: Base: Q46Y. Only respondents where GM canola is currently available were asked this question. Split sampling. *CAUTION: Small base size All respondents in NSW and VIC who have adopted GM canola varieties (n=11). Why are you growing GM canola? 56