Environmental Management Systems in the Australian lamb industry: challenges and opportunities for family farms
K.-J. Huhn A B , E. J. Seymour A and A. M. Ridley AA Department of Primary Industries, Primary Industries Research Victoria, RMB 1145, Chiltern Valley Road, Rutherglen, Vic. 3685, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: kyra-jane.huhn@dpi.vic.gov.au
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47(3) 294-302 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA06256
Submitted: 20 September 2006 Accepted: 22 November 2006 Published: 12 February 2007
Abstract
An Environmental Management System (EMS) has been piloted in the Victorian lamb industry by two producer groups, one with an export focus and one with a domestic focus. We report on producers’ motivation to become involved in EMS, their current environmental performance in 15 aspects of farm management estimated through self-assessment and their experiences with an entry level EMS process. Producers were surveyed to assess motivation for participating before commencing. The results showed a major motivation was concern for the environment and an expressed ‘feeling’ of being responsible for the environmental impacts of their farming activities, both on and beyond the farm. Results from the completion of a self-assessment workbook indicate that producers on average scored well (>66%) in the management of more traditional farming aspects such as livestock and pastures and less well (<49%) in non-traditional aspects such as energy efficiency. All producers in the pilot project have progressed from self-assessment to implementing part of or a full EMS. This has provided insights into producer readiness for adoption with most supporting a staged approach and entry at a low level. We conclude that without market drivers, progress to ISO 14001 certification is not practical for most ‘small’ lamb producers. This supports the concept of a staged approach to EMS as being more achievable than immediate progress to ISO 14001 certification in the first instance because there are insufficient private benefits for most producers. We conclude that producers will need considerable extension support if EMS is to be adopted by more than a minority of producers (even the lower level approaches). Although environmentally motivated producers are likely to be interested in a Stage 2 EMS with extension support, incentives are likely to be required if the majority of producers are to embrace EMS.
Acknowledgements
We would like to sincerely thank all the producers who took part in the project, for giving up their time and imparting their knowledge to help develop the ‘staged’ approaches. We are also grateful for the input of Nick Linden in leading the project and providing essential industry knowledge, Julie Williams for her continued support and to Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) for funding.
Carruthers G, Tinning G
(2003) Where, and how, do monitoring and sustainability indicators fit into environmental management systems? Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 43, 307–324.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
(verified 8 September 2006)
Reid CL, Ridley AM
(2007) Environmental motivation and monitoring by landholders in north-east Victoria: fact, fantasy and future implications for catchment management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47, 346–355.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
(verified 8th September 2006)
