FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE RD&E NEEDS – FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES AND ISSUES:
WORKSHOP REPORT
JULY 14 – 15, 2014 ADELAIDE
Aim: to provide an opportunity for Industry leaders, Managers and Researchers to establish the directions for fisheries and
Aquaculture RD&E investment for the next 5 years.
Session 1 – Strategic planning for fisheries and aquaculture – context
Patrick Hone
Main discussion points / questions raised:
 What have the outcomes of the FRDC Plan and National Strategy been? – measures of success need to be reviewed.
 More clarity – on collecting values from grass-roots.
 Priorities – look more like Industry manifestos than RDE priorities.
 How does National / Sector interaction work?
 Profitability – versus product recognition – need to strengthen property rights.
 Where does aboriginal community fit in future development of Industry?
 To what degree do development projects fund back into R&D?
 Political landscape / agendas.
 What is the role / scope of FRDC in marketing and extension / Industry profile, etc.?
 Will the plan consider how to make best use of limited resources?
 Will there be Government acceptance of Industry priorities?
 Will there be a balance between private / industry funds for RDE?
 Need to clarify return on investment.
 Need to remember that RDE is only a means to an end! RDE needs to meet Industry needs.
 Will you explore options for non-traditional sources of funding? How will FRDC cope with no CRC $?
 How much will the strategy explore Australian versus global – seafood security.
 Loss of fuel rebate impact on RDE?
 Outcomes versus Outputs? - 2010-15 – seemed to be focussed on outputs! Where are outcomes being measured?
 RDE Strategy should be based on longer term vision – not just 5 years.
 How far can we push Major / Support / Link?
 What has changed in last 4 years – to understand how all the pieces fit?
 Where are the NGO’s (at a forum like this)? What are their priorities?
document1
1
Session 2
Progress of RDE to date?
This session began with a range of perspectives on RDE progress from 2010 to 2014 by:
Pheroze Jungalwalla (Aquaculture), Chris Calogeras / Klynton Wanganeen (Indigenous), Dallas D’Silva (Recreational) and
Sean Sloane (Commercial). (Pheroze and Sean’s presentations are available ......). Workshop participants then provided their
own feedback on progress – as summarised in the tables below.
“Scorecard”: FRDC Plan 2009 - 2014
Key Performance What has progressed well? What
Indicators
evidence do you have?
1. Biosecurity
 Funding sources for aquatic
and aquatic
resource biosecurity.
animal health
What needs to improve / be done differently in the future?








2. Habitat and
ecosystem
protection


ERM / ERA.
Done well in various sectors, State
& Commonwealth.






3. Climate
change

Last 5 years of research has put
industry ahead / in a good position.



document1
Determine acceptable level of risk.
$ sucked into jurisdictions and little exposure on the ground.
Welfare issues – killing methods in fishery will see increasing
profile.
Fish welfare (Rec fishing); Invasive species.
Simulation of threats.
Overseas diseases.
Making sure Australia is well protected.
International benchmarking.
CAR. More on-ground work (not RD&E) through Ocean Watch
Australia NRM to improve productivity.
National Fish Habitat Plan. Build into fisheries management.
EBM – how should we do this – select model.
MPA message not sold re no-take.
A lot of research, but not designed for fisheries management.
Improving context of research.
No “Blue Groper” projects. Risk management more broadly.
Electoral cycle.
Management issue.
2
4. Ecologically
sustainable
development



5. Governance
and regulatory
systems





Good development of more tools to
feed into understanding end
process.
National Stock Status report
excellent.
 Better reporting.

Harvest strategy guidelines
developed. Less is more!
Harvest strategy guidelines at
national level.
Support by AFMF important.
National management standards.
Progress in indigenous /
recreational.











6. Resource
access and
allocation




Tropical finfish in TS.
Resource Access guidelines
developed on a national basis.
S.A. Act good.
Indigenous engagement.







7. Production,
growth and
profitability

Aquaculture boom.




document1
Harvest and bycatch interactions and management decisions.
Bycatch and threatened species interaction management.
Better community communication – good news stories.
Supermarkets, NGOS affects. Need easily understood systems
from community perspective.
Self-regulation versus govt regulation.
Review FRAB / HUB process.
Take up by State jurisdictions.
Use in practice.
Nothing done in Indigenous area (ILUA).
Multi-jurisdiction species need cross-State management.
Need more on-ground results.
FRDC are generally looked upon to fund State /Territories fisheries
research.
Crossover effective lessons to other regions.
Competition.
Progress painfully slow in well-managed fisheries and at a
standstill in less sophisticated managed fisheries.
Use in practice.
Indigenous access not considered . FRDC is politically
hamstringing – in relation to marine parks; Regions.
Define (potential) aquaculture areas.
Same old problems keep coming up – value judgement.
Playing to strengths → knowing what they are – reputation /
production potential.
Costs of management continues to climb especially in small scale
fisheries.
Need to assess risk / cost / benefit.
Wild catch / recreational have gone backwards.
3
8. Consumers,
products and
markets


Progress last few years significant,
eg work CRC – Chinese this this is
likely reference to the China
Abalone marketing work that has
been done under the CRC; national
campaign.
Some species good (research).
Big national sectors doing
promotions.
Support for PIERD Act change.
9. Value from
aquatic
resources

Good work on MEY, etc.

10. Resilient and
supportive
communities




11. Leadership
development





Tasmanian salmon.
FRDC engagement with media of
science behind fisheries. Supply of
R&D results.
Leadership programs. Activities of
grads of NSISA, ARMF, Nuffield.
FRDC Leadership program first
class.

Good.
NSILP.
Defining optimal use.
Not well done for recreational and wild?

Change of focus from telling to listening and being collaborative
with the community.
No collective approach to industry promotion to broader
community.
More effort /resource.

Lacking within government management agencies!.

Indigenous employment.
Key gap.
Capability deficit – an emerging problem – Government cash
(support) shortage? RTO quality questionable??




document1
Extension.
Imports / exports dynamic.



12. Workforce
development

4
13. Innovation
skills
14. Extension
and adoption


Differs for aquaculture to wild
capture fisheries.
No funding being provided other
than through individual projects.

Upskill govt management agencies if we are going into economic
and social communication.

Limited / poor.
Not role / good for scientists to undertake.
Not seen as a long-term activity which is should be.
Utilize existing organisations.
Need more extension!!!!




document1
5
“Scorecard”: National RD&E Plan 2009 - 2014
Key Performance Indicators
What has progressed well? What evidence
do you have?
 Number of collaborative arrangements
 Collegiate nature of R&D around the
for the provision of fishing and
country. National projects have
aquaculture RD&E that enhance the
progressed well.
planned outcomes.
 KBBE – EU / NZ partnership – see PH.
 FRDC, IPA’s good. SA/Vic good.
 Trends in sharing of RD&E capabilities,
 Vic / S.A. example FRDC / ABARES –
and trends toward specialisation in
National Stock Status.
fishing and aquaculture RD&E.


Progress against implementation
milestones
Satisfaction in delivery of RD&E
services and outcomes
What needs to improve / be done differently
in the future?
 Communicate what is being done.
Jurisdictions know (management and
R&D) but wider stakeholders not clear.
 Progress co-management not just
promote.
 Not demonstrated. Not in fisheries
assessments. Too many jurisdictions
believe they are “major” rather than
support.







Trends in engagement of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people in
customary, commercial and recreational
fishing and aquaculture RD&E activities
How well RD&E is directly attributable to
the strategy, and delivers on trends in;
o The unit value for seafood products
o Community perceptions of the
acceptability of fishing in Australian
water
o Participation in recreational fishing
o Engagement of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people in
cultural, commercial and
recreational fishing and aquaculture
RD&E activities
o Numbers of fisheries assessed as
environmentally sustainable
document1







Improving – IRG a start.
Started!

No.
FRDC Science Info project. National
Stock Status Report.
No.
Need data.
FRDC IRG process.






By whom? EPBC have assessed
majority of Aussie fisheries. If talking

Extension and adoption remains less
effective.
Split $ from research and fund specific
E&A expertise to communicate.
Industry collective investment in
promoting industry to community seen as
an “old industry”.
Target women.
Increase capability to engage.
No indigenous rep on Rec.
National Standard for fisheries
management.
6

o
Aquaculture production


about “third party” certification WA
moving down MSC path.
Yes, right direction.
Salmon, prawns, oysters (very good).
See Pheroze presentation.



document1
New products very slow.
State specific, eg WA &NT .
Industry resistant to change / inclusion of
Indigenous.
7
Session 3
The future for Fishing and Aquaculture?
(note - This session had 5 short presentations designed to stimulate ideas around F&A issues requiring future RD&E)
presentations available .
a) The future we need to plan for: Tony Smith
Main discussion points: future opportunities and challenges requiring RD&E
 consolidation of responsibilities for managing fisheries?
 How to simplify processes → to invest / engage / joint
 Not just oceans - Rivers and wetlands as well.
ventures; → potential to engage with private sector.
 More $ into universities for RDE?
 Food security – how to meet global demand?
 Struggle to get recognition for F&A as part of economy.
 Opportunities for collaboration with other countries?
 Research providers – are stakeholders as well → strength of
 What is Australia’s potential production?
partnerships!
b) Australian community knowledge of and support for the Industry?
Kate Brooks
Main discussion points: future opportunities and challenges requiring RD&E
 Later generations do not trust government or industry
 What would a successful Industry communication plan /
organisations
approach look like?
 Increase transparency of Industry activities and relate
 Whose communication strategy?
research outputs to community values – need RDE first! –
 Next five years – what are community / Industry values?
but, not just Industry responsibility – also Fisheries
And how to communicate?
Managers – whose responsibility to get the messages out?
 International linkages? International opinions?
 Extension of current research?? – extend in context of what
 Marketing our Industry versus a product??
is important to stakeholders.
 Need to demonstrate effective management of fisheries.
 School curriculum?
c) Fishing and Aquaculture sector overview
Ewan Colquhoun
Main discussion points: future opportunities and challenges requiring RD&E
 How will we compete with other protein suppliers for the
 Better performance will be driven by public scrutiny.
next 30 years?
 Need to look at food security versus supply and affordability
 Social licence (to operate) is dominant.
– need an Australian perspective on food security.
 Social media has replaced mass media.
d) Habitats restoration and maintenance
Craig Copeland
Main discussion points: future opportunities and challenges requiring RD&E
 Need a National Fish habitat Strategy; Need for development of historical recollection of fish stocks.
 Need to develop new / different partnerships and funding streams.
document1
8
e) Fisheries and Aquaculture Ideas Forum– ideas to help the Industry develop? Jonas Woolford
document1
9
Session 4 What are the 4-5 major opportunities / challenges for fishing and aquaculture that RD&E can deal with over the next
5 years?
a)
Nationally / across the whole of fishing and aquaculture?
A range of priority areas were raised and debated, including:
 Address Workforce Development.
 Address Climate Change and Habitat Loss
 Research into new / alternative markets / venture capital.
 All fisheries sustainable.
 Optimising value.
 Allocation for Blue Sky R&D?
 Non-fishing impacts.







Biosecurity and Food Safety.
Domestic and Export market intelligence and analysis.
Public confidence in the Industry and Government’s role.
Reduce regulatory burden,
Industry potential growth and markets.
Resource access and allocation.
Customer needs and supply chain development.
Debate highlighted the following six priority areas for consideration in Session 5 (scope RD&E required):
“Public Confidence” in the
Reduce Regulatory Burden
Industry Potential, Growth &
Resource Access & Allocation
Industry and Government’s
Markets – customer needs
Role (Fisheries Managers)
and supply chain
development.
 Community – celebrates /
 Reduce unnecessary
 Intelligence.
 National approach to ....
acceptance.
burdens.
 Grow the Industry.
 Tradeable rights.
 Benefit of increasing
 Can be self regulating.
 Developing and protecting
 Understanding multi-user
production / by catch.
 Achieve increased
markets.
interactions of marine world
 Outcome – sustainable
efficiency.
 Biosecurity.
(through effective
production.
 Extra knowledge we need
 Food Safety.
mapping?)
 Based on shared values.
to help Govts make better
 Broader context $ and
 Marketing.
decisions.
experience and
 Common reporting
satisfaction.
standards
(note – some debate over
how much of this area is RDE
versus policy changes –
which may require some
RD&E)
document1
10
Workforce Development
 Capacity building opportunities.
 Research capacity (eg TFK).
document1
Non-fishing Impacts
 Habitat loss
 Climate change
11
Session 4 b) What are the 4-5 major opportunities / challenges for fishing and aquaculture that RD&E can deal with over the
next 5 years? in each sector - Aquaculture / Indigenous / Recreational / Commercial?
Commercial
 Greatest opportunity is to expand commercial sector – “dream” – habitat; “low volume high volume” improving the value –
produce / transform / sell.
 Resource access – D&E component (message to consumers); social licence; oil / gas.
 Cost effective management – eco-based fisheries management; stock assessments (multi species); common reporting
mechanisms; real-time data.
 Consumer engagements –experts, needs.
 Strategic Market Development.
Recreational Fishing
 Healthy habitat – habitat enhancement structures. Everything about habitat, future needs, future proofing.
 Accrual catch / effect data and utilisation. (Social, economic, well being).
 People development and linkages, across States.
 Value of fishing – from recreational fishers, non-fishers, consumer groups, females, industry supply chain - include fish
welfare – determine different group’s opinions of fishing.
 Governance of recreational fishing; national representation, funding, access, new stocks, etc .
 Stocks – stock enhancement, ecology of impacted recreational species, closing life cycle, developing fisheries.
 Engagement of recreational fishing.
Indigenous Fishing
Allocation & Resource
Access
 Primacy for Indigenous
People.
 Explore means to ensure
indigenous fishing cultural
rights are met, or
addressed, within the
broader understanding of
fishing rights in Australia.
 Self-determination
(aspirational goals
recognised) rights to use
and manage cultural
assets and resources.
document1
Industry Potential




Economic development (wild
catch, aquaculture) opportunities
arising from indigenous peoples
cultural assets and associated
rights.
Develop/start new commercial
initiatives that maintain ongoing
indigenous interests and concerns
in the fishing and seafood industry
Aspirational vision for Aboriginal
participation.
Community licence for Indigenous
fishing.
Workforce Development


Capacity building
opportunities for
indigenous people are
enhanced.
Research capacity (eg
TFK).
Social licence

Land to sea (EBFM)
management,
communication of
promotion of
stewardship
(corporate
responsibility).
12
Aquaculture
Industry growth,
productivity and
profitability
document1
Aquatic animal health
and biosecurity
Optimisation of
regulatory framework
Mitigation of
environmental
interactions
Development of integrated,
interdisciplinary support tools
13
Session 5 a)
NATIONALLY – scope each of the major opportunities / challenges:
Priority Area – Public Confidence and trust in Industry and Government
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 Everything falls under public confidence and trust in Industry and Government.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 Not just build confidence, not just earn trust but to be loved as providers of seafood and custodians of marine (and
freshwater) resources / environment. Trusted, respected, admired.
 Progress in reduced regulatory burden, improved market access and growth, improved workforce uptake, improved resource
access and more security with other marine resource users. Better communication, stewardship to protect and restore
marine habitat.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Tools will not solve problem – will help within our Industry.
 Create inclusive cultures.
 Citizen science – utilizing, engaging, influencing.
 Media –nothing to hide.
 Communication.
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)
 Understand our own values –

Industry – post harvest – each other; commercial – each other; aquaculture - species; traditional – Recreational - metro,
inland.

Government – States – internal departments.

Research – institutions ? Funding.
 Map our networks.
 Map influential stakeholders networks (have to do this broadly to determine influential ones).
 Understand values of influential stakeholders / determine shared values. Understand our threats – Industry has perceptions need to test.
 Determine our message / brand.
 Role out and sort out ourselves internally first – may not be consensus but slightly different messages may work for certain
networks.
 Scope ways to broadcast at large.
 Develop roll out project that takes 23 million people on experiential journey of discovery.
 Be prepared to accept many hugs.
 review success and continue engagement.
document1
14
Priority Area – Resource Access and Allocation
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 Develop an understanding of multi use interactions of marine and waterways.
 Cost / benefit tools for assisting allocation and reallocation processes including possible triggers.
 Knowing impact of oil and gas exploration / extraction activities on fishing resources.
 Review management arrangements for regional based rather than State based.
 How do we better develop fisheries (new fisheries and new methods).
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 National map identifying recognised fishing use including economic benefits (social and cultural).
 Greater certainty and opportunities for investment.
 Consistent management approach across the country for allocation processes.
 Collaborative approach to regional management, eg manage species (Spanish mackerel).
 Primacy of Indigenous people in the allocation of aquatic resources.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Spatial science and modelling (CSIRO, Geoscience).
 Allocation (universities).
 Oil and gas issues (universities – Curtin).
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)

Articulate into the broader community the agreed allocations processes (NGO’s, States, Federal Government).
document1
15
Priority Area – Streamlining Governance and Regulatory Systems
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 Reducing EPBC Act duplication and through that development of consistent standards.
 Reducing barriers for the Indigenous community to enter into commercial fishing and aquaculture.
 Defining acceptable levels of impact through self-regulation framework around standards and performance for aquaculture.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 Adoption of the standard and transferability to third parties. Aligns with Government’s policy of a one-stop-shop.
 Having Indigenous businesses thrive on Indigenous lands.
 More confidence for investors.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Determining consistent standards to meet requirements under the EPBC Act – commonwealth.
 Levels of assessing the barriers for the Indigenous community, and coming up with solutions – State, Commonwealth, key
Industry leaders, researchers.
 Defining the framework that is acceptable and pro-development agreed to by State, Commonwealth and Marine Parks.
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)

To find cost-effective indicators for environmental performance for research beyond stock assessments in terms of EBFM
(Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management).

Agreed acceptable standard for bycatch and TEPs.

Governance model on land use that covers the commercial, custodial and community needs.

Standards for acceptable discharge limits. EPBC delegation to streamline the processes.
document1
16
Priority Area – Non – fishing impacts on Fisheries and Aquaculture
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 Review list of non-fishing impacts and update.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 National Fish Status Report by 2017.
 Greater awareness.
 Social survey of before- and after- attitudes.
 Measure fish production improvements after 5 years.
 Greater awareness of fish habitat.

Recognised that fish / habitat / ecosystems are fundamental to healthy fisheries –
- legislation / policy for decision-making;
- estuaries, wetlands, nearshore.
this is not about stopping development.
- offsets – 2 for 1 offsets
- fish habitat status report – highlight values.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Need capability audit of fish habitat science.
 Understanding habitat requirements for fisheries.
 Knowledge and information to improve productivity – needs to be improved.
 Cost benefit is needed – modelling of intervention techniques and alternative land uses.
 Fishcare / Landcare.
 Human capability – needs to be improved – not volunteers –man power.
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)

Develop media opinion leaders on habitat.

Measure economic and social value of habitat – tangible way to engage the community.

Need to do “E” to simplify science so it is understood by fishers – community / recreational.

Fish habitat extension does not get to grass roots fishers and community.

Status of fish habitat across Australia.

Climate change - Science to inform MPA management.
document1
17
Priority Area – Workforce Development
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 Defined as leadership and management skills; and business systems with components of skills for innovation; business
culture; technical competency; career paths; induction etc (sometimes even training!).
 The precise gaps are not known and represent a growing business risk. (→ managers; leaders; skilled labour). (WFD Plan).
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 High level skilled leaders and owners (set innovation culture).
 Targeted, specialised training available and used.
 Healthy supply of young professionals and workers (research and enterprise).
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Need organisation(s) to conduct skill analysis – qualitative and quantitative.
 People who can develop training courses and evaluation. Mentoring essential – RD&E needed.
 Need to conduct an in-depth skills audit across the Industry – how to fill the gaps and deficiencies identified; and convince
reality of risk of doing nothing and opportunity if take action.
 People who can supervise industry placements (work experience, cadetships).
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions).

Focus on business skills → bigger ROI → address massive deficiency.

Focus on specific core technical competencies (fish health, aquaculture technology, retail).

Focus on key groups of high performing trainers.

Strategies to attract and retain young professionals and existing workforce (social licence).
CSIRO – High technology skills need.
 Knowledge → biology of different species → TRAINING QUALITY - need consolidated knowledge and credibility.
 Redirection in resources / funds from government. Succession planning.
 Skills – lab work to deckhands.
work readiness / retention
 Young graduates not work ready.
Vet training course – fish health; training, there are a number of people gaining qualifications to be a vet but not with specific
fish health qualifications or understanding.
CURTIN – Health effects of food.
Work Force Development → capacity is out there, how to attract to fishing and aquaculture. What do we need? Courses to
become accredited. Recognition of this training ~ skill sets more widely recognised.
Seafood Market – Lack of recruitment into wild catch sector.
 No one coming through; aquaculture. How do you get the kids to look at this?
document1
18

Social licence → professionalise the industry → delivery of: codes of practice; codes of behaviour; linked to training practice
→ all benchmarked.
document1
19
Priority Area – Industry Potential Growth and Markets; Customer Needs
What does success look like? – profitable; viable; competitive (ongoing); optimise potential resource.
COMPETITIVE
→ Water
→ Fish Habitat
Optimal Use and
performance of Resource
VIABLE
PRODUCT
CONSUMER
- Extent, Impact and Relative Importance
 Utilisation of resource that is viable – fish; waste; ? (lesser priority).
 Primary importance.
 Lack of good measures of viability of industry.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 Profit → viable enterprises and sectors.
KPIs (examples only).
o Bank finance is available and competitive.
o Harvest expanding – and GVP, etc.
o Gross margins sustainable.
o Customer (and consumer) satisfaction.
o New markets identified.
o Consumer product creativity.
o Increase capital value.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Capability and focus exist but not satisfactorily adopted or used – eg, S.A.
require segment based motivation
and standards.
 Need different business models for aquaculture and wild capture → agribusiness and IPA’s.
Disconnect - Compounded by traditional
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)
This area needs RDE for each SECTOR – not nationally.
document1
20
Session 5 b)
By SECTOR – scope each of the major opportunities / challenges:
Sector – Rec Fishing
1 a) Fisheries characterisation –
o
Who are / aren’t they (survey both fishers and non-fishers).
o
What do they want (values / aspirations).
o
What do they catch / how much (where?) do they fish.
o
Benefits of recreational fishing (social including health / wellbeing) and economic.
1 b) Cost effective, innovative and repeatable survey techniques to deliver representative samples.
The above will inform: 2 a) National fish habitat audit (what we have).
2 b) Biological, ecological, social and economic linkages between different types of fish habitat and fisheries productivity (what
is important).
2 c) Approaches, methods, tool kits for improving fisheries productivity cost effectively (doing it).
3 Innovative management approaches to deliver outcomes consistent with values / aspirations of the recreational fishing
community, with clear pathways to adoption.
document1
21
Sector – Indigenous
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 High – gives baseline for informed decisions; informs negotiating.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 Information shared in Aboriginal community and non-Aboriginal sectors.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 People development and capacity building.
 Cost benefit analysis.
 Fishing history and sea country management.
 Governance models to support community economic participation and development.
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)
document1
22
Sector – Commercial
(note – there are 3 priority areas for Commercial)
a) Strategic Market development (Commercial)
What do we want to buy? Market / consumer –
 Analyst – using current data, identify gaps, identify opportunities; smart interpretations of data → paint options for industry.
Seafood trends. → by analysts who are experienced and understand industry – long term – identify current barriers to entry.
 Team of people. End product – industry – will I use it or not??.
 Analysis – change needed - full time analysis that industry finds useful; commercially useful data.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Analysts / Data - Industry do not have time to look at – collate for them.
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)
 Identification of new marketing opportunities (domestic / internationally).
 Australian seafood prospectus – where currently / future markets /opportunities /threats / competition are.
 Value adding and identify what we can do with what we have got.
 Consumer requirements – domestic / international.
 Measure consumer satisfaction with product – kg consumption / head; pleasurable experience buying; who are our
consumers.
 Extension – forum around country through Associations and Seafood Directions and online availability.
What do we want?
One thing - A team of people who can develop long term experience and understanding in the seafood industry with respect to
analysing and interpreting data including –
 Seafood trends.
 Current data.
 Identify gaps.
 Identify opportunities
smart interpretation of data
 Paint opportunities for industries.
 Identify current barriers.
 Marketing trends.
 Value adding.
Extension forums through the association and events such as AGMs / Seafood Directions.
KPI – score out of 10 – Did industry find it useful?
 Do we want to continue to fund this?
document1
23
b) Cost Effective Management (Commercial)
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 Reduce cost.
 Greater public acceptance.
 Greater / better co-management – increased delegation of management (what can Industry do).
 Reduce duplication between Fisheries and EPBC Acts.
 What can be contestable? (eg NZ model).
 Business models.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 Integrated / automated data collection / assessment / decisions.
 Greater contestability for research services.
 Reduced monitoring costs.
 More adaptable management processes.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Policy capability.
 IT capacity to ...............
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)
 Developing standards in data quality and key researchable questions.
 Developing common standards in data collection or use.
 Do governments have the appetite for this approach.
 Improving automated data collection.
 Evaluating cost / benefit of automated data collection along whole pathway.
document1
24
c) Growth Opportunity (Commercial)
- extent / impact / relative importance of opportunity / challenge;
 How do we produce more fish –
o ranching, stock enhancement, seeding;
o rehabilitate lost habitat & create new habitat (mapping);
o develop new fisheries (prospecting);
 How do we produce more from existing –
o harvest methods (Margiris - more efficient methods) including technology;
o utilising waste (now) into product;
o new products.
- image of ‘success’ from applying RD&E to this opportunity / challenge; (+ KPI’s)
 More fish / products / markets.
 Increased GVP / capital value.
 Sustainable gross margins.
- describe the RD&E capability required (or gap in capability); (+ M/S/L if possible)
 Food science / pharmaceutical – QDAF and CSIRO and others.
 Technology and engineering.
 Marketing.
 Fishery science and management (new fisheries).
 Economic analysis (on cost benefit).
- outline the research and extension strategy required. (+ key researchable questions)
 Deliver outcomes of mapping exercise to public.
 As above.
 Engage end user at beginning of projects.
document1
25
Sector - Aquaculture
Generic across all 4 sectors*
National outcome
Specific to each sector
Aquaculture research themes
- Examples
F&A industry "Triple" outcomes
Industry productivity & profitability.
Eg. - Access to water/sites
- Tech & sci projects
- Product safety & quality
- Market/product development
- Innovation
Aquatic animal health & biosecurity.
Eg. - Disease diagnosis & management
- Biosecurity (all tiers)
- Marine pests
- Vaccine / Aquavet chems
Fisheries and aquaculture are
prosperous, economically viable, and
valued by society.
The Australian
community derives
optimal economic,
environmental, and
social benefits from
fishery & aquaculture
activities.
Evidence to support reduction of regulatory
burden.
Eg. - Near / far field impacts of outputs
- Access to aquavet chemicals
- Harmonisation of env assessment
Fisheries & aquaculture are managed
for environmental sustainability.
Mitigation of environmental interactions.
Eg. - Nutrient / chemical release
- Escapees
- Wildlife interactions
- Fishmeal/oil replacement
- Lifecycle assessment
- Habitat degradation
Integrated, interdisciplinary support tools.
Purpose is to enable government regulators and
industry participants to demonstrate to the
community the sustainability credentials of the
aquaculture industry, to the point of gaining
community trust.
Fisheries and aquaculture address
societal expectations of sustainable
practices, and earn community trust.
(AKA SLtO)
Note that many outputs from RD&E undertaken
under economic and environmental outcomes
will provide the material used to demonstrate
industry sustainability.
Note - for the purposes of this Strategy the 4 sectors are:
*
*
*
*
document1
Commercial harvest fisheries
Recreational fisheries
Customary fisheries
Aquaculture
Session 6
National Integration challenges:
Main discussion points:
a) How do we link priorities and investment at the national, regional and sector levels?
 Explore new funding – corporate.
 Timing of funding processes and their application process.
 Maximum leverage of a “few” National issues to obtain sufficient resources to make a difference.
 National RDE Strategy – focus on investment for National – regional and Sector priorities via other processes.
 Need to be clear on what will not be funded.
 How to identify overseas partners – incentives?
 Need to assess who overseas etc would be good funding partners – environmental scan.
 RDE Strategy – principles / philosophy – needs to be clearly articulated – partnership / unity / leverage / efficiency, etc
 Hub process and FRAB workshop – integration.
 IPA’s working against integration
 IRG – to invest at National level in areas only relevant to the IRG.
 0.25 to 0.5%?
What governance structures and processes do we have in place – what needs to improve?
 Competitive versus pre-competitive
 FRAB and Hub linkages – hold annual meeting of this group.
 Governance – need accountability measures.
 Highly complex structures – need to map all the structures – purpose / functions / priorities.
 Invest in communications.
 Indigenous – do they need a peak body – role of IRG – link to all other Industry bodies – Native title / NAICSMA / Land
Council / Regulatory Authorities.
 Listen to paymaster – golden rule.
 National / Jurisdictional competitive funding round and / or sector / organisation – IPA’s or CSIRO – 2 models for governance
at present – listen to those investing!
b) How do we link RDE and Marketing / promotion?
 Link client / consumer needs to RDE planning process.
 Understand and explain how the linkages work.
Comments on National Integration Challenges summarised from the table group notes:
 Percentage licence funds in WA / Vic / NSW? (etc) into a single RR subprogram.
 Better enunciation of priorities – better engagement with end user regarding prioritisation / better understanding of research
capabilities and process.
 Should be directly driven by end user and shopping for researcher.
 Time scales, between priority and response within funding frameworks – reduce lead time / rigidity in system.
document1
27










Corporate partnerships – stretches priority set or share priority sets. Sectoral partnerships. [supermarkets].
Bank opportunities – explore investment → benefit to bank is increased customers.
Explore foreign investment in R&D.
Review FRAB model → consider alternatives to improve efficiency of spend (on current funds). → for example, geographic /
sectoral FRABs.
Change the 0.25? will Federal government match any increase? Or will they decrease public good if they match an
increase.
Current integration of provider skills at national level is driven by the will of providers rather than the strategy document.
Better link national R&D strategy with Sector / IPA strategic plans.
Focus national projects – leverage $ - pick a few serious national issues and do them well, for example – National
Management Standard; National Fish Habitat Management; Developing Fisheries Planning; Technology Transfer –
compliance (SE), data collection (SW), fishing gear (North). National R&D Workshop
Partnering with aligned industry/government bodies / overseas organised – in the priority areas? For example, salmon and
lobster; refrigerants; engines same as climate issues same regionally; boats; trucks; etc. Directing industry to work with a
better provider.
FRDC clearly articulating what FRDC will NOT invest in.
Governance structures and processes - What needs to improve?
 Need explicit collaboration target (KPIs for interaction) for sectors, committees, FRABS. Empowering stakeholders.
 Aligning calendars.
 Critical review of FRAB process to ensure relevance and reduce transaction costs.
 Be more targeted at national level and ensure return on investment (ie do not just focus on how much you can lever in but
ensure high impact is leveraged out).
 Industry partnership “Agreements reducing funds to FRABs.
 Agree with need for better communication –
(i) Between FRAB / HUBs
(ii) For industry to show where the $ go (explore what works best).
 RPN / HUBs have no profile (beyond the members of the RPN) with resource providers and suggest this is also the case for
industry awareness.
 NPP also does not feature in priority settings / decision making process to “best” research provisions.
 Indigenous – do we want a Peak group?
 Do we act as a signpost to all of the current Indigenous peak bodies (National Congress, National Native title, Land Trust,
Land Council, NIALSAM, TSRA, IRG, Indigenous Advisory Council etc?
document1
28
Next steps in the planning process:
- what will be produced? How can people have input?
- workshop report summarising main discussion points will be circulated asap.
- Will work with the Governance Committee to take the main RDE strategy points and collate into a document – to be circulated
– and we will rely on those present at workshop to engage people in your own organisations – to test the validity of the RDE
focus being proposed for the coming 5 years.
- FRDC will produce some simple communiqués to support this document – its purpose, how to engage / provide feedback etc.
- FRDC website – we will put all documents from this workshop.
- if you think there are others that should be involved – let us (Josh Fielding) know.
document1
29
Workshop participants:
Matt Barwick
Recfish research
Gavin Begg
SARDI
Kate Brooks
Social Sciences Res Coord Program
Chris Calogeras
IRG
Chris Carter
IMAS
Ewan Colquhoun
Ridge Partners
Russell Conway
RecFish Aust
Craig Copeland
DPI NSW
Mark Crane
AAH subprogram
Luke Cromie
DPI Vic
Wayne Dredge
Piscari Industries
Peter DundasNSW FRAB
Smith
WA FRAB
John Harrison
Curtin Uni
Euan Harvey
Aust Southern Bluefin Tuna
Brian Jeffries
Aust Prawn Farmers Assoc
Helen Jenkins
National Aquaculture Council
Pheroze
Tas Salmonid Growers Assoc
Jungalwalla
SA FRAB
Adam Main
Fisheries Victoria
Rory McEwan
Curtin Uni
Ross McGowan
Western Rock Lobster Council
Alexandra
Southern Rocklobster Ltd
Mcmanus
DAFF QLD
John McMath
CSIRO
Gary Morgan
Rural Solutions SA
Warwick Nash
Northern Territory Seafood Council
Tony Smith
James Cook Uni
Matthew Osborne
Sydney Fish Market
Katherine
DPI SA
document1
David Smith
Len Stephens
Ilona Stobutzki
Neil Stump
Grahame Turk
Renee Vajtauer
Arno Verboon
Brad Warren
Jonas Woolford
Brett McCallum
Bryan McDonald
Murray Barton
Klynton Wanganeen
Dallas D’Silva
Michael Claessens
Daniel Gaughan
Howard Gill
Leyland Campbell
Nick Rayns
Bob Creese
Jason Wilson
Yvonne Zunic
Johnathon Davey
Simon Veitch
Patrick Hone
Peter Horvat
Josh Fielding
Peter Box
CSIRO
Seafood CRC
ABARES
Tas Seafood Industry Council
Sydney Fish Market
CFA
WA Fishing Industry Council
Oceanwatch
Wildcatch Fisheries SA
Pearl Producers Assoc
NT Government
NT Government
IRG
VRFish
Agrifood Skills
WA DoF
Murdoch Uni
Recfish West
AFMA
NSW DPI
IRG
AFMA
SIV
DA
FRDC
FRDC
FRDC
Facilitator
30
Sarneckis
Colin Simpfendorfer
Bryan Skepper
Sean Sloan
Apologies:
Geoff Allan
Simon Boag
Heather Brayford
Patrick Caleo
Ian Cartwright
Ian Curnow
Mehdi Doroudi
Martin Exel
James Findlay
Rick Fletcher
Craig Foster
Rob Gott
Norm Grant
DPI NSW
SETFIA
DoF WA
MSC
COMFRAB and TASFRAB
NT Government
PIRSA
Austral Fisheries
AFMA
DoF WA
Clean Seas Tuna
DPIPWE TAS
Importers Association
John Gunn
Greg Jenkins
Tim Karlov
Rachel King
Kaylene Little
Jeff Moore
Gordon Neil
Marty Phillips
Peter Rankin
Andrew Rowland
Thor Saunders
Stuart Smith
Scott Spencer
AIMS
Uni of Melbourne
Department of Agriculture
Oysters Australia
Tassal
GABIA
DAFF
ABFA
VIC FRAB
RecFishWest
NT Government
DoF WA
DAFF QLD
Invited:
Colin Buxton
Bo Carne
Anthony Ciconte
Shane Fava
James Fogarty
Michael Gilby
Allan Hansard
Barbara Konstas
Dean Lisson
Consultant
FRDC IRG
CFA
AFMA
QLD FRAB
VIC FRAB and FRDC IRG
ARFF
Melbourne Seafood Centre
Abalone Council Australia
Marshall Lester
Jo-Anne McCrea
Anthony Mercer
Malcolm Poole
Coffin Bay Oyster Farm
WWF
De Cost Seafoods
Recreational Fishing Alliance of
NSW
Deakin Uni
Traffic Oceania
SIMS
QSIA
document1
Gerry Quinn
Glen Sant
Ian Suthers
Scott Wiseman
31