Final Report from Confidence to Grow (C2G)
July 2009
Prepared by Warren Mason and Cathy Phelps
The C2G Story
Climate change (CC) is one of many challenges facing the dairy industry. In response, Dairy
Australia established a one-year package of work called “Confidence to Grow” to rapidly build up
industry knowledge about CC and to bring a dairy industry focus to the debate – see the program
diagram below with its 10 interacting modules. C2G was focussed on answering questions like:
o How well positioned are we to manage climate change?
o Are our systems resilient enough for what we might see in the future?
o How can dairy be on the front foot, capture emerging opportunities and avoid pitfalls?
o How will national targets to reduce greenhouse gas production affect the dairy industry?
o After C2G, what else needs to be done to ensure ongoing profitability and sustainability?
Confidence to Grow aimed to assist all sectors of the dairy industry make sense of the short term
challenges associated with reducing carbon pollution and the longer-term challenges associated
with a changing and more variable climate. The project’s primary question concerned the industry’s
confidence to grow over the next 20 years when the operating environment has been altered by the
impact of CC, its consequences, and associated challenges of sustainability.
This work (in concert with the major efforts in Trade and Strategy) has placed dairy at the forefront
of the agricultural industries with respect to understanding CC and preparedness for it.
Confidence to Grow program diagram:
1. Feedbase
Audit
Region by region
audit of the
feedbase
2. Climate
Knowledge and
Prediction
Building industry
capability to
understand climate
change implications
and to design
effective strategies
3. Client
Stocktake
a) Region by region audit
of farmers needs and
expectations, including
the large farm sector.
b) Stocktake of additional
clients along the value
chain
+
Process 2
Impact Assessment
+
Process 3
Industry Interpretation
4. System Dynamics and
Interactions
Exploring interactions
and broader implications
including policy changes
(STELLA)
5. Biophysical
Farm Impacts
Assessment of climate
change/ water
availability impacts on
dairy farming systems
6. Processing &
Marketing Impacts
Assessment of
international trends and
implications for Australia
7. Social &
Workforce Impacts
Assessment of social issues
and adaptive capacity to
underpin resilience and
product development
8.
Dairy
World
An Australian/New Zealand dairy
industry response and reaction model
Process 1
Stocktake Data
9. Strategic
Analysis &
Foresighting
Scenario
Exploration
Scenario
analysis/
foresighting
to assess
implications
and develop
appropriate
responses
to a range of
possible
futures for
all elements
of the dairy
industry
Process 4
Products & Outcomes
10. Product
Development &
Delivery
Products for Farmers
Products for Regions
Products for Processors
National Products
Outcome
A confident, resilient,
and growing dairy
industry
Overall Conclusions from C2G
These conclusions represent a synthesis from the work done, the results presented and the
conclusions reached in each of the 10 C2G modules that have been summarised in Appendix 1.
1.
The next big challenge relates to greenhouse gas emissions on dairy farms
During the life of C2G, the Federal Government released green and white papers, and is legislating
a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS). From the lessons out of C2G and the green/white
paper process, we can conclude that we now need a major focus on the science underpinning
practical and effective greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies for the industry.
2.
The ‘reality’ of Climate Change no longer matters
For many, the jury is still out on the physical reality of CC – this debate will be on-going because
decades of hindsight are required to differentiate small changes to the average climate from the
background of large and poorly understood climate variability, and individuals have different
motivations around acceptance of the science. However, ‘belief’ in CC is now irrelevant because
the very idea of Climate Change, backed up by clearly more volatile weather events, has created an
overwhelming social and economic phenomenon that is fundamentally changing everything from
the behaviour of Governments to consumer choices. CC is no longer a discretionary issue but has
become one of the critical lenses through which every decision must pass, because the
consequences will affect an industry’s future resilience and competitive advantage.
3.
Industry confidence in the future has been ‘dented’ by the climate change debate
Module 9 found that confidence is never static - if it is not being intentionally enhanced it can
quickly deteriorate. The CC debate has introduced ‘new uncertainties’ into dairy farming and this
has, quite understandably, undermined industry confidence. A common perception among the dairy
farmers who participated in Module 9 was that “the world is changing faster than my performance
is improving. I see myself falling behind my personal vision of being a really competent farmer.”
The drivers of this decline in confidence tend to be embedded in concerns over specific issues
engaging the industry - such as water, feedbase, biofuels or resource security - rather than CC by
itself. Industry commitment to rebuilding the confidence lost through the CC debate so far, requires
a focus on these specific, tangible issues, and delivery though recognised industry channels.
4.
Current Climate Change projections are not an imminent threat to dairy farmers
Some impressive modelling work in Module 5 looked at the impact of climate predictions on
pasture production in 2030 and 2070, across all Australian dairy regions. This modelling clearly
showed that current CC projections (based on averages) do not threaten most dairy farmers for the
next 30 years, and only the most extreme of the climate projections threatens dairy farming by
2070. As a gross summary, lower pasture production in late spring is compensated for by higher
growth rates over winter. We can expect to see a slight increase in C4 pasture grasses and a slight
increase in annuals over perennials, but overwhelmingly, perennial ryegrass will continue to
produce more than 40% of Australia’s milk. There are however, two major caveats:
 This conclusion assumes that the models are near the mark, that the rate of CC will not
exceed IPCC projections, and that climate variability does not markedly increase;
 Irrigated dairy farms face the dual impact of an increase in irrigation requirement (hotter
and drier) and a decline in irrigation availability creating pressure to reduce total water
use, boost WUE and seek appropriate substitutes for water when necessary.
5.
Climate variability is the major challenge for individual businesses
Projections for CC across all Australian dairy regions indicate that on average there will be small
increases in temperature (perhaps 0.2oC) and small decreases in rainfall (perhaps 2%) per decade.
However, averages are very deceptive and are effectively invisible to farmers who are managing
seasonal variability of at least an order of magnitude greater than the decadal CC. Managing this
variability is a major challenge for individual businesses, and if, as predicted, climate variability
increases, then the ‘variability challenge’ for dairy farmers will grow substantially faster than the
‘averages’ indicate. Climate scientists predict that CC will increase climate variability, and CSIRO
has estimated that the ‘return time’ for major droughts in SE Australia will approximately halve.
6.
We need to merge Climate Variability into the Climate Change debate
Climate change is effectively impossible for individuals to detect because the small changes in
temperature and rainfall that can be credited to CC are hidden within the massive peaks and troughs
of climate variability. If (as suspected) the climate becomes more variable, driving increased
volatility in resource supply, input/output prices and home grown forage, then detecting climate
change becomes more difficult. It will be impossible to determine for many years/decades, how
much (if any) of the current situation in the Murray region is due to CC - or is it simply a major
drought and therefore climate variability, from which full recovery can be expected? Merging the
two concepts provides a mechanism for engaging more stakeholders in the dairy industry, especially
those who believe or hope that CC is not real. Managing climate variability is and always has
been an essential part of sustainable dairy farming – by managing now for climate variability
you are effectively managing for future climate change.
7.
More research on local climate projections is not needed
At the time C2G was initiated, the most critical issues perceived for the dairy industry were keeping
direct contact with the most up to date CC projections, and ‘translating’ those general climate
projections into local and regional impacts. Three key lessons have emerged:
 Because the IPCC climate projections are uncertain, and short term modelling cannot
distinguish climate change from variability, keeping tabs on the ‘latest’ modelling and
continually updating our conclusions is not a high priority.
 Regional differences in temperature and rainfall projections are minor and the overall
conclusions are the same for all dairy regions – more certainty in the CC projections
and/or more localised assessment won’t alter these conclusions.
 The differences between farming systems – in terms of both adaptation options and
emission reduction strategies – are significantly greater than the differences between
regions. Future work should be farming system rather than regionally focussed.
8.
On-farm adaptation is important.
Farmers are constantly adapting to economic, climate, social and environmental ‘signals’. CC is a
long term issue that will require on-going adaptation by dairy farmers to buy time and reduce
business risks while the world moves to a low carbon economy. Adaptation is about making
farming systems more resilient to climate variability. This might include farming systems that: a)
require less water or are less reliant on day-by-day pasture production, but have the flexibility to
respond to good years; b) can rapidly respond to changes in input and milk prices; and c) reduce
some of the price and supply risks associated with external inputs. The focus for future needs to be
applying these questions to specific farming systems.
9.
Mitigation (reducing emissions) is the only truly strategic response
Dairy farmers can adapt to climate change but in the end they will be part of a scheme that requires
a substantial reduction in greenhouse gas emissions – aimed at reducing the ‘amount’ of climate
change everyone has to adapt to! Fortunately, managing for on-farm efficiencies not only
increases profit but also reduce emissions - though probably not fast enough to meet national
emission reduction targets. The Government intends to include agriculture in the national
emissions reduction scheme by 2015, making a final decision on this in 2013. Agricultural entry
was delayed because of problems with measurement, the lack of mitigation options, food security
issues and leakage to other jurisdictions. Working with Government to design an appropriate
emissions scheme for agriculture is the most pressing ‘climate change’ issue for the dairy industry.
Recommendations for Post-C2G investments
CC itself is a long term issue, and for which there is little that dairy farmers can or need to do now,
‘in preparation’. The threat of increased climate variability is significantly more important in the
short term than CC itself, but of course managing climate variability has always been a high order
challenge for dairy farmers. However, the suite of challenges associated with introduction of an
emissions trading scheme in Australia is at least an order of magnitude more important than CC or
climate variability as far as the immediate future of the dairy industry is concerned. The investment
suggestions below reflect this understanding and are presented in two groups – continuations of
current projects, and new areas for investment.
1.
Continuation of current activities
The following activities from C2G need to continue in order to address the higher scale conclusions
already presented:
→ Complete the dairy climate change toolkit and locate it on the Dairy Australia web-site. Included
in this recommendation is the need for regionally based training courses in the use of the toolkits.
See conclusion 3.
→ Continue the collaborative work with Dr Craig Miller of CSIRO (begun in Modules 2 and 4),
though with the focus shifted strongly from ‘understanding CC and CC impacts’ to understanding
the needs and vulnerabilities of different dairy farming systems.
→ Continue to co-invest in the 3 major DAFF projects relating to methane (led by MLA), nitrous
oxide (GRDC) and southern livestock adaptation (MLA). See in particular, conclusions 1, 8 and 9.
2.
New investments/activities around climate change
The following activities lead directly from the conclusions from C2G, and while listed and
discussed as independent ‘projects’, they represent a package of related activities:
→ An effective emissions reduction scheme. The most pressing, ‘climate change’ challenge for dairy
is getting the policy settings right for when agriculture joins the national emissions reduction process
in 2015. All our initial indications and input from other modelling (most notably from RIRDC)
suggest that dairy joining the CPRS, with an off-farm point of obligation, will significantly damage
the industry. DA needs to support the underpinning research and modelling required to understand
how the dairy industry can join and contribute to the national effort to reduce emissions, while
retaining on-farm profitability, international competitiveness and contributing to food security. As a
1st step, the C2G team have worked with Trade & Strategy to develop for discussion, a set of draft
principles that might be applied to any emissions reduction scheme for agriculture. See conclusions
1, 2, 3 and 9.
→ Communicating CC across the industry. Module 9 concluded that ‘if non-dairy channels of
information are the only avenue of commentary and insight about CC for dairy stakeholders then
confidence will continue to be eroded.’ Confusions is widespread, and while the web toolkit (see
above) is a critical resource, a wider communications strategy that accesses dairy channels and that
links CC with the other challenges facing the industry is essential – see conclusions 3 and 6.
→ Building farming systems thinking. As outlined in conclusion 7, it has become clear that the
different farming systems will have very different adaptation and mitigation challenges,
vulnerabilities and options, and that these farming systems are likely to be a more coherent basis for
communication than regions or other aggregations. Significant input into the Chris Murphy led
project to define a stable set of farming systems is needed – through which many of our farming
systems investments will be viewed. This needs to be followed by a focussed consultation and
modelling process to understand the best options for tackling the adaptation and mitigation
challenges for each farming system.
→ NZ collaboration. The NZ dairy industry (and broader grazing industries in both countries) faces
the same set of emissions reduction challenges as we do. It would be ideal if the industries in both
countries had the same or similar emissions reduction schemes and targets. Significant levels of
cross Tasman collaboration will be required.
Stocktake Data
Module and Intent
1. Feedbase Stocktake
Results/Outputs
The dairy ‘feedbase’ is a complex mixture of
forages and concentrates. Concentrate use has
been quantified, but there was not an accurate,
picture of the contribution each of the elements
of the home-grown feedbase makes to milk
production, or of the strengths and challenges
the current feedbase faces in each region.
There is an individual feedbase audit report
for each region, with the contribution to
regional milk production made by the
following feedbase categories – annual
pastures (15), perennial rye based pastures
(43), sub-tropical pastures (4), forage crops
(6), concentrates (26), and purchased
hay/silage (6).
The principal objective of this module was to
develop this region-by-region stocktake of the
current dairy feedbase and from that build the
national picture.
When weighted for regional milk production,
the percentage contributions for the above
categories are 15%, 43%, 4%, 6%, 26%, and
6% respectively.
A standard reporting template was developed
for each dairy region.
2. Climate Knowledge and Prediction
This module was a joint venture with CSIRO to
provide the dairy industry with immediate and
on-going access to the most current climate
predictions and regional interpretations.
Principal objectives of the module were:
a. Translation of the global climate
predictions into dairy region predictions
for farmers and processors;
b. Assessment of the likely exposure of the
dairy industry to climate change in terms
of temperature, rainfall and stream flow;
c. Assistance with the development of
plausible climate change scenarios for the
dairy industry to explore through
modelling and foresighting in Module 9.
Conclusions/Lessons/Questions
The audit was undertaken at a time of rapidly changing feedbase conditions
in irrigated areas and therefore under-reports annual pastures and forage
crops.
There is big variation between and within regions.
Collectively, perennial ryegrass based pastures and concentrates produce
~70% of Australia’s milk.
Key farmer questions include:
 What is the system fit for forages; timing of operations and risk
management strategies?
 How to managing reduced availability of irrigation water to best
effect?
Feedbase reports (8 Regional and 1 National)  What impacts will climate change have, especially relating to variation
in soil available water?
are available from DA.
 What’s the best ways to manage and feed bought in forages and
particularly grains at pasture?
The climate modelling indicated that all
 Average climatic conditions in 2030 and 2070 are unlikely to cause
dairying regions would be subject to warming
issues for dairy farming. It is the variability of conditions around the
conditions, including earlier warm conditions
average that are cause for concern.
in spring and an extension of summer
 The window within which climate variability operates is shifting. For
conditions. The models also projected a small
example, if both minimum and maximum temperatures increase, the
decline in average rainfall, although the
actual variability may not change, but the variability will be operating
variability around these estimates was greater
across a different (and higher) range of temperatures.
than for temperature, indicating less
 The frequency and/or intensity of extreme events, such as heatwaves,
confidence in the projection.
rainstorms or droughts, may be greater than currently experienced, even
if, for example, total annual rainfall doesn’t change.
Warmer conditions, especially in combination  Research into more precise projections of future climate in the
with decreases in rainfall, produce significant
individual dairy regions is not warranted.
reductions in water availability for pastures.
 Research is required to help farmers develop strategies to deal with the
effects of climate variability on farm productivity, the effects of climate
variability on dairy input sectors, and the effect of national and global
climate change policies.
Module and Intent
3. Client Stocktake
Stocktake Data
This module was designed to dramatically
increasing DA’s ability to understand and
effectively target particular segments of the
dairy farmer market, through an understanding
of the specific barriers, motivations and needs
for those segments.
Principal objectives of the module were to:
a.
Impact Assessment
b.
Determine an appropriate segmentation
approach (ie. stable over time and by
regions) to support Dairy Australia’s
decisions regarding product development,
delivery and strategic planning;
Carry out the research needed to
effectively divide the dairy farmer
population into segments defined in
objective a), and to build a rich picture of
the attitudes and biophysical characteristics
associated with each segment.
Results/Outputs
Derived Attitudinal Farmer Segmentation was
used and 450 farmers were interviewed –
biased by excluding farms with <100 cows
and adding 20 of the largest farms. The
‘average’ farmer in the survey was 52, had
been farming for 31 years, 25 on the current
farm, milked 249 cows and produced 1.6m L.
Six segments were identified:
1 - Family first (5.5%)
2 - Winding down (3.6%)
3 - Love farming (17%)
4 - Established and stable (25%)
5 - Open to change (22%)
6 - Growing for the kids (27%)
During 2003-2008 groups 3, 5 & 6 increased
production by 25% - 1, 2 & 4 had no growth.
All larger herds (>500) are in segments 3, 5
and 6. 50% of dairy farmers mentioned
climate change as a key challenge facing the
dairy industry.
This project is ongoing, and has identified a
4. Systems Dynamics and Interactions
This module was a joint venture with CSIRO to number of systems related issues that require
further exploration, including:
explore the systems dynamics and interactions
 Vulnerability to climate events such as
between the farm biophysical (module 5), the
drought can be exacerbated by fluctuating
processing (module 6) and the social and labour
commodity prices.
issues (module 7).
 The dairy commodity system has become
The module engaged in participatory research
increasingly connected to other commodity
with a small subset of the dairy regions in order
systems and is therefore subject to their
to:
dynamics as well as its own.
a. Identify and evaluate adaptation options
 Dairy farmers require greater situational
through hands- on dynamic modelling
awareness and management skills than
tools to evaluate different management
ever before.
options.

A focus on productivity and efficiency
b. Support the scenario analysis activities in
gains through high inputs is not necessarily
module 9 by providing a dynamic
the best strategy for achieving resilient or
capability to answer ‘what if’ questions.
profitable dairy farming enterprises for all
dairy farmers in the 21st century.
Conclusions/Lessons/Questions
There is a positive relationship between size and rate of growth – groups
3, 5 & 6 had double the milk production of groups 1, 2 & 4 in 2003 and
increased by 25% over the next 5 years, while 1, 2, & 4 had no increase.
With some minor exceptions, the segments are independent of Regions
and they provide a level of insight into the diversity of farmers than has
not been available in the past to customise messages and approaches. This
segmentation knowledge can be used for:
 A more sophisticated estimation of adoption rates;
 Designing technologies to meet the needs of key audiences;
 Aligning messages content and message sources based on a knowledge
of the receiver’s preferences and motivations;
Analysis of the large farms interviewed showed: a lower than average
aversion to risk; openness to new ideas; a tendency to be fast followers
rather than innovators; they find information sources limiting, especially
field days and workshops that are for ‘average’ farmers; they tend to have
higher education levels and make more use of consultants. They share no
common attitude to intergenerational issues but those with a strong
intergenerational motivation handed over significant management
responsibility to children at an early age.
 The dairy industry operates in an increasingly complex business
environment due to globalisation of markets and the increased reliance
on inputs such as supplementary fodder to increase productivity. While
this can lead to wealth generation for some, many farmers will
continue, on average, to just break even. Understanding the structure,
interactions, and feedbacks, in the commodity system, will be necessary
to develop the means to change the balance in terms of trade and place
dairying in a position of wealth generation.
 Different farming systems will need to take different approaches to
increasing the resiliency needed to manage through a more variable
climate and commodity cycle. For some this might involve more or
less intensive systems, while others might focus on developing the
skills needed to manage input (water, forage and grain) trading or the
switching between farming systems within and between years.
Module and Intent
5. Biophysical Farm Impacts
This module was the ‘biophysical engine room’
of C2G to explore pasture production outcomes
in 2030 and 2070 – in shorter term studies the
normal year to year variations masks any
impacts of climate change per se.
Principal objectives of the module were to:
Impact Assessment
a.
Identify the most probable impact on
feedbase production from a range of
temperature, rainfall and water availability
predictions (from Module 2) across the
different dairying regions of Australia;
b.
Identify potential industry responses to
such changes in feedbase availability;
c.
Increase biophysical modelling capacity
within the dairy industry.
6. Processing and Marketing Impacts
This module was established because the issues
associated with climate change will have an
impact right across the dairy value chain and
markets.
The original objectives of the module were to:
a.
Clarify the likely production and market
trends in major (and emerging) markets
and competitor countries;
b.
Assess the relative competitiveness of
dairy industries around the world to
changes in climate;
c.
Determine the implications for the
Australian dairy industry.
Results/Outputs
This work quantified the effects of Low,
Medium and High climate change scenarios,
in 2030 and 2070 on pasture growth, species
composition and water balance for a range of
sites and pasture types.
Detailed results are available for Malanda
(Dryland and Irrigated), Mutdupilly (D&I),
Kyogle, Albany, Kyabram (D&I), Dookie
(D&I), Terang, Ellinbank and Elliot (D&I).
Across all sites the impacts on pasture
production were very minor under all 2030
scenarios. Only the High climate change
projections for 2070 had a significant impact
(up to 20%) on pasture production as well as
shifting mixed pastures towards C4 spp.
Irrigation requirement increased by up to
10%. A comprehensive report is available
from DA.
Dairy Australia (not C2G) commissioned a
report from consultants Stanton, Emms and
Sia (based in Singapore) entitled “Climate
Change: A summation of current science and
analysis”. This report examine the
likely/potential impact of climate in Europe,
the USA, New Zealand, Asia (specifically
India and China), and South America (Brazil
and Argentina).
The report then examined the likely impact on
the dairy industries, their vulnerabilities and
adaptive capacity, as well as potential
adaptation strategies.
No additional work was undertaken by C2G.
Conclusions/Lessons/Questions
 While there were minor differences between sites, pasture production
across all Australian dairy areas seems to be relatively unaffected by
climate change till well beyond 2030.
 This conclusion may not hold for irrigated farms if streamflows are
significantly reduced, or for dryland farms if seasonal and annual
variability increase. The baseline period was 1970 to 2000 which did
contain droughts, but nothing like the climate variability since 2000.
 Deeper rooted species (or varieties) are a sensible adaptation for those
areas where losses from deep drainage below the rootzone are common.
 Irrigated dairy farms must deal with both increased irrigation
requirement and reduced irrigation availability – a potentially toxic mix
 This analysis reflects the performance of current systems in future
climates - farmers will ‘incrementally’ adapt to mitigate the impact of
climate change, further reducing the system impacts
 The physical impacts of climate change are unlikely to provide tipping
points for transformational changes in dairy production systems for at
least the next 20 years – these are more likely to come from policy
(carbon and water trading) and the usual economic drivers.
The report conclude:
 Global milk production may decrease as a result of negative influences
from climate change;
 Adaptation can reduce vulnerability to climate change, both in the
short and the long term;
 Developed countries such as the USA, EU, and New Zealand are better
able to adapt to climate changes than developing countries such as
China, India, Argentina and Brazil because of financial, technological,
behavioural, political, social, institutional and cultural influences.
We conclude:
 Climate change per se is unlikely to cause significant changes to world
dairy supply or demand in the foreseeable future;
 Adaptations in Australia and other dairy industries will further delay
significant changes;
 As demonstrated by the GFC, there are far greater forces at work
across the international dairy industry than the direct impacts of
climate change.
Impact Assessment
Module and Intent
7. Social and Workforce Impacts
While the biophysical impacts of climate
change on farming systems are important,
confidence is a social construct, depending on
the resilience of farmers, their families, and
their labour resources. This module aimed to
understand how to build confidence and
resilience from a social perspective, with the
principle objectives of:
a.
b.
Assessing the role of social and labour
interactions in the ability of dairy farmers
and dairy farms to adjust to a climate
changed future;
Provide additional insights into the likely
farmer/family responses to the
uncertainties of climate change.
Industry Interpretation
8. DairyWorld
DairyWorld is an ‘agent based’ model of the
NZ dairy industry, being developed for the
Australian industry by AgResearch. Industry
level outcomes are an emergent property from
the myriad of individual decisions made by
‘intelligent and adaptive’ agents responding to
their particular situations.
Principal objectives of the module were to:
a.
Develop a games theory based model of
the Australian dairy industry;
b.
Provide the Australian dairy industry with
a tool that can take the client understanding
developed in Modules 3 and 7, and explore
the industry level outcomes from a range
of potential or real challenges the industry
is facing or may face.
Results/Outputs
No external research was undertaken in this
module. Internally, we explored several
possibilities, including:

Extending the resilience work undertaken
by Sonya Love at MU;

Examining the potential impact of climate
change on workforce planning;


Using the People in Dairy framework to
explore possible interactions between
climate change and the people issues onfarm;
What questions/issues need to be addressed
in the other C2G modules to ensure that the
people issues are being fully considered
and integrated where necessary.
This module has not been completed –
significant delays and some communication
difficulties with the NZ development team
means that a full report on either the results, or
the conclusions is not available at this time
(end June 2009)
Conclusions/Lessons/Questions
 Climate change will provide an additional challenge to the resilience of
dairy farms biophysically and emotionally;
 Climate change is not a significant ‘workforce’ issue in its own right –
there are too many other factors affecting workforce planning and the
other ‘people’ issues on farm to discern a climate change impact;
However, adaptation to climate change is ultimately a human challenge, so
any technical outputs from the other C2G modules need to be
complemented by:
 an understanding of farmer perceptions of the challenges posed by
climate change, and consequently farmer demand for information,
tools, advice and skills development – see M3 and M9;
 the choice and facilitation of learning strategies by the industry service
sector that match farmer demand with an appropriate learning process
that enhances the adaptive response – see M9.

Industry Interpretation
Module and Intent
9. Strategic Analysis and Foresighting
One of the problems associated with climate
change is that while there is growing certainty
about the direction (hotter and drier), there is
great uncertainty about the actual probabilities.
Exploring scenarios is one of the best ways to
handle this type of uncertainty.
Principal objectives of the module were to:
a.
b.
Use Scenario planning/foresighting to
provide a systematic exploration of the
industry wide implications and
ramifications associated with a range of
possible futures for the dairy industry;
Provide an interpretation of the
implications for farmers, processors and
the industry as a whole.
Products & Outcomes
10. Product Development and Delivery
Results/Outputs
Conclusions/Lessons/Questions
Through broad consultation, the project has
delivered major insights into how confidence
emerges, is sustained, and expressed in dairy.
 ‘Climate Change’ has morphed from a biophysical process to become
an overwhelming social and economic phenomenon.
 Climate change has significantly undermined dairy industry confidence.
The ‘strongest call’ from industry was for
programs that enhance the competencies of
stakeholders to understand and make better
informed decisions about climate change
issues and other factors that impact on a dairy
enterprise being viable and sustainable.
Five areas shape and drive industry confidence around climate change:
 The perception that dairy is integrated into a common vision of the
future – within dairy, across agriculture and with the community.
 Personal participation in and the transparency of industry deliberations
about accommodating Climate Change and other sustainability issues.
 Actions that improve resource (land, water, energy, etc) security.
 Developments in the automation of farming tasks that lower production
costs and allow expansion without additional labour.
 Development of new income streams through alternative usage of
existing on-farm resources.
Each of these drivers is two-edged – if they are seen as being worked
on/improved then confidence rises, however, if nothing is happening in
any of the areas, the simple absence of action quickly erodes confidence.
If non-dairy channels of information are the
only avenue of commentary and insight about
Climate Change for dairy stakeholders then
confidence will continue to be eroded.
Discussions about confidence were always
embedded with specific issues engaging the
industry (eg water, feedbase, regulations)
rather than as an abstract intellectual concept.
The focus was on helping dairy stakeholders
to make sense of climate change. Three
significant ‘products’ have been developed:
To create sufficient confidence to positively
stimulate investment for growth within the
dairy industry, individuals and organisations
o
need to be able to answer the question “what
does climate change mean for my growth plans
within the industry?”
Products that effectively ‘make sense’ of
climate change and link individuals with a more o
confident future in the dairy industry are
essential.
In principle, products are intended for
individual dairy farmers and service providers;
for processors and marketers; and for the dairy
‘industry’, both regionally and nationally.
o
14 Climate Change Fact Sheets were
developed at the start of C2G to provide
dairy farmers and others with locally
specific information about how climate
change might impact in their locality.
Presentations on aspects of climate change
and the results from C2G have been made
in most dairy regions.
A web-based climate change toolkit is
under development to make all the C2G
results, combined with other climate
change information readily available and
useable by dairy stakeholders.
 Interest in climate change is strong across the dairy industry, with some
fear being driven by TV campaigns targeting the grazing industries as
major greenhouse gas polluters.
 The level of knowledge of climate change and its implications is quite
low across most sectors/regions/elements of the dairy industry – not
surprising for such a ‘new’ topic, awash with misinformation and
political debate.
 In a similar vein, participants in Module 9 report the need for a basic
understanding of the issues, for visible signs that dairy is part of the
bigger discussion about climate change, and that building competency
at all levels of the industry is critical for the future.
 Consistency of message is critical, so a broadly based consortium has
been pulled together to oversee the development of the dairy climate
change toolkit to minimise the risk of multiple ‘dairy’ sites with
different messages.