Dr John Mullen an adjunct professor at CSU provides the typical arguments: “Agricultural productivity and public investment in agricultural research and development has slowed down in Australia and in some other developed countries. …This is a real worry when we have to contend with the growing effects of climate change as well as three billion more people to feed in the next 30 years. … research I have done with colleagues at ABARE suggests that some of the slow down can only be explained by a stagnation in government investment in R&D in recent decades. The lag between research and increases in agricultural production is up to 35 years, which is why it has taken so long for us to see evidence of this decline in R&D funding through falling productivity.”

Given lower productivity may result from several factors, such as a decrease in agricultural extension, increased farmer age, drought, concentration on off-farm income, there is too much emphasis on the role R&D plays.

In contrast to this productivity imperative, are comments from many leading-edge farmers across virtually all sectors, that maximum productivity is not their principal objective. Their family business success is based on productivity moderation in balance with family life, environmental stewardship, product acceptance amongst consumers and off-farm investments.

What these farmers’ attitudes reflect and what agricultural research too often ignores, is that productivity reaches a value cross-over point with costs, risk aversion, market access, social responsibility, and consumer QA expectations. The evidence for this is increasingly common: certified organic food’s increasing market share; branded beef and lamb with food quality and environmental credentials; branded eggs, chicken, pork and Merino wool with animal welfare credentials; branded freedom foods; and containerized traceable grain.