As our elected representatives begin the Parliamentary year in Canberra – amidst some fairly unpleasant controversy – I’ve been thinking a lot about what leadership means.

As Deputy Chair of the National Australia Day Council I’m lucky to meet some of Australia’s most inspiring community leaders. This extraordinary group of people – 32 finalists in all, from each State and Territory – have taught me a great deal about leadership.

What impresses me most about them is not so much their individual achievements – it’s their powerful ability to lead. All of them understand that leadership is firstly having a strong foundation of values, and secondly bringing people along with them on the journey.

What values do we see in this group? Each thinks well beyond their own individual achievements. Of course they value hard work, discipline, ambition and achievement. But those values are based on something more. They see themselves as contributing to a bigger picture, and it’s this higher vision that drives them.

Australian of the Year Professor Michelle Yvonne Simmons actively encourages and inspires young people to make careers in science, technology and maths –to dream big, and aim high.
Australia’s Local Hero, teacher Eddie Woo, has influenced thousands of students through his unique and caring approach to making maths accessible.

Senior Australian of the Year Dr Graham Farquhar AO is reshaping our understanding of photosynthesis, focusing on some of the most profound challenges facing humanity and the environment – including how the world will feed itself in the future.

Young Australian of the Year, soccer player Samantha Kerr is showing young women around the world that they have a place in elite sport.

What I’ve seen in all 32 finalists, and particularly in the four national winners, are the qualities of generosity, and selfless care, together with strength and determination. It’s these qualities that have earned the Australians of the Year the respect of all Australians.

I’m also incredibly proud that over the past four years, almost half the Australian of the Year finalists have come from rural and regional Australia. That’s a testament to the values of people who live outside the capital cities and our ability to see the bigger picture, and dedicate ourselves to the common good as well as to our own goals and achievements.

There’s a lesson here for all of us – and particularly for our elected leaders. Australians want to respect our leaders – and they need to earn that respect through a strong focus on values and a clear commitment to the common good of all.

This article was published in The Land on 22 February, 2018. Link to the article can be found here: http://www.theland.com.au/story/5238555/what-do-we-look-for-in-our-leaders/?cs=5739 

The post What we look for in our leaders appeared first on Seftons.

By Robbie Sefton

Are we ready for alternative meat? By “we”, I mean those of us who run livestock for meat production. Perhaps within 10 years, certainly within 20, we are not going to be the only ones in the animal protein game.

Plant-based products from companies like Beyond Meat are on the market, and are apparently quite tasty. Beyond Meat has a cast of athletes promoting the virtues of its vision for the “future of protein”.

But most humans love meat, the real thing, which is why livestock producers should be paying more attention to the “cultured meat” movement.

Cultured meat is meat grown in a laboratory from living cells. It sounds gross, and surveys show that most people currently think the whole thing sounds disgusting. But attitudes change.

In 1958, few people were thinking that in 70 years’ time most of the world would be wearing synthetic clothes derived from oil, and that the world’s use of wool would be reduced to a rounding error.

The first lab-grown burger pattie, eaten with fanfare in 2013, cost around AUD$400,000 and took two years to produce. But modern science moves at incredible speed. It’s forecast that a $10 cultured meat burger will be available by 2020 as researchers draw on developments in other fields to drive progress.

The science that will deliver cultured meat is in an ecosystem that includes the race to grow skin and organs as spare parts for humans, and the new gene-editing technologies that allow gene sequences to be changed quickly and cheaply.

As with the “functional” aspects of synthetic fibre, different qualities can be built into lab-grown meat – new tastes, more or less nutrients or health-related compounds.

There is also the promise of cultured meat being grown at a local level, similar to microbreweries, producing different meats for different tastes.

Good money is already being bet on cultured meat. Israeli company SuperMeat has collected US$3 million for its “clean meat” cultured chicken meat program.

Promoters of cultured meat reckon they will have a reasonably-priced, tasty burger pattie on the market by 2020. Us livestock producers may soon have to start looking hard at our future business case.

In a world where most commodity meat is grown in a lab, what happens to commodity livestock, like those raised on our rangelands? How do we sell secondary cuts?

When cultured meat is sold with huge variations in taste and style, what is the marketing proposition for animal meat?

I don’t think, as some have gleefully speculated, that cultured meat will eventually lead to the extinction of livestock farming.

If the technology takes off, it is probable that farmers will run fewer meat animals, but sell them for far higher prices. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, for the farm environment or our bottom line.

But to stay relevant, we may have to re-think the business of livestock farming from top to bottom. I look forward to having those conversations in coming years.

Robbie Sefton has a dual investment in rural Australia as a farmer, producing wool, meat and grains and as managing director of national marketing communications company Seftons.

The post Lab-grown meat: the future of food? appeared first on Seftons.

Click here to find it on the ARTC website

The post ARTC Inland Rail podcast appeared first on Seftons.

The farming life has enough unknowns without volunteering for more.

But change is also the condition that produces opportunity. It is a good time to be pondering change + opportunity, because Australia is somewhere in the process of the biggest change in its short modern history.

Economically, and in some cases politically, we are switching our gaze from our cultural origins in the Western world to our geographical location on the edge of Asia.

That change is well under way. I was recently a guest at an investor conference hosted by vibrant venture capital firm Blue Sky, and was blown away by some of the analysis around the unprecedented size of the markets opening up in Asia, and the vigorous response of some of our forward-thinking agribusinesses.

One talk, by demographer Bernard Salt, brilliantly sketched out the colossal changes occurring in Asia (and demographically within Australia), but laid down a warning: Asian prosperity is not ours for the taking. We can stuff it up.

Bernard made the point that as a whole, Australia’s entrepreneurial culture hasn’t strongly distinguished itself in the world. The world’s biggest companies – Apple, Microsoft, Google – have sprung up in the US within the last few decades. Australia’s biggest companies — BHP, the banks, CSL, Wesfarmers — all started more than a century ago.

And while we may be excited about our prospects in Asia, Bernard observed that, “We are conceding sovereignty in the agribusiness sector to other nations … if you look at the competitive advantage of Australia, we should be leading the world”.

In Bernard’s reading of the situation, relative wealth and prosperity are one of the things hindering Australia’s entrepreneurial drive.

We Australians have had 25 years of uninterrupted economic growth, an incredibly rare luxury for any nation. The result: a generation that thinks prosperity is normal.

(Bernard had some entertaining thoughts about this leading to the “pillowfication” of Australian homes, in which the increasing number of superfluous pillows on beds and couches are a signal of surplus wealth.)

We need to get uncomfortable, Bernard suggested, particularly about how we control our massive resources and means of production, and use that discomfort to kindle a more vigorous spirit of entrepreneurship.

My own extensive travels around this country tell me that Bernard is nailing something here.

Individual entrepreneurs exist, and there are companies that operate in that spirit (not least Blue Sky, which handled $150,000 in venture capital in 2006, and now has $3.5 billion under management).

But we are generally too comfortable to be driven. We don’t even have the inferiority complex that has enabled New Zealand to be the scrappy small dog of agribusiness.

That comfort is delusional. There are no guarantees for Australia in the changing balance of global power and wealth. Without some drive and cleverness, we risk becoming a modern colony, shipping our resources offshore without extracting their full value.

I hope those of us associated with rural Australia can scent the danger wrapped up in the Asian opportunity, and become the makers of change, not the victims of it.

Let’s ensure future generations of young rural Australians carry on the ‘can do, work hard and have a go’ approach to Australian agribusiness and its place in the world.

Read The Land article here

The post It’s time to get uncomfortable Australia appeared first on Seftons.

In any given year they deal with fires, floods, storms, drought, rain at the wrong time, pests, disease and market fluctuations.

However, they also have to be innovative and not afraid to be different – two things Seftons is passionate about.

The need for innovation and striving to be different were highlighted during the Farm Writers’ Association of NSWs’ Christmas lunch at NSW Parliament House on Monday where the 2017 NSW Farmer of the Year was announced.

All three finalists were using technology, they were innovators in their field and they were doing something others aren’t.

The NSW Farmer of the Year (an initiative of NSW Farmers and the NSW Department of Primary Industries, with support from Fairfax Agricultural Media and SafeWork NSW) was Mike and Velia O’Hare, who operate “Greendale” at Beckom in Southern NSW producing canola, wheat and sheep.

What sets the O’Hares apart is that they introduced the nitrogen-fixing, hard-seeded pasture legume, biserrula, which Mr O’Hare said was right up there with some of the biggest innovations during his time in farming.

On winning the award, Mr O’Hare said his advice is to look at research, don’t be afraid to be different and keep innovating.

All sensible and effective advice.

The importance of innovation and research was also highlighted by the Hon Niall Blair MLC, NSW Minister for Primary Industries, Trade and Industry and Regional Water, at the lunch when he was discussing the success of the primary industries sector in NSW this year.

Reflecting on how the Department of Agriculture began in NSW, Mr Blair said since the 1890s the role of the department has been to solve the problems with research and pass on the answers to the farmers so they can do what they do best – grow and produce.

This year alone in NSW the first alkaloid poppies were successfully grown and harvested, medicinal cannabis is being trialled and the first Kingfish have been harvested.

Mr Blair said in 2015 the NSW DPI four-year strategic plan set a target to increase the Gross Value of Production of the NSW primary industries by 30 per cent by 2020.

And they achieved it this year – two years ahead of schedule – with the NSW primary industries sector now worth a record $15.44 billion, an increase of 32.4 per cent.

Results we here at Seftons think are impressive.

“We have done that off the back of being flexible, using innovation, new technologies and working with the sectors,” Mr Blair said.

While the industry has capitalised on favourable conditions and high commodity prices, it wouldn’t have been possible without research and innovation.

And it certainly wouldn’t have been possible without resilience.

NSW Farmer of the Year winner Mike O’Hare accepting his award

The post Resilience and innovation the key appeared first on Seftons.

The cost is astonishing. Australian agriculture loses between $3.5-$4.5 billion a year to weeds, in lost production and control costs. Invasive animals are estimated to cost somewhere north of $1 billion. Not all pests are introduced, and not all solutions are cutting-edge. A 19th Century technology, fencing, is proving the most reliable defence against wild dogs and swelling numbers of kangaroos and wallabies.

But if we focus on technological solutions, we miss the point — which is the focus of some insightful work done by an Invasive Species CRC team led by Professor Paul Martin of University of New England’s Centre for Agriculture and Law. 

In their discussion paper, Effective Citizen Action on Invasive Species, the team points out that above all, invasive species present a strategic challenge. “A landholder who has exercised all possible diligence on their own lands may still find himself or herself with an invasive species problem,” the paper says. 

“There may be relatively little that they can do about this by themselves.”

Effective invasive species control requires all of us to be working across the arbitrary, invisible boundaries that we hold in great importance, but which don’t exist to animals and weeds. 

Nor do invasive pests care about what we think of government or environmentalists. (The environmentalist view of invasive species is also bleak: 16 of the 21 threats to Australian biodiversity come from introduced animals and plants.)

The Pest CRC discussion paper argues that “citizens” (primarily landholders) be acknowledged as the frontline of invasive species management and the institutional arrangements that sit behind them be reshaped to better facilitate behaviour, improve incentives and resources, and reduce fragmentation of action.

Like most farmers, we do our best to manage feral animals and weeds on our property. We work with our neighbours in a collaborative annual fox baiting program, and mindful of the damage that foxes and cats do to native fauna, we try to keep the place a cat-free zone. 

Pigs are also in our sights (or traps), and we have an annual spraying program to reduce weeds, especially those like Bathurst Burr that contribute value-reducing vegetable matter to our wool. This work, which is the work of most farmers, is only ultimately effective if it is being carried out across the entire landscape, across all forms of land tenure.  We’re all in this together, with our governments – or else the invaders keep winning.

Read The Land article here

The post With pests, collaboration is the key appeared first on Seftons.

Consumers often don’t understand the complexities of farming, the myth goes, and they need to be better educated so that farmers can get on with business.

Like all myths, this has an element of fact, but there is a much weightier fact on the other side of the scales.

The affluent consumers that Australian farmers need on their side have more information and choice available to them than in any time in history. If they don’t like what they learn about their food or fibre (whether what they learn is factual or “fake news”), they can choose something else. And they sometimes do.

We hear concerns that much of what consumers are being told about how their food and fibre is grown comes from activist organisations. It is true, but on issues like free-range eggs, sow farrowing crates or mulesing, the activists have created a compelling story for their audiences. Whether we as farmers like it or not.

Confronted with such narratives, farmers can choose to resist or respond. Resistance doesn’t have a good track record, so response seems the wisest option.

As a wool producer, I’m most familiar with the issue of mulesing. When animal welfare activists started to bring mulesing to the attention of consumers more than a decade ago, much of the wool industry bridled at being asked to change its practices.

Like many woolgrowers, we have altered our sheep management practices: we now don’t mules. We responded early, recognising that consumer dislike of the practice wasn’t going away.

It is not being faddish to want to know that animals haven’t suffered so you can eat or be clothed.

Just as farmers tend to operate within a distinctive culture, they sell their produce to people living and thinking within other cultures.

Communicating and connecting with those people across cultural boundaries is not hard, but it takes commitment, tenacity and openness.

It means acknowledging differences and the reasons for them, managing expectations, and actively responding where possible.

It also means demonstrating good faith with consumer concerns, showing that farmers are ‘walking the talk’ and meeting expectations.

It’s called having a ‘social licence’ to farm.

Social licence is having the trust and confidence of consumers because they believe we do the right thing in their eyes. We earn it through two-way communication. Without it, we are mere price-takers. With social licence, how we farm and who we are become important to consumers – and that is surely worth the commitment.

Read The Land article here

The post Time for farmers to ‘walk the talk’ appeared first on Seftons.

But can it really be Australia’s next $100 billion industry?

According to the latest figures agriculture is now the largest contributor to national GDP (gross domestic product) growth and the fastest growing economic sector, rising 23 per cent in the past 12 months.

It is no surprise that the main drivers of this growth are the livestock industries – beef, lamb, goat meat and offal – grains and wool.

At the Farm Writers’ Association of NSW lunch in Sydney last week, National Farmers’ Federation (NFF) President Fiona Simson covered the topic: With Agriculture now the largest contributor to national GDP growth and the fastest growing economic sector – What is the view on the future from the peak industry body?

The NFF certainly believes it is achievable for the agriculture industry to be Australia’s next $100 billion industry by 2030 and have developed a “recipe” for the industry to succeed.

“We have to get some of these things right if we are going to achieve the goals,” Mrs Simson said.

NFF’s recipe looks something like this:

Human Talent:
“It is important to bring and keep good people in our industry and it is important to bring in new talent. Our industry does have a labour supply gap and we have to face the facts, a lot of the jobs in agriculture, Australians don’t want to do,” she said.

The NFF is proposing an agriculture visa for overseas workers which would be specifically set up for agriculture and recognise the labour shortage in the industry and regions.

Flexible Capital:
“Some of the environment we are operating in has outdated road, rail and infrastructure. We need to bring in money.”

When it comes to investing in agriculture Mrs Simson has a different opinion than what a lot of farmers might think.

“We need foreign investment to grow. There is a $160 billion capital gap and there is a lot of capital overseas that is only too willing to come in. Capital is a good thing and growth is a good thing. We need to make sure we keep the discussion very fact focused and look at it factually for what the investment brings and how it is structured.”

Accelerating Productivity:
“How can we use that R&D to keep doing more? Can we keep growing better crops, increase yields, how can we be more productive?”

Premium Branding:
“Branding is something that has eluded agriculture for some time. We all operate under our own brands. How much more can we achieve if we can get under one premium Australian brand like New Zealand?”

Digital Connectivity:
“To date a lot of rural Australia doesn’t have the ability to make the most of some of the amazing technological advance coming our way.”

Market Access:
“We continue to look at new markets going forward. Just signing the free-trade agreements doesn’t necessarily mean happy days for anyone. There are a lot of non-tariff barriers that stop us putting produce in to countries.”

Becoming the next $100 billion industry is a bold vision, but this is a solid “recipe” and one which can be achieved if the whole industry works together.

As Mrs Simson said, “it isn’t just about farmers, but it is about agribusiness. This is about an agricultural industry”.

Go team agriculture!

National Farmers’ Federation President Fiona Simson addressing the Farm Writers’ Association of NSW.

The post Can agriculture become the next $100 billion industry? appeared first on Seftons.

Good people want to be part of a good enterprise. A good enterprise supports the ambitions, ideals, or self-worth — preferably the trifecta — of those that work within it.

2015 Nuffield Scholar Reece Curwen, in his Nuffield report “Growing Your Business With People”, noted that businesses that were attractive to high-value employees tend to have a compelling culture: a clear vision, a respected leader moving toward that vision, and good people supporting the leader.

Remuneration is important, of course, but an attractive business culture will draw the best people because it provides meaning. Meaning provides a reason to decide in favour of one product over another.

In a time when we are information-rich and time-poor, we have seen the rise of the “purpose-driven brand” across all markets because, when given choice — and these days, there is always choice — people will choose to buy from or work with businesses that align with their values.

Considering business values will be a new idea for many farm businesses. But operating without a purpose other than the cyclical labour of producing a commodity for the greatest profit is unlikely to yield the best results for the business, or from the people within it.

Reece Curwen quotes Bob Milligan, senior consultant at Dairy Strategies, LLC, as saying: “If the leader of the organization can’t clearly articulate WHY the organization exists in terms beyond its products or services, then how does he expect employees to know WHY to come to work?”

This is a question that the agricultural sector needs to address, with a degree of urgency.

It seems that almost weekly there are conferences around a technology-driven future for agriculture, but the future of farming, like the past, will be driven by smart, bold, energetic people.

The flow of those people into ag is slowing, while those currently engaged in ag get greyer. Perhaps we can solve this issue with automation – but automation alone doesn’t make a good enterprise.

As an industry, we need to get better at putting meaning into agriculture beyond the media stereotypes. As independent businesses, we need to identify why we are here, in the rain and heat and flies, working from dark to dark, with no desire to do anything else.

When you’re next hiring, the ability to articulate that “why” will determine whether you’re in the market for farm labour, or good people.

Read the online article in The Land here

The post Good businesses lure valuable staff appeared first on Seftons.

We are in the middle of the greatest human migration the world has ever seen: the movement of people from rural to urban areas.

By 2050, the United Nations estimates that around 70 per cent of the world’s population will live in urban environments. Across the planet, this trend is emptying rural areas of talent, youth and capital. As youth packs its bags for the cities, the demographics of the bush change.

Outside the big regional centres — and sometimes inside them — we grow older, less educated, less employed and less employable.

Arguments for the superior lifestyle and affordability of country life are not enough. If you want a cheap home, space and fresh air, there are any number of attractive villages in countries like Italy, Spain, the United States, Japan, and yes, Australia, where bargains are to be had.

But these bargains don’t usually include the opportunity for well-rewarded work, good services or, sometimes, much in the way of society. The energy is draining from rural areas. There is an exception: Greece. Greece’s economic catastrophe is driving young people back to the land.

The national unemployment rate for people under 25 is 48 per cent — but there has been a 15pc increase in Greek farmers aged 18 to 40 since the start of the economic crisis in 2009.

Obviously, this is not a model of regional renewal that we want to follow. But the reporting around this reverse migration has a refrain: if the young people returning to the land are not necessarily finding wealth, they are finding new sources of happiness.

Happiness is an elusive quality, and not something that is easily engineered. It’s easier to identify its opposite: the unhappiness of the urban commute, a crippling mortgage, weekend boredom.

Our challenge in the Australian bush is to provide an environment in which happiness is possible. Not the cheesy happiness of a TV ad, but the happiness of social connection, financial opportunity, space — and good coffee! Regional development tends to be defined by economics and politics.

Perhaps if we start thinking about people instead, our strategies will be built on something enduring – the human quest for happiness combined with a good job with fair pay or creating a new business – rather than on short-term cycles and abstract theories.

It’s worth thinking about.

Read the online article here

The post In pursuit of rural happiness appeared first on Seftons.