Quality Assurance Certification and Implementation: Growers' Costs and Perceived Benefits

Ross S. Kingwell

Australasian Agribusiness Review, 2003, vol. 11

Abstract: This study reports findings from a mail survey of Western Australian broadacre farmers participating in quality assurance (QA) accreditation. A 50 percent response rate generated a sample size of 78 usable replies. The average farm in the survey spent $13,470 gaining QA accreditation, upgrading facilities and implementing the QA system. Most of these costs were set-up costs incurred in the first year of QA training. Almost half of all farmers in the survey considered QA accreditation and implementation to be value for money. A further 39 per cent were unsure of its value. Only 13 per cent of respondents felt it was not a worthwhile investment. Most respondents agreed that there were benefits, apart from price premia, in applying a QA system and 84 per cent of growers viewed QA accreditation as the start of greater regulation of grain production. Even if no price premium was available for QA grain, 39% of respondents indicated they still believed QA to be worthwhile. However, this same group of farmers also indicated that if the premium for QA grain was less than $8.90 per tonne they would begin to question the value of implementing the QA system on their farm. Overall, farmers in the survey suggested an average premium of $12.30 per tonne was required to prevent them questioning the merits of QA. A simple investment model suggested that to exactly offset the cost of QA accreditation and implementation a price premium of $11.70 per tonne was required. This premium was very close the price premium of $12.30 per tonne identified by growers as being required before they would doubt the worth of adopting a QA system.

Keywords: Agribusiness; Crop Production/Industries; Farm Management; Production Economics; Productivity Analysis; Research Methods/Statistical Methods; Risk and Uncertainty; Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2003
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/132535/files/Kingwell.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:auagre:132535

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.132535

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Australasian Agribusiness Review from University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().