Contributing to the industry

[Scientia Sit Potentia]

That's an excellent document @NickWallingford - in terms of wider perspectives and also real-life examples e.g. the passionfruit industry:

"The New Zealand passionfruit industry is a very small industry, with less than 50 commercial growers. The industry is worth around $1 million in annual orchard-gate return and generates $25,000 in levy income annually. The New Zealand Passionfruit Growers’ Association was able to use its levy income to part-fund a research and development project on passionfruit disease control at a total project cost of $447,700. This was a three year project, undertaken from 2006 to 2009 in conjunction with Plant and Food Research (Grant 06/094). The project studied a range of passionfruit diseases, their controls, and then prepared a field guide for growers. The total cash contribution of $260,000 for this project over the three years consisted of $200,000 Government contribution (Sustainable Farming Fund), levy contribution of $30,000 and $30,000 from the New Zealand Fruitgrowers Charitable Trust. There was also an in-kind contribution of $187,700, mainly from the industry"

So for $30,000 of levy funds, they got nearly 8 times that in co-funding.

A good outcome where research is concerned. Would they have achieved an 8 x co funding contribution if the project was Marketing?

 

[JohnF]

Well, given the New Zealand story piece on honey and also business innovation grants etc., then quite possibly (or even more).
https://apinz.org.nz/nzs-lesser-known-honeys-get-a-boost/
Part of the issue for government funding is that I believe the government looks to get the best return on any investment (like we all do). So I could provide money to apiculture or I could provide money to an industry that has already indicated they'll put in X dollars and have a concerted effort to manage it.

 

[Scientia Sit Potentia]

My comment was facetious Gino - I should have added more perhaps.
I think the forum is very useful to me as a hobbiest and learning of industry issues and pressures. But more on a personal level. At an industry level, I'm not sure how much the needle is shifted . . . .

I agree. This forum provides insight to some lines of thinking. At a personal level this is interesting. At an industry level I do not believe the forum can at this stage shift the needle or create impact. There is not enough cohesive momentum created on any of the topics and probably no agreement on what the key topics/issues for the industry should be. Without agreement or wide acceptance for what needs to change both short and longterm to support the industry growth and value (to all parties) then at best we simply remain with an interesting talk fest?