Download PDF

A FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Key achievements in 2019-20 • Tropical oyster aquaculture developments commenced.

• National Carp Control Plan finalised.

• Seafood Industry Safety Initiative and SeSAFE training platform launched.

• Eight Australian innovators make the final of FISH 2.0 Global Forum.

• Seafood Directions Conference successfully run by Seafood Industry Victoria.

• Wild-catch prawn provenance project launched.

• Future Oysters Cooperative Research Centre Project (CRC-P) completed.

• National Habitat Strategy published to inform large-scale rehabilitation programs.

• Macroalgae/seaweed culture saw renewed interest.

• 2019 Australian Fish and Chips Awards conducted.

• Fish Forever 2030 National Fishing and Aquaculture Strategy developed.

• FRDC R&D Plan 2020-25 completed.

Quick guide to the annual report If you do not have time to read this report in detail, look first in the following sections:

• For an outline of the FRDC’s investments and income, read pages i-iv and the financial statements starting on page 131.

• For an overview of operations during the past year, read the letter of transmittal (pages v-ix) and the directors’ review of operations and prospects starting on page 5.

More detailed coverage is in these sections:

• The FRDC’s national priorities are shown on pages 30, 36 and 39.

• Outcomes by recent and current projects are in the research, development and extension (RD&E) programs reporting starting on page 5

3 (Environment), page 6

6 (Industry), page 7

2 (Communities),

page 79 (People) and page 8

4 (Adoption).

• Performance reporting for the Management and accountability program starts on page 107.

• Financial contributions by industry and governments are listed on pages i-iv and 149.

• Coverage of corporate governance information is in the section starting on page 117.

• The financial statements start on page 131.

The Department of Agriculture became the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) on 1 February 2020. For the purposes of this report DAWE will be used throughout. In addition, the Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management was sworn in on 6 February 2020 and for the purposes of this report will be referred to as the Mi

nister for Agriculture.

i FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

2019-20 achievements through investment Five years at a glance TAb le 1: INCO ME

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

$m $m $m $m $m

Total income 30.12 37.32 36.00 39.56 33.03 1

Industry contributions 7.45 8.18 9.04 10.18 8.42

Total government contributions 20.05 21.76 22.71 23.48 22.08

Project funds from other parties 1.48 5.63 2.02 3.42 0.82

Other revenue 1.14 1.75 2.23 2.48 1.71

1. Gross value of production declined during the year associated with COVID-19, which impacted on contributions.

TAb

le 2: MAT

CHAbLE I

NCOME

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

$m $m $m $m $m

Maximum matchable (government) contribution 1 6.78 7.25 7.57 7.78 7.45

Actual government matching 6.48 7.25 7.57 7.78 7.19 2

1. Government funding and maximum matchable contribution (the maximum amount to which the Australian Government w ill match industry contributions) are detailed in Appendix A. 2. Gr

oss value of production declined during the year associated with COVID-19, which impacted on contributions/

TAb

le 3: FIN

ANCIAL I

NDICATORS O

F R

ESEARCH, D

EVELOPMENT A

ND ExTE

NSION (

RD&E) I

NVESTMENT

Expenditure 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

$m $m $m $m $m

Total expenditure 28.33 29.26 31.39 35.22 34.44

Total of RD&E projects 24.58 24.41 26.00 29.80 28.94

RD&E Program 1 (Environment) 8.68 7.46 7.94 7.92 8.35

RD&E Program 2 (Industry) 11.54 12.31 11.24 14.48 13.39

RD&E Program 3 (Communities) 0.86 0.98 1.74 1.83 2.25

RD&E Program 4 (People) 1.55 1.34 2.30 2.39 2.20

RD&E Program 5 (Adaptation) 1.95 2.32 2.78 3.19 2.75

Management and accountability 3.75 4.85 5.39 5.41 5.50

TAb le 4: NEW, A CTIVE A ND C OMPLETED P ROjEC TS

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

Number of approved new projects 116 122 167 145 118

Active projects under management during the year

415

408

493

491

440

Nu

mber of final reports completed 133 86 85 120 124

ii FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

TAb le 5: APP LIED V ERSUS b ASIC R ESEACH P ROjEC TS

2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20

$m $m $m $m $m %

Applied 21.90 22.96 24.56 28.43 27.99 96.7

basi

c 2.67 1.46 1.45 1.37 0.94 3.3

TAb le 6: PROjEC T L ENGTH — AVERAGE C OST P ER P ROjEC T

Duration Number of

projects

Tot

al

investment

Ave

rage

project value

$ $

Lo

ng (36 months and over) 106 64,188,188 605,548

Medium (from 18 and 36 months) 131 45,846,528 349,973

Short (up to 18 months) 203 28,871,697 142,225

Total 440 138,906,414 315,696

TAb le 7: PROjEC T I NVESTMENT b y R ISk P ROFILE

2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Total

$ $ $ $ %

High 2,195,940 1,514,281 1,065,692 669,685 2.3

Low 12,792,771 11,993,516 15,533,813 16,301,505 56.3

Medium 9,438,571 12,495,655 13,204,366 11,965,941 41.4

Total 24,427,281 26,003,453 29,803,871 28,937,131 100.0

iii FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Summary of contributions TAb le 8: CON TRIbUT IONS, M AxIM UM M ATCHAbLE C ONTRIbUT IONS b y T HE AUS TRALIAN G OVERNMENT A ND RE

TURN ON I NVESTMENT

A B C D E F

Jurisdiction —

by year

Ma

ximum matchable contribution

Actual

contribution amounts

Percentage of

matchable

Distribution of FRDC spend

Re

turn on

contribution (D/B)

[n

ote 1] [note 2,3] [note 4,7] [note 5,6]

$ $ % $ 2018-19 5 years

Commonwealth 1,226,595 988,458 81 4,308,710 4.36 2.99

New South Wales 394,963 584,581 148 3,140,065 5.37 4.63

Northern Territory 166,520 217,807 131 980,115 4.50 5.19

Queensland 488,730 683,776 140 3,251,416 4.76 3.94

South Australia 1,080,008 1,148,333 106 3,604,940 3.14 3.47

Tasmania 2,429,368 2,728,387 112 8,456,288 3.10 2.37

Victoria 291,955 281,108 96 1,815,019 6.46 6.43

Western Australia 1,368,593 1,792,415 131 2,986,426 1.67 2.11

Total 7,446,730 8,424,865 113.1 28,937,088 3.43 3.11

Australian farmed prawns [note 8]

202,258

161,555

80

422,016

2.61

2.66

Figures in this table have been rounded, hence totals may not agree with component figures.

1. Ma

ximum matchable contribution is the maximum amount that the Australian Government will match industry contributions in accordance with the criteria detailed in Appendix A. 2. No

te that contribution figures are accrual based — i.

e. some payments for the year may have been made but will not

show in the figures at the time of publishing. 3. Th

ere are timing issues in some jurisdictions therefore matching may not occur in the year in which the invoice is raised. 4. Di

stribution of FRDC spend is based on the estimated flow of RD&E benefits to the respective jurisdictions. It includes a deduction of prior project refunds. 5. Ra

tios in column F are derived from the distribution of FRDC spend (column D) for 2019-20 and the previous four years. 6. Au

stralian Government investment in the National Carp Control Plan has resulted in an increased return on contribution in Victoria. 7. Th

e total distribution of spend excludes $230,000 (approximately) invested in the Australian Capital Territory. 8. Au

stralian farmed prawns are also included in the jurisdictional totals above.

iv FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

The FRDC’s balanced research investment approach The FRDC aims to spread its investment in research, development and extension (RD&E) across the whole value chain of commercial fishing and aquaculture, and for the benefit of both Indigenous and recreational fishers. This balanced approach ensures RD&E investment covers issues of critical national importance, as well as recognising the diversity of stakeholder priorities. Ultimately, all FRDC investment in RD&E is driven by the needs of its stakeholders.

Industry Partnership Agreements investment by program Investment by Industry Partnership Agreements (IPAs) is driven by the needs of individual sectors. As a result, there will be a higher percentage of funds allocated to the Industry program. However, the FRDC requires IPAs to aim for a balanced portfolio approach to their investment.

TAb le 9: IND USTRy PAR TNERSHIP AGR EEMENT I NVESTMENTS b y P ROGRAM

Program $m %

nnn Environment 3. 00 27.23

nnn Industry 6. 01 54.54

nnn Communities 0.8 2 7.46

nnn People 0. 61 5.53

nnn Adoption 0.5 8 5.25

Industry Partnership Agreement investments total 11.03 100.00

Research Advisory Committees investment by program Investment made through Research Advisory Committees (RACs) is driven by the needs of the various jurisdictions. However, as with IPAs the FRDC requires RACs to aim for a holistic approach to their investment.

TAble 10: RES EARCH ADV ISORy COM MITTEE I NVESTMENTS b y P ROGRAM

Program $m %

nnn Environment 2.3 9 38.76

nnn Industry 2.5 2 40.76

nnn Communities 0.4 6 7.38

nnn People 0. 24 3.96

nnn Adoption 0.5 6 9.14

Research Advisory Committee investments total 6.17 100.00

v FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Fisheries Research and Development Corporation Postal address: Locked Bag 222, Deakin West ACT 2600 Australia Office location: Fisheries Research House, 25 Geils Court Deakin ACT T: 02 6122 2100 E: frdc@frdc.com.au www.frdc.com.au

19 August 2020

The Hon. David Littleproud Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management Parliament House CAN bE

RRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister,

On behalf of the boa

rd of the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC), I have pleasure in presenting the Corporation’s annual report for the year ended 30 jun

e 2020.

The report has been prepared and approved by the directors in accordance with our legislative obligations under section 28 of the Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989 (PIRD Act); and sections 39 and 46 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act).

The report provides a clear picture of our performance against priorities and performance indicators in achieving the FRDC’s planned outcome (page 13) for you, the Minister for Finance, members of parliament, FRDC stakeholders and the Australian community.

FRDC’s annual report [performance statements] is produced in accordance with s39 (1)(a) of the PGPA Act for the 2019-20 financial year. The performance statements start with the directors’ review of operations (pages 5 to 10), followed by Report of Operations Part 2: The FRDC’s operational results, services and governance (pages 30 to 125). The financial statements and the Australian National Audit Office audit of the FRDC financial statements (starting on page

1

31)

— whi

ch returned an un-modified audit report, complete the FRDC performance statements. It is the opinion of the boa

rd of FRDC that the statements accurately present the FRDC’s performance in the reporting period and comply with s39 (

2) of the PGPA Act.

This report documents inputs (income and expenditure pages i-iv) and, outputs from research and development against the performance measures published in the 2019-20 Portfolio Budget Statements Budget Related Paper No. 1.1, Agriculture Portfolio and the FRDC Annual Operational Plan (pages 1

6 and 10

8). The report also includes an overview and assessment of the longer-term outcomes for the Corporation’s investment that utilises the methodology developed by the rural research and development corporations (RDCs) (page 90). Report of Operations Part 1: The directors’ review of operations and future prospects contains information on planned budgets and future activities.

vi FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Analysis of key factors affecting performance during the year The financial year 2019-20 was one of many extremes. Australia has faced not one but three major events: widespread, intense bushfires and the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic — bo

th off the back

of one of the country’s worst droughts. These events had a significant impact on Australia, those working in fishing and aquaculture as well as on the FRDC.

COVID-19 Throughout the second half of the year, the FRDC monitored and assessed the impacts of COVID-19 on both stakeholders and the organisation. key i

mpacts felt across fishing and aquaculture revolved

around workforce shortages, disruptions to supply chains, restrictions on recreational fishing, Indigenous biosecurity zones being locked down, instances of panic buying which made stocking vessels difficult, and collapse of markets and lack of sales, requiring companies to hold stock. The most exposed parts of the seafood industry were those with products destined for export markets or associated with food service. Indigenous communities were affected and were even more isolated than usual due to travel restrictions. Likewise, industries related to tourism such as recreational fishing were also damaged by the pandemic, albeit this impact was only for part of the year during lock down. As a result of these restrictions there was an increase in seafood consumed at home.

It is clear the impacts of the COVID-19 will continue well past this reporting period.

Financial summary At the macro level the Australian economy, up until COVID-19, was tracking well. The Reserve bank o f Australia (May Statement on Monetary Policy) downgraded this view noting that combating the spread of COVID-19 had led to severe restrictions on economic activity in Australia and many countries around the world. The result was a large and near simultaneous contraction across the global economy. Heightened uncertainty about the future has exacerbated the contraction, both directly through weaker investment and consumer spending and via tighter financial conditions. Australia’s economic output contracted significantly over the first half of 2020.

There was a decrease in the gross value of production (GVP) for commercial wild-catch and aquaculture, though this was not as pronounced as initially estimated. This will have a downward impact on the FRDC’s income in both the short and longer term despite revenue being calculated using a three-year rolling average of the GVP. Fishing and aquaculture have many positives that will be fast tracked to assist the Australian economic recovery. The New South Wales (NSW) Government’s agreement to fast track the building of the new Sydney Fish Market is one example of many where governments are investing for jobs and growth, in sectors that show promise.

Environmental summary Australia’s ecosystems continue to be influenced and impacted by a range of issues such as climate change, species interactions (sharks), pollution (in particular plastics), urbanisation and use by humans. These topics continue to hold the attention of the community. In particular, the broader community remains focused on the sustainability of fishing and aquaculture — al

though COVID-19 did alter some

societal views — an

d what people value and trust (local versus imported).

There was a continued focus on biosecurity during the year partly as a result of the re-emergence of White Spot Disease in south Queensland. All sectors are focused on increasing biosecurity readiness to reduce risks. As part of the broader biosecurity debate the FRDC delivered the National Carp Control Plan to the Government in early 2020 for review and future decision making.

vii FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Societal summary A major change through the year was on how Australia’s community interacted and engaged. Fear, worry and stress are normal responses to perceived or real threats, and at times when we are faced with uncertainty or the unknown. While COVID-19 is a physical illness, it also brought with it a range of mental health issues. Of key concern during this period were vulnerable populations and how to best protect them. It was pleasing to see the research by FRDC on quantifying mental health needs in the seafood sector, supported by the $600,000 funding from Commonwealth Government for a Seafood Industry Australia led national mental health program.

Indigenous communities faced greater challenges both from a health and economic perspective. Work continued to understand Indigenous communities’ values and priorities and how best to incorporate them in the development of policy and regulations to enable Indigenous people to achieve a greater engagement in fishing.

Key performance indicators The FRDC met the majority of the 2019-20 Portfolio Budget Statements performance indicators.

The two financial targets of income and expenditure were not met. The income target for 2019-20 was $35.00 million and $33.03 million was achieved. The financial expenditure target was $41.44 mi

llion

and actual expenditure was $34.44 million.

For a full explanation of financial target variance, see page 143 in the financial statements for the difference between forecast and actual income and expenditure.

Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) performance measures Tar

gets 2019-20 Results

Perception of the commercial fishing industry increased from 28% to 40% by 2020.

Perc

eption of industry increases to 36%.

Achieved. The most recent survey of community perception (June 2019) sho

ws that 46% believe the industry is sustainable.

Und

erstand the quantity of potential production from Australia’s fishing and aquaculture resources.

One r

eport completed on the quantity of potential production from Australia’s fishing and aquaculture resources.

Achieved. Project 2016-056 measured Australia’s wild-catch production potential at 293,500 tonnes, a substantial increase on the 166

,000 to

nnes caught in 2016-17 (see page 38).

Adv

ance two or more new or emerging aquaculture opportunities/species for which RD&E has identified clear opp

ortunities and technologies for good production and profitability gro

wth, as measured by increases in harvest tonnages.

Two t

housand tonnes of additional production.

Achieved. National government production statistics not available.

Forecasts and individual company records indicate that production will exceed the 2019-20 target.

Par

tners have a RD&E plan. Ninety per cen

t

of partners have a RD&E Plan.

Ach

ieved. Ninety-five pe

r cen

t of IPAs

and RACs have plans in place.

Partners invest in a balanced portfolio across the FRDC purpose themes: environment, industry, communities, people and adoption.

Investment portfolios include investment across FRDC purposes.

Achieved. See pages i-iv.

viii FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) performance measures Ta

rgets 2019-20 Results

Projects focus on the FRDC boa

rd’s

assessment of priority research and development issues.

Ninety-five p

er c

ent

are a priority.

Ac

hieved. Projects align with strategic priorities set out in FRDC’s Annual Operational Plan and partner plans.

Projects are assessed as meeting high standards/peer review requirements for improvements in performance and likely adoption.

Ni

nety-five p

er c

ent

are a high priority.

Ac

hieved.

Maintain ISO9001:2008 accreditation. FRDC maintains certification.

Achieved. See page 100.

Submit planning and reporting documents in accordance with legislative and Australian Government requirements and timeframes.

One hundred p

er ce

nt

met government requirements.

Achieved. All documents submitted in accordance with requirements.

Implement best practice governance arrangements to promote transparency, good business performance and unqualified audits.

Achieve unqualified audit result.

Achieved. See audit report pages 128-129.

De

monstrate the benefits of RD&E investments by positive benefit cost analysis results.

ben

efit analysis undertaken on one i

nvestment area.

Achieved. Average benefit cost analysis results, see pages 63, 69, 75, 81, 87, 92.

Commence collection of voluntary marketing funds, pending legislative changes.

An amount of $350,000 to be collected.

No

t achieved. No voluntary funds collected.

Establish full statutory marketing levy collection with industry sectors for sectors, where requested and pending levy being established.

One marketing levy established.

No

t achieved. Two marketing levies voted on. One successful but not progressed, the other voted down by industry.

Key factors contributing to performance Throughout the year, the FRDC’s focus has been on delivering its core business, investing in priorities to promote sustainability, improve productivity, profitability and grow aquaculture and finalise projects disseminating the knowledge generated.

The FRDC engaged and communicated extensively, using formal consultative structures (representative organisations, Research Advisory Committees, Industry Partnership Agreements, and the Indigenous Reference Group); as well as with the broader range of our stakeholders. The development of the new R&D Plan 2020-25 included expansive stakeholder engagement and as COVID-19 emerged it became more important to maintain linkages with and provide the latest information to our stakeholders to assist them.

The FRDC continues to work collaboratively across all the rural research and development corporations (RDCs) on national issues such as climate change, innovation and people development. An important part of this has been working on a new collaborative investment vehicle to address them in a coordinated way.

The directors’ review of operations (found on pages 6-10 of this report) provides further detail on events and activities that impacted the FRDC during the year.

ix FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Conclusion of the FRDC’s RD&e P lan 2015-20 This report also marks the fifth year of reporting against the FRDC’s RD&E Plan for 2015-20. This plan brought with it a number of key changes for the FRDC. In particular, it was the first time the FRDC set three overarching key priority areas to address (see pages 30-52 for detailed reports).

The first priority aimed to not only underpin the sustainability of Australia’s fisheries through good R&D investment but also increase awareness and inform community perceptions — a k

ey metric for the

priority. It is fair to say the FRDC exceeded expectations in these regards with community perceptions increasing from 24 per cent for the commercial fishing industry and 40 per cent for all fishing and aquaculture in the 2015 survey, up to 37 per cent for the commercial fishing industry and 47 p

er cent

for all fishing and aquaculture in the 2019 survey. A significant body of work was done to achieve this including the release of three Status of Australian Fish Stocks reports which saw around 90 p

er cent of

the fish caught in Australia assessed with a majority rated sustainable.

The second priority focused on improving the productivity and profitability of the seafood industry. This is a difficult area to assess at a micro level (every fisher or fishery), however at the macro level the gross value of production for commercial fishing and aquaculture increased from around $2.5 billion in 2014- 15 u

p to $3.1 billion in 2018-19 before a marked reduction in 2019-20 (down to $2.6 billion) due to COVID-19. It is important to note, that had COVID not have happened the value of fishing and aquaculture was expected to increase to around $3.4 billion. Overall, most industry sectors improved their positions during the five-year RD&E Plan period. This combined with a better community perception is a good outcome for fishing and aquaculture.

The third priority focused on growing the value of aquaculture. Again, the results over the five years were very positive. key f

arming sectors such as Atlantic Salmon and bar

ramundi both increased

production and value. The aquaculture sector also saw important inflows of investment and expansion across all areas. The potential to expand new species was also positive, with the R&D for Profit project to develop yel

lowtail kin

gfish aquaculture seeing not only an increase in knowledge and fish health, but also new lease sites made available across Australia which could grow the production potential from 5000 t

o 60,000 t

onnes. Additionally, towards the end of the RD&E Plan a focus on farming tropical oysters in the north and west of Australia took hold with significant investment and lease (water) space allocated. However, it was not all clear sailing for aquaculture with two serious disease outbreaks occurring — Whi

te Spot Disease in prawns and Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome. bot

h of

these required considerable effort from all stakeholders (management agencies, researchers and industry) which is now paying off with both prawns and oysters on the road to recovery and expansion.

The FRDC’s investment via its RD&E Plan 2015-20 delivered solid outcomes for all stakeholders. Initial benefit cost analysis from over 60 projects undertaken during the Plan’s five-year term had (in present value terms) a to tal investment of $58.38 million and generated estimated total benefits of $281.89 million which gave a weighted average benefit cost ratio of 4.83 to 1 . M ore information on each of the priority areas is detailed in the body of this annual report.

I take this opportunity to acknowledge the strong support of my fellow directors in guiding the FRDC towards outcomes that will benefit people in fishing and aquaculture, as well as the broader Australian community.

you

rs faithfully,

Mr joh

n Williams

Chair

x FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

This annual report describes events in the fifth year of FRDC’s RD&E Plan 2015-20. Because it is the end of a strategic plan ‘cycle’, the graphics in this report intend to show both dawn and dusk (the beginning and end of a daily cycle), and the lunar cycle which affects the waters and tides where fishers of Australia harvest their catch.

1 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

2 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Contents key achievements in 2019-20 insi de front cover

2019-20 achievements through investment i

F

ive years at a glance i

L

etter of transmittal v

R

eport of Operations Part 1: The directors’ review of operations 5

T

he year in review 6

F

inancial targets 2020-21 11

T

he Corporation 13

F

RDC Funding Agreement 14

I

nvestment strategy — a ba

lanced research investment approach 15

F

uture strategic planning 16

Re

lationships with stakeholders 18

R

eport of Operations Part 2: The FRDC’s operational results 27

P

riority 1. En

suring that Australian fishing and aquaculture products are sustainable and acknowledged to be so 30

Pr

iority 2. Improving productivity and profitability of fishing and aquaculture 36

P

riority 3. Developing new and emerging aquaculture growth opportunities 39

N

ational RD&E infrastructure 44

Co

llaborate 46

P

artner 49

O

utputs — an

alysis by FRDC programs 53

P

rogram 1: Environment 53

De

livering the National Carp Control Plan 59

An i

mpact assessment of FRDC investment in project 2013-009 63

Pr

ogram 2: Industry 66

An i

mpact assessment of FRDC investment in project 2015-202 69

3 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Report of Operations Part 2 (continued)

Program 3: Communities 72

An i

mpact assessment of FRDC investment in project 2016-400 75

P

rogram 4: People 79

An i

mpact assessment of FRDC investment in project 2017-196 81

P

rogram 5: Adoption 84

An i

mpact assessment of FRDC investment in project 2017-106 87

A

ssessment of impact and outcomes 90

Eva

luating the results of RD&E investment 90

Eva

luation of R&D projects (completed 2015-20) 91

S

ummary and aggregate results for the years ended jun

e 2016 to jun

e 2018 92

R

eport of Operations Part 3: Services 97

Ma

rketing 98

Tr

ade 99

S

tandards 10

0

Information and communications technology 10

2

Corporate communications 10

3

Report of Operations Part 4: Management and accountability 107

M

anagement and accountability 10

8

Staffing 1

09

Report of Operations Part 5: Corporate governance 11

7

Corporate governance 118

T

he boa

rd 11

8

Directors’ biographies 12

0

Attendance at boa

rd meetings held during the year 123

boa

rd committees 12

4

2019-20 Auditor-General’s report 12

7

Financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2020 13

1

Appendices 1

67

Appendix A: The FRDC’s principal revenue base 16

8

Appendix b: Th

e FRDC’s legislative foundation and the exercise of ministerial powers 16

9

Appendix C: Principal legislative requirements for reporting 172

A

ppendix D: Government priorities 17

4

Appendix E: Freedom of information statement 17

5

Appendix F: Information about remuneration for key management personnel and senior executives 177

Ab

breviations and acronyms 17

9

Indices 1

81

Compliance index 18

2

Alphabetical index 18

6

Publications and other information 19

0

About this report in

side back cover

4 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

5 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

REPORT OF OP ERATIONS

PA

RT 1:

ThE DI

RECTORS’ R

EvIEw

OF OP

ERATIONS AND F

UTURE

PR

OSPECTS

6 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

THE YEAR IN REVIEW The FRDC, like many organisations across Australia, has had a mixed, stressful, but relatively successful year given the events that have developed. For the first half of the year, the outlook was positive across all fishing and aquaculture. In particular, the aquaculture sector continued to see good growth and investment. Recreational fishing remained a popular pastime, and FRDC’s Indigenous Reference Group was providing excellent input to a wide range of initiatives across Government.

In the second half of the year the story was quite different. Ocean heat waves, bush fires and the coronavirus pandemic placed huge pressures on both stakeholders and staff. Impacts ranged from direct financial constraints through to personal (physical and mental) and broader community issues.

Over the last six months both directors and staff spoke with people from across fishing and aquaculture to gauge how they were faring, looking for ways to assist. Unlike previous disasters, it was clear that no two people had the same story — eve

n those in the same fishery or business.

However, despite the impacts the crisis brought out the best in many, with people reaching out to provide support and offer a helping hand to those in need. Likewise, there were rays of hope where companies changed direction and showed how perseverance and commitment even in dark times can still lead to good results. Recreational fishing is seeing a resurgence in participation in areas not COVID-19 locked down.

The following sections summarise the key issues the boa

rd addressed during the year. The letter of

transmittal (beginning on page v) also forms part of the boa

rd’s report of operations and outlines

some of the broader issues faced in the operating environment.

FRDC Chair changes The Hon. Ron bos well was reappointed to Chair the FRDC for a second three-year term in August 2019 by the then Minister for Agriculture bri

dget Mackenzie. In jan

uary 2020, Ron announced he would step

down as FRDC Chair. The FRDC and the fishing and aquaculture community thanked and acknowledged Ron for his exceptional commitment and contribution.

Following the resignation Professor Colin bux

ton acted in the role until 10 March 2020 when Mr joh

n

Williams commenced the role of FRDC Chair.

7 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

Ministerial changes A number of ministerial and portfolio changes occurred during the year following the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Environment and Energy merging to create the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) on 1 February 2020.

Portfolios Ministers during the year were David Littleproud (Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management), Sussan Ley (Environment) and Assistant Minister jon

athon Duniam (Fisheries, Forestry

and Regional Tourism).

The Hon. David Littleproud was appointed as Minister for Agriculture following the resignation of Senator bri

dget Mackenzie who was Minister for Agriculture up to 2 February 2020.

COVID-19 response Early 2020 the FRDC staff and boa rd monitored the progression of COVID-19 and began planning how best to prepare for what might occur. by Ma

rch 2020 it was clear significant changes would need to

be implemented. The starting point was to ensure the welfare and safety of the staff and stakeholders. The FRDC reviewed and updated its policies regularly providing updates via the website.

From March to jun

e the FRDC undertook a major engagement and communication program to provide stakeholders with updates (for example government assistance packages) and information to assist them. Central to this were two COVID-19 editions of FISH magazine and a new weekly e-newsletter.

Research program Another key activity following the COVID-19 outbreak saw the FRDC contact all its researchers to gauge an understanding of the impacts that COVID-19 restrictions would have on them and their projects. The focus was to ensure their health and wellbeing. Where projects and activities, such as fieldwork, were impacted the FRDC varied projects to accommodate timeline changes.

The FRDC also delayed progressing new applications received and cancelled the April 2020 call for applications.

The FRDC’s new Research and Development Plan 2020-25 On 18 june 2020, the Assistant Minister jon athon Duniam approved the FRDC’s Research and Development (R&D) Plan 2020-25.

The R&D Plan 2020-25 forms a central part of the strategic planning process that drives organisational focus and impact. The plan was informed by a series of reviews, research and extensive consultation. Consultation focused around scenario planning, which can be helpful when planning in an uncertain environment.

The new plan responds to a shared vision for fishing and aquaculture, aims to deliver impact in five o

utcome areas, supported through implementation of five cross-cutting enabling strategies. The FRDC’s new plan is ambitious, aiming to push boundaries and drive experimentation on new ways to take fishing and aquaculture into the future. The plan aligns with key national targets and global commitments, such as the shared industry and Australian Government target of building agriculture to $100 billion by 2030, and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

8 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Statutory Funding Agreement The 10-year FRDC Statutory Funding Agreement was signed by the Minister for Agriculture on 5 April 2020. Individual funding agreements with RDCs outline what is expected of them. This includes expectations of performance and transparency, as well as accountability to levy payers, the government and the public. The funding agreements are renegotiated based on the performance of the RDC during the term of the funding agreement (usually four years).

Australian National Audit Office Probity Audit The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) undertook a probity audit of the five statutory RDCs in 2019 which included AgriFutures Australia, Cotton RDC (CRDC), Fisheries RDC (FRDC), Grains RDC (GRDC) and Wine Australia. The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the rural RDC’s management of probity. The report was published on 18 December 2019.

In managing probity issues, key conclusions were the CRDC was largely effective and AgriFutures Australia, the FRDC and GRDC and Wine Australia were partially effective. The corporations’ probity arrangements in relation to governance, policies and internal controls were largely appropriate. The CRDC effectively complied with its applicable probity requirements, while the other four co

rporations

partially complied with Wine Australia the least effective.

The FRDC boa

rd supported all recommendations. A subsequent audit found FRDC had exceeded the audit review requirements.

Review of the FRDC investment and partnership structures The draft of the review undertaken by Forrest Hill into the FRDC’s partnership structures such as the Research Advisory Committees, Industry Partnership Agreements and subprograms was circulated to these partners for comment. The review found that there was broad support for the partner process with options put forward around improvements to collaboration, changes to assist in linkages, consolidation of some committees and better extension. The FRDC has implemented a staged approach to implementing improvements in its planning, prioritisation and assessment processes to address the stakeholder feedback.

Submissions: Inquiries and reviews During the year the FRDC made numerous submissions to a range of inquiries and reviews. They included:

• House of Representatives: Inquiry into growing Australian agriculture to $100 billion by 2030,

• Senate: Inquiry into the impact of seismic testing on fisheries and the marine environment,

• Independent review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999,

• National Agriculture Workforce Strategy,

• Agriculture Levy Review legislation,

• Tasmanian Legislature Finfish Aquaculture,

• Sharing Australia’s Commonwealth fisheries resources,

• Independent review of agricultural and veterinary (AGVET) chemical regulatory framework.

9 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

National Carp Control Plan Over the past three years, DAWE and the FRDC have invested in a world-first program to assess the feasibility of using Cyprinid herpesvirus 3 (the carp virus) as a biological control agent for introduced common carp in Australia, as part of the National Carp Control Plan. In jan

uary 2020, the FRDC

delivered its assessment for consideration by government.

The FRDC’s National Carp Control Plan forms one of several important inputs that will inform a decision by Australian, state and territory governments on the carp virus. In addition to the FRDC’s work, a final decision on carp biocontrol will require further public consultation and regulatory approval.

National RD&e S eafood Industry Safety Initiative The National RD&E Seafood Industry Safety Initiative was developed to deliver improved workplace health and safety in the Australian seafood industry through a cross stakeholder partnership that addresses gaps and/or inefficiencies that affect safety.

The scope of the activities for the initiative are focused on the commercial wild-harvest and commercial aquaculture sectors, with the overarching goal of working towards zero fatalities and re

duction in workplace safety incidences.

A number of associated projects underpin and help deliver the initiative. key s

upporting activities include Sesafe which aims to provide a platform of safety education material and Seafood Industry Australia’s ‘Our Pledge’, that commits to “value our people, look after them and keep them safe”.

Collaboration Collaboration was a priority area for the FRDC during the year. As an organisation, the majority of our investments are collaborative by nature. However, it is important to highlight the FRDC also works across primary industries with the rural RDCs to tackle larger common issues.

During the year this has included playing an active role in the Council of Rural Research and Development Corporations (CRRDC), which has coordinated efforts in response to the modernising RDC discussion coming out of the performance review of the rural innovation system. It has also led to the development of a new climate initiative which aims to fast track investment and response to the key areas associated with changing environmental conditions. The FRDC has worked with eight other RDCs to develop a new investment vehicle that aims to enhance collaborative RD&E to deliver transformational, cross-sectoral outcomes to the stakeholders of the agricultural value chain in Australia. A broader set of collaboration initiatives the FRDC has worked on is highlighted throughout the report and on pages 21-23.

10 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Innovation focus EvokeAg EvokeAg was held on 18-19 February 2020 at the Royal Exhibition buil ding in Melbourne. This year, the FRDC partnered with AgriFutures to sponsor the conference, taking the opportunity to run a panel session, which showcased areas of opportunity within the blue economy space. The FRDC showcased the key innovation activities — Te

kFish and blu

e-x — whi

ch provided an opportunity to bring innovators,

investors and stakeholders together.

Fish 2.0 The FRDC’s partnership with FISH 2.0 culminated with eight Australian companies making the finals at the Global Innovators Forum held in Stanford, California on 4-5 November 2019.

The Global Forum confirmed that the sustainable seafood sector is now on firm footing with other agricultural and technology investment areas and is no longer on the fringe. The investor representation at the forum highlighted that sustainable seafood production and aquaculture was a key area for future investments. Australia’s participation in FISH 2.0 helped raise the profile for innovation and production in our region. It also highlighted to the world the many and diverse investment opportunities, not only in production but also the numerous innovations being developed.

Mapping community trust The FRDC is part of the Community Trust in Rural Industries collaborative project, run by AgriFutures and funded by the CRRDC.

The project aims to explore what the issues are around community trust looking at risk, threat or opportunities that exist for building better trust with the community for primary production. yea

r one

results show rural industries are well trusted, but there remain areas where the community is uncertain about some issues. However, this finding presents opportunities for the relevant sectors to make improvements and address those issues.

International collaboration The FRDC continued to develop and build international collaboration partnerships and opportunities to work on global issues. The FRDC is a member of the International Coalition of Fisheries Associations which is committed to science-based and fully participatory fishery conservation and management processes. The group meets at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) during the year to discuss key issues including the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing (2020 is the 25th anniversary of the code), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), marine plastics and labour issues.

The FRDC had contributed to the development of a global seafood leadership program with the United States, United kin

gdom and Canada, however the emergence of COVID-19 saw this program cancelled.

Significant events after 30 June 2020 Nil.

11 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 1

FINANCIAl TA RgETs 2020-21 TAb le 11: INC OME OVE RVIEW 2 020-21

Forecast income 2020-21

$m

Total revenues from the Australian Government 21.78

Australian Government 0.5% AGVP 14.52

Matching of industry contributions 7.26

Contributions revenue from industry 7.30

Projects revenue from other parties 3.88

Other revenue (such as interest) 0.20

Marketing and promotion 0.00

Total income 33.16

TAb le 12: AUS TRALIAN PRA WN FAR MERS’ LEVy

2020-21

$

FRDC expenditure on R&D projects 368,000

Australian Prawn Farmers Association (APFA) R&D levy contribution 200,000

Australian prawn farmers’ levies are collected under the PIRD Act and the Fishing Levy Regulations. This levy is paid to FRDC by DAWE under a special appropriation as per the PIRD Act.

12 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

TAb le 13: ExPE NDITURE OVE RVIEW 2 020-21

Forecast expenditure 2020-21

$m

R&D 26.87

I. Dr

ive digitisation and advanced analytics 0.20

II. St

rengthen adoption for transformational change 0.20

III. Pr

omote innovation and entrepreneurship 0.07

IV.

bui

ld capability and capacity 0.20

V. Pr

ovide foundational information and support service 0.03

Total R&D 27.57

Communications 0.78

Corporate costs (includes information and communications technology) 4.76

Total expenditure 33.11

PIRD ACT R EQUIREMENTS

2020-21

$

Remuneration and allowances to directors/members 420,000

Cost recovery expenses to pay to the Commonwealth 15,000

Selection committee expenses and liabilities 60,000

COST RECOVERy POLICy

2020-21

$

Cost recovery expenses to the Commonwealth 15,000

13 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 1

THE CoRpoR ATIoN FRDC is a statutory corporation within the Australian Government’s agriculture portfolio and is accountable to the Parliament of Australia through the Minister for Agriculture. Revenue for RD&E investment is based on a co-funding model between the Australian Government and the commercial fishing and aquaculture industries.

The Corporation was formed on 2 july 1

991 and operates under two key pieces of legislation the

Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989 (PIRD Act) and the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act).

2030 vision The FRDC will invest to pursue the shared vision of Australia’s fishing and aquaculture sectors of building collaborative, vibrant fishing and aquaculture, creating diverse benefits from aquatic resources, and celebrated by the community.

FRDC outcome Increased economic, social and environmental benefits for Australian fishing and aquaculture, and the wider community, by investing in knowledge, innovation and marketing.

FRDC mission The FRDC’s mission is to act as a national thought leader, facilitating knowledge creation, collaboration and innovation to shape the future of fishing and aquaculture in Australia, for the benefit of the Australian people.

FRDC role To plan, invest in and manage research and development for fishing and aquaculture, and the wider community, and ensure that the resulting knowledge and innovation is adopted for impact.

14 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Reporting Progress against the annual operational plan (AOP) and RD&E Plan 2015-20 are measured against a performance management framework that sets out how progress will be evaluated using metrics that are appropriate, timely and provide an accurate picture of the impact of the FRDC’s investment. Th

e framework aligns reporting and evaluation with the FRDC’s statutory obligations.

Responsible ministers The portfolio Minister for Agriculture is the Hon. David Littleproud MP and the Assistant Minister is Senator the Hon. jona

thon Duniam (Fisheries, Forestry and Regional Tourism).

Stakeholders The FRDC works with a diverse and geographically dispersed collective of stakeholders that share a connection and interest in fishing and aquaculture.

Representative organisations

The FRDC has four ministerially declared representative organisations.

• Australian Re

creational an

d Sp

ort Fi

shing In

dustry Co

nfederation In

c., tr

ading as Re

cfish Au

stralia

(re

presenting recreational and sport fishers),

• Commonwealth Fi

sheries As

sociation (r

epresenting co

mmercial fis

hers op

erating in Co

mmonwealth

wa

ters),

• National Aq

uaculture Co

uncil (r

epresenting th

e aq

uaculture in

dustry),

• Seafood In

dustry Au

stralia (r

epresenting th

e se

afood in

dustry).

The FRDC also involves the Indigenous Reference Group and the Australian Recreational Fishing Foundation in all representational organisation activities.

More broadly the FRDC works with members of commercial wild-catch, aquaculture, recreational, Indigenous and post-harvest sectors, fisheries managers, researchers, non-government organisations and the Australian community.

FRDC Funding Agreement Australia’s rural RDCs are the mechanism by which primary producers and the government co-invest in RD&E for industry and community benefits. This partnership between industry and government is reflected in joint funding and in input to RDC priorities and planning processes.

The Australian Government has previously entered into agreements with the RDCs which are industry-owned companies as a means to define and govern aspects of their relationship. The Parliament of Australia has legislated to require similar negotiated agreements between the Australian Government and the statutory RDCs.

The Funding Agreement established under the PIRD Act requires establishment of necessary accounting systems, procedures and controls in accordance with the PGPA Act and the Funding Agreement, including a cost allocation policy. The FRDC’s Cost Allocation Policy sets how to allocate direct and indirect costs across the FRDC’s research and development and marketing programs. The Policy is available from the website — ww

w.frdc.com.au

Review of the performance of all RDCs is important to ensure accountability and help foster a culture of continuous improvement. The agreement between the government and the FRDC establishes a framework for periodic, independent reviews.

15 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

Investment strategy — a ba lanced research investment approach The FRDC aims to spread its investment in RD&E across the whole value chain of the commercial fishing and aquaculture industry, and for the benefit of both Indigenous and recreational fishers.

The FRDC will, in line with its RD&E Plan 2015-20, and Statutory Funding agreement invest in:

• a balanced portfolio of projects (type, length and risk),

• outputs (project milestone and report),

• three priority areas and five programs (Environment, Industry, Communities, People and Adoption),

• outcomes (benefit cost analysis).

All R&D or RD&E plans (FRDC, sector and jurisdictional) need to demonstrate how they achieve a balanced portfolio of investment. RD&E investments are regularly assessed to ensure the FRDC maintains a balanced portfolio that meets the needs of its stakeholders, including the Australian Government and the Australian community.

The portfolio is monitored through the FRDC’s project management system which is based on the key metrics above to inform future investment decisions and ensure a balance is maintained. The FRDC ensures funding applications are developed and reviewed by the RACs in line with broader portfolio requirements. A breakdown of investment for the past year can be seen on pages i-iv.

The FRDC seeks to achieve maximum leverage from its investments by providing research administration and services using a value-adding model. Research projects have input provided by the FRDC during their development and assessment phase in order to decide on a specific outcome which is then actively managed and monitored.

Cost allocation policy The board, as the accountable authority, is required by the PGPA Act to establish and maintain systems o

f risk and control to create an operating environment that promotes the proper use and management of public resources, in pursuit of both the public good and the purposes of the entity for which it is responsible.

16 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FISH FOREVER 2030

AR

year 1: 2020-21

AR

year 2: 2021-22

AR

year 3: 2022-23

AR

year 4: 2023-24

AR

year 5: 2024-25

AOP year 1: 2020-21

AOP year 2: 2021-22

AOP year 3: 2022-23

AOP year 4: 2023-24

FRDC’s R&D Plan 2020-25

PERFORMANCE MA NAGEMENT F RAMEWORk

AOP year 5: 2024-25

Future strategic planning Two key documents drive the FRDC’s future strategy, operations and investment. These are the FRDC’s R&D Plan 2020-25 and FRDC’s Annual Operational Plan (AOP). bot

h documents aim to help deliver

the Fish Forever 2030 Strategy (currently in draft and will form a foundation for the Australian Government’s National Fishing Plan). Progress and achievements are detailed in each year’s annual report (AR).

The 2020-21 AOP will be the first of five that will drive the investment for the R&D Plan 2020-25. Each AOP will build on and be informed by previous investment. The proposed approach towards implementation promotes innovation aimed at growing Australia’s fishing and aquaculture sectors. This includes increasing production from the same resources and embracing principles that underpin the circular economy. Investment by the FRDC also aims to better enable the commercial fishing and aquaculture sectors to make greater contributions towards the Government’s target of agriculture being valued at $100 billion by 2030.

New R&D Plan — ne w focus On 1 july 2020, the FRDC’s R&D Plan 2020-25 commenced. The Plan 2020-25 was developed through a c

omprehensive process of environmental scanning, consultation and analysis. The R&D Plan considers key national initiatives such as the National Marine Science Plan, the Government’s target to grow Australian agriculture to $100 billion by 2030 and a draft shared vision for all sectors of fishing and aquaculture entitled “Fish Forever: A shared 2030 vision for Australia’s fishing and aquaculture community”. It also recognises key international plans and obligations such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

17 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

The plan focuses on five R&D outcomes, supported by five enabling strategies that build capability and provide foundational support to the delivery of the outcomes.

The FRDC will continue to invest in the delivery of outputs and impacts to achieve the R&D outcomes. However, how that investment is made (procurement/selection and contracting) will be determined by the type of activity. It will focus on ensuring the highest level of probity while providing agility in responding to the ever-changing environment faced by fishing and aquaculture in Australia.

Few challenges are ever without opportunity. The focus of R&D Plan 2020-25 is to meet these challenges, respond and wherever possible capitalise on them. The FRDC will work with stakeholders to ensure existing partnership and engagement structures (such as Industry Partnership Agreements) are best able to provide the insight on priorities and assist the FRDC in responding to issues and take full advantage of opportunities when they arise.

FIGuRe 1: THE F RDC’S R &D PLA N 2 020-25: F IVE O UTCOMES (WH ITE C IRCLES) S UPPORTED b y F IVE E NAbLI NG STR ATEGIES.

Strategy I: Drive digitisation and advanced an

alytics

Strategy II: Strengthen adoption for tr

ansformative change

Strategy III: Promote innovation an

d entrepren- eurship

St

rategy IV: build capability a

nd capacity

St

rategy V: Provide foundational in

formation and support services

2030 VISION

Outcome 5: Community trust, respect and value

Outcome 1: Growth for enduring prosperity

Outcome 3: A culture that is inclusive and forward

thinking

Outcome 4: Fair and secure access to aquatic

resources

Outcome 2: best practices a

nd production syst ems

18 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Relationships with stakeholders The FRDC works with diverse and geographically dispersed groups who operate or interact with fishing and aquaculture stakeholders. Some of these relationships are driven by a shared vision of working to address issues of concern, with some reinforced through mandate or legislation.

To meet and deliver on these needs the FRDC boa

rd and staff normally visit locations where they can

engage directly with those involved in fishing and aquaculture and see issues firsthand. However, this year COVID-19 made it difficult to do this. FRDC is committed through formal policy to:

• treat stakeholders courteously and professionally,

• provide them with quality service,

• respond to written enquiries within 10 working days of receipt by the FRDC,

• return telephone calls by the close of business on the following day at the latest,

• provide information that is current and accurate.

Engaging with stakeholders plays an important part of the work program for FRDC staff members. Over the course of a year, the FRDC aims to meet with its key stakeholders and participate in discussions on priorities, investment and related issues.

This year the FRDC engaged with stakeholders to develop the new R&D Plan 2020-25. The journey to develop the new R&D Plan took 18 months and included research, discussions, deep thinking, conflict, resolution, prioritisation, awareness raising and many meetings. key a

ctivities included:

• Establishment of two national groups of leaders and innovators from across each of the five fishing and aquaculture sectors, management agencies including representatives of DAWE, researchers, and representatives of conservation non-government organisations to co-design elements of the plan.

• Engagement of these groups over several workshops to undertake system mapping, scenario development, and analysis.

• Integration of broader stakeholder input through the FRDC’s annual stakeholder planning workshop held in Adelaide during September 2019, and regional workshops held in bri

sbane, Melbourne and

Perth during September/October 2019.

• Regular stakeholder updates were provided in F

RDC’s stakeholder briefings a

nd F

ISH magazine.

• Comments were invited from a range of stakeholders including:

- FR

DC representative bodies throughout the plan’s development,

- di

rectors of fisheries agencies from each jurisdiction through the Australian Fisheries Management Forum,

- re

search providers through the national Research Provider Network,

- br

oader input was also invited through publication of the draft plan and an accompanying survey on FRDC’s website in March 2020.

19 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

Research Advisory Committees The FRDC supports a network of Research Advisory Committees (RACs) — on e covering Commonwealth fisheries and one in each state and the Northern Territory. The RACs play an important role in delivering on efficient, effective planning and investment processes, and the development of project applications. The FRDC works to ensure a majority of research funding applications are submitted through, reviewed and prioritised by the RACs. The RACs represent all fishing and aquaculture, fisheries managers and researchers, and most have environmental and other community interest representation.

The RAC Chairs at the end of 2019-20 were as follows.

Commonwealth Peter O’br ien

New South Wales Peter Dundas-Smith

Northern Territory Rik buc

kworth

Queensland Cathy Dichmont

South Australia Don Plowman

Tasmania Ian Cartwright

Victoria Peter Rankin

Western Australia bre

tt McCallum

For further information on the RACs go to www.frdc.com.au

Industry partners The FRDC has continued its close relationship with seafood industry sectors. Industry Partnership Agreements (IPAs) are a key part of the FRDC business because they provide individual sectors with greater certainty for long-term investment against their RD&E plans.

Each IPA develops a RD&E plan containing its specific priorities, from which it determines the focus of its annual call for applications. The RD&E strategic plans for the IPAs can be found on their individual webpages — frd

c.com.au/Partners/Industry-Partnership-Agreements. These RD&E plans and priorities form the basis of investment for the coming financial year. During the year the FRDC has IPAs with the following organisations:

• Abalone Council Australia,

• Australian Abalone Growers Association,

• Australian bar

ramundi Farmers Association,

• Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries,

• Australian Prawn Farmers Association,

• Australian Southern bl

uefin Tuna Industry Association,

• Oysters Australia,

• Pearl Consortium,

• Southern Fisheries,

• Southern Rocklobster Limited,

• Tasmanian Salmonid Growers Association,

• Western Rock Lobster Council.

20 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Australian Government The Minister for Agriculture and the department provide the key priorities that need to be addressed from an Australian Government perspective. The department acts as the day-to-day policy intermediary between the offices of the Minister, Assistant Minister and the FRDC.

Australian Fisheries Management Forum The Australian Fisheries Management Forum (AFMF) is attended by the heads of the Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies responsible for management of fisheries and aquaculture. The AFMF discusses issues relating to fisheries and aquaculture management.

The FRDC understands that adoption of research outputs by management agencies is a key to optimising management outcomes. It will continue to work with the AFMF, participating as an invited representative to its meetings, providing advice and ensuring the AFMF’s priorities are incorporated into planning and prioritisation processes.

Rural research and development corporations The FRDC continues to partner with other RDCs on a range of activities to enhance joint strategic outcomes. The FRDC attends meetings of the CRRDC, as well as meetings of executive directors, business managers and communications managers. It continues to be an active member of these groups driving a number of key areas in particular the CRRDC evaluation program.

The FRDC also partners and participates with other RDCs at the project level. A key area for collaboration has been the R&D for Profit Program and projects in which the FRDC is a co-investor. The FRDC has assisted in coordinating sponsorship and participation in events such as EvokeAg, AbA

RES ‘Outlook’

conference and individual projects on data, safety and community perceptions.

Research partners Investment in research is the FRDC’s core business. As a result, it is vital to the FRDC’s success that good relationships are built and maintained with its research partners. In any given year, the FRDC will have over 400 active projects under management.

21 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

TAb le 14: ExAM PLES O F ST AkEH OLDER C OLLAbOR ATION

A list of acronyms/abbreviations used in this table are on page 179.

Project/activity Brief description Partners

Collaborating on cross-sectoral issues

Ru

ral Research and Development for Profit Program: Natural Capital Accounting

Natural capital is the soil, air, water and biodiversity — the natural resources used for food

and fibre production. This project se eks to determine whether natural

capital accounting could support decision making and drive better productivity of primary industries, which depend on natural capital.

Forest and Wood Products, Cotton RDC (CRDC), NSW Department of Primary Industries (NSW D PI),

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Or

ganisation (CSIRO), Ecological Australia, HVP Plantations, VicForests, Au

stralian bur eau of Statistics, bur

eau of Meteorology, OneFortyOne Plantations.

Community Trust in Rural Communities Research program to build the capacity of food and fibre

in dustries to productively engage with the community with the aim of building community trust.

Ag

riFutures, Australian Pork Limited, Australian Eggs, CRDC, Dairy Australia, Grains RDC (GRDC), LiveCorp, Meat & Livestock Australia, Sugar Re

search Australia, National Farmers’ Federation, NSW D

PI,

CSIRO, Seftons.

People development

FRDC invests with other RDCs in a range of people development ar

eas (e.g. safety education through Primary Industries Education Foundation Australia), leadership through Nuffield Australia and the Australian Rural Leadership Program that build capacity, encourage partnerships and learning across rural industries.

All RDCs and multiple rural bodies.

Na

tional Marine Science Plan (update)

FRDC is on the Executive of the National Marine Science Committee (NMSC) which comprises more than 40 organisations. The NM SC oversees more than $1 billion of public investment in marine science.

Forty plus organisations including CSIRO, Integrated Marine Observing System, bur eau of Meteorology,

Australian Navy, Greening Australia, Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, DAWE, Great bar

rier

Reef Marine Park Authority, Australian Antarctic Division, University of Tasmania, jam

es

Cook University, South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI), Western Australian Marine Science Institution.

22 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Project/activity Brief description Partners

Collaborating on cross-sectoral issues (c

ontinued)

Status of Australian Fish Stocks Assessment of 150 fish species status across eight jurisdictions into

a national reporting framework. Delivers against United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14 (Life below water)

NSW D

PI, Victorian Fisheries Authority, Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (Tas DPIPWE), Australian bur

eau of

Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (AbAR

ES), Western Australian Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Northern Territory Department of Primary Industry and Resources, SARDI, Queensland Department of Ag

riculture and Fisheries.

International Coalition of Fisheries Associations

This group shares knowledge in fisheries and aquaculture from production to consumption with the goal of leveraging knowledge tools and having a consistent approach to emerging issues.

Can

ada, Denmark, France, Iceland, jap

an, New Zealand,

Norway, South American Fisheries Coalition, Spain, The Netherlands, United kin

gdom,

United States of America.

Extension and adoption R&

D Plan 2020-25 Engage across fishing and aquaculture sectors to coordinate identification and deliver of collective activities in pursuit of shared 2030 vision.

Al

l stakeholders. key

include

representative organisations, managers and researchers.

National RD&E Seafood Industry Safety Initiative

The initiative is a cross stakeholder partnership to enhance adoption of work health and safety best pra

ctice through industry focused extension. This includes industry- led Safety Roadshows, ‘Fish Safe Aus

tralia’ website.

Seafood Industry Australia, Australian Maritime Safety Authority, Austral Fisheries, AgriFutures, Australian Eggs, Australian Pork Limited, Australian Wool Innovation, CRDC, Dairy Australia, GRDC, Meat & Livestock Australia.

Stock assessment toolbox Project provides a strategic view of the framework Australia

sh ould adopt with respect to stock assessments. Develops a toolbox that makes stock assessment packages accessible, allows Australian assessors to contribute their models, and provides resources for their use.

Cathy Dichmont Consulting, CSIRO, NSW DPI, Victorian Fisheries Authority, Tas DPIPWE, AbAR

ES, Western

Australia Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Northern Territory Department of Primary Industry and Resources, SARDI, Queensland Department of Agriculture and Fisheries.

23 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

Project/activity Brief description Partners

Future collaboration activities/ projects

Australian Agricultural Innovation Investment Company

Participation in the establishment of a new collaborative investment ve

hicle. The new entity (working title Australian Agricultural Investment Company) will identify nationally significant cross-sectoral opportunities for increasing the productivity and profitability of the agricultural supply chain, develop strategies to facilitate a collaborative approach to realising those identified opportunities, and will secure the necessary resources to then execute those strategies.

Led by Meat & Livestock Australia with a working group consisting of GRDC, CR

DC, Australian Eggs, FRDC, Australian Pork Limited and Dairy Australia.

joi

nt RDC Climate Initiative The purpose of the RDC-led Climate Initiative is to deliver

pr actical, implementable solutions for resource managers through innovative approaches that address climate change and its impacts.

Council of Rural Research and Development Corporations (CRRDC), all RDCs, CSIRO, DAWE. Led by CRDC and the working group of Dairy Au

stralia, GRDC, Meat & Livestock Australia, CSIRO, DAWE, CRRDC.

Smarter Regions Cooperative Research Centre (CRC)

The Smarter Regions CRC aims to empower regional Australia to gain the maximum benefit from the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution. It will transform existing industries and grow a technology sector in and for regional Australia.

Adelaide University, Sydney University, Wine Australia, GRDC and others. FRDC sector partnerships with Sout

hern Rock Lobster Limited, Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries, Tasmanian Sa

lmonid Growers Association, Australian Abalone Growers Association, Australian Prawn Farmers Association, Oysters Australia.

24 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

F IG

u R e 2: T

HE F

RDC’

S F

RAMEWOR

k

F

OR

I

NTEGRATING

L

EGISLATIVE

,

G

OVERNMENT

A

ND

I

NDUSTR

y

P

RIORITIES

Science and research priorities

Food

Soil and water

Transport

Cybersecurity

Energy

Resources

Advanced manufacturing

Environmental change

h ealth

Objects of the FRDC’s enabling legislation

—

PI

RD Act section 3

Object A

—

Make provision for the funding and administration of research and development relating to primary industries with a view to:

(i

)

in

creasing the economic, environmental and social benefits to members of primary industries and to the community in general by improving the production, processing, storage, transport or marketing of the products of primary industries, (i

i)

ac

hieving the sustainable use and sustainable management of natural resources, (iii)

ma

king more effective use of the resources and skills of the community in general and the scientific community in particular, (iv)

su

pporting the development of scientific and technical capacity, (v)

de

veloping the adoptive capacity of primary producers, (vi)

im

proving accountability for expenditure on research and development activities in relation to primary industries.

Object B

—

Make provision for the funding and administration of marketing relating to pr

oducts of primary industries.

FRDC national research priorities

1. Ensuring that Australian fishing and aquaculture products are sustainable and acknowledged to be so. 2 .

Im

proving productivity and profitability of fishing and aquaculture.

3.

De

veloping new and emerging aquaculture growth opportunities.

FRDC programs Communities

Environment

Industry

People

Adoption

25 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 1

Outcome statement

Increased economic, social and environmental benefits for Australian fishing and aquaculture, and the wider community, by investing in knowledge, innovation and marketing.

FRDC vision

The FRDC’s vision is for Australia to have vibrant fishing and aquaculture sectors which adopt world-class research to achieve sustainability and prosperity. Rural research priorities

Advanced technology To enhance innovation of products, processes and practices across the food and fibre supply chains thro

ugh technologies such as robotics, digitisation, big dat

a, genetics and precision agriculture.

Biosecurity To improve understanding and evidence of pest and disease pathways to help direct biosecurity resources to their best uses, minimising bi

osecurity threats and improving market access for primary producers.

Soil, water and managing natural resources To manage soil health, improve water use efficiency and certainty of supply, sustainably develop new production areas and improve resilience to climate ev

ents and impacts.

Adoption of R&D Focusing on flexible delivery of extension services that meet primary producers’ needs and recognising the growing role of private ser

vice delivery.

26 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

27 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

REPORT OF OP ERATIONS

PA

RT 2:

ThE FR

DC’ S

OP

ERATIONAL RE

SULTS

28 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Inputs to output The FRDC developed a flexible approach to how it funds projects to align with the principles of ‘lead, collaborate and partner’ in its RD&E Plan 2015-20.

This means projects can sit under the categories of:

• national priorities or infrastructure, collaboration or partnerships (sector or jurisdiction), or

• FRDC’s five foundation programs (Environment, Industry, Communities, People, Adoption).

See Figure 3 on the following page.

How to read the project reports To show where each project or activity story in this section of the annual report sits within the FRDC’s investment framework, a code has been used as shown in the grid below. The grid shows the national priorities, infrastructure, collaboration or partnerships and FRDC’s foundation programs. The purpose is to show that a single project can cross a number of fields. The coding also allows the reader to see how a project fits within the investment framework.

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

For example, FRDC’s investment in the SAFS reports is funded under national priorities and collaboration but is also coded against FRDC programs — En vironment, Communities and Adoption.

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

29 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

F IG

u R e 3: T

HE F

RAMEWOR

k

F

OR

R

D&E I

NV

ESTMENT

b

y

T

HE

F

RDC

D

URING

2

015-20

E NVIRONMEN

t

IND

u S t

R y

C OMM

u NI

t IES

P EOP

l E

A DOP

t ION

C O R e I N V e S T M e N T P R O G RAM

S

National priorities • Ensuring

th

at

Au

stralian

fis

hing

an

d aquaculture products are sustainable and ac

knowledged to be so • Improving

pro

ductivity

and profitability of fishing and aquaculture • D

eveloping

ne

w

an

d

emerging aquaculture growth opportunities Na

tional RD&

e in

frastructure

• FRDC

su

bprograms

an

d

co

ordination programs • People

de

velopment

• Delivery

of ke

y

se

rvices

Partnerships • Sector-based

pl

ans

• Jurisdictional-based

pl

ans

Collaborative opportunities

lEAD

…

Develop a targeted, national program of in

vestment to deliver high-value, high-priority impacts and outcomes.

C O l l

A b ORA

t E

…

Where sector or jurisdictions priorities align with national priorities or infrastructure leading to co-investment in RD&E to achieve common goals.

P AR

t NER

…

With sectors or jurisdictions to give partnerships greater ow

nership of their strategic priorities and direction, investment in these activities and responsibility for taking outputs and turning them into resources.

30 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FRDC NATIoNAl pR IoRI TIEs

pr

iority 1. Ensuring that Australian fishing and aquaculture products are sustainable and acknowledged to be so Strategy Continue to prioritise investment in RD&E that contributes to the sustainability of fishing and aquaculture, including consideration of target species; bycatch species; threatened, endangered and protected species; and the broader marine environment.

buil

d understanding of the drivers of social licence to operate and respond to community concerns and needs for information with science-based evidence.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $1.34 million or around 4.6 per cent of the total R&D investment for this priority.

Priority area activities Portfolio Budget

Statement (PBS) target 2019-20

Achievement

Perception of the commercial fishing industry increased from 28% to 40% by 2020.

Per

ception of industry increases to 36%.

The most recent survey of community perception (jun

e 2019) shows that 46%

believe the industry is sustainable. Results are available from www.frdc.com.au

31 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The following table shows progress in achieving the deliverables in the FRDC’s RD&E Plan 2015-20.

Target 2016-20 Performance

The number of species in the national Status of Australian Fish Stocks (SAFS) reports increases to include 200 s

pecies.

In 2016 the target was 114 species. In 2018 (1

60 s pecies). In 2020 (2

00 s pecies).

No

t achieved. One hundred and twenty species covering 406 stocks were assessed in the 2018 SAFS. The 20

20 SAFS will contain 150 s pecies. In addition, the FRDC delivered a Shark Report Card that covered and assessed 194 species comprising 199 stocks, of these 124 s

tocks were assessed to be sustainable at current levels of fishing.

The number of species classified as ‘undefined’ is reduced from the 2016 figure of approximately 30% to less than 10%.

In 2

016 (~30%). In 2018 (~20%). In 2020 (<10%).

No

t achieved. Current levels indicate undefined rates at 13%. Workshops have been undertaken in all jurisdictions to i

ncrease the use of methodologies to further reduce the number of ‘undefined’ species (Project number 2017-102: Reducing the number of undefined species in future Status of Australian Fish Stocks reports: Phase two — tra

ining in

the assessment of data-poor stocks).

Positive perceptions of the commercial fishing industry increase from 28% to 40% by 2020 as measured through independently commissioned FRDC stakeholder surveys.

In 2016 (28%). In 2017 (30%). In 2018 (34%). In 2019 (36%). In 2020 (40%).

Ac

hieved. The number of respondents who believe the community perception of the Australian fishing industry (as a whole) is sustainable is 46% in community perceptions survey.

Five-year review of priority 1 Priority 1 aim: by 20 20, the community has effective access to, and understanding of, RD&E that supports fishing and aquaculture sustainability and informs improved perceptions of Australian seafood.

This priority aimed to not only underpin the sustainability of Australia’s fisheries through good R&D investment but also to increase awareness and inform community perceptions — a ke

y metric for the

priority. It is fair to say the FRDC exceeded expectations in these regards with community perceptions growing from 24 per cent for the commercial fishing industry and 40 per cent for all fishing and aquaculture in the 2015 survey, up to 37 per cent for the commercial fishing industry and 47 per cent for all fishing and aquaculture in the 2019 survey. Survey results are available from www.frdc.com.au

A significant body of work was done to achieve the aim including the release of three SAFS reports which saw around 90 per cent of the fish caught in Australia assessed, with a majority rated as sustainable. A key indicator was reducing the number of undefined stocks to less than 10 p

er cent of

the total. Considerable work was undertaken with jurisdictions to review and access data and to minimise the number of undefined or unclassified fish stocks which has seen the number drop from 29 p

er cent in the 2014 report down to 13 p

er cent in the 2018 SAFS.

Following the 2016 edition, the FRDC and the SAFS advisory working group conducted a review aimed at improving future editions. Changes were made around stock status classification categories: the ‘environmentally limited’ classification was removed, the ‘overfished’ classification was replaced by ‘depleted’, and transitional stock categories became ‘recovering’ and ‘depleting’.

The SAFS reports not only provide a solid picture of the status of fish stocks assessed, but they have also harmonised approaches between jurisdictions.

32 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Smartphone app for fish stocks Another positive output was developing phone apps for both Google Play and Apple. The apps were designed to allow consumers to easily browse the information in the SAFS reports. The app makes the information on the status of Australia’s commercial fish species more accessible, distilling information from the SAFS reports into clear language appropriate to a lay audience.

Search SAFS Sustainable Fish Stocks in the Google Play Store (for Android) or the Apple App Store (for iPhone) now or visit https://www.fish.gov.au/app

Examples of project activity during the year Tuna story to inspire new generation of fishers Project 2017-09

For further information: Al McGlashan, al@almcglashan.com

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

The remarkable story behind the recovery of Southern blu efin Tuna from an endangered species to a globally sustainable fishery is told in a recently released Australian documentary.

The combined efforts of Australian science, industry innovation and community education have been showcased in the documentary ‘Life on the line — Th

e story of the Southern blu

efin Tuna’, which tells

the story of how these highly prized, temperate ocean dwellers were brought back from the brink of commercial extinction.

Produced and narrated by photojournalist and ardent fisher Al McGlashan, the documentary tells of how the Southern blu

efin Tuna (S bT) (T

hunnus maccoyii ) stocks went into freefall due to overfishing

and how the fish was rescued from its near demise. It also explains how the strategies and science that saved the SbT no

w stand as a sustainability model for fisheries worldwide.

Life on the line provides an engrossing insight into this warm-blooded marine species and its decade-long lifecycle that sees it reaching 200 kilograms and two metres in length by the time it has traversed the Southern Ocean. The film details the commercial pressures that decimated the S bT po

pulation and

the extraordinary individuals who led its recovery, in the process creating a new, sophisticated industry worth more than $100 million annually in Australia alone.

The documentary was funded by the Australian Government through the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) and the FRDC, both of which were instrumental in the SbT su

ccess

story, along with the CSIRO.

Two technological developments were particularly critical in the recovery of the species. First, Australia’s SbT fis

hers took the lead in developing a new approach, learning how to catch juvenile fish to grow them out in ocean pens off the coast of Port Lincoln, South Australia. The fishers became farmers.

The second was the advent of genetic ‘fingerprinting’ and satellite tagging for population monitoring and management. Given SbT b

egin life in waters off java a

nd north-west Australia before they

traverse the Southern Ocean beneath Australia and South Africa, these technologies remain crucial for setting evidence-based quotas that are now respected by all countries and markets with commercial interests in the species.

33 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

the beginning The SbT story starts in the early 1980s when the species’ red meat was so prized in markets such a

s japan — wh ich consumes 80 per cent of the global catch — th at a single fish could fetch tens of thousands of dollars. but t his boom time for fishers was followed quickly by diminishing catches. by the time the market was peaking, the S bT po pulation was already in terminal decline.

At the time, jap

an was still catching more than 40,000 tonnes of SbT a

year and Australia about

21,000 t

onnes, but the population was estimated to be at barely five per cent of 1960s levels.

Something drastic needed to be done and Australia took a leading role in setting up the Commission for the Conservation of Southern blu

efin Tuna. The commission allowed the three main catching

countries, jap

an, Australia and New Zealand, to manage the fishery cooperatively.

Data gathering Without access to any reliable population data, the three countries estimated that a combined annual catch of 11,750 tonnes would allow stocks to recover. Instead, stocks kept falling. by 20

04, the situation

was critical and perplexing. A United States scientist on the conservation commission said it was clear that the quota was not being adhered to.

Confident in the records being kept by Australian fishers, Glenn Hurry arranged for a team led by Southern Australian blu

efin Tuna Association Chief Executive Officer bria

n jef

friess to visit jap

an and

calculate how much SbT wa

s being sold.

The numbers finally started to make sense and they gave fisheries management data that would allow a scientifically based approach to getting the fishery back to a biologically safe level. Critically, Australia resisted calls to close the fishery, arguing it needed to be kept open to help fund the necessary research.

This also gave the Port Lincoln-based industry the impetus to rethink its entire operation.

Collaborative action The answer the industry came up with was tuna farming, but no one had ever before attempted to ‘ranch’ wild SbT, a

n apex ocean predator that has to swim its body length every three seconds to stay alive.

The technique developed was to net juvenile tuna in the ocean, then tow them to inshore pens that are large enough and deep enough to allow the young fish to grow under free-range conditions until ready for harvest. Feeding the penned tuna also led to the development of a massive industry supplying locally caught pilchards, the tuna’s natural food in the wild.

The need to collaborate is one lesson learned, says Al McGlashan, and the other is the critical role of science. The documentary highlights, in particular, the research undertaken by the CSIRO in Hobart and by the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) at the University of Tasmania.

Principal CSIRO research scientist Richard Hillary has been monitoring SbT p

opulations through an

advanced mark and recapture model. This uses each tuna’s unique genetic ‘fingerprint’ for an identify-and-release program.

The technology takes advantage of high-throughput robotic DNA sampling adapted from human diagnostics and is able to compile a database of tens of thousands of fish. This is supplemented by satellite tagging of a representative sample of fish as they round the south-east corner of Australia.

The resulting population database enables an evidence-based approach to setting quotas. It has also facilitated a community education push that has seen recreational SbT fi

shers, too, become a part of

the overall SbT re

search and management effort.

34 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Principal investigator with IMAS Sean Tracey says recreational fishers and game fishing operators have become champions of SbT, with some also being involved in tagging as part of an increased emphasis

on catch-and-release. With the recreational sector operating in different areas to commercial fishers, this wider community engagement has significantly extended researchers’ coverage.

Al McGlashan believes the SbT re

covery is an inspiring story that should be known in the wider

community for the lessons learned and for creating a shared sense of responsibility towards what he describes as an iconic marine species. SbT is o

fficially assessed as ‘recovering’ in the SAFS reports.

To view the movie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjdb1AVUnVI&feature=youtube

New guides to future fisheries Project 2016-234, 2015-203, 2015-208, 2010-061

For further information: James Larcombe, james.larcombe@agriculture.gov.au and Alistair Hobday, alistair.hobday@csiro.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Conversations around the sustainability of Australian fisheries have come a long way since the status of individual species was singled out as the primary indicator of performance. From a single species, to multi-species fisheries, bycatch, habitats and now even the performance of fisheries managers themselves — al

l of these have come under scrutiny as fisheries management continues to evolve.

New guidelines released in November 2018 are part of this increasingly integrated approach, adding to the rigour of Australia’s Commonwealth fisheries management processes. They provide an evidence-driven approach that could also provide value in other fisheries jurisdictions around Australia. They are:

• Guidelines for the implementation of the Commonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy ,

• Guidelines for the implementation of the Commonwealth Fisheries Bycatch Policy .

The first of these, the revised Harvest Strategy Policy guidelines, was co-funded by DAWE and the FRDC, and is a companion to the updated C

ommonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy. The

originals of both these harvest strategy documents were released in 2007.

Harvest strategies In the Commonwealth, harvest strategies are a set of pre-agreed rules designed to achieve defined biological and economic objectives for commercial fish stocks in a given fishery.

The key biological objective in the policy is to maintain with high confidence all fish stocks above a biomass limit where the risk to the stock is regarded as unacceptable (the biomass limit reference point).

The primary objective was to maximise economic returns from each fishery. It formally introduced maximum economic yield as the target for Commonwealth fisheries management.

Since the introduction of the first C

ommonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy i

n 2007, overfished

or depleted stocks have been rebuilding. No fish stock solely managed by the Commonwealth has been classified as subject to overfishing since 2012. The value of Commonwealth fisheries has seen improvements over the same period.

jam

es Larcombe says these results, and the generally positive feedback from stakeholders, pointed to the success of the original Harvest Strategy Policy and guidelines. but f

ollowing an extensive review,

the s

econd edition of the Policy have been updated to incorporate more than a decade of new fisheries science and experience in implementing harvest strategies along with feedback from stakeholders.

35 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

Some key changes include the application of the policy to by-product species, more direction on meeting environmental and economic objectives in multi-species fisheries, additional clarity around internationally managed fisheries, and guidance on applying harvest strategies under changing environmental and climatic conditions.

“In this edition of the guidelines we have also really focused on how to design harvest strategies that target maximum economic returns across the wide range of fisheries that AFMA [Australian Fisheries Management Authority] manages,” jam

es says. “For example, in the valuable Northern Prawn Fishery,

harvest levels are determined from a complex bioeconomic model designed to maximise future profits across four different species.

“In the guidelines we also suggest approaches that are suitable for smaller, lower value fisheries, and other kinds, that seek to balance the costs of implementing a harvest strategy while at the same time delivering on the policy requirements for sustainability and profitability.”

Proactive management Australian management agencies have been on the front foot for many years when it comes to managing for, and demonstrating, the sustainability of fisheries. While many countries have a harvest strategy; Australia is one of the few that has a bycatch policy as well.

The Guidelines for the implementation of the Commonwealth Fisheries Bycatch Policy , which supports the Commonwealth Fisheries Bycatch Policy were originally developed in 2000.

key r

evisions in the policy include improved guidance on species classification and policy coverage for all species, and the inclusion of a risk-based approach to monitoring, assessing and managing bycatch. There is consideration of cumulative impacts on bycatch species, and a performance monitoring and reporting framework is also provided.

The bycatch guidelines provide impetus to improve data collection to help fishers demonstrate that they are meeting the obligations. This was identified as a gap in existing practices, and has reinforced the need for cost-effective and smart data collection through technologies such as el

ectronic monitoring and digital logbooks, which can provide fast, easy and accurate reporting, in near real time.

The development of the new bycatch guidelines was funded by DAWE.

More information The Commonwealth Fisheries Harvest Strategy Policy an d guidelines — h ttp://www.agriculture.gov.au/ fisheries/domestic/harvest_strategy_policy

The Commonwealth Fisheries Bycatch Policy and guidelines — h

ttp://www.agriculture.gov.au/fisheries/

environment/bycatch/review

The Best practice guidelines for Australian fisheries management agencies is available from — ht

tp://

www.frdc.com.au/media-publications/fish/FISH-Vol-27-2/New-guides-to-future-fisheries.

36 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FRDC NATIoNAl pR IoRI TIEs

pr

iority 2. Improving productivity and profitability of fishing and aquaculture Strategy Invest in RD&E to understand the drivers of, and impediments to, productivity and profitability growth in all fishing and aquaculture sectors; research means of increasing sustainable production and profitability; link these to business education; encompass the needs of Indigenous communities.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $0.99 million or around 3.4 per cent of the total R&D investment for this priority. The following table provides a guide to progress in achieving the deliverables in the FRDC’s RD&E Plan 2015-20.

Target 2016-20 Performance

Provide RD&E to support increased trade of fishing and aquaculture products into countries with free trade agreements by some 300%.

Three hundred per cent.

Achieved. Rocklobster and salmon are now exporting direct to China (estimated to be worth over $600 million a year, up from $56 million for these two species). Trade database is being utilised by industry. FRDC coordinated fishing and aquaculture input into the development of European Free Trade Agreement.

Understand the quantity of potential production from Australia’s fishing and aquaculture resources.

One

report

completed on quantity of potential pr

oduction from Australia’s fishing and aquaculture resources.

Achieved. Project 2016-056 measured Australia’s wild-catch production potential at 293,500 tonnes, a substantial increase on the 166,000 tonnes caught in 2016-17.

37 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

Target 2016-20 Performance

Increase knowledge to improve the utilisation of fisheries resources by Indigenous Australians.

Two reports completed.

Achieved. Indigenous Reference Group (IRG) undertaking scoping project to collect Indigenous catch data. IRG undertaking work to extend the kn

owledge of R&D undertaken over past five years.

Inc

rease knowledge to identify obstacles and opportunities to increase productivity through habitat.

Two reports completed.

Achieved. National Habitat Strategy completed (Project number 2015-501 Recfishing Research Subprogram: Empowering recreational fishers as champions of healthy fish habitat).

New project initiated to undertake social and economic assessment of the value of recreational fishing.

Five-year review of priority 2 Priority 2 aim: by 20 20, deliver RD&E for fishing and aquaculture to increase productivity and profitability consistent with economic, social and environmental sustainability.

This priority focused on improving the productivity and profitability of the seafood industry. This is a difficult area to assess at a micro level (every fisher or fishery), however at the macro level the gross value of production for the fishing and aquaculture increased from around $2.5 billion in 2014- 15 u

p

to $3.1 billion in 2018-19 before a marked reduction in 2019-20 (down to $2.6 billion) because of COVID-19. It is important to note, should COVID not have happened the value of fishing and aquaculture was expected to increase to around $3.4 billion. Overall, most industries improved their positions during the five-year RD&E plan period. This combined with a better community perception is a good outcome for fishing and aquaculture.

FRDC project 2016-056 measured Australia’s wild-catch production and found there was a far greater potential national catch (see project overview on following page).

The FRDC’s Indigenous Reference Group (IRG) initiated the project ‘buil

ding the capacity and

performance of Indigenous fisheries’, released in jun

e 2018, which analysed seven initiatives across

six fis

heries jurisdictions. The project found that fishery assets contribute only a small amount to the total economic wellbeing of Indigenous communities. Communities vary greatly in their understanding of their fishery assets and in their engagement with, access to and use of marine or freshwater fishery resources. As part of the project, seven case studies were developed with community participants about actual or proposed fishery initiatives to identify processes that have worked and potential barriers to be overcome. The project identified six attributes for an Indigenous fisheries venture that provide a sound foundation for success. The IRG continues to work on this issue, extending the knowledge and assisting Indigenous communities to develop new opportunities

38 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Examples of project activity during the year Doubling up on wild fisheries Project 2016-056

For further information: Richard Little, rich.little@csiro.au and David Smith, david.c.smith2@bigpond.com

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

In recent years, Australia’s wild-harvest fisheries have averaged a yield of 166,000 tonnes, a decline of almost 30 per cent on our ‘peak fish’ production. That was in 2004-05, when 236,000 tonnes were ha

rvested. While some fisheries continue to attribute the reduction in yields to dwindling fish stocks, there has been a substantial investment in fisheries research and management over more than a decade to e

nsure this is not the case.

More fish in the sea Researchers undertaking a FRDC-funded project identified that current fished stocks, rebuilt to the baseline where necessary, could allow for double the current harvest, which would set a new peak for the industry.

The project team, led by the CSIRO, included fisheries scientists from each jurisdiction, who calculated the maximum sustainable yield (MSy) f

or 290 fish species and stocks (as some species have multiple

stocks). These species represented 84 per cent of the average national catch for the period (2014-15 to 2016- 1

7).

This allowed the team to estimate what the biomass and sustainable harvest volume could be for each of these species. MSy w as used as a consistent reference point for the calculations (not as a recommended target for fishing). In practice, some jurisdictions and species have different reference points, such as maximum economic yield (MEy).

T

he project used a three-year catch average as the basis for calculations, which also includes 27,000 t

onnes of fish from stocks that were unable to be assessed as part of this project.

When researchers tallied the total MSy f

or the 290 species and stocks they were able to assess, it came

to 345,000 tonnes compared to an actual catch of 139,000 tonnes of these species. That is an additional 206,000 tonnes, and a potential national catch of 371,500 tonnes.

Small pelagic species such as Australian Sardine, mackerels and redbait were big contributors to the potential increase, although, in practice, the total allowable catch set for these species is highly conservative. This reflects the role these species play in the ecosystem: they are the foundation of the food chain for many ocean species, including birds and mammals.

Recognising this, the researchers also recalculated the potential national catch using the current total allowable catchs for the small pelagic species rather than MSy, ad

ding this to the MSy t

otal for the

other assessed species.

This reduced the potential national catch by 78,000 tonnes to 293,500 tonnes, still a substantial increase on the 166,000 tonnes caught in 2016-17.

The project did not consider any changes to fish biomass that might result from climate change, nor the development of any new fisheries or harvesting of other products, such as seaweeds. It was also based on all fish stocks being above a reference point that achieves MS y, in

cluding some species that

are not currently assessed as sustainable, such as Snapper (South Australia) and bla

cklip Abalone

(Central Western Zone, Tasmania), which will need to rebuild their populations.

39 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

FRDC NATIoNAl pR IoRI TIEs

pr

iority 3. Developing new and emerging aquaculture growth opportunities Strategy Identify research constraints to industry growth — su ch as potential markets, cost of production, survival, deformities and uniformity of growth — an

d invest in RD&E to identify opportunities for

successful and competitive commercial activity.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $0.8 million or around 2.8 per cent of the total R&D investment for this priority.

Priority area activities PBS target

2019-20

Achievement

Advance two or more new or emerging aquaculture opportunities/species for which RD&E has identified clear op

portunities and technologies for good production and profitability growth, as measured by increases in harvest tonnages.

Tw

o thousand tonnes of additional production.

Achieved. While national government production statistics are not available (data privacy for producers in some jurisdictions) it is clear from company records that production has increased. Further, the three-year R&D for Profit projects on developing new white fish (yel

lowtail king

fish) was completed

during the year and the project facilitates expansion. New leases allocated for an additional 48,000 tonnes of production.

40 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Five-year review of priority 3 Priority 3 aim: by 20 20, deliver sufficient RD&E for significant commercialisation of at least two new or emerging aquaculture growth opportunities with demonstrated potential for profitable business operations.

This priority focused on growing the value of aquaculture. Again, the results over the five ye

ars were

very positive. key f

arming sectors such as Atlantic Salmon and bar

ramundi both increased production

and value. The aquaculture sector also saw significant inflow of investment and expansion across all areas.

A signature investment for the FRDC was into further developing yel

lowtail kin

gfish. The goal was to

put more yel

lowtail kin

gfish on more Australian dining tables, as a ‘white flesh’ fish option for domestic household consumption. Central to this has been the ‘kin

gfish for Profit’ ( k4P

) research program which

was cofounded with the Australian Government providing a $3.65 million grant through the then Department of Agriculture and Water Resources Rural R&D for Profit program. Contributions from other partners including the FRDC brought the total project funding to $7.3 million.

The research program has brought this consumption goal a step closer, improving both the production efficiency and profitability benchmarks of yel

lowtail kin

gfish aquaculture. At the beginning of the

k4P project in 2016, national yel lowtail kin gfish production was estimated at about 1200 tonnes. The FRDC anticipated that this would increase to about 5000 tonnes by 2022, which industry is on track to deliver. by t

he end of 2018, as the project was winding up, production projections had increased along with allocations of potential farm sites. The independent benefit cost analysis for the project suggests that over a 15-year timeframe a $17.20 benefit will be realised for every dollar invested in this program based on projections of 48,000 tonnes of yel

lowtail kin

gfish a year by 2030.

Additionally, towards the end of the RD&E Plan 2015-20 there was a new focus on farming species of oysters more suited to tropical climates. The research has led to developments in the north and west of Australia emerge, with significant investment and lease (water) space allocated. It is likely the investment undertaken will take several more years to complete and for the value and potential of the new oysters to be measured.

It is important to note that aquaculture while having expanding and increasing production still faced serious issues from disease. During the period two significant disease outbreaks occurred — Whi

te Spot

Virus in prawns and Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome. bot

h of these required significant effort from

all stakeholders (management agencies, researchers and industry) and this effort is now paying off with both prawns and oysters back on the road to recovery and expansion.

Examples of project activity during the year Australian aquaculture is coming of age with increasing scale and diversity Multiple project codes

For further information: Wayne Hutchinson, wayne.hutchinson@frdc.com.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Aquaculture production worldwide has been growing at a rate of almost 8 per cent a year for the past decade — gr owth that is expected to continue at a similar rate for many years to come, to support the

world’s increasing food protein needs.

41 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

In Australia, growth has been less rapid, averaging about 4.3 per cent a year for the decade to 2017- 18 , but is still rising with increasing demand for seafood and the influence of food media, such as M asterChef.

Popular programs like this have increased consumer awareness of seafood provenance, sustainability, quality and traceability — al

l strengths of aquaculture.

While the sector accounted for 36 per cent of Australia’s total seafood production in 2017-18, this represented 44 per cent of the value: 97,406 tonnes worth $1.41 billion from the total seafood production of 271,133 tonnes worth $3.2 billion.

It is clear that aquaculture will continue to be the driving force for growth in Australian seafood and has been a significant focus for the FRDC, forming a large part of its submission to the $100 billion Australian agriculture inquiry. In developing its submission, the FRDC also developed a data analysis tool to predict future GVP volume.

While this overview of activity builds on the two previous aquaculture forecasts the FRDC has written, it only focuses on the major sectors. Over the next 10 years, development is also likely to occur for new and emerging species including seaweed, Cobia, Queensland Grouper and tropical oysters.

Atlantic Salmon Tasmania’s Atlantic Salmon industry is Australia’s most valuable seafood sector — wi ld or farmed — wi th 58,000 tonnes produced in 2018-19, worth $833 million.

Having doubled production during the past decade, the industry has exceeded its own expectations. Last year it revised its 2030 target from $1 billion in value to $2 billion.

Extensive marketing and product development have seen Atlantic Salmon become Australia’s most popular seafood. Stringent biosecurity measures protecting Tasmania’s salmon industry from external and internal disease threats have enabled them to reliably supply a high-quality product to domestic and international markets.

The Tasmanian Government continues to provide support for the industry, which is the largest agri-food contributor to the state’s economy. In 2017 the government released the S

ustainable Industry

Growth Plan for the Salmon Industry a

s part of major management reforms, streamlining processes

and introducing additional steps to provide greater public and industry certainty.

This includes detailed mapping of areas suitable for expansion, as well as ‘no go’ zones, and also a commitment to deeper ocean sites, potentially outside state waters. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization believes that deep-ocean aquaculture, producing both plant and animal food products, will be a major global food resource for the future.

The Australian Government, which manages Commonwealth waters outside three nautical miles, outlined the need for legislative reform in its N

ational Aquaculture Strategy. This

is likely to include an amendment to the C

ommonwealth

Fisheries Management Act 1991 t

o allow individual

jurisdictions to extend their existing aquaculture regulations to adjoining Commonwealth waters.

In preparation for aquaculture in offshore waters, the Atlantic Salmon industry (both here and overseas) is working to develop pens specially designed for high-energy wind and wave conditions of exposed ocean sites.

42 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Prawns Prawn farming has had a turbulent couple of years with the outbreak of White Spot Disease in 2016. The outbreak severely impacted the farms located in southern Queensland and resulted in a drop in production for the sector from 2016 to 2018, to about 4500 tonnes a year.

Over the next two to three years this volume is expected to double to about 10,000 tonnes. Further, larger increases are forecast out to 2025.

The disease outbreak has seen biosecurity and on-farm management become a major focus of efforts for prawn farmers (as it has for other aquaculture producers). However, it has not curbed the sector’s enthusiasm, with many businesses looking to scale up and increase production.

barramundi The Australian bar ramundi Farmers Association (AbFA ) says production by its members is also continuing to increase and reached 9000 tonnes in 2018-19.

National statistics to date have not reflected the full extent of production, as data from two of Australia’s largest operators — Hu

mpty Doo bar

ramundi in the Northern Territory and MainStream Aquaculture in

Victoria — ha

s been excluded under commercial-in-confidence provisions. but b

oth companies have

agreed to allow their production statistics to be included.

The AbFA i

s anticipating a major increase in production in the next five years, with a production target of 25,000 tonnes by 2025. Investment in the infrastructure to achieve this is already underway.

yellowtail Kingfish yellowtail kin gfish ( yTk) f arming has been evolving slowly in Australia for two decades. In 2016 yTk pr

oduction was estimated at 1200 tonnes, and came almost solely from South Australia.

However, the recently completed $7.3 million kin

gfish for Profit ( k4P

) research collaboration, funded

by DAWE and the FRDC, has helped to give production new impetus.

Fish producers, researchers and feed manufacturers came together in the three-year project, which has produced new findings on feed formulations, fish growth and water temperature that will help bring fish to market more efficiently and sustainably.

While predictions for the species’ potential production have been large — up

wards of 60,000 tonnes

across Australia — pr

oduction is more realistically expected to remain at much lower levels in the near future, with producers targeting the premium food service sector markets in Australia and overseas.

The limited number of producers means that yTk i

s also not included in national fisheries statistics,

although estimates for 2019 are for more than 4000 tonnes.

Other species Despite Australia’s aquaculture revolving around a small number of key species, other species such as Murray Cod, Silver Perch, Cobia, Queensland Groper are now also stepping up and continue to grow.

43 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

TAble 15: AUS TRALIAN A QUACULTURE P RODUCTION A ND P ROjEC TIONS

Species 2006-07 2017-18 Comments 2021-22

projections

ton

nes tonnes tonnes

FISh

Sa

lmonids (Atlantic Salmon, trout) 25,253 61,413 Offshore farming is being established and will increase production, a counter

to warming inshore waters, which reduce pro duction.

75,000- 80,000

Southern bl

uefin

Tuna

7,486 8,000 No major increase likely; a slight increase in quota might allow more fish to be ranched.

9,000

barr

amundi 2,

590 5,668* New farms and expansions on existing farms to increase production. * Does not include production from Northern T

erritory or Victoria.

12,000

yel

lowtail king

fish

(yTk)

n/a

n/a Existing and new aquaculture leases in Western Australia expected to increase yTk p

roduction in coming years. South Australia also ramping up production.

5,000

Murray Cod n/a 266* Production based in New South Wales

(NSW) and Victoria. * Figure based on NSW production.

3,000

Ot

her species 772 3

,183 Totals include Silver Perch, Cobia, Queensland Grouper.

2,000

CRUSTACEANS

Prawns 3,284 4,205 Expansions of prawn farms in the north

are expected to increase production.

10,000

Other species 299 166 Stable but low production of yabbies,

marron and Redclaw. New Moreton bay

bug pr

oduction underway.

250

MOLLUSCS

Edible oysters 14,299 8,824 Pacific Oyster production recovering

from Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome in Tasmania. R&D underway for tropical bla

cklip Oysters.

15,000

bl

ue Mussels 3,145 3,781 5,000

Abalone 468 1,027 1,800

Pearl oyster n/a n/a No figures provided because of limited

commercial operators.

n/a

MISCELLANEOUS

Other n/a 873 5,

000

Seaweed n/a n/a Emerging aquaculture production. 5,000

TOTAL 57,596 97,406 148

,050- 153,050

Source: FRDC and AbAR ES. n/a: Not available.

44 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FRDC NATIoNAl pR IoRI TIEs

Na

tional RD&E infrastructure The FRDC has four subprograms (Aquatic Animal Health and bio security, Recfishing Research, Human Dimension Research and the Indigenous Reference Group) and one coordination program (Social Science and Economics Research Coordination).

The FRDC will continue to use the system of nation-wide groups and lead in these areas of RD&E. It will also lead in the areas of people development and service delivery.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $3.44 million or around 11.9 per cent of the total R&D investment for this priority.

Strategies • Continue to invest in leadership capacity building.

• Co-invest with partners in other areas of capacity building.

• Invest with universities in students to study marine science-specific topics relevant to the FRDC’s stakeholders.

• Collect and analyse data to better understand the training needs of fishing and aquaculture.

• Partner in the development of research centres of excellence.

45 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

Examples of project activity during the year Protecting the consumer Project 2014-035

For further information: Shauna Murray, Shauna.Murray@uts.edu.au and Erik Poole, erikp@sydneyfishmarket.com.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Capacity has been built to protect New South Wales consumers of Spanish Mackerel from the southward migration of ciguatera fish poisoning. Ciguatoxins (CT xs) , which are generated by certain

species of marine micro-algae, are responsible for what is the most frequently reported fish-borne illness across the world’s tropical regions — ci

guatera fish poisoning (CFP).

but i

n Australia, an increasing number of people in subtropical regions have also started to be confirmed as suffering from CFP. Twenty years ago, CFP was unheard of in New South Wales, but the past two d

ecades have seen at least 30 confirmed reports, with many more cases likely to be unreported. CFP symptoms include a combination of gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms, typically a reversal of hot and cold sensation, which can last from days to several months.

CTxs a

re produced by single-celled G

ambierdiscus mi

cro-algae, a warm water-loving species, and work

their way up the food chain to accumulate in predatory, apex reef fish species. Confirmed cases of CFP in northern New South Wales relate mainly to the consumption of Spanish Mackerel, with some reports related to Redthroat Emperor and Purple Rockcod in 2015.

The southern movement of CFP cases may appear slight, but it marks deeper underlying ecological shifts that are not well understood. Shauna Murray is leading two new research projects that she hopes will help identify what is causing those shifts and what can be done to update fisheries management practices to protect seafood consumers.

An earlier project funded by the FRDC and the Sydney Fish Market helped establish a new marine biotoxin facility at the Sydney Institute of Marine Science (SIMS), along with sophisticated ciguatoxin testing capabilities.

The SIMS facility is crucial to the new research projects that aim to identify and map the biological and ecological factors causing CTxs in S

panish Mackerel in New South

Wales.

The key outcome of the project was to determine whether guidelines used needed to be updated to exclude potentially CTx-a

ffected fish from sale. Current guidelines restrict catches from known CTx-a

ffected sites and also prohibit the catch of certain fish species over 10 kilograms, to reduce the likelihood that fishers or consumers will eat fish that have a bioaccumulation of the toxins.

NSW Government Food Authority CFP risk management and current catch guidelines are available from http://www.foodauthority.nsw.gov.au/rp/fish-ciguatera-poisoning

46 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FRDC NATIoNAl pR IoRI TIEs

Co

llaborate The FRDC will provide the means (incentives) so that sectors or jurisdictions may leverage funding where there is alignment between their RD&E priorities and those at the national level. This will encourage sectors to collaborate. Specific areas of RD&E such as people development, service functions and social sciences will be actively supported by the FRDC.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $3.44 million or around 11.9 per cent of the total R&D investment for this program.

The following table provides a guide on the progress the FRDC has made in meeting its output target.

Activity Input Comment

Incentive Fund Invest $360,000 into collaborative projects.

The collaboration fund target was exceeded due to addition of external funds, such as the National Carp Control Plan which was deemed a collaborative program of activity.

Examples of project activity during the year Community Trust in Rural Industries Project 2019-042

For further information: Virginia Johnstone, virginia.johnstone@seftons.com.au or Emily Ogier, emily.ogier@utas.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

The FRDC is part of the Community Trust in Rural Industries collaborative project, run by AgriFutures Australia, and jointly funded by the rural RDCs.

47 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The project aims to explore the issues around community trust in rural industries. It will examine the risks, threats, and/or opportunities for primary production based on the community’s trust. The project will provide FRDC stakeholders with insights into similarities/differences between seafood and other rural industries, and where there may be opportunities to collaborate with other industries for improving trust and acceptance.

yea

r 1 research results are available from the project webpage — ht

tp://frdc.com.au/project/2019-042.

key m

essages from the first phase of the research include:

• Trust is important and offers producers the licence for innovation (to improve) and ultimately freedom to operate — bu

t only when trust exists.

• The ‘community’ does not see Australian rural industries the way those who work in them do.

• Trust in rural industries is generally strong but levels of trust vary across the community and by industry.

- Le

vels of trust in Australian fisheries and aquaculture industries are moderate compared with other rural industries.

- Fo

rty-three per cent trust Australian fisheries and aquaculture industries; 39 per cent don’t know and 18 per cent don’t trust.

• The research identified the three strongest drivers of the community’s trust in rural industries as:

- Env

ironmental responsibility — ha

ving confidence that industries are using the land and sea in

a sustainable, responsible way with minimal impact or damage, and not sacrificing the environment for profit.

- Re

sponsiveness — in

dustry demonstrating that they are listening to, respecting and responding to community concerns and perspectives.

- Pr

oducts of rural industries — th

e community highly values the sector’s outputs; from the

nutrition they provide in the Australian diet to raw materials for Australian manufactured goods.

Priorities for industry to improve trust include:

• The community wants to know it is being heard and understood by rural industries and seeks ongoing reassurance that their concerns are being addressed. This requires industry to be responsive to community attitudes and to communicate any changes. The community does not expect industry to be faultless, but it does expect industry to proactively engage on areas of community concern, and in turn respond to breaking issues and crises quickly.

• There is opportunity for industries to respond productively and consistently. The research showed that one industry acting irresponsibly negatively affects the community’s opinion of all rural industries. Having available guidance on best-practice approaches will empower industries to build trust in their own industries and in the sector.

• The community’s main information sources are the internet, television news, television current affairs and social media. These channels can be used by industry to communicate action and engage directly with the community, particularly on those issues where large portions of the community were uncertain — su

ch as whether rural industries listen to and respect community concerns, responsible water use and rural industries’ waste products/run-off causing environmental damage to coastal areas.

An extra survey during COVID-19 found that levels of trust in Australian rural industries increased during this period, highlighting that community trust can be changed or that COVID-19 has demonstrated how important farmers and fishers are to the community — na

mely people need food.

Future research will focus on which industry strategies can improve trust in the longer term, with key topic areas including water use, animal welfare and food safety.

48 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

building resilience in fisheries Project 2013-210

For further information: Renae Tobin, renae.tobin@jcu.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Change is inevitable, whether it be management, environmental or economic. Improving how industries cope with and adapt to change becomes increasingly important as rates and cumulative effects of change escalate.

A collaborative team from jam

es Cook University, CSIRO, Fisheries Queensland (within the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries), and the Queensland Seafood Industry Association worked together to explore how different types of fishing businesses adapted to different types of change within Queensland’s east coast fisheries.

The team documented the diversity of Queensland’s east coast commercial fishing businesses and developed innovative types of business models. It then explored whether there were key characteristics within these business types that improved access to adaptation options, and whether there were common challenges or constraints to adaptation across the industry and between business types.

The findings highlighted the complexity of the industry and the individual nature of responses to change, with no clear ‘recipe for success’ or predictor of failure. Communication and shared learning were critical, and managers as well as representative bodies and industry leaders need to develop communication mechanisms that are currently lacking. Within the industry, fishers feel a lack of security, which seems to stem from uncertainty in future management plans. This leads to an incapacity to plan, experiment and adapt successfully to change in the long term.

Sustainable Fishing Families project Project 2016-400

For further information: Tanya King, tanya.king@deakin.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

In recent years, concern for the health, safety and wellbeing of the professional wild-catch fishing industry has been growing in Australia. In response, this project conducted the first national survey of the health, safety and wellbeing of the Australian professional fishing industry. The results of the survey undertaken in 2017 provide a baseline for the state of wild-catch industry members across a range of indicators, including reported physical and mental health; factors affecting health and safety; factors affecting levels of stress; health and safety behaviours; and access to health services and information.

The project also conducted and evaluated an intensive pilot program specifically tailored for fishing families. The program was modelled on an existing and highly successful program, Sustainable Farm Families™, developed and delivered by the National Centre for Farmer Health at the Western District Health Service, Victoria. The materials and presentations were reviewed and modified to reflect the specific strengths and challenges of the fishing industry.

This award-winning program is now available for use by fishing communities across the country. The Sustainable Fishing Families project was a collaboration of academic and practical expertise and included participants from Deakin University, the National Centre for Farmer Health, University of Tasmania and the University of Exeter, United kin

gdom.

49 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

FRDC NATIoNAl pR IoRI TIEs

partn

er

Jurisdictional and industry sector research priorities Under partnership agreements the RD&E priority-setting process will be led by the relevant sector or jurisdiction. As part of this process the FRDC has put in place a requirement that each group maintain a balanced portfolio (see the table that follows and pages i-iv). Project selection and approval while accepting recommendation from the groups remains the responsibility of the FRDC boa

rd.

In the tables that show the status of deliverables, the icons below mean that:

••• Partner is performing well. For example, RD&E Plan in place; investment targets being met; priorities are being funded; and projects are on time and delivering.

•• Partner partially meets expectations. For example, RD&E Plan in place; priorities or investment targets not being met; and projects are on time and delivering.

• Partner is not meeting expectations. For example, RD&E Plan not in place; or investment targets, priorities, or projects not delivering or being met; or budget under or over spent.

Industry Partnership Agreements Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $11.03 million or around 38.1 per cent of the total R&D investment for partnership agreements. This is 5 per cent above the AOP forecast budget.

The following tables provide a guide on the targets and progress the FRDC has made in achieving them during the year:

Target Progress

Partners have a RD&E plan. Ninety-five per cent of partners have an RD&E Plan.

Partners invest in a balanced portfolio across the FRDC purpose themes — env

ironment, industry,

communities, people and adoption.

Investment portfolios include investment across FRDC purposes.

50 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

IPA with Rating Output and key achievements

Australian Abalone Growers As

sociation (AAGA)

••• Completed a new strategic plan 2020-25 that includes RD&E priorities. Research portfolio includes investment across FRDC purpose themes industry and adoption. key R

esearch projects commenced to investigate

and reduce summer mortality in farmed abalone.

Aus

tralian

barr

amundi Farmers Association (AbFA

)

••• Finalising new strategic RD&E Plan 2020-24. key a ctivity includes completion of situational analysis for Australian farmed bar ramundi to guide future AbFA a

dvocacy activities and prioritisation of R&D. The CRC f

or Developing

Northern Australia funded aquaculture industry situational analysis identified that bar

ramundi farming will make a significant contribution to expansion of aquaculture production across northern Australia.

Abalone Council Australia (ACA) •• Held a workshop that focused on abalone assessment and management (what have we learned, what are the gaps and where can we do better) attended by industry representatives, researchers and managers (2018-193). The ACA have initiated a number of projects with a strong focus on improving industry data collection, data use and decision-making processes. These are key projects that will aid the management of the Australian abalone resource. In addition, the ACA hosted the 2019 Trans-Tasman Abalone and Paua Convention. The ACA remains engaged in the Fight Food Waste CRC and are exploring projects to optimise abalone use.Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries (ACPF) •••Good balance of investment across the portfolio. Several key projects made significant progress in the 2019-20 year (2018-172: Methods to profile and connect the provenance of wild-caught prawn fisheries and their values to the community and 2016-261: Investigating the use of trace element profiles to substantiate provenance for the Australian prawn industry). both projects will heavily inform future investment and work for the IPA.Australian Prawn Farmers Association (APFA) ••Completed a new strategic plan 2020-25 that includes RD&E priorities. Good balance of investment across the portfolio. Completed several key projects which include impacts of White Spot Disease reoccurrence minimised by fortunate timing and increased biosecurity measures implemented on prawn farms. Participated and helped complete CRC for Developing Northern Australia funded aquaculture industry situational analysis which identified that prawn farming will make a significant contribution to the expansion of aquaculture production across northern Australia.Australian Southern bluefin Tuna Industry Association (ASbTIA)••The ASbTIA IPA continued to focus investment into improving efficiencies in production of Southern bluefin Tuna (SbT). In 2019-20 new projects focused on maximising product quality pre-harvest (2019-166: The effects of vitamins and feeding frequency on the extension of the colour shelf life and maintenance of flesh quality of fresh and frozen S bT fle sh) and post-harvest (2019-158: Investigate suitability of alternative bleeding practices of SbT post-harvest and their impact on product quality) to improve optimisation of the SbT resource.While few projects were completed during the period, project 2016-044 (Next-generation close-kin mark recapture: Using SNPs [single nucleotide polymorphisms] to identify half-sibling pairs in SbT and estimate abundance, mortality and selectivity) yielded results that fed directly into the international Commission for the Conservation of Southern bluefin Tuna quota-setting process.Oysters Australia (OA) •••Have commenced development of a new RD&E Plan (2020-24). New Oysters Australia Chair and Executive Officer are working to progress a new strategic R&D plan to guide future investment to address industry priorities.

51 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

IPA with Rating Output and key achievements

Pearl Consortium (Pearls) ••• Good balance of investment across the portfolio. Completed several key projects which are informing future strategies and R&D investments continues to deliver important commercial outcomes.Southern Ocean (SO) •••Good balance of investment across the portfolio. key project was the collection of tissue samples from Antarctic Toothfish across the Southern Ocean and the identification and evaluation of markers for use in a close-kin biomass estimate to differentiate between Antarctic Toothfish stocks and any subsequent management implication.Southern Rock Lobster Limited (SRL) •••Good balance of investment across the portfolio. Completed several key projects which are informing future strategies mainly around supply chains and traceability (2018-176: Refine the Southern Rock Lobster cold chain and 2016-228: SRL IPA: Traceability systems for wild-caught lobster, via Sense-T and pathways to market).Tasmanian Salmonid Growers Association (TSGA) ••The TSGA continue to invest in good levels of RD&E to underpin development of the industry, namely around aquatic animal health and development of vaccines (2019-164: TSGA-IPA: A five-year aquatic animal health R&D program for the Tasmanian salmonid aquaculture industry). There are some areas of RD&E which could be improved, specifically around areas of reputation and social acceptability.Western Rocklobster Council (WRLC) •The WRLC IPA continues to be under-expended against the income. There has been an improvement in priorities and projects coming forward and expenditure next financial year is significantly up. New projects have included a collaborative project with Southern Rocklobster Limited and several projects seeking to understand biological elements related to recruitment and are likely to inform future management under changing environmental conditions, (2019-159: Developing an independent shallow-water survey for the Western Rock Lobster Fishery: tracking pre-recruitment abundance and habitat change, and 2019-099: Climate driven shifts in benthic habitat composition as a potential demographic bottleneck for Western Rocklobster: understanding the role of recruitment habitats to better predict the under-size lobster population for fishery sustainability).RAC partnership agreementsPrincipal inputsDuring 2019-20, there was $6.17 million or around 21.3 per cent of the total R&D investment for jurisdictional RACs. This is 26 per cent below the AOP forecast budget. The drop is primarily the result of COVID-19 and its impact on public call funding rounds. RACs exist with the Commonwealth (COM), New South Wales (NSW), the Northern Territory (NT), Queensland (QLD), South Australia (SA), Victoria (VIC), Tasmania (TAS) and Western Australia (WA). The following tables provide a guide on the targets and progress FRDC has made in achieving them during the year.Target ProgressPartners have a RD&E Plan. Ninety-five per cent of partners have an RD&E Plan. Partners invest in a balanced portfolio across the FRDC purpose themes — environment, industry, communities, people and adoption. Investment portfolios include investment across FRDC purposes.

52 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

RAC Status Comment

RAC-COM ••• Good balance of investment across the portfolio. Number of key focus areas that include SbT in r elation to the assessment and management. Climate was another focus area with two projects (2016-059: Adaptation of Commonwealth fisheries management to climate change; and 2016-139: Decadal scale projection of changes in Australian fisheries stocks under climate change) both looking at management and adaption strategies.

RAC-NSW ••• Research to support market opportunities for key New South Wales wild-caught species (2017-018: Improving survival and quality of crabs and lobsters in transportation from first point of sale to market; 2016-173: Tra

de Mission: Creating a niche market for the supply of NSW wild-caught mixed finfish to China through the GFRESH b t

o b E

-commerce platform).

RAC-NT • Development of FishPath tool to support the management of small, inshore fisheries (2015-215: Low cost management regimes for sustainable, small low-value fisheries based on coastal inshore species).

RAC-QLD •• An understanding of how environmental flows link to the management of key commercial species (2015-012: Influence of freshwater flows on growth and abundance of bar

ramundi and mud crab in the Northern Territory).

RAC-SA ••• New investments addressed a range of priority areas including fishery-ecosystem interactions (2019-063: Assessment of the sustainability of common dolphin interactions with the South Australian Sardine Fishery; 2020-002: Quantifying the exposure, protection and recovery of seafloor habitats in Spencer Gulf to prawn trawling) and declining snapper abundances (2019-044: Quantifying post-release survival and movement of Snapper: Informing strategies to engage the fishing community in pra

ctices to enhance the sustainability of an important multi-sector fishery; 2019-04

6: Cost-effective, non-destructive solutions to developing a pre-recruit index for Snapper). In addition, South Australia Research Advisory Committee co-funded cultivation trials of the red seaweed (2019-144) as an emerging industry.

RAC-TAS ••• A key focus area this year was to address destructive urchin grazing. Two p rojects (2016-208: Waste to profit in urchin fisheries: Developing business opportunities to ensure fishery sustainability and safeguard reef dependent fisheries from destructive urchin grazing; and 2019-128: Commercial upscaling of sea urchin processing waste as an agricultural fertiliser and soil ameliorant) are looking at utilisation, with one identifying a compound in urchins which can help with frost tolerance in some ho

rticulture species. Another key activity has been the partnership with the Indigenous Reference Group to investigate opportunities and impediments for Indigenous businesses to harvest and sell or market seafood.

RAC-VIC •• Evaluate the economic and social contributions of commercial wild-catch fisheries and aquaculture to Victorian community wellbeing complete (2017-092: Valuing Victoria’s wild-catch fisheries and aquaculture industries).

RAC-WA ••• Research to support the recovery of fisheries following the 2011 marine heatwave (2015-026: Understanding recruitment variation (including the collapse) of Saucer Scallop stocks in Western Australia and assessing the feasibility of assisted recovery measures for improved management in a changing environment; and 2011-762: Recovering a collapsed abalone stock through translocation).

53 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

oUTpUTs — ANAlYsIs bY FRDC pRogRAm

prog

ram 1: Environment Australia has a broad range of freshwater and marine habitats that support a diverse range of aquatic species. Australia’s maritime zone is one of the largest in the world covering about 13.6 million square kilometres which is about twice the area of Australia’s land mass. This zone contains about 4500 known species of finfish (and perhaps tens of thousands of invertebrate species) — mo

st in relatively small

numbers.

Federal, state and territory government agencies have legislative responsibility under fisheries legislation and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPbC Ac

t) for managing the

fisheries and aquaculture activities within their jurisdictions.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $8.35 million or around 28.9 per cent of the total R&D investment for this program.

Reporting in relation to the EP bC Ac t Section 516A requires annual reports for Commonwealth entities to report against the criteria set out in this section of the Act. The section requires the FRDC to outline how it impacts on the environment through its activities. FRDC’s annual report covers its two primary functions — it

s internal operations

and footprint and the external projects it funds.

54 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Examples of project activity during the year Deep dive to new ocean frontiers Project 2015-025

For further information: Daniel Lerodiaconou, daniel.ierodiaconou@deakin.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Victoria’s new data-rich marine ecosystem maps and models have revealed important patterns in the dynamics of Southern Rock Lobster and blac klip Abalone fisheries, which will improve management of

these high-value species

The amount of sunlight a landscape receives, the shape of the hills and valleys — eve

n the flow of wind

— al

l have clear implications for the vegetation that grows and the animals it supports. It is a similar story for marine environments, although there are different factors at play.

To better understand what those factors are, the interplay between them and the implications for fish populations, researchers have developed complex models that produce detailed maps of the ocean floor overlaid with myriad physical, biological and oceanographic information.

This process has been completed recently for Victorian waters as part of an FRDC-funded project focusing specifically on the dynamics of bla

cklip Abalone (Haliotis rubra rubra) and Southern Rock

Lobster (Jasus edwardsii) fisheries.

The project mapped 2512 kilometres of Victorian coast and inshore waters — ab

out 12,000 square

kilometres of water out to three nautical miles — to p

roduce highly detailed, localised and dynamic

marine maps. This kind of approach requires expertise from a broad spectrum of disciplines to integrate the many different kinds of data used.

Several different datasets were combined to map the sea floor. The Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning provided bathymetry data (the ocean equivalent of topography) from its Future Coast Program, which was collected to model storm surges. This data, generated by lasers (LiDAR) operated from an aeroplane, provided the first comprehensive state-wide pictures of seabed structure.

However, as lasers are not effective where the water depth is 25 metres or more, Deakin University added its own sea floor data, which it has been collecting since 2014, using its in-house multi-beam sonar. This has filled substantial sea floor knowledge gaps, as sonar systems can provide seabed data to characterise deeper reefs and benthic habitats.

The mapping is generally at a scale of between one and 2.5 metres for laser-generated data and less than one metre for sonar data. These sea floor structural maps have been especially useful to the abalone and rock lobster industries, as both target species rely on sea floor structures for habitat.

The sea floor maps were an important requirement for modelling the hydrodynamic characteristics that influence abalone and rock lobster larval dispersal patterns.

Further integration of catch and fish stocks data dating back to the early 1990s provided by fishers and Victorian fisheries managers has also helped better understand patterns of larval survival.

55 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

Combining these elements with information on sea floor structure and oceanographic and sea surface temperature data from the Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS) has allowed the research team to model biomass changes through time.

The research has identified the need for sustained monitoring of oceano-graphic conditions, such as waves, which is now being addressed through the Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning and the IMOS.

Abalone genetics The team also collected the DNA of blac klip Abalone across 30 sites, along with data on site seabed structures and environmental conditions. The resulting analysis shows how abalone has responded to environmental changes such as converging ocean currents, sea temperature and wave energy, not just at broad regional scales (10s to 100s of kilometres) but also at local spatial scales (100s to 1000s of metres).

Industry engagement was also a critical part of the project’s success, including feedback on the abalone abundance models and patterns observed.

The research team collaborated with commercial fishers to sample 900 abalone for the genomic component of the study and characterised geomorphic traits of 30 reefs across the state’s three a

balone fishing zones.

For abalone and rock lobster, the project has successfully identified important reefs, dominant larval dispersal pathways and the role of selection on larval recruitment processes. For abalone, the project has additionally produced biomass distribution models.

broader applications Given the detail of the data, one of its many uses may well be to identify habitat important to abalone and rock lobster. The data will also provide a guide to the most productive areas of ocean habitat where investment in restorative technologies, such as reef reseeding or translocation of animals, might get the best return on investment.

The project outputs will have multiple uses for fishers, conservation and our understanding of our geological history. The sea floor maps are accessible to the public. Other outputs and the models are currently not publicly available, but work is underway to make everything accessible through the Australian Ocean Data Network.

56 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Marine plastics Project 2017-199

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Globally the issue of microplastic contamination in our marine environment has been of increasing concern and as such, it is an area of interest for Australian and New Zealand researchers. The majority of research focuses around determining the prevalence and type of plastics causing concern, with only a small amount of work investigating the impact to human health. In February 2019, Food Standards Australia, New Zealand published a statement around microplastics in food, which indicated that based on the research to date plastic contamination of the food chain is unlikely to result in immediate health risks to consumers. As such, they have listed this issue as a ‘watching brief’.

The FRDC have supported a pilot project 2017-199, led by the University of Adelaide and SafeFish, to determine how wid

espread the presence of microplastics in the gastrointestinal tract of commercial species of Australian fish and molluscs and compare this to international data.

In addition, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations have also been looking at the issues and have produced two publications:

• Microplastics in Fisheries and Aquaculture — Wh

at do we know? Should we be worried?

http://www.fao.org/3/ca3540en/ca3540en.pdf

• Microplastics in fisheries and aquaculture: Status of knowledge on their occurrence and implications for aquatic organisms and food safety. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7677e.pdf

Supported by society Project 2017-158

For further information: Karen Alexander, karen.alexander@utas.edu.au; Kirsten Abernethy, kirsten.abernethy@gmail.com and Emily Ogier, emily.ogier@utas.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

A deeper understanding of societal support can provide the fishing and aquaculture industry with a greater chance of achieving the outcomes they want.

If having the support of your community could be made to formula, what would the ingredients be? A pinch of visibility, a dash of positive media coverage and half a cup of social capital, perhaps?

Unsurprisingly, the answer is not that simple and while a formula would be nice, in reality the answer is rather more complicated. Instead of prescribing a formula, a recently completed FRDC-funded project, ‘Determinants of socially-supported wild-catch fisheries and aquaculture in Australia’, has sought to broaden the understanding of what securing societal support — or

as many in the fishing and

aquaculture industry would understand it, social licence to operate — re

ally entails.

57 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The project was undertaken by marine social scientists at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) at the University of Tasmania and Sea Change Consulting in Port Fairy, Victoria.

It was commissioned as part of the FRDC’s Human Dimensions Research Subprogram, which oversees the inclusion of social and economic dimensions for all FRDC research proposals, basically broadening the context in which problems are defined and solved.

The project will allow for gaps and issues to be more effectively identified, providing a clearer pathway for research investment when tackling what are often wickedly complex issues.

“Identifying the determinants is a pivotal moment for the subprogram,” Emily Ogier says. “It means we can be more systematic about what RD&E we invest in to address declining societal support at a time when fisheries and aquaculture are making greater efforts to be more sustainable.”

In order to identify common factors or determinants, the researchers conducted a comparison of case studies that demonstrated societal support, or the loss of it — tw

o of

which were representative of wild-catch fisheries and two which represented aquaculture.

Out of this process the researchers identified 16 influencing factors or determinants, which were then combined into the following groups:

• the behaviours of the people working in and representing the fishery or aquaculture farms,

• how industry builds trust with groups they need support from,

• the ability of industry to have influence over how they are perceived,

• the context or situation they are operating in.

The research revealed some of the complexity involved in achieving societal support and why it is difficult to take a prescriptive, one-size-fits-all approach. For example, researcher kir

sten Abernethy

says it is important to recognise that societal support is dynamic. “It is not something that you simply have or don’t have. Some groups of people will support a fishery or aquaculture business and others won’t, and their level of support can waver and change over time.”

The project also revealed that building societal support takes time, is difficult to build in times of crisis and can be lost quickly.

The context for every fishery and aquaculture farm also varies and often there may be parts of a situation that are beyond the control of an operator or business. This could include politics or past experiences with fishing and aquaculture.

The FRDC has created a dedicated buil

ding Community Trust webpage that provides access to tools

and resources to help Australian fisheries and aquaculture operators take action to improve levels of societal support. This includes resources developed by the FRDC and other stakeholders.

Visit https://www.frdc.com.au/Issues/buil

ding-Community-Trust

58 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Seabird interactions: Shy Albatross Project 2016-118

For further information: Rachael Alderman, rachael.alderman@dpipwe.tas.gov.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Seabirds are attracted to fishing vessels through the availability of fishery discards, increasing the risk of injury or mortality from interactions with fishing gear. This project used novel DNA dietary analysis methods, seasonal seabird foraging ranges and fishery catch data to establish a baseline of data from which to evaluate the impact and efficacy of future management/operational or other changes to fisheries with regard to seabird interactions.

Shy Albatross scats were collected from Albatross Island in bas

s Strait every three months from 2014

to 2018 and the food DNA identified in each. A total of 1655 Shy Albatross scats were collected during the project, for which DNA were extracted and sequenced. The results provide a range of end users with data and supporting information for a variety of management and conservation applications, including sustainable fisheries management, ecological risk assessments, and continued conservation and management of Shy Albatross populations.

59 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Delivering the National Carp Control pla n The FRDC established the National Carp Control Plan (NCCP) in December 2016, to assess the feasibility of using Cyprinid herpesvirus 3 (CyHV-3), as a tool to substantially reduce carp numbers.

Carp (Cyprinus carpio ) have been in Australia for over 100 years and are now established in all states and territories, except the Northern Territory. As an introduced pest species carp is causing major disruptions to Australia’s delicate native ecosystems.

Since carp numbers exploded in Australia in the 1970s, a variety of measures have been used to try and control them. However, all have been unsuccessful in reducing carp impacts on a large scale. bio

logical control (a virus) offers some key advantages over other control approaches as it can be species specific and highly effective when used correctly. It is also relatively cost effective.

The NCCP is addressing the questions: Is it feasible to release the carp herpes virus to control carp? If so what is the most effective way to release and manage the virus?

Mo

re than 15 research institutions worked to deliver the research to inform the Plan, which was presented to the Australian Government in jan

uary 2020.

The final decision on whether to release the carp virus to control carp will be made by government ministers from all federal jurisdictions. The FRDC’s role has been to present a science-based plan to Government for its consideration on the next steps.

Delivering the Plan The Plan brings together results from each of the 18 research projects and numerous planning investigations commissioned as part of the NCCP.

The Plan also includes the feasibility assessment based on three main criteria:

• Will the virus be an effective biocontrol agent?

• Will the virus infect other species?

• Can the risks associated with the release be managed?

The Plan also includes an implementation strategy, should the Government decide to release the virus. This is supported by a cost-benefit analysis and a number of case studies outlining how the release might be managed in specific regions.

60 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

With the delivery of the Plan to Government, the FRDC’s main role concluded. The FRDC is still involved in coordinating some additional research related to the NCCP.

The Australian Government will evaluate the Plan and seek the view of state governments to decide whether to proceed with the virus release. If the decision is made to proceed, a phase of legislative approval will follow before reaching the final implementation stage in which the virus would be released.

bringing together all NCCP research The Plan is the culmination of three years’ work, during which 18 research projects and numerous planning investigations considered all aspects of releasing a virus to control carp in Australian waterways.

The Plan is accompanied by a suite of technical papers summarising the research undertaken as well as the final research reports for each project.

Some key findings from the NCCP research include the following Carp numbers This work has provided the first estimate of carp biomass and density across the continent.

In May 2018 this was 205,744 tonnes, with a lower and upper limit of 117,532 and 356,482 tonnes, respectively. The range provided accounts for the statistical challenge of producing a single figure.

During a single wet year, such as May 2011, the carp biomass estimate was 368,357 tonnes, with a lower and upper limit of 184,234 and 705,630 tonnes, respectively.

The figures are a snapshot of a point in time. However, the work has highlighted how carp densities of more than 100 kilograms per hectare cause damage to the ecosystem. Densities of 200 to 400 ki

lograms per hectare were found through much of the middle and lower reaches of Australia’s major southern river systems.

This data pinpoints the areas where carp control is most urgent and where it will have the greatest impact.

the effect of the virus on carp The research assessed how effective the virus would be at reducing carp populations and how long this effect would last.

bas

ed on modelling undertaken by the CSIRO, effective deployment of the carp virus will reduce carp populations by 40 to 60 per cent for at least 10 years. The modelling shows that the virus will be able to reduce carp populations below the 150 kilogram per hectare damage threshold.

Native species The original 2017 CSIRO study on the interactions between the carp virus and Australian native species indicated that no native species appeared to show any sign of infectious disease.

The NCCP undertook a review of impacts on other or non-target species to ensure the Australian Government has the most thorough scientific evidence upon which to base its decision on whether to release the virus. The review highlighted that some additional work could be done to increase confidence that there would not be any impacts on other species.

61 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

Water quality Understanding water quality impacts of carp mortality is important to assess the risks of virus release and to inform carcass management and water treatment.

There are two potential impacts on water quality from carp mortality — re

duced oxygen levels and

algae outbreaks.

The carp decomposition process will cause algae and other organisms to thrive, which in turn will cause the oxygen level in the water to drop. This may impact on native species which are susceptible to reduced levels of oxygen. Cyanobacterial (blue green algae) blooms are also more likely when additional nutrients (e.g. from carp mortality) are added to water bodies.

Results have shown that there would be no large-scale impacts on water quality in natural waterbodies, especially where there is some flow. There are higher risks in still and shallow waterbodies. Carcass management would be required in waterbodies with poor water flow and high carp density to avoid water quality impacts in these sensitive locations.

The research also found that even with the highest likely levels of carp mortality, water treatment plants are already equipped to cope with the purification that would be required. Parameters have also been developed to identify appropriate treatments for each level of carp contamination to ensure safe drinking water for the community.

Environmental risk assessment The study evaluated the ecological risks associated with releasing the virus in a variety of Australian ecosystems, such as wetlands, river systems, lakes and impoundments. The work relied on the water quality research as described earlier.

The assessment highlighted a number or risks that could have a medium level of impact on natural systems. Many risks would be negligible or could be mitigated by management measures.

The work also highlighted the importance of timing the possible release to minimise the impact on fish-eating birds, which would be relying on carp as a food source, especially while raising their chicks.

The report discussed mitigation strategies to minimise these risks and the residual risk after the strategies are implemented. Mitigation is mostly centred on the timing of the release.

Clean-up and carcass management A detailed review of available studies on clean-up of fish kills revealed the importance of planning and preparation. This information, paired with the knowledge of the carp densities present in different areas, will assist in coordinating the carcass management efforts where required.

Community and stakeholders’ attitudes Social risk assessment and surveys found that communities are mostly accepting of carp control using the carp virus. However, people’s attitudes towards the virus release were found to depend on their familiarity with the NCCP, personal interactions with waterways, knowledge of carp impacts, as well as on their values and sense of community responsibility towards environmental stewardship.

A comprehensive survey of relevant stakeholders was also conducted to gather the views of a wide range of groups who may be impacted by the virus release. These included the tourism sector, commercial fishers, traditional owners, recreational fishers, the koi industry, and the native fish aquaculture sector.

Recommendations were included in this project on how to best minimise and manage impacts to these groups.

62 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Case studies The NCCP implementation strategy is high level, allowing for the virus release to be adapted to local conditions, should it go ahead.

However, a number of detailed case studies have been included in the NCCP to provide examples of how virus deployment and carcass management could occur in specific regions. The chosen case studies in the Lachlan, Mid Murray River and Lock 1 to Lock 3 in South Australia assessed every aspect of implementation including: implementation planning, communication and engagement, regional coordination, operations preparation, virus deployment, carcass management, surveillance, and monitoring and evaluation.

The case studies also provided real-world information to use in calculating the cost of virus release, should it be deemed feasible.

As the NCCP draws to a close, the www.carp.gov.au website will continue as a central repository of research completed as part of this work.

Communicating the work of the NCCP Throughout the life of the Plan, a comprehensive communication strategy has been implemented by the FRDC.

This consisted of regular updates on the progress of the NCCP in FISH magazine as well as regular media releases to inform the general public of research results as they became available. During the financial year 2019-20, four media releases were sent out Australia-wide.

An online platform was also established and advertised to over 5000 stakeholders, where interested parties could view the details of each research project as it was completed. The platform allowed stakeholders to provide feedback and their comments were included into the NCCP for Government’s consideration.

Stakeholder input was also sought in person through six-monthly meetings where researchers presented their results and were available to answer questions.

NCCP in COVID-19 times After the NCCP was presented to Government in jan uary 2020, work continued on additional research designed to augment and cross-check previous scientific work.

Thi

s is when the COVID-19 pandemic hit Australia.

COVID-19 has caused significant delays for final project completion. The FRDC and the Government have been in close communication to ensure both parties are aware of the rapidly changing situation.

While all possible planning and risk mitigation is in place to ensure that research can go forward and be completed in a timely manner, a level of risk remains, particularly capacity at Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness (formerly Australian Animal Health Laboratory) in the evolving COVID-19 situation.

There will be a check-in point in October 2020 to firm timelines for work going forward.

63 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

An impact assessment of FRDC investment in Shark Futures: A report card for Australia’s sharks and rays

Project: 2013-009 Title: Shark Futures: A report card for Australia’s sharks and rays Research organisation: jam

es Cook University

Principal investigator: Colin Simpfendorfer, jam

es Cook University

Period of funding: March 2013 to March 2019 FRDC program allocation: Environment 80% Adoption 20% Benefit : Funding for the project over the three years totalled $0.37 million (present value terms) and

produced estimated total expected benefits of $1.26 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.88 million, a benefit cost ratio of 3.4 to 1, an internal rate of return of 24.7% and a modified internal rate of return of 10.0%.

What the report is about This report presents the results of an impact assessment of the FRDC investment in a project to synthesise the available information on sharks and shark-like rays in Australian waters and to prepare a report card on their status. The project arose from the world-wide concern for the status of sharks and rays and to ensure continuing effective management of Australia’s sharks and ray species.

Australian resource management of sharks and rays in Australian waters is recognised as world-leading, but there are still a number of issues and information gaps that face Australian managed sharks and rays. Information is often fragmentary, difficult to access, and limited to a few species that are targeted by fisheries. Apart from the need for Australian government decision makers to have up-to-date and accurate information, the growing information needs of global initiatives such as Shark-Plan 2 and Environment Protection bio

diversity Conservation (EPbC)

listings required synthesised information on

the status of Australian managed sharks and rays. Hence, the synthesis of knowledge about Australian managed sharks and rays was critical to addressing the future challenges of both Australian and global management.

The funding of FRDC’s project 2013-009 (A report card for Australia’s sharks and rays) addressed the need to continue to manage sharks and rays in Australian waters both for their continuing sustainable use as well as for ecological considerations and the maintenance of biodiversity. A total of 320 species of sharks and rays inhabit Australian waters, some of these are endemic. Sharks are inherently vulnerable from overfishing as well from their life history characteristics as they are less productive than many other fish species. To continue to manage shark and ray species sustainably, fisheries managers require up-to-date information, including access to locally relevant information. In 2013 appropriate information was often not readily available and such information, if available, was difficult to interpret for management decision making.

beNeFIT C OST A NAlySIS

64 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FRDC’s project 2013-009 was developed from discussions with managers and decision makers in several Australian and state government departments. A project was developed to assist fisheries managers to manage species with the greatest need. Government processes required such information for domestic fisheries management and planning, biodiversity management including endangered species listings and marine park management, and as an input into a number of international treaty obligations and processes in which Australia was involved (e.g. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), International Plan of Action (IPOA Shark) ).

Results/key findings The major outputs from the project included a synthesis of available information on sharks and shark-like rays in Australian waters, a report card on their status, the development of a database, and a website. Sources of information included formally published literature, observer programs, shark control programs, fisheries data and expert knowledge.

The overall finding was that Australia is effectively managing its sharks and shark-like rays and the majority of the populations are considered sustainable. However, some species of concern were identified where improved management is required to ensure stocks are not overfished.

Prospective users of the improved synthesised information include Australian fisheries managers (e.g. by-catch management, identification of research priorities) and an Australian contribution to international treaty processes such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and Shark-Plan 2.

Ove

r time the investment in up-to-date information, the shark and shark-like ray database and website will assist the current and future effective and sustainable management of sharks and rays in Australian waters, as well as a contribution that will be manifest globally.

Outcomes • Recommendation 1 has been actioned and the project information is now on FRDC’s website — w ww.fish.gov.au.

• Recommendation 3 has been partly actioned; the Red List assessments of rays have been completed as part of the National Environmental Science Program (NESP) funded Shark Action Plan (Colin Simfendorfer, pers. comm., 2020). • Recommendation 4 has been partially actioned via the NESP Shark Action Plan

work and is expected to be finalised soon (Colin Simfendorfer, pers. comm., 2020). • Prospective users of the improved set of integrated information include Australian fisheries managers (e.g. for by-catch management, and for identification of research

priorities). • Prospective users include managers of Australian and state fisheries, as well as environmental non-government organisations.

• The project has resulted in improved priority setting for Australian and state fishery management in terms of shark and shark-like ray management. • The outputs of the project allowed Australia to continue to contribute positively to international treaty processes such as the Convention on International Trade in

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and the FAO IPOA Shark.

Impacts • Contribution to improved prioritisation of research leading to research resource allocation efficiency.

• Reduced chances of a shark and shark-like rays’ species becoming more vulnerable and even extinct in Australia’s waters. • Continued Australian support for the current social licence to fish and continued sustainable access to sharks and shark-like ray species for commercial fisheries, as

well as for recreational and Indigenous purposes. • Contribution/endorsement of Australia’s image world wide as being an effective fisheries manager.

65 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Public versus orivate impacts Most impacts identified in this evaluation are related to effective management of sharks and shark-like rays in Australian waters. bot

h private and public impacts have been delivered by investment in the project 2013-009. These impacts will include the continued catching of some species of sharks and rays in Australian fisheries as well as highlighting where some species of sharks and shark-like rays require more research or where changed management of species is required to ensure specific stocks are not overfished.

Impacts overseas Australia’s positive image and reputation for its management of fisheries has been maintained and potentially enhanced due to the investment in the project. In addition, the methods employed in assembling information may provide a model that could be used by other countries in assessing their management of such fish species.

TRIPLE bOTTOM L INE C ATEGORIES O F P RINCIPAL I MPACTS F ROM P ROjEC T 2 013-009

Economic • Continued access to catch some selected sharks and shark-like rays in Australian fisheries. • Contribution to improved prioritisation of research leading to research resource allocation efficiency.

Environmental • Continued effectiveness of biodiversity and environmental management of sharks and shark-like rays in Australian waters, with reduced likelihood of a shark and ray species decline.

Social • Contribution/endorsement of Australia’s image world-wide as being an effective fisheries manager. • Continued Australian support for the current social licence to fish and continued sustainable access to sharks and shark-like ray species for commercial fisheries, as

well as for recreational and indigenous purposes. • Contribution to increased capability and capacity with respect to assembling key fisheries information at a species level for fisheries management purposes.

Conclusions The overall finding of the project investment was that Australia is effectively managing its sharks and shark-like rays and the majority of the shark populations are considered sustainable. Some species of concern were identified where improved management was required to ensure stocks are not overfished.

The findings of the project will likely generate support for continued access to sharks in commercial fisheries as well as reduced chances of a shark and shark-like ray species becoming more vulnerable in Australia’s waters, at least in the medium term.

Funding for the project over the three years totalled $0.37 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $1.26 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.88 million, a benefit cost ratio of 3.4 to 1, an internal rate of return of 24.7 per cent and a modified internal rate of return of 10.0 per cent.

66 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

oUTpUTs — ANAlYsIs bY FRDC pRogRAm

pr

ogram 2: Industry Demand for high-quality seafood is predicted to outstrip supply in both domestic and export markets. Similarly, in the recreational and customary sectors the demand for high-quality fishing experiences will outstrip supply. There is a need to increase both the production and the value of the catch, and to take advantage of future opportunities. For the commercial sector, business profitability and international competitiveness are overriding concerns. This program aims to assist all sectors improve their overall performance. The following pages provide examples of the R&D currently underway. For a full listing of projects visit the FRDC website — ww

w.frdc.com.au

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $13.39 million or around 46.3 per cent of the total R&D investment for this program.

Examples of project activity during the year Safe work practices Project 2017-046

For further information: Kate Brooks, kate@kalanalysis.com.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

This project, undertaken by a team of researchers, workplace health and safety specialists, industry association and Australian Maritime Safety Authority representatives, responded to a call to research how barriers to the adoption of safe(r) workplace health and safety practices could be identified and addressed.

The objective of the project was to identify why fishers’ behaviours and attitudes were not changing positively, despite training, information and coronial pressure to adapt existing workplace health and safety approaches.

67 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The project had a three-stage approach including a literature review, safety climate survey and focus group discussions. Identifying a number of issues, the findings provide a clear pathway and opportunity to change how we approach safety and the development of workplace health and safety culture in the fishing industry, and to achieve significantly improved outcomes for fishers and their families.

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority has been working on generating changes to approaches and engagement regimes, fully detailed in the ‘Extension and adoption’ section of this report. These initiatives will help to establish more effective relationships between regulators and industry, with the result of assisting industry to develop a stronger safety culture.

Safety at sea Project 2018-106

For further information: Geoff Diver, geoffdiver@iinet.net.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

In recent years there have been a number of instances where vessels have been lost causing the deaths of a significant number of fishers. In some cases, the vessels were lost before the crew could activate the vessel’s Emergency Positioning Radio bea

con (EPIRb). E

PIRb f

orms the basis for the formal search

and rescue (SAR) agencies in Australia, and the absence of an EPIRb s

ignal can significantly diminish

the effectiveness of a search and rescue mission.

This project examined other electronic platforms typically found on fishing vessels and investigated if these could be incorporated into a process, policy or procedure which could increase the maritime safety of the Australian fishing fleet. In analysing these electronic platforms, it was concluded that EPIR b sh

ould remain the primary distress signalling platform for Australian fishing vessels. EPIR b s

ignals are

monitored globally by dedicated SAR authorities which have the expertise and resources to triage the initial distress signal, and coordinate a SAR mission. The report also discusses other safety issues such as the development of a safety management system, and other quantitative risk assessment processes, as well as making 14 recommendations to aid in increasing sea safety.

Spotlight on Australian Salmon Projects 2006-018, 2013-711.3, 2016-121, 2017-023, 2018-306; CRC 2008.794.10, 2008.794

For further information: Janet Howieson, j.howieson@curtin.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Can collaboration between fishers and the seafood supply chain help the under-rated wild-caught Australian Salmon find a place in a consumer market dominated by a red-fleshed import?

Australian Salmon’s image problem is twofold. One is its poor reputation as a fresh fish offering. The other is its unfavourable comparison with the market-leading Atlantic Salmon. For commercial fishers, both issues have contributed to falling demand and prices so low the fish is hardly worth catching.

Australian Salmon have a pinky-brown coloured flesh when raw, which turns pale — al

most white —

w

hen cooked. They are more like herring than salmonids and the Australian Herring ( Arripis georgianus) is a member of the same family.

68 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Fishers’ challenge During the past decade, the FRDC has invested in several research projects to identify ways to make better use of Australian Salmon. It is officially designated as ‘sustainable’ in the 2018 SAFS reports (www.fish.gov.au), and it could be harvested in significantly larger quantities than it currently is.

As a fisheries resource, it has the potential to return a much greater value to fishers, and to the community more broadly, than it currently does. With Australians importing almost 70 per cent of the seafood they eat, there is a growing economic and social imperative to eat local.

but a

mong fishers and fishmongers, Australian Salmon is often considered a bait species and not worth the care needed to prepare it for the dinner table. And this fish does need care; it is unforgiving of mistreatment.

A quick kill by brain spiking the fish, then bleeding and immediately chilling is considered best practice to maintain the quality of the flesh (see FRDC Aquatic Animal Welfare — Re

search). However, Australian

Salmon are often harvested in large numbers from shallow water by hauling nets onto beaches, which can make clean and speedy processing a challenge. It may be difficult in these conditions, but not impossible to maintain fish quality, as an FRDC-funded project has demonstrated. This project developed best practice processing techniques and quality standards for the fish in Western Australia, which has previously provided the majority of the national harvest, although volumes have fallen in recent years.

In other states, fishers might also purse seine fish onto vessels rather than beaches. Some make this choice to avoid sand contamination and improve processing; for others it is part of compliance with state regulations that prohibit beach landings, such as in Tasmania and Victoria.

Distribution of Australian Salmon There are two closely related species of Australian Salmon, each of which forms a single, independent biological stock that crosses several fisheries jurisdictions.

The Eastern Australian Salmon (Arripis trutta) is found in southern Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania. Large mature fish are most commonly found off the coast of New South Wales. Eggs and larvae disperse, and maturing fish return north to spawn, usually aged two to four years.

The Western Australian Salmon (Arripis truttaceus) is found in south-western Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria and Tasmania. It spawns off south-west Western Australia, with eggs and larvae dispersing eastward. Fish return west to spawn, usually aged three to five years.

The Western Australian Salmon species grows to 85 c

entimetres and 10 kilograms. The Eastern Australian Salmon grows slightly longer, to 87 centimetres, but is lighter, at less than eight kilograms.

69 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

An impact assessment of FRDC investment in Maximising net economic returns from a multi-species fishery

Project: 2015-202 Title: Maximising net economic returns from a multi-species fishery Research organisation: CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Flagship Principal investigator: Sean Pascoe Period of funding: jul

y 2015 to September 2017

FRDC program allocation: Industry 75%, Environment 25% Benefit : Funding for project 2015-202 totalled $0.67 million (present value terms). The FRDC investment costs were $0.40 million (present value terms). Though currently there is no evidence that the project outputs have been utilised, the findings may lead to future changes to Commonwealth fisheries management (and, potentially, the management of other fisheries) via increased attention to total economic outcomes including interests of consumers and non-market impacts. Such future changes, in turn, may result in productivity and/or profitability impacts for Australian fishers, reduced prices for consumers of Australian fish, and improved economic and environmental sustainability for some Australian fisheries.

What the report is about Setting management reference points and targets in multi-species fisheries is complex (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), 2013). While the pursuit of a fishing offtake target that maximises net economic returns (NER) or maximum economic yield (ME y) is c

onsidered logical, it was

recognised that such a pursuit may result in some less prominent commercial species being at higher risk than would be desirable. This was because the offtake of such species could result in their population levels falling to below their individual sustainable yields. This increased risk could be associated with higher industry costs in the long term in order to return some species to sustainable populations.

Also, another review of Commonwealth fisheries policy and management had already highlighted the importance of giving greater consideration to issues of bycatch and other environmental factors wh

en setting management targets (bor thwick, 2012). Other FRDC projects (e.g. 2011/200) had developed techniques to approximate economic-based target reference points in multi-species fisheries. However, such projects did not address potential constraints on targets to ensure that populations of individual species are not reduced to levels that may result in high risk of stock collapse, or the scenario of the potential future costs of allowing minor stocks to recover.

beNeFIT C OST A NAlySIS

70 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Further, the previous studies had not identified how to monitor the transition to NER, particularly for minor species where data were limited. The DAFF (2013) report had recognised that setting catch targets which are incompatible with the relative catch mixes was likely to result in substantial under-catch of some species and over-catching and discarding of other species. This issue was considered relevant to the Commonwealth South East Shark and Scalefish Fishery (SESSF). This is a multi-species and multi-gear fishery. The SESSF, and the trawl component in particular, was targeted as the main case study for the current project. This fishery was chosen as the SESSF was experiencing issues with balancing actual catch with catch targets.

Other background to the current project was that NER and MEy w

ere restricted to the net economic

gain by commercial fishers and did not include the interests of consumers. The current project extended its scope to include consumer interests in NER and MEy, n

ot just long-term commercial fisher profitability

that accounted for sustainability issues.

Results/key findings Currently there is no evidence that the project outputs have been utilised. However, the findings of the investment in project 2015-202 may lead to future changes to Commonwealth fisheries management (and, potentially, the management of other fisheries) via increased attention to total economic outcomes including interests of consumers and non-market impacts.

Outcomes • No evidence of changes to how the SESSF is managed were discovered during the period of assessment. However, it is possible that the project findings may be used to improve future SESSF management decisions to ensure sustainable management of the multi-species fishery.

Impacts • Though currently there is no evidence that the project outputs have been utilised, the findings may lead to future changes to Commonwealth fisheries management (and, potentially, the management of other fisheries) via increased attention to total economic outcomes including interests of consumers and non-market impacts. Such changes are likely to lead to improved economic and environmental sustainability of affected fisheries.

• Potential beneficiaries of the project will be both the commercial fishing industry and consumers; industry will potentially benefit from improved quota setting processes that better align with their catch and also result in reduced frequency of closures to allow recovery of threatened species; consumers potentially will benefit from reduced prices for the more abundant fish species.

Public versus private impacts both public and private potential impacts were identified for the project. Private impacts may be d

elivered as a result of increased productivity and/or profitability for Australian fishers achieved through improved quota setting and management of fisheries. Further, consumers of Australian fish may benefit from reduced market prices because of increased abundance of some fish species. Public impacts may potentially be delivered through improved environmental sustainability of Australian fisheries as a result of improved management.

71 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

TRIPLE bOTTOM L INE C ATEGORIES O F P RINCIPAL P OTENTIAL I MPACTS F ROM P ROjEC T 2 015-202

Economic • Maintained and/or increased productivity and/or profitability for commercial fisheries through improved quota setting and management of Commonwealth and, potentially, other Australian fisheries. Industry will potentially benefit from improved quota setting processes that better align with their desired catch and improved overall fisheries management resulting in reduced fishery closures to allow recovery of threatened species.

• Associated with increased productivity for fishers, consumers of fish may benefit from reduced market prices for more abundant fish species.

• Potential changes to Commonwealth fisheries management (and, potentially, the management of other fisheries) via increased attention to total economic outcomes including interests of consumers and non-market impacts. Such changes are likely to lead to improved economic and environmental sustainability for affected fisheries.

Environmental • As noted above, potential changes to fisheries management may lead to improved environmental sustainability for affected Australian fisheries.

Social • Nil

Conclusions Funding for project 2015-202 totalled $0.67 million (present value terms). The FRDC investment costs we

re $0.40 m illion (present value terms). Though currently there is no evidence that the project outputs have been utilised, the findings may lead to future changes to Commonwealth fisheries management (and, potentially, the management of other fisheries) via increased attention to total economic outcomes including interests of consumers and non-market impacts. Such future changes, in turn, may result in productivity and/or profitability impacts for Australian fishers, reduced prices for consumers of Australian fish, and improved economic and environmental sustainability for some Australian fisheries.

72 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

oUTpUTs — ANAlYsIs bY FRDC pRogRAms

pro

gram 3: Communities The fishing industry forms an integral part of many rural and regional communities. For the long-term sustainability of the fishing industry, it is important the interactions and co-dependence between the community and industry be understood. For a full listing of projects visit — ww

w.frdc.com.au

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $2.25 million or around 7.8 per cent of the total R&D investment for this program.

Examples of project activity during the year Common ground Project: 2017-069

For further information: Chris Calogeras, chris@c-aid.com.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

The capacity for Indigenous involvement in fisheries and aquaculture is growing through an approach that puts communication at its core.

Fisheries science and management have many concepts in common with Indigenous community practices, but the lack of a shared language has often made it difficult to bring the two together. Finding ways to do just this was the aim of an inaugural Indigenous fishery capacity-building workshop held in bri

sbane earlier this year.

Organised by the FRDC’s Indigenous Reference Group (IRG), the three-day event was designed to help Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) people participate in fisheries management discussions and strengthen their voice in the decision-making process.

Capacity building starts with clear communications, says chair of the IRG, Stan Lui, who is also an environmental program manager with the Torres Strait Regional Authority.

73 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The concepts around fisheries management among Indigenous and non-Indigenous people are similar, but are just couched in different terms.

When Indigenous communities talk about storylines, this equates to migratory patterns in the equivalent scientific terminology. Management-speak, such as biomass limits and total allowable catches have their equivalent in Indigenous practices, learned in childhood. For example, to never take as much as you can, but always leave some behind to regenerate so that there is more to harvest next time.

This project is about making those linkages and giving ATSI people a broader understanding. So, when they are in fisheries meetings or talks they understand exactly what the terminology means and the concepts behind it. We are building bridges between people and pulling down barriers.

Fifteen Aboriginal people from around Australia who are passionate about fisheries attended the workshop, gaining greater knowledge about management practices and the terminology used in policies and regulation, as well as sharing issues important to them.

Sessions included understanding the protocols and structures of management meetings, stock assessment methods and fishery management frameworks, among others.

The program provided a two-way learning process helping both sides to better communicate and understand terminology used by ATSI people, and how that aligns with management-speak.

As the language barriers are broken down, people will be able to step confidently into this space. With greater understanding, more opportunities will emerge for Indigenous input, or ‘buy-in’ into management tools such as harvest strategies as they are being developed.

Capacity building is a key priority for the FRDC’s IRG. The overall aim of the capacity-building program is to have more Indigenous men and women participating actively in fisheries and build in succession planning for Indigenous communities.

Resources developed for the workshop are expected to be available from the FRDC website (https:// www.frdc.com.au) once the project is completed.

74 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Fisher conversation helps shape industry pledge Project 2017-242

For further information: Seafood Industry Australia, info@seafoodindustryaustralia.com.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Many community and industry values align, but further action is needed to help secure the social licence of the Australian seafood sector.

Whether you call it trust, acceptance or social licence — li

stening to, acknowledging and responding to

community concerns is critical to the future of the Australian seafood industry. So much so that Seafood Industry Australia’s (SIA) members have made building the industry’s social licence their number one priority.

Assisted by the FRDC, SIA has assessed current and emerging community concerns using data from risk management agency Futureye, the FRDC and the Marine Stewardship Council. The primary concerns identified relate to sustainability, the environment, accountability, animal welfare and industry safety.

SIA also assessed the industry’s values and current practices. These were found to mostly align well with community values such as responsible fishing practices, environmental stewardship, connecting with communities and sharing information about fisheries, fishing practices and products.

From this process has grown ‘Our Pledge’, a statement, still in development, from industry that responds to community concerns and acknowledges the industry’s responsibility for the future.

Social licence is front and centre for our members and the wider industry, and SIA is taking a proactive approach to ensure our industry’s ongoing acceptance within the community by developing ‘Our Pledge’.

SIA has taken ‘Our Pledge’ to workshops around the country to discuss it with SIA members and as many other industry participants as possible before it is finalised and made public.

SIA has consulted with over 50 industry sectors at these meetings. There’s a broad range of views about the industry from highly favourable to suspicious. The goal of the

project is to demonstrate our authentic practices that help us look after the marine environment and contribute to the community.

For further information visit the SIA website — https://seafoodindustryaustralia.com.au/.

75 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

An impact assessment of FRDC investment in Sustainable Fishing Families: Developing industry human capital through health, wellbeing, safety and resilience

Project: 2016-400 Title: Sustainable Fishing Families: Developing industry human capital through health, wellbeing, safety and resilience Re

search organisation: Deakin University Principal investigator: Tanya kin

g

Period of funding: yea

r ending jun

e 2016 to jun

e 2018

FRDC program allocation: Communities 100% Benefit : The investment in this project will likely be translated into improvements in the long-term health, safety and wellbeing of Australian commercial fishers. Funding for the project over the two years totalled $0.23 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $1.18 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.95 million, a benefit cost ratio of 5.1 to 1, an internal rate of return of 60.9% and a modified internal rate of return of 12.3%.

What the report is about This report presents the results of an impact assessment of the FRDC investment in a project to improve the health and wellbeing of those engaged in the wild-catch fishing industry. The investment was precipitated by earlier pressures highlighting the need for health and safety improvements including the safety culture that currently existed.

Project 2016-400 addressed these issues via a national survey of the professional wild-catch fishing industry addressing a number of health and wellbeing indicators. The survey established a baseline set of health and wellbeing information. Then followed an intensive pilot program on health, safety and wellbeing that was aimed specifically at fishers and fishing families; the program was modelled on the previously successful Sustainable Farm Families Program.

The current project evolved from an earlier FRDC-funded project 2012/402 entitled ‘Staying healthy, industry organisations’ influence on behaviours and services used by fishers. This earlier project both reported an urgent need for nationwide baseline data on mental health concerns in the commercial fishing sector, on the detailed health requirements of fishers, and the differences between the health challenges faced by fishers compared to those faced by farmers. Health issues faced by Australian farmers had already been addressed by the Sustainable Farm Families TM Program. The program directed at farmers had already delivered significant health benefits to farmers and farming communities.

beNeFIT C OST A NAlySIS

76 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

The funding of the Sustainable Fishing Families project addressed the need to recognise the importance of the human capital role in the Australian commercial fishing industry. The project also addressed a need identified by the Victoria Research Advisory Committee, formerly the Victoria Fisheries Research Advisory bod

y, to identify and address potential losses incurred though fisher poor health and wellbeing (including mental health).

Results/key findings The major findings from the survey identified the health symptoms experienced by fishers, as well as their levels of psychological distress. The factors contributing to their symptoms included both physical and mental issues. The health and safety behaviours of fishers were identified as well as how they accessed health information and whether they sought assistance or treatment.

Despite difficulties in recruiting fishing families to the pilot program, seven fishing families participated in the pilot program. The program was successful based on the evaluation by those participating in workshops, as well as the evaluation of the program as a whole. Outcomes from the program included improvements in fitness and diet, as well as elicitation of follow-ups with general practitioners. The most common referral was for cardiovascular disease and associated risk factors.

The pilot program delivered implications for fishing families and communities, health professionals, industry associations, fishing managers and policy makers. A number of recommendations were made in the final report.

Over time the investment in the survey and pilot program is likely to lead to greater awareness of issues associated with the health, safety and wellbeing of fishers and fishing families leading to potential policies and programs to elicit behavioural changes and promote increased wellbeing within the wild-catch fishing industry.

ADRIAN k OLIC W ITH H IS F ATHER IVA N k OLIC (A R ETIRED F ISHER).

77 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Outcomes • The first national benchmarking survey delivered information that provided a baseline information on the status of health and wellbeing of Australian commercial fishers. The survey information also informed issues related to the pilot training program.

• The pilot Sustainable Fishing Families Program was successful based on the evaluation by those participating in workshops, as well as the evaluation of the program as a whole.

• Outcomes from the pilot training program included improvements in fitness and diet of fishers, as well as elicitation of follow-ups with general practitioners. The most common referral was for cardiovascular disease and associated risk factors. Also, having a better understanding of one’s own health and wellbeing can assist with making self-improvements and a stronger focus on areas that need attention.

• In addition, the project delivered greater awareness of commercial fisher health and wellbeing issues to fishing industry associations, fishing managers and policy ma

kers, community organisations and health professionals associated with commercial fishing. • A key outcome of the project has been the taking up of the issue of mental health in the fishing sector, through programs like Rural Alive and Well (Tasmanian

Seafood Industry Council), the Project Regard project (Women in Seafood Australasia) and the funding of a mental health workshop by FRDC in Adelaide (Tanya kin

g, pers. comm., 2020).

• Seafood Industry Australia (SIA) now list mental health as a central concern for the industry, and the federal government has provided $600,000 to implement a me

ntal health program targeted at the industry (Tanya kin g, pers. comm., 2020); • Further information on SIA and mental health is available at —

https://seafoodindustryaustralia.com.au/our-priorities/mental-health/

Impa

cts • Improved health (including mental health and safety) and wellbeing of the commercial fishers and their families involved in the pilot program.

• Improved health (including mental health and safety) and wellbeing of commercial fishers and their families delivered via potential future initiatives that build on the experiences, findings and recommendations of project 2016-400.

• Potential contribution to improved health, safety, and wellbeing of fishers through improved understanding and management of issues by industry associations, fishing managers, policy makers and health professionals.

• Co ntribution to increased research capability and capacity with respect to understanding factors affecting the health and wellbeing of commercial fishers and their families.

Public versus private impacts Most impacts identified in this evaluation are related to improved health (including mental health and safety) and wellbeing of commercial fishers and their families. These impacts will apply to some individual fishers participating in the pilot program, as well as a contribution to potentially improved future programs and other industry management and policy changes that may evolve from project 2016-400.

Some public impacts will be in the form of improved industry and policy management that provides attention to the health and wellbeing of commercial fishers.

78 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

TRIPLE bOTTOM L INE C ATEGORIES O F P RINCIPAL I MPACTS F ROM P ROjEC T 2 016-400

Economic • Contribution to potential improved health (including mental health), safety and wellbeing of the seven fishers who undertook the pilot training program. • Potential contribution to improved health (including mental health), safety and wellbeing of other fishers through improvements to future wellbeing fisher

programs that build on project 2016-400.

• Potential contribution to improved health, safety and wellbeing through improved understanding and improved management of the issues by industry associations, fishing managers, policy makers and health professionals.

Environmental • Nil

Social • Contribution to increased research capability and capacity with respect to understanding factors affecting the health (including safety) and wellbeing of commercial fishers and their families.

Conclusions The investment in this project will likely be translated into improvements in the long-term health, safety and wellbeing of Australian commercial fishers. Funding for the project over the two years totalled $0.23 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $1.18 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.95 million, a benefit cost ratio of 5.1 to 1, an internal rate of return of 60.9 per cent and a modified internal rate of return of 12.3 per cent.

As only one impact of those identified was not valued, the investment criteria as provided by the valued benefit are likely to cover adequately the impacts adequately. However, confidence in the assumptions made to value the impacts was considered to be only low to medium.

bROTHERS DAM ON A ND DIO N EDM UNDS, F ROM STR EAky b Ay MAR INE PRO

DUCTS, A

RE S

ECOND G

ENERATION AbAL

ONE D

IVERS.

79 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

oUTpUTs — ANAlYsIs bY FRDC pRogRAm

pr

ogram 4: peo

ple

People are the cornerstone of every industry. For the fishing industry, it is vital that it continues to attract and develop people who will take the industry to a sustainable and profitable future. The FRDC has taken a strong role in supporting people development, from employing and developing young researchers, through to facilitating access to leadership development for all levels of industry. Development of people is also a critical element and pathway to realising the benefits of the FRDC’s investment in R&D.

Projects funded under Program 4 primarily address the FRDC’s People program. However, this is also addressed, as a secondary but very important element, by projects within programs 1 and 2

. For a full

listing of projects visit FRDC’s website — ww

w.frdc.com.au

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $2.2 million or around 7.6 per cent of the total R&D investment for this program.

Examples of project activity during the year FISH 2.0 Project 2017-219

For further information: Monica Jain, mantaconsulting@gmail.com

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

The FRDC experiment in partnering with the United States based Fish 2.0 has delivered some good results. Eight of the 40 companies who took part in the FISH 2.0 Australian program made it to the global finale at Stanford in the United States.

80 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

The FRDC partnership culminated at the Global Innovators Forum held at Stanford, California on 4-5 N ovember 2019. The core elements of Fish 2.0 included a series of entrepreneur training workshops

that included exposure to investor feedback, an online (pitch readiness) assessment program, which again provided investors feedback and helped innovators improve their pitch, a series of investor education publications and an ongoing communications campaign to raise awareness and engagement in the sustainable seafood sector.

This year’s forum confirmed that the sustainable seafood sector is now on firm footing and is no longer on the fringe. The investor representation at the forum reflected this mainstreaming, including not just ‘seafood’ investors, but individuals and funds from the broader ‘ag-tech’ world and agricultural banking. For the first time, the leading United States seafood distributors were there too, and were amazed at the innovation happening in their own sector.

The winner judged ‘Fish 2.0 Top Innovator Award — Au

stralia’ by the forum was Australian Crayfish

Hatchery.

Aquaculture focus for science stars Project 2008-339

For further information: Elliot Scanes, elliot.scanes@sydney.edu.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Combining marine biology and food production, marine biologist Elliot Scanes won this year’s FRDC-sponsored Science and Innovation Awards for you ng People in Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.

The awards are presented at the Australian bur

eau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences

(AbA

RES) annual Outlook conference each March. The research awarded featured the microbiome of oysters, high-value nutritional supplements from algae, and systems to concentrate oxygen in aq

uaculture ponds.

Elliot plans to investigate the microbiome of oysters, an area of research he says has the potential to improve oyster resilience in the face of disease and climate challenges.

The first step will be to assess what organisms make up the microbiota inside oysters, a process made possible by new technology and techniques. He says all animals, be they oysters or people, have microorganisms — ba

cteria, viruses, fungi and other single-celled animals — th

at live within them.

“These microorganisms are really important to our health and wellbeing, but we’re really only just discovering how important they can be.” He will then look at how climate change, especially the warming of the oceans, might affect the microbiota inside oysters.

The second part of the research will be to identify whether existing techniques, such as selective breeding, can be used to improve that microbiota.

Elliot says the immune systems of oysters might not be as strong as that of mammals. This, combined with their exposure to changing environments, leaves them vulnerable to diseases and other pathogens. “Microorganisms associated with oysters are really important in helping them fight disease, and also to be healthy in general,” he says. “We know that diseases are one of the biggest issues with oyster growing. If we can wind that back a little bit, it’ll be really rewarding to know that we actually helped the industry that way.”

Elliot is based at the University of Sydney and will partner with the NSW Department of Primary Industries on the research.

81 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

An impact assessment of FRDC investment in Seafood Marketing Symposium 2018 Showcasing Our Seafood — A s

pectrum of opportunities

Project: 2017-196 Title: Seafood Marketing Symposium 2018 Showcasing Our Seafood — A sp ectrum of opportunities

Research organisation: Queensland Seafood Marketers Association Principal investigator: Marshall bet

zel

Period of funding: jun

e 2018 to October 2018

FRDC program allocation: People 50% Industry 50% Benefit : Funding for the project over the two years totalled a modest $0.06 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $0.20 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.14 million, a benefit cost ratio of 3.3 to 1, an internal rate of return of 26.7% and a modified internal rate of return of 9.5%.

background and rationale The Queensland Seafood Marketers Association has a principal function of promoting the quality of Queensland seafood. In 2017, a marketing symposium was held in Queensland focusing on the post-harvest sector and delivering quality products along the value chain. Presentations included examples from long-line harvesting, oyster growing, prawn promotion, product branding and retail strategies.

In 2018 a second symposium broadened the scope and attendance compared to the 2017 symposium.

It was contended that there was a continuing need for the seafood industry to better understand the market supply chain and keep up-to-date with new product development and marketing initiatives. The 2018 symposium was designed to address this industry need, and in particular:

• how effective marketing can work at both an individual company and/or sector level,

• showcase effective marketing to address both domestic and export demand,

• new marketing channels and opportunities,

• brand development

• the application of market segmentation.

beNeFIT C OST A NAlySIS

82 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Results/key findings The symposium was considered successful by the Queensland Seafood Marketers Association and the symposium participants. It is likely that initiatives along the seafood marketing chains will evolve from ideas generated and discussed at the symposium.

The principal output from the project was a successful symposium held in bri

sbane in 2018. One of the

outcomes of the symposium was an increase by many of the participants in their understanding of the marketing opportunities and marketing enhancements that were available. Participant exit forms from those who attended indicated a general desire for an annual symposium to be held as opportunities to access and discuss such information by many attendees were infrequent.

Apart from supporting the symposium financially, the FRDC supported six young people in various positions in seafood marketing by way of scholarships to attend. bas

ed on some limited feedback, the

scholarship holders were unlikely to have attended the symposium without that support and those who provided information demonstrated that the symposium had assisted them with networking, updating software, hardware and social media.

Outcomes • An intermediate outcome was an increased understanding by participants in the seafood industry of marketing opportunities available to them.

• However, details of any marketing changes made by participants as a result of attending the symposium are not available.

• The participant exit forms supported an annual symposium in the future; it was suggested there were limited opportunities to access such information and current trends via other sources; however, it was considered necessary to avoid any clash with Seafood Directions as this would have a detrimental effect on both events.

• The FRDC scholarship supported attendees were drawn from a wide range of geographic locations operating at different stages of the value chain. Scholarship holders, for example, included a: 1. We

stern Australian marketing and communications company 2. Ne

w South Wales trawler operator 3. To

rres Strait lobster fisher 4. Tas

manian Seafood Industry Council project officer 5. Se

afood retailer from Victoria 6. No

rthern Territory mud crab fisher. • A survey of the six scholarship holders resulted in four responses:

- A

ll four respondents stated that they would not have attended the symposium without the support of the scholarships.

- On

e of the respondents (a retail business owner) stated she had benefited from a reassessment of how to create connections and lasting impressions, how to enquire those around her for their thoughts, and the importance of social media.

- A se

cond recipient responded “The program of speakers was inspiring, and the content was highly relevant to my role. Personally, it has improved my knowledge and capacity to serve the Tasmanian industry better. I have taken away several key messages in relation to optimising social media and how the consumer engages with ‘seafood’. Meeting the representatives from other states was fantastic, and I learned that we have a lot in common in terms of projects and marketing ideas.” • This respondent returned to her organisation and wrote a marketing and

communication strategy for a brand new ‘Eat More Seafood’ campaign.

- A th

ird respondent said a feature for him was the quality of the presentations with implications for product promotion for large companies as well as for small-scale businesses; however, networking was the most useful personal benefit and he learnt ways on how best to talk to people and how to promote his product.

83 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Outcomes (continued)

- Th e fourth respondent attended the symposium with her husband (also a small

business owner). The material presented and the networking discussions applied therefore to one or both of the businesses they operate. Valuable insights from the event are now included in the fishing operation business and also are applied through involvement in the fishing industry (Western Australian Fishing Industry Council) or just by general communication to friends, family and others. Some insights communicated include: > Ed

ucate consumers, chefs, fish and chip shops and retailers. > Do

n’t assume they know or understand the process or the product. > Do

n’t rely on location/provenance to promote/brand your product.

>

bui

ld social licence to operate for access to the resource.

• Since the symposium, the fishing business has developed its own social media profile (rather than being promoted under a group association banner) and they have encouraged chefs to tag us into their posts to create interest in our products from both consumers and other chefs.

Impacts • In the short term, some increased and improved marketing and promotion activity along the seafood value chains potentially may have resulted in increased profitability across a range of seafood businesses.

• In the longer term, the innovative marketing capability and capacity of some personnel attending the symposium potentially will have been enhanced. • Regional economies associated with seafood will indirectly benefit in the longer term from improved seafood supply chain profitability.

Public versus private impacts The impacts produced from the project investment were predominantly private in nature and shared between individuals, seafood businesses and by specific seafood industries. Some public benefits will have been delivered through improved capability and capacity.

TRIPLE bOTTOM L INE C ATEGORIES O F P RINCIPAL I MPACTS F ROM P ROjEC T 2 017-196

Economic • In the short term, some increased marketing and promotion activity along the seafood value chains potentially may have resulted in increased profitability across a range of seafood businesses; this is likely to have been driven by increased ne

tworking associated with cost reductions along the supply chain and increased product demand.

Environmental • Nil

Social • In the longer term, the innovative marketing capability and capacity of some personnel attending the symposium potentially will have been enhanced.

• Regional economies associated with seafood will indirectly benefit in the longer term from improved seafood supply chain profitability.

Conclusions The investment in this project will likely be translated into improvements in profitability in some Australian seafood supply chains for both wild-catch fisheries and aquaculture.

Funding for the project over the two years totalled a modest $0.06 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $0.20 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.14 million, a benefit cost ratio of 3.3 to 1, an internal rate of return of 26.7 per cent and a modified internal rate of return of 9.5 per cent.

As only two relatively minor impacts of those delivered were not valued, the investment criteria as provided by the valued benefit are likely to cover the impacts delivered adequately. However, confidence in the assumptions made to value the impacts was considered to be only low.

84 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

oUTpUTs — ANAlYsIs bY FRDC pRogRAm

pr

ogram 5: Adoption Adoption is the use of knowledge arising from RD&E. A core activity in which the FRDC invests is extension (the E in RD&E) — an

d these activities assist, educate, make aware or facilitate end users taking the knowledge and utilising it. This ranges from undertaking communication activities such as direct communication (FISH magazine and websites), conferences and meetings, through to transforming R&D outputs into appropriate mediums to support stakeholder decision making, assist with achieving their objectives, and inform the broader community.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $2.75 million or around 9.5 per cent of the total R&D investment for this program.

Examples of project activity during the year Connecting health professionals with sustainable seafood Project 2018-092

For further information: Nicole Senior, nicolesenior@ozemail.com.au

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Combined information on the health benefits and sustainability of Australian fish stocks will help health professionals confidently recommend that clients eat more Australian seafood.

Want to protect your brain, heart, eyesight and bones? Evidence from a growing body of international research shows that eating fish and other seafood has a powerful role to play in doing just that. but

confusion over which species are sustainable has often stymied Australian healthcare professionals who want to recommend that their clients eat fish.

To address this issue the FRDC has worked with dietitians to

create new resources specifically for health

professionals that combine information on both the health benefits and sustainable Australian species.

85 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The SAFS reports already provide a publicly accessible and rigorously tested scientific benchmark for the sustainability of commercially wild-harvested fish species. The reports are updated every two years, and the latest release, in March 2019, includes 120 species that make up the bulk of available Australian seafood.

The FRDC identified healthcare professionals as a key influencer group to Australians selecting food and an excellent conduit for behaviour change in the broader community. Materials includes dietitians, nutritionists, primary healthcare nurses and public health practitioners. Secondary influencers who will also be included are home economists (such as food educators), food scientists and food technologists. All these groups share a commitment to scientific evidence that is also shared by the FRDC.

The evidence brought together international research findings about seafood and health, to underline the health benefits of seafood consumption. It addresses not just disease-related findings, but also the protective benefits of seafood that consumers can proactively take advantage of, to optimise their health throughout life.

key

findings include:

• Two serves of fish and other seafood a week is recommended as part of many national dietary guidelines, Fish may help reduce the risk of obesity and improve cognitive performance in children and adolescents.

• Fish in the diet of children may reduce their risk of asthma.

• Evidence supports fish and other seafood as a cardioprotective food.

• Omega-3 fatty acids in seafood are important for metabolic health.

• Fish consumption is associated with better bone health in older people.

• Fish and other seafood consumption is associated with reduced risk of depression.

• Fish consumption supports eye health.

lessons from across the seas Project 2017-132

For further information: Chris Calogeras, chris@c-aid.com.au, http://www.frdc.com.au/ Partners/National-Priorities-and-Subprograms/Indigenous-Reference-Group

NATIONAl P RIORITy IN FRASTRuCTuRe PA RTNeR: J urisdiction PARTNeR: Industry COllAbOR ATION

eN

VIRONMeN

T INDuST

Ry CO

MMuNI

TIeS PeOPle ADO

PTION

Cultural pride, leadership and collaboration were highlights of an Australian delegation’s trip to learn more about Ma -ori involvement in New Zealand fisheries.

Learning how to harness both economic benefits and cultural wellbeing for Indigenous Australians through involvement in seafood provided the drive for a trip to New Zealand by members of the FRDC’s Indigenous Reference Group (IRG) and the Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation.

The Australians were guests at the 2019 Ma -ori Fisheries Conference, where they presented and were later honoured to be the first ever non-members to attend the annual general meeting — a co

llective

of Ma -ori fishing groups.

86 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

The purpose of the trip was to develop stronger relationships between New Zealand and Australian First Nations peoples, in order to share knowledge and experience related to operating in fisheries and aquaculture. The Australian delegation returned home buoyed by the experience and confident about the promise for Indigenous Australians in Australia’s seafood industry.

The trip provided insight into the strategies and policies that have either hindered or assisted the economic and cultural development of First Nations peoples in New Zealand, and how these learnings can assist in Australia.

united community Now in its eighth consecutive year, the Ma -ori Fisheries Conference was held in Auckland, with more than 300 people attending including the Australian contingent. The theme of the 2019 conference was ‘Te ha- o Tangaroa kia ora ai ta - ua’ — ‘t

he breath of Tangaroa sustains us’. Tangaroa means ‘God of the

Sea’, and the theme spoke to the interconnectedness of humanity with the environment, underpinning the purpose of the Ma -ori Fisheries Trust, Te Ohu kai

moana, and the work it undertakes to protect

Ma -ori fishing rights.

Members of the IRG delivered a presentation on Indigenous fisheries in Australia, with Matt Osborne presenting on the IRG’s Indigenous fisheries research advisory role for the FRDC. Shane Holland gave an overview of native title and access to aquatic resources for Indigenous Australians and Chels Marshall spoke about some of the key research projects that have been funded, such as the identification of values placed on fishing by Indigenous Australians.

The conference really emphasised the strength of working together and that, although it can be slow, it is far more substantive than moving forward in isolation.

The visit is part of the FRDC’s longer-term investment in the Indigenous Fishing Subprogram, activities such as participation in the conference will continue to be undertaken as part of ensuring that fishing and

seafood industry focused RD&E delivers improved economic, environmental and social benefits to Australia’s Indigenous people. It also provides an opportunity to build a strong relationship with Ma- ori fishery stakeholders to learn from them how t

hey have got to where they are today.

Their combined presentations ‘What’s happening in Australian fisheries’ can be viewed at https://youtu.be/ lD9ybxyd

RCA.

87 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

An impact assessment of FRDC investment in Communicating the research management and performance of Tasmanian marine resource industries by video

Project: 2017-106 Title: Communicating the research, management and performance of Tasmanian marine resource industries by video Research organisation: University of Tasmania Principal investigators: Caleb Gardner and jul

ian Harrington

Period of funding: yea

r ending jun

e 2018

FRDC program allocation: Adoption 100% Benefit : Funding for the small promotional video project totalled $0.21 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $1.04 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.83 million, a benefit cost ratio of 4.93 to 1, an internal rate of return of 21.0% and a modified internal rate of return of 11.2%.

What the report is about This report presents the results of an impact assessment of FRDC investment in a project to communicate and promote Tasmanian commercial wild-catch and aquaculture industries. The investment was driven by a perceived need to better communicate to stakeholders, including the Tasmanian Government and the wider community. The ultimate aim was to showcase the marine resource industries in Tasmania, their research excellence, achievements and impacts, and attract future resources and community support. FRDC project 2017-106 addressed these objectives by producing a series of promotional videos for usage by the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) and the Tasmanian Seafood Industry Council (TSIC).

A need was identified by both IMAS at the University of Tasmania (UTAS) and the Tasmanian Seafood Industry Council (TSIC) to better communicate and promote fisheries and aquaculture research and industries in Tasmania. The production and use of short videos was selected as an effective means of meeting these needs, largely because they could be used in various situations.

Through the Sustainable Marine Research Collaboration Agreement with the Tasmanian Government, the UTAS and IMAS fund and undertake world-class research into temperate marine and coastal fisheries and aquaculture, support the effective and sustainable management of Tasmanian marine resources, and ensure maximum benefits accrue to the Tasmanian environment, economy and industries. Videos for IMAS were intended to explain the range and excellence of research investments associated with Tasmanian fisheries

beNeFIT C OST A NAlySIS

88 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

The videos for TSIC were to showcase the seafood industries (both wild-catch and aquaculture). Economies were foreseen by both organisations in pooling resources to produce the videos for the two o

rganisations. The research-oriented videos were part of the communication plans for both organisations. In addition, a longer video was planned to address environmental issues and research in Macquarie Harbour, where salmon aquaculture was expanding, and provide information that was balanced and educational for the general community.

IMAS videos can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/user/IMASTas/videos. The industry videos can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyy4OLlzz- yOjLC

vdiETakg.

Results/key findings The videos have contributed to increased awareness and understanding of the wild-catch and aquaculture industries in Tasmania among a wide group of stakeholders including the general community, future research funders, including UTAS, and environmental regulatory authorities.

The videos were partly responsible for increased funding for marine research at IMAS, as well as a potential contribution to maintenance of the social licence to fish in Tasmania (wild-catch and recreational) and/or to further develop aquaculture industries (e.g. salmon).

OUTCOME-IMP ACT A SSESSMENT

Outcomes • bot h general community and internal support for IMAS activities have increased and has undoubtedly led to a much greater understanding that management of marine resources in Tasmania is backed by science.

• Th e social licence of the industries and scientists to conduct marine research has been strengthened by the videos as advanced by people who watch them, for example at public events like Agfest (Caleb Gardner, pers. comm., 2020).

• Th e Macquarie Harbour video has proved to be highly effective; this was achieved by taking a controversial topic and explaining the science. The video screenings have led to a more sensible debate within government and communities.

• Such success could be repeated with the expansion of salmon farming into Storm bay b

y explaining issues such as whether the feed inputs used are sustainable and what happens to the salmon poo (Caleb Gardner, pers. comm., 2020).

• UT AS has recognised fisheries and aquaculture research more over the last two y

ears and part of this may have been due to the video releases. Two years ago UTAS focused heavily on lobster aquaculture; as a result of the videos UTAS now have three high level priorities for research at the College levels (salmon centre, lobster enhancement and wild-fisheries education); this has brought in more resources (Caleb Gardner, pers. comm., 2020). • Another example of a favourable outcome for the research videos follows. UTAS

appointed a new vice-chancellor two years ago who attended the Australian Universities forum soon after he arrived — a na

tional meeting of all the vice-

chancellors in the country. The shellfish aquaculture video had been selected as the winner of the best research communication video nationally and was screened be

tween courses at the vice-chancellor’s dinner; this showcased the UTAS research to every university leader in Australia and most importantly, showcased the IMAS research to the new leader (Caleb Gardner, pers. comm., 2020).

89 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Impacts • The videos were partly responsible for increased funding for marine research at IMAS including several large infrastructure grants totalling $10 million to date and, prospectively, another $5 million in 2021. • Contribution to information available to industry, government and the community

regarding fisheries production and environmental interactions, in turn leading to more balanced environmental management policies. • Some indirect contribution to maintenance of the social licence to fish in Tasmania (wild-catch and recreational) and/or to further develop aquaculture industries

(e.g. s

almon).

• Improved community capability and capacity for understanding the conduct, structure and performance (including environmental integrity) of fisheries in Tasmania.

Public versus private impacts Potential private impacts and their supply chains identified in this evaluation are related to Tasmanian wild-catch and aquaculture industries, through increased research funding with implications for future productivity and profitability. Other private impacts will be delivered via a contribution of the project to maintaining the social licence to fish.

Some public impacts may be delivered via an improved understanding by the wider community that, in turn, impacts on the Tasmanian government and its associated decision making on environmental management of fisheries.

TRIPLE bOTTOM L INE C ATEGORIES O F P RINCIPAL I MPACTS F ROM P ROjEC T 2 017-106

Economic • Potentially, contribution to increased research funding for IMAS from Tasmanian fishery industries and UTAS.

Environmental • Contribution to information available to industry, government and the community regarding fisheries production and environmental interactions, in turn leading to more balanced environmental management policies.

Social • Contribution to maintaining the social licence to fish (including wild-catch, recreational and aquaculture). • Improved community capability and capacity for understanding the conduct, structure, and performance (including environmental integrity) of fisheries in

Tasmania.

Conclusions The investment in this project has driven increased research investment in Tasmanian fisheries; in turn this increased investment will provide benefits to Tasmanian industries as has been demonstrated in the past. Funding for the small promotional video project totalled $0.21 million (present value terms) and produced estimated total expected benefits of $1.04 million (present value terms). This gave a net present value of $0.83 million, a benefit cost ratio of 4.93 to 1, an internal rate of return of 21.0 per cent and a modified internal rate of return of 11.2 per cent.

As two further potential impacts were identified but not valued in monetary terms, the investment criteria as provided by the valued benefit is likely to be an underestimate of the total value of the project investment.

90 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

AssEssmEN T oF ImpAC T AND oUT ComEs evaluating the results of RD& e i nvestment Evaluating impact Evaluating the outcome of a research project in an annual report is difficult because many projects run over multiple years and there is a period of time between when R&D is undertaken, completed and then adopted by end users as to when the total value of the investment is realised.

The time scale can also vary depending on the activity undertaken. While there can be an instant impact from a project — re

sulting in change of practices or management arrangements for example — th

e total outcome may take time to accrue and that can only be measured when looking back.

The FRDC has in place metrics to anticipate potential value and a formal measurement process to evaluate benefit costs, which aligns with the Council of Rural Research and Development Corporations (CRRDC) evaluation framework.

RDC impact assessment and performance reporting The evaluation program being undertaken by the FRDC is part of the CRRDC work to collaboratively implement a framework of benefit cost analysis to evaluate RD&E activities.

The FRDC assessment uses the methodology developed by the rural RDCs benefit cost framework which is based on the work of the Department of Finance in Introduction to Cost-Benefit Analysis and Alternative Evaluation Methodologies , and subsequent discussions with the department to refine the methodology.

Generating and documenting evidence of impact and demonstrating performance of the RDCs as a collective is also a key objective for the CRRDC.

The purpose of the cross-RDC impact assessment program is to:

• assess and report on the overall returns to rural industries from the portfolio of investments in RD&E by RDCs,

• assess and report on the non-market benefits (including public and spillover benefits) arising from the portfolio of investments in RD&E by RDCs,

• inform government and the public about the nature of those non-market (i.e. public and spillover) benefits from rural RD&E that are conditional on public contributions to the RDCs.

91 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 2

The cross-RDC impact assessment program provides for consistency in the evaluation of investments in rural RD&E made by the rural RDCs in their respective industries. The program involves aggregating the results of regular and rigorous assessment of completed RD&E investments by each RDC. These assessments provide accountability to RDC stakeholders, including government, levy payers, researchers and the community. The aggregation will generate estimates of the performance of the RDC portfolio as a whole and over time.

The 15 rural RDCs are: AgriFutures Australia, Australian Eggs Limited, Australian Meat Processor Corporation, Australian Pork Limited, Australian Wool Innovation, Cotton RDC, Dairy Australia, FRDC, Forest and Wood Products Australia, Grains RDC, Horticulture Innovation Australia, LiveCorp, Meat & Livestock Australia, Sugar Research Australia, and Wine Australia.

evaluation of R&D projects (completed 2015-20) benefit cost assessment program — Ev aluations ( year 4) In 2015-16 the FRDC started a five-year program of impact assessments that would be carried out annually on a number of investments across its RD&E portfolio.

Agtrans Research and Consulting was contracted to complete the assessments which were required to meet FRDC’s evaluation reporting requirements. The following summary presents an overview and aggregate results for the fourth year (2018-19) of the evaluation program.

brief description of the selection process At the beginning of the program, the FRDC identified that the unit of investment to be evaluated would be an individual FRDC project and that a total of 20 randomly-selected projects would be evaluated each year. Five of the 20 projects for yea

r 4 of the assessment are on pages 63, 69, 75, 81 and 87.

92 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

summary and aggregate results for the years e nded June 2016 to June 2018

Introduction The FRDC’s RD&E Plan 2015-20 ended on 30 jun e 2020 and a new R&D Plan 2020-25 took effect on 1 july 2020. Under FRDC’s Evaluation Framework, FRDC required an aggregate summary of 6

0 co mpleted ex-post RD&E evaluations for investments that were completed under the RD&E Plan 2015-20 and the FRDC’s associated annual impact assessment program. This summary report presents the aggregate results for the 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18 FRDC evaluation of randomly selected samples of individual projects along with a selection of other summary results demonstrating the performance of FRDC’s investments under the RD&E Plan 2015-20.

Method Individual impact assessments The evaluations completed for each annual series of impact assessments followed general evaluation guidelines that are now well entrenched within the Australian primary industry research sector including RDCs, CRCs, state Departments of Agriculture, and some universities. The approach includes both qualitative and quantitative descriptions that are in accord with the impact assessment guidelines of the CRRDC (2018). The evaluation process involved identifying and briefly describing project objectives, activities and outputs, outcomes, and impacts. The principal economic, environmental and social impacts were then summarised in a triple bottom line framework.

Some, but not all, of the impacts identified were then valued in monetary terms. Where impact valuation was exercised, the impact assessment used benefit cost analysis as its principal tool. The decision not to value certain impacts was due either to a shortage of necessary evidence/data, a high degree of uncertainty surrounding the potential impact, or the likely low relative significance of the impact compared to those that were valued. The impacts valued are therefore deemed to represent the principal benefits delivered by the project. However, as not all impacts were valued, the investment criteria reported for some individual investments potentially represent an underestimate of the performance of that investment.

eVAluATION O F P ROJeC TS

93 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Aggregate analysis The real, undiscounted, aggregate benefit and cost cash flows from each annual series of impact assessments for each FRDC program within each of the three evaluation samples (2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18) were extracted, integrated and updated such that all past and future cash flows were expressed in 2019/20 dollar terms using the implicit price deflator for gross domestic product (Australian bur

eau of Statistics, 2020). Cash flows then were discounted to the year 2019/20 using a 5 p

er cent

discount rate as required by the CRRDC impact assessment guidelines.

The aggregate present value of benefits (PV b) a

nd present value of costs (PVC) then were used to

estimated aggregate investment criteria for each evaluation sample (2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18), each FRDC program across all three evaluation samples (Environment, Industry, Communities, People and Adoption), and for all FRDC programs across all three evaluation samples in total. Further investment criteria were estimated for the total investment and for the FRDC investment alone and for different time periods up to 30 years from the last year of investment across all 60 FRDC RD&E investments included in the aggregate analysis (2018/19).

Investment criteria reported included the net present value (NPV), benefit cost ratio ( bCR

), internal rate

of return (IRR) and the modified IRR (MIRR). The PV b f

or the FRDC investment was estimated by

multiplying the total PVb f

or each program area by the FRDC proportion of real, undiscounted investment in each program and then aggregating by sample year. The FRDC proportion of real investment varied from 26.4 p

er cent in the Adoption Program in the 2017/18 sample to 100 p

er cent

for both the People Program in the 2016/17 sample and the Communities Program in the 2015/16 sample.

Results Aggregate investment criteria by program Table 16 shows the aggregate investment criteria for the total investment for ea

ch of the five FRDC program areas addressed by the RD&E Plan 2015-20 across all three years of evaluations.

The Industry Program performed best with an estimated aggregate bCR o

f 8.32 to 1 and a NPV of approximately $173.06 million. This was expected as the individual project analyses focused on the valuation of economic impacts and industry related RD&E investments tended to have a greater number of the more significant economic impacts (in terms of impact magnitude). The People Program had the second highest performance with an estimated bCR o

f 5.05 to 1.

Results for individual program areas should be interpreted with some caution because of small sample sizes. bas

ed on the sample selection

criteria in each of the annual series of impact assessments and FRDC’s system of project program allocation 28 out of 60 projects contributed to the costs and benefits for the Environment Program, 31 projects contributed costs and benefits for the Industry Program, nine p

rojects contributed costs and benefits for

the Communities Program, six projects contributed to the costs and benefits for the People Program, and 10 out of 60 projects contributed to the costs and benefits for the Adoption Program. This occurred because some projects were allocated across multiple FRDC program areas.

94 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

For example, a project may have been classified as 80 per cent Environment, 20 per cent Industry. In thi s case the project would be categorised as an ‘Environment’ project within the impact assessment

sample, however 80 p

er cent of the projects estimated benefit and costs cash flows would be attributed to the Environment Program and the remaining 20 p

er cent would be attributed to the Industry

Program. Thus, the one project from the evaluation sample would have contributed to the final investment criteria estimated for both the Environment and the Industry Program.

TAb le 16: AGG REGATE INV ESTMENT CRI TERIA b y FRDC P ROGRAM ARE A (TOT AL INV

ESTMENT, 30 yEA

RS, 5 P

ER C

ENT DIS

COUNT RAT

E)

Total investment (30 years, 5 per cent discount rate) across all three samples

FR

DC program PvB PvC NPv BCR I

RR MIRR

$m $m $m % %

Environment 52.61 26.42 26.19 1.99 9.66 2.04

Industry 196.69 23.63 173.06 8.32 16.78 4.69

Communities 4.29 2.06 2.23 2.08 10.13 5.05

People 17.71 3.52 14.25 5.05 nc 7.63

Adoption 10.53 2.75 7.78 3.83 42.93 4.64

nc: not calculable. An IRR may not be calculable where the relevant cash flows result in multiple possible solutions for the IRR.

Specifics of the assumptions underpinning the estimation of benefits for each program can be found in the individual project evaluation reports for each sample year available from FRDC.

95 REPORT OF O PERATIONS PA RT 2

Aggregate investment by sample year Table 17 shows the aggregate investment criteria for the total investment for each of the three annual evaluation samples completed to date. The results show that, based on the representative random samples evaluated each year, FRDC has demonstrated positive and consistent performance with bCR

s

between 4.18 and 5.71 to 1. Further, these investment criteria are likely to represent a lower bound of the FRDC’s RD&E performance as a number of impacts identified across the 60 individual project evaluations were not valued in monetary terms.

TAb le 17: AGG REGATE I NVESTMENT C RITERIA b y E VALUATION S AMPLE (TOT AL I

NVESTMENT, 30 yEA RS, 5 P

ER C

ENT D

ISCOUNT R

ATE)

Total investment (30 years, 5 per cent discount rate)

Evaluation sample PvB PvC NPv BCR I

RR MIRR

$m $m $m % %

2015/16 109.84 26.31 83.53 4.18 22.58 8.31

2016/17 106.75 18.69 88.06 5.71 21.72 8.49

2017/18 65.30 13.38 51.92 4.88 10.76 1.46

Conclusion Over the period 2017 to 2019, there were 60 randomly selected FRDC RD&E investments completed in the years ended jun

e 2016 to 2018 (20 each year) have been subjected to impact assessment to meet the following FRDC evaluation reporting requirements:

• Reporting against the FRDC RD&E Plan 2015-20 and the Evaluation Framework associated with FRDC’s Statutory Funding Agreement with the Commonwealth Government.

• Annual reporting to FRDC stakeholders.

• Reporting to the CRRDC.

The 60 individual RD&E projects evaluated had a total investment of $58.38 million (present value terms) and generated estimated total benefits of $281.89 million (present value terms). This gave a NPV of $223.51 million, weighted average bCR o

f 4.83 to 1, an IRR of 15.64 p

er cent and a MIRR of 5.24 p

er

cent over 30 years using a 5 p

er cent discount rate.

When aggregate results were estimated by FRDC program area across all three evaluation samples the analysis showed that all five FRDC program areas (Environment, Industry, Communities, People and Ad

option) had positive investment criteria with bCR s ranging from 2.08 to 1 for the Communities Program to 8.32 to 1 for the Industry Program. Also, aggregate results estimated by evaluation sample (2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18) demonstrated that FRDC has had positive and consistent performance with bCR

s between 4.18 and 5.71 to 1. Further, the investment criteria are likely to represent a lower bound of the FRDC’s RD&E performance as a number of impacts identified across the 60 individual project evaluations were not valued in monetary terms.

bas

ed on the random sample selection process these results are considered to be largely representative of the performance of the FRDC RD&E investment portfolio for investments completed in the years ended jun

e 2016 to 2018 under the FRDC’s RD&E Plan 2015-20. The results show that FRDC has consistently delivered benefits to fisheries and aquaculture industries and the broader Australian community. Further, the results are consistent with the average performance of the Australian RDCs with an estimated weighted average bCR

of 4.5 to 1 (Agtrans Research, AgEconPlus and jav, 2016) and

should be viewed positively by government, fisheries and aquaculture industries, other stakeholders, and FRDC management.

96 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

97 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

REPORT OF OP ERATIONS

PA

RT 3:

SERvIC

ES

98 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

marketing During 2019-20, the FRDC did not undertake any marketing activities.

Priority area activities PBS target

2019-20

Ach

ievement

Commence collection of voluntary marketing funds pending legislative changes.

An amount of $250,000 to be collected.

No

t achieved.

Coordinate the delivery of the Love Australian Prawns campaign pending legislative changes.

Campaign activities delivered in line with marketing plan.

Not achieved. Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries and Australian Prawn Farmers Association manage the Love Australian Prawns funds via voluntary contribution.

Establish full statutory marketing levy collection with industry sectors for sectors, where requested and pending levy being established.

One marketing levy established.

No

t achieved. Two marketing levies voted upon. One successful but not progressed, the other voted down by industry, details follow.

Marketing levies development As part of developing the appropriate systems and knowledge, the FRDC has continued to meet with the levies area of DAWE as part of assisting Australian Prawn Farmers Association (APFA) and the Abalone Council of Australia move to implement a marketing levy. These meetings established a clear picture of the processes, steps and timeframes required to put in place a statutory levy, if industry decides to go down this path.

Prawn farmers to pave path to market The marketing levy development activity for Australian prawn farmers continued through the year with further consultation completed in early 2019. Following this consultation, a formal vote was undertaken.

Although a majority supported the proposal there remained some who did not. The APFA Management Committee discussed at length the issue noting that writing to the Minister requesting the levy without the support of all farms was not the preferred option. After careful consideration, the APFA decided not to progress a compulsory marketing levy for the Australian prawn farm industry.

Australian Wild Abalone™ The Abalone Council Australia continued discussions with fishers early in the year regarding establishing an abalone marketing levy through the early part of the year. The formal abalone consumer education and promotion ballot closed on 15 December 2019.

Following final metrics of the ballot being collated and verified by CorpVote. The outcome was clear that the compulsory marketing levy was not supported by the industry (either by numbers of individuals or by ownership). jus

t under 70 per cent of quota holders participated, with a majority 76 p

er cent

voting not to progress the levy.

99 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 3

Trade trade statistics International trade and exporting play an important role for many in the Australian seafood industry. The FRDC trade database is now gaining recognition and use by Australian exporters. It continues to provide access to the latest import and exports trade data from the Australian bur

eau of Statistics. The

database is updated monthly and can be filtered and will allow in-depth analysis of import and export trends based on key attributes — co

untry, state, product type. Export codes have been grouped

together in logical blocks for ease of use. Visit the portal at www.frdc.com.au/Services/Trade-data.

trade bursary Program During the year COVID-19 caused the cancellation of the FRDC Trade bur sary Program due to rising health concerns and travel restrictions. This included the 2020 Seafood Trade bur

sary to the Seafood

Expo Global (in bru

ssels) and the World Recreational Fishing Conference to be held in Rotterdam.

Seafood tra de Advisory Group The FRDC-funded Seafood Trade Advisory Group (STAG) project continued to provide advice and updates on market conditions in China. Following the outbreak of COVID-19 the STAG became a critical part of ensuring Australian exporters were kept across changes to markets. The STAG also provided information and data to assist industry participate in the International Freight Assistance Mechanism and continue to export.

Seafood industry engagement in the Australia-European uni on Free tra de Agreement Australia progressed the European Union free trade agreement during the year. The FRDC assisted through the coordination of input from fishing and aquaculture industry members. The European Union remains a significant, if not under-accessed market for Australian seafood exporters. This is partly due to Australian exporters facing commercially onerous European Union import regulations and procedures as well as tariff barriers of between 12-26 per cent. The FRDC will continue to assist and coordinate input where requested until the negotiations are completed.

China seafood market development The FRDC, the Sydney Fish Market and the Australia-China Agricultural Cooperation Agreement program agreed to fund the Professional Fishermen’s Association (PFA) to conduct a trade mission to China to explore the concept of supplying mixed seafood between New South Wales commercial fishers and China using an e-commerce tool. The program was developed in consultation with the PFA, GFRESH, Sydney Fish Market, Austrade and DAWE.

The report from FRDC’s project 2016-173 found at the time there was a significant opportunity and rationale to developing the market to China, with benefits to the Australian seafood industry. The creation of a more stable market that can handle the substantial fluctuations in the supply of specific Australian seafood species as well as the willingness of the Chinese market to pay for high-quality products linked strongly to providence marketing and tourism.

100 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

standards Standards Organisation The FRDC is approved by the Accreditation boa rd for Standards Development Organisations as a Standards Development Organisation AS/NZS ISO 9001:2015 organisation for quality and undertakes internal and external audits annually with a recertification audit of its quality system each three years.

The FRDC carried out both an internal and an external three-year re-accreditation audit in October 2019. The Standards Development and Accreditation Committee approved the reaccreditation of the FRDC at their meeting on 6 February 2020.

The FRDC has continued to work with industry partners throughout the year looking at a number of potential options to create future fisheries-related standards. Over the coming year there will be more work to formalise and finalise groundwork already completed by a number of research projects. Standards being developed include responsible fishing, science, and fisheries management standards. Further information is available at www.seafoodstandards.com.au

Australian Fish Names Standard The Fish Names Committee met at the Melbourne Museum on 9 October 2019 and by videoconference on 22 April 2020.

Having a standard in place increases consumer confidence in the seafood they buy because no matter where they buy their seafood in Australia, they know it will be called by the same name. Standard names also allows for more efficient and effective management of food safety and reduces the potential for misleading and deceptive conduct as more accurate trade descriptors can be used. The Australian Fish Names Standard is a searchable online database — vi

sit www.fishnames.com.au

FISH NAMES COMM ITTEE ME MbER SHIP

Independent Chair Gus Dannoun

Fisheries agencies appointee as nominated by Australian Fisheries Management Forum (AFMF)

jason Gibson

E

xpert member (seafood marketing and fish and Invertebrates taxonomy) Don Tuma

Expert member (hospitality) Glenn Austin

Expert member (fish taxonomy) Gordon yea

rsley

Expert member (seafood processors) Anthony Mercer

CSIRO fish taxonomy representative ka

ren Gowlett-Holmes

Australian seafood industry appointee Renee Pearce

Recreational fishing appointee Russell Conway

Expert member (seafood imports) Mark bou

lter

Expert member (major supermarkets) Hamish Allen

Expert member (seafood marketing) Anni Conn

DAWE representative Lisa Mckenzi

e

Expert member (Master Fish Merchants’ Association of Australia representative) ker

ry Strangas

101 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 3

ObSERVERS A ND N ON-VO TING M EMbERS

Standards Development Organisation representative Dr Patrick Hone

Standards Development Organisation representative Nicole Stubbing

PROjECT M ANAGER A ND A DMINISTRATION

Project manager Alan Snow

Co-investigator Meaghan Dodd

Development of Australian Standard for Aquatic Plant Names Work on developing the first Australian Standard for Aquatic Plant Names (AS 5301) continued throughout the year. Plants from marine and freshwater environments are covered by this standard, irrespective of the country of origin. The final draft, which included the list of standard names to be used in Australia for edible and commercial aquatic plants was completed and put out for the required public consultation period.

AS 5301 the Australian Standard for Aquatic Plant Names will be published in November 2020.

MEMbERSHIP O F T HE AQU ATIC PLA NT NAM ES COM MITTEE

Representation Name

In

dependent Chair Gus year

sley

CSIRO and Codes for Australian Aquatic bio

ta (CAAb) da

tabase ka

ren Gowlett-Holmes

Industry jame

s Ashmore

Industry Pia Winberg

Industry Russell Glover

Hospitality Cassandra Austin

Academia Alecia bell

grove

Academia joh

n Huisman

ObSERVERS A ND N ON-VO TING M EMbERS

FRDC representative Patrick Hone

FRDC representative Nicole Stubing

PROjECT M ANAGER A ND A DMINISTRATION

Project manager Meaghan Dodd

Co-investigator Alan Snow

102 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Information and communications technology Aligning information management systems for the future The FRDC continued to leverage the benefits of Microsoft 365 Cloud Services by implementing Microsoft Teams to enhance communication and collaboration, driving efficient and effective outcomes.

The FRDC had just finished the migration of its telephony system to Microsoft Teams and its on-pr

emises

document management system to SharePoint Online when it had to transition all staff to SharePoint so they could work from home during COVID-19 restrictions. As such, the transition has been seamless with negligible impact on information and communications technology (ICT) systems.

It allowed the ICT team to explore ways for the organisation to operate in this virtual environment, while striving to maintain a connected and cohesive work culture. In the first part of the financial year, the FRDC was increasing its cloud usage maturity by transitioning from Infrastructure as a Service to Platform as a Service and Software as a Service. This included migration of the on-pr

emises document

management system to SharePoint Online. The FRDC also took advantage of the telephony services that were introduced with the Office 365 offerings to migrate the PA bx s

ystem to Microsoft Teams.

COVID-19 ‘home enabled’ work environment The finalisation of the two activities were timely because the second half of the financial year was about transitioning to home-based work for all staff due to COVID-19. The new systems and hardware and the training that was conducted meant the transition was as seamless as can be expected. Cybersecurity vigilance was also heightened due to emerging threats and scams targeting home users.

Future system development The FRDC will utilise the opportunity offered by COVID-19 to continue to improve its system with further efforts put into:

• streamlining some of the manual steps in the project management life cycle;

• expanding capability to store project-related information;

• driving efficient business processes.

103 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 3

Corporate communications During the year the FRDC communications team has played a significant role in developing and engaging with stakeholders particularly during COVID-19. The mix of activities has remained largely the same — me

dia releases, digital communications, FISH magazine, communications collateral and events. In addition, the FRDC staff attended and presented at stakeholder events (pre COVID) across the country to ensure ongoing conversation and engagement.

COVID-19 communications update The FRDC focused a lot of its communication activities in the second half of the year to assess and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. A dedicated COVID-19 webpage was established to provide up

dates both from government agencies (health, agriculture and fisheries) and on what the FRDC was doing in response to the evolving global situation (research projects, meetings and assistance). Th

e website has allowed stakeholders to provide comment and feedback on issues they have faced across various regions and fisheries. See http://frdc.com.au/media-publications/fish/FISH-COVID19.

In addition, the FRDC increased the frequency of its regular communication, modifying the schedule of FISH magazine from quarterly to two shorter, timelier COVID-19 relevant editions. The content of the magazine was also tweaked to provide relevant information to FRDC stakeholders in relation to the cascading impacts of this challenging period, as well as to track the impacts on FRDC stakeholders through coverage in the magazine. To ensure the content FRDC provides is timely and relevant to its audience, the FRDC has established a feedback page for stakeholders to use — ht

tps://www.frdc.com.

au/media-publications/fish/Feedback.

Message in a bottle The FRDC’s communications team started producing a weekly e-newsletter in May 2020 which is delivered to all stakeholders. Subscriptions are via FRDC’s homepage at www.frdc.com.au. The newsletter mainly focuses on information that can assist with how stakeholders can adapt to COVID-19.

Project communications and extension The FRDC has reviewed its extension activities, examining ways to better deliver information to end users. A large part of this was undertaken by looking at FRDC’s internal and external structures (RACs and IPAs) and how the system could be changed to improve extension and adoption.

In a

ddition, the FRDC started to undertake a number of synthesis projects that will, when complete, combine the research and knowledge around a particular area or issue — fo

r example bycatch.

104 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FISH magazine FISH magazine is a major tool for the FRDC to communicate with industry and its broader stakeholders. The publication is widely recognised as the leading fisheries research magazine in Australia. FISH magazine provides the FRDC with a platform for extending knowledge generated from research as well as to discuss key policy, practice and management issues that are relevant to fishing and aquaculture stakeholders.

During the year the FRDC ran a select tender process for the production of the magazine. A number of media production companies were identified as producing similar science-based content and asked to participate in the process. The companies were assessed against the selection criteria and evaluated by a panel consisting of the FRDC and two external rural RDC communication managers. Coretext was selected as the service provider to produce FISH magazine.

New issues and synthesis page The FRDC undertakes research across a wide range of topic areas. Some of these become ‘hot topics or issues’ that garner a lot of industry and public interest. Where possible the FRDC will provide an easy-to-understand summary of the research undertaken on that issue.

Th

e FRDC produces a range of digital-only communication materials including the quarterly stakeholder briefing (https://www.frdc.com.au/Media-Publications/Stakeholder-briefings), issues papers and e-mail updates. These publications are shared via e-mail to subscribers and key stakeholders on the FRDC’s customer database.

National Carp Control Plan Communications activities in relation to the National Carp Control Plan (NCCP) have been a key focus for the FRDC over the past year. Activities included a regular progress report circulated via FISH magazine as well as to stakeholders at workshops and other events. In addition, the FRDC published regular media releases to inform the public of both the research as it is completed and of the more general activities being undertaken by the NCCP team. The NCCP exists in a contested space of complex and controversial research. For this reason, communications activities have been guided by an ethos of adherence to the research results and to maintain both transparency and an agnostic stance in relation to the outcome of the NCCP. For more on the NCCP see the section on page 59.

105 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 3

little fish films The FRDC organised an international short film competition aimed at school children. The goal was to raise awareness in the younger generation of the aquatic environment and how humans interact with it. The FRDC had gained the support and collaboration of fisheries agencies in other regions and applications had started when COVID-19 hit.

The competition was to be run in coordination with the World Fisheries Congress due to take place in October 2020 in Adelaide. However, due to the pandemic, the Congress was postponed by 12 months and the competition was also put on hold.

International collaboration The FRDC is a member of the International Coalition of Fishing Associations Global Communication group. Throughout the year, the group meets four times to look at key issues to develop consistent information for industry and consumers. This year, the group also undertook an exercise to identify and map significant issues and areas of change in fishing and aquaculture across the world over the next five years (all prior to COVID). The key changes raised across all areas of the network are:

• efficiencies of different forms of seafood production,

• appropriate resource management,

• trade distortion, embargoes, agreements,

• available workforce,

• spatial management,

• fish production volume,

• microplastics,

• climate change,

• changing landscape for seafood sustainability,

• animal welfare.

Digital media The internet and associated enabling technologies will continue to be the central point from where the FRDC will deliver information. All finalised FRDC project reports are available from www.frdc.com.au

All the FRDC sites continue to be upgraded to provide better integration as part of FRDC’s ICT strategy. The curation and collation of online content in relation to particular projects and issues has also continued to be a focus over the last year and work is ongoing. Project specific sites and pages have been developed during the year such as the SeSafe website — se

safe.com.au — fo

cusing on safety

training for the seafood sectors.

Social media provides the FRDC a platform to engage with stakeholders and consumers and address and respond to questions. As a whole, across all social media platforms, the FRDC has now almost 50,000 followers. A library of you

Tube videos has also been created to cover topics from cooking

seafood to fishing and aquaculture practices. The FRDC social media channels include:

• www.facebook.com/FRDCAustralia,

• twitter.com/FRDCAustralia,

• www.facebook.com/fishfiles,

• www.facebook.com/catchoftheyear,

• @frdc_au.

106 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

107 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

REPORT OF OP ERATIONS

PA

RT 4:

MANAgEM

ENT AND

ACCO

UNTBILITy

108 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

management and accountability Management and accountability activities focus on continually improving how the FRDC operates and manages its organisation. A large part of the activities undertaken align and respond to legislative and financial requirements. These also align with the corporate governance section starting on page 111.

The FRDC strategic planning and reporting documents (comprising RD&E plan, annual operational plan and annual report) were completed and presented within their legislated timeframes to the Minister for Agriculture and his department. These documents aim to identify the key issues that face the FRDC, and outline strategies to take advantage of opportunities, and to minimise or mitigate against negative threats.

Principal inputs During 2019-20, there was $5.5 million or around 16 per cent of total FRDC expenditure.

Performance indicators Since the management and accountability outputs contribute to the planned outcome of the FRDC’s RD&E programs, they are crucial to the FRDC’s effectiveness and efficiency. These outputs are outlined below.

Performance indicators Target Achievement

Projects focus on the FRDC boa

rd’s assessment

of priority research and development issues.

Ni

nety-five p

er c

ent

are a priority.

Achieved. Projects align with strategic priorities set out in AOP and partner plans.

Projects are assessed as meeting high standards/ peer review requirements for improvements in performance and likely adoption.

Ninety-five p

er c

ent

are a high priority.

Achieved.

Maintain ISO9001:2008 accreditation. FRDC maintains certification.

Achieved. See page 100.

Submit planning and reporting documents in accordance with legislative and Australian Go

vernment requirements and timeframes.

One hundred per cent met Go

vernment requirements.

Achieved. All documents submitted in accordance with requirements.

Im

plement best practice governance arrangements to promote transparency, good business performance and unqualified audits.

Achieve unqualified audit result.

Achieved. See audit report pages 127-128.

Demonstrate the benefits of RD&E investments by positive benefit cost analysis results.

ben

efit analysis undertaken on one i

nvestment area.

Achieved. Average benefit cost analysis results see pages 63, 69, 75, 81, 87, 92.

109 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 4

Staffing The FRDC is governed by a board of directors (see page 118) appointed for their expertise and is led by a Managing Director who manages the day-to-day operations of the organisation.

In 2019-20, the FRDC employed 20 people (four staff are part time) across its operations with an average staffing level of 19.3. FRDC’s staff are one of its most important resource, and are key to the Corporation’s ongoing success.

ALL O NGOING E MPLOyEE S C URRENT R EPORT P ERIOD ( 2019-20)

Male Female Total

Full time

Part time

Total male

Full time

Part time

Total female

Australian Capital Territory 4 0 4 2 0 2 6

Total 4 0 4 2 0 2 6

* There were no ongoing employees in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, V ictoria or Western Australia.

ALL N

ON-ON

GOING E

MPLOyEE

S C

URRENT R

EPORT P

ERIOD (

2019-20)

Male Female Total

Full time

Part time

Total male

Full time

Part time

Total female

Australian Capital Territory 2 0 2 3 3 6 8

New South Wales 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Northern Territory 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

South Australia 2 0 2 1 1 2 4

Total 5 0 5 5 4 9 14

* There were no non-ongoing employees in Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria or Western Australia.

ALL O

NGOING E

MPLOyEE

S P

REVIOUS R

EPORT P

ERIOD (

2018-19)

Male Female Total

Full time

Part time

Total male

Full time

Part time

Total female

Australian Capital Territory 4 0 4 3 0 3 7

Total 4 0 4 3 0 3 7

* There were no ongoing employees in New South Wales, the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, V ictoria or Western Australia.

ALL N

ON-ON

GOING E

MPLOyEE

S P

REVIOUS R

EPORT P

ERIOD (

2018-19)

Male Female Total

Full time

Part time

Total male

Full time

Part time

Total female

Australian Capital Territory 4 0 4 3 3 6 10

New South Wales 1 0 1 1 1 2 3

South Australia 2 0 2 3 1 4 6

Total 7 0 7 7 5 12 19

* There were no non-ongoing employees in the Northern Territory, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria or Western Australia.

110 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

equal employment opportunity The FRDC promotes a work environment that is free from discrimination on the basis of race, colour, sex, sexual preference, age, physical or mental disability, marital status, family responsibilities, pregnancy, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, or on the basis that an individual either is, or is not, a member of a union of employees, or of a particular union of employees.

The FRDC has a policy of equal employment opportunity. Merit-based principles are applied in recruitment and promotion to ensure discrimination does not occur.

Industrial democracy The FRDC’s staff members work as a team in which all contribute freely. This process is strongly reinforced by the FRDC’s total quality management philosophy and the attendant emphasis on continual improvement. Staff members are provided with the opportunity at regular meetings to raise issues and discuss options to resolve how they are handled.

Disability and accessibility The FRDC’s employment policies and procedures align with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 in the broader context of the National Disability Strategy 2010-2020. The FRDC’s recruitment and staff development practices seek to eliminate disadvantage that may be contributed to by disabilities. Consultation with people with a disability and when required, with appropriate specialist organisations, is a component of the FRDC’s policies and practices, recognising the effect of a disability differs widely between individuals and that often a little thought makes a big difference in meeting a person’s needs.

Final report requirements Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 , Australian Government agencies are required to ensure information and services are provided in a non-discriminatory accessible manner — th

e FRDC aims to

make all project reports meet these requirements. Where information is not accessible, the FRDC ensures that it is made available in a suitable format.

behaviour Corporate governance practices are evolving rapidly, both in Australia and overseas. The FRDC is proactive in adopting better practices, including those governing ethical behaviour, into its own processes. The FRDC has a code of conduct that is appropriate to its structure and activities. New directors and staff are briefed and sign off agreeing to comply with the code during induction training.

Records management The National Archives of Australia undertakes an annual assessment (Check-up PLUS) looking at maturity and performance in information and data management. Check-up PLUS is structured to align with the National Archives’ Information Management Standard. The survey assesses agencies maturity and performance in information and data management, in line with the Digital Continuity 2020 Policy.

A total of 166 agencies completed the 2019 Check-up PLUS survey. The FRDC scored an overall maturity score of 3.81 out of 5, an increase from 2019. This is 0.56 above the Australian Government average of 3.25.

111 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 4

FRDC scores Rank (out of 166 a gencies) Position

Governance index 3.00 40 out of 166 Middle third of agencies

Information creation/generation index 5.00 1 Top third of agencies

Interoperability index 3.76 42 Top third of agencies

Storing information digitally index 4.50 21 Top third of agencies

Disposing index 3.29 60 Middle third of agencies

Digital operations index 5.00 1 Top third of agencies

Overall index 3.81 34 Top third of agencies

Risk management There was no incidence of fraud detected at the FRDC during the year.

Risk management is incorporated into FRDC’s activities in accordance with its risk management policy, which is integrated into its quality management system and internal audit program. The risk policy also incorporates a fraud control framework in accordance with the Fraud Control Guidelines produced by the Attorney-General’s Department which seeks to minimise the likelihood and impact of fraud.

All staff participate in regular internal risk reviews which are used to update the FRDC’s risk register. Additionally, the boa

rd reviews the highest-ranked strategic risks at every meeting.

COVID-19 risks Following the outbreak of COVID-19, the FRDC undertook a risk review looking at the impacts of the pandemic. A COVID-19 risks matrix was identified and is updated regularly. key r

isks identified were

to staff, delivery of R&D and financial impacts (both on stakeholders and corporation).

Agreements and contracts Each year the FRDC engages companies, research institutions and government agencies to undertake RD&E activities. The process for applying for funding is outlined on the FRDC’s website. The FRDC engages each organisation using a contract or consultancy agreement that outlines the requirements and responsibilities associated with undertaking work for the FRDC. This includes obligations around government policy and standards such as privacy, fraud, and work health and safety. A list of all active pr

ojects, including projects approved is available on the website — w

ww.frdc.com.au

112 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Comcover Risk Management and ben chmarking Survey The FRDC completed the Comcover Risk Management and ben chmarking Survey, which is conducted every two years, and achieved a risk maturity of Optimal; noting that the average maturity level of all survey participants was integrated.

FIGuRe 4: COM PARISON O F C URRENT A ND T ARGET M ATURITy S TATUS A CHIEVED A CROSS E LEMENTS 1- 9 FO R yOU

R E

NTITy R

ELATIVE T

O yOU

R C

OMMUNITy O

F P

RACTICE

Industry contributions At the core of FRDC’s finances is maintaining solid partnerships with those contributing stakeholders, namely the state and territory fisheries agencies and individual industry sectors. The FRDC currently has 12 I

PAs.

These partnerships offer both parties a number of advantages. For industry, they provide more involvement in determining and undertaking RD&E. For the FRDC they provide a more certain flow of industry funds and ultimately a greater understanding of the fishing industry.

An overview of state and territory contributions against the maximum matchable contribution is shown in Table 8: Contributions, maximum matchable contributions by the Australian Government and returns on investment (page iii).

During the year, FRDC also held a share in Australian Seafood Co-products (ASCo) which is a company developed to look at alternate uses for fish processing waste. The company was closed on 30 jun

e

2020 (see Note 2.1C in the financial statements, page 152).

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

ELEMENT

FRDC maturity 2019 Community of practice average maturity 2019 Community of practice average maturity (overall) 2019

FRDC target 2019 Community of practice average target 2019

Fundamental

Element 1. Establishing a risk management policy 2. Establishing a risk management framework 3. Defining responsibility for managing risk 4. Embedding systemic risk management into business processes 5. Developing a positive risk culture 6. Communicating and consulting about risk 7. Understanding and managing shared risk 8. Maintaining risk management capability 9. Reviewing and continuously improving the management of risk

Developed Systematic Integrated Advanced Optimal

Fundamental Developed Systematic Integrated

MATURITY

Advanced Optimal

113 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 4

Consultancy services and selection of suppliers During the year, the FRDC engaged 11 consultancies which were valued at $10,000 or more (see tables below).

When selecting suppliers of goods and services, the FRDC follows its procurement policy procedure which seeks to achieve value for money and to deal fairly and impartially with its suppliers. Obtaining value for money does not necessarily require the cheapest supplier to be selected. Other factors considered are urgency, quality, ethical conduct of the supplier and whole-of-life costs.

The FRDC policies and procedures align with principles contained in the Commonwealth Procurement Rules and are available from the FRDC website.

CONSULTANCy SER VICES

Consultancy Description Amount

gST inclusive

$

I

T Payroll Solutions Provision of contract staff 390,936.70

Hays Recruitment Agency contracted staff 128,643.37

Mercer Workforce plan 95,751.29

yar

dstick Advisory Internal auditors 78,541.60

Forest Hill Consulting Performance and partner agreement review 41,527.28

be Su

stained Pty Ltd Leadership development 38,721.47

Ashurst Lawyers Legal advisory services 43,836.53

Dot Zone Information technology provider 28,281.25

Versecorp Pty Ltd Information technology provider 74,470.71

CONSULTANCy S ERVICES A S R EQUIRED U NDER SEC TION 3 11A O F T HE COM MONwEAlTH E lECT ORAl ACT 1 918

Consultancy Description Amount

gST inclusive

$

M

aking Data Easy Stakeholder data analytics and e-mail services 126,169.82

Intuitive Solutions Market research 58,000.00

legal Services Directions exp enditure Report On 9 August 2019, the FRDC submitted its signed Annual Compliance Certificate and Legal Services Directions Expenditure report to the Attorney-Generals Department.

Ministerial directions During the year the FRDC received no ministerial directions or notifications.

The PIRD Act provides that the portfolio Minister may give direction to the Corporation with respect to the performance of its functions and the exercise of its powers. In addition, the Finance Minister, under the PGPA Act, may notify the boa

rd of any general Australian Government policies that apply

to the FRDC.

114 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Government policy The FRDC complied with all relevant Australian Government policy requirements:

• Australian Government Cost Recovery Policy,

• Australian Government Commonwealth Procurement Rules,

• Australian Government Commonwealth Property Management Framework,

• Australian Government Public Sector Workplace barg

aining Policy,

• Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines 2011,

• Foreign Exchange (Forex) Risk Management,

• National Code of Practice for the Construction Industry and the Commonwealth’s Implementation Guidelines.

See the compliance index starting on page 182.

Protective Security Policy Framework The FRDC continues to align FRDC practices with the Protective Security Policy Framework. This year, a number of physical and system changes were implemented to not only meet the requirements of the framework but assist with staff safety during COVID. This included reducing access to external visitors and higher levels of access and entry. The FRDC continues to work on improving its security policies and procedures with regards to security risk management.

Judicial reviews and administrative tribunals There were no judicial or administrative tribunal decisions during the year.

Freedom of information During 2019-20, the FRDC received no requests pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). The FRDC is required to comply with the FOI Act.

In m

any cases it may not be necessary to request the information under the FOI Act — th

e FRDC may

simply provide it when asked. At all times, however, individuals have the option of applying under the FOI Act.

More information on freedom of information see Appendix E (pages 175-176) or the FRDC website to view the FOI Disclosure Log https://www.frdc.com.au/About/Freedom-of-information/Disclosure-Log.

energy efficiency The Commonwealth Government has established energy efficiency targets in its document Energy Efficiency in Government Operations Policy which seek to improve energy efficiency in relation to vehicles, equipment and building design.

The FRDC adheres to this policy. It is a minority tenant occupying part of an office building and does not own motor vehicles or large equipment. Prudent management of power consumption is followed within the FRDC’s premises. For example, energy efficient lighting has been installed and timer switches have been placed in offices to reduce the time lights are left on.

115 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 4

Work health and safety The FRDC is committed to providing a safe and healthy environment for all staff, contractors and visitors to its workplace. The Corporation recognises that its people are its greatest asset and its most valuable resource. The FRDC’s ultimate goal is that its workplace is free of injury, illness and disease (including COVID-19). The FRDC complies with its legislative obligations under the wor

k Health and Safety Act

2011 (WHS Act) and takes all reasonably practicable steps to ensure a safe working environment. Regular maintenance of equipment and testing of electrical cables is also undertaken.

The FRDC’s Workplace Health and Safety Policy and procedure has been developed in accordance with the requirements under the WHS Act in consultation with FRDC’s employees. The FRDC also recognises that continued reviewing and improvement of its health and safety management system makes good sense legally, morally and from a business perspective.

PART 4 O F T HE w ORk HEAlTH A ND SAF ETy A CT 2 011

Statistics of any notifiable incidents of which the entity becomes aware during the year that arose out of the conduct of businesses or undertakings by the entity.

• No injuries occurred on FRDC premises during 2019-20.

Initiatives taken during the year to ensure the health, safety and welfare of workers who carry out work for the entity.

• Co

nsultation of WHS issues includes all staff.

• Agreed health and safety management arrangements policy and procedures.

Health and safety outcomes (including the impact on injury rates of workers) achieved as a result of initiatives mentioned under pa

ragraph ( a) or previous initiatives.

• Health and safety awareness and incidents are a standing item for all staff meetings. • Occupational rehabilitation physiotherapist provides ergonomic assessments to all new staff in their

immediate working environment, and when requested.

• Staff provided with access to influenza vaccinations.

• Workplace safety training.

• Annual fire safety and warden training, and six-mo

nthly checks of fire safety equipment.

• Annual testing and tagging of electrical appliances.

• Qualified first aid officer and fire warden.

• Assessment of risks in line with the risk framework annual review.

Investigations conducted during the year that relate to businesses or undertakings conducted by the entity, including details of notices given to the entity during the year under part 10 of th

e Act.

• Increased awareness of roles and responsibilities in WHS including responsibilities of managers.

• No requests were received from staff and no undertakings were given by the FRDC.

• No directions or notices were given to the FRDC.

Notifiable incidents 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

Deaths 0 0 0 0 0

Dangerous occurrences 0 0 0 0 0

Serious personal injury 0 0 0 0 0

Incapacity 0 0 0 0 0

Total 0 0 0 0 0

Comcare Australia is responsible for worker’s compensation insurance coverage within the FRDC. The insurance premiums are levied each year based on the level of salaries and wages costs and experience in claims made by employees.

116 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

117 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

REPORT OF OP ERATIONS

PA

RT 5:

CORP

ORATE

gOvE

RNANCE

118 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Corporate governance Governance refers to processes by which organisations are directed and controlled — in cluding, characteristics such as authority, accountability, stewardship and leadership. Corporate governance is concerned with structures and processes for decision making, and with controls and behaviour within organisations that support effective accountability for performance outcomes.

The FRDC’s general governance arrangements are established by legislation and government policies and reporting requirements. In addition to the requirements of the PIRD Act, which includes an annual operational plan, a research and development plan and an annual report, the Corporation also operates under the provisions of the PGPA Act which applies high standards of accountability for statutory authorities.

The boa

rd and staff are strongly committed to ensuring good corporate governance. In doing so, the focus is on policies, structures, processes, controls, behaviours and transparency. To support the FRDC’s high level of commitment to these principles, a full list of FRDC policies and copies of the financial statements are available from the FRDC website — ww

w.frdc.com.au

The board The FRDC board sets the overarching direction and strategy for the organisation. It has ensured that the necessary governance (policies), systems and procedures are in place to enable the organisation to invest in priority areas and specific RD&E activities.

The boa

rd comprises eight directors who are appointed in accordance with sections 17 and 77 of the PIRD Act. Directors are selected on the basis of their expertise in a variety of fields including commodity production and processing, conservation, science, economics, and business and financial management. All directors, except the Managing Director, are appointed for three ye

ars on a part-time basis.

At the commencement of a term all directors undergo a formal induction including a workshop run by the Australian Institute of Company Directors. In addition, to ensure the boa rd has a strong understanding and connection to the fishing industry and its stakeholders, it meets outside Canberra wherever possible (ideally at least three times a year in regions key to the fishing industry. This provides directors with the opportunity to discuss relevant issues with industry stakeholders, as well as see first-hand, the fishing industry in action.

The boa

rd plays a fundamental role in guiding the organisation and providing the FRDC management with strong leadership. It oversees corporate governance, ensuring the FRDC has a good framework of policies and procedures, playing a strong role in the approval and oversight of financial matters including approval of any high-risk projects.

A key update during the year was revising the delegation policy by which the boa

rd entrusts specific

powers to either FRDC directors and employees, pursuant to section 90 of the PIRD Act. It also reinforced the organisational focus to ensure that FRDC management are focused on those matters it is best suited to manage.

In a

ddition, this year the boa

rd approved the AOP and funds for current commitments (existing contracted projects), and for new commitments delegating FRDC management to oversee that these investments are in line with stakeholder priorities, the AOP and the new R&D Plan 2020-25 — wi

th the

boa

rd providing the necessary governance, oversight and approval for projects that are high risk. The objective is to provide a more flexible and nimble approach to investment, so the FRDC can assess applications at any time throughout the year.

Details of the directors who held office during the year are shown on the following pages.

119 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 5

TOP T O bOT TOM, leFT T O R IGHT: MR j OHN WIL

LIAMS (

CHA

IR), THE HON. RON b

OSWELL (

RETIR

ING CHA

IR),

PRO

FESSOR COL

IN b

UxTO

N (

DEP

UTy CHA

IR), DR k

ATE b

ROOkS, DR SAR

ANNE COOkE,

MS k

ATIE HOD

SON, MR MARk k

ING, MR j

OHN LLOyD,

DR LES

LEy MacLEO

D, DR PAT

RICk HON

E (

MAN

AGING DIR

ECTOR).

120 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Directors’ biographies

Mr John Williams: Chair Appointed Chair from 10 March 2020

joh

n Williams was elected to Federal Parliament in 2007 as Senator for New South Wales and was sworn in on 26 August 2008. joh

n was born in jam

estown South Australia but has lived most of his

life in the Inverell district in the New England region of New South Wales. Prior to entering politics, he had been a truck driver, shearer, farmer and a small business owner.

With this background, joh

n understands regional Australia and the issues small business operators deal with every day. joh

n is a strong advocate for the reduction of red tape in small business to allow businesses to not only survive and compete but to grow and prosper. His vision is for regional Australia to obtain adequate funding to maintain rural communities and facilities and maintain the way of life so many people enjoy.

the Hon. Ron bos well: Chair Appointed as Chair 1 September 2016, reappointed August 2019 and resigned 10 January 2020.

Ron bos

well represented the National Party in the Australian Senate for Queensland from 1983 to 2014 and led the party in the Senate from 1990 to 2007. In 2008 he became Father of the Senate.

Over the course of his political career Ron was the leader of the Nationals in the Senate from 10 April 1990 to 3 December 2007, holding many positions in the Coalition shadow ministry including Shadow Minister for Regional Development and External Territories (from September 1988 to April 1990), Shadow Minister for Northern Australia and External Territories (April 1993 to May 1994) and Shadow Minister for Consumer Affairs (May 1994 to December 1994). bos

well was appointed Parliamentary

Secretary to the Minister for Transport and Regional Services in jul

y 1999 but left the position in

October 2003.

Ron is a strong advocate for Australia’s primary producers and improving their productivity and profitability based on the best knowledge available.

Professor Colin bux ton: Director (Deputy Chair) Director from 1 September 2015 to 31 August 2018, reappointed 10 October 2018.

Colin bux

ton is an independent director and principal consultant at Colin bux

ton & Associates. In 2014

he retired as Director of the Fisheries, Aquaculture and Coasts Centre at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania (UTAS), where he is now an Emeritus Professor. Colin has held senior management positions at the Port Elizabeth Museum, Rhodes University and the Australian Maritime College, as well as being the inaugural director of the Tasmanian Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute at UTAS. A fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, he has served on the board of several organisations including the Aquaculture, Finfish and Seafood CRCs, Southern Rock Lobster Ltd (Chair) and the Tasmanian Environment Protection Authority. He is also Chair of the National Fisheries Advisory Council and serves on the Tasmanian Marine Farming Review Panel. Colin has a broad knowledge and experience in coastal marine environments, fisheries and aquaculture and is a frequent consultant and advisor to government and industry in Australia, Africa and the United States. A graduate of the University of Cape Town (Masters) and Rhodes University (PhD), he is internationally recognised and has published widely on his work on the life histories and effects of exploitation on reef fishes. Much of his research has been focused on understanding the role of Marine Protected Areas as a conservation and fisheries management tool.

121 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 5

Dr Kate brooks: Director Appointed Director from 10 October 2018.

kat

e bro

oks is an experienced non-executive director and panel advisory member in the coastal, marine and fisheries management sectors. This is augmented by an established career as a consulting sociologist, working almost exclusively in the fishing and seafood industry and related areas, since 2007. She is an internationally recognised social researcher in the area of marine and natural resource management and reputational risk for over 20 years, and has collaborated with clients across Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Dubai, Europe and the United kin

gdom. Her application of intellectual rigor and

curiosity to strategic planning, implementation and extension is focused on delivering strategically sustainable development and growth for industry in the context of also creating supportive community environments.

kat

e has worked with the seafood industry since 2000. She holds a master’s degree in social impact assessment, and a PhD in social capital, both with the focus on supporting and developing industry and community benefit. In that time, she has played a key role in bringing the social dimension to triple bottom line approaches in the management of fisheries and the seafood industry as a whole. kat

e is

also a graduate and member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.

Dr Saranne Cooke: Director Appointed Director from 10 October 2018.

Dr Saranne Cooke is a professional director and chair with experience on a variety of boards across the education, health, sport, financial and not-for-profit sectors. Saranne is Deputy Chancellor of Charles Sturt University, Racing NSW boa

rd Member, HESTA Trustee boa

rd member, Director of the Western

NSW Primary Health Network, Director of Leading Age Services Australia, and Chair of the Western Region NSW Committee of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.

Prior to her career as a professional director, Saranne held a number of senior roles within the energy, financial, education and manufacturing industries. She completed her doctorate researching board governance across the ASx 2

00 companies in 2018. Saranne also holds a bac

helor of Commerce,

Master of bus

iness (Marketing), and a Master of Commercial Law. She is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, a Fellow Certified Practising Accountant, a Fellow of the Australian Marketing Institute, a Certified Practising Marketer and a member of the Golden key I

nternational

Honour Society.

Ms Katie Hodson- thom as: Director Appointed Director from 10 October 2018.

kat

ie Hodson-Thomas represented the Western Australian metropolitan electorate of Carine from 1996-2008. During her time in parliament she served as a Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health; held shadow portfolio responsibilities for transport, tourism, small business, environment, and road safety; and was Deputy Chair of the Community Development and jus

tice Standing Committee.

After retiring from parliament, she joined several membership-based industry associations holding senior positions. Prior to joining FTI Consulting in 2012 she ran her own consultancy practice specialising in government relations. kat

ie was elected as the first female independent Chair of Western Australian Fishing Industry Council at the 2017 Annual General Meeting; is a Member of the Western Australian Gaming and Wagering Commission and the Gaming Community Trust; and has served as a jus

tice of

the Peace since 1997.

122 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Mr Mark King: Director Appointed Director from 10 October 2018.

Mark kin

g is a third-generation dried fruit grower and has a 100-hectare family farm growing sultanas and currants at Pomona, which is irrigated from the Darling River. Pomona is located in the far south west corner of New South Wales, and is 50 kilometres from South Australia and close to the Victorian border. Mark grew up on the Darling River and has witnessed the many changes to river health and irrigation demands. He is a former councillor and Deputy Mayor of the Wentworth Shire Council and was a former Chair of the Lower Murray Darling Catchment Management Authority (NSW) from 2000 to 2012. During this time, he had undertaken many projects that explored river and fish health in the Darling and Murray Rivers. Mark is now the current Chair of Dried Fruits Australia, which is the peak industry body, and has held this position for nine years. He is also a current board member of the National Farmers’ Federation. Mark has had experience with industry and a range of government boards and authorities. Mark ventured into aquaculture in 2012 growing Murray Cod, Silver Perch and Golden Perch within a dam system. With aquaculture growing in the surrounding area (Sunraysia), Mark sees this as a sustainable way to meet the growing demand for fish, without affecting wild fish numbers.

Mr John lloyd: Director Appointed Director from 10 October 2018.

joh

n Lloyd is the former CEO of Horticulture Innovation Australia/HAL leading both organisations over a nine-year period of significant growth, change and transition. He is a current director of Agribusiness Australia and Menari bus

iness Solutions Pty Ltd. Recently relocating to Orange New South Wales, he and his family run a small agricultural enterprise at bor

enore. joh

n is a director on boards of both

Charles Sturt University and Meat & Livestock Australia.

joh

n’s career has spanned most parts of the Australian agribusiness sector with senior leadership positions including Managing Director Case IH/New Holland ANZ; General Manager Commercial Incitec Pivot; and General Manager Merchandise Wesfarmers Dalgety. More recently joh

n has led a significant

restructure of the research corporation for the $10 billion horticulture sector, creating new funding models that have catered for its longer-term strategic issues as well as accessing broader and non-traditional sources of investment. These issues include Asian export markets, biosecurity, health and nutrition, pollination, major pests, intensive farming systems and urban greening. joh

n has a bac

helor

of Applied Science from the University of NSW as well as an MbA f

rom Macquarie University.

Dr lesley Mac leo d: Director Director from 1 September 2015 to 31 August 2018, reappointed 10 October 2018.

Lesley MacLeod is the former CEO of Dairy Innovation Australia and a former board member of Murray Dairy, bar

ley Australia and MbQI

P Ltd. Lesley is currently a director on the Agriculture Victoria Services board. Educated in Edinburgh, Scotland she has a first-class honours degree in marine biology and PhD from Heriot-Watt University. Following a 12-year research career in Edinburgh and Adelaide focusing on grains research Lesley moved into industry in Victoria where she gained over 20 years’ experience in senior agribusiness management for Australian and multinational companies. Lesley has a focus on research management, innovation and commercialisation and has established of a number of national R&D programs and not-for-profit companies. She has a Diploma in bus

iness Management and is a

graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.

123 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 5

Dr Patrick Hone: Managing Director Appointed Managing Director from 21 April 2005.

Patrick Hone is Managing Director of the FRDC and a member of the National Marine Science Committee. Patrick has extensive knowledge of all sectors of the fishing and aquaculture industries. He has more than 20 years working for the FRDC and has played a key role in the planning, management and funding of fishing and aquaculture related research, development and extension in Australia. In recent years Patrick has become one of Australia’s leading spokespeople on the role of marine science.

Patrick has a PhD from Adelaide University, and previously worked for the South Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI) on a wide range of aquaculture research for Southern blu

efin Tuna,

Pacific Oysters, mussels, yel

lowtail kin

gfish and abalone.

Attendance at boa rd meetings held during the year The tables below and on the following page show attendance at boa rd and committee meetings held during the year. The Chair approved all absences from boa

rd meetings in accordance with section 71(2)

of the PIRD Act.

TAb le 18: A TTENDANCE b y D IRECTORS A ND F RDC R EPRESENTATIVES A T bOA RD M EETINGS

Date 16/08/

2019

28

/11-

29/11/ 2019

26/

02/

2020

22/

04/

2020 v/c

28/

05/

2020 v/c

17/

06/

2020 v/c

25/

06/

2020 v/c

Th

e Hon. Ron bos

well

(Chair). Retired 10/01/2020

ye

s* n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Mr john

Williams (Chair). Appointed 10/03/2020 n/a n/a n/a ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr Patrick Hone (Managing Director) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Professor Colin bux

ton

(acting Chair from 01/11/2019 to 09/03/2020)

ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr kat

e bro

oks ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr Saranne Cooke ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Ms kat

ina (kat

ie)

Hodson-Thomas

ye

s ye

s ye

s

via t/c

ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Mr Mark kin

g ye

s* ye

s** ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s n/a

Mr joh

n Lloyd ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr Lesley MacLeod ye

s* ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Mr joh

n Wilson

(Company Secretary) ye

s n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Cheryl Cole (Acting General Manager bus

iness)

ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

* Early departure * * Ea

rly departure 29/11/2020 t/c: T

eleconference.

v/c: V

ideoconference. n/a: Si

gnifies the Committee member or FRDC representative was not eligible to attend the meeting (either they had not yet been appointed or their tenure had ended).

124 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

board committees The board had two committees operating during the year. The Finance, Audit and Risk Management (

FARM) committee and People and Culture committee. Each committee comprises at least two non-executive directors. The FARM committee provides financial oversight for the FRDC reporting back to the boa

rd, as well ensures effective communication to the external and internal auditors. The committee also oversees the FRDC Risk Management Framework. The People and Culture committee has oversight and responsibility relating to the people, remuneration and culture.

TAb le 19: ATT ENDANCE b y D IRECTORS, A ND A CTING G ENERAL M ANAGER bUS INESS A T F INANCE, A UDIT A ND R ISk MAN AGEMENT C

OMMITTEE ME

ETINGS

Date 14/08/

2019

27

/11/

2019

24/

02/

2020

28/

05/

2020

Dr S

aranne Cooke (Member) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Mr joh

n Lloyd (Member) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr Lesley MacLeod (Committee Chair) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr Patrick Hone (Member) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Cheryl Cole (Acting General Manager bus

iness) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

TAb le 20: ATT ENDANCE b y D IRECTORS A T T HE PEO PLE A ND CUL TURE COM MITTEE

Date 27/11/

2019

24/

02/

2020

Mr M

ark kin

g (Committee Chair) ye

s ye

s

Ms kat

ina (kat

ie) Hodson-Thomas (Member) ye

s ye

s*

The Hon. Ron bos

well (Member) Retired 01 jan

uary 2020 ye

s n/a

Dr Patrick Hone (Member) ye

s ye

s

Professor Colin bux

ton (Member) ye

s ye

s

Dr kat

e bro

oks (Member) ye

s ye

s

t/c: Via teleconference.

TAb

le 21: ATT

ENDANCE b

y D

IRECTORS A

T T

HE INV

ESTMENT MEC

HANISM WORkIN

G GRO

UP

Date 22/07/

2019

11/

11/

2019

28

/01

/2020

17/

03/

2020

29

/05/

2020 t/c

john

Lloyd (Chair) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr kat

e bro

oks (Member) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Professor Colin bux

ton (Member) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

Dr Patrick Hone (Member) ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s ye

s

t/c: Teleconference.

Record of meetings Minutes of each meeting are kept and agreed to by the boa rd. The Managing Director prepares a letter to the Minister on behalf of the Chair after boa

rd meetings, highlighting significant events and items.

The same occurs if a significant event occurs between boa

rd meetings.

125 RepoRt of opeRa tions part 5

Directors’ interests and related entity transactions The FRDC’s policy on directors’ interests, complies with section 27 and 29 and Rule 13-16b of the PGPA Act. The policy centres on the principle that a director must disclose an interest whenever he/she considers there is a potential conflict of interests.

A standing notice (register) about directors’ interests is updated at each boa

rd meeting. All declarations

of interests, and their consideration by the boa

rd, are recorded in the minutes.

Importantly, where the director has declared a ‘material personal interest’ in a matter that relates to the affairs of the FRDC, in addition to the duty of disclosing that interest, the director must not be present while the boa

rd is discussing that matter and, importantly, must not vote on the matter unless one of a number of specific exceptions applies.

Indemnities and insurance premiums for officers The Corporation holds directors’ and officers’ liability insurance cover through Comcover. During the year, no indemnity-related claims were made.

When appropriate, the FRDC may take out insurance policies to mitigate insurable risk.

Remuneration policy Remuneration of non-executive directors is determined by the Remuneration Tribunal.

Remuneration of the Managing Director and staff is determined by an FRDC policy set by the boa

rd.

The amount of individual remuneration of the Executive Director and staff is based on advice by Mercer Human Resources Consulting Pty Ltd. The amount is also influenced by performance measured against individual performance agreements and by the size of the program support component within the total FRDC budget, from which salaries are paid.

PIRD ACT R EQUIREMENTS

year 20 17-18 2018-19 2019-20

$ $ $

Remuneration and allowances to non-executive directors and independent committee member*

344,341

351,039

365,758

Se

lection committee expenses and liabilities 37,488 10,000 -

* The independent committee member resigned on 21 November 2018.

liabilities to staff The FRDC provides for liabilities to its staff by ensuring its financial assets (cash, receivables and investments) are always greater than its employee provisions. Compliance with this policy is evidenced in the Statement of Financial Position in the Corporation’s monthly financial statements.

126 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

127 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

2019-20 AUD ITOR- gEN

ERAL’ S REP

ORT

128 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

129 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

130 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

131 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

FINANCIAL STAT EMENTS FO

R T

HE yEA

R E

NDED

30

j

UNE 2020

132 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

CoNTENTs Certification

Statement by the Accountable Authority, Managing Director and A/g Chief Financial Officer 13

3

Primary financial statement

Statement of Comprehensive Income 13

4

Statement of Financial Position 13

5

Statement of Changes in Equity 13

6

Cash Flow Statement 13

7

Overview

Objectives of the FRDC 13

8

FRDC budgetary explanation of major variances 14

3

Notes to the financial statements :

1. Fi

nancial performance

1.1 E

xpenses 14

4

1.2 Ow

n-source income and revenue from the Australian Government 14

8

2. Fi

nancial position

2.1 Fi

nancial assets 15

1

2.2 No

n-financial assets 15

3

2.3 P

ayables 15

6

2.4 In

terest bearing liabilities 15

7

3. Pe

ople and relationships

3.1 Em

ployee provisions 15

8

3.2 key

management personnel remuneration 15

9

3.3 An

nual total remuneration ranges paid to key management personnel 16

0

3.4 Re

lated party disclosures 16

0

4. Fi

nancial instruments and fair value measurement

4.1 Fi

nancial instruments 163

4

.2 Fa

ir value measurement 16

4

5. Ot

her information

5.1 Agg

regate assets and liabilities 16

5

133 FINANCIAl STA TeMeNT S F OR T HE yEA R E NDED 3 0 j UNE 2 020

F I S H E R I E S R E S E A R C H A N D D E V E L O P M E N T C O R P O R A T I O N ( F R D C )

sTATEmENT bY T HE ACCoUN TAblE A UTHoRI TY (CHAIR AND CHAIR FINANCE, AUDIT AND RIsK mANAgEmEN

T Com

mIT

TEE), mANAgINg D

IRECToR

A

ND A/g

CHIEF FINANCIAl oFF

ICER

In our opinion, the attached financial statements for the period ended 30 jun e 2020 comply with subsection 42(2) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act), and are based on properly maintained financial records as per subsection 41(2) of the PGPA Act.

In our opinion, at the date of this statement, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the FRDC will be able to pay its debts as and when they fall due.

This statement is made in accordance with a resolution of the directors.

Signed .................................................................. 19

-August-2020

Mr joh

n Williams Da

te

Chair Accountable Authority

Signed .................................................................. 19

-August-2020

Dr Lesley MacLeod Da

te

Chair Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee

Signed .................................................................. 19

-August-2020

Dr Patrick Hone Da

te

Managing Director

Signed .................................................................. 19

-August-2020

Cheryl Cole Da

te

A/g Chief Financial Officer

134 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

statement of Comprehensive Income FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 30 jUNE 2020

2019-20

2018-19

Or

iginal budget

Notes $ $ $

NET COST OF SERvIC

ES

Expenses

Employee benefits 1.1A 3,036,925 3,605,110 4,021,000

Suppliers 1.1b 1,

512,070 1,542,554 2,097,000

Projects 1.1C 28,937,131 29,803,871 34,000,000

Depreciation and amortisation 2.2A 364,297 183,464 200,000

Finance costs 1.1D 10,018 - -

Write-down and impairment of assets 1.1E 5,001 12,073 -

Other expenses 1.1F 575,246 70,130 1,120,000

Total expenses 34,440,688 35,217,202 41,438,000

Own-source income

Own-source revenue

Revenue from contracts with customers 1.2A 817,717 - -

Interest 1.2b 302

,329 544,651 410,000

Grants 1.2C - 3,418,716 -

Contributions 1.2D 8,424,865 10,181,347 8,584,000

Other revenue 1.2E 1,403,353 1,931,438 2,600,000

Total own-source revenue 10,948,264 16,076,152 11,594,000

Total own-source income 10,948,264 16,076,152 11,594,000

Net cost of services 23,492,424 19,141,050 29,844,000

Revenue from the Australian Government 1.2F 22,083,577 23,478,957 23,407,000

(Deficit)/surplus on continuing operations (1,408,847) 4,337,907 (6,437,000)

OThE

R COMPREhE

NSIvE I

NCOME

Items not subject to subsequent reclassification to net cost of services

Changes in asset revaluation reserves 2.2A 115,315 (1,664) -

Total other comprehensive income/(loss) 115,315 (1,664) -

Total comprehensive income (loss)/income (1,293,532) 4,336,243 (6,437,000)

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

135 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

statement of Financial posi tion AS AT 30 jUNE 2020

2019-20

2018-19

Or

iginal budget

Notes $ $ $

ASSETS

Financial assets

Cash and cash equivalents 2.1A 26,411,348 24,553,443 15,657,000

Trade and other receivables 2.1b 2,30

6,370 4,826,305 3,493,000

Other investments 2.1C - 5,001 5,001

Total financial assets 28,717,718 29,384,749 19,155,001

Non-financial assets 1

buildings 2.2 A 834,433 - -

Plant and equipment 2.2A 129,400 74,450 122,000

Computer software 2.2A 601,095 686,425 1,100,000

Other non-financial assets 2.2b 14

,070 11,258 10,000

Total non-financial assets 1,578,998 772,133 1,232,000

Total assets 30,296,716 30,156,882 20,387,001

LIABILITIES

Payables

Suppliers 2.3A 193,836 255,499 190,000

Projects 2.3b 1,

414,377 210,786 250,000

Total payables 1,608,213 466,285 440,000

Interest bearing liabilities

Leases 2.4A 847,595 - -

Total interest bearing liabilities 847,595 - -

Provisions

Employee provisions 3.1A 695,438 1,019,845 797,000

Total provisions 695,438 1,019,845 797,000

Total liabilities 3,151,246 1,486,130 1,237,000

Net assets 27,145,470 28,670,752 19,150,001

EQUITy

As

set revaluation reserves 526,551 411,236 413,000

Retained earnings 26,618,919 28,259,516 18,737,001

Total equity 27,145,470 28,670,752 19,150,001

1. Right-of-use assets are included in the following line item — bui ldings..

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

136 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

statement of Changes in Equity FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 30 jUNE 2020

2019-20

2018-19

Or

iginal budget

$ $ $

RETAINED EARNINgS

Op

ening balance

bal

ance carried forward from previous period 28,259,516 23,921,609 25,174,001

Adjustment on initial application of AASb 15 / A ASb 1058 / A ASb 16

(231,750)

-

-

Op

ening balance 28,027,766 23,921,609 25,174,001

Comprehensive income

(Deficit)/surplus for the period (1,408,847) 4,337,907 (6,437,000)

Total comprehensive (loss)/income (1,408,847) 4,337,907 (6,437,000)

Closing balance as at 30 June 2020 26,618,919 28,259,516 18,737,001

ASSET REvAL

UATION RESERvE

Op

ening balance

bal

ance carried forward from previous period 411,236 412,900 413,000

Opening balance 411,236 412,900 413,000

Comprehensive income

Other comprehensive income/(loss) 115,315 (1,664) -

Total comprehensive income/(loss) 115,315 (1,664) -

Closing balance as at 30 June 2020 526,551 411,236 413,000

TOTAL EQUITy

Op

ening balance

bal

ance carried forward from previous period 28,670,752 24,334,509 25,587,001

Adjustment on initial application of AASb 15 / A ASb 1058 / A ASb 16

(231,750)

-

-

Op

ening balance 28,439,002 24,334,509 25,587,001

Comprehensive income

(Deficit)/surplus for the period (1,408,847) 4,337,907 (6,437,000)

Other comprehensive income/(loss) 115,315 (1,664) -

Total comprehensive (loss)/income (1,293,532) 4,336,243 (6,437,000)

Closing balance as at 30 June 2020 27,145,470 28,670,752 19,150,001

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

137 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Cash Flow sta tement FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 30 jUNE 2020

2019-20

2018-19

Or

iginal budget

Notes $ $ $

OPERATINg AC

TIvITI

ES

Cash received

Receipts from the Australian Government 24,215,784 22,248,062 24,607,000

Contributions 10,563,053 10,604,532 9,959,000

Grants 59,798 3,418,716 -

Interest 322,680 519,160 410,000

Net GST received 2,524,007 1,646,468 -

Other 1,543,688 2,124,582 -

Total cash received 39,229,010 40,561,520 34,976,000

Cash used

Employees (3,361,332) (3,597,929) (4,181,000)

Suppliers (2,534,291) (1,760,515) (3,199,000)

Projects expenditure (30,627,253) (32,881,918) (34,000,000)

Interest payments on lease liabilities (10,018) - -

Other (632,771) - -

Total cash used (37,165,665) (38,240,362) (41,380,000)

Net cash from operating activities 2,063,345 2,321,158 (6,404,000)

INvES

TINg AC

TIvIT

IES

Cash used

Purchase of property, plant and equipment - (16,799) (50,000)

Purchase of intangibles (43,556) (44,738) (300,000)

Total cash used (43,556) (61,537) (350,000)

Net cash used by investing activities (43,556) (61,537) (350,000)

FINANCINg AC

TIvIT

IES

Cash used

Principal payments of lease liabilities (161,884) - -

Total cash used (161,884) - -

Net cash used by financing activities (161,884) - -

Net increase in cash held 1,857,905 2,259,621 (6,754,000)

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the reporting period

24,553,443

22,293,822

22,411,000

Ca

sh and cash equivalents at the end of the reporting period

2.1A

26,411,348

24,553,443

15,657,000

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

138 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

oVERVIEW

ob

jectives of the FRDC The FRDC is an Australian Government controlled entity. It is a not-for-profit entity established as a statutory corporation on 2 july

1991 under the provisions of the Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989 (PIRD Act). The FRDC’s mission is to act as a national thought leader, facilitating knowledge creation, collaboration and innovation to shape the future of fishing and aquaculture in Australia for the benefit of the Australian people. To achieve this, the FRDC plans, invests in and manages research and development for fishing and aquaculture, and the wider community, and ensures that the resulting knowledge and innovation is adopted for impact. The FRDC also undertakes monitoring of key indicators of change across fishing and aquaculture. This helps in the evaluation of impact that results from the FRDC’s investments. Information collected is also of use to decision makers, to understand and respond to emerging issues.

The FRDC’s strong relationships with sectors, managers and researchers are fundamental to enable the needs of key stakeholders to be identified and addressed.

The FRDC is structured to meet the following outcome:

In

creased economic, social and environmental benefits for Australian fishing and aquaculture, and the wider community, by investing in knowledge, innovation and marketing.

The continued existence of the FRDC in its present form, and with its present outcome, is dependent on Australian Government policy, and on continuing funding from the Australian Government for the FRDC’s outcome.

The basis of preparation The financial statements are general purpose financial statements, and are required by section 42 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 .

The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with:

a) Pu

blic Governance, Performance and Accountability (Financial Reporting) Rule 2015 (FRR) , and

b) Au

stralian Accounting Standards and Interpretations — Re

duced Disclosure Requirements issued by

the Australian Accounting Standards boa

rd (AASb) th

at apply for the reporting period.

The financial statements have been prepared on an accrual basis, and in accordance with the historical cost convention, except for certain assets and liabilities at fair value. Except where stated, no allowance is made for the effect of changing prices on the results or the financial position. The financial statements are presented in Australian dollars.

New Australian Accounting Standards Adoption of new and future Australian Accounting Standard requirements The new standards, revised standards, interpretations and amending standards that were issued prior to the signing of the statements by the: boa

rd Chair; Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee

Chair; Managing Director; and A/g Chief Financial Officer; and are applicable to the current reporting period. The impact of the standards is considered further in Note 2.3b: Pr

oject payables and Note 2

.4A:

Leases.

139 FINANCIAl STA TeMeNT S F OR T HE yEA R E NDED 3 0 j UNE 2 020

Standard/Interpretation Nature of change in accounting policy, transitional provisions, and adjustment to financial statements

AA

Sb 1

5 Revenue from Contracts with Customers / A

ASb 2

016-8 Amendments to Australian Accounting St

andards — Australian Implementation Guidance for Not-for-Profit Entities and AASB 1058 Income of Not-For-Profit Entities

AA

Sb 1

5, AASb 2

016-8 and AASb 1

058 became effective 1 jul

y 2019.

AASb 1

5 establishes a comprehensive framework for determining whether, how much and when revenue is recognised. It replaces existing revenue recognition guidance, including AASb 1 18 Revenue, AASb 111

Construction Contracts and Interpretation 13 Customer loya lty Programmes. The core principle of AASb 1

5 is that an entity recognises

revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.

AA

Sb 1

058 is relevant in circumstances where AASb 1

5 does not apply.

AASb 1

058 replaces most of the not-for-profit (NFP) provisions of AASb 1

004 Contributions and applies to transactions where the consideration to acquire an asset is significantly less than fair value principally to enable the entity to further its objectives, and where volunteer services are received.

The details of the changes in accounting policies, transitional provisions and adjustments are disclosed below and in the relevant notes to the financial statements.

AASb 1

6 le

ases AASb 1

6 became effective on 1 jul

y 2019.

This new standard has replaced AASb 1

17 le

ases, Interpretation 4

Determining whether an Arrangement contains a lea

se, Interpretation 115

Operating leas

es — I

ncentives and Interpretation 127 Evaluating the Substance of Transactions Involving the leg

al Form of a lea

se.

AASb 1

6 provides a single lessee accounting model, requiring the recognition of assets and liabilities for all leases, together with options to exclude leases where the lease term is 12 months or less, or where the un

derlying asset is of low value. AASb 1 6 substantially carries forward the lessor accounting in AASb 1

17, with the distinction between operating

leases and finance leases being retained.

The details of the changes in accounting policies, transitional provisions and adjustments are disclosed below and in the relevant notes to the financial statements.

Application of AAS b 1 5 Revenue from Contracts with Customers / AASb 1058 Income of Not-For-Profit Entities The FRDC adopted AASb 1 5 and AASb 1 058 using the modified retrospective approach, under which the cumulative effect of initial application is recognised in retained earnings at 1 july 2

019. Accordingly,

the comparative information presented for 2018-19 is not restated, that is, it is presented as previously reported under the various applicable AASbs an

d related interpretations.

Under the new income recognition model the FRDC shall first determine whether an enforceable agreement exists and whether the promises to transfer goods or services to the customer are ‘sufficiently specific’. If an enforceable agreement exists and the promises are ‘sufficiently specific’ (to a transaction or part of a transaction), the FRDC applies the general AASb 1

5 principles to determine the appropriate

revenue recognition. If these criteria are not met, the FRDC shall consider whether AASb 1

058 applies.

In relation to AASb 1

5, the FRDC elected to apply the new standard to all new and uncompleted contracts from the date of initial application. The FRDC is required to aggregate the effect of all of the contract modifications that occur before the date of initial application.

140 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

In terms of AASb 1 058, the FRDC is required to recognise volunteer services at fair value if those services would have been purchased if not provided voluntarily, and the fair value of those services can be measured reliably.

The first column shows amounts prepared under AAS b 1

5 and AASb 1

058 and the second column

shows what the amounts would have been had AASb 1

5 and AASb 1

058 not been adopted:

1 july 2019

I

mpact on transition

The impact on transition is summarised below:

Departmental

Liabilities

Contract liabilities 231,750

Total liabilities 231,750

Total adjustment recognised in retained earnings 231,750

Set out below are the amounts by which each financial statement line item is affected as at and for the year ended 30 jun e 2020 as a result of the adoption of AASb

15 and AASb

1058. The first column

shows amounts prepared under AASb 1

5 and AASb 1

058 and the second column shows what the

amounts would have been had AASb 1

5 and AASb 1

058 not been adopted:

Transitional disclosure AASB 15 /

AASB 1058

Previous AAS

Inc

rease / (decrease)

$’000 $’000 $’000

Revenue

Revenue from contracts with customers 817,717 - 817,717

Grants - 877,515 (877,515)

Contributions 8,424,865 8,950,865 (526,000)

Total revenue 9,242,582 9,828,380 (585,798)

Net (cost of)/contribution by services 9,242,582 9,828,380 (585,798)

Departmental

Liabilities

Contract liabilities 817,548 - 817,548

Total liabilities 817,548 - 817,548

Total adjustment recognised in retained earnings 817,548 - 817,548

Application of AAS b 1 6 Leases The FRDC adopted AASb 1 6 using the modified retrospective approach, under which the cumulative effect of initial application is recognised in retained earnings at 1 july 2

019. Accordingly, the comparative

information presented for 2019 is not restated, that is, it is presented as previously reported under AASb 1

17 and related interpretations.

The FRDC elected to apply the practical expedient to not reassess whether a contract is, or contains a lease at the date of initial application. Contracts entered into before the transition date that were not identified as leases under AAS b

117 were not reassessed. The definition of a lease under AAS b

16 was

applied only to contracts entered into or changed on or after 1 july 2

019.

141 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

AASb 1 6 provides for certain optional practical expedients, including those related to the initial adoption of the standard. The FRDC applied the following practical expedients when applying AASb 1 6 to leases

previously classified as operating leases under AAS b 1

17:

• Apply a si

ngle di

scount ra

te to a po

rtfolio of le

ases wi

th re

asonably si

milar ch

aracteristics,

• Exclude ini

tial di

rect co

sts fro

m th

e me

asurement of ri

ght-of-use as

sets at th

e da

te of ini

tial

ap

plication for leases where the right-of-use asset was determined as if AASb 1

6 had been applied

since the commencement date,

• Reliance on pr

evious as

sessments on wh

ether le

ases ar

e on

erous as op

posed to pr

eparing an

im

pairment review under AASb 1

36 impairment of assets as at the date of initial application, and

• Applied th

e ex

emption no

t to re

cognise ri

ght-of-use as

sets an

d lia

bilities fo

r le

ases wi

th le

ss th

an

12 m

onths of lease term remaining as of the date of initial application.

As a lessee, the FRDC previously classified leases as operating or finance leases based on its assessment of whether the lease transferred substantially all of the risks and rewards of ownership. Under AASb 1

6,

the FRDC recognises right-of-use assets and lease liabilities for most leases. However, the FRDC has elected not to recognise right-of-use assets and lease liabilities for some leases of low value assets based on the value of the underlying asset when new or for short-term leases with a lease term of 12 m

onths or less.

On adoption of AASb 1

6, the FRDC recognised right-of-use assets and lease liabilities in relation to leases of office space, which had previously been classified as operating leases.

The lease liabilities were measured at the present value of the remaining lease payments, discounted using the FRDC’s incremental borrowing rate as at 1 july 2

019. The FRDC’s incremental borrowing rate

is the rate at which a similar borrowing could be obtained from an independent creditor under comparable terms and conditions. The annual weighted-average rate applied was 1.0896%.

The right-of-use assets were measured as follows:

a) Of

fice space: measured at an amount equal to the lease liability, adjusted by the amount of any prepaid or accrued lease payments.

b) Al

l other leases: the carrying value that would have resulted from AASb 1

6 being applied from the

commencement date of the leases, subject to the practical expedients noted above.

142 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Impact on transition On transition to AASb 16, the FRDC recognised additional right-of-use assets and additional lease liabilities, recognising the difference in retained earnings. The impact on transition is summarised below:

1 july 2019

D

epartmental

Right-of-use assets — bui

ldings 612,889

Lease liabilities (612,889)

Retained earnings -

The following table reconciles the Departmental minimum lease commitments disclosed in the FRDC’s 30 jun e 2019 annual financial statements to the amount of lease liabilities recognised on 1 july

2019:

1 july 2019

M

inimum operating lease commitments at 30 jun

e 2019 617,566

Less: low value leases not recognised (4,677)

Undiscounted lease payments 612,889

Less: effect of discounting using the incremental borrowing rate as at the date of initial application

-

Le

ase liabilities recognised at 1 July 2019 612,889

Taxation The FRDC is exempt from all forms of taxation except Fringe ben efits Tax (F bT) a nd the Goods and Services Tax (GST).

Comparative Comparative figures have been adjusted so they conform with changes in the presentation of these financial statements at Note 1.1F: Other expenses.

events after the reporting period The FRDC recognises ongoing uncertainties due to the widespread impact of COVID-19, and in particular the second wave post 30 jun

e 2020. At this stage the financial impact on FRDC has not been

material. The FRDC has taken a number of measures to continually monitor and mitigate the financial and operational effects of COVID-19 within our industry.

In addition, we have developed strategies to mitigate the effects within the workplace to protect the safety and wellbeing of our staff.

143 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

FRDC budgetary explanation of major variances The following information provides a comparison of the original budget as presented in the 2019- 20 P

ortfolio bud

get Statements (PbS) t

o the 2019-20 final outcome as presented in accordance

with Australian Accounting Standards for the FRDC. The budget is not audited. Explanations of major variances are provided below.

Major variance and explanations from original budget to actual result for 2019-20 Statement of Comprehensive Income Employee expenses decreased due to unanticipated staff exits and delays in recruitment commencing the new workforce plan.

Supplier expenses decreased due to reduced travel arrangements and ICT costs.

Project contractual commitments originally forecast can vary due to the timing of completion of project deliverables. Project deliverables are subject to significant variation due to research delays and in 2019-20 project expenses decreased largely driven by impacts of COVID-19.

Depreciation increased due to the adoption of the new Accounting Standard AASb 1

6.

Other expenses allowed for marketing expenses for marketing levy arrangements that were not established.

Grants increased due to additional Research & Development (R&D) funding received from Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) under the Research & Development deed with DAWE.

The original budget has been reclassified under AAS b 1

055 (6 and 12) to represent the actual result

with the following line items:

• Contributions we

re in

creased $1

.2 mi

llion to in

clude th

e in

dustry le

vy co

ntributions fo

r th

e Au

stralian

Fi

sheries Management Authority R&D levies and the Australian Prawn Farmers Association levies.

• Revenue fr

om Au

stralian Go

vernment ha

s be

en re

duced $1

.2 mi

llion to re

move th

e in

dustry le

vy

co

ntributions for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority R&D levies, and the Australian Prawn Farmers Association prawn levies.

Other revenue originally forecast allowed for additional increased project contributions that did not eventuate.

Changes in asset revaluation reserves increased due to the revaluation of fixed assets under a new leasing term of 3 years.

Statement of Financial Position Cash and cash equivalents were higher due to contractual project commitments expenditure delays, that were originally forecast to be spent in 2019-20. This resulted in a higher than anticipated cash balance at year end and these commitments will now be paid in 2020-21.

Trade and other receivables may vary due to the timing of the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Australian Gross Value Production Determination which can result in increases to aged debtors at year end. The decrease is due to revenue from Australian Government that was re

ceived earlier than originally forecast in the 2019-20 PbS.

P

roject payables increased due to adoption of the new Accounting Standard AASb 1

5 resulting in an

increase to contract liabilities.

144 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

building and interest bearing liabilities increased as a result of adoption of the new Accounting Standard A ASb 16.

I

ntangibles varied due to the intangible costs and extent of works were lower than budget.

Retained earnings increased due to the increase in net income as a result from lower than anticipated project expenses.

Statement of Cash Flows The variance between actual and forecast cash and cash equivalents for the period is explained in the Statement of Comprehensive Income and Statement of Financial Position.

Financial performance Note 1.1: expenses Note 1.1A: Employee benefits

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Wages and salaries 2,174,828 2,665,931

Superannuation

Defined contribution plans 186,191 207,562

Defined benefit plans 364,549 382,025

Leave and other entitlements 311,357 349,592

Total employee benefits 3,036,925 3,605,110

Accounting policy

Accounting policies for employee related expenses are contained at Note 3.1A.

145 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Note 1.1b: Suppliers

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

goo

ds and services supplied or rendered

Agency staff - 31,786

Asset purchases less than $5,000 20,589 52,196

Audit fees 36,000 36,000

External service providers 483,853 333,826

Insurance 32,640 37,149

Information technology 503,612 317,607

joi

nt research and development corporation (RDC) activities 72,390 56,347

Legal 27,247 11,381

Office supplies 14,292 19,192

Postage and couriers 1,883 2,769

Property 22,424 44,421

Recruitment/director selection costs - 4,527

Representation 31,728 69,085

Representative organisations consultation 46,699 5,926

Telecommunications 34,882 34,662

Training 79,031 116,370

Travel 70,178 155,730

Other 17,814 27,655

Total goods and services supplied or rendered 1,495,262 1,356,629

Other suppliers

Operating lease rental in connection with external parties

Workers compensation expenses 11,236 13,903

Operating lease rentals 1 5,572 172,022

Total other suppliers 16,808 185,925

Total suppliers 1,512,070 1,542,554

Supplier expenses in relation to communication activities were reclassified in the comparative year, due to the implementation of a new communications budget activity as per the FRDC 2019-20 approved Annual Operational Plan. As a result, $70,130 has been transferred to Note 1.1F.

1. Operating lease

Th

e FRDC has applied AASb 1

6 using the modified retrospective approach and therefore the comparative information has not been restated and continues to be reported under AASb 1

17.

Th

e FRDC has no short-term lease commitments as at 30 jun

e 2020.

Th

e above lease disclosures should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Notes 1.1b, 1.

1D, 2.2A and 2.4A.

Canb

erra office

Th

e lease for the office accommodation at 25 Geils Court, Deakin, Australian Capital Territory has been renegotiated for a further three years and expires 31 jul

y 2023. Lease payments are subject to a 3 percent annual increase in accordance with the lease agreement.

Ade

laide office

Th

e lease for the office accommodation at Wine Australia, corner bot

anic and Hackney Roads, Adelaide, South Australia

commenced 31 March 2016 with an annual right of renewal until 30 March 2021. The current lease term expires 30 Ma

rch 2021. Lease payments are subject to the annual increase in accordance with movements in the consumer price index.

146 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Accounting policy Short-term leases

The FRDC has no right-of-use assets and lease liabilities for short-term leases of assets that have a lease term of 12 months or less.

Note 1.1C: Projects

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Australian Government entities (related parties) 2,979,893 3,188,851

State and territory governments 5,227,433 7,050,061

Universities and educational bodies 8,546,062 7,851,284

Research and development corporations 175,622 15,804

Industry (commercial, recreational and Indigenous) 8,185,701 6,908,786

Overseas research entities 27,106 139,365

Private providers 3,795,314 4,649,720

Total projects 28,937,131 29,803,871

Accounting policy

The FRDC recognises project liabilities through project agreements that require research partners to perform services or provide facilities, or to meet eligibility criteria. In these cases, liabilities are recognised only to the extent that the services required have been performed, an invoice issued consistent with the contractual requirements, and the eligibility criteria have been satisfied by the research partner to the FRDC’s satisfaction and approved invoice payment by the relevant delegate.

Project commitments Project commitments comprise the future funding of approved projects that are contingent on the achievement of agreed deliverables over the life of those projects (project agreements are exchanged prior to release of the first payment on a project). Projects, where amounts were payable but were unpaid at the end of the period, have been brought to account as project payables. The FRDC contracts to fund projects in future years in advance of receipt of the income needed to fund them. FRDC manages this risk by having the project agreement allow for termination at its sole discretion for any reason. If the FRDC were to terminate a project agreement, it would only be liable to compensate the research partner for any reasonable costs in respect of unavoidable loss incurred by the research provider and directly attributable to the termination of the agreement, provided that the costs are fully substantiated to the FRDC.

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Project commitments are payable as follows:

Within 1 year (unpaid deliverables up to 30 jun

e 2020) 36,613,413 35,014,593

bet

ween 1 to 5 years (1 jul

y 2020 to 30 jun

e 2024) 22,234,485 16,352,491

Over 5 years (from 1 jul

y 2024) 55,000 -

Total project commitments 58,902,897 51,367,084

Note: Project commitments are GST inclusive.

147 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Note 1.1D: Finance costs

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Finance leases 1 10,018 -

Total finance costs 10,018 -

1. The FRDC has applied AASb 1 6 using the modified retrospective approach and therefore the comparative information has not been restated and continues to be reported under AASb 1 17.

Th

e above lease disclosures should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Notes 1.1b, 2.

2A and 2.4A.

Note 1.1E: Write down and impairment of assets

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Write down of ASCo shareholding investment 1 5,001 -

Write down of intangible assets 2 - 12,073

Total write down and impairment of assets 5,001 12,073

1. FRDC’s one-eighteenth share in Australian Seafood Co-Products Pty Ltd (ASCo) was written down to zero at 30 jun e 2020, due to the closure of the company (refer Note 2.1C: Other investments).

2. FR

DC’s business process software was written down at 31 October 2018.

Note 1.1F: Other expenses

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Communications

Annual report 25,321 23,765

Factsheets 11,922 -

Communications external provider 159,682 -

Media monitoring and releases 33,600 43,780

Other stakeholder consultation 25,500 -

FISH magazine 277,510 -

Sponsorship 8,446 -

Corporate merchandise 2,300 -

Photos and videos 368 2,585

Education materials and events 30,597 -

Total other expenses 575,246 70,130

In 2019-20 communications expenses were disclosed as a separate activity and consisted of new and existing communication activities. The comparative year includes existing expenses of $70,130, previously classified in Note 1.1 b: Su

pplier expenses. The FISH magazine was previously expensed as a

project ceasing in jan

uary 2020, and the expenses up to jan

uary 2020 were $233,230 (2018-19

$491,121). All other communication expenses with no comparatives listed are newly created communication activities with no previous comparative amounts.

148 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Note 1.2: Own-source income and revenue from the Australian Government Own-source revenue

Note 1.2A: Revenue from contracts with customers

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Australian Government entities (related parties) — ov

er time 817,717 -

Total revenue from contracts with customers 817,717 -

The FRDC has applied AASb 1 5 and AASb 1 058 and has not applied retrospectively for comparatives, and therefore it has not been restated.

Accounting policy

The FRDC receives revenue from the Australian Government under which it manages a suite of research activities. These activities are listed at Note 3.4b, page 162. FRDC has specific funding agreements with

the Australian Government that include enforceable rights and performance obligations. The FRDC initially recognises the funding received as a credit liability entry to recognise the contracted liability (refer Note 2.3b). O

nce the performance obligations have been satisfied as per the funding agreement milestones over time, it is then recognised as revenue from contracts with customers, unwinding the liability.

Note 1.2b: I nterest

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Deposits 302,329 544,651

Total interest 302,329 544,651

Accounting policy

Interest revenue is recognised using the effective interest method.

149 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Note 1.2C: Grants

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Australian Government

Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment 1 - 3,418,716

Total grants - 3,418,716

1. Research & Development funding from Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE).

Th

e FRDC has a Research & Development Funding Head Agreement with the DAWE under which it manages a suite of research activities. The activities are listed at Note 3.4b, pag

e 162.

The FRDC has applied AASb 1 5 and AASb 1 058 and has not applied retrospectively for comparatives, and therefore it has not been restated.

Accounting policy

Australian Government grants income is revenue paid to FRDC for the purpose of funding specific research and development projects, and is recognised when:

a) th

e FRDC obtains control of the grant or the right to receive the grant,

b) it i

s probable that the economic benefits comprising the grant will flow to the FRDC, and

c) th

e amount of the grant can be reliably measured.

Note 1.2D: Contributions

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Fisheries

Australian Prawn Farmers Association 161,555 130,666

Australian Fisheries Management Authority 826,902 1,359,182

New South Wales 584,581 778,953

Northern Territory 217,807 183,439

Queensland 683,776 891,953

South Australia 1,148,332 1,500,969

Tasmania 2,728,387 3,166,903

Victoria 281,108 239,562

Western Australia 1,792,417 1,929,720

Total contributions 8,424,865 10,181,347

Accounting policy

Contributions are recognised when:

a) th

e FRDC obtains control of the contribution or the right to receive the contribution,

b) it i

s probable that the economic benefits comprising the contribution will flow to the FRDC, and

c) th

e amount of the contribution can be reliably measured.

150 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Note 1.2E: Other revenue

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Project funds received 1,213,991 1,808,250

Project refunds of prior years expenditure 189,072 123,188

Other 290 -

Total other revenue 1,403,353 1,931,438

Accounting policy

Project funds received are recognised when they are entitled to be received by the FRDC.

Project refunds from research partners are brought to account when received.

Note 1.2F: Revenue from the Australian Government

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

Corporate Commonwealth entity payment item of 0.50% of AGVP 1 14,893,460 15,698,265

Matching of industry contributions 2 7,190,117 7,780,692

Total revenue from the Australian gov

ernment 22,083,577 23,478,957

1. AGVP is the average gross value of fisheries production for the current year and the two preceding financial years. The A ustralian Government’s contribution of 0.50% of AGVP is made on the grounds that the FRDC exercises a stewardship

role in relation to fisheries resources on behalf of the Australian community.

2. Ma

tching of industry contributions (up to 0.25% of AGVP) by the Australian Government.

Accounting policy Revenue from the Australian Government

Revenues from the Australian Government are recognised when they are entitled to be received by the FRDC.

Funding received or receivable from non-corporate Commonwealth entities (appropriated to the non-corporate Commonwealth entity as a corporate Commonwealth entity payment item for payment to this entity) is recognised as revenue from Government by the corporate Commonwealth entity unless the funding is in the nature of an equity injection or a loan.

151 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Financial position Note 2.1: Financial assets Note 2.1A: Cash and cash equivalents

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Cash on hand or at call 6,411,348 3,553,443

Cash on deposit:

Fixed term deposit — or

iginal term 3 months - 15,000,000

Fixed term deposit — or

iginal term 2 months 15,000,000 -

Fixed term deposit — or

iginal term 1 month 5,000,000 6,000,000

Total cash and cash equivalents 26,411,348 24,553,443

Accounting policy

Cash is recognised at its nominal amount. Cash and cash equivalents includes:

a) ca

sh on hand, and

b) de

mand deposits in bank accounts with an original maturity of three months or less that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and subject to insignificant risk of changes in value.

152 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Note 2.1b: tra de and other receivables

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

goo

ds and services receivables

Goods and services 720,256 1,561,369

Total goods and services receivables 720,256 1,561,369

Department of Agriculture, wat

er and the Environment

Receivables 1,429,630 2,744,120

Total receivables from Department of Agriculture, water and the Environment

1, 429,630

2,744,120

Oth

er receivables

GST receivable from the Australian Taxation Office 156,484 520,816

Total other receivables 156,484 520,816

Total trade and other receivables 2,306,370 4,826,305

Trade and other receivables are expected to be recovered

No more than 12 months 2,306,370 4,826,305

Total trade and other receivables 2,306,370 4,826,305

Trade and other receivables aged as follows

Not overdue 1 2,239,601 4,677,805

Overdue by

0 to 30 days - 148,500

31 to 60 days 66,769 -

Total trade and other receivables 2,306,370 4,826,305

1. Credit terms for goods and services are within 30 days (2018-19: 30 days).

Accounting policy Financial assets

Trade receivables, loans and other receivables that are held for the purpose of collecting the contractual cash flows where the cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest, that are not provided at below-market interest rates, are subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method adjusted for any loss allowance.

Note 2.1C: Other investments

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

One-eighteenth share in Australian Seafood Co-Products Pty Ltd (ASCo), an unlisted company converting fish waste and fish nutrient into agriculture fertiliser products

-

5,001

To

tal other investments - 5,001

Australian Seafood Co-Products Pty Ltd (ASCo) company closed effective 30 jun e 2020. The FRDC’s share was written down to zero at 30 jun e 2020, as no funds will be paid out to shareholders (refer Note 1.1E: Write down and impairment of assets).

153 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Note 2.2: Non-financial assets Note 2.2A: Reconciliation of the opening and closing balances of property, plant and equipment and intangibles

Reconciliation of the opening and closing balances of property, plant and equipment and intangibles

Buildings

Pr

operty, plant and equipment

Intangibles (computer software)

Total

$ $ $ $

As a

t 1 July 2019

Gross book value - 74,450 1,272,074 1,346,524

Accumulated depreciation and amortisation

-

-

(585,649)

(585,649)

To

tal as at 1 July 2019 - 74,450 686,425 760,875

Recognition of right of use asset on initial application of AASb 1 6

612,889

-

-

612,889

Ad

justed total as at 1 July 2019 612,889 74,450 686,425 1,373,764

Additions

Internally developed - - 43,556 43,556

Right-of-use assets 1 396,590 - - 396,590

Revaluations recognised in other comprehensive income 2

-

115,315

-

115,315

De

preciation and amortisation - (60,365) (128,886) (189,251)

Depreciation on right-of-use assets (175,046) - - (175,046)

Total as at 30 June 2020 834,433 129,400 601,095 1,564,928

Total as at 30 June 2020 represented by

Gr

oss book value 1,009,479 129,400 1,315,630 2,454,509

Accumulated depreciation and amortisation

(175,046)

-

(714,535)

(889,581)

To

tal as at 30 June 2020 834,433 129,400 601,095 1,564,928

Carrying amount of right-of-use assets 834,433 - - 834,433

1. Right-of-use assets (Building leases) Canb

erra office

Th

e lease for the office accommodation at 25 Geils Court, Deakin, Australian Capital Territory has been renegotiated for a further three years and expires 31 jul

y 2023, with a 3 year right of renewal until 31 jul

y 2026.

Ade

laide office

Th

e lease for the office accommodation at Wine Australia, corner bot

anic and Hackney Roads, Adelaide, South Australia

commenced 31 March 2016 with an annual right of renewal until 30 March 2021. The current lease term expires 30 M

arch 2021.

2. Re

valuations of non-financial assets As a

t 30 jun

e 2020, jon

es Lang LaSalle Public Sector Valuations conducted a revaluation of plant and equipment. A revaluation increment of $115,315 for 2019-20 (2018-19: decrement of $1,664) was applied to the asset revaluation reserve by asset class and included in the equity section of the Statement of Financial Position.

No i

ndicators of impairment were found for plant and equipment and intangibles.

No p

lant and equipment is expected to be sold or disposed of within the next 12 months.

154 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Accounting policy

Assets are recorded at cost on acquisition except as stated below. The cost of acquisition includes the fair value of assets transferred in exchange and liabilities undertaken. Financial assets are initially me

asured at their fair value plus transaction costs where appropriate.

Assets acquired at no cost, or for nominal consideration, are initially recognised as assets and income at their fair value at the date of acquisition, unless acquired as a consequence of restructuring of administrative arrangements. In the latter case, assets are initially recognised as contributions by owners at the amounts at which they were recognised in the transferor’s accounts immediately prior to the restructuring.

Asset recognition threshold

Purchases of property, plant and equipment are recognised initially at cost in the Statement of Financial Position, except for purchases costing less than $5,000 that are expensed in the year of acquisition (other than where they form part of a group of similar items where the value is greater than $5,000).

Lease right-of-use (ROU) assets

Leased ROU assets are capitalised at the commencement date of the lease and comprise of the initial lease liability amount, initial direct costs incurred when entering into the lease less any lease incentives received. These assets are accounted for by Commonwealth lessees as separate asset classes to corresponding assets owned outright, but included in the same column as where the corresponding underlying assets would be presented if they were owned.

On initial adoption of AASb 1

6 the FRDC has adjusted the ROU assets at the date of initial application by the amount of any provision for onerous leases recognised immediately before the date of initial application. Following initial application, an impairment review is undertaken for any right-of-use lease asset that shows indicators of impairment and an impairment loss is recognised against any right-of-use lease asset that is impaired. Lease ROU assets continue to be measured at cost after initial recognition in Commonwealth agency, GGS and Whole of Government financial statements.

Revaluations

Following initial recognition at cost, property, plant and equipment (excluding ROU assets) are carried at fair value less subsequent accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses. Valuations are conducted with sufficient frequency to ensure that the carrying amounts of assets do not differ materially from the assets’ fair values as at the reporting date. The regularity of independent valuations depend on the volatility of movements in market values for the relevant assets.

Revaluation adjustments are made on a class basis. Any revaluation increment is credited to equity under the heading of asset revaluation reserve except to the extent that it reverses a previous revaluation decrement of the same asset class that was previously recognised in the surplus/deficit. Revaluation decrements for a class of assets are recognised directly in the surplus/deficit except to the extent that they reversed a previous revaluation increment for that class.

Any accumulated depreciation as at the revaluation date is eliminated against the gross carrying amount of the asset, and the asset restated to the revalued amount.

155 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Depreciation

Depreciable property, plant and equipment assets are written off to their estimated residual values over their estimated useful lives to the FRDC using, in all cases, the straight-line method of depreciation.

Depreciation rates (useful lives), residual values and methods are reviewed at each reporting date and necessary adjustments are recognised in the current, or current and future reporting periods, as appropriate.

Depreciation rates applying to each class of depreciable asset are based on the following useful lives:

2019-20 2018-19

bu

ildings Lease term -

Leasehold improvements Lease term Lease term

Plant and equipment up to 5 years up to 5 years

Impairment

All assets were assessed for impairment at 30 jun e 2020. Where indications of impairment exist, the asset’s recoverable amount is estimated and an impairment adjustment made if the asset’s recoverable amount is less than its carrying amount.

The recoverable amount of an asset is the higher of its fair value less costs of disposal and its value in use. Value in use is the present value of the future cash flows expected to be derived from the asset. Where the future economic benefit of an asset is not primarily dependent on the asset’s ability to generate future cash flows, and the asset would be replaced if the entity were deprived of the asset, its value in use is taken to be its depreciated replacement cost.

Derecognition

An item of property, plant and equipment is derecognised upon disposal, or when no further future economic benefits are expected from its use or disposal.

Intangibles

The FRDC’s intangibles comprise internally developed software and purchased software for internal use. These assets are carried at cost less accumulated amortisation and accumulated impairment losses.

Software is amortised on a straight-line basis over its anticipated useful life. The useful lives of the FRDC’s software is 10 years (2018-19: 10 years).

All software assets were assessed for indications of impairment as at 30 jun

e 2020.

156 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Note 2.2b: O ther non-financial assets

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Prepayments 14,070 11,258

Total other non-financial assets 14,070 11,258

No indicators of impairment were found for other non-financial assets.

Note 2.3: Payables Note 2.3A: Suppliers and other payables

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Trade creditors and accruals 122,158 102,138

FbT pa

yable 1,866 1,582

PAyG pa

yable 69,812 151,779

Total suppliers and other payables 193,836 255,499

Settlement is usually made within 30 days.

Note 2.3b: Projects

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

State and territory government expense 535,609 33,000

Contract liability 1 817,548 -

Other 61,220 177,786

Total projects 1,414,377 210,786

1. The FRDC has applied AASb 1 5 using the modified retrospective approach and therefore the comparative information has not been restated.

The contract liability is associated with funding provided for Research & Development activities under Funding Agreements with the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment and Department of Primary Industries NSW as detailed below.

Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment:

• Assist wi

th da

ta ge

neration to su

pport AP

VMA ap

plication — er

ythroymycin in fin

fish,

• Assist wi

th da

ta ge

neration to su

pport AP

VMA ap

plication — Pr

aziquantel — Sk

in an

d gi

ll fluke

s

(M

onogenea) — N

on-seriola finfish,

• Development of on

-farm bi

osecurity pla

n im

plementation su

pport pr

ograms fo

r aq

uaculture

in

dustry.

The FRDC recognised a contract liability in 2019-20 totalling: $291,548.

Department of Primary Industries NSW:

• NSW se

afood pr

oduct de

velopment pr

ogram

The FRDC recognised a contract liability in 2019-20 totalling: $526,000.

157 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Accounting policy

Project payables are recognised at their nominal amounts, being the amounts at which the liabilities will be settled. They relate to payments approved on achievement of agreed deliverables, but which were unpaid at the end of the reporting period. Settlement is usually made within 30 days.

As per AASb 1

5 Revenue from Contracts with Customers, contract liabilities are recognised at their nominal amounts, being the amounts at which the liabilities are not yet settled. They relate to payments received for funding provided for research and development activities, of which specific performance obligations were not met at the end of the reporting period.

Note 2.4: Interest bearing liabilities Note 2.4A: le ases

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Lease liabilities 1 847,595 -

Total leases 847,595 -

1. The FRDC has applied AASb 1 6 using the modified retrospective approach and therefore the comparative information has not been restated and continues to be reported under AASb 1 17.

To

tal cash outflow for leases for the year ended 30 jun

e 2020 was $161,884 plus finance costs of $10,018.

Accounting policy

Refer Overview section for accounting policy on leases.

158 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

people and relationships Note 3.1: emp loyee provisions Note 3.1A: Employee provisions

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Leave 695,438 1,019,845

Total employee provisions 695,438 1,019,845

Employee provisions that could be settled

No more than 12 months 615,674 949,696

More than 12 months 79,764 70,149

Total employee provisions 695,438 1,019,845

Accounting policy

Liabilities for short-term employee benefits and termination benefits expected within 12 months of the end of reporting period are measured at their nominal amounts. Other long-term employee benefits are measured as net total of the present value of the defined benefit obligation at the end of the reporting period minus the fair value at the end of the reporting period of plan assets (if any) out of which the obligations are to be settled directly.

Leave

The liability for employee benefits includes provision for annual leave and long service leave. The leave liabilities are calculated on the basis of employees’ remuneration at the estimated salary rates that will be applied at the time the leave is taken, including the entity’s employer superannuation contribution rates to the extent that the leave is likely to be taken during service rather than paid out on termination. The estimate of the present value of the liability takes into account attrition rates and pay increases through promotion and inflation.

Superannuation

The FRDC’s staff are members of the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme (PSS), or the PSS accumulation plan (PSSap), or other superannuation funds held outside the Australian Government.

The PSS is a defined benefit scheme for the Australian Government. The PSSap and any other superannuation funds are defined contribution schemes.

The liability for defined benefits is recognised in the financial statements of the Australian Government and is settled by the Australian Government in due course. This liability is reported in the Department of Finance’s administered schedules and notes.

The FRDC makes employer contributions to the employee’s defined benefit superannuation scheme at rates determined by an actuary to be sufficient to meet the current cost to the Australian Government. The entity accounts for the contributions as if they were contributions to defined contribution plans.

159 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Note 3.2: Key management personnel remuneration key management personnel are those persons having authority and responsibility for planning, directing a

nd controlling the activities of the FRDC, directly or indirectly, including any director of the board (whether executive or otherwise) of the FRDC. The FRDC has determined the key management personnel to be the non-executive directors, the Managing Director and senior general managers. key

management personnel remuneration is reported in the table below:

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Short-term employee benefits (salary and accrued annual leave) 1,518,401 1,268,027

Post-employment benefits (superannuation) 243,247 214,199

Other long-term employee benefits (accrued long service leave) 44,265 38,600

Total key management personnel remuneration expenses 1,805,913 1,520,826

The total number of key management personnel that are included in the above table is 14 (2017- 18 : 16 ). They are made up of:

• seven no

n-executive di

rectors

• one no

n-executive di

rector (C

hair)

• one Ma

naging Dire

ctor

• three sen

ior gen

eral ma

nagers

• one ac

ting se

nior ge

neral ma

nager

• one no

n-executive di

rector (C

hair) (r

etired 1 Ja

nuary 20

20).

key m

anagement personnel remuneration figures have been restated for 2018-19. Accrued annual leave totalling $85,779 has been reclassified from other long-term benefits, to short-term benefits to better align to the 2019-20 Annual Report Executive Remuneration Note.

In 2018-19 an independent member of the Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee was included in Note 3.3: Annual remuneration ranges, for the purposes of recognising the services that were paid during 2018-19. They were not included in Note 3.2: key m

anagement personnel

remuneration, as they were paid under a consultancy agreement and not paid as key management personnel.

160 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Note 3.3: Annual total remuneration ranges (including superannuation) paid to key management personnel

2019-20 2018-19

Nil to $39,999 2 12

$4

0,000 to $69,999 7 1

$180,000 to $239,999 3 2

$280,000 to $309,999 1 1

$360,000 to $389,999 1 1

Total number of key management personnel 14 17

Note 3.4: Related party disclosures Related party relationships The FRDC is an Australian Government controlled entity. Related parties to this entity are non-executive directors, the Managing Director, and senior general managers and other Australian Government entities.

The non-executive directors and the Managing Director of the FRDC during the year were:

Mr john

Williams Chair

(Appointed 10 March 2020)

Dr kat

hryn bro

oks Director

(Member Investment Mechanisms Working Group)

Pr

ofessor Colin D. bux

ton Director

(Deputy Chair) (A/g Chair from 1 November 2019 to 9 March 2020) (Member Investment Mechanisms Working Group)

Dr S

aranne Cooke Director

(Member Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee)

Ms kat

ina Hodson-Thomas Director

(Member People and Culture Committee)

Dr P

atrick Hone Managing Director

(Member Investment Mechanisms Working Group)

Mr M

ark kin

g Director

(Chair People and Culture Committee)

Mr joh

n Lloyd Director

(Chair Investment Mechanisms Working Group) (Member Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee)

Dr

Lesley MacLeod Director

(Chair Finance, Audit and Risk Management Committee)

Th

e Hon. Ronald bos

well Chair

(Retired 1 jan uary 2020)

161 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Note 3.4A: tra nsactions with director-related entities The FRDC’s practice is to disclose all transactions with an entity with whom a director has an association. This means that directors who have disclosed a material personal interest that all the transactions of that entity will be listed. Typically, the FRDC will not transact with all the entities for which a director has made such a declaration. The transactions that are not with related parties as defined by AAS b 1

24

Related Party Disclosures, are identified below with an asterisk (*).

The FRDC’s ‘boa

rd governance policy’ provides guidance to directors on how the FRDC deals with material personal interests. Where a director has an association with an entity where a conflict has the potential to arise, in addition to the duty to disclose that association, the director absents him/herself from both the discussion and the decision-making process.

Given the breadth of Australian Government activities, related parties may transact with the government sector in the same capacity as ordinary citizens. Such transactions include the payment or refund of taxes, receipt of a Medicare rebate or higher education loans. These transactions have not been separately disclosed in this note.

The directors disclosed material personal interests during the directors’ related period.

Director Organisation and

position held

Na

ture of interest

Dr k. bro

oks OzFish Unlimited

Non-executive Director 1 jul

y 2019 to 30 jun

e 2020

Research projects or work undertaken by the organisation

kal A

nalysis Pty Ltd Director 1 jul

y 2019 to 30 jun

e 2020

Research projects or work undertaken by the organisation

School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Education De

akin University Adjunct Associate Professor 8 October 2019 to 30 june 2020

R

esearch projects or work undertaken by the organisation

Professor C. D. bux

ton Southern Rock Lobster Ltd

Chair 1 jul

y 2019 to 30 jun

e 2020

Research projects or work undertaken by the organisation

Institute from Marine and Antarctic Studies Un

iversity of Tasmania * Ad

junct Professor 1 jul

y 2019 to 30 jun

e 2020

Research projects or work undertaken by the organisation

Dr P. Hone Council of Rural Research and

Development Corporations Me mber of the Executive

and CEO’s Committee 1 jul y 2019 to 30 jun

e 2020

Research projects or work undertaken by the organisation

162 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

The following transactions occurred during the directors’ related period with these entities.

Director 2019-20 2018-19

Expenditure Income Expenditure Income

OzFish Unlimited 2,454 - 71,895 -

kal A

nalysis Pty Ltd 38,566 - 143,726 -

School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Education Deakin University

345,652

-

-

-

Sout

hern Rock Lobster Ltd 191,290 852 810,590 -

Institute from Marine and Antarctic Studies Un

iversity of Tasmania

3,840,665

-

3,561,224

3,250

Co

uncil of Rural Research and Development Corporations

51,940

-

33,093

-

All transactions were conducted under normal terms and conditions and include GST.

Note 3.4b: O ther related party disclosures Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

The FRDC has a Research & Development Funding Head Agreement with the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment under which it manages the suite of activities detailed below:

• AQUAPLAN De

velopment Wo

rkshop Pu

blication

• Aquatic Ani

mal He

alth Tr

aining Sc

heme 20

19-2022

• Data ge

neration to su

pport AP

VMA ap

plication

• Development of on

-farm bi

osecurity pla

n im

plementation su

pport pr

ograms fo

r aq

uaculture in

dustry

• National Ca

rp Co

ntrol Pla

n

• Rural R&D for Profit: Growing a profitable, innovative and collaborative Australian yel

lowtail kin

gfish

aquaculture industry: bringing ‘white’ fish to the market

• The ro

le of th

e re

creational fis

her in th

e st

ewardship of th

e So

uthern Bl

uefin Tu

na fis

hery.

The FRDC has received funding from the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment in 2019- 20 t

otalling: $877,515 (2018-19: $3,418,716).

163 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Financial instruments and fair value measurement Note 4.1: Financial instruments Note 4.1A: Categories of financial instruments

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Financial assets at amortised cost

Cash and cash equivalents 26,411,348 24,553,443

Trade and other receivables 720,256 1,561,369

Other investments - 5,001

Total financial assets at amortised cost 27,131,604 26,119,813

Total financial assets 27,131,604 26,119,813

Financial liabilities

Financial liabilities measured at amortised cost

Suppliers and other payables 122,158 102,138

Projects 1,414,377 210,786

Total financial liabilities measured at amortised cost 1,536,535 312,924

Total financial liabilities 1,536,535 312,924

Accounting policy Financial assets

With the implementation of AASb 9 Financial Instruments for the first time in 2018-19, the entity classifies its financial assets in the following categories:

a) fin

ancial assets at fair value through profit or loss,

b) fin

ancial assets at fair value through other comprehensive income, and

c) fin

ancial assets measured at amortised cost.

The classification depends on both the entity’s business model for managing the financial assets and contractual cash flow characteristics at the time of initial recognition. Financial assets are recognised when the entity becomes a party to the contract and, as a consequence, has a legal right to receive or a legal obligation to pay cash and derecognised when the contractual rights to the cash flows from the financial asset expire or are transferred upon trade date.

Comparatives have not been restated on initial application.

Financial assets at amortised cost

Financial assets included in this category need to meet two criteria:

1. th

e financial asset is held in order to collect the contractual cash flows, and

2. th

e cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest (SPPI) on the principal outstanding amount.

Amortised cost is determined using the effective interest method.

Effective interest method

Income is recognised on an effective interest rate basis for financial assets that are recognised at amortised cost.

164 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Impairment of financial assets

Financial assets are assessed for impairment at the end of each reporting period based on expected credit losses, using the general approach which measures the loss allowance based on an amount equal to lifetime expected credit losses where risk has significantly increased, or an amount equal to 12-month expected credit losses if risk has not increased.

The simplified approach for trade, contract and lease receivables is used. This approach always measures the loss allowance as the amount equal to the lifetime expected credit losses.

A write-off constitutes a derecognition event where the write-off directly reduces the gross carrying amount of the financial asset.

Financial liabilities

Financial liabilities are classified as either financial liabilities ‘at fair value through profit or loss’ or other financial liabilities.

Financial liabilities are recognised and derecognised upon ‘trade date’.

Financial liabilities at amortised cost

Financial liabilities, including borrowings, are initially measured at fair value, net of transaction costs. These liabilities are subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method, with interest expense recognised on an effective interest basis.

Supplier and other payables are recognised at amortised cost. Liabilities are recognised to the extent that the goods or services have been received (and irrespective of having been invoiced).

Note 4.1b: N et gain or loss from financial assets

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Financial assets at amortised cost

Interest revenue (Note 1.2A) 302,329 544,651

Net gains on financial assets at amortised cost 302,329 544,651

There are no gains or losses on financial liabilities.

Note 4.2: Fair value measurement Accounting policy

FRDC engaged jon es Lang LaSalle Public Sector Valuations (jLL ) to conduct an asset revaluation of all non-financial assets as at 30 jun e 2020. An annual assessment is undertaken to determine whether the carrying amount of the assets is materially different from the fair value. Comprehensive valuations are carried out at least once every three years. jLL h

as provided written assurance to the FRDC that the

models developed are in compliance with AASb 1

3.

The methods utilised to determine and substantiate the unobservable inputs are derived and evaluated as follows.

165 Financial StatementS for the year ended 30 June 2020

Physical depreciation and obsolescence — as sets that do not transact with enough frequency or transparency to develop objective opinions of value from observable market evidence that have been measured using the depreciated replacement cost approach. Under the depreciated replacement cost approach, the estimated cost to replace the asset is calculated and then adjusted to take into account physical depreciation and obsolescence. Physical depreciation and obsolescence has been determined based on professional judgement regarding physical, economic and external obsolescence factors relevant to the asset under consideration. For all leasehold improvement assets, the consumed economic benefit/asset obsolescence deduction is determined based on the term of the associated lease.

FRDC’s policy is to recognise transfers into, and transfers out of, fair value hierarchy levels as at the end of the reporting period.

Note 4.2A: Fair value measurement

Fair value measurements at the end of the reporting period

201

9-20 2018-19

$ $

Non-financial assets

Leasehold improvements 111,450 47,060

Plant and equipment 17,950 27,390

Total non-financial assets 129,400 74,450

The FRDC did not measure any non-financial assets at fair value on a non-recurring basis as at 30 jun e 2020.

As at 30 jun

e 2020, jon

es Lang LaSalle Public Sector Valuations conducted a revaluation of plant and equipment. The table above summarises the results of the valuation at fair value. A revaluation increment was applied to the asset revaluation reserve by asset class and included in the equity section of the Statement of Financial Position. Refer Note 2.2A.

other information Note 5.1: Aggregate assets and liabilities Note 5.1A: Aggregate assets and liabilities

2019-20 2018-19

$ $

Assets expected to be recovered in:

No more than 12 months 28,731,788 29,391,006

More than 12 months 1,564,928 765,876

Total assets 30,296,716 30,156,882

Liabilities expected to be settled in:

No more than 12 months 2,385,205 1,415,981

More than 12 months 766,041 70,149

Total liabilities 3,151,246 1,486,130

166 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

167 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Appendices

APPENDICES

A~b~C

~D~E~F

168 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Appendix A: The FRDC’s principal revenue base As stipulated in the PIRD Act, and shown in Figure 5, the FRDC’s primary revenue source is based on:

A. Au

stralian Government providing unmatched funds equivalent to 0.50 per cent of the average gross value of Australian fisheries production (AGVP) for the current year plus the two preceding years.

b. Fi

shers and aquaculturists providing contributions via government.

C. Au

stralian Government matching this amount up to a maximum of 0.25 per cent of AGVP.

D. Fu

nds received from RD&E providers, both as cash and in-kind contributions through projects that have been successful for funding.

E. Ma

rketing funds collected from the sectors through a statutory levy (or if approved voluntary contributions). Marketing funds are not eligible to be matched by the Commonwealth.

There is no legislative impediment to fishers and aquaculturists contributing to the FRDC above the maximum level at which the Australian Government will provide a matching contribution. Industry contributions for the past financial year and trends for the past five years are shown on page iii.

Details of all FRDC revenue (including investments, royalties, and sales of products, information and services) are in the financial statements starting on page 131.

FIGuRe 5: PRO PORTIONS O F T HE F RDC’S P RINCIPAL R EVENUE bAS E

Rationale for the FRDC’s revenue base The high component of public good in the operating environment of the fishing industry, has significance for the FRDC’s revenue base. The Australian Government’s contribution of 0.50 per cent of AGVP is made on the grounds that the Australian Government exercises a stewardship role in relation to fisheries resources on behalf of the Australian community.

Fishing and aquaculture contributes to the FRDC on the basis that RD&E will be targeted to its needs and will deliver economic and social benefits. The Australian Government matches industry contributions on the basis that the beneficiaries of research should pay approximately in proportion to the benefits received, but the government should contribute to spill over benefits to the wider community.

A: PUbLIC-GO OD F UNDING b y AUS TRALIAN GOV ERNMENT Au stralian Government pays 0.50 p

er cent of AGVP of the commercial sector

D: ADDITIONAL I NVESTMENTS

by po

st-harvest, retail, recreational and import sectors and government agencies

E: MARkETING INVESTMENT

T

hese funds are invested separately from RD&E investments and are to be used for marketing only

b: CONTRIbUT ION b y T HE CO MMERCIAL S

ECTOR

Co

mmercial fishers and aquaculturists contribute at least 0.25 p

er cent of AGVP

C: AUSTRALIAN GOVE RNMENT M ATCHING OF CON TRIbUT

ION by

C

OMMERCIAL S

ECTOR

Sa

me amount as b, up t

o a maximum

of 0.25 p

er cent of AGVP

169 Appendix B

Appendix b: T he FRDC’s legislative foundation and the exercise of ministerial powers The FRDC was formed as a statutory corporation on 2 july 1 991 under the provisions of the PIRD Act. It also operates under the provisions of the PGPA Act, which applies high standards of accountability while providing for the independence required by the Corporation’s role as a statutory authority.

The FRDC’s objects, deriving from section 3 of the PIRD Act and shown in Appendix C, are incorporated in the FRDC’s vision and planned outcomes. As reflected in Figure 2 on pages 24-25, the FRDC’s five R

D&E programs mirror the industry development, natural resources sustainability and people development themes of, respectively, sub-sections 3(a), (b) and (c) of the Act. This alignment has brought simplicity and robustness to the FRDC’s RD&E planning, implementation and reporting, and to many of the organisations with which it does business. Importantly, the alignment ensures the RD&E outputs resulting from the FRDC’s investments fully address the legislative objects.

More information about the FRDC’s legislative foundations can be found in Appendix C.

enabling legislation The FRDC’s enabling legislation is the Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989 (PIRD Act).

The FRDC boa

rd is responsible to the Minister for Agriculture and, through him, to the Parliament of Australia.

The objects, functions and statutory powers of R&D corporations are specified in the PIRD Act, the text of which is available via the FRDC website.

In the interests of clarity, the following statements of the FRDC’s objects, functions and statutory powers mirror the wording of the PIRD Act but are specific to the FRDC and its business environment. Similarly, the statements of the FRDC’s functions and statutory powers have been made shorter and simpler than the wording of the Act.

170 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Objects The objects of the FRDC, deriving from section 3 of the PIRD Act, are to:

(a) ma

ke provision for the funding and administration of research and development relating to primary industries with a view to:

(i) in

creasing the economic, environmental and social benefits to members of primary industries and to the community in general by improving the production, processing, storage, transport or marketing of the products of primary industries, and

(ii) ac

hieving the sustainable use and sustainable management of natural resources, and

(iii) ma

king more effective use of the resources and skills of the community in general and the scientific community in particular, and

(iv) su

pporting the development of scientific and technical capacity, and

(v) de

veloping the adoptive capacity of primary producers, and

(vi) im

proving accountability for expenditure on research and development activities in relation to primary industries, and

(b) ma

ke provision for the funding and administration of marketing relating to products of primary industries.

Functions The functions of the FRDC, deriving from section 11 of the PIRD Act, are to:

• investigate and evaluate the requirements for fisheries research and development and, on that basis, prepare a five-year R&D plan, review it annually and revise it if required,

• prepare an annual operational plan for each financial year,

• coordinate or fund the carrying out of R&D activities that are consistent with the annual operational plan,

• monitor and evaluate fisheries RD&E activities that are funded and report on them to the Parliament; the Minister for Agriculture, statutory levy payers and the FRDC representative organisations, and

• facilitate the dissemination, adoption and commercialisation of the results of fisheries R&D.

Statutory powers Subject to the PIRD Act, the FRDC is empowered under section 12 of the Act to do all things necessary or convenient to be done for, or in connection with, the performance of its functions, which may include:

• entering into agreements for the carrying out of R&D activities by other persons,

• entering into agreements for the carrying out of R&D activities by the FRDC and other persons,

• making applications, including joint applications for patents,

• dealing with patents vested in the FRDC and other persons,

• making charges for work done, services rendered, and goods and information supplied by it,

• accepting gifts, grants, bequests and devices made to it, and acting as trustee of money and other property vested in it on trust,

• acquiring, holding and disposing of real and personal property,

• joining in the formation of a company, and

• doing anything incidental to any of its powers.

171 Appendix B

The description of ministerial powers that follows has been drawn from several sections of the PIRD Act and has been condensed from the original in the interests of clarity.

Ministerial powers Ministerial powers under the enabling legislation may be exercised by the Minister for Agriculture. They relate to:

• directing the FRDC in writing as to the performance of its functions and the exercise of its powers,

• approving the RD&E plan and the annual operational plan,

• requesting and approving variation to the RD&E plan and the annual operational plan,

• requesting the establishment of a selection committee and determining certain conditions relating to the selection committee,

• appointing the presiding member and members of a committee for the selection of directors,

• determining the number of directors,

• determining the terms and conditions of appointment of directors (other than the Managing Director) in relation to matters not provided for by the PIRD Act,

• appointing the Chairperson,

• appointing directors, other than the Chairperson and Managing Director, from persons nominated by a selection committee,

• declaring one or more specified organisations to be representative organisations in relation to the FRDC,

• determining the gross value of production of the fishing industry for the purposes of establishing the maximum payments by the Australian Government to the FRDC,

• establishing written guidelines covering the payment by the FRDC to an eligible industry body, or member of an eligible industry body, for expenses reasonably incurred in connection with consultation with the FRDC,

• causing, at least once in each financial year, a coordination meeting to be held of all R&D corporations,

• granting leave of absence to the Chairperson, and

• terminating the appointment of the Chairperson or a director other than the Managing Director.

Additional powers under the PGPA Act relating to corporate governance and reporting are available from the Minister for Agriculture.

Exercise of ministerial powers are described on page 113.

172 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Appendix C: pr incipal legislative requirements for reporting This annual report complies with the requirements of Commonwealth legislation. The principal reporting requirements, and some of their consequences for the FRDC, are outlined in this appendix. The Acts are:

• Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989 (PIRD Act),

• Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act),

• Environment Protection and bio

diversity Conservation Act 1999 (Section 16A).

PGPA Act requirements The PGPA Act is one of the principal pieces of legislation that specifies the content and standards of presentation of statutory authorities’ annual reports for parliamentary scrutiny.

Part 2-3: Planning, Performance and Accountability consolidates government policy for planning and performance reporting with budgets and actuals for both financial and non-financial measures. Section 4

6 of the PGPA Act requires the FRDC’s directors to prepare an annual report in accordance with PGPA Rules, and to give it to the responsible Minister by 15 October.

PIRD Act requirements The PIRD Act also specifies matters that must be reported. In particular, section 28 states:

(1) Th

e annual report prepared by the directors of an R&D Corporation and given to the Minister under section 4

6 of the PGPA Act for a period must include:

(a) pa

rticulars of:

(i) th

e R&D activities that it coordinated or funded, wholly or partly, during the period, and

(ia) if a l

evy attached to the Corporation had a marketing component during the period — th

e

marketing activities that it coordinated or funded, wholly or partly, during the period, and

(ii) th

e amount that it spent during the period in relation to each of those activities, and

(iib) th

e impact of those activities on the primary industry or class of primary industries in respect of which the Corporation was established, and

(iii) re

visions of its R&D plan approved by the Minister during the period, and

(iv) th

e entering into of agreements under sections 1

3 and 14 during the period and its activities

during the period in relation to agreements entered into under that section during or prior to the period, and

(v) it

s activities during the period in relation to applying for patents for inventions, commercially exploiting patented inventions and granting licences under patented inventions, and

(vi) th

e activities of any companies in which the Corporation has an interest, and

(vii) an

y activities relating to the formation of a company, and

(viii) si

gnificant acquisitions and dispositions of real property by it during the period, and

173 Appendix C

(b) an assessment of the extent to which its operations during the period have:

(

i) ac

hieved its objectives as stated in its R&D plan, and

(ii) im

plemented the annual operational plan applicable to the period, and

(c) an a

ssessment of the extent to which the Corporation has, during the period, contributed to the attainment of the objects of this Act as set out in section 3

, and

(d) in r

espect of the grain industry or such other primary industry or class of primary industries as is prescribed in the regulations, particulars of sources and expenditure of funds, including:

(i) co

mmodity, cross commodity and regional classifications, and

(ii) fu

nds derived from transfer of assets, debts, liabilities and obligations under section 1

44.

ePbC Act requirements Section 516A requires annual reports for Commonwealth entities to report against the criteria set out in that section of the Act.

Part 21 — Reporting — Division 1 — Annual reports Section 516A: Annual reports to deal with environmental matters

(6) A re

port described in subsection (

1), (4) or (5) relating to a body or person (the reporter) for a

period must:

(a) in

clude a report on how the activities of, and the administration (if any) of legislation by, the reporter during the period accorded with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and

(b) id

entify how the outcomes (if any) specified for the reporter in an Appropriations Act relating to the period contribute to ecologically sustainable development, and

(c) do

cument the effect of the reporter’s activities on the environment, and

(d) id

entify any measures the reporter is taking to minimise the impact of activities by the reporter on the environment, and

(e) id

entify the mechanisms (if any) for reviewing and increasing the effectiveness of those measures.

174 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Appendix D: gov ernment priorities The FRDC works closely with the Minister for Agriculture and, Assistant Minister and DAWE to ensure it delivers results that in line with the Australian Government’s Science and Rural RD&E priorities — se

e

Australian Government Science and Research Priorities section at Attachment 1

. The FRDC invests in

targeted projects that will assist in the delivery of Australian Government priorities. Government priorities are consistent with the FRDC’s four legislated objects (section 3 of the PIRD Act) as shown in Figure 2: FRDC’s framework for integrating legislative, government and industry priorities (pages 2

4- 25

).

The following tables summarise the total expenditure allocated against each set of priorities within the 2019-20 financial year. The allocation of funds is shown in both dollar and percentage terms for each investment theme — no

ting that totals may not equal 100 per cent as not all projects fit the Government priorities.

Government research priorities attributed to each RD&e pr ogram ($ and %) RURAL RESEARCH PRIORI TIES

$ %

Adoption of R&D 6,988,383 26.0

Advanced technology 5,053,558 18.8

bio

security 3,171,335 11.8

Soil, water and managing natural resources 11,648,288 43.4

Total 26,861,564 100.0

STRATEGIC RES EARCH PRIORI TIES

$ %

Advanced manufacturing 799,386 2.9

Cybersecurity 144,538 0.5

Energy 40,207 0.1

Environmental change 4,584,230 16.9

Food 12,651,810 46.6

Health 901,395 3.3

Resources 3,421,737 12.6

Soil and water 4,588,909 16.9

Transport 42,671 0.2

Total 27,174,884 100.0

Not all projects align to the priorities. Figures in these tables have been rounded, hence totals may not agree with component total RD&E financial figures.

175 Appendix E

Appendix E: Freedom of information statement Australian Government agencies subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) are required to publish information to the public as part of the Information Publication Scheme (IPS). This requirement is in Part II of the FOI Act and each agency must display on its website a plan showing what information it publishes in accordance with the IPS requirements.

Further information on the FRDC’s agency plan is available from the FRDC website — ww

w.frdc.com.

au/About-us/Freedom-of-information.

Role, structure and functions The FRDC’s role is described on page 13 of this annual report; its structure and functions and legislation under which it is established are described in Appendices A to C.

DOCUMENTS A VAILAbLE F OR I NSPECTION

RD&E plan (the FRDC’s strategic plan) File, publication and website*

FRDC policies Unpublished documents, list on website*

Annual operational plan File, publication and website*

Project details Database, files and website*

Project agreements Files and generic copy on website*

Final reports and non-technical summaries Publications and website*

RD&E funding applications Files

Annual report File, publications and FRDC website*

FISH magazine File, publications, iPad and FRDC website*

Administration Files, unpublished documents

Mailing lists Database

* The FRDC’s website address is www.frdc.com.au

Some other information may be subject to assessment of access for such matters as commercial confidentiality or personal privacy in accordance with the FOI Act.

Access to documents To seek access to FRDC documents, please contact the FRDC’s FOI Officer: address, telephone and e-mail details are shown inside the back cover of this report. It may not be necessary to request the information under the FOI Act — th

e FRDC may simply provide it to you when you ask for it. At all times, however, you have the option of applying under the FOI Act.

176 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Fees and charges for FOI

Request Charge

Application No fee

Search and retrieval $15 per hour (GST inclusive)

Decision making and consultation First five hours free, after that $20 per hour

(GST inclusive)

Wh

en a FOI request is not responded to within the statutory time limit No

fee

Internal review No fee

Request for personal information No fee

The standard FOI application fee is nil when making your application, however processing charges will apply.

Documents are usually made available for direct access at the FRDC’s office in Canberra. They may also be provided, depending on your preference:

• by post (photocopies) to an address specified in your request, or

• at the Information Access Office (established by the Attorney-General) nearest where you live.

177 Appendix E

Appendix F: Information about remuneration for key management personnel and senior executives

Information about remuneration for key management personnel

Post-

employment benefits

Other

long-term benefits

Name Position title Base salary Annual

leave accrued (4 weeks)

Supe

r-

annuation contri-butions

Long service leave accrued

Tot

al

$ $ $ $ $

Mr

john

Williams Chair (appointed 9 March 2020) 18,919 - 1,797 - 20,716

Professor Colin

b ux

ton Deputy Chair 45,283 - 4,302 - 49,585

Dr

k at

hryn

b ro

oks Non-executive director 36,590 - 3,476 - 40,066

Dr Saranne Cooke Non-executive director 36,590 - 3,476 - 40,066

Ms

k at

ina Hodson-Thomas Non-executive director 36,590 - 3,476 - 40,066

Mr Mark

k in

g Non-executive director 36,590 - 3,476 - 40,066

Mr

joh

n Lloyd Non-executive director 36,590 - 3,476 - 40,066

Dr Lesley MacLeod Non-executive director 36,590 - 3,476 - 40,066

The Hon. Ronald

b os

well Chair (retired 1

jan

uary 2020) 30,725 - 2,919 - 33,644

Dr Patrick Hone Managing Director 313,853 28,681 59,004 12,906 414,444

Mr

joh

n Wilson General Manager

b us

iness 249,520 23,789 59,731 10,705 343,745

Mr Crispian Ashby General Manager Research and Investment

200,800

17,655

36,142

7,945

262,543

Mr P

eter Horvat General Manager

Communications, Trade and Marketing

171,666

15,654

31,836

7,044

226,200

Ms C

heryl Cole Acting General Manager

b us

iness 169,726 12,589 26,660 5,665 214,640

Total 1,420,033 98,368 243,247 44,265 1,805,913

FRDC does not have any other senior executive staff or highly paid staff.

178 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Information about remuneration for senior executives

Total remuneration bands

Post-

employment benefits

Other

long-term benefits

Number of senior ex

ecutives

Average base salary

An

nual leave accrued (4 weeks)

Ave

rage super-annuation contri-

butions

Average long service leave

Ave

rage total remun-eration

$ $ $ $ $

$0- $220,000

2

170,696

14,122

29,248

6,355

220,421

$220

,001-

$245,000

1

200,800

17,655

36,142

7,945

262,542

$29

5,001-

$320,000

1

249,520

23,789

59,731

10,705

343,745

$37

0,001-

$395,000

1

313,853

28,681

59,004

12,906

414,444

179 AbbReVIATIONS A ND A CRONyMS

ABBREvIATIONS AND A CRONyMS AASb Au stralian Accounting Standards boa rd AbA

RES Au

stralian bur

eau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences

A/g A

cting

AGVP ave

rage gross value of production

ANAO Au

stralian National Audit Office

AOP an

nual operational plan

APVMA Au

stralian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority COVID-19 Co

ronavirus

CRC co

operative research centre

CRDC Co

tton Research and Development Corporation CRRDC Co

uncil of Rural Research and Development Corporations CSIRO Co

mmonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation DAWE Au

stralian Government Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment EPbC Ac

t En

vironment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 FAO Fo

od and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FOI Act Fr

eedom of Information Act 1982

FRDC Fi

sheries Research and Development Corporation GGS Ge

neral Government Sector

GRDC Gr

ains Research and Development Corporation GVP gr

oss value of production

GST go

ods and services tax

IMAS In

stitute for Marine and Antarctic Studies

IPA In

dustry Partnership Agreement

IRG In

digenous Reference Group

ISO In

ternational Organization for Standardisation ICT in

formation and communications technology k4P kin

gfish for Profit

m m

illion

MP me

mber of parliament

NCCP Na

tional Carp Control Plan

NSW New

South Wales

NSW DPI NS

W Department of Primary Industries

PAyG pa

y as you go

PGPA Act Pu

blic Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 PhD Do

ctor of Philosophy

PIRD Act Pr

imary Industries Research and Development Act 1989 PbS Po

rtfolio bud

get Statements

POMS Pac

ific Oyster Mortality Syndrome

R&D re

search and development

RAC Re

search Advisory Committee

RD&E re

search, development and extension

RDC re

search and development corporation

SAFS St

atus of Australian Fish Stocks reports

SARDI So

uth Australian Research and Development Institute SbT South

ern bl

uefin Tuna

Tas DPIPWE Ta

smanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment WHS Act wor

k Health and Safety Act 2011

yTk

yel

lowtail ki

ngfish

180 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

181 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

INDICES

COMP

LIANCE ~

ALP

HAbET

ICAL

182 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Compliance index This index shows the page numbers on which the FRDC has reported on matters specified in Australian Government legislation and policies. Where an entry is not applicable (n/a) the page reference will be indicated by a —.

The requirements for annual reports acknowledges that agencies vary in role and size and there is discretion as to the extent of information to include in annual reports and the sequence in which it is presented. The joi

nt Committee on Publications has also observed that a departmental report will necessarily be different from that of a statutory authority; and a statutory authority, while accountable for its activities, has a degree of independence not shared by departments and its annual reports will thus have a greater freedom of expression and comment. The FRDC’s reporting is, accordingly, appropriate to its legislative basis, functions and size.

TAb le 22: PRI MARy I NDuST RIES RES EARCH A ND DEvElOP MENT ACT 1 989 (PIRD ACT)

Section Title Comply Page

Section 10 R&D corporation is a body corporate etc. ye

s 169-171

Section 11 Functions ye

s 170

Section 12 Powers ye

s 170-171

Section 19 R&D plans ye

s 7, 16

Section 20 Approval of R&D plans ye

s 7, 16

Section 21 Variation of R&D plans ye

s 7

Section 24 Consultation ye

s 7, 8, 18-20

Section 25 Annual operational plans ye

s 16

Section 27 Compliance with R&D plans and annual operational plans ye

s 16, 108

Section 28 Annual report ye

s 108, 172

Section 29 Accountability to representative organisations ye

s viii, 14, 145

Section 33 Expenditure of money of R&D corporations ye

s 127-165

Spending must be in accordance with funding agreement ye

s 8, 14

Section 33A R&D money must not be spent on marketing ye

s 98, 127-165

Section 34 Commonwealth to be paid levy expenses from R&D corporation ye

s 12

Section 35 Commonwealth to be reimbursed for refunds of levy ye

s 12

Section 40 Separate accounting records ye

s 127-165

Section 47 Times and places of meetings ye

s 123-124

Section 53 Minutes ye

s 123-124

Section 76 Duties ye

s 118

Section 87 Employees ye

s 109, 177

Section 143 Minister may give directions ye

s 113

183 Index compliance

TAb le 23: SEC TION 1 7bE: CON TENTS O F A NNUAL R EPORT

The annual report for a corporate Commonwealth entity for a reporting period must include the following.

Comply Page

(a) details of the legislation establishing the body, ye

s 169

(b) both of the following:

(i) a su

mmary of the objects and functions of the entity as set out in the legislation, ye

s 16-171

(ii) th

e purposes of the entity as included in the entity’s corporate plan for the period, ye

s 13

(c) the names of the persons holding the position of responsible Minister or responsible Ministers during the period, and the titles of those re

sponsible Ministers,

ye

s 14

(d) any directions given to the entity by a Minister under an Act or instrument during the period, ye

s 113

(e) any government policy orders that applied in relation to the entity during the period under section 22 of the Act, ye

s 114

(f) if, during the period, the entity has not complied with a direction or order referred to in paragraph (d) or (e) — pa rticulars of the noncompliance,

n/a —

(g) the annual performance statements for the entity for the period in accordance with paragraph 39(1)(b) of the Act and section 16F of this rule,

ye

s v-ix, 127-165

(h) a statement of any significant issue reported to the responsible Minister under paragraph 19(1)(e) of the Act that relates to noncompliance with the finance law in relation to the entity,

n/a —

(i) i

f a statement is included under paragraph (h) of this section — an

outline of the action that has been taken to remedy the noncompliance, n/a —

(j) information on the accountable authority, or each member of the accountable authority, of the entity during the period, including:

ye

s 15, 133

(i) th

e name of the accountable authority or member, and ye

s 133

(ii) th

e qualifications of the accountable authority or member, and ye

s 120-122

(iii) th

e experience of the accountable authority or member, and ye

s 123-124

(iv) fo

r a member — th

e number of meetings of the accountable authority attended by the member during the period, and ye

s 120-122

(v) fo

r a member — wh

ether the member is an executive member or non-executive member, ye

s 120-122

(k) an outline of the organisational structure of the entity (including any subsidiaries of the entity), ye

s 190

(l) an outline of the location (whether or not in Australia) of major activities or facilities of the entity, ye

s 190

(m) information in relation to the main corporate governance practices used by the entity during the period, ye

s 118

n/a: Not applicable.

184 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Comply Page

(n) the decision-making process undertaken by the accountable authority for making a decision if:

(i) th

e decision is to approve the FRDC paying for a good or service from another Commonwealth entity or a company, or providing a grant to another Commonwealth entity or a company, and

ye

s 111, 170, 172

(ii) th

e entity, and the other Commonwealth entity or the company, are related entities, and ye

s 111, 170, 172

(iii) th

e value of the transaction, or if there is more than one t

ransaction, the aggregate value of those transactions, is more than $10,000 (inclusive of GST),

ye

s 113

(o) if the annual report includes information under paragraph (

n):

(i) if t

here is only one transaction — th

e value of the transaction, and ye

s 113

(ii) if t

here is more than one transaction — th

e number of transactions

and the aggregate of value of the transactions, ye

s 113

(p) any significant activities and changes that affected the operations or structure of the entity during the period, ye

s v-ix, 6-10

(q) particulars of judicial decisions or decisions of administrative tribunals made during the period that have had, or may have, a significant effect on the operations of the entity,

ye

s 114,

(r) particulars of any report on the entity given during the period by:

(i) th

e Auditor-General, other than a report under section 4

3 of the

Act (which deals with the Auditor-General’s audit of the annual financial statements for Commonwealth entities), or

ye

s 128-128

(ii) a Co

mmittee of either House, or of both Houses, of the Parliament, or n/a —

(iii) th

e Commonwealth Ombudsman, or n/a —

(iv) th

e Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, n/a —

(s) if the accountable authority has been unable to obtain information from a subsidiary of the entity that is required to be included in the annual report — an e

xplanation of the information that was not obtained and the effect of not having the information on the annual report,

n/a —

(t) details of any indemnity that applied during the period to the accountable authority, any member of the accountable authority or officer of the entity against a liability (including premiums paid, or agreed to be paid, for insurance against the authority, member or officer’s liability for legal costs),

ye

s 125

(u) an index identifying where the requirements of this section and section 1

7bF (i

f applicable) are to be found.

ye

s 182-184

n/a: Not applicable.

185 Index compliance

TAb le 24: GOV ERNMENT P OLICy A ND A SSOCIATED R EPORTING R EQUIREMENTS

Section Comply Page

Australian Government Cost Recovery Policy ye

s 12, 114

Australian Government Foreign Exchange Risk Management Guidelines ye

s 114

Australian Government priorities • Rural Re

search Pr

iorities

• Strategic Res

earch Pri

orities

ye

s 174

Australian Government Commonwealth Procurement Rules ye

s 114

Australian Government Commonwealth Property Management Framework ye

s 114

Australian Government Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) ye

s 114

Australian Government Public Sector Workplace bar

gaining Policy ye

s 114

Comcover Risk ben

chmarking Survey ye

s 112

Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (National Disability Strategy 2010-2020)

ye

s 110

Commonwealth Fraud Framework 2014 ye

s 111

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Section 1

6A)

ye

s 53, 173

Freedom of Information Act 1982, quarterly and annual lodgements ye

s 114, 175-176

National Code of Practice for the Construction Industry and the Commonwealth’s Implementation Guidelines ye

s 114

OLSC [Office of Legal Services Coordination] Legal Expenditure annual return ye

s 113

wor

k Health and Safety Act 2011 ye

s 115

186 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Alphabetical index A Abalone, 38, 43, 52 ge

netics, 55

se

e also Australian Abalone Growers Association, se

e also Australian Wild Abalone Abalone Council Australia (ACA), 19, 50, 98 AbAR

ES, 22, 80

Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islanders (ATSI), 72-73 se

e also Indigenous agricultural & veterinary (AGVET) chemical regulatory framework, 8 Agriculture Levy Review legislation, 8 AgriFutures Australia, 8, 10, 21-22, 46, 91 Agtrans Research and Consulting, 91, 95 algae, blue-green, 61 animal health, 51, 62 animal welfare, 47, 68, 74, 105 Antarctic Toothfish, 51 aquaculture, ix, 6, 40-43 se

e also National Aquaculture Council Aquatic Animal Health & bio

security Subprogram (AAHbS)

, 44

Aquatic Animal Welfare — R

esearch, 68

Assistant Minister 7, 14, 20, 174 Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar ), ix, 40-41, 43, 67-68 Austrade, 99 Austral Fisheries, 22 Australia-China Agricultural Cooperation Agreement, 99 Australian Abalone Growers Association (AAGA), 19, 23, 50 Australian Agricultural Innovation Investment Company, 23 Australian Antarctic Division, 21 Australian bar

ramundi Farmers Association (AbFA

), 19, 42, 50

Australian bur

eau of Statistics, 21

Australian Capital Territory, iii Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness, 62 Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries, 23, 50, 98 Australian Crayfish Hatchery, 80 Australian Eggs Ltd, 21-23, 91 Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA), 32, 35 Australian Fisheries Management Forum (AFMF), 18, 20, 100 Australian Government, see Commonwealth Australian Herring (Arripis georgianus), 67 Australian Maritime Safety Authority, 22, 66 Australian Meat Processor Corporation, 91 Australian National Audit Office (ANAO), 8 Australian Ocean Data Network, 55 Australian Prawn Farmers Association (APFA), 11, 23, 50, 98 Australian Pork Limited, 21-23, 91 Australian Recreational and Sport Fishing Industry Confederation

Inc., 14

Australian Recreational Fishing Foundation, 14 Australian Rural Leadership Program, 21 Australian Salmon, marketing (FRDC & CRC projects), 67-68 Australian sardine, 38 Australian Seafood Co-products (ASCo), 112 Australian Southern bl

uefin Tuna Industry Association (AS bTI

A),

19, 50

Australian Standard for Aquatic Plant Names, 101 Australian Universities Forum, 88 Australian Wild AbaloneTM, 98 Australian Wool Innovation, 22, 91 award, Top Innovator, 80

B barramundi, ix, 40, 42-43, 52 bas

s Strait, 58 biosecurity, vi, 42 biotoxins, 45 blac

klip Abalone (Haliotis rubra rubra ), 38 ma

pping (project 2015-025), 54-55 bla

cklip Oysters aquaculture, 43 blu

e Mussels aquaculture, 43 blu

e-x, 10 boa

rd of FRDC, 109, 118 Ch

air, 6, 120

co

mmittees, 124 De

puty Chair, 120 Di

rectors, 120-123 Ma

naging Director, 123 me

etings and attendance, 123 re

muneration policy, 125 bru

ssels, bel

gium, Seafood Expo, 99 bui

lding Community Trust webpage, 57 bur

eau of Metereology, 21 bursaries, 99 bycatch, 34-35, 69

c Canada, 10, 22 cardiovascular disease in fishers, 76-77 carp (Cyprinus carpio ), see National Carp Control Plan catch-and-release, 34 Cathy Dichmont Consulting, 22 China, exports to, 36, 52, 99 ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP) (project 2014-035), 45 climate change, vi, 52, 80, 105 Climate Initiative, 9, 23 Cobia aquaculture, 41-43 Codes for Australian Aquatic bio

ta, 101

Comcover Risk Management & ben

chmarking Survey, 112

Commission for the Conservation of Southern blu

efin Tuna, 33

Commonwealth At

torney-General’s Department, 113 co

ntribution, iii

Fi

sheries byc

atch Policy, 34-35

fishe

ries resources, sharing, 8 FR

DC RAC Chair, 19 Fu

nding Agreement, 14-15, 95 Ha

rvest Strategy Policy, 34-35 Na

tional Aquaculture Strategy, 42 Na

tional Fishing Plan, 16 pri

orities, 20, 174 re

port on Carp Control, 59-60 RA

C-COM, 52

se

e also Departments Commonwealth Fisheries Association, 14 Commonwealth Fisheries Management Act 1991, 41 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation,

see CSIRO Commonwealth South East Shark & Scalefish Fishery (SESSF), 70 communications, 47, 48 community perceptions, ix, 31, 47, 74 community wellbeing, Vic, 52 Community Trust in Rural Industries, 10, 21 (p

roject 2019-042), 46-47

187 Index alphabetical

conferences AbAR

ES ‘Outlook’, 80

Ev

okeAg 2020, 10 Gl

obal Innovators Forum 2019, 10 Ma -o

ri Fisheries 2019, 85-86 Tr

ans-Tasman Abalone and Paua Convention 2019, 50 consumers, 67-68, 70-71 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), 10, 64 Coretext, 104 CorpVote, 98 Cotton RDC (CRDC), 8, 21-23, 91 Council of Rural R&D Corporations (CRRDC), 23, 90, 95 COVID-19, vi-ix, 6, 7, 10, 18, 37, 47, 51, 62, 99, 101, 102, 105, 110 CSIRO, 21-23, 32-33, 38, 100-101

d Dairy Australia, 21-23, 91 Denmark, 22 Department of Agriculture, 7 Department of Agriculture & Water Resources Rural R&D for

Profit, 40

Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE), 7, 9, 21, 23, 34-35, 98, 99, 100 Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), 69-70 Department of the Environment and Energy, 7 Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, 21 Department of Finance, 90 Developing Northern Australia CRC, 50 disease, 40, 80, see also virus DNA analysis, 33, 55, 58 dolphins, 52

e E-commerce, 52, 99 Eastern Australian Salmon (Arripis trutta), 68 ‘Eat More Seafood’ campaign, 82 Ecological Australia, 21 EconSearch, 95 Emergency Positioning Radio bea

con (EPIRb), 6

7

Environment Protection and biod

iversity Conservation Act 1999

(EPbC Ac

t), 53, 173

re

view of, 8

lis

tings, 63

European Free Trade Agreement, 36, 99 EvokeAg, 10 exports, 36, 99

F FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing, 10 Fight Food Waste CRC, 50 Fish 2.0 (project 2017-219), 79-80 Fish Forever 2030 Strategy, 16 FISH magazine, 7, 103-104 Fish Names Committee, 100 FishPath tool, 52 Fish Safe Australia, website, 22 Fisheries Queensland, 48 food safety, 47 Forest and Wood Products Australia, 21, 91 Forrest Hill Consulting, 8 FRDC ac

countability, 108 Au

ditor-General’s Report, 127-144 An

nual Operational Plan, 16 boar

d, see boa

rd of FRDC

con

sultants, 113

co

ntracts, 111

co

rporate governance, 118-125 Co

st Allocation Policy, 14 di

sability policy, 110 eq

ual employment opportunity, 110 e-

newsletter, 7, 103 ener

gy efficiency, 114

et

hical behaviour, 100 Ev

aluation Framework, 90, 92

FRDC (continued) ev

aluation of R&D projects 2016-2018, 90-95 fr

eedom of information, 114, 174-175 Fu

nding Agreement, 8, 14-15, 21, 95 go

vernment policy, 114 Hu

man Dimensions subprogram, 57 IC

T, 102

in

dustrial democracy, 110 i

nvestment 20

19-20, iv

c

riteria, 94-95

f

ramework, 28-29

s

trategy, 15

le

gislative foundation, 169-171 ma

nagement, 108 min

isterial directions, 113 mis

sion, 13

na

tional research priorities, 24-25 1.

sustainability, 30-35 2.

productivity & profitability, 36-38 3. a

quaculture development, 39-43 pa

rtnership structures, 8 pro

bity audit 2019, 8 pr

ojects, 20

RA

C Chairs, 19

R&

D Plan 2020-25, viii, 7, 16-18, 22 R&

D programs

1: E

nvironment, 53-65

2: I

ndustry, 66-71, 93

3:

Communities, 72-78 4: P

eople, 79-83

5: A

doption, 84-89

RD

&E Plan 2015-20, ix, 14, 15 re

cords management, 110 re

muneration for key personnel, 177-178 re

search partners, 20 re

venue base, 168 ri

sk management, 110 se

curity, 114

so

cial media, 104 st

aff, 109

st

akeholders, reporting to, 95, 104 su

bmissions to inquiries, 8 sub

programs, 44

Tr

ade bur

sary Program, 99

vi

sion, 25

vi

sion 2030, 13 we

bsites, 14, 35, 47, 57, 64, 73, 99, 103, 104 wo

rk health and safety, 115 Free Trade Agreement, with European Union, 36, 99 Future Coast program (Vic), 54 future fisheries (FRDC projects), 34-35

G genetic ‘fingerprinting’, 32-33 GFRESH, 52, 99 Global Innovators Forum 2019, 10, 80 Grains RDC (GRDC), 8, 21-23, 91 Great bar

rier Reef Marine Park Authority, 21 Greening Australia, 21

H Harvest Strategy Policy, 34-35 health of fishers, vii, 48, 75-78 health benefits of seafood (project 2018-092), 84-85 Horticulture Innovation Australia, 91 House of Representatives inquiry on agriculture, 8, 41 Human Dimensions Research Subprogram, 57 Humpty Doo bar

ramundi, NT, 42

i Indigenous communities, vii ca

pacity building workshop (project 2017-069), 72-73 Indigenous fisheries on you

Tube, 86

Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation, 85 Indigenous Reference Group (IRG), viii, 6, 14, 37, 44, 52, 72, 85-86 information and communications technology (ICT), 102 innovation, 9-10, 23

188 FRDC ANNUAL REPORT 2019-20

Institute for Marine & Antarctic Studies (IMAS), 33-34, 57, 87-89 Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS), 21, 55 International Coalition of Fisheries Associations, 10, 22, 105 International Commission for the Conservation of Southern

blu

efin Tuna, 50

International Freight Assistance Mechanism, 99 Industry Partnership Agreements (IPAs), iv, viii, 8, 19, 49-51

J japan, 22, 32

K key Performance Indicators, vii-viii kin

gfish for Profit ( k4P ), 40, 42

L labour issues, 10 Lachlan River, 62 leadership capacity building, 44 gl

obal seafood, 10 LiDAR, laser mapping, 54 ‘Life on the line’ documentary, 32-34 LiveCorp, 21, 91 Lock 1 to Lock 3, SA, 62 Love Australian Prawns campaign, 98

M mackerels, 38 Macquarie Harbour, Tas, video (project 2017-106), 87-89 MainStream Aquaculture, Vic, 42 Ma -ori fisheries (project 2107-132), 85-86 Ma -ori Fisheries Trust, Te Ohu kai

moana, 86

marine heatwave 2011, 52 marine plastics (project 2017-199), 10, 56 marketing levy, 98 Marine Stewardship Council, 74 Marketing Symposium (project 2017-196), 81-83 marron aquaculture, 43 Master Fish Merchants’ Association, 100 MasterChef TV program, 41 Meat & Livestock Australia, 21-23, 91 Melbourne, Vic, 10, 18, 100 mental health, vii, of fi

shing families (project 2016-400), 48, 75-78 Minister for Agriculture, 6, 8, 13, 14, 20, 108, 171, 174 Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management, v, 7 Minister for the Environment, 7 Moreton bay bug a

quaculture, 43

mud crab, NT, 52 multi-species fishery, economic returns (project 2015-202), 69-71 Murray Cod aquaculture, 42-43 Murray River, 62

n National Agriculture Workforce Strategy, 8 National Aquaculture Council, 14 National Aquaculture Strategy, 41 National Carp Control Plan (NCCP), vi, 9, 46, 59-62, 104 National Centre for Farmer Health, Vic, 48 National Environmental Science Program (NESP), 64 National Farmers’ Federation, 21 National Habitat Strategy (project 2015-501), 37 National Marine Science Committee (NMSC), 21 National Marine Science Plan, 16, 21 natural capital, 21 New South Wales (NSW) aq

uaculture, 43

De

partment of Primary Industries (NSW DPI), 21-22, 80 FR

DC RAC Chair, 19 Go

vernment Food Authority, 45 in

dustry contribution, iii ma

rketing, vi, 52

RA

C-NSW, 52

New Zealand, 22, 32, 56

Northern Territory (NT), 59 aq

uaculture, 42

De

partment of Primary Industry & Resources, 22 FR

DC RAC Chair, 19 in

dustry contribution, iii RA

C-NT, 52

Nuffield Australia, 21

O ‘Our Pledge’ (project 2017-242), 9, 74 oysters mi

crobiome (project 2008-339), 80 se

e also pearl, see also tropical Oysters Australia, 19, 23, 50

p Pacific Oyster Mortality Syndrome (POMS), ix, 40, 43 Pearl Consortium (Pearls), 19, 51 pearl oysters aquaculture, 43 people development, collaboration, 21 PGPA Act, v, 13-14, 172 pilchards as feed, 33 PIRD Act, v, 12, 13-14, 24, 113, 169 pollution, vi Port Fairy, Vic, 57 Port Lincoln, SA, 32-33 prawns far

med, iii, 41, 43 No

rthern Prawn Fishery, 35 Wh

ite Spot Disease, ix, 42, 50 wi