Voluntary adoption of Environmental Management Systems in the Australian wine and grape industry depends on understanding stakeholder objectives and drivers

Abstract

In recent years, members of the Australian wine and grape industry have been encouraged to participate in a range of Environmental Management System (EMS)-type programs. These have been sponsored by a variety of stakeholders including government organisations, environmental non-government organisations, industry associations and large corporations. Collectively, these stakeholders have a diverse range of objectives they are seeking to address through the adoption of EMS by grape growers. These objectives range from natural resource management outcomes through to maintenance of market access and meeting investor expectations. However, these stakeholder objectives may not align to the individual needs of grape growers, nor to the drivers that may influence the adoption of an EMS by such individuals. To date, there has been variable success with voluntary adoption of EMS (or similar concepts) across viticulture regions throughout Australia. This paper seeks to clarify this variability based on an assessment of the needs and circumstances of various industry groups associated with EMS initiatives. A conceptual framework is proposed which categorises these particular needs according to different scales of influence (e.g. industry, region, business and individual). In addition, the drivers that operate at the individual grower level are further explored through a qualitative field study. This study has implications for the design and promotion of EMS programs for the wine and grape and other agricultural industries. It is clear that a ‘one size fits all’ approach will not meet the varying needs and objectives of all industry participants. Furthermore, grape growers may not perceive a need to change and, therefore, are yet to identify any benefits from voluntary adoption of an EMS. Alternative mechanisms such as market-based or regulatory instruments may need to be considered, dependent on the objectives that are sought.

Rainforest Alliance Certification of Kenyan tea farms: a contribution to sustainability or tokenism?

“…Objectives pursued by various organisations when adopting EMS have been identified by Tee, Boland, & Medhurst (2007) as natural resource management, maintenance of market access and meeting investor expectations. There has also been pressure on businesses from various interest groups including the media, as they expose poor working conditions, especially in developing countries, and campaigns for fairer trade launched by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) (Hughes, 2001).…”

“…The adoption of EMSs has spread extensively worldwide mainly in the industrial sector and more recently in the horticultural sector of the agriculture industry (Tee, Boland, & Medhurst, 2007). The EMS concept refers to actions incorporated voluntarily by organisations into their management in order to prevent or minimise adverse environmental and social impacts.…”

“…Given the intention of developing EMSs, which is pursuing sustainability in the operations of businesses and organisations (Darnall et al, 2008;Mutersbaugh, 2002;Raynolds, 2000;Rondinelli & Berry, 2000;Tee et al, 2007), their evaluation needs to be based on Triple Bottom Line (TBL) sustainability considerations (Hughey et al 2004). Yunlong & Smit (1994, p. 305) assert, -Sustainable agriculture can be viewed from ecological, social and economic perspectives, and should be assessed relative to all three.‖ This is the basis on which most studies evaluating voluntary standards have been conducted (e.g., Hughey et al, 2004;Raynolds et al, 2006;Rondinelli & Berry, 2000;Wagner, 1998).…”

“…Furthermore, farmers also have a diverse range of objectives they are seeking to address through the adoption of EMSs. Tee et al (2007) identify these objectives in the Australian wine and grape industry as ranging from natural resource management outcomes through to maintenance of market access and meeting investor expectations. In the main, studies evaluating broader links between an organisation's environmental strategies and its business performance report mixed results (Darnall et al, 2008), with some claiming improved business performance and others illustrating insignificant results.…”

Foreword to 'Environmental Management Systems in Agriculture — Diversity and Innovation'

“…Pahl and Sharp (2007) outline the expectations for environmental assurance of various players in the pastoral industry. Similarly, the provision for diverse stakeholder needs in viticulture, while addressing the individual needs of grape growers is reviewed by Tee et al (2007).…”