Victoria's Southern Hemisphere competitors for exports to Asia: Ten Competitiveness Factors
Contents
-
Introduction
-
Products under pressure from Southern Hemisphere competitors
-
Ten competitiveness factors
-
Product Quality and Other Product Attributes
-
Understanding Consumers
-
Value Chain Strategies
-
Innovation
-
Market Access
-
Cost of Production and Price
-
Supply Capability
-
Marketing and Promotions
-
Understanding Competitors
-
Economies of Scale
-
Summary and Further Considerations
Introduction
This discussion paper focuses on the key factors that influence the competitiveness of Victoria’s exports in Asian markets relative to our leading Southern Hemisphere competitors.
Asia is the principal market for Victoria’s agri-food industries, accounting for more than 70% of Victoria’s agri-food exports in 2008 (GTIS, 2009). This reliance on Asian markets means that developments in Asia -shifting demography, rising incomes and changing tastes (Euromonitor, 2009) – are of crucial interest to Victoria’s food exporters. Victorian agri-food exporters need to be up-to-date with market requirements in Asia and have a sound understanding of international competitors in order to maintain performance.
In recent years agri-food export volumes from Victoria’s Southern Hemisphere competitors have grown considerably. Brazilian beef exports have more than doubled since 2002 to over one million tonnes in 2008. Chile’s wine exports increased from 355 million litres in 2002 to 590 million litres in 2008 and South African fruit exports grew by almost one million tonnes over the same period (GTIS, 2009). These and other Southern Hemisphere competitors are increasing their share of Asian markets, sometimes at Victoria’s expense.
The rapid growth in agri-food exports by Victoria’s competitors and their increasing market share in Asia raise several questions. What are Victoria's competitors doing differently? Where does their competitive advantage lie, and how does it compare with the strengths and weaknesses of Victorian agrifood industries? Why is Victoria losing market share for some products in Asia?
A crude analysis might conclude that Victoria is losing share in Asian agri-food markets due to higher prices; however, in many Asian markets the import price for agri-food products can vary considerably for different trading partners, suggesting that other competitiveness factors are important. This is encouraging for industries that are struggling to match the price of products from low-cost competitors.
To develop an understanding of why some Victorian agri-food industries are being out-competed, we conducted a preliminary analysis of international trade data and identified ten competitiveness factors. By focusing on these ten factors, this discussion paper is intended to raise awareness of competitive factors other than price and generate discussion in industry and government, laying the foundation for a detailed study of Victorian and competitor performance in Asian markets.
Our analysis thus far has identified two products and two Southern Hemisphere competitors. Victorian citrus and table grapes exports are under significant pressure in Asian markets from Chilean and South African fruit. These export products and competitorsare used as examples throughout this discussion paper where appropriate.
Ten competitiveness factors
Products under pressure from Southern Hemisphere competitors
International agri-food trade data was analysed to determine the Victorian agri-food exports under most pressure from Southern Hemisphere competitors. The analysis involved applying a succession of filters to data describing all agri-food products exported from Australia to Asian markets.
To be identified as under significant pressure from international competitors in Asian markets, the product had to show:
An annual export value between 2000 and 2008 of $AU 10 million or more.
A decline in market share between 2000 and 2008, and Growth in the total volume of the product being imported by the market.
This filtering led to a short-list of nine products - nuts, whey, citrus, table grapes, wine, legumes, frozen fish, fresh tuna and pome fruit. To keep the analysis simple, further filtering was conducted to isolate two products. The products of greatest economic significance to the State of Victoria were prioritised, and the Victorian Department of Primary Industry’s (DPI’s) International Market Development Officers
were asked which of these products they perceived to be under particular pressure from Southern Hemisphere competitors. Citrus and table grape exports were identified as being under pressure from Southern Hemisphere competitors in Asia (while acknowledging that performance in specific Asian markets will vary from the regional pattern).
“Value chains that are competitors for Australia, real orpotential, are South Africa and Chile for fruit” (DPI Thailand, Vietnam and China Manager, 2009).
“Across all South East Asian markets, especially Malaysia, there is a notable decrease in our market share of fresh fruit with increased competition coming from South Africa and Chile” (DPI South East Asia Manager, 2009).
Having isolated citrus and table grapes, the international trade database was interrogated again to identify the countries that are growing their market share for citrus and table grape products. The key Southern Hemisphere citrus producers which are increasing their market share in Asia are Chile, Peru and South Africa. The Southern Hemisphere competitors identified as increasing market share for table grapes in Asia are Brazil, Peru, Chile, and South Africa.
To narrow the shortlist of competitors and simplify the analysis further, those competitors that are most economically significant and compete in both citrus and table grapes were prioritised. DPI’s International Market Development Officers perceived Chile and South Africa to be Victoria’s most significant competitors in Asia.
“Chile is a leader in table grape supplies to North Asia” (DPI North Asia Manager, 2009).
“In terms of citrus we are seeing some market share in Korea being taken by South Africa.” (DPI North Asia Manager, 2009).
“In Thailand, and similar in Vietnam, for horticultural products our main Southern Hemisphere competitors are South Africa and Chile.” (DPI Thailand, Vietnam and China Manager, 2009).
The decline in market share of Australian citrus in Hong Kong is presented in figure 1, and the decline in market share of Australian table grapes in Indonesia is shown in figure 2, in both cases relative to our major competitors.
In this section ten competitiveness factors are identified and briefly discussed. Our analysis of these factors suggests that Victorian agri-food industries need not compete in Asian markets on price alone; additional components to competitiveness exist. Evidence about the performance of the citrus and table grape industries in Australia, Chile and South Africa are used to ground the following discussion of the ten competitiveness factors.
Product Quality and Other Product Attributes
Product quality and differentiation can be used to create competitive advantage.
Maintaining quality and consistency in citrus products and tables grapes is challenging, particularly given the effect of seasonal variation on fruit quality. Quality can deteriorate along the supply chain (Trienekens et al.2008), and consumers rely heavily on past experience when deciding which fruit to buy (Poole & Baron,1996).
Product quality is clearly a vital aspect of competitiveness. After completing a study tour of South African citrus production, Philp (2006) noted that South African citrus products were increasing market share in Singapore largely due to their product’s superior quality. Similarly, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) expects US oranges to perform well in 2009-10 due to consumers’ familiarity with the high quality fruit (USDA, 2009). Further, DPI’s South East Asia manager observed that:
“South African product is seen as being of comparable quality to Australian product in South East Asian markets” (DPI South East Asia Manager, 2009).
“South African product is seen as being of comparable quality to Australian product in South East Asian markets” (DPI South East Asia Manager, 2009).
High quality fruit can command premium prices in Asian markets, but this depends on quality being assured and consistent (PIRSA, 2005). Product quality and attributes such as food safety and health and environmental benefits are known sources of differentiation and value (DPI, 2007). Differentiating a product in terms of consistent, superior quality or other product attributes enables it to compete on more than price alone (conversely, poor or inconsistent quality can permanently damage the exporter’s reputation).
Victoria’s ‘clean and green’ image is an asset thathelps in gaining and maintaining market access and building consumer confidence in Victorian fruit.
Fresh fruit is well recognised as a product that promotes good health. Health and ‘wellness’ foods are a growth area in Asian markets (DPI, 2007), suggesting that increased promotion of the safe and healthy attributes of Victorian fruit will maximise competitive advantage.
Understanding Consumers
Understanding consumer demand can increase the competitiveness of a product by enabling innovation, differentiation and marketing to be better targeted at the consumer.
In South Korea imported fruit is considered inferior and less safe compared to local fruit. This perception is due to repeated food safety issues (USDA, 2008).
Nevertheless table grapes from Chile have developed a “fresh” image among Korean consumers (USDA, 2008). Chilean table grape exporters to Korea have developed a competitive advantage by understanding and marketing to the Korean consumer.
The Australian table grape industry is engaged in consumer research. The Table Grape Tracking Study sampled 600 consumers, investigating purchase behaviour, consumption, attitudes and positioning effectiveness (Table Grape, 2008). Although a domestic study, the learning from such research will help the Victorian table grape industry to improve theircompetitive position.
Understanding the aspects of a product most highly valued by consumers – for which they are willing to pay more - enables producers segments can then be targeted with products that are differentiated to meet their specific needs.
Product innovation in the absence of a thorough understanding of the market is less likely to be successful. Well communicated market intelligence can help drive innovation through the entire value chain (see the innovation section).
Quality control systems developed in response to consumer demand are a valuable innovation for agricultural industries. Halal and Kosher certifications are examples of quality control systems that havebeen developed for particular segments (see product quality section). Similarly, in the future we can reasonably expect that agri-food production will need to account for carbon emissions and water consumption to appeal to some consumer segments.
Value Chain Strategies
Value chain management is about managing a traditional ‘supply chain’ in such a way that additional value is created for the benefit of both consumers and producers. Value can be created through efficiency gains, greater effectiveness and innovation within a supply chain.
Value chain management can create a competitive advantage for businesses and industries by strengthening relationships along the supply chain, improving information flows, and developing strategic capabilities that are difficult for competitors to copy.
There are five elements to a successful value chain (see figure 3). Collectively, these elements contribute to the overall effectiveness and efficiency of a business.
There are three levels at which an individual business competes: products and services, capabilities, and business design (see figure 4). Business design describes the structure, strategy and relationships of a business and is the hardest to replicate. Products and services can be copied, capabilities can be developed but business design is complex and unique. Industries with strong value chain functions are often better able to compete in the global marketplace.
Successful value chain management can be a sign that an industry is working together well and is structured effectively. For example, the New Zealand kiwifruit industry is characterised by good coordination of the value chain facilitated by open communication systems, an understanding of market issues and general co-operation (Kilgour et al, 2008). New Zealand’s kiwifruit industry has responded to global pressures by monitoring market information and consumer trends, supported by growers keeping abreast of changing market conditions and retaining an element of marketing control (Kilgour et al, 2008). Integrated production, processing, distribution, and information sharing gives New Zealand a total supply chain management system that will be difficult for foreign competitors to replicate.
Value chain management enables the development of unique systems and relationships that generate greater industry performance and, ultimately, competitive advantage. There may be opportunities for Victorian horticulture exporters to develop a value chain approach in markets where cost is not the only factor. Victorian horticultural industries could benefit from a “whole of value chain” approach.
Innovation
Markets change over time. Modern markets are characterised by new lifestyles, higher incomes, and demand for variety, quality, year-round supply, convenience and healthy food (Trienekens et al.2008). These market characteristics provide many opportunities for producers to innovate and differentiate to stay ahead of competitors.
Businesses may elect to invest in product innovation, marketing innovation and/or process innovation. A business might choose to develop a new product – perhaps a new variety, or a distinguishing attribute – or take a novel approach to marketing or seek ways to improve its processes. If the innovation is accepted by the market it can generate improved competitiveness and performance.
As noted earlier, coordinating innovation has been a key competitiveness factor for the New Zealand kiwifruit industry. The Kilgour et al. (2008) study of the industry found that innovation efforts were most successful when they were well coordinated and information was shared along the value chain. Zespri, New Zealand’s leading kiwifruit company, has vigorously pursued innovation at the product, marketing and process levels.
“Innovation and intellectual property are at the heart of how New Zealand's NZ$1 billion kiwi market has been maintained against competition” (Kilgour et al. 2008).
The development of new varieties is crucial to remain competitive, particularly for industries that don’t compete primarily on price. Such industries need to stay in touch with consumer and competitor variety trends (see understanding consumers section).
South African citrus growers produce varieties of fruit for different markets and maturity times over a range of climatic zones. After completing a tour of South African citrus production, Philp (2006) concluded that South African citrus growers appear more active than Australian growers in tailoring varieties to suit tastes in different countries and for specific markets.
Globally, table grape industries are adopting new bred-for-market varieties with a trend towardsproduction of seedless types (Table Grape, 2008). In order to remain competitive Victoria’s industry must persist with innovation efforts.
Innovation is critical to offering consumers new products, marketing them more effectively and improving production processes, all of which enable industries to be more competitive.
Market Access
Market access requirements and restrictions may be either barriers or enablers for the competitiveness of suppliers in a particular market.
Market access requirements take a variety of forms. Familiar instruments for restricting market access include tariffs, quotas and phytosanitary conditions. Less familiar market access requirements include packaging and labelling regulations, rules on country of origin and retailer requirements. Products that have greater access to a market relative to competitors enjoy a significant competitive advantage.
Citrus and table grape exports to Asian markets are limited by market access requirements. The North Asian markets have significant market access regulations that restrict market growth for Australian and other Southern Hemisphere exporters.
Tariff and quota barriers to market access are being addressed multilaterally in World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations and by regional and bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs). To increase thecompetitiveness of their export industries, Australia and many of its competitors are pursuing bilateral FTAs.
Australia has signed FTAs with Singapore, Thailand and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and is negotiating FTAs with China, Japan, Korea and Malaysia.
Chile has signed FTAs with China, Singapore and Japan. Chile is also a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership which includes Brunei, Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore.
South Africa is exploring free trade agreements with India and China, and citrus products are included in the list of products for which tariff relief is requested (USDA, 2009).
As tariffs have been reducing under the WTO, other instruments of protection such as phytosanitary conditions, product standards and labelling have assumed greater importance (Kulkarni, 2005). Australia cannot export its citrus or table grapes to some major Asian markets - Taiwan, China, South Korea and Japan - due to phytosanitary barriers.
Being able to demonstrate the existence of fruit fly free areas is a source of competitive advantage and commercial benefit for Australian citrus and table grape industries. Thailand prohibits South African table grape imports for phytosanitary reasons, providing the Australian table grape industry with an advantage. Cold sterilisation temperatures (eg –0.5 C) required by some countries make it more difficult for
South African citrus growers to gain access (Philp, 2006). Chile has had success in addressing regulatory market access restrictions, and this partly explains Chile’s increase in market share in Asia over recent years: Chile is now the largest Southern Hemisphere supplier of table grapes to Japan, South Korea and China (GTIS, 2009).
Market access requirements can also be opportunities. There is often a ‘first mover advantage’ for industries which are prepared to invest in addressing market access requirements, particularly where these have recently changed, and doing so brings competitive advantage. There is a strong correlation between market access and trade and export performance.
Cost of Production and Price
Many of Victoria’s international competitors benefit from lower costs of production. Cheaper labour and water in competitor countries such as Chile and South Africa often cannot be matched in Victoria.
Cost of production data for citrus products and table grapes in Victoria's competitor countries are not readily available. In lieu of a direct comparison of cost of production, the cost of labour could be considered an indicator of overall cost. The minimum wage in Australia is AUD$544/week, compared with approximately AUD$90/week in Chile and AUD$60/week in South Africa. Although citrus and table grape production in Victoria is less labour intensive than in Chile or South Africa, vastly higher labour costs may lead to a higher overall cost of fruit production.
“South East Asia is price sensitive and cost/price is a reason for decreasing market share” (DPI South East Asia Manager, 2009).
Currency exchange rates should also be recognised as significant contributing factors to price competitiveness.
In most Asian markets the average import price – including Cost, Insurance and Freight (CIF) – paid for Australian citrus products or table grapes are in the middle of the markets’ price ranges, but in some markets the CIF price paid for Australian fruit is significantly higher than the average price paid tointernational competitors.
Similarly, the Hong Kong and Indian markets pay higher prices for Australian table grapes than Chilean or South African grapes (data not shown).
Figure 5 shows that the Japanese and South Korean markets paid higher prices for Australian oranges than for Chilean or South African oranges in 2008/09.
Similarly, the Hong Kong and Indian markets pay higher prices for Australian table grapes than Chilean or South African grapes (data not shown).
“In Japan, Australian oranges have a reputation for being particularly sweet” (DPI North Asia Manager, 2009).
The USDA (2009) noted that the decrease in family sizes in South Korea, means price is becoming a less important factor in the purchase of fruit so an increasing number of South Korean consumers are willing to pay extra for better taste and quality. Figure 5 suggests that the Japanese perception of the high quality of Australian oranges is shared by South Koreans.
Although price is an important competitiveness factor, there are markets (and consumer segments within markets) that are willing to pay more for consistently high-quality or effectively differentiated fruit, demonstrating that competition is not exclusively price based.
Supply Capability
Continuity, consistency and quantity of supply are critical capabilities that enable a business to maintain its market share and competitive advantage.
Continuity of supply in a global marketplace is becoming more important with regard to competitiveness. In markets with tight margins and
strong competition, providing continuous supply 12 months a year can increase competitiveness by ensuring continuous shelf space (Hewett, 2003). In New Zealand, Zespri identified 12 month supply as the key to being able to maximise returns to growers, and licensed plantings of Green and Gold kiwifruit in eight different countries to develop a 12 month supplysystem to more than 60 markets (Hewett, 2003).
Seasonality is a challenge for most agricultural industries, restricting their ability to provide continuous supply to their customers. Victoria’s ability to supply agri-food products to customers can be heavily influenced by events that occur throughout the supply chain. Labour shortages, climatic events, pest and disease outbreaks, inventory issues and machinery faults make achieving consistent supply difficult.
With respect to table grapes, Australia is fortunate to have a diverse range of production areas spread across various states and climatic regions, allowingthe season to extend from November to May.
Developing the capability to supply table grapes to markets for even more months of the year will improve Australian competitiveness further.
Continuity of supply is important to competitiveness, but so too is supply volume. Growing economies and populations in many Asian markets demand larger quantities of food. Victoria’s production capacity has been impacted upon by drought and other factors with
total tree numbers falling over the last 5 years (ABS, 2006).
Philp (2006) reported that South African citrus growers are able to achieve yields of around 60 tonnes per hectare, while Australian growers average 30-35 t/ha. In addition, Australian citrus plantings are only half that of South Africa and one third of South African plantings are under seven years old, suggesting further growth in South Africa’s supply capacity in the medium term.
Although competitors such as South Africa hold a competitive advantage in supply capacity, the Zespri model (licensing offshore planting) or alliances with other suppliers may enable Victorian citrus and table grape exporters to improve supply competitiveness.
Marketing and Promotions
Marketing is the delivery of customer value and satisfaction at a profit (Kotler, 2003) and is an important aspect of international competitiveness. Some markets and segments require encouragement to develop their interest in a product (USDA, 2009). Marketing and promotions are an important function for attracting consumers to a product. Marketing initiatives help to capitalise on investments in product or brand differentiation by enabling consumers to recognise that point of differentiation and distinguish a product from its competitors.
Marketing can focus on any of the product’s attributes: examples include a novel use of the product, health benefits or convenience (such as easy peel and seedless grapes) (FAO, 2006). If consumers are being asked to pay more for a product from a new source, they must have confidence that it offers added value.
Branding and image in the market place are powerful ways of capturing consumers’ attention and maintaining market position, and can be achieved via activities such as sales promotion, advertising, personal selling, and publicity (Smith, 2004). In-store promotion can lift sales and gain price premiums (USDA, 2008).
Chilean and South African exporters have invested heavily in in-market promotion in Asia, including point of sale and catalogue advertising. Australian table grape exporters have also engaged in in-market promotion in Asia, with some success (Table Grape, 2008).
The Australian citrus industry strategy outlines its intention of appealing to market segments that value premium quality fruit (ACG, 2006). Even so, some of Victoria’s competitors in Asian markets are more active in marketing their products. The Washington Apple Commission, Sunkist, the Californian TableGrape Commission and Zespri all have strong brands supported by well-organised marketing and promotion
efforts that help maintain customer loyalty.
For marketing activities to be effective they must be guided by a strategy focused on identified target markets (see the understanding consumers section). After securing initial interest and sales, marketing initiatives must persist to maintain consumer interest and sales in subsequent years (Martin, 2005).
Understanding Competitors
To attract and retain market share, Victorian agri-food exporters must meet the needs of their international customers and do it better than their competitors. Acompetitive advantage can be gained by offering consumers greater value - lower prices, or greater benefits and service that justify higher prices - than competitors. To do this, exporters must have access to information about their competitors and their products.
There are three categories of competitor information (Davidson 1997):
Recorded data: this is easily available in publishedform either internally or externally. Examples include competitor annual reports and product brochures;
Observable data: this has to be actively sought and is often assembled from several sources. An example is competitor pricing;
Opportunistic data: much of it is anecdotal, coming from discussions with suppliers, customers and (possibly) the previous management of competitors.
Understanding competitors can be about more than monitoring competitor pricing or marketing strategies. Victoria’s competitors in the agri-food industry face similar challenges, so there are opportunities to take inspiration from them. For example, Chile and South Africa may be implementing adaptations to climate change or limited water availability from which Victorian agri-food industries can learn.
Competitor analysis may include benchmarking against international competitors, and can be conducted at a business, industry or national level. An analysis of international table grape and citrus competitors would help the Australian industry to identify and maximise its ompetitive advantages.
Economies of Scale
Whether competing on price or a differentiated value proposition, it is useful to consider economies of scale. Economies of scale are the cost advantages that a business obtains due to expansion, so the average cost per unit falls as scale is increased. A greater scale of operation has the potential to minimise the per unit (marginal) cost of business activities and to create efficiencies that lead to improved business performance in other ways. Economies of scale can be achieved internally, by a single operation, or externally, through industry collaboration.
Business activities that can benefit from economies of scale include gathering market information, managing finance, product development, input procurement, production, marketing and distribution. Individual businesses can benefit from internal economies of scale: the marginal cost of overheads, salaries and depreciation decreases as orchard size increases (PIRSA, 2005). Nevertheless, significantly increasing orchard size may not always be a costeffective option (PIRSA, 2005).
Instead, benefits of scale can be gained across the industry as a whole. Industry bodies and associations provide opportunities for external economies of scale by pooling funding and centralising capabilities.
Research, development and extension, marketing, promotion and branding, and disseminating market information are examples of areas in which industry associations are able to gain economies of scale.
A recent restructure of Australian citrus industry bodies combined several organisations with the aim of increasing economies of scale and minimising duplication (CAL, 2008). Participants are optimistic that the restructure will eventually produce substantial benefits to the industry.
External economies of scale can be compared internationally. Comparisons should include national production, levy rates and industry body efficiency and effectiveness.
In 2006, South Africa produced three times more citrus than Australia (Philp, 2006). In the same year, Australian levy rates were AUD$2.75 per tonne for oranges (DAFF, 2007) and South African rates were approximately AUD$4 per tonne for any citrus product (CGA, 2009). In this comparison South Africa has a significant external scale advantage over Australia.
This advantage is apparent in the South African citrus industry’s ability to develop “different varieties tailored to tastes in different countries” (Philip, 2006).
Summary and Further Considerations
Our initial analysis and consultations with market experts suggests that some Victorian agri-food industries are being out-competed in Asian markets by their Southern Hemisphere competitors.
Citrus products and table grapes were identified as Victorian agri-food exports under significant pressure from Southern Hemisphere competitors in Asian markets. Chilean and South African exporters appear to be Victoria's most successful of Southern Hemisphere competitors, claiming increasing shares of Asian markets at Victoria’s expense.
To progress an understanding of the competitive differences between Victorian exporters and Southern Hemisphere competitors, ten competitiveness factors were identified. The diversity of the factors highlights that competitiveness is multifaceted – it is more
complex than price alone. The competitiveness factors demonstrate that price premiums can be realised for high quality, new, reliable or otherwise differentiated products. This finding should be encouraging for exporters that are struggling to match the price of products from their lower-cost international competitors.
The competitiveness factors we identified are not applicable only to industries under significant pressure from competitors, but could be used by any agribusiness or industry to stimulate continuous improvement or to be the framework for learning from competitors.
Understanding the competitive strengths and weaknesses of Victorian agri-food export industries and their international competitors will inform the strategic direction for agri-food exporters, industry and government. Further investigation of Victorian and competitor performance relative to the competitive factors identified in this discussion paper is an important next step to verify and add detail to what has been covered in this discussion paper.
The Victorian agri-food industry’s productivity is limited by water availability, suitable land, labour and other factors. Victorian agri-food exporters are not always able to compete on price. Nevertheless, they have strengths in competitiveness factors other than price -
including quality, food safety and environmental impact – and focusing on these non-price factors could improve their competitive advantage.
Authors:
Jonathan Creese
DPI Spring St, (03) 9658 4723 - jonathan.creese@dpi.vic.gov.au
Ashley Paech
DPI Rutherglen, (02) 6030 4566 - ashley.paech@dpi.vic.gov.au
Simon Fraval
DPI Spring St, (03) 96584325 - simon.fraval@dpi.vic.gov.au
Editor:
Dr Campbell Aitken
Express Editing Writing and Research
Published by the Department of Primary Industries, Farm Services Victoria, February 2010 © The State of Victoria 2010.
This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968.
Authorised by the Victorian Government, 1 Spring Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia ISBN ISBN 978-1-74217-995-7 (print) ISBN ISBN 978-1-74217-996-4 (online)
References
Armstrong, J. & Green, K. (2005). Competitor-oriented Objectives: The Myth of Market Share. Working Paper
17/05 – Monash University.
Australian Citrus Growers incorporated (ACG). (2006). Creating our future: A national strategy for the citrus industry. Horticulture Australia Limited
Australian Table Grape Association (ATGA). (2002). Strategic plan. Horticulture Australia Limited
Bartlett C. & Ghosal (1989). Managing across borders: the transnational solution. Hutchinson Business Books.
CAL, 2008. “Citrus Australia Ltd” heralds new industry structure http://www.australiancitrusgrowers.com.au/gen_pdfs/CitrusAustraliaLtdtobeFormed2JUNE08.pdf
Citrus growers association (CGA), 2009.
http://www.cga.co.za/site/awdep.asp?page=11455&depnum=11455
Davidson, J.H. (1997) “Even more offensive marketing” An exhilarating guide to winning inbusiness. Penguin Business (London)
Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), 2007. Citrus levy rates
Department of Primary Industries. (2007). Beyond credence? Emerging consumer trends in international markets. Department of Primary Industries:Melbourne.
Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO). (2006), Agricultural and Food Marketing Management, Harmsen, H., Grunert, K. & Declerk, F. (2000). Why did we make that cheese? An empirically based framework for understanding what drives innovation activity. R&D Management. 30(2): 151-166.
Hewett, E. (2003). Perceptions of Supply Chain Management for Perishable Horticultural Crops: An Introduction. Proceedings International Conference Quality in Chains.
Kilgour, M., Saunders, C., Scrimigeour, F., and Zellman, E. (2008). The key elements of success and failure in the New Zealand kiwifruit industry. AERU, Lincoln University, New Zealand.
Kotler, P., Adam, S., Brown, L., and Armstrong, G. (2003) Principles of marketing, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall
Kulkarni, P. (2005). Non-tariff barriers and NAMA negotiations. Centre for Trade and Development.
Martin. R. and Luxton. P. (2005). The successful commercialisation of Zespri™ gold kiwifruit. ISHS Acta Horticulture (694): 35-40.
Mowat, A. & Collins, R. (2000). Consumer behaviour and fruit quality: supply chain management in an emerging industry. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. 5(1): 45-54. Philp, B. (2006). South African citrus industry – Study tour report. Primary Industries and Resources SA: Adelaide.
PIRSA (2005). Fresh Citrus: Issues and Prospects PIRSA (2009). Sustainable value chain analysis: a case study of South Australian wine.
Poole, N. & Baron, L. (1996). Consumer awareness of citrus fruit attributes. British Food Journal. 98(1): 23- 28.
Sikich, G.W. (2005) Integrating business continuity criteria into your supply chain.
Smith, Paul et. al. (2004) Marketing communications: an integrated approach. Kogan Page Ltd.
Table Grape. (2008). Annual Industry Report. Australian Table Grape Association.
Trienekens, J., Uffelen, R., Debaire, J. & Omta, O. (2008). Assessment of innovation and performance in the fruit chain. British Food Journal. 110(1): 98-127.
USDA (2008). Korea Grapes
USDA. (2009). China Stone Fruit Annual
USDA (2009). South Africa Citrus Annual
USDA (2009). Korea Citrus Annual
USDA (2009). South Africa Citrus Semi Annual
Verbees, F. & Meulenberg, M. (2004). Market Orientation, Innovativeness, Product Innovation and Performance in Small Firms. Journal of Small Business Management. 42(2): 134-154.
