Australian Meat Product Branding Reforms

This assignment examines a proposal for reforming Australian meat product branding standards. It analyzes the potential economic impacts of these reforms and their alignment with Australia's national branding strategy. The text argues that maintaining high quality standards is crucial for safeguarding Australia's reputation in the international meat market.

Meat Reforms 1
REFORMS IN THE AUSTRALIAN DAIRY INDUSTRY
Student’s Name
Course
Professor’s Name
University
(City) State
Date

Meat Reforms 2
Reforms in the Australian Meat Industry
The Australian meat industry is a reputable sector globally. For this reason, any reforms
in the industry significantly affect the economy. Recently, two crossbench MPs proposed that
Australian grown meat but proposed overseas should be banned from being sold as Australian. In
the proposed reform, the MP for Kennedy Bob Katter and the NXT MP Rebekha Sharkie argue
that the reform would safeguard investments in local production and maintain high quality
standards (Vidot, 2017). Consequently, it would protect the country’s meat industry reputation as
it would ensure only quality meat from the country is branded as Australian. For this reason,
Anna Vidot explains the details of the reform in an article dubbed “Meat processed overseas,
branded Australian faces ban in proposal by Federal crossbenchers”.
Primarily, the reform solicits the interests of various stakeholders in the meat industry.
Firstly, the article is of interest to local livestock farmers who export their live animals overseas
for processing. In addition, the article would be of significance to international companies that
purchase Australian live animals for processing in their own countries. Notably, this lot would be
considerably affected by the proposal as they would have to change their brand, something that
would adversely affect their marketing and sales. Furthermore, the proposal would cost both
Australia and its exporting countries a lot of revenue. For this reason, the article will interest
agents from livestock exporters and importers council in the participating economies.
It is imperative to note that the issues arising from the article can be explained using
various economic theories. As such, the rationale behind the proposal can be justified using
economic concepts. Fundamentally, the main arguments raised in the proposed reform relate to
the concept of nation branding. In economics, country branding plays a significant role in

Meat Reforms 3
international markets. Profoundly, nation branding pertains to the tactical self representation of a
state with the intention of developing reputational capital through economic interest promotion
both locally and out of the country (Szondi, n.d.). Primarily, it involves the use of tools of
imaging to alter the identity, behavior and image of a country in a positive manner. By so doing,
the branded commodity has a better chance to compete in the international market because of the
reputation associated with that particular country.
In many cases, a country engages in nation branding with the aim of gaining influence in
the international market. So far, the Australian economy has branded its products as high quality
goods and services. As a result, Australian livestock products have gained international
credibility and have created investor confidence throughout the world. In addition, it has allowed
for improvement in the ability to win against regional and global businesses (Nason, 2017).
Today, Australian livestock products are recognized as superior and, thus, competitive in the
international market. Owing to these advantages, the proposed reform seeks to detach from
livestock products processed abroad (Daily Mail, 2017). As such, the MPs realize that processing
meat products outside the country and branding them as Australian may lead to a compromise on
quality. In turn, this may affect the country’s reputation in the international market, something
that may lead to significant loss of revenue.
Additionally, the reform is based on the Bayesian model of reputation. According to the
Bayesian updating process, reputation is a situation in which buyers have great belief on the
ability of a particular seller to provide high quality products (Teacy et al., 2012). Thus, any
uninformed party relies on the reputation of the seller to make informed decisions regarding
whether or not to consume the product (Cleave et al., 2016). Therefore, branding foreign

Meat Reforms 4
processed meat as Australian may significantly affect the country’s reputation if their quality is
compromised during processing (Cleave et al., 2016). Tainting Australia’s reputation may
significantly affect the price that consumers will be willing to pay for products from the country
in the future. Consequently, it may affect the nation’s revenue from the global market.
Source: (ABS, 2017).

Meat Reforms 5
With regard to the theories stated above, one would support the rationale behind the
proposed reforms. Fundamentally, Australian commodities are of high standard. Specifically, the
nation has the highest level of food safety programs in the world. In addition, the nation boasts
one of the highest levels of animal welfare globally. It is worth noting that allowing foreign
companies to brand processed products outside the country as Australian would significantly
affect the nation’s image and reputation. Over time, a consistent compromise on quality would
permanently damage the status of the country’s goods and services in the international market.
Eventually, it would adversely affect the country’s competitiveness. Furthermore, it would affect
the level of exports from the country; thereby negatively influence the level of growth.
In this regard, it is crucial that the government implements the reforms as proposed by
Sharkie and Katter. It is recommended that the country detaches itself from foreign processed
commodities by banning the branding of Australian grown meat as Australian if it is not
processed within the country (Vidot, 2017). However, during branding, the government may
allow the processing company to mention that the meat originates from Australia, but processed
in another country. This way, the nation can benefit from the fact that it has been mentioned as a
producer of livestock, but detach itself from any complications that may arise during processing
and marketing. Besides, it can maintain high reputation for its locally processed meat exports.
Meat export from Australia
Area Chilled
beef/veal
Total
beef/veal Buffalo Mutton Lamb Goat Pork Fancy
meats Total
European
Union (EU) 676382 730129 0 254547 205291 0 0 16599 1206566
Other
western
25229 25229 0 1967 58335 0 0 0 85530

Meat Reforms 6
Area Chilled
beef/veal
Total
beef/veal Buffalo Mutton Lamb Goat Pork Fancy
meats Total
Europe
Eastern
Europe 0 0 0 19669 1161 0 0 3000 23831
USA East
Coast 2280416 7782332 0 219652 1148949 337811 0 167227 9655972
USA West
Coast 626606 3611614 0 198639 564781 88542 0 42457 4506033
Canada
East Coast 18727 734327 0 110622 169500 71847 0 24489 1110784
Canada
West Coast 54069 75458 0 0 292008 56164 0 18912 442542
Japan 4526612 13042930 0 124204 230033 10729 0 972433 14380328
Korea 1297736 6275583 0 52496 297038 96246 1319 1070967 7793649
Taiwan 283203 1519178 0 183453 70432 228512 0 110898 2112473
Other Asia 791809 8160812 0 1596332 1972370 624 711790 3159332 15601259
Middle
East 470981 1317954 0 1404760 2346866 0 0 515120 5584699
Other
destinations 85941 324900 0 374477 861175 93937 218917 1300355 3173761
Total Aus 11137712 43600446 0 4540818 8217938 984412 932027 7401789 65677429
Source: (Australian Government Department of Agriculture and Water Resources, 2017).
All things considered, the proposed reforms are consistent with economic policies
pertaining to reputation and nation branding. Thus, the Australian government would be justified
to implement the reforms as suggested by the two members of parliament. It is worth noting that
the Australian government has invested a lot to maintain a nation brand that guarantees high
quality and safe meat. In addition, the nation has a great reputation to uphold in the global
market. For this reason, it should ensure that all products branded as Australian are of high
quality to avoid losses in the future. This way, the Australian government would successfully

Meat Reforms 7
safeguard the high quality standards and reputation that the Australian meat products command
in the international market.
Reference List
7215.0 - Livestock Products, Australia, Jun 2017. (2017). [Online] Australian Bureau of
Statistics. Available at:

Meat Reforms 8
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS%5Cabs@.nsf/0/19C645E328441244CA2568A90013935A?
Opendocument [Accessed 10 August 2017].
Australian red meat export statistics. (2017). [Online] Australian Government Department of
Agriculture and Water Resources. Available at: http://www.agriculture.gov.au/export/controlled-
goods/meat/statistics [Accessed 10 August 2017].
Bid to ban beef from live exported cattle being sold as ‘Australian’ product. (2017). [Online]
Daily Mail. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12377/Australia-bans-
European-beef-imports.html [Accessed 10 August 2017].
Nason, J. (2017). Bid to ban beef from live exported cattle being sold as ‘Australian’ product.
[Online] Beef Central. Available at: https://www.beefcentral.com/live-export/bill-to-ban-sale-of-
beef-from-live-exported-cattle-as-australian-product/ [Accessed 10 August 2017].
Szondi, G. The role and importance of country branding - how to manage the reputation of
countries. [Online] Tunisia Investment Forum. Available at:
http://www.tunisiainvestmentforum.tn/En/upload/1364338791.pdf [Accessed 10 August 2017].
Teacy, L., Luck, M., Rogers, A., and R. J., Nicholas (2012) ‘An efficient and versatile approach
to trust and reputation using hierarchical Bayesian modelling’, The Australian Feminist Law
Journal, vol. 193, , pp. 150-167.
Vidot, A. (2017). Meat processed overseas, branded Australian faces ban in proposal by Federal
crossbenchers. [Online] ABC News. Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2017-06-