| 
   
    Steve
   Spencer 
   Director,
   Whitehall Associates (Management Consultants) 
   Ormiston, Queensland 4160 
   
    
     
    
    
   The
   Australian dairy industry went through a deregulation of its farmgate pricing
   and supply arrangements in June 2000.  This
   process was brought about by a combination of factors, the most influential
   of which was the commercial pressure brought by major farmer-owned dairy
   product manufacturers and exporters.  
   These
   companies claimed that the regulated milk pricing placed their farmers at a
   disadvantage compared to their counterparts who were protected from the
   commercial price of milk by what was known as market milk regulation. 
   The dairy farmers of Victoria agreed and the formal means by which
   dairy regulation was challenged at law – a state national competition
   policy review – resulted in a recommendation that the Victorian government
   repeal the Dairy Industry Act 1992. 
   During
   the period in which dairy regulation was under the spotlight in a number of
   state and federal reviews, the merits of so-called controls over the pricing
   and supply of milk were criticized by the rational economic fraternity for
   creating an artificial environment which distorted milk production and led to
   “undesirable economic outcomes”.  Such
   outcomes were said to result in an undue quantum of resources being attracted
   to the dairy industry from alternate uses of farming land, water, capital and
   labour. 
   The early
   effects of deregulation on the dairy industry have been well chronicled in
   the media which has highlighted the effects of the loss of incomes of farmers
   who were most significantly exposed to falls in milk prices.  
   This
   paper however outlines some of the changes that have occurred in the dairy
   industry value chain since the removal of regulation almost two years ago. 
   The changes that the move towards a totally commercial milk market
   include: 
   
    - 
     
The
     effects of supply and demand on the farmgate milk market;  
    - 
     
The
     impact of change on the business of the processor/manufacturer;  
    - 
     
The
     nature of the milk producers’ contract with the marketplace, and  
    - 
     
Transparency
     and ongoing development of market information.  
    
   Change in context
   Change
   within the industry has to be taken in context. 
   Any analysis of what has happened in the dairy industry in the two
   short years since deregulation has to be read against a background of ongoing
   change in world market dynamics and in the way that retailers and consumers
   influence the marketing of products at home and in offshore markets. 
   In
   specific terms, the dynamics that have affected the Australian industry
   whilst changes occurred in farmgate markets have included: 
   
    - 
     
Fluctuations
     in fortunes in world dairy markets;  
    - 
     
Marketplace
     deregulation of the pricing and wholesale distribution of packaged milk;  
    - 
     
The
     increasing use of generic brands in packaged dairy milk and a range of
     dairy products;  
    - 
     
Gradual
     increasing liberation and sophistication of major export markets –
     requiring increased product and service differentiation and specialisation,
     and  
    - 
     
Consolidation
     of major global dairy companies, the formation of a major single
     manufacturer and exporter in the NZ industry in the form of Fonterra, and
     that company’s investment in Australian manufacturing and export
     marketing  
    
   Deregulation
   has – in my view – given the dairy industry, at a national level, greater
   ability to deal with these challenges.  At
   a regional level, the impact of deregulation on farmers and processors has
   varied and in some areas has been extremely adverse. 
   Supply, demand and
   competition
   In short,
   the deregulation of the dairy industry has introduced new types of
   competition into the industry which were previously unseen: 
    
   
    
   
    
     | 
       In the past
      
       
      | 
     
       New forms of
      competition now and in the future
      
       
      | 
     
    
     | 
       ·         
      Service level competition at wholesale levels for packaged milk
      
       
      ·         
      Price, service and quality competition for dairy products at wholesale
      level 
      
       
      ·         
      Price, service level and product quality competition in export markets
      for dairy products
      
       
      | 
     
       ·         
      Strong price competition at wholesale levels for packaged milk
      products
      
       
      ·         
      Supply competition between milk buyers (processors, manufacturers and
      traders) for milk suppliers
      
       
      | 
     
    
    
   
    
   Much of
   the focus of the change in the dairy industry was placed on the formerly
   regulated packaged liquid milk sector – which at a national level consumes
   less than 20 percent of all milk produced by volume. 
   Yet because the level of milk used in packaged milk products in
   certain states and regions was much higher than average the impact of this
   change has varied. 
   The
   Australian dairy industry now exports more than half its output in milk
   equivalent terms.  The “world price” for dairy products that are exported is
   governed by several factors, including the prevailing export spot prices out
   of Europe and the US (determined by prices net of subsidies), the Australian
   dollar exchange rate, the demand for product from importing countries (which
   is affected by the use of tariff protection). 
   As is the case with New Zealand (the major other “free market
   exporter”), the majority of those exports by volume are dairy commodities
   and ingredients – cheese, milk powders and butter – though there is an
   increasing degree of specialisation and customisation in the product range
   which offers some protection against spot market prices.  
   With the
   complete removal of regulated milk prices and supply management arrangements,
   the total returns to the industry are now more directly driven by the level
   of export returns available to major exporting manufacturers. 
   In basic terms, other uses of milk in the domestic market – over
   time – are priced off the base level of returns set by the export market.  The other direct influence of the world market on our
   industry is the significant volume of cheese that is imported from New
   Zealand, which to some extent keeps a cap on the returns that local
   manufacturers can extract from the domestic retail cheese market. 
   In the past, the pooling of regulated market milk returns to farmers
   offered some insulation from these effects.  
   In the
   second half of 2000, while deregulation was starting to adversely effect milk
   prices across the liquid milk sector, export prices moved favorably for
   Australia, resulting in a surge in export demand and in unit selling prices. 
   Poor seasonal conditions across the major production regions of
   Victoria limited available milk to meet this strong demand for milk. 
   Within months of the change in industry arrangements, the industry
   faced a situation where significant shortages of milk were creating strong
   competition for supply between dairy manufacturers, driving up the price of
   milk at the farmgate and in particular in the “spot” bulk milk market for
   dairy components (milk protein and butterfat) between companies. 
   Supply
   competition has taken two forms: 
   
    - 
     
The
     scurry for sufficient milk to fill (mostly export) market orders. This
     occurred across south-east Australia driving up milk prices in the second
     half of the 2000-1 season.  
    - 
     
The
     use of milk price to capture milk supply to damage competitors by limiting
     throughput,  weakening factory profits and the ability to respond to
     market competition. This form occurred as Murray Goulburn and Nestle took
     supply from Bonlac in 1998-2001. It is still occurring in South East
     Queensland in 2001-2 between Pauls and Dairy Farmers.  
    
   Neither
   form is specifically new since July 2000, but the emergence of the latter has
   come about due to the weakening of companies who were and are exposed to milk
   supply that depended upon regulated incomes. 
   Change to the business of
   the processor
   The lead
   up to farmgate deregulation saw the introduction of new demands on the
   business of certain processors.  New
   milk purchase contracts were released by companies that were previously able
   to rely on regulated supply management arrangements to deliver milk to their
   factory door.  The prices offered at the time in such contracts had not
   fully anticipated the sudden swing in world market fortunes.  
   With the
   onset of commercial farmgate prices (and given the transparency of those
   prices), major retail chains stepped up to the plate and called for fresh
   rounds of tenders, forcing strong price competition between processors for
   the share of the supermarket segment of the packaged milk market (which is
   approximately 50 percent of all packaged milk sales).  
   As a
   result of the fall in packaged milk margins as new lower prices swept the
   supermarket shelves, the sharp fall in milk prices was passed onto farmers
   with the most severe effects being felt in NSW and Queensland regions.  
   Average
   milk prices at farmgate quickly fell by as much as 8 cents a litre (depending
   on the dairy company supplied and the farmer’s former access to market milk
   returns).  Over time, the effects of the supply response to falls in
   returns took their toll on milk production volumes in these regions through
   the exit of hundreds of producers.  
   In this
   respect, the effects of reduced supply has put significant pressure on the
   profitability of commodity product manufacturing operations in areas north of
   the Murray River, ironically at a time when export product prices were at
   their highest for many years. 
   The total
   lower supply has not enabled recovery of fixed production overheads –
   forcing consolidation and closure of many small regional operations. 
   The nature of the milk
   supply contract
   In the
   absence of certain regulatory controls on the supply and pricing of milk, the
   milk supply agreement is the major form of commercial regulation of milk
   supply that operates in the industry today. 
   The major
   form of contract used in the industry prior to deregulation has been in the
   form of a co-operative milk supply policy, where each of the farmer-owned
   businesses sought to operate with a generic milk purchasing policy common to
   all member-suppliers.  The use of
   these pricing policies is today largely unchanged.   
   The
   advent of a range of sophisticated milk supply contracts, mostly by liquid
   milk processors, has accompanied the deregulated farmgate market.  
   Certain
   co-operatives have been forced to adopt more differentiation in their pricing
   in order to produce a milk supply curve more suited to their business needs,
   and/or to lay-off some pricing risk to the producer. 
   The
   greater role for “the contract” as a tool provides the following contrast
   between the past and future: 
    
   
    
   
    
     | 
       Control through
      regulation
      
       
      | 
     
       Management through a
      commercial contract
      
       
      | 
     
    
     
      Control
      of supply
      
      
      ·        
      (pooling
      states) the milk processor was able to rely on their milk needs being met
      through directions being made by the regulator 
      ·        
      (quota
      states) individual farm production was influenced by limits as to the
      quantity of milk output that would return the market milk price 
      | 
     
      Supply
      management
      
      
      ·        
      direct
      supply agreements (usually for all milk produced by a farm) 
      ·        
      a
      limited number of contracts contain a stipulation that the producer be
      required to supply an agreed minimum contract volume 
      | 
     
    
     
      Control
      of pricing
      
      
      ·        
      Fixed
      input prices to milk processing – which varied by region 
      ·        
      (pooling
      states) farmers incomes were supplemented by an allocated share of the
      proceeds of packaged milk usage at regulated prices 
      ·        
      (quota
      states) farmers made business and production decisions based on their
      chosen level of exposure / dependence on market milk incomes 
      ·        
      The
      cost of manufacturing products for the domestic market were higher due to
      the DMSS payments 
      | 
     
      Sharing
      of the price risk
      
      
      ·        
      Pricing
      signals convey bonuses and penalties for: 
      o       
      Under or over-production (against a plan)
      based on the end use of milk by the buyer 
      o       
      Production of milk with superior milk
      component levels (butterfat and protein) 
       
      
       
      | 
     
    
    
   
    
   Conveying signals in milk
   pricing
   As
   identified above, in the past two years, there has been some advancement in
   the sophistication of the price signals conveyed by processors and
   manufacturers to their suppliers.  Chiefly,
   signals are used to: 
   
    - 
     
Enhance
     the overall quality of milk;  
    - 
     
Promote
     expansion of individual farm business enterprises;  
    - 
     
Match
     milk flows to the market demand according to each company’s
     market/product mix, and  
    - 
     
Share
     the cost of unplanned milk production.  
    
   The great
   majority of milk purchased at farmgate in the industry is priced according to
   standard terms and conditions that are offered by co-operatives and other
   major exporting manufacturers.  The
   will to vary these policies is not strong; the major co-operatives still
   treat as sacrosanct the obligation to take all the milk produced by their
   suppliers at the times when it is cheapest to make milk, without
   discriminating between suppliers on the basis of size and location. 
   Co-operatives lead in the structure of those policies; their
   competitor exporters and milk buyers mimic those buying policies. 
   Despite
   the broad trends towards the market for Australian dairy product requiring
   more year-round product supply, the structure of these policies has not
   changed significantly in the past few years. 
   Farmer-owned manufacturers remain committed to supporting seasonal
   milk production as a low-cost strategy to their suppliers, whilst maintaining
   investments in facilities sufficient to cope with the mounting peak supply
   volume on the highest milk production day of the year. 
   Only timid use of pricing signals to encourage a flattening of the
   production pattern, which would provide more efficient utilisation of factory
   capacity, has been advocated. However, the desire of company managers to
   achieve that outcome is strong.  
   In this
   time however, some greater use has been made of: 
   
    - 
     
Seasonal
     production incentives, which promote movement of production towards the
     times of the year when milk is more difficult to produce;  
    - 
     
Bonuses
     and penalties for quality parameters;  
    - 
     
Differential
     payments rewarding larger producers, both through fixed cartage charges and
     production volume incentives, and  
    - 
     
Growth
     incentives – rewarding increases in production over the prior season.  
    
   The
   greatest use of signals in pricing has come from companies who have the
   greatest at stake in ensuring their milk supply flows match their market
   requirement (liquid milk leaders National Foods, Parmalat and Dairy Farmers)
   across a range of dairy products.  The
   companies have adopted different strategies to deal with the trade-off to
   their own respective businesses between security of milk supplies at
   controlled prices versus investment in milk balancing and storage facilities. 
   Accordingly,
   the industry has seen the use of the concept of the production plans or
   supply allocation by these groups in their contracts, coupled with the use of
   penalty prices to combat unplanned volumes. 
   The use of these varies according to the overall supply and demand
   situation. When an over-supply of milk was feared upon deregulation, the used
   of tiered prices by several companies discouraged excess milk to plan. This
   quickly swung when milk shortages were apparent such that production over
   plan was actually rewarded in most cases. 
   Collective bargaining
   Since the
   advent of a commercial marketplace, the peak industry body for dairy farmers
   has sought to remedy the position of the individual dairy farmer through
   authorized collective bargaining under Trade Practice law. 
   Dairy companies have shown mixed interest in this concept. One company
   has embodied the principles into its dealings. Co-operatives largely feel
   this is redundant as collective bargaining is their main role. Other
   companies have rejected collective negotiation. 
   The impact of the facility on the structure and dynamics of the
   farmgate market is uncertain but likely to be limited. 
   In my
   view, the greatest tools that producers have in ensuring that bargaining is
   broadly fair are: 
   
    - 
     
The
     existence of strong, viable integrated dairy co-operatives, and  
    - 
     
Knowledge
     of options they have for their milk and/or their enterprise.  
    
   With few
   to endorse intervention between farmer and processor the market will govern
   all other outcomes. 
   Transparency and
   information
   The
   transparency of farmgate milk prices has always been relatively high in the
   dairy industry, although comparisons between company price offerings have
   been made increasingly complicated in recent years as supply competition
   between processors has intensified.   
   Transparency
   of pricing information in the hands of the wholesale and retail sector today
   affects the dairy industry in two major ways: 
   
    - 
     
It
     allows the buyers to understand milk pricing and margin structures of
     processors when calling for bids on milk supply tenders, and  
    - 
     
The
     landed world price for cheese effectively becomes the benchmark buying
     price for cheese into this domestic market, more so now that the NZ dairy
     industry has a major direct stake in the Australian industry at
     manufacturer level.  
    
   These
   changes give industry participants at farm and factory level less control
   over price setting for their businesses. While the absolute level of prices
   has become more transparent, the complexity of different pricing structures
   has made the comparison between company offerings much more complex. 
   In the
   background, one of the greatest challenges faced by the total industry is to
   communicate (in language that can lead to decision-making) the big picture
   and the market dynamics that surround the industry in the context of the
   world market.  The future growth of the industry compels a clear view of the
   demands and expectations of the available markets. 
   Conclusion
   Deregulation
   in 2000 has created a new Australian dairy market to which the industry is
   still adjusting. The UK dairy industry deregulated in 1994 and is still
   enduring the pain of transition through ongoing changes that are driven by
   the industry’s inability to match supply with demand. 
   Our strength in this regard is far greater as a total industry, but we
   are still very early into change for many participants.  
   Over
   time, we can expect to see more diversity in the devices that are used to
   manage the milk volumes and its cost, despite increasing pressure to
   consolidate our food sector for more effective global positioning. 
   The pressures brought on by new forms of competition will be some of
   the drivers for ongoing change at corporate level. 
   The major
   impact of change in farm incomes in high-cost milk production areas will take
   several years to have its full and lasting effect on the industry. 
   Future changes are not solely governed by the supply response of
   farmers to changes in market access, but also (and largely) by the ability of
   people to realise their available options, and to make and act on life
   choices.  The culture in these
   affected regions has been shaped by a dependence on farming sustained by
   certainty of prices at regulated levels. 
   In the
   dairy industry, that will see greater use of signals in the pricing of milk
   to suit the business outcomes of processors, but also see the advent of risk
   management tools to enable prices and input costs to be managed by
   professional farmers and major processors.  
   The
   future will also see the need for greater responsibility to be taken by dairy
   farmers for the ethical standards of the product they supply in terms of
   animal welfare, food safety, environmental impact and service reliability. 
   Today these elements are market differentiators. In future they will
   be basic business requirements and their commercial enforcement through
   business contracts is inevitable. 
   
    
     
    
    
   References
   ABARE
   2001, The Australian Dairy Industry:
   Impact of an Open Market in Fluid Milk Supply, ABARE Report to the
   Federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, January. 
   
    
   Senate
   Rural and Regional affairs and Transport References Committee 1999, Deregulation
   of the Australian Dairy Industry. The Parliament of the Commonwealth of
   Australia. 
   Milk
   Development Council
   (United Kingdom) www.mdcdatum.org.uk  
   
      |