AgTrace Australia
The objective of the AgTrace Australia project team was to support exporters, processors and producers to meet the growing demands to provide evidence of their compliance with new regulations and rules for global market access.
AgTrace does not define the rules or how credentials are created. Instead, it defines how credentials can be used and deployed in a Digital Product Passport.
Non-compliance risks losing market share, while compliance offers an opportunity to gain market share. These types of rules favour countries that have a record of clean, green and ethical production systems – provided these claims can be shown to be true.
In June 2023, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) awarded a $5 million grant to Food Agility CRC to drive industry-led innovation to streamline and modernise Australia’s food data through delivery of a digital ‘AgTrace’ initiative.
Source: The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
AgTrace abides by strict data sharing protocols, it integrates with existing industry systems, it prioritises data interoperability to support existing, commonly used standards enabling efficient data sharing, and it is able to provide assessments for the nominated property.
As of July 2025, there are no other industry solutions that can integrate with existing platforms and perform a comprehensive assessment to enables producers to meet EU Requirements.
To meet EUDR, producers must be able to:
- Confirm their geolocation
- Create a deforestation assessment that demonstrates land has not been cleared.
- Produce a whole of life statement for their product.
‘Deforestation’ is defined as the conversion of forest to agricultural use, whether human-induced or not, which includes situations caused by natural disasters.
The assessment of whether the commodity has contributed to deforestation is conducted by looking backwards in time to see if the crop land was a ‘Forest’ at any time since the date specified in the Regulation (31 December 2020).
A forest that has experienced a fire and is then subsequently converted into agricultural land (after the cut-off date) would be considered deforestation under the Regulation.
In this specific case, an operator would be prohibited from sourcing commodities within the scope of the Regulation from that area (but not because of the forest fire).
Conversely, if the affected forest is allowed to regenerate, it would not be deemed deforestation, and an operator could source wood from that forest once it has regrown.
On 22 May 2025, the European Commission (EC) classified Australia as a low-risk country under the EUDR.
The low-risk rating means that only 1 per cent of importers placing regulated goods exclusively from Australia and other low risk sources on the EU market will be subject to annual checks by the EU competent authorities. It also means that regulated goods originating from Australia will be subject to the simplified due diligence process set out in the EUDR.
However, under the simplified due diligence process, Australian producers and exporters will need to provide geolocation data and other information on land use to EU importers to undertake their simplified assessment.
To date, major businesses including Coles, Woolworths Group, McDonalds, Westpac, ALDI SOUTH Group, and Kraft Heinz have made public commitments to sustainability frameworks including no deforestation and land management.
Producers without verified deforestation-free credentials risk losing their supplier status to companies with these sustainability commitments.
The Australian Agriculture Traceability Protocol (AATP)
The Australian Agriculture Traceability Protocol (AATP) underpins three primary components;
- Verifiable Credentials – a way of sharing data that is tamper proof and not reliant on centralised systems
- Distributed Identifiers – a way of verifying an identity in a decentralised approach
- Trust Anchors – entities that enhance trust in a claim by drawing on their authority to verify claims.
These are emphasised by defined standards that ensure consistency, regardless of system or technology. The AATP is not a single ‘system’. It’s a trust architecture for Australian agricultural produce.
The AATP is an extension of the UN Transparency Protocol (UNTP), which means it aligns with international standards.
Core to the AATP is the ability to integrate best-of-breed credentials from an array of trusted sources, such as government or commercial datasets and access points.
The protocol is flexible and can be applied to ANY product or production system claim – including all environmental, social and governance (ESG) credentials. Examples include sustainable land use, emissions, ethics (including modern slavery), or technical performance or compliance. If a claim is linked to a ‘thing’ (a product, production process, participant or place in the supply chain) then the protocol can help provide an evidence-based link information about that thing.
No. The AATP evolved after it was proven internationally that centralised and decentralised platforms, including blockchain-based systems, do not scale well. The AATP does not use or require distributed ledger technology, however, it can be used to link blockchain-based systems already in use in different territories, industry sectors or business communities.
No. Industries are not required to adopt specific systems or standards to use the AATP. However, given the extensive use of GS1 standards internationally (>95% of all retail items), industries could benefit from leveraging common and internationally recognised standards for the identification of products, places, parties and processes.
The AATP enables interoperability across all sectors of the economy. This is important for national productivity, as outputs from one sector are often inputs to another, for example food flows into healthcare and extractive industries like mining feed into agriculture, building and construction. Similarly transport and shipping interfaces all sectors.
The AATP is a protocol rather than a platform. The AATP keeps data at its source and ‘pulls’ information when needed for specific purposes, with the consent of data owners and providers. We’re linking data from multiple sources, not centralising it. It is standards-based and can be applied to existing systems, including those already used by farmers.
By linking data sources, we can connect the identity of the ‘thing’ (the product or shipment, etc.) to information about that thing. This approach solves many problems, including data sensitivity, duplication, waste, and complexity. All that is required is unique identification of products (and other traceable items) so that related information is ‘discoverable’.
Our approach aligns with the WTO rules-based system of trade and mutual recognition agreements. It’s designed to align with and test new market access rules in the European Union and other regions, including the United States. It is also aligned with Australian 1 up and 1 down traceability and industry recall requirements as specified by FSANZ.
The cost is minimal. To issue a Verifiable Credential, farm management platform providers will be required to become AATP compliant. If produce cannot be identified, then there may be costs, such as labelling, to enable traceability outside of the business.
The biggest change is behavioural. You could think of it like the shift to online banking – where customers have the option to go the bank branch (ie. continue to use paper) or make transactions online. Supply chain partners, including regulators, would simply ask for digital credentials rather than (or along with) paper forms. These credentials are stored like other valuable business assets in a Digital Product Passport, in the same way many of us manage an airline boarding pass or vaccination certificate.
The NSF are just more claims – these can be managed via the protocol. The approach we are focusing on concentrates on the claim and certificate (linked to the traceable product) as much as the credentials and ‘authority’ of the parties that provided the certificate. It recognises that more or new certificates do not necessarily address compliance concerns.
Our approach meets the principles outlined in the Code. It encourages and supports the concept of data being maintained by the data owner with full control over the terms of sharing and use of the information. Solution providers that adopt the AATP may choose to have their services certified by the operators of the farm data code – or related schemes.