Grain: Supply Chain Harmonisation
Food Agility was commissioned by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) to examine how information exchange in grain supply chains could be improved through harmonisation. The team reviewed five case‑study supply chains, pre-selected or endorsed by the GRDC and de-identified for this report, that reflect a range of supply‑chain structures, digital maturity and market exposure.
In partnership with
The Australian grains industry is facing increasing requirements for traceability, sustainability reporting and transparency, driven by export market expectations, regulation and financial sector disclosures.
Although substantial data is collected across grain supply chains, it is fragmented, inconsistently structured and often exchanged in paper-based or bespoke digital formats. This limits its re-use, increases compliance costs and constrains the industry’s ability to respond efficiently to emerging requirements such as Scope 3 emissions reporting.
The review mapped current information flows, identified existing roadblocks to more efficient data exchange, assessed opportunities for improved sustainability and traceability credentialing, and evaluated the costs and benefits of adopting a harmonised digital approach.
A comparison of case studies was achieved by invoking a common ‘future state’ based upon the Australian Agriculture Traceability Protocol (AATP), Australia’s implementation of the United Nations Transparency Protocol (UNTP).
The AATP represents harmonisation (not homogenisation) through a protocol-based framework designed to standardise how data is recorded, exchanged and verified across supply chains.
It promotes interoperability standards that allow any technology platform or data ecosystem to participate in sustainable value chains ensuring that supply chains can be connected and verified without imposing technical dependencies on each other. The approach is scalable and is aimed at leveraging investments and systems already in place to support supply chain transparency.
AgTrace Australia approached this review by posing a ‘future state’ that’s different today.
World Trade Organisation (WTO) data from the last decade shows the number of global non-tariff trade measures (NTMs) increased by an average six per cent per year, proving the need for evidence of sustainability, legality, and provenance.
Environmental concerns, social responsibility, labour standards, and governance expectations also shape consumer and investor behaviour.
Australia’s traceability systems are fragmented, inconsistent both within and across commodities, and often reliant on centralised databases that are difficult to scale.
Commercial, digital traceability systems do exist, but these are generally closed systems running on proprietary platforms. As such, current arrangements are not adaptable or responsive and rely on centralised ‘systems’, often include data of variable quality, do not empower data owners (i.e. farmers) and do not easily evolve.
One perspective is that these limitations can be considered as posing risks to market access, regulatory compliance, and the ability to demonstrate ESG performance. Another perspective, given increasing consumer awareness and expectations, is that the current processes miss a significant opportunity to support farmers in a way that eliminates or minimises the duplication of data inputs or reporting as well as limits a farmer’s ability to derive value from their own data.
