IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation in Quality Assurance Programs in the Apple Industry


  • Bewsell, Denise
  • Kaine, Geoff


There are several quality assurance (QA) programs operating in Australia for horticulturalists. The documentation of orchard activities and decision making are key features of any QA system. Activities of interest are management of pest and diseases, irrigation, fertiliser management, and fruit production and packing. This documentation provides a means of tracing product flow and is evidence that growers are acting in an environmentally responsible manner to help achieve food safety. QA systems are also often a means to assist growers in their production decisions and in some situations participation in QA is a precondition for supplying fruit to some markets. In this paper we present the findings of research designed to obtain insights into apple growers’ participation in QA programs. The research involved in-depth interviews with growers as well as analysis of a mail survey. In relation to market access, growers observed that they could supply fruit to domestic and (some) exporters and export markets without participating in a QA scheme, provided they could supply spray diaries. Hence, non-participation in a QA program did not necessarily mean exclusion from markets. In the absence of a premium for participation in QA, or exclusion for non-participation, the main benefits to participating in a QA program were the advantages made possible by record keeping, such as improved orchard management. Unfortunately, most growers believed that, apart from using spray diaries to assist in pest and disease management, there were limited benefits in keeping records. Growers therefore were inclined to treat any claims regarding QA programs with suspicion.

Suggested Citation

  • Bewsell, Denise & Kaine, Geoff, 2006. "Participation in Quality Assurance Programs in the Apple Industry," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Melbourne School of Land and Environment, vol. 14.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:auagre:126098

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    2. Barberis, Nicholas & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "Style investing," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 161-199, May.
    3. David A. Lins & Bruce J. Sherrick & Aravind Venigalla, 1992. "Institutional Portfolios: Diversification through Farmland Investment," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 20(4), pages 549-571.
    4. Kroll, Yoram & Levy, Haim & Markowitz, Harry M, 1984. " Mean-Variance versus Direct Utility Maximization," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(1), pages 47-61, March.
    5. Roger G. Ibbotson & Laurence B. Siegel, 1984. "Real Estate Returns: A Comparison with Other Investments," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 12(3), pages 219-242.
    6. repec:hrv:faseco:30747193 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Levy, H & Markowtiz, H M, 1979. "Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(3), pages 308-317, June.
    8. James R. Webb & Jack H. Rubens, 1988. "The Effect of Alternative Return Measures on Restricted Mixed-Asset Portfolios," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 16(2), pages 123-137.
    9. Hardin, William G, III & Cheng, Ping, 2002. "Farmland Investment under Conditions of Certainty and Uncertainty," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 81-98, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:auagre:126098. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.