Program Roadmap¶
| Status: | Draft roadmap; primary research not commenced |
|---|---|
| Source file: | 00 Project Management/project-status.md; 01 Scoping/06-primary-research-plan.md |
| Sensitivity review: | Completed |
| Purpose: | This page sets out a staged Phase 3 primary research pathway. The pathway is designed to move from a low-cost initial evidence check to a resourced project design and then, only if justified, to a larger funded parallel research program. The roadmap is neutral. It is not a recommendation to grow industrial hemp or to apply for funding. It is a decision pathway for testing whether further work is warranted. |
Staged Pathway¶
| Stage | Indicative timing | Indicative duration | Role | Decision it supports |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 Initial Primary Research | Start after Phase 2 targeted gap closure is accepted. | 4-6 weeks | Collect top-layer primary evidence from key stakeholder groups. | Is there enough credible interest, evidence and strategic fit to scope a larger project? |
| 3.2 Scoping and Resourcing | Immediately after 3.1 synthesis. | 4-8 weeks | Convert Phase 3.1 evidence into a realistic project design, delivery model and funding case. | Can a larger research project be resourced, governed and framed without promotion? |
| 3.3 Funded Parallel Research | After funding, partner and governance approval. | 6-18 months | Conduct coordinated agronomy, agri-business, market, environment and community research. | Can the project produce decision-quality evidence for producers, supply chains, GBLC and the region? |
Evidence Flow¶
Phase 3.1 must feed directly into Phase 3.2. The initial project should not be treated as a standalone communications exercise. Its value is to identify whether a larger project is justified, what it should test, who should be involved and what resources would be required.
Phase 3.2 must then define whether Phase 3.3 is feasible. It should produce a project design that could support a grant application, partner proposal or internal decision not to proceed.
Phase 3.3 should only proceed if the earlier stages show that the work is useful, fundable, resourced and capable of being delivered without implying endorsement of industrial hemp.
Program Integrity Rules¶
- Keep product pathways separate.
- Include failed cases, non-adopters and sceptical views.
- Distinguish market interest from verified demand.
- Keep environmental claims tied to realistic local alternatives.
- Treat GBLC's role as an open question.
- Publish only reviewed, anonymised and non-sensitive summaries.
- Make clear that a valid outcome may be to not proceed with some or all pathways.