Business Case Structure

Status:: Draft
Source file:: 05 Business Case/index.md
Created:: 2026-07-21
Last updated:: 2026-08-05
Sensitivity review:: Completed
Purpose:: This document designs the final business case structure. It does not populate findings or conclusions.

Final business-case drafting has not commenced. Current published work is focused on evidence gathering, staged primary research planning and scoping whether a larger funded research and extension project could be justified.

This work does not make a recommendation. It tests possible GBLC roles and keeps product pathway viability separate from the organisational opportunity.

Current Business Case Streams

Stream	Purpose	Source pages
Phase 2 Interim Case	Session material for the June 2026 Granite Borders Landcare discussion on industrial hemp strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.	Overview, Presentation, Presentation Handout, SWOT Summary, Evidence & Gaps, Potential GBLC Roles
Program Opportunity Validation	Draft Phase 3A material testing whether a funded research, economics validation and extension program could be a defensible Landcare role.	Framework, Funding Register, Partner Map, Capacity Assessment, Research Program, Extension Program, Product Pathways, Opportunity Summary

Proposed Final Structure

Executive Summary.
Project Purpose and Scope.
Methodology.
Industrial Hemp Product Categories.
Market Assessment.
Producer Economics.
Supply Chain Assessment.
Regional Suitability.
Environmental Assessment.
Strategic Relevance to Granite Borders Landcare.
PESTLE Analysis.
Porter's Five Forces.
SWOT Analysis.
Risk Assessment.
Opportunities Assessment.
Strategic Options for Granite Borders Landcare.
Recommendations.
Evidence Register and Appendices.

Section Design

Section	Purpose	Required content discipline
Executive Summary	Present final decision implications.	Separate conclusions by perspective and confidence level.
Project Purpose and Scope	Define the decision context.	State geography, product categories, inclusions and exclusions.
Methodology	Explain how the assessment was conducted.	Include evidence classification, source hierarchy, transferability and limitations.
Product Categories	Prevent over-generalisation.	Separate grain, fibre, hurd, biomass and other legal industrial uses.
Market Assessment	Test demand.	Use prices, volumes, buyer specs, substitutes and confidence ratings.
Producer Economics	Test farm-level viability.	Include enterprise budget, sensitivity analysis and comparator enterprises.
Supply Chain Assessment	Test beyond-farm-gate viability.	Include processing capacity, logistics, contracts, bottlenecks and counterparties.
Regional Suitability	Test local fit.	Include climate, soil, water, land use, agronomy and cross-border issues.
Environmental Assessment	Test net environmental outcomes.	Compare against realistic alternatives; do not assess hemp in isolation.
Strategic Relevance to GBLC	Test organisational role.	Include member value, mission fit, reputation, resources and no-action option.
PESTLE	Assess macro conditions.	Evidence-backed only.
Five Forces	Assess industry structure.	Distinguish product categories where relevant.
SWOT	Summarise strategic position.	Evidence-backed, perspective-specific items only.
Risk Assessment	Identify downside and uncertainty.	Include probability, consequence, mitigation and residual risk.
Opportunities Assessment	Identify feasible opportunities.	Link opportunities to evidence and preconditions.
Strategic Options	Compare possible GBLC roles.	Include no role, monitor, inform, convene, trial, partner and advocate options.
Recommendations	State what should happen next.	Include perspective, evidence base, confidence, preconditions and risks.
Appendices	Preserve traceability.	Include registers, source log, interviews, assumptions and sensitivity tables.

Required Presentation Discipline

Do not merge product categories unless evidence supports doing so.
Do not report a general conclusion without perspective-specific interpretation.
Do not present environmental benefit claims without comparator evidence.
Do not make recommendations unsupported by evidence strength and confidence.