Project Status
Snapshot
| Item | Current position |
|---|---|
| Current phase | Phase 2 - Secondary Research |
| Phase 1 Scoping | Complete; re-scoped to the NELN member-organisation footprint |
| Phase 2 Secondary Research | Broad scan synthesised; targeted gap closure, Senate inquiry submission mining, producer economics, product-pathway economics, economic confidence, supply chain and regional suitability pages underway |
| Phase 3 Primary Research | Not commenced; flattened numbered staged roadmap prepared |
| Phase 4 Strategic Analysis | Not formally commenced; interim Phase 2 analysis exists |
| Phase 5 Business Case | Final findings and recommendations not drafted |
| Scope review | Foundational refresh complete for Project Overview and Scoping. The primary geography is now Granite Borders Landcare, Southern New England Landcare, Glenrac and Gwymac member areas. Secondary research pages still need a separate re-scoping pass. |
| Publishing layer | Markdoc site; Cloudflare deployment settings selected |
Recent Progress
| Area | Status |
|---|---|
| Phase 2 synthesis | Broad secondary research has been synthesised in the Phase 2 Summary Report. Further general desktop scanning is likely to have diminishing returns for the moment. |
| Senate inquiry submissions | Initial targeted mining has added market-validation leads and sentiment themes from public submissions. These are stakeholder evidence, not proof of demand. |
| Producer economics | Draft page updated. AgriFutures gross-margin figures now provide a grounded national budget scaffold for grain, biomass and dual-purpose scenarios, but do not prove local profitability. |
| Product pathway economics | A draft rough guide now separates rough benchmark figures, minimum budget fields and conservative/base/upside scenario structure by product pathway. |
| Product pathway register | The register has been checked for omitted pathways and expanded so seed-derived ingredients, planting seed/genetics, lower-specification fibre uses, hurd/horticulture uses, building materials, panels/packaging/composites, dual-purpose production, bioenergy/biochar, cosmetics, animal feed/pet food and cannabinoid/medicinal exclusions are explicit. |
| Source traceability | A separate Claim And Data Extracts register page now records priority source claims and data with stable sub-IDs such as S001-001, plus page-level back-references to where each item is used. Source Register rows link to the relevant extract anchors where pilot extracts exist. |
| Economic confidence review | A secondary-only process now concludes that targeted primary validation is justified, especially for grain / seed food, while evidence remains insufficient for promotion, investment or grower recommendation. |
| Supply chain | Draft actor and pathway table added with direct contact details redacted and locality-level fields suitable for later mapping. |
| Regional suitability | Draft page added using BoM station indicators for Tenterfield, Stanthorpe and Applethorpe plus Stanthorpe trial evidence. |
| Agronomy profile | AgriFutures Australia's 2023 BMP manual has been incorporated as the national agronomy checklist for variety choice, sowing, soil, nutrition, water, crop protection, harvest, storage and farmgate cost categories. It remains national guidance, not proof of local suitability. |
| Regulatory follow-up | NSW low-THC hemp licensing, Queensland industrial cannabis licensing, Food Standards Code Standard 1.4.4 and APVMA chemical-use pathways have been reviewed at desktop level. |
| Interim analysis | PESTLE, Porter's Five Forces, SWOT and synthesis pages have been checked against the latest secondary research and updated to reflect the economic confidence review, AgriFutures gross-margin scaffold, grain / seed-food validation priority and named-processor test for fibre, hurd, biomass and dual-purpose pathways. They remain provisional. |
| Phase 2 Interim Case | A Business Case subsection contains draft session material originally prepared for a June 2026 Granite Borders Landcare discussion. It remains useful as historical/interim material but has not yet been re-scoped as a NELN-wide business case output. |
| Publishing navigation | Home, Project Overview, Scoping and Registers have structured landing pages in the Markdoc navigation. Secondary Research uses workflow groups, with Phase 2 Gaps and Risks and Phase 2 Summary Report retained as separate items. A top-level Registers section sits above Site Notes and includes the Source Register, Claim & Data Extracts, Product Pathway Register and Product Pathways - Logistics. |
| Primary Research roadmap | The published Primary Research section now sets out a numbered roadmap for 3.1 Initial Primary Research, 3.2 Scoping and Resourcing, 3.3 Funded Parallel Research and research safeguards. The 3.1 navigation now contains eight neutral print-ready survey drafts as subpages: Growers and Non-adopters, Post-harvest Processors, Raw and Post-harvest Material Buyers, Manufactured and Wholesale Product Buyers, Landcare Leadership, Partners and Stakeholders, Community and Consumers, and Agronomists, Researchers and Advisers. Processors and buyers are separated so fee-for-service processing is not confused with material purchasing. Community and Consumers is treated as an equal-priority stream. The research safeguards now align with the eight survey streams and state that participant information may be combined, anonymised and shared back as aggregate summaries for benchmarking and project learning. The survey forms now use plain-English participation invitation purpose statements, place the interview recording prompt near the top, use wider printed tick-box spacing, include optional demographic baseline fields near the end for aggregate communication planning, and close with participant consent checks split into research consent, respondent details and follow-up/published-information preferences, including whether the research statement has been provided, a top-of-form survey number, compact signature/date block, short disclosure panel with QR access to the participant snapshot, and simplified audio-recording check. The Landcare Leadership survey also includes a clear no-role option and asks leaders to consider both opportunities and threats for Landcare organisations, including whether a separate Murray Industrial Hemp-style project identity would help manage brand exposure. The Community and Consumers survey has been reworded for non-specialist readers using plain-language prompts about what people know, use, value, worry about and want explained. The Agronomists, Researchers and Advisers survey now provides expanded regional-suitability reasoning space and an optional expression-of-interest section for possible later technical, research, trial, extension or referral roles and limitations. The 3.2 page incorporates funding, partner, capacity, delivery-model, research-extension, product-pathway and sensitivity-control detail. No interviews or form-based engagement have commenced. |
| Research disclosure | The Primary Research navigation now includes a Research Disclosure subsection with long-form disclosure for researchers, funders and reviewers and a short participant snapshot for farmers, consumers and community participants. The pages include direct standards-alignment links, describe intended methods and safeguards only, and do not claim ethics approval, funding approval or hemp endorsement. |
| Publishing quality control | Published pages use neutral project-record language for progress notes and change records, structured front-matter metadata and print-specific treatment. Markdoc imports the Landcare Design System screen and print layers with project-specific layout adjustments. |
Recommended Next Direction
The foundational scope review is complete for Project Overview and Scoping. The initial Granite Borders scope was deliberately limited to provide a manageable starting point for evidence collection, project controls and early decision framing. The primary geography is now the New England Landcare Network member-organisation footprint: Granite Borders Landcare, Southern New England Landcare Ltd, Glen Innes Natural Resources Advisory Committee (Glenrac) and Gwymac Landcare.
The next re-scoping task is to update the secondary research pages and assess which existing findings are direct, comparable or background evidence for the full member-organisation region.
The current recommended direction is targeted gap closure and staged Phase 3 primary research planning, subject to approval.
The remaining decision-critical questions are mainly practical, commercial and local.
| Priority question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Buyer demand | The project needs verified demand, not general market interest. |
| Processor access | Farm production is not viable without realistic intake, processing and logistics pathways. |
| Product specifications | Each product pathway has different quality, testing and handling requirements. |
| Freight-adjusted returns | Prices need to be tested after transport, storage, drying and compliance costs. |
| Grower economics | Producers need realistic margins under local or comparable conditions; the AgriFutures scaffold now needs local yield, freight, buyer-price and processor-access testing. |
| Product pathway economics | Each pathway needs separate financial assumptions so grain, oil/protein, fibre, hurd, dual-purpose and biomass uses are not collapsed into one generic hemp budget. |
| Economic confidence | Secondary evidence now justifies targeted primary research, but primary research must remain focused on prices, specifications, intake terms, freight-adjusted returns and local budgets. |
| Local agronomic suitability | Regional climate, soil, water and frost risks remain central. |
| Member-organisation strategic fit | Organisational involvement needs member value, governance clarity and risk control. |
| Funding and partners | A larger funded research program would require genuine funding fit, delivery capacity and partner appetite. |
Current Priority Areas
- Phase 3 primary research design based on the Phase 2 gap review.
- Phase 3 staged primary research design, including initial evidence collection, indicative sampling, scoping and resourcing, and possible funded agronomy, agri-business, market, environment and community streams.
- Senate inquiry submission leads and sentiment themes to shape Phase 3 interview questions.
- Senate submission validation to separate stakeholder claims, lived experience and repeated barriers from verified market evidence.
- Funding, partner and organisational-capacity validation for any larger research program.
- Review and later update the interim PESTLE, Porter's Five Forces, SWOT and synthesis analyses after primary research.
- Review the Phase 2 Interim Case presentation and handouts before reusing them in any NELN-wide context.
- Buyer, processor and market-demand evidence.
- Producer economics, including freight, machinery, labour, water, drying, storage, buyer prices and processor-access assumptions.
- Product-pathway financial scenario modelling using the rough guide as a template, starting with grain / seed food.
- Targeted primary validation of grain / seed food as the strongest current commercial pathway lead.
- Member-area trial extraction and transferability assessment, including Stanthorpe evidence where relevant.
- Regional climate, soil, land-use and comparator enterprise baselines by member area where possible.
- Member, leadership and strategic-fit evidence across participating organisations.
- Current funding pathways and possible NELN/member-organisation delivery models.
- Eligibility checks for the most realistic funding pathways and partner-led research options.
Important Limits
| Limit | Meaning |
|---|---|
| No primary research findings yet | Interview-based evidence has not been collected. |
| No final strategic assessment yet | Interim analysis is an organising tool, not a final Phase 4 conclusion. |
| No business-case recommendation yet | Recommendations should wait until evidence gaps are closed. |
| Deployment verification | Confirm the Cloudflare dashboard uses the selected Markdoc build command and output directory, and record the first verified public Markdoc deployment. |
Detailed internal status is maintained in the working file 00 Project Management/project-status.md.