A recent blog by Sam Trethewey on sentimentality in farming
certainly got the agricultural twitterverse into a frenzy. Sam’s basic point was that sentimentality
amongst farmers clouds their business decision making and makes them slow to
adjust to modern commercial farming realities.
Many farmers hold on to land bequeathed to them over generations for too
long, Sam contends, and some of them even hold their hand out to the Government
to keep them afloat.
While I agree that sentimentality, can cloud business
decisions, I would not necessarily agree with all that Sam Trethewey said. The fall in commercial farm numbers suggests
that many farmers do overcome this sentimentality and do manage to sell their
properties and move on to other lives.
Many businesses have made plenty of money when sentiment is
pushed aside. There is no better example
than that of Wesfarmers. The former
farmer’s cooperative showed no sentiment in divesting rural businesses and
certainly has shown no sentiment towards farmers as suppliers to their
supermarket businesses.
The right amount of sentimentality can be a good thing for
farmers. It drives them to maintain
their properties and leave them in better shape than they found them. It motivates them to expand their business so
that they have something to pass on to future generations rather than just a
mountain of debt and an unproductive property.
Some sentimentality can give a longer term focus and the implementation of
environmental projects which take a long time to produce an economic
benefit.
A key point in Sam’s blog is that a lack of business acumen among
farmers clouds business decision making.
All of us should improve our business skills and be clear about why we
are doing what we are doing. It is
obvious that many primary producers accept a very low return on the assets they
have employed and a very low return on their own labour. It is up to each individual farm business to
determine how they can improve returns on their capital and labour.