Satacrop continues to be well supported by cotton growers as a valuable tool for mapping sensitive crop areas. Mapped area as a percentage of total cotton area was 77% for the 2023/24 season and 63% for the 2024/25 season. Unfortunately, we were unable to achieve 80% coverage of the total crop which was our original aim. The commencement of the cotton industry data platform project presents an ideal opportunity to re-assess the scope of Satacrop and to explore ongoing funding options.

Objectives:

 Operation of Satacrop platform for 2023/24 and 2024/25 seasons  

Advance discussions about the future role of Satacrop, including

•  Investigation of alternative funding arrangements  
• Automation of data collection
• Expansion of functionality for the platform

 Promote the ongoing use of the platform and achieve 80% of total area mapped for each season

Historically, the Australian agricultural sector has engaged with sustainability schemes and reporting on a voluntary 
basis. However, on 1 January 2025, the Australian Government introduced mandatory climate-related financial 
disclosure reporting, called the Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards (ASRS) AASB 2 (referred to as ASRS 
in this report for brevity). The ASRS are standards for assessing and disclosing information about an entity’s climate 
and sustainability-related risks and opportunities. Only one of the ASRS standards is mandatory at this stage, ASRS 
AASB 2, and is the focus of this report. 
The introduction of the ASRS means that many large companies and institutions, including farms, which meet certain 
criteria around revenue, gross assets, or number of employees are, or will be, required to report their greenhouse 
(GHG) emissions data under a new framework. This includes scope 1 and 2 emissions initially, followed by scope 3 
emissions. Smaller entities that are not required to report directly may need to supply their GHG emissions data to 
third parties within their supply chain, so that their supply chain can meet their scope 3 emissions requirements. 
Supplying scope 3 emissions data to reporting entities is likely to have the largest effect on cotton farming businesses 
in the immediate future, especially in relation to banks (and potentially insurers), who have a direct line of sight to 
their clients. Limited and complex cotton supply chain traceability will likely result in, for example, brands and retailers 
relying on secondary data, such as industry averages, in the first instance rather than farm-specific primary data for 
their scope 3 emissions reporting. The development of a robust, Australian-specific cotton emissions intensity 
database in line with emerging guidance is needed to keep Australian cotton competitive in world markets. 
A survey of the rural lenders and farm insurers revealed strong activity from the banking sector on engaging their 
farming clients in collecting farm-specific GHG emissions data. All the bankers and finance brokers surveyed reported 
discussions with farmers linked to ASRS compliance. In contrast, the insurance industry brokers, and farm 
underwriting representatives, had no awareness and were not conversant in understanding the ASRS reporting 
requirements. The bankers surveyed were also aware of voluntary Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures 
(TNFD) reporting and obligations, however respondents alluded to the recent “Trump effect” of railing against 
environmental regulation which inferred TNFD as regulatory overreach. Banks, when asked if ASRS reporting 
requirements were likely to create a “price on sustainability” in the future, a mixed response ensued with almost half 
of responses claiming, “it’s already happening” to “the credit market is already too competitive to draft discounts and 
premiums among clients”. A small survey sample of cotton brands and retailers suggested that scope 3 reporting in 
the cotton supply chain remains likely, although limitation and usefulness of industry data exists until a trusted 
traceability scheme can be implemented to track the source of fibre to farm. Large companies in this sector affected 
by ASRS were content to use secondary data to fulfil ASRS requirements. Demonstrating biodiversity stewardship 
was also mentioned as a key sustainability metric for brands and retailers. Supply chain requirements remain an area 
of more detailed future research. 
As the irrigated cotton industry experiences a shift to more resilient systems, introducing bankless irrigation that can 
adapt to extreme weather conditions, reduce inputs without compromising yield, and produce higher output per labour 
unit there may result in small benefits for agriculture finance and ASRS strategy reporting. A minority group of banks 
had plans or finance products in place to offer more competitive credit for investing in more efficient irrigation 
infrastructure if environmental gains could be proven. Separately, bankless irrigation does satisfy the main criteria as 
a strategy for specifically dealing with several risks under the AASB S2 core topics. 
A survey of specialist property valuers and irrigators found the flow on monetary gains to asset valuation following the 
installation of bankless systems can be in the range of $500 to $2,000 per hectare, with access to labour as the 
primary driver. An economic analysis using a Whole Farm Modelling (WFM) approach sensitivity tested these 
valuation uplift scenarios with two installation cost outcomes ($600/Ha and $4,200/Ha) each investigating 400 Ha and 
782 Ha of development respectively. The overall equity position of the farm, considering a 20% water saving and 
$230/Ha labour saving under the new operating scenario, the WFM was a very resilient system with a strong asset 
and earning base. Only in the high cost ($4,200), low valuation (+$500/Ha uplift) and the whole-of-farm development 
did return on assets and return on equity erode considerably, owing in-part to the relatively conservative Debt/Equity 
ratio of 82%. Current day assets and earnings were applied to the WFM. These results are exploratory only and 
should be viewed as a snapshot at a particular location at a particular point in time. It may be inaccurate for farms 
with markedly different soil type, climate, and resources to those of the Lower Namoi Valley representative farm. 

The Cotton Production in Northern Australia 2025 mini manual has been developed for a Northern audience, or those contemplating growing cotton in the North. It aims to help people better understand how cotton grows under tropical conditions and interacts with weather and focuses on things that are different for agronomic management such as sowing time, nutrition, canopy management and irrigation in the tropics.

This is designed to be used by Northern growers in conjunction with the full Australian Cotton Production Manual 2025. 

The 2025 Australian Cotton Production Manual is a critical reference tool for cotton growers. The manual is a one-stop-shop for growers, outlining all the various decisions that need to be made on-farm in preparation for, and during, cotton production. The manual provides an understanding of cotton physiology, and discusses important considerations for both productivity and profitability. The Australian Cotton Production Manual is published by CRDC and CottonInfo and is updated each year to incorporate the latest research and consistent improvements in industry best practice.

For Northern cotton growers: an accompanying Cotton Production in Northern Australia 2025 mini manual is available. 

In 2019, the Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC) commissioned this 
research project to better understand labour issues along the Australian cotton value chain and 
to recommend strategies for the industry to explore. 

Workers’ rights in the textile and garment industries have come under increasing scrutiny from 
governments, nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), and consumers. Labour concerns in the 
cotton value chain include poor health and safety, human rights abuses, lack of freedom of 
association, and forced and child labour. Organisations acting alone have been unable to address 
these issues, leading to ongoing exploitation of workers. While labour abuses may occur 
anywhere in the chain, the labour-intensive manufacturing parts of the Australian cotton value 
chain is an area of particular concern. 

Australian cotton enjoys a reputation as a clean, green crop grown under decent working 
conditions, however once the cotton enters global value chains, visibility is lost, and sustainable 
value is diminished. Practices occurring downstream from Australian cotton growers represent a 
risk to the industry and to its supply chain partners, including brands and retailers. Positive action 
by the cotton industry represents an opportunity to demonstrate the industry’s commitment to 
human rights and sustainability.

This Final Technical Report is a high-level summary of the project findings and a guide to the 
detailed reports and resources developed through the project

The Winter 2025 edition of Spotlight showcases the latest in cotton research and innovation, headlined by a $13 million project exploring floating solar panels on irrigation storages. This initiative, led by Ag Econ and supported by CRDC and the Federal Government, aims to reduce evaporation, generate renewable energy, and enhance drought resilience, tackling three of cotton's challenges – water, energy, and emissions – in one stroke. 

This edition also highlights the latest news re the CRDC data platform, designed to streamline emissions reporting and unlock value across the cotton supply chain. In preparation for the data platform, Spotlight features practical advice on improving data quality on-farm.

This issue also introduces the full team of CottonInfo Regional Extension Officers (REOs), now on board across most cotton-growing valleys to connect growers with the latest R&D, and features the finalists in this year's CRDC Chris Lehmann Young Cotton Achiever Award.

Other features include a deep dive into nitrogen cycling and soil microbes, the economic and environmental benefits of fish screens, and the latest on cotton’s sustainability reporting and leadership development programs. It also includes the full list of CRDC’s 2025–26 R&D investments, offering a comprehensive look at the projects driving progress across cotton's paddocks, people and planet. 

This document provides a brief outline of the projects CRDC has invested in for 2025-26 (current as of May 2025).

CRDC's Annual Operational Plan for 2025-26 (AOP): the third annual operational plan under the CRDC's Strategic RD&E Plan 2023-28.

There are an increasing set of drivers acting on agricultural producers to collect, assess and report on biodiversity data, both at the farm scale, and across a sector. These drivers include but are not limited to: • Market access for agricultural products (including voluntary disclosures; regulatory requirements) • Income diversification via entry into and ongoing participation in environmental market schemes • Informing management decisions on-farm, linked to (for example) ecosystem service reliance / provision • Recognising and promoting positive management practices across the industry. Noting these drivers, the Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC) engaged 2rog Consulting (2rog) to review available tools, methods and datasets for collecting on-farm biodiversity data. To frame this review, a subset of biodiversity ‘indicators’ were selected for consideration, as these were identified to be of most relevance to cotton growers in Australia. These were: • State of Nature. Native vegetation extent. Native vegetation condition. Habitat extent. Habitat condition. Native species richness. Threatened species or species of interest. Native species population size • Pressures / impact. Invasive species presence (including terrestrial and aquatic weeds; feral animals) o Land use / cover.

The Regional Australia Institute was engaged by the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) and Cotton Research and Development Corporation (CRDC) to develop an understanding of the social impacts of GRDC and CRDC research in regional communities and subsequently develop a framework for assessing the socio-economic impacts of their agricultural research, development and extension projects in regional communities. 

The framework provides a standardised structure which can be adapted to cover multiple types of agricultural innovations, including new technologies, practices, policies and business models. The framework is designed for assessing the socio-economic impacts of agricultural innovations beyond the farm-gate. The assessment framework is designed to complement agricultural production and first order economic benefit analysis by assessing broader societal impacts such as community resilience, socio-economic equality, and workforce skills and availability.

As the GRDC and CRDC lead investment in grains and cotton research, development and extension (RD&E) in Australia, it is important to understand where the institute is driving positive change and delivering the greatest impacts for both growers and regional and rural communities. The GRDC’s Performance and Impact Framework identifies three broad areas of assessment: GRDC’s investment level impact, on-farm adoption and impact, and cumulative impacts aggregated at a grains sector level. Whilst this is necessary to monitor the economic impact of GRDC investment and RD&E activities, there are many social impacts (direct or spillover), that can be additionally considered to further evaluation the contributions of GRDC and CRDC. The socio-economic impacts can be incorporated into this framework or operate as a standalone framework.  

In the Strategic RD&E Plan 2023-28, CRDC states that their RD&E investments aim to boost environmental, social, and economic benefits for cotton growers, the cotton industry, regional communities and the broader Australian public. This underscores the importance to design a socio-economic impact assessment framework to monitor, evaluate and communicate the broad and diverse impact of agricultural RD&E investment. 

The framework detailed within this document has been constructed using a combination of sources:

• literature on Australian and international socio-economic assessment frameworks[1]
• information provided by the GRDC and CRDC, such as the GRDC Performance Impact Framework
• information gained from RAI-facilitated workshops in July 2023
• fieldwork in three case study regions to understand the socio-economic impacts of GRDC and CRDC research in each community.

The RAI conducted fieldwork in the three GRDC growing regions: Eyre Peninsula (Southern), Goondiwindi (Northern) and Dalwallinu (Western) to gain a deeper understanding of the socio-economic impacts of GRDC and CRDC research that is playing a significant role in supporting innovation in agriculture. Agricultural innovations clearly have extensive impacts on local communities, beyond the immediate effects on the agriculture industry and related sectors. These impacts were noted as being relatively consistent across all fieldwork regions, though the extent of impact was unique to each region. Notable observed impacts included: shifting from on-farm labour to off-farm technical expertise, an improved ability to mitigate environmental pressures (particularly water scarcity), high capital cost and barriers to entry, and decreasing use of local suppliers in favour of specialised distributors. More complex, multi-directional relationships were also observed with housing and labour markets.  See the appendix for further details of these findings. 

A socio-economic impact assessment (SEIA) is a tool for evaluating the potential impacts of a set of proposed or existing changes and predicting stakeholder responses. Socio-economic impact assessments can be used to identify vulnerable groups and inequalities, incorporate local voices and assess impacts on local economies and communities. Various frameworks exist for SEIA, with a notable example in the agriculture sector being the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Toolkit developed by the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Key to a successful SEIA is selecting appropriate indicators, with best practice centring on indicators that cover industry characteristics, community impacts, workforce impacts, and Indigenous impacts.

Well-designed and conducted SEIAs can provide significant benefits by informing and enhancing decision making and improving the long-term sustainability of research and development innovation through improved community outcomes.  

See, for example, Maughan C. 2012. Monitoring and evaluating social impacts in Australia. CRC-REP Working Paper

CW003. Ninti One Limited, Alice Springs. On international frameworks, see Vanclay, F., Esteves, A. M., Aucamp, I., & Franks, D. 2015. Social Impact Assessment: Guidance for assessing and managing the social impacts of projects.