Australian beef consumers have different preferences given their characteristics and the effect on expected quality of cues related to health, production process and eating experience. Beef brands using Meat Standards Australia (MSA) grades can help to signal quality and reduce consumers' uncertainty when shopping. The objective of this study is to identify the characteristics of beef buyers and their perceptions about product attributes that affect the propensity to buy branded beef. Binary logistic models were applied identifying differences between all respondents and the potential target market, including buyers in medium to high income segments, and between buyers in the target market who would buy branded beef for taste and health reasons. Variables increasing the propensity to buy branded beef include previous experience, appreciation for branded cuts and concern about quality more than size. Finally, variations in preferences for marbling and cut were found between buyers who would buy branded beef for taste and health reasons.

Meat Standards Australia (MSA) represents a new beef classification system, derived from consumer preferences, which allows classifying beef in interesting ways to consumers and creates the basis for product differentiation and branding. Currently, branding of beef cuts occurs on a limited scale; however, research has revealed clear segmentation across consumers and premiums for preferred products in niche markets. The objective of this study is to identify the potential for large-scale differentiation and branding in the Australian beef marketing system and how this may best be done given the structure of the supply chain.

*Australian Beef Industry has evolved in: • Processing → A more integrated supply chain. • Quality evaluation system → Introduction of MSA grades. *Research Problem: • Eating Quality is guaranteed, but Product Information is low. • Small companies have survived by focusing on niches (Selling differentiated and branded products). • Large Australian beef-producing companies are not selling differentiated and branded products to Supermarkets. *The challenge for the industry → To develop a wider range of brands on a larger scale. Consumers could recognise different attributes, uses and origins. Is this possible?

Beef consumers in Australia have shown differences in their preferences for products and sensitivity to price. This can be explained by the characteristics and influences of each consumer and the effect on expected quality of cues related to health, production process and eating experience. Eating experience is difficult to predict as consumers generally do not have enough information to form reliable expectations. In this context, branded beef can help to signal quality and reduce the degree of uncertainty that consumers experience when shopping. Research has detected premiums for branded beef cuts, where product attributes related to specific preferences had more influence than income and other consumer characteristics. Focus-group research, reported in this paper, has identified different segments, premiums for preferred products and the potential for large-scale differentiation and branding in the Australian market.

Global food, beverage and fibre markets can be characterised as networks of global value chains. Increasingly such chains are private and powerful, closely coordinated or fully vertically integrated, self-regulated, global and experience-based. The more that global agricultural and food product trade is conducted in these global value chains, the greater the concern that market efficiency may be compromised and the stronger the argument for having effective regulatory policy on hand for these markets. It is difficult to define appropriate roles for government intervention in these new environments. A priori, standard market failure justifications for public interventions are no longer as strong. In this paper the standard public good/market failure argument is summarised, developments in these markets and implications for analyses of agricultural and food sector markets are reviewed, and appropriate roles for government in an environment dominated by global value chains are considered. The conclusion is that there are potential roles for government or the governing agency in the value chain. These roles relate to creating or improving chain goods to ameliorate chain failure, rather than customary intervention to provide public goods in the face of market failure.

Retail beef markets not offering objective grade indicators in-store leave consumers uncertain about the quality of beef they purchase. The introduction of fresh brands can better meet consumers' expectations. Willingness-to-pay for 'ideal' quality cuts represents the maximum premiums brands could achieve. Using Australian consumers' survey data, the maximum premiums are modelled using zero-inflated negative binomial models. Results indicate that buyer's characteristics and perceptions about product attributes influence the premiums for high-quality beef that consumers are willing to pay for a cut considered 'ideal', indicating the maximum premium that brands could achieve in relevant segments. The premiums indicate there is substantial potential for beef cuts that reduce purchase risk by more assuredly meeting buyer's preferences in Australia.

The concept of value chain upgrading and promotion has been proposed as a vehicle for small-holder farmers in developing countries to gain access to higher value markets and thus generate greater income for their families and communities. However, there are many instances where investments in upgrading have not generated the expected outcomes. One of the contributing factors has been that existing approaches focus more on who does what rather than the real problem to be addressed. A chain failure framework on the other hand focuses attention on the core problem and the appropriate response, rather than on who does what. It takes a system view rather than a function or component view, and it starts from the supposition that the only reason for intervening in a value chain is to increase chain surplus, where chain surplus is properly measured to include any chain or social externalities. In this paper we review some of the existing literature on value chain upgrading and promotion as proposed for developing country situations, outline the essential elements of the chain failure/chain good theory and its relationship to the club goods literature, and then assess whether the chain upgrading and promotion literature can be reconfigured as a chain failure/chain good problem, using a number of published case studies. Finally, we discuss various types of governance models used in agricultural value chains in developing countries and suggest how well they might align with the chain failure/chain good approach.