以平衡計分卡探討產銷履歷制度之績效

Abstract

為提升我國農產品與加工品之品質及安全，維護國民健康及消費者之權益，我國於2007年1月29日公布『農產品生產及驗證管理法』，依據「農產品生產及驗證管理法」推動之農產品產銷履歷制度，已完成農產品產銷履歷制度相關法制作業、制定符合品質管理與國際安全標準的臺灣良好農業規範（TGAP）、建立公正第三者認驗證制度、建置產銷履歷資訊系統，截至 2019年 4 月底，經行政院農業委員會採認財團法人全國認證基金會（TAF）特定評鑑結果，經認證通過之驗證機構有 14 家，驗證機構通過認證之範圍包含一般作物、有機作物、作物加工、家畜、家禽、畜禽加工、養殖水產品、水產品加工等 8 大領域。其中有 2,498 家農產品經營業者通過驗證(包含農糧、蔬果、漁、畜禽產品)，生產農、漁、畜等 153 項產品於市面上販售，產值也由 2007 年的 4 億元，至 2018 年成長 20 倍，達81億元。雖農產品產銷履歷有許多成果，然而推動上還是無法完全被農民及消費者所接受，為評估其執行績效，本研究透過國內外文獻探討，並以平衡計分卡4個構面搭配專家訪談以質和量方式，歸納出影響農產品產銷履歷績效及未來農委會在推動上可以加強之處及消費者使用平台的友善設計提出建言。 經訪談及分析結果彙整如下： 1.經營者希望獲得差價尚未達到，於訪談過程中詢問通過產銷履歷驗證後，農產品單價是否有提高，56%人員認為單價有提高，44%人員認為價格是不變的，在單價提高的幅度中，主要提高幅度在2-5%占56%，提高幅度在6-10%占22%及有11%認為提高幅度在20%以上，在詢問認為通過產銷履歷驗證後，認為合理的價格增加幅度應為幾％，有63%的人認為合理增加幅度應為5-10%。 2.通路單的拉力才是農民願意加入之動力，詢問如何鼓勵年輕世代參與務農行列，有81%人員認為提供銷售管道媒合有助於年輕世代的投入，目前國內農產品通路主要於拍賣市場銷售集中於台北一、二市及西螺果菜市場，如果要推行產銷履歷驗證應鼓勵前述的單位優先拍賣產銷履歷產品，如果銷售量有超過50%給予獎勵，如此較能提升產銷履歷的生產量。 3.如何降低驗證費用大部分被訪談者提出以集團驗證或規模化生產來申請驗證，但集團的定義應更明確避免集團中有一位農民農藥檢出造成全部班員受影響無法出貨，集團的管理中心應訂定一套管理機制(QMS)如GLOBALGAP，同時有專家提出團體/集團驗證退場機制待調整，集團驗證的規定應再明確。以水產品業者提出主要費用是設置冷凍設備，所以，以水產品為例應建立區域中心，如果政府要補助費用應該補助冷凍設備。 4.產銷履歷的制度很好，但以通路的角色來看，單一農民應該集中分區來申請驗證，以國內超商鮮食商品採購者一定不希望一家公司對應許多單一農戶，希望僅由單一公司來對應，負責廠商(供應商)其貨源可來自許多產銷班，所以，集團/總部管理很重要。而且企業都希望能永續經營，缺貨對通路或店商來說，都不樂見，所以，農民要如何達到產量一致且貨源充足，皆須具有一定規模來生產。

Taiwan promulgated the Agricultural Production and Certification Act on January 29th, 2007 to improve the quality and safety of agricultural products and their processed products, and to protect the health of citizens and the rights of consumers. The promotion of the traceability system of agricultural products in accordance to the Agricultural Production and Certification Act included the completion of necessary regulatory preparations, the establishment of the Taiwan Good Agriculture Practice (TGAP) per international safety standards, an independent third-party certification system, and a traceability information system. As of the end of April 2019, the Executive Yuan's Council of Agriculture have approved the evaluation results of the Taiwan Accreditation Foundation and approved the status of 14 certification bodies for the following 8 categories: crop, organic crop, crop processing, livestock, poultry, livestock and poultry processing, Aquaculture, and Fisheries Product Processing. A total of 2498 agricultural businesses received certification for grains, vegetables, fishery, husbandry and poultry products, and the rights to sell 153 items. The value of production rose 20-fold from 400 million in 2007 to 8.1 billion in 2018. Although the traceability system of agricultural products achieved much success since its inauguration, producers and consumers have not entirely accepted all of its various facets. This study conducted a literature review and used the 4-domain Balanced Scorecard to interview experts from qualitative and quantitative perspective to measure the current state of promotional performance, and to ascertain what the Council of Agriculture could improve in the future. Other recommendations, such as a more user-friendly consumer platform design, are also sought. The interviews and analysis are presented in the following. 1. Agricultural product operators have not been able to attain the expected pricing differentials. When asked during interviews on whether the unit price of agricultural items has risen after the implementation of the traceability system, 56% were positive responses, while 44% of respondents claimed that unit pricing has not changed. In terms of the extent of unit price increase, 56% of respondents identified a 2-5% increase, while 22% responded 6-10%, and 11% claimed that the extent of price increase was above 20%. When asked about the expected extent of unit price increase, 63% of respondents considered a 5-10% increase as a reasonable target. 2. Distribution channels form the main leverage that draws in more participating agricultural producers. When asked how to encourage younger generations to enter the agribusiness, 81% of respondents think that distribution channel matchmaking would make agribusiness more appealing to younger generations. Current agricultural distribution channels are concentrated in the auction sales of the Taipei First and Second Wholesale Markets, as well as the Xiluo Fruits and Vegetables Wholesale Market. Incentives ought to be provided to these markets, such as a bonus to reward sales exceeding 50%, in order to better promote the use of the traceability system. 3. Many respondents raised the issue of lowering certification costs, and the methods they proposed are variants of group certification or scale production. However, the definition of a group needs to be better defined, to avoid the situation where one negative test of a producer's products prohibits the sale of the products of other members in the group. The management center of the group needs to establish a Quality Management System (QMS), such as GLOBALGAP. Also, experts pointed out that the exit mechanism of group certification needs to be more specific, so too the regulations that define group certification. Producers of aquatic products were mostly concerned with the acquisition of refrigeration equipment, and hence, if the government should choose to subsidize this sector, it should encourage the founding of a regional center and provide assistance to the acquisition of refrigeration equipment. 4. The traceability system received generally positive feedback, but the distribution network requires some consideration. Individual agricultural producers ought to be consolidated for certification. Domestic supermarkets would not want to face multiple single agricultural producers when sourcing products and would be more interested in negotiating with one business supplier, which could source their products from different producers. Therefore, group/central management is essential. Corporations all seek sustainability, and short supply is an issue for both distributors and businesses. Therefore, the goal is for agricultural producers to maintain stable production, and must have scale production to maintain supply.