Análisis del Mercado

One way in which food banks provide value to the supply chain as a part of the integration process was to collaborate (e.g. share food) with other competing food banks which sometimes cut across conventionally competing supply chain lines. This was done in order to manage peaks and troughs in surplus food supply and demand.

The issue of food bank competition versus more collaboration had been an ongoing strategic priority for SecondBite Tasmania management and they had implemented a policy recommendation from the Food Security Council of Tasmania (and later from DPAC as per below) to seek efficiencies in surplus food redistribution in Tasmania. A senior SecondBite manager stated that:

One of biggest issues in Tasmania is the lack of collaboration and the competition that exists among charities performing the same services. Tasmania doesn’t need another food bank… (Respondent A 2014, pers. comm., 13 August).

New branch openings, however, appeared to more of a concern in the smaller Tasmanian market than elsewhere. A senior FareShare manager acknowledged that duplication could be an issue but seemed more ‘resigned’, stating the reasons as follows:

it’s about egos sometimes…the growth plans and the national sponsorship arrangements means that food banks will open up in new places for the benefit of national sponsors even where they will be duplicating services (Respondent F 2014, pers. comm., 20 October).

While the practice of the food banks sharing food on an irregular or opportunistic basis was commonplace, four examples were noted of more (or less) formalised than opportunistic arrangements among food banks. These were: (1) an informal and fairly new SecondBite and

distribution partnership with Foodbank Victoria, and (4) the already mentioned formalised and financially binding arrangement between SecondBite and Foodbank Tasmania through the Healthy Hamper project. Of most relevance and interest to this case are (2) and (4) above, which are now discussed in more detail.

While Produce to the People (PTTP) was a food bank in its own right, it was limited geographically to the northwest region of Tasmania and operationally by its very small size. In the past if PTTP was offered a large donation it may have been forced to decline, but after becoming a type of food hub for SecondBite, PTTP subsequently approached SecondBite to undertake food collections on its behalf. This service led to the two-way sharing of food between PTTP and SecondBite, despite the fact that each was in collaboration with supply chain competitors (i.e. arch rivals Woolworths and Coles Supermarkets).

With regard to Foodbank, a SecondBite operations manager had commented that:

in the past they were the competition but now we can work with them… (Respondent O 2015, pers. comm., 15 January).

The ‘Healthy Hampers’ project with Foodbank emerged as a condition of funding by the Tasmanian Government. In the DPAC (2014) Emergency Food Relief Report it was recommended that:

Prior to receiving further funding, it is recommended that Foodbank, SecondBite and Produce to the People outline ways in which they can minimise duplication and work towards a more collaborative and coordinated distribution model (DPAC 2014, p. 35).

However, prior to 2013, PTTP and Foodbank Tasmania were regarded as fierce competitors of SecondBite whereas under new management in 2013, higher levels of cooperation were evidenced as follows:

under the old State Manager Foodbank and Produce to the People were like competitors. We can now help out a bit …taking food to Hobart for Foodbank…helping Produce to the People collect food…it was ridiculous driving an empty truck to Hobart and Foodbank food was sitting up north (Respondent O 2015, pers. comm., 15 January).

By then SecondBite was, for example, returning food or empty pallets from the north of Tasmania to Foodbank in the south and was working closely with PTTP. In the case of Foodbank Tasmania, it still had no physical presence outside of Hobart by late 2015. According to SecondBite, there were some competitive advantages resulting from these arrangements. Foodbank’s lack of a presence and its more ad hoc than regular collection activities in the north, meant that farm gate donors often preferred to deal with SecondBite because of the aforementioned tight scheduling and reliable collection service (features of the ‘one-stop- shop’). For example, opportunities arose when:

sometimes food is not collected by Foodbank, and we [SecondBite] have on occasions been asked to take a Foodbank donation away (Respondent O 2015, pers. comm., 15 January).

There were problems for the social welfare agency clients; having already paid Foodbank both an initial membership fee and for food (either per kg or per pallet), some clients then had to organise and pay for the actual pallets to transport their own food. Therefore, SecondBite had a distinct competitive advantage in sourcing large donations close to the source of growth and production (for freshness etc.), and providing value to downstream clients, due in part to its fairly comprehensive state-wide service, new refrigerated truck and donor relationship building. In 2015, SecondBite Tasmania reported to DPAC (2015, p. 2), its Tasmanian Government funders that:

SecondBite’s food procurement efforts have developed strong relationships with the farming sector, especially in the north west of the state. This combined with our Coles Community Food with SecondBite program, which includes sixteen stores and two distribution centres ensures a consistent supply of surplus fresh food. This has resulted in collections during the reporting period of 511,668kg from 137 food donors.

SecondBite has been able to redistribute donated fresh food using an integrated system, which is extremely cost effective. While there is a requirement to operate refrigerated vehicles, cool rooms and freezers, there is a strong emphasis on small staff numbers, a large volunteer pool and in kind support especially in the area of logistics.

However as collaboration was a strategic priority for SecondBite (and the Tasmanian Government) it considered partnering with Foodbank in a joint venture in the northwest of the state. While Foodbank were located only in Hobart, by 2015 SecondBite redistributed surplus food through a network of two warehouses and twelve food hubs (and interstate). SecondBite then offered to open a new DC (in the northwest) in conjunction with Foodbank whom had declined the offer. One possible reason, aside from Foodbank’s size and its lack of a need to cooperate with the smaller SecondBite, was that SecondBite was on this occasion too openly attempting to access resources across conventional supply chain competitor lines (e.g. Woolworths and Coles Supermarkets). Unlike the more formalised collaborations involving conditional funding this time there was no institutional imprimatur. In response, an undated letter circa 30 September 2015 was written from SecondBite to a federal member of parliament Brett Whitely whom had expressed support for Foodbank Tasmania opening their own north western Tasmanian warehouse. :

We at SecondBite note with interest that the Liberal Party are supporting the establishment of Foodbank Tasmania’s expansion in the North West of Tasmania. While this is a most laudable gesture by yourself and your party, perhaps it would be beneficial for all concerned to examine the development of fresh food rescue and redistribution in Tasmania from a historical context and the implications of competing interests in the North West (SecondBite Tasmania 2015, pers. comm., circa 30 September).

SecondBite management had commenced lobbying based on appealing to government funders about the issues of efficiency, namely the duplication of services in Tasmania versus more collaboration between food banks.