2026 Nuffield NZ Farming Scholarship. Apply by 17 August 2025. Read More...

Apply for 2026 Nuffield NZ Farming Scholarship by 17 August 2025. More details...

Nuffield Scholar Reports

Energy use in New Zealand’s primary food production chains and a transition to lower emissions.

Listen to the podcast
Download the report

Executive Summary

This report explores and applies a novel methodology of standardising and quantifying energy flows within New Zealand’s primary food production chains and more widely within New Zealand itself in relation to the Zero Carbon bill. Then demonstrates the method as a critically important adjunct to economics in planning and navigating our transition to low emissions food systems and society more generally.

The looming challenge of maintaining the success and growth in global food production enjoyed over the last century is heightened by the fact that underpinning a huge amount of this progress was cheap, flexible and incredibly energy dense fossil fuels. Given that managing our human population seems an impossibly thorny maelstrom, our only option is to mitigate its impact while trying ever harder to meet its needs.

Tension within our food systems between increasing production and reducing environmental impact is creeping steadily upward. Many ‘wicked’ issues are involved. Proposed solutions based on economics often seem to compound them further yet, while confounding our leaders and causing frustration amongst the public. We need to strip away all that is superfluous and get down to the very basics of how to produce food in a genuinely sustainable fashion. I sought to explore this from an energy perspective.

In my Nuffield Scholarship I investigated and applied a method of describing systems, food systems for example, in terms of their energy use and their energy production. From this understanding their, strengths, weaknesses, risks, and opportunities can be quantified, especially with respect to reducing energy related emissions. Even the comparatively high level calculations reported here illustrate the very very critical risks inherent in plotting a path to low emissions food systems and for society more generally based solely on economic analysis.

The method is known as Energy Return On (Energy) Investment (EROI) and lies within the field of Biophysical Economics.

It has traditionally been used to quantify the net energy returned from fossil fuel or other energy sources. In so doing it consistently shows that fossil fuels have a higher EROI than almost all the non-fossil alternatives. In essence, the fossil options are a more lucrative energy source. This presents a tremendous challenge to maintaining current levels of prosperity during our shift to other energy sources that is not immediately visible economically.

EROI has immense potential in a diverse spectrum of other applications. For example food systems, transport, industries, or any element of our society, even society itself. The key point is any system that we want to reduce energy use within and emissions from.  My report shows that it is an ideal adjunct to our economic approaches to adapting New Zealand’s primary food production chains and our society more widely toward goals set out in the Zero Carbon Bill.

Key outcomes are that:

Energetically, organic and less intensive farm systems tend to have proportionally lower inputs and outputs than their conventional counterparts, often by a considerable margin, eg 15-25%. Hence a nation-wide shift to low intensity food systems will reduce our total production.

Energetically, producing food from plants is far more efficient than producing it from animals. Many other environmental and emissions related benefits link to this point.

Despite advances in our agriculture, forestry, and fisheries over the last 30 years, the energy required by this sector to produce a dollar of GDP has not changed.

Fonterra’s projected energy requirement in 2050 under the Zero Carbon Act will increase 5% even with the simplistic assumption that their production levels remain static between now and then. All similar industries will experience much the same increase in primary energy requirement as they transition away from fossil fuels, more so if they want to grow between now and then. This is a fundamental challenge to our low emissions transition.

Critically, there is very little understanding of energy use in our primary food production system from a chain perspective. That is, right from the creation of farm inputs through to the shipping of processed product to consumers. Without this, transition weaknesses and opportunities cannot be prioritised effectively.

Under the 2050 Innovative Scenario modelled in the Low Emissions Economy final report, energy used by our energy supply system (primary energy) increases from 5% of our national consumption today to 9% in 2050. This is a drop in EROI from 20.3 today to 10.0 in 2050. But concurrently GDP is projected to double.

In this same scenario, anticipating population growth within New Zealand and a transition to both less energy and renewable energy sources, energy delivered per capita per year drops 37% from 16.5GJ to 10.4GJ, equivalent to what we used per person in the late 1970s.

In my view the proposed Zero Carbon bill is an exceptionally forward thinking and valuable document to guide a transition to lower emissions. It identifies all the critical elements. But it needs an energy perspective alongside its economic one for success.

What to do?

The Zero Carbon Bill presents the perfect opportunity to bring EROI in to optimise our transition to lower emissions systems.

Development of this methodology, for which the vast majority of expertise and logistics are readily available, should be undertaken by a ‘Transition Institute’ that links initially to the Interim Climate Change Committee and then to the independent Climate Commission.

In a little more detail, we need to deepen our understanding of New Zealand’s primary production systems from an energy stock and flow perspective. First by creating an overarching perspective of energy use in the different components of our systems, then by filling knowledge gaps. The rural transport sector typifies such a gap. Fonterra show notable foresight in making key data in this regard publicly available but their results emphasise the importance of both EROI and economic approaches to future projections.  Nationally and within the sphere of primary industries this is not a huge undertaking. But the benefit would be immense if it brought an energy perspective to those leading our transition.

On recognising the merits of EROI, I feel it is a natural it would then be applied beyond our primary industries to other aspects of New Zealand’s Zero Carbon transition.

Furthermore, it could easily be adapted to other food systems around the world. It provides a standardised means of comparison mercifully unbiased by the usual blizzard of economic and political instruments. Consequently it could play a major role in optimising the full range of food systems from subsistence through to super high tech, all of which will play some role in 2050. In doing so, New Zealand would be truly forging ahead globally in the process of optimising a low emissions transition. We would actually be making a major contribution to adaptation and mitigation efforts against the impact of climate change.

Sure our land mass won’t feed everyone but our ingenuity, practical mentality and pioneering spirit absolutely could. See the recommendations on page 62 for how.

Energy use in New Zealand’s primary food production chains and a transition to lower emissions: The role of Energy Return On Investment in our success – Solis Norton

Keywords for Search: Solis Norton, Solas, Solos

On farm biosecurity: The importance of the farm gate.

Listen to the podcast
Download the report

Executive Summary

For the 8th consecutive year World Class Biosecurity ranked the number 1 priority for industry leaders in KPMG’s annual Agribusiness Agenda for 2018. It is interesting to note that while industry leaders recognise this as such a critical focus, at grass roots level there seems to be a disconnect or unwillingness to engage in practical on-farm biosecurity practices. In New Zealand we do have one of the best international biosecurity borders in the world, but as we continually see, this border protection cannot stop everything.

The only way to achieve complete border protection would be total isolation by eliminating international trade and travel. This is obviously not an option and with ever increasing international trade and travel, the risk of another incursion also increases. Given that we can’t eliminate the risk of a future incursion, then the next step is preventing or slowing the spread of that incursion within New Zealand before it is detected. The only way to achieve this is through active farm gate biosecurity protection.

Some pests we have very good early detection systems for like the trapping systems for fruit-fly. Other pests and disease can exist without any obvious symptoms for several years making early detection very difficult and giving substantial time for spread before it is detected and any controls are put in place as part of a response.

Basic farm biosecurity practices do have a cost in terms of setup and ongoing maintenance and inconvenience, and for the most part there is little or no recognizable benefit from these practices. It’s a lot like insurance where you are paying out for a service that hopefully you will never need, but if you do then it is vital. One of the other issues with biosecurity practices is that it is a lot like immunisation where you need basically everyone to get on board to make a difference. Unfortunately, those who do nothing can also be protected in the same way herd immunity works.

The key to creating lasting biosecurity practices is to make it part of our culture to the point where it just becomes business as usual. Therein lies the difficulty, making a cultural change within farming in New Zealand and making on-farm biosecurity the norm.

The key finding of this report are that biosecurity doesn’t stop at the border and that we all have a role to play. Talk and education alone will not drive this change, we need to find the levers that will shift people from knowing they should be doing something about it – to doing something about. Those levers will not come from farmers, they must come from industry organisations pushing the need for biosecurity and working with commercial players in their industry to make biosecurity a mandatory part of their contracts. We have seen the push in this area for worker welfare and safety, and a strong social push to clean

up the environment. We need that same push to also implement biosecurity practices to protect the environment and our livelihood.

On Farm Biosecurity: The importance of the farm gate – Simon Cook

Keywords for Search: Simon Cook

Growing value for New Zealand’s Red Meat Industry: Ensuring we build quality and life long connections with consumers.

A paradigm shift in the way we farm is occurring, one that emphasises the importance of producing more effectively, efficiently and responsibly, with a particular focus on protecting the environment. New Zealand farmers are confronting these changes now. Our geographic isolation no longer shelters us from the global and instant communication and information networks are now freely available. I believe that our opportunity is to leverage this increased public and consumer awareness of the environment and the growing desire of consumers to understand how their food is produced and where it comes from.

My aim in undertaking this study was to provide a pathway allowing farmers to better connect with consumers. If we are to set NZ product aside from our competitors in-market, it was my view that we needed not only a good story that engaged the consumer, but also a way of ensuring that the consumer can understand the way in which we treat both the animals and the land on which we farm them.

From this study, I believe we have a fantastic opportunity to future proof our businesses across the supply chain and to create a new level of connection with the consumer that will lead to gains in the value of the food we produce over time. As farmers, I believe that we need to step up now and own this as an opportunity. This has to be a ‘bottom, up’ process where we recognise the value that this will create for us as farmers, as food producers and as an industry over time. We must work together to develop a meaningful connection with the consumers who recognise our food for what it is; sustainably produced to the highest standards for the environment, animals and consumers.

The study commenced with extensive internet research and discussions with key NZ industry figures to understand the current status quo and current goals and initiatives. Initial thoughts were to implement the ‘Environmental Sustainability’ (such as Origin Green) approach as a means of connecting with the consumer, however this morphed into a wider discussion about what consumers desire from producers as I engaged with manufacturers, importers and distributors around the world. I began to understand that consumer perception is influenced by a number of factors including the manner in which product is presented and the way in which its claims are demonstrated.

Consumers are rightly demanding more knowledge and accountability from their food producers. It is almost mandatory for Country of Origin labelling. Why? Because we as consumers identify that the standards that are met and controls that are in place differ from country to country, and it gives us an idea of whether the food that we are eating is safe. As a small exporting nation that is reliant on the export of agricultural products, we cannot allow ourselves to have any doubt cast on the quality and safety of our produce. As we know, with the power of social media now, the implications of an error in judgement by a single farmer, can lead to challenges in ensuring our produce is accepted by consumers in global markets.

Certification of the farming system from both an environmental and animal welfare perspective gives us a starting point in terms of having a discussion with the consumer. As part of an overall strategy, it allows farmers the opportunity to provide visibility and assurance to our consumers of the production process their food has gone through and the impact of that process on the environment. It also connects consumers with their food ‘story’, something that has been lost as society has become more urbanised. For farmers, this creates a meaningful way in which we can differentiate our product from other producers. It also gives an opportunity to connect with the urban population of NZ, to show our commitment to maintaining our social licence to farm by working to improve the environment.

Keywords for Search: David Kidd

Broken food systems: Developing a citizen centric New Zealand food strategy.

The global devaluation of food in developed countries due to physical, digital and biological advances has been the catalyst for destruction of both social, cultural and economic systems and New Zealand, in the absence of an ethical humanity centred ‘whole food system’ risks the same deterioration and consequences, other first world nations are attempting to reverse.

Lack of understanding around the role of food as a connector in every facet of our lives not only diminishes the importance of food production – it further industrialises and negates the responsibilities of the process, which in turn reshapes the ‘economic social, cultural and human context in which we live’.(1)

At a time when discourse and a disconnect between those on the land and those in built up areas is at unparalleled levels, questions and negative scrutiny has and will continue to be levelled at the New Zealand farming fraternity – the scapegoats and the legacy of citizens who have been progressively severed from their local food systems.

New Zealand’s dogmatic approach to talking about agri-food products as commodities, instead of food in a socio- cultural context emphasizes the lack of connection between the country’s food production and culture, and makes it vulnerable, as noted by Berno.(2)

Although this detachment continues to widen, globally, as evidenced by the author’s studies, there is a growing resonance from citizens (3) (albeit sub-consciously) of the social, symbolic and economic role that food has in their lives, leading many Governments to consider the opportunities this developing conscience might offer.

Other drivers towards a ‘whole food system’ approach include burgeoning nutritional health issues, such as Scotland is experiencing, with two thirds of adults considered obese(4), due to food insecurity and the increase in low cost nutrient poor processed foods.

Although Scotland’s first (and the United Kingdom’s first strategic food policy) National Food and Drink Policy, Recipe for Success (5), was led by the economic imperative of food and drink to the economy, the paradox between producing an abundance of fresh natural produce and having one of the poorest diet-related health records in the developed world led to a whole food human rights holistic system approach to food policy.

Becoming a Good Food Nation (Scotland’s updated strategy) encompasses a wider strategy and legislation is currently being consulted and debated upon by the Scottish Government and citizens. It, like Canada and France, articulates new and visionary aspirations around food that are human rights based and is sensitive to the relationships between food, health, the environment and social justice.

At its core, the Good Food Nation Bill has been designed to create a framework for a democratic food system, geared towards the wellbeing of the Scottish population and the protection of the environment.

Like New Zealand if it were to adopt a food strategy, Scotland must balance the tension between reducing environmental impacts and increasing economic growth and encouraging local food growing initiatives while encouraging exports and developing export markets. However, the Government and advocates for the Good Food Nation Bill are confident they can reach desirable outcomes for all parties that ensure a united, prosperous and economically sustainable Scotland.

Indeed, adopting a ‘whole food approach’ by definition, means social and economic aims need not be mutually exclusive just as the rights and economic viability of food producers need not be sacrificed. New Zealand is at a similar crossroads with its Commonwealth kin. Despite the tyranny of distance and its vast necessitous global trade relationships it cannot be isolated from the effects of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (the fusion of industrial, biological and digital technologies).

Automation, urbanisation and the continuing de-valuation of food, including disruption to traditional ‘foodways’ (the cultural, social, and economic practices relating to the production and consumption of food) will cause fundamental transformation across New Zealand that will require urgent collective action.

A shared aspirational national collaborative vision for food and a ‘Team New Zealand’ approach would position us strongly towards the future, and prepare for the pace of change occurring. Together, New Zealand, could achieve monumental environmental, social and economic goals, and extend opportunities to further sustain and grow future market opportunities for the nation’s food producers, while nourishing its most important asset – its citizens.

Keywords for Search: Nadine Porter, Porta

Developing an online sales strategy for New Zealand: How New Zealand agri-food producers can leverage mobile technology to add more value.

New Zealand exported a total of $37 billion in agri-food products in 2015 – yet KPMG (2016) estimates those same products ultimately generated more than $0.25 trillion dollars in retail sales when sold to consumers around the world. The challenge was how we forge new pathways that will help us capture more share of the export pie? The aim of this report is to investigate how New Zealand could utilise e-commerce as a sales channel to get closer to our customers and provide less volatility in niche markets. My study involved immersing myself in global markets to observe how customer’s and consumers purchased our products, how we could get closer to them and how we could build world leading e-commerce solutions.  When I started my research into e-commerce sales I focused initially on the internet. However, this quickly changed to looking at mobile sales platforms and how they were disrupting our traditional supply chains.  How we buy and consume our food and beverage products is changing globally and traditional supermarkets are struggling to find ways to be relevant.

The key insights that I observed was the growth of mobile first e-commerce platforms globally, and the frequency of transactions involving food and drink products particularly in Asia n countries. One important statistic was that one in five Chinese e-shoppers wants to buy products from New Zealand which is currently 156 million people.  E-commerce was also the fastest growing sales channel globally with double digit growth. Another important statistic for New Zealand was the growth in B2B selling via e-commerce which will be twice the size in value of the B2C market by 2020.

Key elements of a successful online sales strategy that need to be considered are mobile first platforms, leveraging the dominant ecommerce marketplaces and accepting foreign forms of payment relevant to the market you are selling in. In addition to this, businesses need to consider both B2B and B2C strategies that are different but both online in nature. New Zealand agri-food companies also need to collaborate together to have ‘pop up stores’ in crucial New Zealand markets to attract customers to the online offering. The final finding is how you leverage existing companies with dominant ecommerce marketplaces and customer bases to grow your brand without losing to much of your margin.

Traditional relationship-based sales channels have serve d New Zealand well in the past. However, as we move into the future both business customers and consumers will be made up of millennial and Gen Z individuals who have lived their whole lives immersed in mobile technology. They no longer value face to face relationships like previous generations and prefer convenience and speed of technology when doing business and consuming products.  We need to focus more on these consumers as they will be the dominant purchaser by 2030.

The humble mobile phone has not replaced retail or the face to face selling of food, it has just internationalised it and made it more accessible globally with simpler supply chains connecting producers direct to the customer. Businesses such as Alibaba, Tenpay and Amazon are disrupting how consumers interact with retailers and farmer producers and bypassing the traditional banking systems we are so used to.  If you want your business to remain relevant in a constantly changing global market place you need to read this report!

Keywords for Search: Jason Rolfe

The Innovative farmer: Generating innovation through a farmer and grower-led system of innovation.

The genesis for my Nuffield Scholarship research was a sense that farmers and growers have a number of significant challenges or problems, both on-farm and off that have not been solved, or we are struggling to solve. As we milk, shear, tend and harvest, thousands of farmer and grower-minds around the country turn to these problems and to the dreams we have for the future.

We think about our immediate problems, like how much grass have I got to feed my animals, or do I have a water leak? We think about system problems, like how will I reduce my nutrient use, or what is my environmental footprint? We think about the tough problems like changing consumer preferences, or heightened society expectations and how can we reconcile these. Collectively we think and dream of a hundred thousand ideas. At the moment very little happens with many of these ideas. I want to change that.

In this Report I refer to the Wicked Problems of agriculture and food. These are the complex, incomplete, and changing problems we face, where there are no black and white answers but rather trade-offs. And often when a solution is found to one problem, then another problem emerges. Producing nutritious food for a growing population, with less agricultural land, a smaller environmental footprint, climate change and satisfying a multiplicity of consumer demands, while improving livelihoods for rural communities is a wicked problem.

In NZ we have many of the pre-conditions for innovation and fare comparatively well on international innovation indexes. So, what is missing? Why are we struggling to solve the wicked problems we face? The problem is two-fold: firstly the very-nature of the problems we face needs to be recognised; they are wicked problems and we cannot solve them alone. Working away in isolated groups won’t do it. Rolling up our sleeves and puffing out our chests to declare we will solve it won’t do it. And well-intended broad consensus collaboration won’t do it. Secondly, we need to take a closer look at our system of innovation. Where is the user (the farmer and grower) in our design of innovation, where is the user in the generation and development of innovation? How do we close that gap, refine our innovation and speed our cycles to market?

This Report aims to provide a model for generating and capturing ideas to solve the wicked problems of food and agriculture. The key element to solving this is bringing to bear the focus, passion, practical application and entrepreneurial drive of our farmers and growers. The innovation model needs to put them at the centre. It also needs to build an innovation consciousness amongst our farmers and growers.

This topic is important because the world today has become much more complex, uncertain and fast- moving. I borrow the term VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) from the military to throw light upon this. To succeed and innovate in this VUCA world we need to be actively engaged in innovation to perceive the opportunities and foresee the risks of disruption to our businesses and industries. As Rodd Carr, Vice Chancellor of University of Canterbury explained, “the lone-farmer standing in the field is a high- risk strategy.”

Generating ideas is the easy part. Ideas sitting in silos by themselves are useless. We need platforms to take one good idea and, as Stephen Johnson in his book Where Good Ideas Come From describes, collide it with another good idea to create innovation.2 We need places where good ideas can be shared, refined and given substance. In this Report I look at case study examples of platforms for innovation from Salinas Valley in California, from the Netherlands, from the EU and from Silicon Valley.

This Report recommends an innovation model for New Zealand where farmers and growers lead from the middle to solve the challenges they face. I describe eight principles of innovation to assist farmers and growers understand what good innovation looks like. I explain the myths, barriers and wrong-turns to innovation, to help navigate along the zig-zag path of innovation.

Keywords for Search: Mathew Hocken, Hocking

Effective industry collaboration for environmental gains.

New Zealand farmers are facing significant pressure to manage the impact of their land use on water quality which has been affecting their social licence to farm. The environment we farm in underpins the sustainability of our farming businesses and our country. As stated in the KPMG Agribusiness Agenda 2017, an annual report detailing the insights and megatrends relevant to the agribusiness sector, a vision for the agri-food sector is actually a vision for New Zealand, given we are the only developed country that relies on selling biologically produced products to fund our schools, roads and hospitals.

Statutory regulation for fresh water management has caused competition between farmers within catchments as allocation of nutrients amongst land owners is discussed. A national strategy and anticipating the way forward is an easier way to collaborate than when legislation is in place. It takes more listening and more engagement. In my experience as a Certified Nutrient Management Advisor, farmers are willing to better understand what changes need to be made on farm, they don’t want to be doing the wrong thing.

The competition really begins when industry bodies or processing companies get involved. Energy-wasted competition with fellow New Zealand farmers will get us nowhere. In situations where compromise is needed between farmers the time needs to be taken for the trust and understanding to be built between all parties involved. We need to better use our resources, both physical such as soil, water and biodiversity, and human resources to be the best New Zealand we can be. All too often I hear and read phrases such as “We need to collaboration more” or “we need to collaborated better”. What does that actually mean? What is effective primary industry collaboration for environmental gains? That is the questions I have been asking myself and others over the last 12 months.

This report includes four case studies that have been completed from 68 interviews completed during my Nuffield travels through America, Canada, Ireland, England, China and Australia. These case studies show how effective collaboration can be achieved. When effective collaboration is referred to, it is focusing on communities and catchments remaining strong and

vibrant. I’d love to see a New Zealand where instead of talking about Sarah the dairy farmer or Tom the sheep and beef producer, we talk about Sarah and Tom the food producers who farm in the same environment.

Environmental gains regarding soil, nutrients, irrigation, effluent and biodiversity can be made by each and every one of us. Each land based agricultural sector in New Zealand has a role to play and often, regardless of which sector you farm in, the same management practices will be applied to achieve these gains.

We need to acknowledge the current model of collaboration is not working. The main findings of this report identify key themes that came from interviews with overseas organisations that are having success with collaboration which enabled them to tackle environmental challenges.

 

Keywords for Search: Rebecca Hyde, Hide

How can pastoral Dairy Farming remain competitive.

The NZ dairy industry has always historically enjoyed the advantage of being the world’s lowest cost producer of milk with our cheap pasture feed resource being the envy of the dairy industry globally.

Despite this, farmers in the Europe and the US, the worlds 2nd and third largest exporters are eyeing opportunities for growth to compete with NZ in the global milk market. They are using a containment (housed) dairy model to achieve this and becoming increasingly competitive on many production and cost metrics through the application of efficiency, scale and productivity gains. These same techniques are being applied to world grain production with resultant excess of supply over demand suppressing prices, a key driver for profitability in containment livestock industries.

The question for the NZ dairy industry in light of this is ‘How can pastoral dairy remain competitive?’

The aim and purpose of this paper is to explore and evaluate the comparisons between pastoral based and containment-based production systems and determine where the advantage for NZ will lie in the future i.e. how we can compete and stay relevant.

This is an important discussion, the NZ dairy industry is a key part of the NZ economy and its prosperity is important on many levels. Over the past decade, the NZ dairy industry has pursued a volume (growth) model but due to emerging environmental constraints, this has evidently run its course and a value model is the next opportunity.

Information gathered on the topic followed two main themes: production systems and consumer insights. Dairy farming businesses, particularly scale or expanding operations were consulted in the US and Europe with a view to establishing resilience of their business models, future prospects and intentions. Consumer market insights were observed, mainly in Asia and the US, to establish what trends are currently occurring in dairy consumption and consumer preferences.

The key findings suggest that cost competitive marginal milk will be delivered onto world markets from the US, Europe and others, but there are opportunities for NZ to differentiate and pursue a value proposition around ‘grass-fed’. Our free-range pastoral model is unique in a global volume context and difficult for most dairying nations to replicate. Many consumers are actively seeking out food produced from sustainable, high animal welfare production models and this is an important opportunity for NZ.

The recommendations from this research contain a key message around the NZ dairy industry continuing to do what it does best on-farm. Beyond the farm, we need to look at ways to tell our story and leverage the differentiation that already exists in our national milk supply.

There are of course a number of challenges along the way and some of these will be discussed. This report endeavours to provide only a perspective based on observations offshore. It is up to the industry to evaluate the merits of the discussion and find a way forward.

Keywords for Search: Ryan O’Sullivan

Community-Centric innovation and the regenerative farming frontier.

There is a new frontier of food and farming emerging. Its emergence is in part a response to the limitations and negative impacts of our current farm systems, and in part driven by a realisation that ‘regenerative farming’ is opening up a new world of possibility. Many of our current farming systems are being ‘squeezed’ by commodity market competition and volatility, rising costs, public scrutiny and regulation, plus potentially disruptive technologies that bring significant challenges to the ongoing viability of agricultural businesses – farming is becoming increasingly complex and the future less certain. Recent KPMG Agribusiness Agendas have identified these pressures and called for New Zealand agriculture to target high end consumers, focusing on product and environmental leadership and excellence. What is perhaps less emphasised is the scale of shifts required in our farm systems if we are to truly respond to our changing reality.

This report is a call for a new and additional ‘approach’ to agricultural development and innovation in New Zealand. As I travelled with Nuffield it became increasingly clear that regenerative farming not only full of opportunities, but shifting our farm systems and practises in this direction is both a positive and necessary response to our changing reality as farmers. Regenerative farming is a broadly defined system of principles and practises focused on biodiversity, soil health, ecosystem function, carbon sequestration, improving yields, climatic resilience and health and vitality for farming communities. A key feature of these farming systems is their high demand for knowledge and creativity in designing and managing the complex biological relationships that underpin their success, as opposed to conventional systems that are more dependent on inputs for control and management. This key distinction is where our current agricultural development and innovation system falls short in its potential to support regenerative farming. Our current system focuses on a “science-driven, linear, technology transfer-oriented approach to innovation” (Turner et al. 2015) that, while perhaps suited to more homogenous and input-oriented conventional farm systems, does not align well with the more holistic and high risk innovation demands of regenerative farming (that also offers less opportunities for agribusinesses).

The ‘approach’ to support the innovation of regenerative farming systems and practises needs to move beyond old dichotomies between ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ drivers of change, towards community-centric approaches guided by the knowledge, experience and creativity of farmers and rural communities, with the support of other actors (ie. government, policy, research, relevant businesses and organisations etc). Farmer and practitioner experiences of making or 3 supporting shifts towards regenerative farming, around the world, have formed the basis for the conclusions of this report. Community-centric approaches were observed to facilitate diverse participation and place equal value on local and external expertise, where everyone ‘meets as equals’ in a shared commitment to achieving community goals. In this manner, the diverse interests of communities and society can be acknowledged and incorporated into decision- making and action, with the potential to reconcile apparent conflicts within and between rural communities and wider society.

A community-centric approach to regenerative farming innovation is also a principle-led and prototyping approach. A principle-led approach is a shift way from ‘recipe’ farm systems that are often inappropriately applied, towards a focus on translating farming principles into the diverse contexts created by land, climate and farmer skills and aspirations. A prototyping approach tests possible solutions to complex settings with a fast-fail methodology, representing a new approach to learning that focuses on diverse teams, innovation and agile testing, guided by practitioners such as Otto Scharmer and Zaid Hassan. A community-centric approach engages actors from across the system on challenges at a range of scales, such as water quality management in a catchment or rural employment/livelihoods, to challenges on individual farms (ie. what trees to plant where) that may or may not be shared by other farmers. It recognises the inherent connectedness between individual and collection actions, utilising diverse participation and commitment to understand complex settings and develop solutions that are beyond the capacity of any individual.

Mangarara Station, where I now live and work, is committed to a regenerative farming vision and is confronted every day with the challenge (and excitement) of working towards it. We hope to build mutually beneficial relationships with many different people, from local farmers and community members, organisations, to regional and national policymakers, researchers, sector organisations and NGOs, entrepreneurs and businesses, software developers and generally any creative person who sees opportunities here to support what we are trying to achieve. There is a huge amount that we don’t know, and therefore we must experiment based on existing knowledge, intuition and creative thought about what might be possible. It is essential that regenerative farming innovation is supported by the institutions and organisations whose mandates align with the potential value regenerative farming can generate. The opportunity for New Zealand (and other countries) is to collectively build more diverse, integrated and resilient landscapes, economies and communities that contribute positively to the future we want to create.

Keywords for Search: Sam Lang

China Dairy: the growth of an industry.

China is currently the most important market to the New Zealand Dairy Industry.

I first visited in 2014 and soon realised there were some large differences to the information New Zealand Dairy Farmers believed to what was actually happening on the ground in China.

Rapid development was occurring in the Chinese Dairy Industry and the potential for a significant increase in production through minimal improvements was apparent.

Knowing the Chinese people had the ability to modernise industry rapidly, I felt there was a potential threat to the New Zealand Dairy Industry; my livelihood.

On reflection, China will struggle to meet growing demand internally due to factors such as poor management, substandard feed quality and increasing environmental pressures.

Barriers to rectifying these problems will be faced by the Chinese Dairy Farmer through Chinese consumer pressure for sustainable on-farm practices such as reducing the environmental impacts of housed dairy operations.

New Zealand can capitalise on this by increasing the amount of due diligence on the analysis of risk in China.

New Zealand needs to beware that the threat to export markets is not only from internal Chinese production, but also from that of their European counterparts. New Zealand needs to clearly differentiate their products by becoming Genetic Engineering (GE) Free.

New Zealand must invest in relationship building with a long-term view to match that of Chinese relationship ideals.

The New Zealand Dairy Industry needs to change how it participates in the evolving Chinese consumer market to, maximise returns to it’s farmers.

Keywords for Search: Bede O’Connor