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...

Ideas That Grow. Podcast: Lucie Douma – Data sharing to achieve data interoperability.

Kia Ora, you’ve joined the Ideas That Grow podcast, brought to you by Rural Leaders. In this series, we’ll be drawing on insights from innovative rural leaders to help plant ideas that grow so our regions can flourish. Ideas that Grow is presented in association with Farmers Weekly.

Bryan Gibson
Welcome to the Ideas that Grow podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. This week we are talking to Lucie Douma. G’day, how’s it going?

Lucie Douma
Hi, Bryan. I’m good, thank you. How are you?

BG: Good. Now, we’re together today to talk about your Nuffield Scholarship and your report. You’ve covered something that is a real big issue in New Zealand agriculture, I think, and that’s how we best utilise farm data. What got you into this topic?

Data Interoperability and why it’s useful.

LD: That’s a very good question. So there’s a lot of people actually working on data interoperability challenges at the moment. I mean, they don’t call it a wicked problem for nothing. I had also been involved in that in my time at the Ministry of Primary Industries, where I was looking after the data interoperability and governance work stream as part of the Agritech Industry Transformation Plan.

That was about four years ago and we’re still at the point that we’re having conversations about how to tackle this problem, because it’s a really difficult one.

So that’s what made me want to apply for a Nuffield Scholarship, that I could unpack the problem a bit more and see what was happening internationally and if we could learn anything from that and move from the talking to the action.

BG: Now, just to explain, data interoperability is lots of farm data is collected by lots of different people, but at the moment, lots of those data sets don’t talk to one another, so you’re not necessarily getting the best out of them. Is that kind of how it works?

LD: Yes, that’s correct. That’s how I’ve been looking at it. So you’re correct that there is a lot of different data points and data collected from different organisations. Farmers can access that data, but it’s all siloed. It is independent systems and then farmers and growers are required to actually do their own calculations and then find out what some of those relationships are between the different data points.

So what we want to achieve from data interoperability is to have data sets, and platforms, and systems that speak across each other so that you can see your farm or operation as one holistic approach. One holistic organisation.

The challenges to achieving shared data.

BG: What are the main stumbling blocks? Is it sovereignty? People like to think that the data is worth something and so they won’t share? Or are there other, more structural or technological issues?

LD: Yes, it’s actually not a technological issue. So technically, we’re at the point that we can do it. A lot of it comes down to the relationships. There’s also commercial challenges that we have to deal with because it’s commercially sensitive data, some of it. The sovereignty side is also a really big aspect.

It really comes to the relationships between companies, relationships between people and who has access to it, because data is seen as an asset and something that people own, and I think we need to get away from that. Like, data is something we can use. But it’s the information that you get out of it that’s the benefit of it, not the data itself.

BG: Yeah, I mean, it’s all very well thinking that data is worth something, but it’s only worth something to a farmer if it turns itself into lower costs or greater value or something like that.

LD: Yeah, exactly. You can make better decisions on farm, so it’s the information that you want.

Nuffield global travel, the engine for good research.

BG: Now, Nuffield Scholars do a bit of touring around the world and you did the same. What did you find out there in terms of other nations and their relationship to data sharing in the farming sector?

LD: I spent about four months overseas last year. I predominantly spent the time with farmers and growers and farming organisations, as well as support organisations overseas. I found out some really interesting aspects around how people were managing data. Then what we can learn for us here in New Zealand.

I also found what doesn’t work. I’ll tell you a story. I was over in Norway and I was looking at some of the aquaculture there for salmon. That’s quite a new industry. It’s very advanced and you need a lot of capital to start. So, I went over there thinking, oh well, they’ll have data interoperability sorted, so I’m sure we can learn a lot from them.

While I was talking to the people there, they actually had the same problem as almost everyone else, only at a company level. So every department had invested in their own system to look at fish housing and then there was like, fish production and things like that, but again, you had none of those systems talking to each other.

So that was really interesting that it actually didn’t matter what size the companies were, it was also that they still had the challenge of data interoperability, because, again, it comes back to the relationships and the way that that business is structured.

How the Australians are doing it.

So where I learned the most, and where my plan and way forward of looking at this differently came from, was in Australia. So I learned a lot from the Australians because they have spent a lot of time with data in the mining sector. The mining sector gets it and has done a good job of finding out that everything has to be very precise.

There’s a lot of investment when you’re looking for new mine and new minerals. They have worked out what data they want and how to collect that. Then the best way to present that so it’s consolidated. What they have done is they’ve got a data manager. The data manager actually works with the mine to find out what it is that they need. They have big data teams. Now, that’s not something you can apply directly to farming, but it is something we can learn from.

Data Managers may be an answer.

BG: You mentioned in your report, perhaps having a data manager as part of a wider farming business. How would that work do you think?

LD: Yes. That’s the way that I’ve looked at it. How could we do it differently, in that we aren’t asking farmers to be finance experts. They have an accountant for that. So why are we going around asking them to be the experts in their data with the technical expertise to work out what to do with these systems? They should have a data manager.

I went to Brisbane and spoke to Smithfield Cattle with cattle feedlots. They have their head office in Brisbane, then they have two feed blocks that are about 4 hours apart in two different directions. Those two feed lots are about 20,000 cattle per feedlot, 40,000 total.

The feedlots are managed and formed very differently. One of them is very organic, so they have quite a different structure to the one that’s very symmetrical. And so you can’t apply the same sorts of applications and way that you manage those feed lots.

They hired a data manager, and that data manager was responsible for working with the feedlot managers to find out what was actually going on in the feedlot. What their strategy was and then what information they need to make the best decisions on the feedlot to maximise production.

So, with the data manager, it was working really well. He knew exactly how the feedlots operated. He was spending a lot of time with the managers, and from a head office perspective, they were getting all of the information they needed from the two feedlots.

On the ground asking the people that know.

I also went out to the feedlot and asked the feedlot managers, hey, is this working for you? Because from the Brisbane perspective, head office is great. But does it work for you? The feedlot manager said that it was brilliant because they could get real time information and make decisions on the spot.

If something wasn’t working, they could call up Rowan, who’s the data manager, and actually say, this isn’t working, and they’ll get a response immediately rather than going through call centres and raising tickets and all those sorts of things. From that perspective, it worked really well.

A solution for smaller operations.

Now, that’s a large business. Not every farm here in New Zealand could do that – hire their own data manager. So that’s why I was looking at the accounting model in that we haven’t asked farmers to be finance experts. They have an accountant. That accountant looks after five or six different farms.

So why couldn’t we have that with the data space? That enables someone who can help with collecting information to then provide something useful back to farmers and growers for better decisions making.

They can also work with farmers to find out, well, this is your farm strategy, which the farmer or grower may have worked with their rural advisor on, then match that to a data strategy. Then do a data audit to find out what information and data is being collected now and what they may also need.

That information and that advice is independent because at the moment there are a lot of apps and tools that farmers and growers can use, but people are just selling it to them. There’s no reviewed independent advice on that.

I think the data manager role is a skill set that can be applied and I think would be really good for farmers and growers in the current time we are in – the information age. That’s how I see that working.

Getting the data farmers and growers need for the future.

BG: I mean, that sounds great. Apart from the fact you’re removing a large chunk of work that many farmers or many people in general are not wired to do, you get the benefits of having that data well utilised, don’t you?

LD: Yes, and someone independent that can really help you work out what you’re trying to achieve on the farm. Someone who can provide you with that advice, and the strategy, and the data tools you may need to actually enable that.

BG: And this would also feed into reporting in terms of, say, emission schemes and freshwater plans into your council, that sort of thing?

LD: Absolutely. Because what I envision is that with the data manager, they would be holding that data digitally in a data lake. I mean, this gets more into the technical space, but with that large data lake, you can then get permission and share to different people that may want that, whether it’s government, local government, central government, or your customers.

A food system hungry for data – as a requirement.

Also part of the reason I did this, is that with our customers and consumers, they’re hungry for data and information. They want more of this. They want to know how our farms operate. So we need to be in a position that we can share those stories and we can explain that to them. For that you need data.

BG: I think that is a message that is beginning to spread more widely amongst the primary industries here. Just how important it is to be transparent about the supply chain of New Zealand food products. That’s really something that’s only going to get more important, isn’t it?

LD: Absolutely. Last month, Nestle, which is one of Fonterra’s largest customers, released their roadmap for how they want to get to net zero. They want to achieve net zero by 2050 and they want to halve their emissions by 2030. Now, that’s only seven years away. That’s not far. And of their emissions profile, about 30% of their total emissions comes from the sourcing of dairy and livestock.

They’re really pushing for this, which means we need to then have the data to back up those claims that we’re making on farm and the emissions that we have so that Nestle can report it to their customers.

There’s going to be more demands for this across all of our customers because we have premium products. For us to maintain that premium market access, we have got to be one of these first movers in reporting our emissions and actually giving it to these companies that are wanting that.

BG: So having access to all this data can not only prove where we are now, but it can make sure we have the best strategy going forward to get to where we want to go in the future.

Data and trade.

LD: That would be right. It’s also around our free trade agreements because with us having that market access, because we’re an export country, right – most of our products and food is sent offshore.

In March, I was at the Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit and we had Vangelis Vitalis speaking to us. He is with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and he’s the chief negotiator on the EU Free Trade Agreement. Now, he was saying that when he was negotiating that agreement, they asked questions back of that agreement, and of the 20 questions, around 15 of them were around climate change and environmental aspects, and GHG emissions.

So if that’s the requirement, to even get into these markets, we need to be able to meet them and we need to have the data to back that up. I think just going back to where the data sits and where it belongs, I think farmers are best positioned to actually collect that and pull that together. So that’s why I was looking at this from a farmer-grower perspective – having them in the centre.

BG: So what are the next steps for you? Have you got plans to move on from what you’ve written in your report?

Turning interoperability talk into action.

LD: Yes. The next step, like I said in the beginning, I want to move to action. The report is still in writing, so we need to action some of this. I’m in the process of working through what some of the pilot projects could be, because we need to now prove if this can work or not, because it is looking at it differently. And, look, don’t get me wrong, once we go out there and we try some of this, there will definitely be challenges and things that we can work on. 

I don’t think we should be afraid to fail. At least not fail, but the fast fails that you can learn from. So the next step will be piloting some of this out on farm with a group of farmers. Yeah, you’ll hear about that in the future. There’s a few things in the making at the moment.

BG: That sounds amazing. Have you always been a data geek or is it something you’ve embraced recently?

LD: This is more of a recent thing. I actually have no data background. I’m more in that system strategic base, so I don’t have any technical background. But it was a bit of a learning curve with this project where I had to work out exactly how this can happen, at least to a basic level, and then just work through the strategy and the structure of making this work at a relationship and system space. So no, I’m not a data expert! It’s been very interesting though.

BG: Well, we wish you all the best with it and no doubt we’ll check in in a while and see how you’re going.

LD: Thanks, Bryan. I look forward to reporting back on this in the future.

Ideas that grow. Podcast: Getting Grounded in the Humanverse and the opportunity for New Zealand farmers.

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor, Farmers Weekly.

Welcome to the Ideas that Grow podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. With me today, I have the recent Keynote Speaker from the Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit, Devry Boughner Vorwerk. G’day, Devry. How’s it going?

Devry: Oh, it’s going great, thank you. I wish I was still with you all in New Zealand. Hopefully you’ll invite me back.

Bryan:  From what I can gather, I think we will. Now, obviously, you were one of the star attractions at the Summit. And it’s interesting because I was thinking anyone involved in New Zealand farming would perhaps think of it as being a bit of a challenging environment at the moment, but you really brought a sense of optimism to the Summit. Can you just outline what you spoke about?

Getting Grounded in the HumanverseTM.

DevrySure. I’m glad that you mentioned the optimism, because that was my goal Bryan. I was trying not to ruffle feathers on any side, but really to put front and centre the opportunity, that is not unique just to New Zealand agriculture, but broadly what rural communities and farmers and industry worldwide are dealing with.

So the title of my speech was ‘Getting Grounded in the Humanverse. In terms of Ideas that Grow, I’m hoping that idea grows. I presented the audience with the opportunity to think about the pressures they’re facing as it relates to the constraints that industry has in terms of the need to reduce emissions, harmful emissions like CO2 or methane, or deal with the issues in the soil like nitrous oxide.

I presented an opportunity for the audience to think about that problem, or that challenge, by putting the people that are impacted, and the planet, at the centre of the conversation. Because a lot of the stressors I picked up on while I was there, have to deal with ‘how do we run a profitable industry’? We’re constantly being constrained by regulations and now we’ve got the emissions trading scheme at hand and we’re getting all these pressures from our customers, the government, and consumers.

Taking the longer term view.

So how do we maintain our profitability? The optimism was to take the longer term view, to put yourself in the middle of the Humanverse, which I just described as putting people and planet first. Think through the opportunities that come from that, and the profit will come as an outcome.

That sounds a bit sort of Pollyanna’ish, but it does allow those who are in the middle of it, farmers especially, who are facing the pressures, to start to think through the longer term strategy as opposed to the immediate pain that they’re feeling, or the immediate constraints.

BryanThat is one of the challenges working in any business. You face those challenges. But in farming especially, it’s quite often difficult to see outside the fences of your farm. You’re just focused on paying the bills, getting the crop out, milking the cows and ticking all these other boxes – all the paperwork.

Making changes to your farming system that you can’t quite see the rationale for [can be difficult]. It is good to extend your horizon a little bit, isn’t it?

Moving farmers from price-takers to price-makers.

Devry:  It certainly is. One thing we always talk about is, does the consumer want this? Because the consumer is expecting this. Then it goes all the way back down the chain to say, okay, well, fine. Then the branded products company turns to the processors, then the  processors turn to the farmers at the end. It’s this pressure that’s on the farmers.

My message and my desire is for farmers to acknowledge that, yes, they’re a huge part of the solution here, but farmers are price-takers all the time. The optimism I’m trying to introduce into the conversation is, how do we collectively turn farmers into price-makers? Meaning you’re already facing these pressures. What is it that you can do standing in the middle of this moment, to start thinking through sort of the long term adaptation strategy that you need to put yourself on better footing?

I used a story, an example of a farmer that I had come across recently here in the United States, in Colorado, who was beginning to take over his farm – a third generation farmer. He stood in front of his dad and said, listen, I want to do this. But Dad, you’ve been working so hard for your whole career and you’re just breaking even. If I’m going to do this, I’m going to have to do this differently.

A farmer named Roy.

So, I told this story of this farmer, his name is Roy, and how Roy started to realise, well, gee, I need to be thinking differently. Diversification was a big thing, and quality of the soil too. So he started pulling in the data that his father had and started to look at his farm more holistically. How do I maximise the value of this land, by doing things differently?

He introduced some regenerative practices – which at the end of the day I used to work in a very large scale food and agriculture company, and the conversation was always, you can’t scale that, you can’t scale that. What Roy was proving is, look, by drawing down expensive inputs and starting to work on some new practices, he could do it. Now he’s building toolkits for others. So my message to the New Zealand industry was look beyond the boundaries of your farm.

Work with others. Figure out where New Zealand as a whole has an advantage and talk about how you can begin to adapt some of your practices so you can put yourself in the position of being a price-maker, not a price-taker over time. Some of that it’s complicated because it also involves engaging the government, and the government having realistic expectations on farmers as well.

Bryan:  That’s a great story. I mean, that’s quite often the pushback we get here when we talk about these things – that you can get added value through adopting some of these practices on a smaller scale. But how do you apply that to the whole of the industry? I mean, you worked for Cargill for a long time, one of the biggest red meat companies in the world. What would their strategy to this be and how would someone of that size move the dial in this direction?

Scaling up change faster by starting small.

Devry:  Yeah, I mean, it is interesting because I was one of the maybe top twelve or thirteen leaders of the company before I left. Some people say, you had such a large platform and you could scale it, so why go out on your own? I just thought, well, because over the 15 years I was there, I and the team that was part of this took the company on a very integrated external stakeholder strategy that did involve consumers, it did involve NGOs, it did involve the government.

We’re talking really big issues that have to be resolved in the supply chain, everything from deforestation to child labour issues in Cocoa, over the time I was there. Imagine taking that across 70 countries. You’re invested in multiple business units and say, how do you do this? How do you steer the ship in the right direction? So Cargill wasn’t the only one going through it. All of the companies were going through it. I could see the pressure coming on the medium and the small enterprises, like the small farmers or the medium sized farmers and other small manufacturers.

There’s a whole market in this. The business that I run is we don’t have time to waste with these very expensive consulting firms coming in with these very expensive and long plans that only get a portion of the problem, or don’t even get a portion of the problem. I decided, look, we can scale the change much more swiftly by coming up with a process to work with small and medium enterprises.

I also work with large companies, but there’s too much pressure at the beginning of the supply chain to expect everyone to adapt so swiftly without having the tools to do it. That’s why I stepped out of a large scale situation and said, we’ve got to move faster and we do have to provide tools to others in the supply chain. You can’t just turn to them and say, you pay all the cost. The farmers can’t pay the whole cost here.

Like I said, I knew once I got there what the national debate was, and there’s a very real fear about farmers saying, am I going to be able to stay in business? And Bryan, I was talking to my husband last night because he’s getting ready to inherit his father’s farm at some point in North Dakota, and I was thinking, all right, what are we going to do?

We’re like Roy. We’re like the New Zealand farmers. We’re standing there saying, how are we going to honour my father in law’s legacy, his father’s legacy, maintain the farm,  because he wants to keep it in the family and make sure that we don’t go bankrupt in the process.

So, there’s a real opportunity to do this grand pivot around, restoring the soil, getting more out of it, drawing down the inputs. The biologicals that are going to be on the market at some point will be, of course, more environmentally friendly. We have to walk both paths at the same time. Not just completely draw back on fertiliser and pesticides, but draw those down so that we can scale up the more environmentally friendly and restorative practices, for sure.

Real change requires leadership intent.

Bryan:  In a story we published, you had a chat with our reporter Craig Page. You mentioned that leadership was vital for this evolution and that you need strong leaders to lead this change and that sometimes the big companies were not actually set up to do this. Can you expand on that a little bit?

Devry:  I always say, companies are actually not set up to succeed on sustainability, you can call it ESG. [At the Summit] I also introduced the ESG framework, by the way, Bryan, and it seems like it’s a bad word out there, but I demystified it a bit.

Companies aren’t set up to succeed unless they have leadership intent. If you can check the box and say, yes, the leaders want to move in this direction, that’s great. But taking leadership intent and getting that all the way out the door in terms of action, is incredibly difficult because organisations aren’t necessarily set up.

How do you cross across business units and functions to make sure that they’ve got a collaborative environment on ESG and sustainability? Culture is a big one. Is their culture one that adapts to change quickly? Or is it one that says, we won’t even be the fast follower, we’ll just wait till everybody else does it and goes through with it? Bonus structures, short term profit and loss versus long term investment strategies. Companies are not set up to succeed. So unless they are intentional and they acknowledge that by putting people and planet at the centre of their business strategy is actually going to mean they actually have to disrupt themselves. If they’re not ready for that disruption, they will fail.

It just takes real deliberate effort and action. And it’s not just in one time frame. I mean, say you have a CEO and a leadership team that says, yeah, we’re going to do this well, people change, new leaders come in. Have they built that into the succession plan and sort of the long term investment strategies, the long term production strategies or processing strategies? It just takes continuous improvement and continuous attention for companies to do it and do it well.

New Zealand Food and Fibre – and positioning for opportunity.

Bryan:  You mentioned what phase of the evolution a company chooses to be in. A lot of people in New Zealand think that our plan to price emissions is one of, if not the first in the world. Why are we doing this? We should wait and see what happens because we might get it wrong or we might overburden farmers or the industry for no reason. Having said that, we are kind of best placed to do it because we’re already in a pretty good position. What would you say to the New Zealand industry in that regard?

Devry:  Well, what I did say on stage [at the Summit] is that they will be locked out of export markets if the government doesn’t push them outside of their comfort zone and begin to position New Zealand broadly as a leader on carbon-reduced exports.

I cited what was happening in the European Commission as it relates to their movement and the conversation or the negotiation that goes on between the US Trade Representative and the Commission, where they’ve said, by 2024 we’re going to come up with an agreement on what the trade standards look like. What the border standards look like – called carbon border adjustments, which would be like a tariff or a tax at the border based on how much carbon you emitted in the whole lifecycle of the product.

New Zealand as the incubator of sustainably branded products.

So, I see it is painful. New Zealand is positioning itself to actually be what I said is like the incubator of sustainably branded products. I mean, the New Zealand brand is so strong. So, to show that New Zealand industry is actually leading on this is going to position the industry really well, especially in the markets where the segmentation is such that the consumers are willing to pay for the European and the US market.

While it’s painful right now, I see it as an opportunity. I’ve worked with New Zealand for years as it related to the implementation of the Uruguay Round Agreement and the WTO. New Zealand made some painful decisions like removing subsidies, trade distorting and production distorting subsidies, committing to Indian export subsidies, transforming its state owned enterprises. So when you go back and look at the environment back then, there were protests and it was difficult, but the country made it through.

I’m obviously not a Kiwi, but I’m citing what I have seen of New Zealand in the international marketplace, one of being flexible, adaptable and willing to make the tough changes that they need to make, even if it means that New Zealanders have to compete even more. Because the longer term view is if you’ve got competition on these things, then let it play out in the marketplace. That’s where I think New Zealand is really well positioned. I walked them all through a very simple model on how to get in the right sort of mindset to go through this change.

The truth model – as presented at the Rural Leaders Summit.

I called it the truth model, which is, it’s important when all this pressure is coming at you, whether you’re running a business or farm or a household, that when you’re being pressured with external information that your body is physically resisting this. No, I’m not going to change that. So, you actually have to face the truth.

You have to seek the truth first. Seek the truth. Is there an element of truth in what is being sort of put out there and put in front of me? And if the answer is yes, which is the climate imperative is the truth here, but then once they seek that truth, they move into, okay, how do I face that truth? Because now I actually have to acknowledge that agriculture is part of the problem, but it can be part of the solution. And after facing the truth, walk yourself toward following the truth.

That’s where the creativity can come in. Get in a room with a whiteboard and start coming up with new ideas on how you’re going to adapt. That’s where new revenue streams can come in, new business ideas. Then the last one, after you seek, face, follow, you share the truth. You tell people what you’re doing. One, so you can have collaborative partnerships with others and they can be inspired by the change you’re going through. Two, so that consumers know what you’re doing, government knows what you’re doing. So – seek, face, follow, share. A very simple adaptation model that I walked the audience through.

Bryan:  Awesome. Now, given your past experience in both working with and observing what’s happening here, and having been at the Summit and hanging out basically with New Zealand farmers, New Zealand agribusiness leaders, do you think we’re up for it?

Is New Zealand Food and Fibre up for the change?

Devry:  Well, for those that are listening, I would ask them that question. Do you think you’re up for it? I hope the answer is yes. And what Roy, this farmer, said to me when I was telling the story, he said, hey, Devry, farmers can endure a lot of pain. Once they’re at the point of real pain, that’s when the change takes place.

I want to acknowledge that it’s hard, but yes, I think they’re up for it. Absolutely. I also mentioned that I haven’t met a Kiwi that wasn’t willing to sit down with me and solve a really difficult problem and take me from A all the way to Z – and back.

The creative problem solving that I’ve observed in your culture. The desire to compete and win, the innovation that I see present there. I just want to applaud Rural Leaders for having this conference and putting it all out there because this is a really important and pivotal moment for each individual industry within New Zealand [Food and Fibre]. But also, can you imagine if the entire industry came together and said, we will be the premier supplier, New Zealand, of sustainable, regenerative, carbon neutral food and Ag products?

If they set a goal collectively and started to work themselves toward that, imagine how energising that could be, as opposed to all of the friction that comes from working against each other.

I’m going to bet on New Zealand every time.

Alumni in the Spotlight. Lucie Douma, 2022 Nuffield Scholar

Lucy Douma speaking at Nuffield Awards
Lucy Douma speaking at Nuffield Awards

Lucie Douma and her fellow 2022 Scholars have, or are right now completing their final research reports. Between Nuffield travel and work commitments, Lucie found time to do a webinar for AgriTech New Zealand in early February.  

The webinar was called ‘Global AgriFutures Insights – How can NZ respond to overseas trends?’  

As well as a Nuffield Scholar Lucie Douma, is the Ministry for Primary Industry’s Covid Recovery and Supply Chain Manager. 

For the webinar, Lucie drew on her recent travel abroad as part of her Nuffield Scholarship – particularly in North America where food security issues are causing shifts away from food production. 

Here’s the full article by Elaine Fisher for Dairy Exporter. 

Cyber-attacks, theft of crops, access to water, climate change and labour are among the issues causing some North American farmers and growers to change their land use away from food production. 

That was among findings outlined in an AgriTech NZ webinar presented in February by Lucie Douma, 2022 Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholar and Ministry for Primary Industry’s Covid recovery and supply chain manager. 

Hosted by Kylie Horomia, community engagement manager for AgriTech New Zealand, the webinar was called Global AgriFutures Insights – How can NZ respond to overseas trends? During the on-line session, attended by rural professionals, Lucie outlined the findings of her recent visits to North America, UK and Europe.  

Cyber-attacks had the potential to disrupt the sowing of crops by machinery using GPS navigation in North America’s ‘Corn Belt’. “All the planting is done over an intense three-week period, using GPS so a cyber-attack which disrupted that, would mean a reduction in corn and soy yields.  

“The US government is looking closely at how susceptible that industry is to cyber-attacks and how to protect it,” Lucie said. 

Some growers of high value crops were employing ex-navy Seals as security guards after cases of cartels moving in at night before harvest, to strip trees of crops like pistachio nuts or harvest cannabis, she said. 

By far the biggest threat was lack of water, especially in California, which is the USA’s largest producer of food, growing two thirds of North America’s nuts and one third of its fresh vegetables. 

 However, its climate was changing, and Lucie said access to water is of increased concern. “I spent time in the San Joaquin Valley which is an important food and grape growing area.  

“The region, which is in a flood plain, does not get a lot of rain but does get a lot of fog close to the coast. Growers rely on water from snow melt in the Sierra Nevada Ranges. Snow forms giant reservoirs, providing water when it slowly melts but, partly because of the forest fires in the mountains and climate change, snow is not settling and is melting a lot quicker than usual. 

“The region has experienced three years of drought and how to manage water is a major issue. Each county within California manages its own water allocation in an individualistic approach which doesn’t account for growers further down the supply.   

“Up to 40% of the land is flood irrigated with river water. One of the reasons is to recharge the land but there’s an economic reason too as it could cost up to $US400 more per acre for mechanical irrigation. However, flood irrigation is not a good way to manage water, with much of it evaporating.”   

Lucie said water restrictions were among the reasons some growers, including Woolf Farms, were converting some of their land to other uses. “Woolf Farms, which has 25,000 acres of land and grows tomatoes and almonds, is moving to non-food crops, carbon sequestration and solar energy.”

Among the options are drought-tolerant crops such as agave, the feedstock for products like tequila and mezcal. Woolf Farms also has plans to convert former cropland to solar installation. Lucie says the company was not alone in seeking alternatives to high-cost food production.

“Stuart Woolf thinks that in the next few years, he will stop growing on 30 to 40% of his land. If this happens on scale in California, some figures show that in the next few years up to one tenth of the land or half a million acres will not be used for food production by 2040.” 

That posed a huge food security threat for North America and ways to address it included vertical farming under which crops grow in vertically stacked layers, often in controlled environments and soilless techniques such as hydroponics. 

Lucie saw similar trends in energy and food farming in the Netherlands where wind and solar generators are interspaced alongside crops. 

There were however, marked differences in public attitudes to farmers and farming between North America, UK and Europe. 

“In North America people are proud of farmers and farming and the quality of food produced. Some restaurants even showcase food from specific regions with the provenance stories of where it is produced and by who.”   

In Europe, including the Netherlands and UK, the impact of Covid isolation, social media and tv channels like Netflix showing a one-sided aspect of farming, had had a huge impact on public perception. 
“Many farmers are not proud to be farming any more. They don’t want their children going into farming and are planning exit strategies which is sad to see.  

“In the UK there has been a big rise in activism with environmental, vegan and animal welfare groups sharing resources to have a powerful impact on public perception. We saw something of that in New Zealand with activist group slashing tyres of people driving utes.   

“In New Zealand we need to support our farmers and growers who are under a lot of pressure including from water challenges and adverse weather events.” 

Labour costs and supply were issues common to New Zealand, California, Scotland and Europe Lucie said. The availability of cheap labour had been impacted by the Covid pandemic and in Scotland, also by Brexit, where farmers were now relying on a domestic labour force, which often proved unreliable. 

This had added impetus to the need for innovation, including robotic harvesting and this was an area New Zealand tech companies could benefit from, she said. 
However, New Zealand tech companies should not try to ‘go it alone’. Her recommendation was to work globally and build relationships with other countries and tech companies to meet the needs of a rapidly changing world.  

Lucie said New Zealand should focus on producing high quality, premium foods for the world, rather than compete in the commodity space. She also believed the dairy and meat industry had a strong future. 

“It’s my personal view that animal farming is not a sunset industry. Its future is as a niche industry in the premium space. People may not be able to afford to eat meat every day, but meat will not go away. Humans have eaten meat ever since we were on the planet.” 

California’s Top 10 Agricultural Commodities

California produces more than 400 commodities, accounting for a third of the country’s vegetables and three-quarters of the country’s fruits and nuts. California’s top 10 valued commodities for the 2021 crop year were: 

  • Dairy Products, Milk — $7.57 billion 
  • Grapes — $5.23 billion 
  • Almonds — $5.03 billion 
  • Cattle and Calves — $3.11 billion 
  • Strawberries — $3.02 billion 
  • Pistachios — $2.91 billion 
  • Lettuce — $2.03 billion 
  • Tomatoes — $1.18 billion 
  • Walnuts — $1.02 billion 
  • Rice — $1.00 billion 

(Source: California Department of Food and Agriculture)   

Nuffield Scholars on the move. 

With Scholar research reports coming in and travel itineraries being finalised, the first half of 2023 is a busy period for Nuffield – and there’s the Nuffield Triennial in the mix for Scholars too.  

The higher than usual activity for Scholars in 2023 is because Rural Leaders and Nuffield are in catch-up mode. The backlog of COVID disrupted plans plays out this year. 

We share a quick breakdown of upcoming key moments for Nuffield, including travel for 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023 Nuffield Scholars. 

2020 Scholars 

One Scholar to complete their Global Focus Programme (GFP) and international travel. 

2021 Scholars

Daniel Eb, David Eade and Ben Anderson will all begin their GFP mid-year. 

2022 Scholars

Anthony Taueki will do his Contemporary Scholars Conference (CSC) in Vancouver 10 March. Anthony will also do his GFP in March, starting with the Nuffield Triennial. 

Parmindar Singh does her GFP in June. 

Lucie Douma also does her GFP in June.  

2023 Scholars 

All 2023 Scholars will do the CSC in Vancouver 10 March. 

Kylie Leonard and Matt Iremonger will begin their GFP in March, beginning with the Nuffield Triennial. 

James Allen and Kerry Worsnop will do their GFP in September/October. 

2023 Scholar research reports are due in March 2024.

That’s eleven Global Focus Programmes for 2023, when a normal year might be six.

The state of leadership development in New Zealand’s Food and Fibre Sector. 

In August 2022, The Food and Fibre Centre of Vocational Excellence (FFCoVE) requested the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust conduct research into the current state of leader development in the Food and Fibre sector. 

Click on the image to access the report.

The Food and Fibre sector includes the primary production industries (other than mining) and the related processing industries. It also includes service industries along the value chain from producer to final consumer, including providers of transport, storage, distribution, marketing, and sales.  

Working with sector stakeholders, the project will collaboratively define, design and develop an integrated approach tailored to Food and Fibre to help establish leadership development pathways for our people to grow and succeed. 

Interviews have and continue to be conducted, along with focus groups. The research rigour ensures perspectives are fully understood from across the span, strata, and demography of the sector.  

Interviews have also been conducted with United Kingdom and Australian counterparts, and conversations with selected individuals outside of the sector. Most of the interviews were with people in senior roles.  

The first report is now complete. It delivers findings on the state of leadership development in our Food and Fibre sector. The report suggests six principles of leadership that are relevant to the sector. 

You can read the full report at the link at the top of this article.

The second phase of the research will seek wider perspectives. To achieve this the research team will run several focus groups during March and April.  

We’ll keep you posted on the research as it progresses.

Olivia Weatherburn joins NZRLT Board as Associate Trustee. 

Olivia Weatherburn
Olivia Weatherburn

The NZRLT Board and Leadership Team are pleased to announce Olivia Weatherburn’s (Nee Ross) appointment as Associate Trustee. Olivia replaces Albert ‘Alby’ Hanson. We’ll share more on Alby’s positive and valuable contribution to the board in next month’s Rural Leader. 

Olivia joins Kate Scott, Chair, Michael Tayler, Rebecca Hyde and Craig Mckenzie, Trustees, and Hamish Fraser, Independent Trustee.  

In the appointment Kate Scott said, “We’re pleased to welcome Olivia to the NZRLT board. Olivia will bring a deep connection to the sector and a passion for the development of people.” 

Olivia is based in Southland living on a 700ha sheep and beef operation supporting her husband. 

“I am a farmer, rural professional and all-round advocate for the rural sector and its people. I see the opportunities as endless and am honoured and excited to be part of the red meat and wider food and fibre sector.” 

“Throughout my community roles with both New Zealand Young Farmers, Lions International, and day-to-day role at Beef + Lamb New Zealand (B+LNZ), I meet many people who have been positively impacted by the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust and the programmes they deliver.”  

“I see the confidence and drive it gives our future leaders. In 2017 I was also privileged to complete the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and the outcomes from the experience and learnings have and continue to open doors for me”, says Olivia. 

An Associate Trustee role is for one year. It offers valuable governance in practice experience to those appointed, while providing the opportunity to contribute to the Board’s objectives and to the wider sector in a meaningful way. 

Olivia’s first official board meeting will be 19 April. 

Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit: One day, 12+ speakers, and a Town Hall full of Food and Fibre leaders.

With the Summit less than a month away now, registrations are strong, and the speakers, host, panellists and organising team, are set to deliver a stand out day for our sector.

On Monday, 27 March, The Christchurch Town Hall will see food and fibre leaders, agribusiness professionals and growers from all over New Zealand, get together with international agriculture delegates and speakers.

Here’s a summary of the day, which includes a couple of new speakers since the last update.

Welcome Scene Setting

Snapshotting the imperative for change and the opportunities landscape – supercharging the discussions to come.

Devry Boughner Vorwerk CEO, DevryBV Sustainable Strategies

Embracing change while balancing shareholder and stakeholder expectations. To set the scene for the day, Devry’s Keynote piece ‘Getting grounded in the humanverse’, will outline the mechanisms to succeed where geopolitical volatility, climate change, and societal expectations are putting pressure on traditional business models.

Our World: Our Natural Environment (10am-11:45am)

Speakers: Tom Sturgess, Volker Knutzsch, Karin Stark, Harry Clark.

Exploring leadership and innovation in the advancement and restoration of the natural resources critical to the future of agribusiness.

This stream will showcase champions nurturing and restoring our environment while remaining profitable, and early adopters building their business toward a carbon neutral future. It will also provide an oversight of the role of the public sector in delving outcomes for the natural environment, while touching on how NZ is shaping its future in the agriculture, food and fibre sector.

Our People: Consumer Trends & Trade (12:45pm – 2:30pm)

Speakers: Vangelis Vitalis, Lain Jager, Emma Parsons, Mark Foote, Anna Benny.

Businesses responding to the unstoppable international trends of power shifting to the consumer, business models being challenged, and the eastern movement of the world’s economic centre of gravity.

Our Future: Entrepreneurship & Leadership (3pm – 4:30pm)

Speakers: Julia Jones, Marl McLeod-Smith, Dr Ellen Joan Nelson, Angus Brown.

Concentrating on the future social, economic, and environmental wellbeing of agribusiness.

This stream will traverse the areas where value will be derived in generations to come, showcasing world-leading business exemplars and responsive new business models.

Presenters from a wide range of industries will show how economic viability will be the key to family business succession and intergenerational business value growth.

Consolidation and Wrap Up

A consolidation of discussions and a focus on the key takeaways and action commitments. Presented by panel and interviews from Corin Dann, Master of Ceremonies.

Learnings of agri-food and consumer businesses front footing the challenges of changing demographics, food trends and fads, and changes in consumer values.

To secure your seat for the Summit today, head to
https://ruralleaders.co.nz/rural-leaders-international-summit-day/

Changes at the helm of the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust.

New Zealand rural Leadership team 2022
New Zealand rural Leadership team 2022
From left: Matt Hampton, Lisa Rogers, Hon Damien O'Connor, Annie Chant, Chris Parsons

Chris Parsons, CEO Rural Leaders has resigned after three years leading the Trust. Chris will take up a role with MyFarm Investments in May, where he will work closely with former NZRLT Chair and MyFarm CEO, Andrew Watters.

Under Chris’s leadership, characterised by strong purpose and gentle (but persuasive) direction, Rural Leaders has enjoyed a busy, effective and stimulating period of achievement.

“Chris’s contribution to NZRLT has been significant and impactful. Chris has helped to shape our purpose and contribute to growing world class leaders for New Zealand.

Under his leadership we have navigated many trying circumstances, including a global pandemic, but have emerged with a clear understanding of the needs of future leaders,” said Kate Scott, NZRLT Chair.

Here are some of the successes Chris has generated over the last three years. We have grouped these across four key areas: Programme Innovations, Projects, Presence and Partnerships, and Thought Leadership.

Programme Innovations

  • Kellogg PG Cert through Lincoln and RPL through Massey and Lincoln (96% uptake and 63 PG Certs awarded in the first 18 months).
  • Value Chain Innovation Programme, with Lincoln – to increase the entrepreneurial capabilities within the sector and to extend NZ Rural Leader’s impact.
  • undaunted by Covid, NZRLT actually increased the number of Kellogg Scholars and ran two regionally located programmes to increase the rural leadership bench in our regions.
  • Introduced geopolitics into Kellogg to better equip Scholars for a changing global environment.
  • Revitalised the Nuffield Scholarship, including a full review of the selection criteria.

Projects

  • Mackenzie Study, a world-class longitudinal study on the impact on NZ made by Nuffield and Kellogg Scholars over the last 72 years.
  • High-Performance Study with Lincoln University on behalf of MPI
  • Commissioned by the Food and Fibre CoVE to complete a major body of work to design an ecosystem for leadership development in NZ Food and Fibre Sector.

Presence and Partnerships

  • MoU with Massey, Lincoln and AGMARDT
    finalists in the inaugural B+LNZ & Rabobank people development awards.
  • Forged a relationship with the Australian Rural Leadership Foundation.
  • Built a closer working relationship with AWDT
    developed several regional partnerships (Whangarei A&P, Whanganui and Partners) to promote regional leadership growth.

Promote Thought Leadership

  • Established the Ideas that Grow podcast, hosted by AgriHQ to promote the thought leadership of our Scholars.
  • Established the Kellogg Insights Series that takes gives a thematic summary of Kellogg reports (eg Horticulture, dairy, Māori Agri business).
  • Upgraded the website and lifted the report quality to make Scholars thought leadership more accessible.

The Rural Leaders Team continue to build on many of these achievements. Chris, the NZRLT Board and leadership team have set into motion several initiatives set to generate further positive outcomes in the near future.

On the strong foundations Chris has helped set, we will continue to deliver outstanding leadership for the sector and look forward continuing to work alongside Chris in his new role,” added Kate Scott, NZRLT Chair.

Dr Scott Champion – Seeing beyond the boundary fence: Strategic leadership development for Food and Fibre now.

Dr Scott Champion has a wealth of sector knowledge, gained not just from tenures at the top of organisations such as Beef+LambNZ, but from possessing a genuine passion for helping our rural leaders grow. 

As Facilitator and Programme Director of the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, Scott plays a vital role lifting rural leadership capability. 

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

Welcome to the ‘Ideas that Grow’ podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. With me today is Dr Scott Champion, who is the programme leader for Kellogg. G’day, Scott. How’s it going? 

Scott Champion – Facilitator and Programme Director of the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme

Yeah good thanks Bryan. Great to be with you. 

Bryan: We often talk to the scholars themselves about their individual research projects, but with the Kellogg Programme, you’re in charge of running the programme as a whole. How long have you been with Rural Leaders?

Running the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme – what’s involved.

Scott: I’ve been running the programme for about five years now and had actually spoken at the programme as a guest speaker prior to that. So it’s been a real delight to be involved over the last five years. And it’s a programme now that’s been going for close on 50 years and has put through over 1000 graduates in that time. 

Bryan: What’s involved in running the programme? Obviously, there’s attracting people to get involved, there’s organising their meetings and get-togethers and what they’re going to study and marking assignments. What else is there? 

Scott: The focus really, from my time as course director, is on the face to face interaction and the way we connect between what we call phases. So the programme itself is divided into three of these phases.  

The Kellogg Programme’s three phases – Phase One.

Scott: The first one is nine days long, second one is five days long, and then the third one is five days long. So they’re quite intense, particularly that first phase, across the nine days. So we run two programmes a year.  
 
Each programme has about 24 participants. Sometimes it’s a little bit less, sometimes it’s a little bit more. And the focus in each of those, really the nine day intense phase one, is all about getting to understand concepts of leadership. Where also we use the analogy of a toolbox. We’re trying to give our Kellogg participants tools that they can use to go out and be more effective and contribute both into their own businesses or the business that they work in, but also in the sector more broadly.  
 
We think about things like presentation skills, leadership models, and tools. And then also in that first phase, we’re trying to introduce them into aspects of the different components of the broader food and fibre sector that they might not be aware of. 
 
For example, if you work in Horticulture, giving you an opportunity to understand what are the big picture issues that are happening in dairy and vice versa across that sort of plethora of industries that are operating in New Zealand. So that’s our focus around phase one.  

Kellogg Phase Two.

Phase two is completely different. We come to Wellington, so I should say phase one and phase three are both typically held at Lincoln.

We come to Wellington for phase two, and that’s all about the economy, politics, and concepts of influence, models of government communications, the role of media, things like that.  

Kellogg Phase Three.

Then in phase three, we come back to Lincoln again. I think you might have mentioned earlier, the Kellogg Scholars are undertaking a project through the five or six months that they’re on the Kellogg Programme and that’s on a topic of their own choosing.

It’s quite a significant piece of work and they’re presenting those back to the group. We also get some industry people coming along to those presentations and then we tie the programme together. So that’s the broader structure across the five or six months of the Kellogg Programme. 
 
Bryan: So someone turning up, as a newly minted Kellogg Scholar, and that first phase one, those nine days, it’s sort of full on workshops and a lot of listening and a lot of talking, and you bring together people from all around the Sector, and all around the country into that?  

What to expect on Kellogg.

Scott: Absolutely. We’re deliberately trying to do that and to get a real mix of different industries. So one of the things we’re trying to do is expose people beyond the boundaries of their day to day and give them an opportunity to think more broadly. So that’s pretty important to us.

It’s really interesting when you talk to the Kellogg Scholars at the end of the programme about what’s been most valuable. One of the things that they often talk about is the fact that they got to understand things outside the boundaries of the industry they typically work in.  
 
What many of these people will do is they’ll be in that transition from technical roles to general management and focusing more on people and managing teams and those sorts of things. So creating that broader understanding and giving them an opportunity to think beyond their technical skill set is one of the things that we’re really trying to do. But the first nine days is quite full on. It’s a real immersion. 

One of the things we try to do is have lots of speakers coming to present. We might have Chairs or CEOs or Directors, quite senior people from around the sector and make sure in those sessions we’re opening up lots of time for discussion and Q and A. It’s not just that monologue from the front.

One of the things I always say, is at the start of phase one, that you’re going to learn as much from one another as you do from those that you hear presenting at the front of the room. 

The Kellogg Final Research Project.

Bryan: Do people applying to be Kellogg Scholars have an idea in mind of what they’re going to do their project on, or are those formed as the programme goes forward? 
 
Scott: I guess the answer to that question is yes and no. So we do get Kelloggers to think about their project topic prior to joining us in Phase One. We kicked off a couple of weeks ago, and we actually ran a video conference prior to the start of the face to face programme to give them an opportunity to get more information on the nature of their projects, to do a bit of thinking about what they wanted to focus on when they came into Phase One.  
 
Some of the conversations we have around project topics happen here. But often what people do is they’ve got a broad idea of the area that they want to work in, but as they get exposed to some of the content in Phase One, even as we head sometimes towards phase two, they’ll refine the topic, narrow it down, and get more focus. I think the answer, Bryan, is yes, they do. But often the interactions with one another, the interactions with the content, will help refine that and give it a real impact as they go through the programme. 
 
Bryan: I’ve interviewed 20 or 30 of the Rural Leaders Scholars and a number of them said to me, I had what I thought was a fantastic idea for the project and after sitting through this or talking to one of my fellow Scholars, I realised that my angle was wrong and it went this way – and it was much better for it. 
 
Scott: Absolutely. And you’re right, that’s often a point of feedback, and we talked about that at the start, just saying, this is probably going to happen and that’s fine. Be aware that your topic might change and shift a bit as you go through and you learn more and you start to think about things from other perspectives you might not have been exposed to before.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship. What are the differences?

Bryan: Maybe it may not be clear to some, but what is the difference between a Kellogg and a Nuffield Scholarship?
 
Scott: Sure, it’s a great question which we get asked all the time. They’re quite different programmes. So the Nuffield Programme is a year-long experience. It’s individually directed.  
 
The Nuffield Scholars are really focusing on a project topic and then designing their own experiences – gathering information and data as they write the report. So there’s a report that comes out of a Nuffield Scholarship as well. They design that themselves in conjunction with the trust and mentors that they’ve put together.  Obviously, travel is a big component of a Nuffield. So going offshore, immersing in other agri-contexts is a really key part and has always been a key part of Nuffield.  
 
The Kellogg Programme is six months long and more structured in the sense that we are running the phases I described previously. Where we have content that we’re putting in front of Kelloggers and getting them to think about and interact with. And their project is obviously shorter in duration and more compact in terms of what’s required. So Kellogg is more structured and shorter.  

Scott: They’re different rather than staircasing one way or the other. In fact, recently we’ve had someone who had previously done a Nuffield Scholarship, come back and do the Kellogg Programme. There have been a number of people who’ve done Kellogg Programmes and then gone on to do Nuffield Scholarships. So, different in scope and focus, and I guess, the degree of self-direction that there is in them. 

What academic support is available to Kellogg Scholars?

Bryan: I guess there are lots and lots of people in the food and fibre sector who would get really excited about leadership training and being in the room with all these people. They might be a bit daunted by the sort of academic aspect of putting together a large project. Is there support for that and how academic are they? How does that work? 
 
Scott: There is support, absolutely. So I’m really fortunate to have a colleague, Dr Patrick Aldwell, who was previously one of the Deans at Lincoln. Patrick is involved in the programme. He was the Course Director prior to me and he still looks after the project component. Patrick’s enormously experienced in the sector, but also in terms of just how do you do a really good piece of research?  
 
One of the things we say to our Kellogg Scholars is, look, you might not have done one of these before, and actually, you might not have to do another report like this again.  
 
If you think about the core skillset that we’re trying to encourage you to experience and build into your toolkit, it’s about how do you identify a really great problem?

How do you define a solid research question or a problem definition around that?

How do you go out and collect data and talk to people and assemble information to analyse that? And then, how do you craft a really compelling response to what it is that you’ve been working on over the last six months and to respond to that research question? 
 
If you can generalise those skills, they can be used in a really significant array of different contexts, whether that’s a family, farming or growing business. Whether that’s working with a bunch of colleagues, whether that’s reporting up to a management team, a senior leadership team, or a board. That logic and argument is something we’re really trying to give people an opportunity to experience.  

Yes, lots of support, and I think, as we say, even if you haven’t done it before, and even if you’re not doing it again, there are really core skills here about logic and how you create really compelling arguments to have impact and influence as well. 

Kellogg Programme Director Scott Champion – background.

Bryan: Now, you yourself have a background in academic study, and you’ve been at the top of industry good groups in New Zealand. Tell us a little bit about how your journey to where you are now. 

Scott: As you can probably tell, I’m an Australian from the accent, which hasn’t faded. I’ve been here for about 20 years now, so I’m a city kid who did agriculture, sort of stumbled across agriculture when I was trying to work out what I wanted to do when I finished school.

I’ve just had a really wonderful professional career and opportunities to date. I love the broader food and fibre sector and have had fabulous experiences here in New Zealand. I did an undergraduate degree at the University of New South Wales in Sydney and it’s actually a programme that doesn’t exist anymore. It was called Wool and Animal Science. It had a sort of a textile component – as well as an Ag component.  

My technical background is in wool and I then did a PhD in Animal nutrition and ended teaching after that in the School of Agriculture at the University of Tasmania in Hobart.

The school had lots of really close connections with industry and Tasmania’s economy was a lot like New Zealand’s. Very food and fibre dependent. I was teaching Animal Nutrition and Physiology and Introduction to Ag and Hort. I did that for six years.  

New Zealand and the path to Kellogg.

Scott: I then came across here to New Zealand to work for the New Zealand Merino Company, as Research, Development and Product Innovation Manager. I had four and a half years there. Again, wonderful experience working with a great bunch of people who were doing interesting things and really trying to think about Merino fibre in a different way and that tight connection to growers.  
 
Then I went to the industry body, which was then Meat and Wool New Zealand, which then became Beef+LambNZ. I had ten years there. I had a GM role, looking after policy and promotion, and then the last seven and a half years as CEO.

Then almost seven years ago now, we started a little consulting practise called Primary Purpose. There are three of us in the business. We describe ourselves as sort of a niche research, advisory and analytics firm, working across food and fibre in New Zealand.

So, yeah, we work across all of the sort of major industries and then for about probably a quarter to a third of my time, is the Kellogg work. So it’s a lovely mix. 
 
Bryan: Now, having led Beef+LambNZ for quite a long time and then being away from it for a while, what are your thoughts on the industry group’s advocacy efforts in the last few years and do you think the criticism of them is valid? 

Common challenges beyond the boundary fence.

Scott: I’ve been thinking about this a bit lately having had a number of conversations with people, that in my time, so almost seven years ago I left, a lot of the focus was around productivity improvement.

In my time with Beef and Lamb, I think from memory, it was the 2006/2007 season, was sort of the worst year in 50 years in real terms for profitability in the sheep and beef sector.  
 
So that’s, how do we stay profitable as individual farming businesses and how do we stay in the game? The challenges around that was a real theme that ran through my time there. One of the things that really strikes me now is, we look at the dominant conversations that hit the front pages of your publications, and we talk about them in the Kellogg Programme too.  
 
There are these big cross sector issues around environment, animal welfare, social licence and all of the different components of that. How do we maintain that social licence with the public onshore and offshore in our export markets to continue to be able to export and deliver the products that people want? 
 
It’s a really significant shift. The boundaries of the problems now and the things that we talk about, they don’t line up with the boundaries of an individual business. They don’t stop at an individual farm or an orchard’s fence line. How you deal with that is quite challenging. The ability of the sectors to work with one another and operate with one another, I think is really critical. 

We’ve seen various models and approaches like that developed over the last while. That feels like it’s quite different to what it was ten years ago, 15 years ago, in terms of what’s required, in terms of focus, but also at an individual farm and business level. Of course, there’s still the requirement to make those individual productivity improvements and to focus on the business and stay in the game.  

So one of the things that has been pretty challenging, both for individual businesses, and for the service sector and also for the industry bodies, is it’s an ‘and’ conversation as well as supporting individual businesses to continue to improve. We have to connect across the sector to address these big cross sector issues as well. So it’s a pretty full agenda.

Gaining perspectives on the sector’s big challenges with Kellogg.

Bryan: I think that point you made about these issues being far wider than the boundary fence is quite important, because I almost feel that if more in the industry did the Kellogg Programme, they’d realise at the moment, a lot seem to take the ‘my farm’ attitude to an all of world issue.

Whereas if you had a more holistic view of what consumers are feeling overseas, the social licence position in New Zealand, then there would be a different perspective on things. 
 
Scott: Yes. I think one of the responses we often get, and we run a little activity on the last day of the Kellogg Programme with a conversation about what was most valuable to you as you’ve gone through the programme. One of the responses we’ll often get from participants is ‘I got insights into other sectors beyond my own and I learnt that I can generalise and they’re actually dealing with many of the same issues that I am’.  
 
So the context might be different if I go from horticulture, to dairy, to sheep and beef, to forestry, whatever it might be. But if I push that level up, that issue up, and think about it at a slightly more strategic level, there are really similar things here that we’re trying to grapple with.

I think when you do that, it does give you opportunity to connect with others, to get different insights, to think about things in different ways.  
 
So, in terms of the context of the Kellogg Programme, what we’re trying to do with our 50 or so Scholars each year, is to get them to think about ‘how do I look across to other sectors and other places and beyond the boundaries of food and fibre as well other things going on in tech or manufacturing or whatever it might be.

Where I go, the context is a bit different, but actually, there’s an analogy there. There’s something I could really learn from that. I think about how to adapt it. I might be able to bring it back into my own context and do something a bit better, or a bit faster, or with a bit more impact, or whatever. 

The Kellogg Programme in 2023.

Bryan: All right, so two and intakes a year into the Kellogg Programme. So I guess you’ve got another cohort kicking off mid-year, is that right? 

Scott: Yeah, sometimes three intakes, but that’s right. We kicked off our last programme two or three weeks ago, last week of January, first week of February. That programme goes through to July, and actually we start our second programme of the year just before we finish our first programme of the year. So we’ll have a programme running from mid-June through to the end of November. Applications are closing, I think about 16 April, for that second programme of the year. 

Bryan: So anyone interested can get all the details on the Rural Leaders website, I guess? 

Scott: Absolutely. If they go and have a look at the Rural Leaders website, they’ll see some blue coloured links there through into the Kellogg Programme, and that will give them all the details.  

Thanks for listening to ‘Ideas that Grow’ the Rural Leaders Podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, and Agmardt. This podcast was presented by Farmers Weekly.

Kellogg Rural Scholars Series: Horticultural Insights

Kellogg Rural Scholars Series: Horticultural Insights

New Zealand’s food and fibre sector is full of capable and purpose driven people. Supported by Horticulture New Zealand and an incredible group of
Partners, the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust is privileged to be entrusted with growing many of these people in their leadership journey.

A key aspect of the rural leadership approach is research-based scholarship. The clarity of thought and confidence this approach promotes is transformative.

Many Kellogg and Nuffield Scholars go on to live their research. They build businesses. They advance community and social enterprises. They influence
policy and they advocate for animal and environmental outcomes, informed by an ability for critical analysis and their own research-fuelled passion.

The relevance of research by emerging strategic leaders – with their sleeves rolled up – is no more apparent than it is in New Zealand’s Horticulture Sector.

In the following pages we are delighted to précis 14 horticultural research reports by Kellogg Scholars. The full reports can be found at
https://ruralleaders.co.nz/kellogg-our-insights/

The reports traverse topics as wide and timely as horticultural futures, social impacts on Iwi, the potential for impact investing, technical production and
profitability topics.

Ngā mihi,  
Chris Parsons

and the NZ Rural Leaders Team 

Download and read the full report here: