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...

Phil Weir on Nuffield’s global perspective, sheep and beef farming, and industry good.

In this podcast, Phil Weir, 2020 Nuffield Scholar, Farmer, Director B+LNZ and Associate Director AGMARDT, talks to Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor at Farmers Weekly, about the positive value industry good brings to farming.

Phil also talks through some of the challenges and opportunities for sheep and beef farming and how his Nuffield Scholarship and research has given him a valuable global perspective.

Listen to this episode of Ideas that Grow, or click on one of the platform icons below to listen on your favourite player:

Episode Transcript

You’ve joined Rural Leaders’ Ideas That Grow podcast. 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, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly.
You’re with Ideas That Grow, a  Rural Leaders podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. With me on this week’s show is Phil Weir, 2020 Nuffield Scholar. G’day Phil, how’s it going?

Phil Weir, Farmer, 2020 Nuffield Scholar, Consultant, Farmer Director B+LNZ and Associate Director AGMARDT:
Hey, Bryan. How’s it going?

BG: Pretty good thanks. Now, you’re a farmer in the Waikato, and also sit on a board or two, don’t you?

PW: Yeah, I’m, first and foremost a farmer in Te Pahu in the Waikato. We’re sheep and beef farming here, and I’ve been doing that for about seven years. Had a range of other roles in an agribusiness prior to that, and then did a Nuffield Scholarship in 2020, which we’ll probably touch on because it was an interesting time to do that.

Since then, I’ve become a farmer elected director for Beef + Lamb New Zealand, and that also involves the New Zealand Meat Board and an Associate Trustee with AGMARDT. And then do a little bit of consulting for AgFirst Waikato. So, I keep myself busy enough and a nice diversity of things going on. So nothing never gets too boring, right? That’s great.

BG: That’s where I met you the first time was when you turned up for your first Nuffield weekend, wasn’t it?


Doing a Nuffield Scholarship during COVID.

PW: Yeah, I think so. I think we were getting media training at that point, Bryan, about how to talk to journalists and then that thing. So hopefully, some of that flashes back to me, I guess, today. But yeah, we were down in Wellington at that point preparing for… That would have been 2019, and we would have been preparing for what a Nuffield Scholarship was to look like.

Ultimately, the experience I had was a wonderful one, but probably one that was a little bit different than when we were sitting when I first met you and in 2019. But I think the whole Nuffield thing, I think this year is 75 years of Nuffield, and I was really lucky to get a scholarship. As I mentioned, did it during COVID, which meant that some of the travel arrangements didn’t happen right away, but absolutely, we did at some point get to go around the world and see some fantastic agribusinesses.

I think one of the cool things was reflecting prepping for this was we did the first Value Chain Programme around New Zealand, so Rural Leaders are now running a programme which looks at how good New Zealand agribusiness and agriculture and growing is.

And we were lucky to be the forced guinea pigs for that because we couldn’t go abroad. And so we got the chance to go and have a look at the best growers and best Agribusiness is in New Zealand, and I think it’s fantastic that programme now has been created probably out of the back of that.

I think it’s so valuable to go and look at what’s in your own country because we do so many things really well. That was one of the lucky things, I guess, about a COVID disruption. Every cloud has a silver lining.

BG: That programme’s going great guns these days. As the old ad used to say, ‘don’t leave town until you’ve seen the country’. Did you grow up in a farming family? Have you always been rurally focussed?


A call back to the farm.

We grew up in a small dairy farm, so I showed Ayrshire Cows as a teenager and a child. My wife brings up some of the photos with me leading cattle around the ring.

We grew up on a small dairy farm on the outskirts of Hamilton. In. It was fantastic. It was the classic family farming upbringing. We were probably fairly poor, but we didn’t want for anything, I guess. We were lucky, we were on the outskirts of town, so we got the best of both worlds. Then after high school, I probably tried to get as far away from agriculture as I could, to be honest.

I went and did a social… I started doing engineering and found that wasn’t quite for me. And then social science. And then went and did a master of marine management in Canada. So, for someone to get seasick, it was a bit of a novel thing to go do, but it was probably just a case of seeing the world, right?

Then I ended up living in Sweden with my wife in a range of places before we made it back to New Zealand via Australia and then worked at AgResearch. In a few business roles there. Then the opportunity to come farming on my wife’s family farm presented itself in 2017. We took that opportunity. So, it was full circle, I guess. Probably I tried pretty hard to get away from it, but kept nagging away to come back and have a crack. When the opportunity presented, we took it.

BG: I get that story a lot when I talk to your alumni in the Nuffield and Kellogg Programmes. A lot of them grow up in farming, head off and pursue other things, do things in other fields, see the world. Then, I don’t know, something nags at them, and they find themselves back where it all started.

I think it’s pretty hard to get past the fundamentals of rural life. Particularly, as you become a parent, you have plenty of space, and you have fresh air, and you don’t have some of the challenges associated with having children in urban environments. I think It’s not all roses going back from a corporate or agribusiness to a farming role. Farming is quite hard work, and there’s different challenges to it.

PW: I think that’s probably one of the big drivers. I think that’s what we reflect on that we really like about it, is that life It’s still an opportunity for both us and probably our children as well.

BG: On the sheep and beef farming side of things, it’s been a pretty tough few years, hasn’t it?

Sheep and beef farming now.

PW: It has. Yeah, there’s no doubting it. It’s been tough. Everyone experienced rapid inflation, so your costs escalated significantly. At the same point, we had the global commodities really dipped. So it was tough, particularly for sheep farmers.

There hasn’t been a whole lot of love from wool for a for a long time, and some of the high pricing that existed around COVID for sheep came off at a really unfortunate time. So it has been really hard. I think it’s great now there’s a sense that most people’s budgets are able to balance.

When I hang out with other farmers, I see more confidence. It’s partly just because you know you can make the box balance, and ultimately, you’re working for a profit or to be able to have some improvements. I think, really, there’s across the country, we got smacked with weather events amongst that as well, whether it be Gabriel or Northland weather events.

I think most of the North Island anyway had an event that costs significant amounts to farming businesses. It’s been a hard couple of years with interest rates and other things. But I think it’s on the right trajectory now. One’s going down and the prices are going up. So, I think make hay while the sun shines, Bryan.

BG: Yeah, I’ve been talking to AgriHQ analysts a bit over the past few weeks, and they’re surprised but happy with the way things are looking in terms of export demand and farm gate returns. They don’t see a downside coming soon. It looks like it’s going to be pretty good throughout the season. So that’s great stuff.

The outlook is positive.

PW: I think it’s nice to know that the strong prices are projected to continue. The world’s not without a fair dose of crazy right at the moment, but things could change. But I guess the fundamentals is a bit of a deficit of protein, and the protein that we produce. It’s nice to be in that position at the moment.

BG: Just getting back to your Nuffield experience. Obviously, you investigate an idea, I guess. Your report was on the changing world in farming and diversification and resilience and that sort of thing, wasn’t it?

PW: My Nuffield report, I guess when I entered it, I’d come from a research environment. I believe there’s a whole lot of value in farmers and growers investing collectively. I looked the industry good bodies and how they might best arrange themselves.

I had a particular focus on commodity levies bodies. But I guess probably what I found through that was that there’s a whole lot of industry good activity that goes on. And ultimately, New Zealand does a really good job in doing a lot of that.

We’ve got Beef + Lamb New Zealand, DairyNZ and other organisations, but we’ve got a whole range of other industry good bodies. And to be honest, it probably worked pretty well together. I think I probably looked at it from the angle and I proposed some change that could happen.

The value of industry good to farmers.

PW: I suppose the starting point was, and I guess it’s why I’ve become a beef and land director, is that I see massive value in individual farmers contributing a small amount of money in the form of a levy or a relatively small amount of money in the form of a levy to enable certain activities to happen that we otherwise couldn’t do.

The R&D work and the helping farmers to perform better in areas where you’ve got market values, the stuff that I’ve always been interested in. I don’t know whether it was ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ reading that when I was at university or something like that, but that whole pooling of resources to get a better outcome and stuff that the market won’t fund the area I was interested in.

I was lucky to look at the New Zealand system, but also to look at the United Kingdom and some European examples, Australia and the US as well. I guess probably what the outcome of it was is that when it’s all finished, I don’t think any system’s perfect, but our one does a pretty good job.

BG: That’s really good to hear because I guess in terms of the industry good organisations, you could argue we’ve been through one of the more turbulent times in recent memory, I guess, fuelled by the emissions pricing process, which ended up with a lot of people questioning how farming side of things went through it.

We seem to have evened out on the other side of that now. Of course, this government doesn’t have such a strong hand of regulation on the sector. It’s good to hear that through your insights globally, we look pretty good compared to others.

PW: Yeah, Bryan, I think the He Waka Eka Noa and water and those big media issues are often what people think of as the work that some of this industry good stuff does. But I think probably the thing we often forget is the amount of other work that goes on.

So whether it be the benchmarking work that can enable a farmer through Beef + Lamb’s economic service or a dairy base or some other tool to work out, well, hey, if I have this property and I’m running this system, then how are my peers going economically? What are they spending their money on? How does that work? Those data sets that have been prepared on behalf of industry for many years are really powerful and really important and can help us farm better.

I think there’s also areas where industry good bodies can ultimately collect some resources and they can make determinations around where some of our investment is spent from an R&D perspective. If we look at facial eczema in our area, if it rains today, then I’ll be happy. But in another level, I’ll be worrying a wee bit about facial eczema.

The fact that there’s an industry good body, in our case, doing work on that’s great. It’s not something I can afford. I can’t afford to do that work, but it’s stuff that very much underpins my business. I think we often forget or get caught up in those couple of big political critical areas where there’s a bit of conflict that clouds our overall perspective of all the good stuff that goes on.

BG: And of course, New Zealand being so unique in the world of farming, with its geography, climate farming systems, we’ve really got to do all that stuff here. We can’t just import IP or knowledge from other places because no one does it quite like we do.

PW: We’re so unique, right? There’s not many people produce sheep meat or kiwifruit, for that matter at any real scale. We’re the leaders in that, or us in Australia, and it depends maybe on what product you’re talking about.

Ultimately, we do have a unique primary production system based on grass, and so we have some unique challenges we need to deal with. I think it’s great that for the most part, growers have, whether it be onions, or potatoes, or tomatoes, or dairy beef, sheep, whatever, pulled little bits of funds together to help out the collective. It’s probably builds a problem like cooperatives and other collective models that have been really effective and efficient to helping New Zealand Ag, I think.

Despite your Nuffield experience being curtailed or hit, I guess, with the pandemic, how did you find the whole thing?

The Nuffield experience.

It was a life-changing experience, Bryan. To that point, we were on Tangalooma Island, which is off the Coast of Brisbane, like a tropical paradise, doing this scholar conference for Nuffield when the world fell apart during COVID. I think the group this year are coming to New Zealand. And so what happens there is that 100 scholars from each year converge on one location and discuss global agriculture. So we got the start of that, and then things changed.

But I guess probably what Nuffield provides as perspective, I think. Perspective as to where New Zealand’s agricultural system fits. So the basic thing of it is you get to travel and then you do a report. But through the travel piece, I suppose from a perspective, you get to see a range of different agricultural systems. Our group visited North Carolina, we visited Argentina, we visited Chile, we visited a range of places.

So, we saw agriculture in the United Kingdom. We saw agriculture being done on a range of scales, from massive feed lot systems, to avocados and lemons being growing on areas where there was basically no soil left, and it was all irrigation and social licence issues to do with that.

Then right down to small scale producers, 20,000 sheep, milk, dairy sheds, 100,000 hams hanging up in Iberian ham factories. So, you got the range of scale and perspective. And so I think that made me think about what is the role for New Zealand agriculture. I think the other one that it does is it provides a significant amount of confidence. And I think that’s across all leadership programmes.

Gaining confidence through leadership development.

I did Kellogg a number of years ago, and I think it provided the same thing. Both programmes empower the individual to think that they are credible contributors, that they can have an opinion, that their ideas are important, and that they can discuss and work through those with a range of different people in the industry.

So you get to interact with the people that are running the big businesses, whether it be Fonterra or Zespri, or others, and you get to hear their perspectives. I think that confidence is something that I’ve definitely taken from it. I think, yeah, confidence and perspective are probably the two . I think the other one that’s probably also stuck with me is, I remember Julian Raine talking to us, who’s been heavily involved with rural leadership in New Zealand.

He’s saying that a lot of it’s about how spending as much time as you can to really understand a problem. I guess part of it is it’s a programme, and I think Kellogg as well, they really encourage you to critically think about an issue to go a bit past the social media grab or the particular part of spin or headline grabbing that might be going on and actually think, what is this? Whose perspective is this from? What does it mean for me? What does it mean for the people I might represent?

For me, that was a really powerful learning experience. I’m very grateful for the Nuffield and for the sponsors that sit behind it.

BG: So, you’d recommend it to those thinking about doing it?

Investing in yourself.

You often speak with people that are looking at doing it and there’s no great time to do it. But the reality is you’ll probably have young kids, you’ll probably have… You will have business commitments. And what it makes you do is drop all of that and invest time in yourself and understanding agribusiness or agriculture globally. They used to stick you on a ship and send you off for six months, but now it’s more like five or six weeks. But regardless, it is a circuit America.

The programmes when you’re abroad are so busy, you can’t be running your own business at home. You struggle to deal with the family affairs, and so it provides a real disconnect. That is one of the strengths of it. I think that the best time to do it is now. It’s not going to get any easier to do it. I feel scholarship-wide, very young kids. I have a very supportive wife. I was very lucky in that sense. But I think it’s something you just need to do. The immersive learning component of it is something that’s really unique. I really encourage people to have a crack at it.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast presented in association with Farmers Weekly.

You can read Phil’s Nuffield report here.

For more information on Rural Leaders, the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarships, the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, the HortNZ Leadership Programme, the Engage Programme, or the Value Chain Innovation Programme, please visit ruralleaders.co.nz

Coding for Change: Navigating adoption of gene editing in the New Zealand primary sector

Gene editing is poised to reshape the New Zealand primary sector by enabling adaptation to climate change, enhancing environmental sustainability, and boosting productivity.

Advancements in faster, safer, and more precise gene editing techniques have prompted proposals for new legislation to align New Zealand’s gene technology regulations with those of key trading partners. A balanced approach is needed, harnessing scientific innovation while maintaining public trust and market access.

Gene editing can transform parts of the agricultural value chain, especially scientific research, the biotech sector, and plant breeding. In other areas, its impact may be incremental and take time to reach meaningful scale. Therefore, managing expectations is critical so stakeholders maintain realistic views of both its benefits and limitations. Independent government and primary sector research will be important for ongoing monitoring and transparent reporting.

As New Zealand develops a regulatory framework, it has the chance to embed Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles. This would broaden assessment criteria beyond standard safety and risk to include economic, societal, and environmental impacts. Though this approach would require more intensive, case-by-case evaluations from regulators and applicants, it could increase trust among the public, the sector, and international trade partners.

Leadership from the primary sector is necessary to ensure agricultural impacts and opportunities are prioritised in regulation. Coordinated strategy frameworks for gene technology will help map innovation pipelines, risks, opportunities, and commercialisation timelines.

Early engagement with stakeholders, including government, sector bodies, farmers, growers, Māori, and the public is essential. These discussions should be grounded in relatable examples to support informed public opinion, rather than dictated by a top-down expert model. It is also important to acknowledge and respect those who oppose regulatory changes.

Driving innovation will require significant investment, supported by public-private partnerships and international collaboration. A key challenge lies in enhancing scientific capability and confidence, especially during uncertain times for the science sector.

New Zealand is encouraged to adopt a ‘fast follower’ approach to gene technology legislation, allowing it to benefit from scientific advancements while preserving public and trading partner trust. By navigating the adoption of gene editing carefully and inclusively, New Zealand can boost the primary sector’s productivity, sustainability, and global competitiveness.

Keywords for Search: Rachel Baker, Rachael

Changing the Bog-Standard; repeatable solutions for Aotearoa’s Peatlands

Peatlands might look like the scruffy margins of New Zealand’s landscape, yet these water-logged soils are anything but marginal. Although they cover barely one percent of Aotearoa, they warehouse roughly 20 percent of the nation’s total biomass carbon – part of a global system that stores more carbon than all the world’s forests combined. Drain them, however, and the peat shrinks and oxidises, emitting CO₂ and nitrous oxide. Recent estimates suggest that drained peat already contributes up to seven percent of New Zealand’s greenhouse-gas inventory. Put simply, landscapes that should be carbon vaults are leaking fast – and some of our biggest customers have noticed, with companies like Nestlé now asking suppliers to avoid peat-related emissions.

With more than 90 percent of our original wetlands already drained or degraded, the challenge is clear: how do we stop the loss without undermining farm profitability or rural livelihoods?

One answer is paludiculture – production systems purpose-built for permanently wet soils. By cultivating raupō, harakeke, sphagnum moss and other water-tolerant species, landholders can keep peat saturated while generating fibre, construction materials, substrates and, potentially, carbon-credit income. International evidence is compelling: rewetted dairy pastures in northern Germany and wet-farming pilots in England’s Cambridgeshire Fens are just a few examples showing that, with supportive policy and market signals, “peat-positive” enterprises can be both profitable and resilient.

This report also underscores that peatlands – repo – are taonga for Māori. For generations they have provided kai, rongoā and weaving fibre, and their cultural narratives are embedded in the whenua. Successful restoration therefore hinges on genuine co-design with mana whenua, blending mātauranga Māori with ecological science.

Restoring peatlands under paludiculture offers a practical pathway to reduce agricultural emissions while keeping land productive. By scaling up sustainable

management practices, New Zealand can balance economic growth with its climate commitments.

Momentum is building – stronger wetland rules under the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and dozens of pilot projects are already under way. Yet this report calls for a further step-change. It urges decision-makers to treat peatlands as critical national infrastructure – carbon banks, biodiversity reservoirs and cultural landscapes worthy of sustained investment.

The bottom line is clear: the science, tools and precedents already exist; the missing ingredient is collective will. Reframing peatlands as essential ecosystems is vital to cutting emissions, improving freshwater quality and protecting native species. This report concludes with a challenge: keep the ground wet on purpose and transform the future of peatland management.

Keywords for Search: Jenna Smith, Genna

Putting the Success back into Succession

Peter Templeton's report

Farm succession in New Zealand is a critical issue, with an aging farmer demographic and rising land prices making it increasingly difficult for younger generations to enter agriculture. This report explores the barriers to farm succession and potential pathways for ensuring the long-term sustainability of New Zealand’s agricultural sector.

The report examines the challenges of family farm succession, the growing influence of corporate farming, the affordability crisis in farmland, and alternative succession models.

Historically, farm ownership has depended on intergenerational succession, but rising land values and tighter financial conditions complicate this process.

Succession typically involves three key phases: physical contribution (working on the farm), financial decision-making (taking on financial responsibilities), and equity transition (the formal transfer of farm ownership). However, many succession processes fail due to poor planning, lack of communication, and financial challenges. Key barriers include the reluctance of older farmers to relinquish control, challenges in fairly compensating multiple siblings, and the high financial burden placed on successors.

Successful succession requires early planning, clear communication, and often the involvement of external advisors.

This report highlights the dramatic shift in farmland affordability, with land values rising so quickly that it now takes up to 60 years of savings to afford a farm deposit. As a result, corporate farming structures, which have access to capital and economies of scale, are becoming more common. While these models can improve efficiency, they risk concentrating land ownership and reducing local community decision-making. Key concerns include the loss of family-owned farms, reduced reinvestment in local communities, and a focus on short-term profits over long-term land stewardship.

Alternative succession models, such as share-farming agreements, equity partnerships, lease-to-buy agreements, profit-sharing models, and crowdfunding, offer ways for younger farmers to enter the industry without the capital constraints of traditional ownership. These models enable gradual equity building, risk-sharing, and community support for funding.

To facilitate these models, this report suggests several policy changes, including incentivising banks to accept livestock and plant assets as loan security, government-backed loan programmes, tax incentives for succession planning, and support for financial education. Industry leaders should also encourage a cultural shift toward treating farm succession as a strategic business process.

In conclusion, ensuring the sustainability of New Zealand’s agricultural sector requires fostering diverse, innovative pathways to farm ownership, supported by government, financial institutions, and industry bodies. Collaboration is essential to preserving New Zealand’s farming heritage.

Keywords for Search: Peter Templeton, Tempelton

Beyond the Farm Gate: Rethinking New Zealand’s Economic Future

New Zealand’s economy has long relied on agriculture and tourism, industries that have shaped national identity and driven export earnings. However, both sectors face growth limitations: agriculture contends with land constraints, environmental regulations, and changing trade dynamics, while tourism is volatile and constrained by infrastructure and environmental capacity. If these industries are nearing their natural limits, the country must consider its long-term economic strategy.

As a small, trade-dependent nation reliant on imports for manufacturing, energy, and technology, New Zealand must prioritise strong export earnings over GDP. Historically, agriculture and tourism have underpinned this, but their uncertain future growth poses challenges.

Lessons from Global Agriculture
This report examines global agriculture for lessons. In Brazil, agriculture is seen as limitless, driven by vast land expansion and investment. In contrast, the UK and Netherlands deliberately constrain farming. The UK pays farmers not to farm under ESG policies, while the Netherlands focuses on high-value niches and supply chain dominance, rather than sheer production. Despite its small size, the Netherlands exports more food than Brazil by controlling logistics, processing, and distribution.

New Zealand aligns more with the UK and Netherlands than Brazil. It lacks vast arable land, and environmental policies limit production expansion. The country is losing farmland: since 2017, over 260,000 hectares of pastoral land have shifted to forestry. Sheep numbers are at historic lows, and processing facilities like Alliance Smithfield have closed due to declining supply. Simultaneously, global trade dynamics are shifting. The EU’s Farm to Fork Strategy tightens environmental standards on imports, and UK trade deals with Australia and South America undermine New Zealand’s competitiveness. Heavy reliance on China, buying 40% of dairy and 30% of red meat, also poses risks.

The Path Forward: A National Conversation
New Zealand’s agricultural growth is likely to be linear, not exponential. This report calls for a national conversation about the next 25–50 years. Should the country emulate Ireland by using tax incentives to attract high-value industries? Should it invest in processing and logistics to retain more export value domestically? Could it lead in renewable energy, digital innovation, or advanced manufacturing?

New Zealand must proactively shape its future. The UK’s experience warns of deprioritising food production without alternatives, while the Netherlands shows that controlling the supply chain can be as valuable as production.

It’s time to ask: What comes next?

Keywords for Search: Carlos Bagrie, Karlos, Bagree

Lisa Lunn on genetic technologies in agriculture

In this podcast, Lisa Lunn, 2024 Kellogg Scholar, talks to Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor at Farmers Weekly about her Kellogg research into the use of genetic technologies in agriculture. Lisa’s research presents a balanced view that unpacks the challenges, and the opportunities genetic technologies offer the food and fibre sector.

Listen to this episode of Ideas that Grow, or click on one of the platform icons below to listen on your favourite player:

Episode Transcript

Bryan GibsonManaging Editor of Farmers Weekly.
You’ve joined Rural Leaders’ Ideas That Grow podcast. 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, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly.
You’re with Ideas That Grow, the Rural Leaders podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. With me on this week’s show is Lisa Lunn, who is a recent Kellogg scholar.

Lisa Lunn, 2024 Kellogg Scholar and Category Manager for Crop Protection at Farmlands:
LL: Hi, Bryan. Thanks for having me.

BG: Where are you speaking from?

LL: Currently in beautiful Morrinsville in the Waikato, where I’m based.

Lisa’s Journey and Passion for the Food and Fibre Sector

BG: Nice. Now, you work for Farmlands, is that right?

LL: Yes, I do. I’m the Category Manager for Crop Protection at Farmlands.

BG: That sounds like a big job.

LL: Yes, essentially, it’s looking after anything related to agrochemical with an agronomy focus across the country. Working in really close with our team of talented TFOs, our agronomists, and our supply chain team as well.

BG: What knowledge and education do you need to get that job?

LL: I went through Lincoln University and got an Agricultural Science Degree, and I spent quite a few years in the sector working in various technical sales roles. I’ve had pretty good on-the-ground experience around the industry. Then this opportunity came up to get into the merchandising team. On my side of things, I bring a bit of technical on-the-ground knowledge, in an incredibly supportive environment with a lot of resources to help on the category side of things as well.

BG: Was the food and fibre sector always going to be your career of choice?

LL: Yes, I think so. I grew up on a small farm in the North Waikato. I think I always lean towards science and agriculture. Heading down to Lincoln to get my qualification was a natural step – Just so passionate about the food and fibre sector. It’s obviously everything starts and stops the food we grow. I’m proud to be involved with a sector that puts food on people’s tables around the world every day. It’s a pretty exciting industry to be part of.

Genetic technologies and the Kellogg research report

BG: We know the food and fibre sector in general, and New Zealand has a few challenges ahead of it. One of them we’re grappling with at the moment is whether to relax the rules around genetic technologies. And your Kellogg’s scholarship report looked directly at that, didn’t it?

LL: Yes, I was part of Cohort 51 that kicked off about a year ago. At the time, it was being talked about, but obviously a lot more has happened in the past year since then. The coalition government proposed some rules, a rethink of the rules, I suppose, that govern the genetic technology space. My report looked into if a change were to happen, what do we need to understand, as a country ,to make sure that any changes implemented are sustainable and the best thing for the country and our export markets.

Kellogg research process and key findings

BG: How do you go about getting the information and putting it together?

LL: Every Kellogg report generally involves a literature review. There’s a fair bit out there on this topic. Genetic technologies are very prevalent overseas, so there’s plenty of information there, and there’s quite a bit of information as well as to how it may impact our export markets.

The other part of that was semi-structured interviews. I spoke to about 16 key stakeholders from across the industry and also environmentalist groups as well, to make sure it was balanced. I had some interviews, and analysed the data as to the main trends that came out of it.

BG: Can you tell us a little bit about what those trends were?

LL: I spoke to a number of stakeholders representing a lot of sectors throughout the primary industries, and environmental groups, to make sure it was a fair and balanced discussion. In the groups I spoke to, no one was outright against a change, but there was plenty of those that were for it, and a portion were supportive but proceed with caution.

There were definite trends there in that a lot of people did support a change, and then probably the main group was ‘proceed with caution’. It was, ‘have a look at what other countries have done, make sure there’s a very good national conversation had so that everyone’s brought up to speed and understand what it means for us as New Zealanders, what it means for our export markets’. All of these things, that if we are to do it, we’ve got to do it right. We’ve got to take our lead from other countries that have done it and who’s been successful and who hasn’t.

Legislation and Global Considerations

LL: There was a group of individuals that I spoke to that were a bit more, ‘let’s find out a bit more information before we can make a decision, and potentially, are there other areas we should be focusing on first?’

A big thing that came out of it was that there are a lot of uses of genetic technologies. One of them, that’s been heavily spoken about, is the ability to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. The group of respondents I spoke to were very clear on saying, ‘this is not a silver bullet’.

It has to be part of a holistic approach that means that we can use other technologies and other mechanisms to help reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. This isn’t just going to be a set and forget. We’ve got to look at the bigger picture and make sure we are using everything we can to make sure we’re hitting the targets we’ve set ourselves and doing the right thing to be sustainable farmers. It’s not something that’s just going to come in and solve all our problems overnight.

BG: The legislation we’re working to now was written in the mid ’90s, wasn’t it? Considering how far the science has moved, it’s definitely time to have another look at this.

LL: Yes, scientific consensus is that basically the technologies have moved faster than our legislation has. As you said, it was written a long time ago, the HSO Act, which governs the space. Initially, when it was written, genetic technologies was a lot more cisgenesis.

There was a lot more inter-species genetic transfer. Nowadays, it’s much more specific with CRISPR-Cas9, and those technologies. There’s also some cases where certain modifications that might happen in the market that’s been exported to, might not even be considered a genetic modification because it’s something that can occur in nature anyway. It’s about having clarity on the definitions and what our export markets would consider genetic modification or genetic gene-editing. And bringing that legislation up to date with the technology we have available to us these days.

BG: That’s the big thing. I think I often find in the correspondence I get on this, that some people think we can do this, so we should, whereas there’s a bigger discussion to have around what does that mean for other things outside of science in terms of society and the way we market ourselves to the world.

The Kellogg Experience and Future Outlook

BG: You mentioned trade agreements already. There are a lot of places who have different ideas what is acceptable or not. There’s a lot to get through, isn’t there?

LL: Absolutely. A lot of the competing nations in the agriculture space do use it, and in some areas it has given them an advantage. But we tend to trade on ‘clean green’ with the NZ Inc. image.

We need to be conscious of the fact that just because we can do it, it doesn’t mean we should. That’s an absolutely fair argument. There are a lot of very valid concerns out there. To name a few, it would be what impact is it going to have on our export market? There’s concerns around the corporate regulations around it.

There’s concerns about coexistence. Can an organic farmer still do what they want to do and be nearby to a farm that’s using GE products? I think it needs to be balanced. It needs to be fact-based.

I think you have valid concerns on both sides of the coin, and they need to be heard and understood and addressed. Some of the literature I read spoke to the fact that our export markets are probably more concerned with us moving in the right direction with our greenhouse gas emissions, water quality, animal husbandry, those things, even though we’re already very good.

But there were areas that, potentially, they’d like to see improvement, whereas in some markets, genetic technologies was less of a buying decision for them. But can we coexist? Can we still have the non-genetic technologies with farms operating alongside ones that choose to take up these technologies? The government has drafted a bill that’s already available for viewing and submissions.

It’s making sure that the discussions that are had our fact base, and it is an emotional topic. Hearing both sides of the coin and looking into what’s best for us as a country, as an agricultural export nation, and as New Zealand does as well, it goes beyond agriculture. Just understanding the technologies that may be available to us – what benefits are they going to bring?

BG: I understand the bill that’s been drafted is loosely based on the Australian system that they’ve got in train. Is that correct?

LL: Yes, it is.

BG: That there is some aligning with our close neighbours, is not a bad place to start, hopefully.

LL: Yes, absolutely. Just taking a lead on some of the nations that have done it and what their learnings have been and going more risk-based assessments as opposed to reviewing the individual technology itself, what’s the end product. They’re definitely taking a lead from Australia’s legislation.

A Transformative Leadership Experience

BG: Your report is out there. What was it like doing it? What was the Kellogg experience like for you?

LL: Fantastic, I absolutely loved it. I couldn’t recommend it more. I was very fortunate to be sponsored by Farmlands to do it. Farmlands are very generous with allowing me the time to head down and do the in-person courses. It was a lot of work putting the report together and doing the interviews, but the whole experience was absolutely incredible – The people you’re able to connect with both throughout the cohort.

The speakers that came to see us, conducting themselves under Chatham House rules meant they were just able to be so free and frank, and you could ask them questions you probably could never normally ask an industry leader or a CEO or a high-powered scientist or politician. You could be very open and transparent and learn whatever you needed to for your own personal development journey.

It was just absolutely unreal. The scope of people that were in the cohort, the knowledge they had, the questions they asked, just a wonderful cross-section of people from across the industry. The main thing we all had in common was we were passionate about the industry and the future of the sector.

BG: You mentioned it is personal development. What does the future look like for you?

LL: I touched on it before: Food and Fibre is my passion. I love being part of the sector, and I will always remain a part of the sector. I’m excited to be part of it here in New Zealand. It’s such a small industry. Everyone knows everyone. It’s a great thing. Everyone’s genuinely passionate to turn up to work every day.

I’ve been with Farmlands for about two and a half years now, so I’m really happy to get stuck in there and keep building on my role and working with a fantastic team I’m lucky to be a part of. Whatever I do, it’ll be involving the sector.

BG: For those out there who might be thinking about getting to work on something like the Kellogg programme, you’d recommend it?

LL: Absolutely. Rural leaders do a fantastic job of giving you all the resources you need, all the tools you need in your toolbox to become a better leader, to be more self-aware, to understand the skills you do have and the skills you could improve on.
The networks are astounding, and it gives you really good context for both internal
New Zealand-centric trends and aspects of the sector here, and also a really good handle on geopolitics and things that are happening overseas.

It helps you understand what trends may be emerging and how they could affect us here, as well as teaching us really good soft skills, like improving your critical thinking skills and time management and all sorts of things that come out of it.
Everything I gained from that is absolutely invaluable, and I’ll continue to use it in my career.

Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast presented in association with Farmers Weekly.

You can read Lisa’s Kellogg Report ‘Understanding a future with genetic technologies in New Zealand agriculture’ here.

For more information on Rural Leaders, the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarships, the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, the Engage Programme, or the Value Chain Innovation Programme, please visit ruralleaders.co.nz

Dave Nuku on Kaitiakitanga and adopting a long term view.

In this podcast, Dave Nuku, 2024 Kellogg Scholar, talks to Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor at Farmers Weekly, on his work with Ngamanawa Incorporation and about how adopting a philosophy of Kaitiakitanga can be in alignment with a strong and profitable business.

Listen to the podcast here.

Bryan GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.
You’ve joined Rural Leaders’ Ideas That Grow podcast. 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, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly.
You’re with Ideas That Grow, the Rural Leaders podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. This week, I’m talking to Dave Nuku. How’s it going?

Dave Nuku, 2024 Kellogg Scholar, Ngamanawa Incorporation.
DN: Hi, good Bryan and you?

BG: Going good, thank you. You’re one of the very recent Kellogg scholars. I understand your report has only just come out.

DN: I’ve had a fantastic experience with Kellogg. Just finished my report, so glad to have had that completed. Yeah, it’s good to be here with you today.

BG: Just tell us a little bit about yourself. Where are you from?

Bringing a global perspective to New Zealand food and fibre.

DN: I’m from the Bay of Plenty, up here in Tauranga, and have some strong whakapapa connections back here. My family have been here for a long time. I’m currently working for Ngamanawa Incorporation, managing a block of Māori land of around 4,000 hectares in the lower Kaimai.

BG: Awesome. I was born in Tauranga, so I know the place pretty well. Has most of your career been in the food and fibre sector, or is that something relatively new to you?

DN: To be completely honest, it’s very new to me. I do not have a background in the food and fibre sector. I actually spent two decades overseas working through Southeast Asia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia. So I lived based in Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Singapore for several years in a completely different industry.

I was working for a multinational company over there running health clubs and resorts across Southeast Asia. So, it’s a big change from that perspective. I moved back home to Aotearoa a few years ago, just after COVID, and was fortunate enough to make a transition into the food and fibre sector with the Incorporation which our family have got long-standing connections with. It was a nice fit, but a very different industry – and all the differences that come with changing industries and countries.

BG: Yeah, that is quite a change, isn’t it? How did you find your time overseas? You’re obviously there a long time. environment.

DN: Absolutely loved being overseas, loved travel. My wife and I have got two kids as well, and so they were born overseas. So very much an international whanau. We did a lot of travel when the kids were young, and as they grew up. It was a constant part of our lives.

We were working in these different markets, so it was quite dynamic. Quite different to New Zealand. We were living in Malaysia and Singapore – so that’s closely connected to a lot of other countries, very easy to be mobile and get around. Businesses, languages, all of those things are very different, more nuanced, more complex than New Zealand in industries that we’re working at, but loved it. Absolutely loved it.

Having said all of that, it’s great to be home. I think Aotearoa, New Zealand is the best country on Earth and absolutely love living here, working here, and being home with my family.

BG: Tell me a little bit about the Incorporation you’re working for now.

Managing, leading, and stewardship.

DN: Yeah. So, Ngamanawa Incorporation has a large land block up in the lower Kaimai’s. Mainly the Incorporation has its roots in forestry. It’s around 2000 hectares of pine, radiata pine, and around 2000 hectares of native forest. In the native forest, we have a conservation team of five full-time Kaimahi or staff who are involved in our predator control efforts there.

We do everything from monitoring the waterways, the habitat for native species, whether it’s tuna/eels or kōkako, or kiwis. We have a lot of those really special native species up on the block. As well as forestry, we’re also involved in horticulture. We have a kiwifruit orchard with golden and green kiwi fruit in the Kaimai area, a little bit closer to Tauranga.

Then we also have some investments in other horticulture crops, strawberries on Matakana Island and some rocket apples in the Hawke’s Bay. So, quite a mix of different business interests across the Incorporation. It keeps you busy and it’s varied.

BG: Yeah, a lot of variation and diversity there. I guess there’s a lot of different farming techniques, business management, and you’ve got the native block as well, which is more of a conservation approach, I guess. A lot to keep on top of.

DN: I think it’s the variety and that diversity that makes it fascinating for me. I have a really strong international business background, but it’s nice to be doing something that is very, I suppose, organic and something working for an entity that we’ve got a long-standing connection to.

The block, the incorporation is made up of a number of different blocks of traditional Māori land, that has been in Māori ownership for hundreds of years. It’s nice to be taking that and really making sure that it’s productive in terms of our forestry, and then also in the indigenous forest space and the native bush, really looking at preserving the native species there.

We also have a lodge for our shareholders, so you can book the lodge and go up there and enjoy it with your family. It’s nice on a lake with lots of waterways in the middle of the bush.

It’s also about connecting people to land as well. Then the horticulture and the kiwifruit is really that’s a lot of the day-to-day operations. Long time between drinks in terms of the business model for forestry, but with Kiwifruit. They’ve got a more seasonal cash flow in business requirements and operations there.

BG: How are things tracking for you guys at the moment? Has it been a good year? Things looking pretty good?

DN: It’s been a fantastic year for kiwifruit in general across the Bay. It’s been something that the industry has really needed. We had a couple of rough years there with COVID, and there were a number of weather events.

Also, some of our growers down in the Hawke’s Bay area were really affected by cyclone Gabrielle. But overall, the industry has had a great season, a really strong crop. I think a record season, just under 200 million trays, which is around about a 25% increase on the previous highest year for Zespri overall, who sell our kiwifruit into market.

It’s been a record crop. Growers have really benefited from it. Last year’s growing conditions were excellent. Not only did we get good volume, but it also got really good fruit quality, which has held up well in the markets. We sell that through into Europe, China, and other places.

You’ve got to celebrate the wins, and we’ll take those because horticulture can be challenging. There’s always weather events, and you’re always on your toes, and no two seasons are the same. We’ll just take the win and then really focus on trying to do that again this season.

A background into how a Māori Land Incorporation works.

BG: Now, probably most of our listeners have a bit of an idea about how a Māori Incorporation functions and is structured. But could you just give us an overview of how that works?

DN: Absolutely. The Incorporation is governed by a committee of management. They function more or less like a board, I suppose, if you could think of it in that way, with some really small, subtle differences. But if you think of them as a board that are duly elected by the shareholders to represent the shareholder interests in the land block.

The Incorporation itself is an amalgamation of five different blocks in the lower Kaimai area that were all brought together just for the economies of scale that comes with a motivating all that land, which led to the 4,000 hectares that we currently have. Then what ends up happening is all of the owners in those individual land blocks more or less get shares in the Incorporation as opposed to a direct ownership in the land itself. That’s the governance structure and the ownership structure is more like a shareholding reporting into the committee of management.

The big difference between a Māori Land Incorporation versus a trust where the owners of the land still retained a slightly different ownership model. The Incorporation has been around for around 50 years and came together in the 1970s to amalgamate the land blocks to secure the land over the long term.

At that time, we were facing some challenges with the confiscation of land through the Public Works Act for the hydro scheme that’s currently up in the in the Kaimais. As I said, that was the origin story of the Incorporation. It’s come together as a result of that. We got into forestry and then have diversified over the years.

Kaitiakitanga – guardianship/stewardship. Adopting the long term view.

DN: So, generally speaking, Māori Land Incorporation, long term holders of assets in land, long term view, primary in nature, forestry, horticulture, looking to diversify. We have some other stocks and portfolio financial products. But everything we do isn’t really driven on a quarterly basis in terms of returns. It’s much more about where we want to be in 5, 10, 15, 20 years.

BG: That’s something that a lot of people are thinking about more and probably should think about more is having that longer term view of where you’re going. Because you’re right, that quarterly reporting makes you overegg the omelette in some ways.

You can drive production to meet targets and then have some issues to clean up afterwards. Whether a more measured approach with more long term targets seems to be a better way to take care of our land?

DN: I think so. That’s definitely our view on it. It’s more of the Kaitiakitanga view. Kaitiakitanga, meaning guardianship or stewardship. I’d describe it in that way – which was the subject of my report. What I wanted to do, having come back from extensive experience overseas in more international markets, where stewardship, guardianship, long term, intergenerational ownership, wasn’t really anything that I worked in overseas.

I worked for companies, many of whom were private equity owned. So, a different modus operandi, so to speak, a different timeframe, buying and selling companies, building them, selling them to the next person.

Coming back into this environment with a much more long term view, real care for land and nature, led me to study Kaitiakitanga, which is the subject of my Kellogg report. The concepts and all of the different influences, in fact, as they tie into Kaitiakitanga, I thought that would be a good way to educate myself and bring myself back up to speed so I can use that philosophy when managing the Incorporation assets and people.

Kellogg and Kaitiakitanga as a pathway to enduring prosperity.

BG: So, your report, as we said just out very recently, is called ‘Kaitiakitanga as a pathway to enduring prosperity’. I was interested that you kicked off by saying a lot of us have a simplistic view of what Kaitiakitanga is.

DN: Yeah, I think it’s most often thought about or used as a term in reference to guardianship or stewardship with regard to the natural environment. Whilst that is a part of Kaitiakitanga, that’s only a small component of Kaitiakitanga.

The broader application of Kaitiakitanga is the idea that one has a relationship not only with the environment, but also with your family members, also with everything within that environment. And with that, we call it Whanaungatanga or kinship. And with that kinship, our relationship, comes responsibilities. And the responsibilities that come from that, Whanaungatanga, or kinship, are responsibilities of care and Manaakitanga, looking after the environment, looking after others, looking after yourself, respecting the spiritual dimension that are imbued in all things.

We believe as Māori that things have a spirit, they have a Wairua, they have a Mana, they have a life force, or Mauri. Just acknowledging and respecting those things, particularly in the Taiao, but also one’s self. It’s a real all-encompassing philosophy in terms of how one can approach their life.

For me, in the way in which I think about it for the Incorporation. I see myself as a Kaitiaki of the assets that are within my responsibility, making sure that they’re not only produce good results, but they don’t do harm, whether it’s to the environment.

We look at things like forestry and our aspirations there to convert more of that into indigenous forests over time, perhaps retire parts of that. We also take the responsibility quite seriously and invest a lot into the conservation space, trapping possums, predators, to be able to restore some of the natural bird life on our block, to get the bird numbers up. To do that, you need to suppress the predators because they tend to kill all the chicks and the eggs and so on and so forth. That’s an example of Kaitiakitanga there.

Our team have rituals or practises that they use each day when they go out into the bush. They protect their Wairua or their Mauri. They’ll say special Karakia or incantations or prayers to protect themselves.

They’ll also ask for blessing and protection when they do the work in the bush. Then likewise, within the organisation itself, our philosophy is driven by Kaitiakitanga in terms of starting meetings with Karakia, with prayer, acknowledging people within the meeting or anyone who may have, for example, for us as Māori, in speaking back to that kinship and relationship connection.

We’ll also acknowledge those who may have passed on, their family connections and those within the region or the Mutu of Tauranga, the rohe of Tauranga will acknowledge them and do a Mihi to them and their family. So, all of these different practises that feed into Kaitiakitanga are all a part of the way you operate the way that you live and aspire to live.

Can you have alignment between Kaitiakitanga and propseprous business?

BG: As the title of your report suggests, Kaitiakitanga is not in opposition to having a prosperous and profitable business operation, is it? I mean, enduring prosperity, you can make a good living for all of your shareholders.

DN: Absolutely. That’s the aim. I suppose that was really what drew me to the subject  they’re not opposing forces. One can be a good steward of the land, good steward of themselves and a guardian, and still prosper and have good economic returns, whether it’s for your shareholder, whether it’s for your Whanau or your business or whatever it is. Those are not things that are opposing their nature. I think that comes back to the long term view.

Then also considering in a broader sense what the return on an investment might be. An example of that would be we most often measure return on investment in dollar terms. Whilst that’s an important metric, it’s not the only metric. For example, we have businesses we’ve invested in, and they have a really good social return for our people.

It’s about unlocking the potential of some of our Māori land, by our people, for our people and creating employment opportunities. Like growing high-value horticulture crops. The case in point is the blueberry investment we’ve made. We know that that investment is not just about a hard and fast financial return. That is also about investing in capability and building skills in high value horticulture.

We can accept that for that type of investment that may carry a higher risk, so to speak. But we think the returns are going to be social in nature as well as ultimately a sustainable, profitable business. We’re prepared to take on a bit more risk because we can see that we measure success differently, so to speak. You have the right size that for your Incorporation in your business.

We’re not going to put all your eggs in that type of investment, but we do take a number of smaller investments that allow us to be more adventurous. Then as those businesses grow and perform, then we can scale them up knowing that they have a good return for our people, for our land, and then also from a financial or Putea perspective for our shareholders.

BG: Obviously, your report looks at this quite in-depth. You’ve looked at the literature, of course, and case studies. You’ve made some recommendations about how to incorporate more of a Kaitiakitanga mindset into a food and fibre of sector business. What are some of those?

Three recommendations to include Kaitiakitana principles into business.

DN: What came out of the report that I did were a series of recommendations that I think I did expect would be the outcome. They are, first and foremost for Māori entities where there’s an opportunity to include Kaitiakitana principles. Those are things like in the culture of the organisation, having Tūkanga, what we call Tūkanga or Māori protocols around the Karakia, Mihi, acknowledgement of people, those who have passed special occasions, opening meetings with Karakia, finishing meetings with Karakia, welcoming new guests into your office with Mihi and Whakatau. That would be one example of something that the Incorporation does.

Also, there are some tools out there that one can use to exercise the Kaitiakitanga in regards to waterways. There’s a really cool tool called the Mauri compass, which allows you to measure the habitat of certain wildlife, wild species. For example, the native silverbelly tuna (or eels) that we have here. We do a lot of work in that space. So, water quality, habitat cover, abundance of life within the waterways, et cetera. Creating benchmarks using the Mauri compass across those different areas. Then setting some goals based on that.

One of the other recommendations that came out of the report was the importance of really capturing Kaitiakitanga and incorporating it into what we call our SAIPO, our strategic investment priorities and objectives document that outlines how we invest in different things and incorporating Kaitiakitanga as a guiding principle. So, that one, we’re investing in things that we’re proud of, that we want to be in, that are going to be good for the Taiao and the environment as opposed to things that aren’t.

That we are also making investments for a certain portion of our asset base. We’re looking at that as a good financial return, but also a good social return as well. And so, we have the lens of Kaitiakitanga, that’s our perspective, and we look at different investments.

Those were the three recommendations, what you can do on a daily basis in your Incorporation to make it part of what you do. Two is, tools that you can use in the natural environment. Three is, how you can weave it into your governance structures or your investment structures so that you’re getting involved with things where you can exercise your Kaitiakitanga.

BG: I talk to a lot of people and do a lot of reading in my job running Farmers Weekly. It seems to me that there’s a lot in the Incorporation’s view of how to run things that everyone could learn whether they’re a family farm in Canterbury, or wherever they are.

It gives a story to someone about the weighing up all of the externalities and the balance sheets of what you’re doing in terms of sustainability, social responsibility, social licence to operate, profitability, that sort of thing. Is that something you think?

Kaitiakitanga - universal principles for a long term view.

DN: I think the principles are universal. I really do think they’re universal. We’re talking about them in a Māori context here, but these are principles that you find in many indigenous populations across the world. I think you’ll find them in non-indigenous populations as well.

Part of the research that I looked into, you’d see new concepts emerging, for example, in the US, around steward ownership models that are really very similar to Kaitiakitanga, where entities that are in the environmental space, in the education space, or the charitable space in the US. They have come up with certain corporate structures that allow them to separate the stewardship values as a separate and enduring part of the governance structure that oversees those companies.

Irrespective of who the owners might be, they’re still held accountable to those principles of stewardship, and that’s really aimed at enshrining those principles of guardianship over these different assets, more common in the environmental space. I suppose my point is that that’s an example of the same concept halfway across the world being implemented and enshrined in legislative corporate law. Because I think it’s a lot of people are wanting to do that.

I think there are a lot of entities out there that are saying, Hey, look, these are really good principles of long term view, not just measuring the bottom line from a dollar perspective, but also from a social perspective. I think that a more holistic view and long term view is better. I mean, anything, even from an investment perspective, if you invest in it for longer, it’s generally better. I think there’s a lot of principles that could apply to any business.

BG: I was reading just the other day about something that applies to the other end of the supply chain, NZ Story, which is part of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, did its most recent survey with Chinese consumers.

They found that after COVID, they were connecting more with their history and felt that New Zealanders, the fact that we embrace our indigenous culture and what we do more than some other colonised countries, was a point of difference for us. So, it’s an interesting thing to think about as well.

DN: I think we’ve got a great story. I think we’ve got the greatest country in the world. I really do. I think New Zealand is an incredible country. I think we do food and fibre really, really well. I hope there’s opportunities to lean into these indigenous narratives and concepts because they’re good for their environment, good for people.

That also sounds, as you’ve said, that they have a powerful resonance with other people abroad and other cultures. In typical New Zealand fashion, we’re probably too humble about it, quite modest. I think it’s okay to say, hey, look, these are things that we do really well. We do lean into it. That’s a part of our culture and our history, and we should be proud of.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme.

BG:Now, how did you find the whole process of going through the Rural Leaders’ Kellogg Programme?

DN: I can absolutely say without any word of a lie or doubt that it was the best leadership programme that I’ve ever done. The most complete and thorough. The quality of the information from the presenters that you’re exposed to is really world-class.

We’ve got some of the best educators presenting content, a wide variety, too. People with military backgrounds, doctors, professors, politicians, farmers, horticulturalists, you name it. Te Ao Māori educators and specialists too. The broader array of leaders in all of these different fields and to be able to listen to them, to interact with them, to learn from them was just incredible.

It was a very, very special experience. Throughout that all, you’ve also got this report that you need to produce. You’re constantly taking in information from these presenters. You’re learning a lot from some of the best young minds, and probably I wouldn’t put myself in that, but more of a more mature vintage, shall we say myself. But they’re really, really great leaders in their own right who come in to do this course. You end up learning a lot from the people around you. That’s very motivating. Iron sharpens iron, so the whole experience has been exceptional.

If I was to say one thing to someone considering doing it, is to absolutely do it, go for it, but do not underestimate the amount of time it’s going to take you, and the focus and commitment that you’re going to need to get the most out of it. It’ll be worth it, but it’s a lot of great work.

You can read Dave’s Kellogg Report ‘Kaitiakitanga as a pathway to enduring prosperity’ here.

Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast presented in association with Farmers Weekly.

For more information on Rural Leaders, the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarships, the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, the Engage Programme, or the Value Chain Innovation Programme, please visit ruralleaders.co.nz

Is a more holistic approach to risk management and risk identification needed on Canterbury dairy farms?

Executive summary

This report examines risk management practices on Canterbury dairy farms and explores whether there is a need for the development of an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) framework specific to the dairy sector.

The report also identifies the supply of diesel to farms as critical to ensuring business continuity after an adverse weather event or seismic natural disaster. It studies the likelihood of an earthquake on the Alpine Fault on New Zealand’s South Island, or a tsunami caused by a rupture in the Hikurangi subduction zone off the east coast of the North Island. The report also considers the supply of diesel in New Zealand and looks at a number of factors that might disrupt the diesel supply chain.

2.1 Just some of this report’s Key Findings are:

  1. Dairy farms in Canterbury are heavily reliant on diesel generators for electricity backup, with most farms having at best a month’s supply of diesel to maintain operations.
  2. The likelihood of a significant earthquake (M8+ or more) at the southwestern end of the Alpine Fault is statistically relevant with one researcher estimating the probability of a rupture of this magnitude within the next fifty years at approximately thirty percent. In this circumstance, Canterbury’s roading and transport infrastructure is likely to be significantly compromised.
  3. Similarly, Canterbury’s ports are susceptible to both near source tsunami and distant source tsunami potentially damaging fuel import terminals at Lyttelton and Timaru.
  4. The COVID-19 pandemic and incidents like the Suez Canal blockage have highlighted vulnerabilities in international supply chains, leading to increased costs and delays for New Zealand.
  5. The closure of the Marsden Point oil refinery in 2022 has reduced New Zealand’s flexibility in fuel supply and increased its vulnerability to supply chain disruptions and global security threats.

2.2 Just some of this report’s Recommendations are:

  1. On farm – for farmers regular refilling of the diesel tank is important. Most farmers are on a regular fuel distribution route managed by their fuel supply company. Remote monitoring might also be an option for farmers who use a lot of diesel and need more regular topping up.
  2. On farm – where the well for stock water is close to the dairy shed, the pump could be run from the same electricity mains switchboard as the dairy shed to minimise the need to have a second generator to run a stock-water pump.
  3. Generation technology – farmers looking at their back-up electricity supply options could look at new generation technologies, such as PV solar and batteries, which are becoming more affordable and provide the farm with a layer of generation capacity that doesn’t rely on off-farm inputs such as diesel.
  4. AF8 and SAFER – given the high probability of a significant rupture of the Alpine Fault, it would be prudent for the New Zealand Government and local councils to continue its research and preparedness training alongside local councils and other relevant statutory bodies. Possibly, Tsunami should also be taken into account during these planning and training exercises.
  5. ERM research – there is need for further research into the topic of risk management on farm, and the need for the development of an ERM framework for dairy farms and potentially the wider farming community.

Peter Saunders

What’s the beef? Opportunities for beef on dairy in New Zealand.

Over 2 million calves are produced from the dairy herd in NZ every year, some are either retained for herd replacements, or are raised and finished on dry stock farms. However, approximately 1.8 million non-replacement or bobby calves are slaughtered annually at 4-7 days of age.

The opportunity for beef on dairy is to shift the value chain from dysfunctional to functional. If the end product has a greater value, then financial participation and therefore functionality increases for all activities involved in creating, rearing, growing, processing, marketing, and delivering a beef product to the end consumer from the dairy industry.

Financial effectiveness is the fundamental aspect throughout any value chain, facilitating the flow of resources, transactions, and incentives at each stage.

Unless there is more money for the end product of non-replacement calves, the value chain will continue to focus on cost minimisation of the calf as a by-product of milk production.

Money saves the bobby calf, but to realise more value with the consumer a successful beef on dairy value chain requires several key changes that contribute to delivering a product that has a higher value to the consumer, and increased effectiveness and efficiency.

  1. Understand the Customer Needs: Grain fed is often a customer preference, especially in Asia markets. Short fed grain finished beef could be an opportunity to align the value chain activities with customer requirements. Grain fed also creates products that deliver value and meet customer demands of product consistency and reliable supply effectively.
  2. Improve Integration and Coordination of Farming Systems: This involves seamless communication, collaboration, and synchronization of activities to ensure smooth flow and timely delivery of products or services, dairy farms, rearers growers and finishers.
  3. Efficiency and Cost Optimisation: Using genetics designed to minimize costs and maximize efficiency at every stage of beef production optimises resource utilisation to achieve production cost advantages.
  4. Sustainability: The opportunity to communicate and validate existing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors of a low carbon beef sales platform to deliver value to the consumer.
  5. Technology: Meat grading is critical to improve value, give visibility and confidence of product quality and consistency of eating experience for the consumer.
  6. Continuous Improvement and Innovation: marketing and branding of beef on dairy needs to continuously seek ways to introduce new digital transaction functions, and data analysis to optimise processes, and innovate across all stages of the value chain.

By shifting from a production driven to a consumer demanded beef on dairy value chain there is a prospect to enhance value and provide an opportunity for beef on dairy and the non-replacement dairy calf.

Keywords for Search: Matt Iremonger

Boots on the ground are part of the solution. Transitioning agriculture towards sustainability together.

A reduction of Greenhouse gases is being demanded through our value chains. Farmers need to be at the table of change, not on the menu. The boots on the ground are part of the solution and need to be part of discussions and decisions. Farmers must remain profitable to enable change.

In the aftermath of the World Wars, nations prioritised food security and production, leading to increased international trade. Post-COVID, global discussions now revolve around food and fuel security, climate improvements, and sustainability. Agriculture is recognised as crucial in finding solutions to these challenges, with responsibility extending throughout the entire value chain, not just to farmers. Trade plays a pivotal role in resource sharing and environmental sustainability, exemplified by New Zealand’s dairy industry, which exports 95% of its products.

However, the dairy industry faces environmental pressures, both domestically and internationally. Successful mitigation programs emphasise voluntary, trusted, and measurable approaches, such as those seen in the Catskills Watershed and Arla’s 80-point programme.

To avoid dairy becoming the new coal and instead be part of the climate solution, financial solutions driven by Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) targets are crucial. Companies setting ESG targets are viewed as more successful and profitable, leading to increased access to capital. Green loan funds globally highlight the growing importance of sustainability in business.

Consumers’ demands for greenhouse gas reductions are not met with a willingness to pay, but rather through pressure from ESG stakeholders, investors, and employees. Market and capital access is now contingent on meeting social expectations, such as sustainability plans.

Transition payments through the value chain offer a solution, alleviating the burden falling solely on farmers and ensuring their economic viability during the transition to more sustainable practices that reduce greenhouse gases. Brands and customers, such as Nestle and Mars, are recognising the need to support farmers through this transition. However, structuring payments is complex, with brands currently willing to pay for greenhouse gas reductions but not yet for other nature-positive outcomes.

A reverse auction model or transition payment system could provide a platform for change, enabling farmers to choose their level of participation and providing compensation for their efforts in adopting sustainable practices. New Zealand’s unique farming system, facilitated by cooperatives like Fonterra, presents opportunities for collective action and innovative solutions.

By embracing ESG principles and transitioning towards sustainability, agriculture can ensure continued access to markets and capital while addressing environmental challenges. Early adopters stand to eliminate their risks and become experts in sustainable farming practices, shaping the future of agriculture for generations to come.

Keywords for Search: Kylie Leonard