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...

From supply chain to value chain. Understanding the mindset needed to transition for lamb producers.

Executive summary

Disruption has become a constant condition of doing business. The businesses that are more likely to thrive are those that can not only respond by adapting to continuous change but also become the drivers of that change.

The landscape of farming in New Zealand is evolving. Previously it has relied on low-cost competitive advantage. This has been achieved by either increasing productivity or reducing costs, but it is now becoming more difficult to maintain this. Adding value to the lamb that we produce is seen as a way to adapt to this change and is seen as a pathway forward for lamb producers.

This report seeks to understand some of the existing lamb-selling strategies and the mindset of lamb producers. It then examines how to change from a supply chain strategy to a value chain strategy and what that means for the farmer.

A literature review was undertaken to further understand the research topic. Nineteen semi-structured interviews were undertaken with participants either connected to the Lumina Lamb programme or with a deep understanding of value chains.

Some lamb producers have the same selling strategy that they have always employed whilst others are naturally curious and seeking opportunities, to increase returns and build resilience which leads them to be attracted to a customer-led value chain. This relates fundamentally to a farmer’s mindset and the reason ‘why’. Which was driven by an understanding of the customer, the chef.

Lumina Farmers valued their connection with the chefs. The key to Lumina’s success today is based on communication and transparency of the whole value chain and the ability for farmers to be part of a producer group with similar values.

Farmers valued the connection with other like-minded farmers, the collaboration and opportunity to learn from each other, were powerful, motivating and encouraged farmers to join the Lumina programme. To enable this change, the use of incentives in areas that need behavioural change that benefit the whole value chain would be the biggest challenge for growth.

Recommendations

This report outlines recommendations for companies trying to transition from producing a commodity product to a premium product. Some of these findings will be directed at the Lumina programme, but the concept will have relevance to other sectors and programmes.
To achieve the organisation’s goals Lumina leaders, need to:

1. Actively seek to understand the farmer’s current selling strategy and their mindset.

When looking to bring new farmers into the Lumina programme, the initial focus of the discussion should be to get an understanding of the farmer’s existing selling policies and why their motivations for choosing that strategy. The transition to supplying a premium product could require a change in values and mindset by the farmer.

2. Connect the farmer to the Customer.

Build an attractive connection between Lumina farmers and their customer.

3. Utilise the power of the champions in the Lumina community.

Encourage interaction amongst the farmers of the group, express the benefits of collaboration, to build on the strength that the Programme already has.

Champion farmers as Lumina ambassadors, which will create an environment of excellence.

4. Develop a Road Map for farmers to understand the pathway into the Lumina programme.

Outline the different pathways on how to join the Lumina programme with clear systems in place that outline the requirements and identify the risks and opportunities. And expectations?

Matt Smith, Matthew

Is it worth it? Costs and benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions on sheep and beef farms.

Executive summary

Why should sheep and beef farmers decrease their on-farm greenhouse emissions and what is the cost in doing so?

Climate change is directly linked to greenhouse gas emissions and is something that cannot be ignored. Major weather events, affecting the primary sector have highlighted the need for change. 50% of NZ emissions come from the agriculture sector, but at what cost will emissions reduction have on the farmer? Will the potential economic benefits outweigh the costs of current mitigation methods?

This report seeks to inform sheep and beef farmers, which of the current mitigation methods have the least effect on profitability and what economic benefits they may gain in doing so. The focus is on the cost and benefits of on-farm profitability, so concentrates on costs, income streams and potential premiums linked to the reduction of on-farm emissions.

Scenario analysis has been used to model greenhouse gas reduction methods that are currently available on sheep and beef properties, other literature was reviewed to compare methodology and results. A literature review was also used to assess benefits of reducing emissions.

While planting forestry offsets and reducing stocking rates are the mostly available methods, the scenario analysis also explored a combination of both, combined with increases in reproductive rates of the remaining stock units on hand.

Plantation forestry is an opportunity for sheep and beef farmers to use lesser productive areas of their property and along with reducing emissions, provides another revenue stream.

Reducing stocking rates is a solution which requires little initial investment but unless production per head is increased, has a large impact on profitability. A combination of forestry and reduced stocking rates, has the largest emissions reduction but the potential earnings from forestry will not be realised unless production has been increased. This may be unachievable depending on the underlying features of the property.

The demand for reduced emissions is mainly from leadership in organisations such as governments, processors and banks. This is driven by obligations to provide feedback to stakeholders on environmental objectives and align with targets of the Paris Agreement. There is no huge demand for low-emissions meat from consumers as they place greater importance on other factors such as the quality of meat.

An introduction of an on-farm emissions levy or introduction of Agriculture in the emissions trading scheme, in order for NZ to achieve their Paris Agreement obligations would be the greatest incentive to currently reduce emissions.
Based on the analysis, it is recommended that the following is taken into consideration when adopting a method to reduce on-farm emissions:

  • the saving of an emissions levy that the method would provide;
  • if the cost of the mitigation method is more than the expected emissions levy price;
  • reviewing the cost of mitigation on the basis of kilogram of meat produced on farm to determine what premium would be required;
  • if planting forestry, assessment of the expected return on investment and minimum return per hectare required to achieve this;
  • if reducing stocking rates, the ability and extra costs of increasing production per head;
  • demand for reduced emissions from organisations that directly affect the farm business, and
  • consumer demand for low emissions products and their willingness to pay a premium.

Tim Bathgate

Growers feeling fleeced. How might the market price improve for strong wool growers?

Executive summary

New Zealand farming is synonymous with sheep. Their naturally grown fleece has many unique attributes that make it a “super-fibre”, but competition from synthetic fibres has seen a decline in the popularity of wool over the last fifty years, as synthetics are cheaper to produce and consistently perform well in manufacturing.

Wool used to be the main income stream for sheep and beef farmers and strong wool now is currently a net loss for growers. Sheep still need to be shorn for the health of the animal but considering all the additional costs of doing business these days, removing wool from their business is a choice many are considering.

For generations, New Zealand growers have developed sheep genetics that yield a high quality and quantity of wool and this report highlights the opportunities and markets that still exist and are developing that need their wool clip.

Purpose of report.

The purpose of this report is to understand the structure of the New Zealand strong wool industry. To understand how the market price is determined for strong wool, an industry analysis is conducted, the driving forces influencing the wool market pricing are identified and the opportunities and challenges facing the industry are discussed with a focus on the grower.

This report is aimed at the next generation of decision-makers on sheep and beef farms to inform them of the market opportunities that exist for strong wool and recommend how might the market price improve for strong wool.

Methodology.

A mixed qualitative research approach is used including Content analysis, through a literature review, Semi-structured interviews with fifteen industry stakeholders, and Thematic analysis used to evaluate insights from the interviews. Discussion of the profitability and competitiveness of the New Zealand strong wool industry is completed using Porter’s Five Forces and PESTEL model.

Analysis and Discussion.

Analysis of the themes from interviews and literature found prioritizing quality, collaboration, promotion, environmental sustainability, and global market engagement will pave the way for improved market prices.

  • There is a consumer trend towards natural fibre solutions over plastics and synthetics.
  • There is a demand for quality New Zealand strong wool, and it is well-suited for carpet manufacturing.
  • Competitive rivalry is high within the strong wool industry and profitability is low.
  • There are many other uses for strong wool, and these are increasing as growers and businesses innovate by solving problems with natural fibres, none of which are currently consuming a significant volume to influence the market demand.
  • Quality strong wool will sell well, but to what degree? that is influenced by the additional value created through collaboration with businesses well connected to the consumer.


Recommendations.

  1. Growers to ensure a quality clip is produced and well prepared for sale.
  2. Growers to collaborate with other wool suppliers and supply chain partners. This is key to creating additional value and a unique value proposition with their strong wool clip.
  3. All stakeholders are responsible for promoting wool and its advantages to consumers.

Annabel Barnett

Climate resilience. How might we build resilience with kiwifruit growers in a changing climate?

Executive summary

The kiwifruit industry is New Zealand’s largest horticultural exporter, responsible for 40% of all horticultural revenue (Aitken & Warrington, 2021) and in 2021, celebrated a record-breaking harvest exceeding $4 billion of global revenue (Burke, 2023). The impacts of climate change are being felt in the industry and will continue to have an impact on kiwifruit growing seasons into the future.

The purpose of this report is to collate scientific climate change data, analyse the likely impact this will have on key kiwifruit growing regions and summarise strategies to help kiwifruit growers build climate change resilience.

The aims of this report are to:

  • Outline the likely impacts of climate change for New Zealand.
  • Understand the current impacts of climate change on kiwifruit growers and where the greatest risks are for the future.
  • Provide recommendations that will help build resilience and give growers confidence going forward.

The methodology for this report was based on the three-legged stool model. This included conducting a literature review, semi-structured interviews, and a thematic analysis to discover new knowledge to help build climate change resilience amongst kiwifruit growers.
The four main areas of climate change impact are:

  1. Average temperatures are set to increase.
  2. Minimum temperatures are set to increase.
  3. Average rainfall (precipitation) will be varied across the regions. The upper North Island is likely to become dryer.
  4. Hot days (>25 oC) are likely to become more frequent with impacts posing a moderate risk.

These climate change impacts will have two major impacts on the kiwifruit industry. Firstly, there will be a decrease in winter chill hours, directly affecting the number of flower buds produced. Secondly, there may be a shift in suitable kiwifruit growing regions due to increasing temperatures. Regions that were formerly too cold and presented frost risk, may become more suitable than current regions.

The findings from semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis identified the following recommendations to help growers build climate change resilience:

  1. Growers should work to become financially resilient by building reserves for responding to future climate change events.
  2. Prior to purchasing a new orchard, due diligence should include climate change impacts.
  3. Climate change is not a static problem. Adaptability is an essential attribute for growers to maintain their climate change resilience.
  4. Collaboration will be key in responding to climate change. Growers, postharvest and Zespri all have their part to play.

Transparency of data from postharvest and Zespri is needed to give growers confidence in the longevity of the kiwifruit industry.

Bryce Morrison

Genetic Technologies and the Effect on New Zealand’s Dairy Farmers

Executive summary

New Zealand’s dairy industry is strategically important to New Zealand. Dairy generates $25.7b in exports, or 1 in every 4 dollars which has grown by $7.9b since 2019. It is a cornerstone employer in many regions, with 55,000 employees’ nationally, considerable wage growth, and is a top 10 purchaser across dozens of industries. (Stats NZ – Sense Partners 2023).

Despite dairy farming’s economic importance, New Zealand has strict controls regarding the use and development of genetic technologies that are readily available around the globe, which could further advance the industry.

The aims of this report are to:

  • Outline the potential opportunities for genetic technologies for New Zealand’s Dairy Farmers.
  • Understand the potential risks or threats of genetic technology use in New Zealand.
  • Help to inform dairy farmers on genetic technologies.

The methodology for this report was the joint analysis method. This included conducting a literature review and semi structured interviews to build knowledge on genetic technologies and what implications those could have on the end user – the farmer.

Genetic technology is a broad topic, covering transgenesis or genetic modification, as well as new breeding technologies which is targeted gene editing using site directed nucleases resulting in gene deletion, modification, or gene insertion. Application of these technologies are broad; however, this report serves to focus on plants for animal feed such as grasses, legumes, and brassicas.

The findings from the literature review and semi structured interviews identified the following recommendations that could help farmers improve across the board, including increased output and productivity, improved environmental outcomes, animal wellbeing and financial benefits.

  • New Zealand needs a science based, consistent approach to regulating genetic technologies. This will need to evolve as the science develops and evolves.
  • Risks need to be balanced against benefits and ensure adequate testing is undertaken before commercial use. This should include flow on effects and animal health monitoring for plant breeding.
  • The right plant breeding programs need to be prioritised first.
  • Incremental gains are powerful in the long run, but New Zealand needs to adopt genetic technologies now.

Due to the economic value of the dairy industry, if farmers prosper there can be an expectation that regional economies will be positively affected, median wages for dairy workers will rise, and local input purchasing will rise with this.

Scott Armer

Commercialisation learnings for Agritech

Executive summary

There is a growing global demand for agritech to solve major global issues, such as climate change, water use and quality, and increased yields from food and fibre to feed the world’s population.

Whilst New Zealand has a proud history of primary sector innovation, there are only a handful of agritech companies of international significance. The 2020 Aotearoa Agritech Unleashed Report opined; “Compared to our international peers we are punching below our weight in our relative economic value and export earnings from agritech”.

What can New Zealand agritech companies do better to commercialise their innovations to grow the sector, but ultimately to help solve these global challenges and in the process advance New Zealand’s international competitiveness in primary production and grow our export earnings.

This report has undertaken to seek learnings and insights of what successful commercialisation of innovation looks like and apply this to a New Zealand agritech context to present key denominators for successful commercialisation of agritech.

The study completed literature reviews of academic, industry and business publications across innovation and agritech, together with semi-structured interviews with New Zealand agritech practitioners.

Thematic Analysis was applied to the body of research and interviews to capture the Key Findings and related Recommendations as follows:

1. Engage in Critical Self-Assessment:

Critically evaluating whether the agritech founder has a minimum viable product with initial customers to get to the start line. To be commercially successful at scale requires ongoing discipline for critical self-assessment of:

  • Total addressable market; develop a clear understanding at the outset of the addressable market, validating the innovation to that addressable market, what investment is required and the profit model.
  • Founders’ skills, traits and shortcomings; actively build a team with complementary skills and capabilities requiring the right industry and functional expertise (technical, operational, commercial and financial) with an ability to execute.

2. Value Proposition:

Develop and define a clear and (relatively) material value proposition for the adopters of the innovative solution. The Founders need to be focused on delivering a client solution (not an innovation).

3. Business Model:

Bring together the component parts to execute the commercialisation growth, including:

  • Product and market lifecycle; recognise and plan for the innovation to evolve from the initial core product and early adopter market to an augmented solution delivered and serviced for a mainstream market which requires active planning for channel to market, wrap-around solution, communication strategies and services model.
  • Resources; The resources required to execute, not just the team and governance, but broader relationships, suppliers, channel partners, components, facilities etc.
  • Profit Model & Capital structure; continually evaluate the commercial model and align with a fit for purpose capital structure. If external capital is required to support the company to break-even, then ensure that “smart” capital is pursued with the right industry experience and networks for execution.

The approach and recommendations have been brought together into a Framework of Key Denominators to Enhance Successful Commercialisation of Agritech (show in Figure 11 of the report).

The key themes, or denominators are all inter-related, they cannot be approached or applied in isolation. The framework is not a one-size-fits-all but a valuable roadmap to be evaluated and adapted for each unique agritech innovation and market opportunity.

Murray Dyer

How do early-stage AgriTech founders use professional assistance?

Executive summary

This project has looked at how smaller AgriTech start-ups have used professional assistance, with the objective of better understanding of why or why not assistance is obtained and the timing around these decisions.

A combination of a literature review followed by interviews with six founders of smaller AgriTech start-ups and four professional advisors were undertaken to identify topical findings.

There was limited New Zealand specific literature, therefore relevant literature from a broad range of overseas countries has been reviewed.

Interviews were undertaken to obtain qualitative data from founders of smaller AgriTech start-up companies and professional advisors aligned with the AgriTech industry.

A consistent theme observed in the findings from both the literature review and interviews was that better outcomes can be achieved by founders of smaller AgriTech start-up companies who make use of appropriate professional assistance earlier on in their journey.

The main recommendations are:

  • Founders of smaller AgriTech start-up companies should seek professional assistance early in the journey.
  • Founders of smaller AgriTech start-up companies should actively seek out their regional start-up hub for educational events and networking.
  • Professional Advisors should be sufficiently self-aware to understand that they may not have the appropriate skill set for working with smaller AgriTech start-up companies.
  • Professional Advisors should provide Founders with a road-map outlining the stages at which specific advice would best be most useful.
  • Founders and professional advisors should ensure that their relationship is built on mutual trust. There needs to be an inherent level of trust between the founders of smaller AgriTech start-up companies and the professional advisors that they engage with.

    As noted in the limitations to this project, further research could be undertaken with a larger sample pool to ensure robustness of the conclusions.

Steve Hydes

Know Your Why – Motivations for a Sustainable Future.

Executive summary

With growing demands for sustainability in the food and fibre industries, there is mounting pressure from consumers to produce environmentally responsible products. This report addresses the necessity for the New Zealand dairy industry to prioritise climate change concerns and associated greenhouse gas emissions to secure a sustainable future.

The report aims to understand the motivations behind the adoption of new innovations by dairy farmers and learn how to accelerate the uptake of practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, thereby ensuring the long-term sustainability of farming in New Zealand. Additionally, the report aims to create a resource to inform government, industry bodies, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) about alternative approaches to motivate farmers in reducing greenhouse gas emissions positively.

The research question guiding this study is: How can we motivate New Zealand dairy farmers to embrace practices that effectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

A literature review was conducted to gain insights into the significance of greenhouse gases in the New Zealand dairy industry. The review examined the impact and relevance of greenhouse gases within the New Zealand dairy industry. 23 semi-structured interviews were used to uncover the motivations that would drive New Zealand dairy farmers to adopt practices aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions on their farm. Responses were categorised into the following high-level themes:

WHY (belief): Explored the aspects of purpose, motivation, social structure, and trust.
HOW (actions): Focused on leadership, communication, and pathway implementation.
WHAT (result): Addressed knowledge acquisition, problem definition, and barriers encountered.

Information gathered from the literature review and semi-structured interviews, highlighted the importance of understanding the “WHY” behind motivations and the utilisation of effective communication strategies (“HOW”) to drive the adoption of sustainable practices within the New Zealand dairy industry.

Recommendations:

  • Leverage the intrinsic values and purpose that farmers already possess. When developing GHG related communications to dairy farmers, industry partners should inspire farmers towards transformative change by building on farmers’ existing intrinsic values and encouraging mastery to drive toward continuous improvement.

  • Emphasise the importance of the economic benefits and social licence to operate. Milk processors need to communicate to farmers and rural professionals the potential advantages of being market leaders in greenhouse gas emissions reduction and the consequences of falling behind.

  • Create a single location for information regarding greenhouse gas related resources. Ministry for the Environment should provide and manage a resource location (i.e. website) for reputable GHG related literature, policies, regulations and general resources related to climate change specifically for the dairy sector.

  • Provide greenhouse gas emissions resources for veterinarians. New Zealand Veterinarian Association (NZVA) should curate a list of reputable sources of information regarding greenhouse gas emissions regulations, mitigation strategies, and the economic advantages of adopting practices that reduce GHG emissions. As a trusted source of information, veterinarians can disseminate this information to dairy farmers.

Tracey Reynolds

Lean on Me: The Effectiveness of Psychosocial Services Available to Farmers Following Adverse Events.

Executive summary

Climate change is increasing the frequency of climatic extremes. Accordingly rural psychosocial services must be prepared to support farmers in the face of increased adverse events. For those farmers most severely affected, the rural clinical mental health services which treat farmers are often underfunded, under resourced and difficult to access due to structural inequities.

New Zealand’s economy and wellbeing of its people are intricately linked to the success of the primary sector. Therefore, farmers’ psychosocial recovery after an adverse event is vital, not only for moral reasons, but sound economic reasons.

This project examines who the stakeholders are in the rural psychosocial ecosystem, how farmers interact with these stakeholders, and how these stakeholders in turn interact together. It aims to understand the challenges and constraints to delivery of effective psychosocial services, and solutions to overcome these challenges and constraints.

The key learnings of this project are:

  • Distant stakeholders who set policy and control funding are removed from rural communities’ needs and consequently, prioritisation and understanding of rural mental health suffer.
  • There is a lack of strategic direction and metrics in rural mental health, and specifically psychosocial recovery following adverse events. There is a dearth of data, duplication and confusion of roles, unsustainable funding models for psychosocial services and a stretched clinical mental health workforce. All of which contribute to a less effective service for farmers.
  • Psychosocial services need more support to develop and deliver their services.
  • There is currently no plan to address rural mental health clinical workforce issues.
  • In the absence of sector leadership, the government is currently leading the psychosocial response after adverse events which is leading to ineffective outcomes for farmers.

The recommendations from this project are:

  • Develop a long-term national strategy for rural mental health including psychosocial recovery following adverse events, led by the sector and its industry co-funded mental health champion/ chief executive (CE).
  • Establish a role within MPI’s Rural Communities’ office to advocate rural mental health and improve prioritisation of rural mental health.
  • Develop a rural pathway for clinical psychologists and psychiatrists with their respective registration bodies to bolster the rural mental health workforce, overseen by Ministry of Health and the sector’s mental health champion/ CE.
  • Fund and resource existing psychosocial services, such as Rural Support Trust, to attract and develop some in-house clinical expertise to lessen the burden on the rural clinical workforce.
  • Prioritise rural connectivity to enable technological solutions, with subsidisation for satellite connectivity.

Vanessa Thomson

Women in beekeeping: how to champion ladies in the apiculture industry.

Executive summary

The Apiculture industry plays a key role in the economy not only for their production itself but also for all the benefits that bees provide to the ecosystem and economy. It is also important to consider that diversity and inclusion are not a trend or an item on the governmental agencies agenda, but it is one of the goals of the United Nations to achieve sustainable development by 2030. This report will focus on female beekeepers and will delve into their experiences in the New Zealand’s Apiculture Industry.

Key findings.

The nine interviews provided valuable insights and the semi-structured questions were thoughtfully organised into thematic groups that facilitated the subsequent thematic analysis of qualitative data. To maintain focus and coherence, the identified themes will be kept for in-depth exploration and analysis.

Representation: female beekeepers see the industry as a place where they are underrepresented.
Support: Mentoring was key, and life-changing support was received. The support they did not receive but was needed, is diverse; varies from one beekeeper to another greatly.
Barriers, Uncovering Biases and Advancing Gender Awareness: the most mentioned were gender-based bias and queen bee syndrome.
Women+: Work flexibility is especially important for employed beekeepers as well as for self-employed, this perk is fundamental in attracting more women into the industry and increasing retention.

Recommendations.

Increase women’s representation:
● Annual women’s meeting at the beekeeping conference.
● More female speakers at conferences.
● Showcase the ladies that represent the industry.

Biases, gender awareness and harassment: things to keep in mind on the way to gender bias-free interactions are: Question your bias, address inappropriate behaviour and act against “bad” behaviour.

Improve Gender Equality in job promotions: Ask Why? Why are women not applying for a position?

Sol Tejada