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...

2017

Is it possible to enhance environmental protection on a farm without sacrificing all your farm profits.

Executive summary

Environment protection to some degree is something that every sheep and beef farmer in the country is going to have to either deal with currently, or sometime in the near future. The degree of environmental protection will depend on the regions location and also the issues relevant to every individual farm, but it would be naive for anyone do think that doing nothing is an option. 

The purpose of this project is to try and quantify some of the costs associated with environmental protection to an individual farmer and their farm. It is also about investigating whether farm policy changes or changes in management practices could generate increased income to cover the costs of environmental protection. Any changes to the farming system had to be sustainable though, and not have an increased environmental footprint.

The project focused on a case study 420 effective hectare sheep, beef, and dairy support farm in the King Country. The main costs associated with enhancing environmental protection included riparian fencing and planting, stock exclusion from native bush and wetlands, poplar pole plantings, and reticulated water system upgrades. The total cost for the farm is calculated to be $124,920, or $297/eff ha.

Scenario analysis was then conducted and different stock class policies were analysed, giving a lift in annual farm profit from current farm profits, ranging from $41,442 to $138,587. All of these scenarios required additional capital funds for capital stock purchases, ranging from $80,530 to $378,921.
All of the scenarios analysed were also modelled through computer nutrient budgeting software programme Overseer, and all scenarios either held or decreased nutrient outputs lost to water.

After comparing and contrasting all the scenarios, it was decided to implement a scenario that did not generate the highest lift in profit, but one which was relatively risk averse, and had the best fit with the vision and long term goals of the farm and farm shareholders.

In this case, it was possible to demonstrate that it was possible to enhance the level of environmental protection on a sheep and beef farm without sacrificing farm profits, however it did require stock class and policy change in order to fund this. Farms where stock class and policy change is not an option would have to look at increasing the performance of their current stock classes in order to achieve the same outcome.

Dwayne Cowin

What does good governance look like for irrigation schemes to be perceived as successful.

Executive summary

Water for New Zealand has been described as a ‘Wicked Problem’. 

This is a term that has been used to relate the degree of social and ecological complexity involved. It also describes how different world views on such problems can shape both the definition and the solution. This is not always positive or balanced.

For New Zealanders water is a passion, an integral part of our lives and our environment. It is also an important resource for agriculture and economic development. Our need to balance expectations to achieve optimal outcomes for all New Zealand is paramount.

There are many layers of water governance in New Zealand. For irrigators and irrigation schemes the many elements at play and competing voices are creating an increasingly complex environment for them to work in.

The aim of this project is to clarify for Irrigation schemes the breadth of elements at play in water governance in New Zealand. Through conversations with stakeholders, it is also to provide some direction for schemes as to what is going to be required of their own governance structures. This will enable them to be perceived as successful, legitimate and trusted users of water, our public resource.
For the wider public in New Zealand water quality has consistently been seen as a pressing environmental issue. The scrutiny of governance and management of water has never been greater than now. Competing needs have come to the fore and the environmental impact of land and water use has become better understood. As the degradation of our water ways has become more evident environmental groups and the media have been increasingly effective in highlighting any issues through campaigns and negative commentary. This has done an enormous amount of damage to the confidence and trust placed not only in irrigators and irrigation schemes as water users, but also ‘brand Agriculture’.

Understanding how the layers of water governance in New Zealand work is critical to understanding how we got to this place. There is no doubt that water governance in New Zealand is complex. It is not well integrated. There is responsibility for, or a connection to, water in almost every government department.

New Zealand’s primary legislation for the sustainable management of its natural and physical resources – the Resource Management Act (RMA) was passed in 1991. The councils charged with implementing this piece of legislation were often poorly resourced.

The slow response to environmental expectations politically, regionally and by the primary sector led to the growing influence of less formal but significant voices being heard. The accumulative effect of these voices and government policy development, including environmental bottom lines has led to the unprecedented scope and pace of change now being experienced on the ground by irrigators and irrigation schemes.

This scope and pace of change is an enormous challenge. Not only logistically for implementation but also the expectation for environmental results. This is impacting on irrigation schemes and their role.
Once conveyors of water to the farm gate, irrigation schemes are now finding themselves in a far more complex situation. Their role is now one of resource management – that is management of water and nutrients with responsibility and liabilities for meeting consent obligations. They are being ambitious, and investing significantly in supporting their shareholders in implementing change but this is unchartered territory and not all benefits or pitfalls can be anticipated. Maintaining relationships, with both shareholders and councils as the granters of the consent, are of primary concern and this is going to be critical to their success.

This project has exposed deep challenges around trust and confidence at all levels of water governance in New Zealand. There is no silver bullet to deliver an immediate change to water quality to fix this. The interviews show a clear commitment by the schemes to work through implementing change and ensuring they work with those stakeholders directly connected to best effect.
This research however has highlighted a new opportunity to effect real change. This is the opportunity to change perceptions so that irrigators and irrigation schemes be acknowledged as effective, legitimate and trusted users of water for the benefit of New Zealand.

This will mean irrigation schemes need to be willing to embrace a more diverse and outward looking board. They need to bring people in that will challenge their thinking and hold them to account. Building diverse boards that look outwards and have societal values will go a long way to building external confidence. As one interviewee pointed out “There has been some tinkering around the edges – mainly with lawyers and accountants and while they can be valuable additions the question needs to be ‘what is the skill we need?’ and ‘what is the issue we are dealing with?’ Not who do we know that we can work with… and definitely not representing where you come from (leave your hat at the door!)”
Such an approach will be confronting but it will provide a transparency and an openness to start discussion. It will also provide an opportunity to have realistic conversations and find reference points for communities to collaborate. It will negate negative commentary because the wider community along with irrigation scheme boards will own the outcomes.

This is a first and critical step for irrigation schemes to ‘break the ice’ and become trusted users of water, our public resource.

Chris Couglan

Canterbury water management strategy.

Executive summary

Water and water management in New Zealand, and specifically Canterbury, has been described as a ‘wicked problem’ (‘Old Problems New Solutions’, 2011). Increased demand for water abstraction, along with issues of water quality, water storage and decision making processes that recognise cultural and social values, have resulted in ongoing debates between stakeholders and interested parties. Over time several interventions have been introduced, including resource management legislation and the formation of regional councils. With the Ministry of Primary Industries setting a goal of doubling agricultural export production by 2025, the ‘wicked problem’ will continue to challenge our communities into the future. In addition, global markets and their consumers increasingly want to know their purchased food items have been sustainably harvested and managed. To achieve these goals, we will need to learn from the past, think and operate in new ways and continue to be innovative in good management practices (Ministry of Primary Industries, 2016). 

Regions, industry, and politicians are collectively working out solutions at a national, regional, and local level to be able to achieve sustainable growth objectives and implement agreed good management practices. A new range of regionally specific implementation tools will be required to achieve these objectives and outcomes. Since the late 1990s the Canterbury Water Management Strategy (CWMS) has been a primary tool used in this region to engage and involve community, special interest groups, industry and agricultural, in the development of enduring water management policies, practices, and outcomes.

Since November 2009, the CWMS has stimulated a significant amount of community and stakeholder engagement and commitment. By resourcing dedicated positions and integrating community members alongside the Regional Council staff, this approach has led to innovative and collective solutions to water management issues. The CWMS engagement process was the centre focus to the development of a statutory regional land and water plan, now into the implementation phase. This region wide plan provided the framework to develop catchment based sub-regional plans, which CWMS was vital in delivering, as well as the identification of catchment specific non-statutory tools.

The author is a Programme Manager for CWMS (and Biodiversity and Biosecurity), and sought to understand, after seven years of implementation of the CWMS, “How do you keep community members/organisations and stakeholders actively engaged and participating in an established collaborative governance process, on regional water management?”

Collaborative community driven water management policies are not unique to Canterbury or New Zealand. An international literature review of differing collaborative community based programmes was conducted to understand the motivators for sustained community involvement. Three catchment based water management models (Murray-Darling Basin, Australia, the Fraser River Basin, Canada and the Lower Saxony, Germany), were looked at in more detail to provide a comparison to local findings from participants in the CWMS.
The required commitment to an integrated water resource management process is ongoing with no likely end point. It continually develops as do the organisations that are charged with supporting or collaborating in the process. The commitment of the region’s political leaders to the participatory process as it moves from centralised to decentralised governance, is essential. The motivators for maintaining community engagement include, wider understanding of the issues, building new networks, strengthening existing networks, and developing collaborative solutions.

The main findings from this study are:

  • Adoption of a collaborative community process requires significant commitment from the community and governance institutions. Most models allow for an iterative approach of development, implementation and review meaning these processes often have no end point.
  • Collaborative community participatory processes enables a shift from centralised decision making to decentralised governance.
  • Benefit of community driven processes includes ownership of issues and solutions, growth of community knowledge, stronger networks, wider understanding of issues and viewpoints and a greater sense of community.
  • Critical requirement that local or regional authorities fully support and implement the community derived solutions. This requires authorities to adopt solutions without modification and with sufficient dedicated resources.

Don Chittock

Communicating with our growers.

Executive summary

This report was written with the aim of finding out how we can communicate more effectively with our suppliers. By ‘we’ I mean Trevelyan’s Pack and Cool Ltd, a kiwifruit and avocado post harvest company based in Te Puke, with approximately 330 suppliers. The research methods included
  1. a literature review
  2. an interview of four other primary industry based operations
  3. an online survey of our existing suppliers
  4. an interview of four existing suppliers
Key findings included
  • A need for our company to revamp our website offering to growers
  • A need to be concise with the information we provide
  • High performing companies have a focus on reporting and payment of quality of product supplied, not only quantity of product supplied.
This report was compiled with the help of many different people from throughout primary industries within New Zealand.

Daniel Birnie

Spray Use In The Kiwi Fruit Industry: How are we communicating with our community here in the bay of plenty

Executive summary

This report provides a review of how we are communicating with our communities (grower communities and wider public) within the context of the Bay of Plenty kiwifruit industry, as a way of starting to answer the question of whether we are adequately communicating, and if there are areas we need to focus on for improvement. 

Sources reviewed included material made available by the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Zespri, New Zealand Kiwifruit Growers Incorporated, traditional news media, alternative news media, and social media. There were also conversations held with several orchardists. The goal was to find information that would come up when a member of the public searches, and this meant that not
all sources were the newest available.

The first sources that came up in most searches were from the regional council, followed by news media and social media. Material from the kiwifruit industry tended to be further down the list unless the search terms were modified with terms related to these (such as adding “Zespri” or “NZKGI” to the search). While most sources were quite balanced, alternative media had a tendency to publish more opinion pieces which were often negatively pointed towards spraying, and social media was all negative with one or two exceptions.

How should we communicate with our communities going forward?

  • Grower education – Make sure growers understand what their responsibilities are, and what their neighbours’; expectations are. Ensure that they know how to use their products correctly.
  • Community education – Help the community understand what their rights are, so that they understand there are laws to help protect them. Inform them as to what types of products we are using, why we’re using them, how those products compare to their alternatives, and what steps we have taken as an industry to reduce the impact we have on our neighbours through spraying.

The report finds that the kiwifruit industry is in the process of developing a strong communication programme regarding orchard spraying, but that the information we want to get in front of the public isn’t necessarily being shared with them right now. The industry has made great improvements to our spray practices in the last few years, and we need to make sure we promote this to the community prior to any major spray application periods via newspapers, mailbox drops, and community meetings, to counter the negativity before it becomes a major issue.

A time limitation while working on this report has led to detailed interviews with orchardists and the public not being conducted. Some additional work needed is suggested in the “Next Steps” section for anyone wanting to go into more depth on the issue of communication regarding spraying and agrichemicals.

Craig Ward

Technology use by sheep and beef farmers.

Executive Summary

Farming is increasing in complexity. As such technology is becoming more important in businesses to understand impacts on both financial and physical performance. Top farmers typically lead effective technology adoption. However, this is not always the case. Five Wairarapa farmers along with one Central North Island Farmer were interviewed to determine how and why technology is used in farm businesses, to be a top farmer.

Past research in this area has been minimal, particularly in the sheep and beef sector. The majority of the research has been conducted with dairy industry funding. As such, little is really known about how and why top sheep and beef farmers use technology.

Budgeting technology was a key part of each farm business, and the only technology used by all six farmers. Farmax and Farm IQ were the two other technologies that were utilised in four of these farm businesses and were a key to their success.

Three important findings have emerged from this research. Firstly, top farmers are intrinsically successful. Technology just assists them in knowing their position to make informed decisions. Secondly, ground-truthing the results from technology with the farmers gut-feel and observations in the paddock is critical to effective decision making. Finally, technology provides some level of ‘insurance’ against events that may render the key decision maker unable to perform their duties for an extended period.

Technology use is unique to individuals, but some themes emerge time after time. Therefore, a greater understanding of these will lead to a more successful and resilient sheep and beef industry.

It is hoped this report will stimulate further discussion and investigation into technology-use on farms by farmers and industry professionals alike.

Industry crossroads.

Executive Summary

The dairy industry in New Zealand today is as important to the future of the dairy farmer as it is to the future of the New Zealand economy.

But as the industry stands, dairy is at a crossroads.

New Zealand was identified early in its colonisation as being blessed with the ideal climate and wide open spaces, ideal for pastoral farming and growing healthy livestock perfect for the production of milk. Chief Dairy Economist to the Government in 1884, William Bowron noted “The untold wealth of New Zealand lies upon the surface and the cow is the first factor in the way of securing it…..”.

In recent years, dairy in New Zealand has experienced unprecedented growth, driven by the availability of efficient irrigation to areas that traditionally saw other land use. This growth is based on the returns from other sectors not meeting the needs in many cases to make that irrigation viable. Market signals and the reputation of our milk in emerging markets, notably China has resulted in a change, not only the supply and demand paradigm but also in the interest international corporations and governments have in New Zealand Inc and more importantly New Zealand dairy. This is seen in the purchasing of land for conversion to dairy or established dairy farms, and the building of milk processing plants by these overseas players.

Multinational companies continue to set up in New Zealand thereby increasing competition, but further fragmenting the industry. The increase in optionality for farmers and the attraction of growth through release of share capital has proved to be too tempting for many. Fonterra is still the majority co-operative but it’s market share of the New Zealand milk pool has declined in recent times.

The Dairy Industry Restructuring Act (DIRA) introduced at the inception of Fonterra, has played a key role through the past 15 years in the sectors growth and development. It also encouraged greater competition within the industry. Although this act is being reviewed and changes are to go to the select committee, there is a further need for its relevance in the current climate. It needs to be reviewed as to whether parts, if not all of it is necessary at all.

In order to protect the future of the dairy industry, we have to look to the long term. With talk of competition coming at us from less traditional means in the form of synthetic milk we need to work collaboratively in order to ensure our future prosperity as an industry and a country.

Investigating the impact of social media on the primary industry in New Zealand.

Executive Summary

Social media offers primary sector corporations the opportunity to leverage network effects. Rather than one to one interactions, groups of customers and stakeholders have the opportunity to support each other. Primary industry corporations can use social media platforms to facilitate these interactions. This results in increased efficiency, better brand awareness and improved customer relationships.

The primary industry is constantly in the public eye and put under scrutiny. Therefore, it is important for companies within the industry to have a voice, social media has proven to provide a platform for companies to share their voice.

This report identifies how social media is used both positively and negatively. Firstly, an overview of what social media is, who uses it, and different types of social media.

A literature review researching how social media can be used effectively has been outlined in Chapter 2. This highlights how social media can benefit a business when done right. Social media can be used to build direct relationships with customers, collect feedback, and identify new business opportunities.

Nine interviews were conducted with representatives from companies that are active in social media to evaluate how they use social media, and what their aims are by doing so. Respondents were asked how risk is managed within a team, to ensure that the right information is given and that responses have a positive impact. It was found that companies using social media generally attempt to increase engagement, educate their customers, stakeholders, and the general public. It is important that a company has a risk management strategy, to help manage any negative interactions on their media platforms.

To complement the information gathered through the interviews, a case study was done about a business that has a very low presence on social media. The goal was to see benefits of using a different platform to engage with suppliers. From the learnings found in the interviews with the other companies, it was obvious that there is value in having a social media presence to educate the public. However more resource is needed to manage the social media platforms to make it more effective.

The report concludes with an overview, discussion, and recommendations on how companies can use social media to their advantage, and be an effective tool adding value to their business.

The urban rural divide: How can the New Zealand dairy industry better its social licence with New Zealand’s urban populations.

Executive Summary

Dairy farmer’s rights, like those of every member of society are bound by what that society is prepared to defend. This defence is called our social licence and it is the trust that has been built up over time between two parties.

The goal of this report is to identify ways in which dairy farmers can better their social licence and hopefully in doing so build enough trust with the public that allows farmers of the future a form of negotiated autonomy.

This need for a strong social licence has always been there but has come to the fore quickly over the last few years as the rise of digital media has meant people can now quickly share or find information on anything at the click of a button. Sometimes the facts of this media are not always accurate, sometimes they are but it may be taken out of context. Trust can be broken down a lot faster than it is made.

My investigation was done with a literature review on how other industries around the world have handled their situations with diminishing trust from communities and what ways they used to improve that standing. I have also conducted a survey of the community to see if any trends were obvious and used the feedback given to formulate some of my research and conclusions.

What I found from the surveys were a difference of opinions on the state of the environment from farmers to more urbanised people with farmers thinking the environment is better than those outside of farming. I also found that people are becoming more environmentally aware.

Results pointed to farmers not wanting to educate themselves at a field day as they thought they knew enough just working on the farm. I believe this is one of the key reasons we are getting a widening of the rural-urban divide and a weakening of the social licence farmers have with the NZ public.

In my opinion, the dairy industry needs to invest more into promoting its story. Farmers need to be implementing and displaying good on farm practices, principles and values. These actions need to be backed up by Dairy NZ with relatable facts to show what is being achieved on farm nationally and how it relates to the NZ public where possible.

More farmers need to play their part in educating the public. This can be done by hosting open field days, community groups and schools onto their farms to show case what happens on farms and connect the milk in the supermarket to the cow in the paddock.

A unified effort to wards improving farming practices in general needs to be done as a collaborative approach by the primary producer industry bodies. The siloed approached to public perception and social license is not effective and I believe this should be a united voice.

I think using on farm certification schemes is a significant way to encourage farmers to go over and above industry requirements. More promotion and adoption of these initiatives will also go a long way to building trust of the public sector. Examples of these programs are Synlait’s “Lead with Pride” and Miraka’s “Te ara Miraka.”

Although change may be painful and costly for some i  the short term, embracing the requirements of the social licence in a positive way may be the most effective way for farmers to receive continued support from the community.

Deer Farmers attitude towards benchmarking and data recording system requirements.

Executive Summary

Deer Industry New Zealand is currently involved in a Primary Growth Partnership and levy payer funded project called Passion to Profit (P2P). The overall aims are to improve market returns and on-farm productivity for deer farms. One of the contributing projects to P2P is the definition and recording of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and industry benchmarks.

Data recording and benchmarking is important for business growth and a feature of higher performing farms. Benchmarking requires real-time management of data within an electronic database. Use of electronic data storage can be considered a “new technology” on farms which have traditionally kept pen and paper records. Adoption of new technologies follows a well described pattern amongst populations.

This study aimed to determine the attitudes of farmers towards data recording and benchmarking and the system requirements to encourage uptake of digital data recording technology.

The study design was an online survey of seventy eight farmers using SurveyMonkey. Of these seventy five responses provided useful data. Questions related to demographic information, current practices, attitudes towards data recording and benchmarking and requirements and impediments to the use of digital data recording systems.

Deer Farmers have a high level of interest in setting targets, recording production and benchmarking. They consider previous performance on their own properties and on farms similar to themselves as the most important factors for determining what their targets are.

Respondents considered that it is not adequate to solely focus on own performance and that comparison with other farms within the same year is also necessary to help them set realistic targets and identify potential areas for improvement.

The level of uptake of digital recording of production is low and manual records using paper and diaries are the most common method. Data are more likely to be formally recorded when there is a mandatory requirement to do so. For example financial accounts for tax return purposes.

There are a wide range of reasons for limited uptake of digital production data recording and benchmarking. These reasons vary between farmers. Relative satisfaction with current systems probably provides inertia for change along with the perception that current systems on offer will not provide a significant level of advantage, are too complicated to use or have other limitations.

The most important factors for achieving a high level of uptake are a simple system that is easy to use with good support. It needs to be reasonably priced, integrate well with other systems and give immediate feedback on the situation on the farm by comparing year on year and generating graphs and printable reports. The system should be accessible to all farmers and thus allow for offline use in situations of poor internet connectivity.

A wide range of privately managed digital recording and management options exist. These are not well integrated with each other, except perhaps for FarmIQ and data is not directly comparable or accessible between the systems. There is a relatively small number of deer farms in New Zealand so a high level of participation in a single platform will be required for adequate benchmarking. The deer industry should investigate whether a nationally managed collectively owned database is appropriate similar to those provided by Beef and Lamb NZ and Dairy NZ.