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...

Jen Corkran – Trust, truth and how we learn.

Farmers Weekly Managing Editor Bryan Gibson speaks to Jen Corkran, Senior Animal Protein Analyst at Rabobank and a 2023 Kellogg Scholar.

Jen discusses her day job to provide red meat insights to clients and farmers. Jen also reveals what her Kellogg research tells us about trust, truth and the way farmers take on information.

Listen to Jen’s podcast here or read the transcript below.

Bryan GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

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

Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly.
You’re with Ideas That Grow, the Rural Leaders podcast. I’m Farmers Weekly Editor, Bryan Gibson, and with me today is Jen Corkran, a Kellogg Scholar. G’day Jen, how’s it going?

Jen Corkran, 2023 Kellogg Scholar, Senior Animal Protein Analyst at Rabobank.
Hi, Bryan. It’s good here. How are you?

BG: Yeah, pretty good, thanks. To get started, tell us a little bit about your background. Where are you from?

Foundations in rural Hawkes Bay.

JC: I grew up in rural Central Hawkes Bay, in a little town called Waipukarau. My mum was a teacher at a primary school there, Flemington School, so right in the heart of sheep and beef country in Hawkes Bay.

I grew up and went to primary school there and I think from that grew this really in-depth passion for the agriculture industry in New Zealand. Ever since I can remember, I wanted to be a farmer. So, I think that background set me up well for that.

BG: Did that follow through to higher education or your first jobs, that sort of thing?

JC: Yeah, it did. After high school, I went to Massey in Palmerston North and studied agricultural science down there for three years, which was good fun. From there, I went farming in mid-Canterbury for a couple of years on a big beef farm. This is early, mid-2000’s, before the dairy boom. There was still a lot of sheep and beef country down that way. Before this farm did end up converting to dairy, it was all flood-irrigated beef, and spent two years down there as stock manager, which was great fun, especially coming straight out of university and not actually growing up on a big farm.

We did have a lifestyle block there in the Hawkes Bay with 70 odd sheep and a few cattle. But this gave me that real, in-depth understanding of farming, and through the seasons, and the longer term understanding of what it takes.

From that, I got inspired to go back to uni to do some post-grad. I did an honors year in Pastoral Science and Sheep and Beef Farm Systems. After that, it was great coming back into that, having spent some time farming as well. Then after few years in the UK I moved back to New Zealand.

Senior Animal Protein Analyst, Rabobank Research Team.

BG: Yeah. And you’re with Rabobank right now. What do you do there?

JC: Yes. I’m the Senior Animal Protein Analyst in the Rabo Research Team. So our job in Rabo Research is pretty much to provide insights and understanding around what’s happening in the markets in that global picture. My area in animal protein is red meat, for New Zealand, so sheep and beef. We cover all the commodities. In the team I sit in, we’ve got dairy in New Zealand, and sheep, beef, and then we’ve got a whole bunch of other Rabo Research analysts who sit out of Sydney and Australia and cover off a whole bunch of other stuff.

So great to be part of a global team as well. There are analysts all around the world for Rabobank. We’ve got real global reach to find out what’s going on in other markets, what’s driving some of the things that we’re seeing down here in New Zealand. We provide that insight to clients and farmers in New Zealand, arming people with good information so they can make the best decisions for their farming businesses.

BG: We enjoy getting your guys insights across our desks here at the Farmers Weekly. They usually turn into good stories. Now, talking today about your Kellogg Scholarship Programme. Tell us a little bit about what you decided to study?

Kellogg Programme research on pastoral farmer learning preferences.

Image: Jen Corkran speaking in Rabobank site at the Wanaka A&P, March 2024. (Rabobank’s Scott Levings in blue looking on).

JC: My research for Kellogg was on farmer learning preferences, pastoral farmers, to be specific. I was with Barenbrug New Zealand for over 10 years before starting with Rabobank. So, when I did Kellogg last year, I was still with Barenbrug. As a Pastoral Seed Company, they really wanted to understand how farmers are learning and getting information; pastoral is our bread and butter here in New Zealand. We turn grass into saleable protein.

How our farmers learning anything to do with harvesting homegrown feed? So, we know that the most profitable farm systems in New Zealand harvest the highest amounts of homegrown feed because it’s the cheapest form of feed, and they turn that into milk or meat. So, I guess Barenberg is a business, and I really was quite passionate about this topic, too, because at the time, I was in a pasture specialist role around helping farmers get the best from their grass and crops. How do they learn? How do they prefer to get information? And from that, what do they do with it, basically?

It was essentially more of a social science topic in terms of adult learning preferences. And some interesting results came out of that. It was a challenging project, but certainly understanding people and what makes them work is part of what we all do every day, too. So, yeah, it was great.

BG: That issue of tech and knowledge transfer through to the boots on the ground in the farming sector is one that has had lots of people scratching their heads over time. What were the key findings? How do farmers like to learn things.

What the Kellogg research revealed.

JC: So, there’s a lot to it. I had to go right back to the start to understand some of what’s already been done in that space. So, a big literature review in terms of what do we already know about how our farmers learn? You can look overseas, but really we’re quite a unique here in New Zealand, and we want to know how we, as more outdoor feed systems, are doing things.

So, yes, a big literature review in terms of what’s already been done. There’s a lot of work that’s been done, but it’s quite complex. But the real interesting findings came with actual farmer interviews. Just talking to farmers all around New Zealand, both in the dry stock, red meat sector, and also dairy, cropping, arable, whatever it might be, to find out how they learn. What we found was these two broad pillars, when it comes to learning, there’s a purely learning aspect, and then there’s a social aspect. They’re both equally as important as each other. And when it comes to learning, there’s information. People need to know what it is that they’re after. They also have to make a decision.

But before all of that, they need to be aware of what the thing might be. So for example, a new type of crop that might suit a certain area of New Zealand, say a summer crop where it’s summer dry, and this thing’s going to provide protein over that time. Before a farmer is even going to think about putting this new crop in, they’re going to be aware that it even exists and then understand how it works. What overlies that is understanding it through information, so whether it’s data or science or trials or your neighbour tried it, to make a decision to whether it will work for them. So that’s understanding their own farm business and seeing if it’s relevant.

Relevance is hugely important. But what overlays basically everything is this social aspect around trust and trusting the information that they’re getting is both true and relevant to them. Also, I guess, having a yarn about it with other people, as farmers in New Zealand, like to do. So this whole networks, trusted networks, trust is really key to farmer learning.

The other big one, I guess, that overlays the learning aspect is relevance to farm system. So, a dairy farmer is not going to necessarily be selling the same pasture and using it in the same way as a sheep farmer who struggles with more dry or harder conditions or in different soil types. They were the key pillars, I suppose. Obviously, in interviews with farmers, it was just so interesting to see all the themes lining up – networks and trust, those two words came up-time and time again.

Building trust takes time.

BG: Obviously, trust is the key. It doesn’t really matter where that trust lies. It could be different for different farmers, say, friends or colleagues or catchment group members, or it could be the seed rep or someone else. As long as there’s that relationship there, is that the thing that drives any evolution?

JC: Yeah, 100 %. What I basically did with the interviews is get a transcript and look for themes – a thematic analysis of themes. Some of the keywords that kept coming up were ‘trust takes time’, and trust doesn’t have to be for a person necessarily. It could be for a brand or a company or a business or a thing. But building trust takes time and has to be something that’s proven. I think a lot of farmers, and it’s something we hear as people in the industry all the time, you can’t just assume that you meet someone and then they’re going to trust what you’ve got to say. You have to earn it. And ‘earning trust’, I think, was one of the key things that kept coming up again and again. A business can become a trusted business within the inc of New Zealand also, and so can individual people.

Often, farmers said, they might have an agronomist who works for X company, and it’s the agronomist that they trust, and they’re going to follow that agronomist wherever they go through their career or their seed rep, or whoever it might be. Or it might be that they trust this particular brand, and they’re going to follow that. It could be whatever, but it has to be earned. I guess, backed up by some positive that they’re seeing. A lot of us work in the same way. We want to trust what we’re doing, and it becomes easier to make a decision if you trust that it is a safe one, I suppose.

BG: Farm owners hold a lot of the purse strings in terms of the wider industry, so they’ve got a lot of people coming down the driveway trying to sell them the newest and best thing. They do have that detector to go, ‘well, is this going to work for me. Or is this just someone trying to sell me something new and unproven or a one-size-fits-all approach?’ They really need to have that filter on, don’t they?

Trust in rural New Zealand.

JC: It was really interesting, because with the Kellogg Programme itself, we do the research project as one part of it. And then the other part of it that’s within the actual course itself in the in-person phases, is learning for all of us on the course. A lot of this was around critical thinking. How do you get to a place of trust, asking the right questions, critically thinking about things so that you are asking the right curious questions to find out if something is true or not.

We live in an age where there’s so much information out there. You type something into a little square on your computer screen, and you can come up with scrolls of information. But what’s actually true and what’s not, and how do we trust it? So, it was really interesting. Some of the stuff we learned about misinformation and disinformation and critical thinking on Kellogg really paralleled a lot with what the farmers were naturally saying and doing.

Some of the most experienced business people are farmers, right? They have to be across so many different things. And so for me, doing a leadership course and seeing it tie in naturally with these amazing farmers around New Zealand was really cool.

They naturally have this ‘right, can I trust you or can I not?’ And a lot of them said, it sounds negative, but they didn’t mean it in a negative way. I’ll always start from a place of distrust trust and then move to trust. It’s not necessarily that you’re going to have trust straight away. So good thing to think about, I guess, for anyone dealing in rural industries in New Zealand.

The Kellogg experience.

BG: Yeah, for sure. How was your experience going through the Kellogg Programme?

JC: It was great, Bryan. You have six months, basically, where you have this tight knit group of anywhere between 18 and 24 people. There was 23 people on our course, cohort 50, we were last year. You get really close to these people. You spend the first 10 days down at Lincoln together all day, every day, learning about leadership and learning about yourself.

You’re on this journey together and so those networks that you make with the people in your cohort, you can’t really put any value on it because it’s golden. Because you’re doing the journey together, you’re in this challenging but stimulating environment. It was really, really great. And that network is for life now with those people.

Outside of the people that you’re doing your Kellogg with, I think for me, it was the leaders that were put in front of us. Seeing the characteristics that they had was really inspiring. They’re optimistic, a lot of them, there’s a lot of humility there. They’re curious, they ask questions, they’re open-minded. These are the ones that stood out to me as the most natural leaders.

They’ve obviously got all of these learnings along the way that have helped them get to this point that seems magical. You can see things in yourself that you maybe already have or that you need to work on because you’re just getting this exposure to these things that you wouldn’t necessarily get in that six month period.

Critical thinking, being curious, asking questions, keeping an open mind. There’s these themes that keep coming up over and over again. You see places for your own growth too. You see places where you’ve had challenging situations and you realise why, perhaps. So, In terms of leadership, there’s a heap of learning. In terms of that bigger picture thinking, where this tiny little export nation sitting in the South Pacific Sea, selling produce to the world, but we are affected globally by a lot of what goes on.

For me, very much in that pastoral science space at the time, it opened my mind up to this bigger picture way of thinking, which was my big learning. I did my Kellogg last year in my mid-30s. A great time to do it because I’d had a bit of life experience, a bit of career experience, but still you realise how much you’ve got to go and do. So, it was really good. Yeah, loved it.

BG: Awesome. And what’s the plan for you? Just still sinking your teeth into global protein markets, that thing?

JC: Yeah, that’s correct. Kellogg did open my mind to other opportunities and started with Rabo at the end of last year. So very much in that getting into the role space, what’s driving global protein consumption. We’re going through a challenging time right now in the red meat sector with meat prices, especially. There’s a number of reasons for that. What is the light at the end of the tunnel? When might we see it? So no, it’s really good, and I certainly, leapt right into that big picture thinking, which is great.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas that Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, AGMARDT, and FoodHQ. This podcast was presented by Farmers Weekly. For more information on Rural Leaders, the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarships, or the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, please visit, ruralleaders.co.nz

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

Alumni in the Spotlight: James Parsons, Phillip Weir, Vanessa Thomson, Donna Cram, Kylie Leonard, Carlos Bagrie.

Phillip Weir, 2020 Nuffield Scholar.

In February, Nuffield Scholar and Waikato farmer Phillip Weir was appointed an associate board member of the Agricultural and Marketing Research and Development Trust (AGMARDT).

The AGMARDT associate trustee position gives emerging leaders an opportunity to learn, develop and supports AGMARDT’s mission to nurture people and ideas and in putting people at the heart of what it does, while focusing on the things that create the most impact. 

In a recent Farmers Weekly article Phillip said, “I’m looking forward to supporting fantastic people who have great ideas that will both change the future of New Zealand Food and Fibre production and will be essential in its future.”

Phillip is also standing for election to Beef + Lamb New Zealand’s Board, Northern North Island region. We’re sure Phillip would appreciate our support.

Phillip and his wife Megan farm dairy-beef bulls and sheep on the side of Mt Pirongia, Waikato.

Phillip’s profile for the voting can be found here. 

You can also learn more on how to vote at the B+LNZ contact details below.

Candidate profiles and voting papers should be with voters (from Northern North island voting area) by now as part of the annual meeting voting pack. All registered farmers elsewhere across the country should also have received a meeting pack.

In a recent Farmers Weekly article Phillip said, “We have debt. We have kids. We shift bulls. I am not a professional director. I’m proud of our Ballance Farm Environment Award, my Nuffield Scholarship and industry contributions as Farmer Council Chair.”

About the voting process.

The director election and postal and electronic voting close March 13.
If you’ve previously received annual meeting materials from B+LNZ you’re already on the electoral roll.

However if you’re not sure and want to check, you can: 
call B+LNZ on 0800 BEEFLAMB (0800 233 352)
or email enquiries@beeflambnz.com 

Vanessa Thomson, 2023 Kellogg Scholar. Donna Cram, 2023 Value Chain Innovation Programme.

Vanessa Thomson, did the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme in 2023 and is a working mum with a young family, who sharemilks with her husband on two farms in the Waikato. She is also an ex-lawyer and currently the contract manager for DairyNZ.

In 2022 Vanessa received a scholarship to the Kellogg Programme through Dairy Women’s Network (DWN) and in a recent interview with DWN said, “It’s been a life-changing opportunity for me, and I am so grateful for the network that I have made through Kellogg, and the tools that it has given me. I am excited for the future, and what my leadership journey might bring.”

Check out the full article here.

Vanessa’s Kellogg research ‘The effectiveness of psychosocial services available to farmers following adverse events’ examined who the stakeholders are in the rural psychosocial ecosystem, how farmers interact with these stakeholders, and how these interact together. The research aimed to understand the challenges of delivery of effective psychosocial services. 

In 2023 Donna Cram won the Fonterra Dairy Woman of the Year. Donna chose to use some of the scholarship to attend Rural Leaders’ Value Chain Innovation Programme, instead of the Kellogg Programme.

Donna has said that just as much was learned from the deep, insightful and honest bus and evening meal discussions with other participants on the Value Chain Programme, as from the rural leaders who welcomed them into their businesses.

Applications close soon on 29 February.

More information about the award, click here.

To apply or nominate, click here.

James Parsons, 2008 Nuffield Scholar.

James Parsons is co-owner of Matauri Angus beef stud and the 600 hectare Ashgrove Farm, near Dargaville. He has been trialling Halter collars on breeding cows and heifers for the past three months.

You may have seen James on a recent brand ad for Halter. You can have a look here.

James and his family’s sheep and beef farming business, Ashgrove Ltd, breeds and provides sheep and beef genetics to clients throughout the country. He is also former chairperson of Beef + Lamb New Zealand and is a board member of AgFirst Northland and chair of Wools of NZ.

In a February 19 article in Farmers Weekly, James shared his thoughts on what he sees as a game-changer for hill country farming.

Check out more in the article around cattle adaptability, grazing pressure, and calf growth rates.


Kylie Leonard, 2023 Nuffield Scholar.

Kylie was recently interviewed by the Pathways to Dairy Net Zero initiative (P2DNZ).

Founded in 2021, during Climate Week, P2DNZ is dedicated to reducing dairy’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  

P2DNZ is providing insights and solutions to help Kylie overcome any farm challenges and more broadly accelerate climate action throughout the dairy industry.

You can read the interview here.

Carlos Bagrie, 2024 Nuffield Scholar.

Carlos’s innovative and unique approach to farming, the transformation of waste into a viable resource, as well as a few impressive side projects, were the subjects of a not-so-recent interview with REX host Dominic in late December.

Carlos’s energy and passion for what he does is infectious and FYI, his innovation doesn’t stop at zero-waste solutions. There are plenty of great ideas being realised at Royalburn Station with his wife and family. This podcast is well worth a listen – especially if you need a good dose of positivity.


Dr Matt Sowcik. Humility and finding a common purpose.

Dr Matt Sowcik is currently on sabbatical from his role as Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Education and leadership at University of Florida.

As part of his time here in NZ, he joined the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme in Lincoln. He spoke to Scholars (and Bryan Gibson) about the power of humility in leadership and its role in working together toward a common cause.

Listen to Matt’s podcast here or read the transcript below.

Bryan GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

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

You’re with ideas that grow the Rural Leaders podcast. I’m Farmers Weekly Editor Bryan Gibson. This week we’ve got a guest from a bit further afield than usual. We’ve got Dr. Matt Sowcik, who is Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Education and Communication at the University of Florida. 

G’day, Matt. How’s it goin?

Matt Sowcik, Associate Professor, University of Florida.
It’s going great. Thank you so much for having me on the podcast. Blessed to be here in New Zealand and certainly excited to talk to all the good folks out there.

BG: Now, your area of academic expertise is leadership in the agricultural space.

An American agri-leadership academic in Aotearoa.

MS: Yeah, actually it’s first in leadership. I am interested in the psychology around leadership. I got an undergraduate in psychology and then went off and got a master’s in organisational leadership, and then a PhD in leadership studies.

I had applied it to businesses for a really long time, but found that the space of ag, natural resources and fibre really needed leaders. So was excited to join a number of colleagues down at the University of Florida, to really put all my time into this context. I think it’s so important as we more forward.

BG: You’re on a sabbatical at the moment, taking in a few leadership programmes around the world. And are we the first stop?

MS: Yeah, this is the first stop. And I’m really interested in this idea of humility and how humility impacts leadership. Certainly it’s something in the States that we need a little bit more. And as I was looking across the world, New Zealand was a wonderful place to study how leadership and humility were impacting this particular context. So came to Christchurch, worked in Lincoln, certainly understanding your rural leaders a lot better from the Kellogg Programme.

Humility in leadership.

BG: I’m interested in the concept of humility in leadership. Can you just sort of unpack that a little bit for me?

MS: Yeah. One of the things we struggle with is humility. It is so important and there’s so many reasons for it, but we’ve been under this impression that humility is thinking less of ourselves or not thinking about ourselves. The truth is, it’s just not true. I think New Zealanders really do that well. Farmers really do that well. This idea of humility, having confidence in ourselves, but not overconfidence.

When you get into overconfidence, you miss a lot of opportunities to develop and grow and adapt and innovate, and certainly to be a good leader. So, my interest was in better understanding this idea of how we could have the proper perspective of ourselves, others, this larger world, and use that in a leadership capacity.

BG: The amount of academic research that has gone into how to manage teams and be a leader is massive, isn’t it? It does seem to be we embrace more of a ground-up approach to leadership these days than, what did they used to call it, arrow management, or it’s my way or the highway, type thing.

MS: That’s absolutely right. Yeah, I think that’s true. I think we started to distinguish a little bit better this idea of managing or keeping things the same and running to an idea of leadership where we need really great ideas. Those ideas don’t often just come with one leader at the top who rides in on the horse and saves the day. It’s really this idea around how do we collectively get a group of people, all of their wisdom and intelligence, and certainly skills, and utilise that to adapt and grow and change the world for the better?

BG: It’s softened to if you’re the smartest person in the room, you’re in the wrong room, and that sort of thing.

MS: That’s exactly right. Yeah. No, you find that no one person is going to be smarter than the entire room, and if you are, you’re in the wrong room.

Sitting in on the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme.

Image: Matt Sowcik speaking on Kellogg Programme One in late January.

BG: So, you’re sitting in on the Kellogg Programme at the moment.

MS: Yeah, it just wrapped-up yesterday, so I had an opportunity to sit through the nine days and to really engage myself. We’re so busy at times, we’re running with administrative stuff and doing our own programmes, that we don’t take the opportunity to learn.

I think what the University of Florida has blessed me with is this opportunity to come out, take a break from everything and just sit down and learn again and engage with this process.

So the Kellogg Programme, as humble as it is, allowed me to come in, have conversations, engage, explore the Programme, and really get to hear from some amazing academics, researchers in the private sector, certainly those who are doing the good work in farming, food and fibre. It was just a holistic experience to understand how leadership works so well here and certainly what we can bring back to the States to be better leaders there.

BG: It’s interesting you say leadership works well here. I don’t know how much you know about the recent history of New Zealand farming, but we’ve had kind of, some would say a leadership schism or something like that. Our farming leaders have really been under the pump and some of them haven’t survived the process. So we’re kind of soul searching in a way.

Working together with humility to solve the big challenges.

MS: I think it’s all about perspective. It’s this idea of the current problems, and certainly I can speak to those. The US is going through some current leadership crisis and of understanding how to engage with people.

What I saw on the Kellogg Programme made me feel positive and optimistic about the next five to ten years, especially around natural resources and farming; this idea that people are coming together. We need to move towards, in kind of a humble fashion, working together and engaging together. Those old philosophies of, ‘I have been doing this for ten years and I must have all the answers’, I didn’t see that on the Programme. What I saw was a collective effort of all of these sectors coming together.

I think that’s the positivity I talk about. I know there’s some current issues, some bumps in the road that are happening right now, but when I look at ten years out, about the leadership that’s happening here, I really feel optimistic that those engagements, those connections are being made and that folks are starting to realise, humbly, that we’re going to need to work together to be able to move forward in a positive direction.

BG: Yeah, I think some of those issues we’ve had last year or two really come down to communication. A failure of communication by government to sell its story, failure of communication by farming, leadership to report back to its stakeholders what’s happening through various processes. And if you’re not communicating well, then people will fill that gap with their own stories, if you know what I mean.

MS: I do know what you mean. I think there’s something so humbling about that, isn’t there? There’s this idea that we need people and people need us and we have to have that line of communication.

They often talk about communication as being the most important tool of leadership. If you don’t do that, if that breaks down, all of the other pieces, the innovation, the adaptation, the opportunity to move forward collectively, all really suffer from that.

The first step is to have some self-awareness, to be able to say, we have failed over the last couple of years to do this. So, how do we make sure we don’t fail in the future? How do we collectively come together even if we don’t agree? How do we have that civil discourse so we can understand eachother better?

The truth is, you’re all in the same boat here. I mean, it doesn’t matter who you are: Government, farmer, business owner, everybody’s on the same island moving in the same direction. And there’s some really important pieces of that, whether it’s exports, whether it’s understanding the changes in climate and some of the issues you’ve been dealing with around that. It’s a collective effort to be able to move that forward.

The challenge of individualism in the US and NZ.

BG: Yeah, we’ve had quite a number of discussions here about ‘carrot or stick’ in terms of getting progress going in environmental changes, sustainability, that sort of thing. I think farmers being sort of individualistic type people in a certain way, tend to want to be in control of their own destiny more and have (to be given a strong) reason why they should do something. Market driven approaches often work best, rather than government-led regulatory approaches. Is that similar in the States?

MS: Yeah, I actually think it’s probably more so. It’s not just farmers that we see that from, we’ve built our country on that idea of individualism and the ‘American dream’. Go get it! Pull your boots up! You can make it happen! What we’re finding is that sort of approach really lacks some humility.

My interest in researching that is, can we address some of these issues now? What we’re trying to understand in the States is, there are some problems where you can do that. If you think about it, there’s some issues that happen on a farm tractor breaks, you know that broken piece, you can fix that broken piece. You’re having some issue with a particular crop, you know that well enough. But, the problem with things like climate change and policy, they’re not simple fixes.

There’s this wonderful quote that I really love that talks about ‘all systems are not broken. There’s no system that’s broken. Every system is perfectly aligned to get what it gets.’ And what that means is no matter which way a system works out, it’s going to get the results you see at the end.

So the truth is you have to almost break it yourself if you want to change it, if you want to fix it. Those issues aren’t ones that are easily fixed by one person. They’re not like just changing out a gear. You have to bring people together, if we’re going to talk about things like policy and climate change. Those issues are ones that we need to have more than one person and they’re going to be issues that we’re going to have some trial and error, and mistakes on. Then as we move that forward, just continue to make it better and better along the way.

BG: One concept that has had some real wins over the years in New Zealand are catchment groups. That’s a collection of farmers and other stakeholders in say, a valley, where all the water runs into the same place. They all work together to protect the environment more, clean up the waterways, that sort of thing. What they found is that that sort of groupthink way of doing things with aligned goals, and to be honest neighbour peer pressure, really helps to get things moving in the right direction.

MS: Yeah, it just makes sense. It’s stepping back from ‘me’ being the only thing that’s important to collectively saying ‘we’re all important’ and that actually there’s this bigger purpose we’re all working towards.

Common purpose.

A lot of the research around humility has suggested that this idea of people coming together with a common purpose, which really is leadership common purpose, you start to understand not only will you achieve that purpose, but a lot of other things come along with it.

One of those is performance or outcomes. You’re more likely to achieve an outcome if everyone’s buying into it. If there is some of that social pressure, ultimately everybody kind of shares information, communicates and engages in that process.

I’m not surprised to hear that, and I think we need to do that a lot more. It’s ‘how are my problems also similar to others’ problems?’ What are they doing? How are they engaging? Instead of keeping that in and pretending that’s some market advantage.

The real market advantage here is being able to share information, because if I figure something out or you figure something out, that changing, sharing, engaging, really is a process to not only move in that direction, but then to be able to move further in a direction, because things will continue to change.

BG: Can you tell me a little bit about this leadership programme you teach at the University of Florida?

Leadership education at University of Florida.

MS: I’m very fortunate. I have a kind of three-pronged responsibility at the University of Florida. Certainly, teaching is one of them. We teach the undergraduate level for the entire university. We offer a certificate and minor in leadership studies to undergraduates to get them started or interested in leadership.

We teach a masters and PhD in leadership in ag and natural resources. So that’s an opportunity to bring those folks in who are interested in doing some consulting in the area or going off and teaching leadership for land grant universities. That’s just one part of what I do.

I also do research. We’re a research one institution. So, looking at how we build organisational leadership programmes within different ag industries. I’m real interested in this idea of how do we build great capacity in those who are going to take over farms, who are going to work in those communities and engage in that process? How do we start to develop that young talent? But my favourite part of my job is what we call extension, and this is going out and practicing it. So, here I run two leadership programmes myself.

One is for our county commissioners. We have 67 different counties in Florida, usually a board of five. Folks kind of oversee that when they get elected, they come to our programme and they start to learn a little bit about leadership. They start to learn a little bit about the practice of leadership in that government setting and we help them better understand how ag and natural resources are impacting their job in a way that they can lead better from that government seat and work together as a board.

Then I also will go out to different ag and natural resource industries and provide training and engagement. Really those three approaches are my job and it leads to what I think is a healthier Florida and certainly a Florida that really appreciates ag and natural resources as we move forward.

Experiential leadership education with Rural Leaders’ Kellogg Programme.

Certainly speaking of the Kellogg Programme I think the things that I learned there is this is an extraordinary programme where individuals from different industries have an opportunity to come and communicate, engage with each other. What I really loved about the Programme is that they consistently, and in a very humble way, said, you’re going to get ‘a little bit’ out of what we talk about.

But the power is collectively coming together. And when we talk about communication, when we talk about humility, it is the folks in the room having access to each other, to share, to engage, and that’s really the power of the Kellogg Programme. Besides all the wonderful speakers and opportunities, it’s that ability for individuals in the Sector to be able to come together and communicate.

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

Emma Crutchley. Finding the sheep and beef value-add.

Emma Crutchley, 2018 Kellogg Scholar, talks to Bryan Gibson, Farmers Weekly managing editor about some of the challenges sheep and beef farming faces in a water-short region.

Emma discusses her Kellogg research, the Value Chain Innovation Programme, and the work being done on ‘Puketoi’ to find value-add.

Listen to Emma’s podcast here or read the transcript below.

Bryan GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

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

My name is Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly and this week, we are talking to Otago sheep and beef farmer, Emma Crutchley.

Bryan Gibson:
G’day, Emma. How’s it going?

Emma Crutchley, 2018 Kellogg Scholar, sheep, beef and arable farmer.
Good, thank you Bryan. How are you?

BG: Yeah, I’m really good. Yeah, so whereabouts in Otago are you?

EC: My husband, and I and two children live in a little inland basin called the Maniototo in Central Otago on a sheep, beef, and arable farm here called Puketoi.

BG: Sounds like a lot of work.

Maniototo sheep, beef and arable farming.

EC: Yep. So, I grew up here. My grandfather bought the farm in 1939, and we go a couple of more generations back here in the Maniototo. He’s one of the youngest sons, and he moved over from Kyeburn to Puketoi then.

I am an ’80s child, so I remember little bits of farming growing up through there. And I’m the youngest daughter out of…I’ve got an older brother. When I was younger, I had a love for animals and the farm and I could literally be found in any lamb pen, in any dog kennel, any filthy, smelly, or challenging job.

Growing up, I would be neck-deep in it. Mum and dad never really had a chance to get me out of it, and not that they ever thought that was a thing. They were very supportive of all their children, regardless of gender, being involved in the farm. I guess growing up here, I went away to boarding school and continued my love for the farm straight to Lincoln, and I never really looked anywhere else. From there, I moved on to work as a rural professional, as an agronomist, working in Christchurch for PGG Wrightson, and then later working for Pamu out of Wellington.

I knew I’d return home to the farm, but I was always a little bit hesitant because I love being around people and I love my networks and the social life side of it. I knew if I moved home, I was moving to a relatively isolated place away from a lot of the people that I really enjoyed being around.

I knew that it was the best opportunity I had and always something I really wanted to do. So I moved home in 2009, and imported a husband to the Maniototo, because it won’t come as a surprise, but being a small, rural community, everyone’s relatively related. I knew I had to find a husband before I moved home. So, yeah, he came home, and he moved here in 2010. And yeah, so we’ve worked to take over the family farm from my parents.

We’ve got just under 500 hectares of irrigation. The rainfall here is often what ‘wows’ people, it’s a 350ml rainfall. So irrigation creates the resilience we need to do what we do. We’re arable, so we grow about 100 hectares of arable crops: wheat, barley, peas, linseed, clover, rye for seed, and a few other bits-and-bobs as they come along.

We’ve got an angus stud as well. So we sell about 25 stud bulls each year. The main thing we do here, that is our main point of production, is our lambs. We have about six and a half thousand ewes. And apart from replacements, we finish all lambs born on the farm and also purchase more store lambs in January and carry them through as well to meet the demands of what we can produce and who we supply.

I do a lot in the advocacy space with Federated Farmers in Otago and also as a director for Irrigation New Zealand. My husband is very involved and he leads a lot of the rural fire stuff in this area. Being in a dry climate, it’s one of our challenges, I suppose.

BG: That sounds like a massive and diverse life you’ve got.

EC: Yeah, there’s a wee bit going on. They’ve got two kids of the mix, two, eight, and 10, so they keep us on our toes.

BG: Now, you mentioned the engagement with the Rural Leaders Programme was a Kellogg report, I think it was in 2018, that was on how to manage water efficiently and what that might mean. I guess it’s an issue that’s close to your home – and your heart. That’s why you took it on?

Kellogg research into water sharing in a water-short catchment.

EC: Well, as you know in 2017, one of the top election issues was around freshwater and how it’s managed in New Zealand. There was a lot of pressure around irrigation and the association with water quality and quantity. At that time, I was a director on our local irrigation company.

Being in this extreme climate where we are short growing season – long winters, and the value that irrigation is to our business in terms of the resilience and our adaption to climate change, I knew when I applied for the Kellogg Programme, exactly what I wanted to study in terms of a research project.

I’d been looking at it for a while, because the kids were, at the time, I think they were two and four, and at that time they’re starting to get a little bit more…I don’t know…I just went and did it!

So, my project was on water sharing in a water-short catchment, which was basically focusing in around, freshwater governance, or even crossing into environmental governance. I looked at different models from around the world and different examples of how water was managed, ownership rights, community management, and then investigated some of the policy settings we have. Also some of the solutions that might work in that space.

I think one of the learnings I got out of that was, as farmers in New Zealand we’re incredibly individualistic in how we run our businesses and that is a reflection of the challenges. The challenges we faced in the ’80s, we found ourselves then in that time of high interest rates and challenging Rogernomics type stuff. As individual farmers we had to farm our way out of it. We did that really, really well. But then that’s led us to being really innovative.

We need to understand the ‘why’ as to why the change is happening. I’m probably going a little bit off track here, but that project set the scene for me, for doing a lot of work over the last six years in the advocacy space and advocating for not only enabling farmers room to understand the ‘why’, but also those connections with stakeholders and the importance of that.

At the end of the day, the government calls the shots on policy, but the people that are voting for the government are our stakeholders, our New Zealand public, and the importance of understanding that dynamic for long-term goals rather than focusing on short-term advocacy outcomes.

BG: Yeah, I know you’ve done a lot of work. We had some stories in the newspaper this year on some of the work you’ve done to advocate for some changes to some of the water plans down your way?

Farming and the environment.

EC: I guess the thing that in Otago, we’ve worked first off the bat with land and water plans and regional policy statement, and I guess we’re also one of the most diverse regions in a Otago. For me, or for everyone really, farming systems in New Zealand are heavily intertwined with the environment. There’s always going to be public interest in farming because of our association with the environment that we farm in.

Everyone’s always looking over our fence. From that, it’s like, how do we set it up, so we enable farmers who are very good at change. So for that example, multiple challenges can be solved with one solution, and one challenge can be solved with multiple solutions. And what I mean by that is, how do you enable policy settings that enable this diverse, incredibly stunning region to actually find the scope within those policy settings to innovate around the challenge and to solve the different water quality, biodiversity, climate change challenges that we have faced.

I think advocacy is probably…I think it’s changing. We need to start learning. But it’s like communicating in a way which enables you to be understood. And my thoughts around that is we had in the Upper Taieri, one of our biggest challenges was the Upper Taieri plain and the diverse hydrology landscape that was tied up in the national wetland regulations. Then what that was the unintended consequence that that was going to create.

So, we had our big jobs for a nature project set up at that time, which involved the relationships with multiple stakeholders. I guess we always knew that if we were going to be successful in changing the settings around the wetland regulations that we needed to have a common ground with our stakeholders and what we were trying to achieve.

I know there’s a lot of narrative around, for example, the stock exclusion regulations and the huge cost they create on farmers. If you can flip that into, we need the tools in the toolbox to manage our environment, in a way that is best for the environment and best for our rural communities. We need to recognise the role that livestock can play within those systems to control our weeds and help with pest control. That was a common ground that we found.

So when we went to MFE with that case to Minister Parker, it was probably a more resonating message than just saying, ‘Oh, it’s a huge cost of fencing, and we’re going to lose all this land that we can graze’, which doesn’t resonate with everyone. They actually don’t care. They just want fresh water and they want a pristine environment. It’s explaining it in a way that actually identifies the unintended consequence of that.

So off the back of that, we managed to get that cut out of the stock exclusion rules, but it’s still a work in progress. We’ve still got to continue that conversation with our regional council as part of our water plan.

The art of making the tough conversations easier.

BG: Sounds like you’re at the forefront of a type of evolution that’s been talked quite a lot in terms of managing our natural assets – has many stakeholders who mostly want to do the same thing. It’s not an us and them farmers versus, say, fishermen or environmentalists or anything like that. And if you can in advance find those shared values, then it’s much more easy to overcome the challenge.

EC: Yeah, and I think I was talking to Julia Jones a couple of months ago and we’re brainstorming. I think she said something, and it was ‘we have a responsibility to seek to understand diverse perspectives’, then I added on the end, ‘we also need to give ourselves the personal freedom to change our minds’. I guess for me, that crosses into the fact that we are a small part of the population in New Zealand.

Like a lot of people like those in Auckland don’t really care about farming. They might want a pristine environment, but they don’t care about farmers as such. So the best way to get people to understand your perspectives is to actually listen to them and when you can create an environment which lets people feel like they’re understood – it takes away the defensiveness and the silos, and it creates more of a safe space to continue that conversation.

So when you’re really passionate, I think, and I have to be aware of this, because I’m really passionate about Ag and what we do, but passion can show up in many different ways. And when you’re passionate about a topic like farming or the environment and both, probably, most of the farmers fit into both those camps, but it’s like, how do you talk to someone and create that curiosity to let them feel like they’re heard? And then you create that connection and then that’s progress.

The Value Chain Innovation Programme and finding the value-add.

BG: Now, you’ve had a more recent Rural Leaders experience. You were on the Value Chain Innovation Programme this year. What was that all about?

EC: Yeah. So my lane, probably, in the past year has been a lot around the environmental stuff – freshwater, irrigation. But as a sheep and beef farmer, we are doing so much behind the farm gate in terms of how we farm and environmental gains on-farm. For us, because we are main point of production is lamb and finishing lambs, we’ve seen a lot of disruption within the supply chain over the past few years, especially since COVID.

Then we had another one more recently this year, where some of the guys we’ve worked really closely with over the past few years to develop our lamb supply programme. We went to them eight years ago, probably a little bit frustrated at the time, we wanted to supply a product that worked with our lamb, our supply chain, and what was actually needed within that, so we could add more value.

So they came back to us. We said to them, ‘how can we better support what you’re trying to do so we can add value to what we’re trying to do?’ They came back and they said, we need to know when your lambs are coming three to four months ahead. We need all year-round supply, and we need to have a consistent hook weight. And we went ‘righto’ and took that away. Then over the next few years, we worked really hard to actually schedule three to four months out and supply 11 to 12 months of the year and build a system around that, but then also target those specific hook rates and get it right. So, it worked really well.

Then when we had a bit of disruption within our meat company, probably three or four months ago, it blew a bit of that away. It blew away those trusted relationships, and it’s a bit of an ‘aha’ moment for me, and I realised how vulnerable we are to what happens in that supply chain and what we do. Because when your main part of your business is producing lambs and something happens in the supply chain, that’s a big issue.

I’d looked at the Value Chain Innovation Programme last year and I thought it was probably not really in my lane. And then I was like, well, actually, it really is in my lane, because if we’re doing all this other environmental stuff and trying to add value on-farm, we need a supply chain that actually supports what we’re trying to do.

So we, as farmers with our increasing costs, our sheep and beef farmers, especially the catchment limits that you’re trying to farm within, you can’t just produce your way out of it anymore. So, the real important thing that I’m seeing is, how can we value-add?

I applied for the Value Chain Innovation Programme with Hamish (Gow) and Phil (Morrison) to look at all the different value chain examples through the North Island. We got on a bus in Auckland and went down to Hamilton, explored the Fonterra markets with the Fonterra value chain around there, going to a dairy farm and then into the Fonterra factory, and also looking at LIC and DairyNZ and how those operations also support the dairy industry.

Then we investigated kiwifruit, and we also went to Robotics Plus in Tauranga. That was pretty amazing, seeing some of the tech that and the robots that they can pull in to support different production systems.

From there, we went down to Taupo and went to Pamu, and also sheep and beef there. I’m probably missing one, but over to Hawkes Bay to look at the apples as well, and also First Light Foods and a couple of others in there, just investigating what all these systems are trying to target. From there, I figured out that we are…yeah, I feel like we are lacking a little bit in leadership to support innovating the value chain to create value for what we do.

A lot of us are also limited in the land use change that we can actually do to add value. So it’s really important to me to start thinking about how we do add value through the supply chain.

BG: It seems to be like the Holy Grail. A lot of the feedback I get at the newspaper about various regulations and environmental and sustainable goals, people just go, well, we were promised it was value-add, and we’re not seeing it. We’re still slave to the schedule, that sort of thing. And so that’s a real hard nut to crack.

EC: And it’s never going to be easy. People will probably listen and say, she’s crazy. You can’t do that. But what options do we actually have in some cases? It’s like saying, well, okay, it’s hard, but what else are we going to do? Because in New Zealand, we’re actually not… I don’t know, we’re passionate about what we do, we have an amazing industry in sheep and beef.

I guess the other thing is we’ve also…when I think about, I’m very much Ag right through my life. Everything that I see as sheep and beef farmer supports what I can do behind the farm gate and creating efficiencies within the farm gate. There’s not a lot that actually looks at how we create value through the supply chain.

So I think that was probably a bit of an ‘aha’ for me throughout the (Value Chain Programme) trip, is actually realising that, yeah, we are actually stuck. There’s been amazing work done, but it’s like, how do we realise that, yes, a lot of what we do, even with our industry bodies, is focused on production, and behind the farm gate, but there’s not a lot on added value.

BG: Well, the cool thing is, I guess, that the product is amazing already, so it’s a good launching pad.

EC: Yeah, 100 %

BG: It sounds like your experience with Rural Leaders has been pretty rewarding. Is that something you’d recommend to others.

EC: Yeah, absolutely. I don’t know where we would be in New Zealand’s primary sector without Rural Leaders – there’s some great options of different programmes you can get involved with, and there’s always stuff to learn. I think even if I went back and did either of those courses again, you’d still pick up something new.

The people you meet along the way as well and I guess the networks. And I guess when I’m thinking about something and I know I don’t know the answer from those networks, I have a fairly good idea that I will know someone that will. And if they don’t, they’ll know someone that will. It’s a small, small place, the New Zealand primary sector, and there’s a lot of power and networks as well.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas that Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, AGMARDT, and FoodHQ. This podcast was presented by Farmers Weekly. 

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

How does New Zealand ensure we do not get complacent in long-term disease control, specifically Bovine Tuberculosis?

Executive summary

Bovine Tuberculosis (TB) has been a persistent concern for New Zealand’s agricultural sector since the 1880’s and is still ongoing today in some parts of the country. While considerable progress has been made in reducing the prevalence of bovine TB, complacency in both farmers and industry representatives poses a threat to its effective control and eradication.

New Zealand Inc. must be bold in the fight for TB freedom. Eradicating Complacency looks at the historical journey New Zealand has been on with the disease, the efforts taken to reduce possum numbers and infected herd numbers, and what the current state of play of the disease is currently at in 2023.

This report, Eradicating Complacency, investigates the current perception and understanding of Bovine TB with farmers and industry, to gauge if there is a level of complacency happening with the disease in NZ. The aims of this study were to:

– Investigate the current perception and knowledge of Bovine TB and the TBfree programme with farmers and industry in NZ.
– From the above findings, determine what is needed to make TB visible in regions where there aren’t infected herds or wildlife.
– Review what story telling has already been done with farmers and industry representatives that have been impacted by TB in the past.
– Determine a people centred strategy going forward to ensure complacency does not occur with farmers and industry, and efforts are sustained the closer we get to eradication of TB in herds by 2026.

To carry this out a literature review was done on the international efforts of eradication of Bovine TB in other countries, the stories that have already been told of those impacted by the disease and how story telling can impact recovery in adverse events. A digital survey focusing on knowledge and perception of the TBfree programme was created and had 71 responses from farmers and industry professionals around NZ. A thematic analysis was used to theme the perception responses. One interview with a Senior Vet from OSPRI NZ was conducted to understand how the TBfree programme has evolved over time.

The research highlights that farmers and industry have a relatively sound understanding of the TBfree programme, however farmers feel there are not enough stories being told on the human and farming impacts of being TB infected. More literature reviews were conducted on the impacts of storytelling in recovery from adverse events.

Recommendations to eradicate complacency, the closer we get to Bovine TB eradication are:

– Human centred communications focusing on the people impacts, alongside the technical information.
– Increase story telling of impacted farmers and industry professionals to help make TB visible in non-visible areas of NZ.
– Education with younger generations, lifestylers on impacts of TB, and what it means to be TB free in New Zealand.

Eradicating Complacency shows valuable insights into what the next few years could look like as we move closer to 2026. It’s human-centred and has the people in the industry at its core.

Tessa Appleby

Dairying horizons. Exploring the potential for New Zealand’s dairy expansion in Nigeria.

Executive summary

In the face of market volatility and increasing uncertainty in international trade, New Zealand as an exporting nation, must adopt forward-thinking strategies to protect its interests. Market diversification within the dairy industry holds significant impacts on New Zealand dairy farmers, processors, and the wider economy. This report analyses the potential for expanding New Zealand’s dairy partnership with Nigeria, a market with untapped opportunities.

Report objectives:

  • Investigate the current landscape of Nigeria to set the context in which the dairy sector operates.
  • Analyse the structure and dynamics of the Nigerian dairy sector.
  • Examine the relationship between demographic factors, economic growth, urbanisation, and the political landscape on the demand for and consumption patterns of dairy products in Nigeria.
  • Propose recommendations for New Zealand dairy exporters to explore further growth between New Zealand and Nigeria.

The research methodology involved a situational analysis through a comprehensive literature review to assess the current state of Nigeria and the structure of its dairy sector. Semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders were conducted to gain an understanding of the consumption trends and drivers.

Critical analysis of the literature review and interviews revealed four drivers impacting the growth of Nigerian dairy consumption these were: the force of population growth and demographic shifts, economic recovery, political stability, and rate of urbanisation.

As Nigeria’s population continues to grow, urbanise, and the working age demographic expands the demand for dairy products is projected to substantially increase. This increased demand is driven by an emerging middle class, youthful and urban population. However, the Nigerian dairy market’s potential hinges on the country’s political stability and sustained economic recovery. Given global market uncertainties and geopolitical dynamics, New Zealand’s commitment to diversification is paramount. Underscoring the significance of engagement with Nigeria to ensure that future growth opportunities remain open.

Recommendations for New Zealand’s engagement with Nigeria:

  1. Establish relationships:
    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to proactively build relationships in Nigeria and West Africa. Through establishing representation across the country to prepare for future growth opportunities.
  2. Cultivate market familiarisation:
    New Zealand Trade and Enterprise to invest in building expertise and knowledge to gain a greater understanding of the Nigerian market. Enabling New Zealand to make informed decisions.
  3. Prioritise Nigeria as a long term future trading partner:
    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to develop a strategic plan to build engagement with Nigeria by dedicating resources and diplomatic presence.
  4. Facilitate exchange and capacity building:
    Industry bodies to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and expertise. By bringing Nigerian dairy stakeholders to New Zealand to familiarise themselves with New Zealand dairy processes, quality standards and market dynamics.
  5. Diversify commodity offerings:
    Encourage New Zealand dairy processors to consider expanding their product range to include Fat Filled Milk Powder to target a broader and growing consumer base.

Anna Gower-James

What are the impacts on germplasm importers if regulations get harder to comply with and what are the consequences for NZ?

Executive summary

New Zealand is an exporting nation with its primary sectors being some of the biggest contributors. There is a lot to protect ourselves from in the way of biological incursion that could crush our primary industries, in particular, horticulture.

Protecting our country is done in the way of border controls and monitoring what is entering the country through government created biosecurity systems. The new germplasm import pathways has its own biosecurity system which for users is fraught with complex and multi-layered challenges, all with the primary goal of protecting New Zealand from biological incursions.

This report aims to help support ongoing work in the germplasm import industry and to find beneficial solutions for importing pathways while keeping New Zealand safe from biological threats. This report will explore three key research questions.

  • What is the history of the quarantine system in New Zealand, and how does the system now work?
  • What are the most common barriers to entry of new plant germplasm material into New Zealand?
  • What are the solutions to assist with the simplification of the import process?

The methodology comprises a literature review to provide context around the key barriers faced with the importation of germplasm. A thematic analysis is then conducted from ten anonymous semi-structured interviews of four people from fruit and vine, two that work across multiple horticultural production sectors, one from the ornamental sector, one from the arable sector and two from a non-governmental organisation. The questions were grouped into five high-level themes:

  • Business involvement with plant germplasm
  • Introduction of new plant germplasm
  • The impact and understanding of import barriers
  • Challenges, improvements and impacts
  • Other opinions brought to light

After analysing various themes related to import systems, four major discussion areas emerged from the literature. These areas include the need for simplified operational processes to improve the import system’s usability, economic feasibility to address the potential implications of increased import costs, and New Zealand’s competitive advantage in both domestic and international markets for horticultural products.

Recommendations to improve import pathways for New Zealand and the users:

  • Plant importers, NGO’s and the government need to implement better collaboration between themselves for the improvement of importation frameworks and legislation.
  • To build better capability with MPI and provide comprehensive training for biosecurity officers and relevant personnel involved with the import processes.
  • The need to streamline and standardise New Zealand’s import processes to reduce inconsistency between imports and decrease time delays.
  • Industry and government’s continual investment in advanced diagnostic technologies to reduce testing time and cost.

Jake Kitson, Jacob

Farmer learning preferences around pasture and homegrown feed.

Executive summary

The most profitable farm businesses in New Zealand value the utilisation of pasture and homegrown forage first and foremost. They understand the importance of feed grown and eaten at home, and they farm to get the most from this cheapest form of feed.

But what do we know about the learning preferences of our farmers to efficiently grow and harvest homegrown feed in their farm systems? The purpose of this report was to provide pastoral agribusiness with key insights, including feedback from farmers, around learning preferences and how they make decisions. Pastoral farmers are defined as those who primarily use animals to harvest homegrown forage from their land, turning this into saleable protein, that will ultimately be sold off farm.

Specifically, this report looked to address two research objectives:

  1.  To identify a clear and deep understanding of how and from whom (or what) New Zealand pastoral farmers learn about pasture and homegrown feed for their farm system(s).
  2. Understand the main learning preferences and what is important to the New Zealand pastoral farmer making forage related decisions on farm.

The research used a literature review, fourteen semi-structured interviews (seven red meat sector farmers and seven dairy sector farmers), as well as an example of farmer learning through extension in a three-pronged approach to address the research objectives.

The literature review gave a theoretical base to current knowledge, focusing on research around learning preferences of farmers and how the social aspects of relationships, people and trust play into learning.

From the interviews, a thematic analysis of responses identified that there are two broad pillars (aspects) around farmer learning. Firstly, a pure learning aspect, and secondly a social aspect. Within each of these key themes were identified in the learning aspects Awareness, Information and Decision making, and in the social aspects People and Trust. The people theme is closely tied up with farmer networks.

For learning to occur, awareness of a concept, idea or management practice is always the first step. Awareness can often lead to ‘seeking of more information’ and/or a ‘give it a go’ approach, as our farmers are practical people. Other people/ networks play a major role in farmer learning, and most farmers prefer to learn from others and/or use other people or trusted networks to gain awareness, learn more and help make decisions. Trust over arches nearly all of learning. Farmers must trust in aspects such as information, people, companies, and the science – to be open to learn. And information presented must be relevant to farmers/farm systems, with many farmers preferring science or and data driven information.

Key recommendations for pastoral agribusiness to foster farmer learning are:

  • To aim first to create an awareness of the forage related concept or practice.
  • Ensure information provided is science-based or verified
  • Know who the target audience(s) is/are, be clear on this. Break them into groups, ask questions, listen, deeply understand regional or system challenges and quirks.
  • Information must be relevant to the target audience.

With this in mind, create a fostered learning environment, potentially through closed on-farm groups or any system that brings farmers together. Deeply understand that trust must be gained in order to succeed, that it takes time for this to build, but being part of this inner network is a golden place to be, and provides an opportunity for long-lived learning relationships.

Jen Corkran

Balancing life and work until the cows come home. The potential for a four-day week in the New Zealand dairy industry.

Executive summary

In the time of the ‘great resignation’ in a post COVID-19 world, finding and retaining top talent is an ongoing and costly concern for businesses. As the employee value proposition evolves, employers may wish to use a change in the structure of the work week as a distinguishing factor for them as an employer.

This research investigates the efficacy of a four-day week amongst the office-based knowledge workers of the New Zealand dairy industry workforce. The key aims of this study were to identify the benefits that a four-day week could provide, establish the barriers to said four-day week, and to recognise how COVID-19 impacted the evolution of workplace norms. The research was undertaken by reviewing existing literature and conducting semi structured interviews employees in the dairy industry.

Thanks to COVID-19 and changes in the use of technology as an accepted modality within the business world, the line between work and home has continued to become increasingly permeable. This impacts work-life balance for employees and subsequently satisfaction in both life and work. An opportunity is presented for a reset of worker culture to benefit the mental health and wellbeing of the employee, increase employee engagement within their personal communities, all while simultaneously benefiting the company through more engaged employees and potential increases to productivity.

Employees have benefited greatly from the increased flexibility that has been normalised following COVID-19. There may be further advantages to both employers and employees by formalizing a four-day week variation. This could see further benefit to employee wellbeing and enhanced engagement within their community. However, implementing a four-day week might be difficult due to anecdotal reports that many employees are regularly working over their contracted hours. Others admitted to working to appear like they are still productive, but they admit to idly filling in time until it is socially acceptable to leave the office. As such, feasibility will depend on the team itself and specific circumstances, such as stakeholder availability or time zone cross over.

Transitioning from the current model straight to a four-day week is not the best approach, but instead opting for a four-day week variant would help to smooth the transition and address/overcome the key barriers.

Interviews with 12 current employees of the New Zealand dairy industry found that the key obstacles to a four-day week were perception (of shareholders, and other employees), and maintaining availability to an employee’s respective stakeholders. This reiterates the nuances that exist in each team. These would need to be accounted for in any change to the structure of the working week. Another important recurring theme that manifested was the importance of bidirectional trust between employees and their manager/company. Bidirectional trust enables managers to not have to time-keep their employees, while the employees feel empowered to complete the requirements of their role. Trust on both sides empowers the respected privilege of a four-day week variation.

The key recommendations from this study for a dairy company considering a four-day week are:

  • Acknowledge the difference between task-oriented workers and knowledge workers within their employee base and structure workplace change specific to each worker type.
  • Use a formalised process/framework and support from senior leaders within the company to overcome any negative stigmatism from current workplace attitudes towards long hours.
  • Establish clear performance measures for both business and employee to ensure adequate outputs; and
  • Allow individual teams to devise their own implementation plan within set boundaries to adequately consider team-specific nuances.

Daniel Brocx

Reducing New Zealand’s livestock methane emissions.

Executive summary

Climate change is a global issue with local influence. It will both impact New Zealand’s agricultural systems and be impacted by them. New Zealand farmers face significant agricultural emissions reduction targets. Achieving these will be heavily influenced by how agricultural methane emissions can be reduced. The methane from farmed livestock in New Zealand accounts for 76 per cent of all of the biogenic methane New Zealand produces.

This report seeks to understand the potential options for New Zealand livestock farmers to decrease their methane emissions. It considers the unique circumstances faced in New Zealand and assesses some of the drivers and impacts which should be considered in their uptake.

To understand the potential options for New Zealand farmers and the impacts they may have, several questions needed to be answered:

  • What are the drivers pushing New Zealand farmers to decrease methane emissions?
  • Where New Zealand agriculture has got to on reducing methane, and how it got to this point?
  • What are the reduction options for New Zealand farmers to consider?

The methodology comprises of a conducting a stocktake of emission reduction targets faced by farmers to understand how the timing and intensity of these targets have changed. Datasets from peer reviewed, government, and industry, published sources were extracted to produce a time-series view of the livestock sector and enable interlinkages to be explored. Finally, a review of existing peer-reviewed and grey literature and a thematic analysis was conducted. This both identified possible options for New Zealand farmers and considered the implications for New Zealand farming systems of the options.

Each themed option was explored to understand:

  • What the option is.
  • The methane emissions reduction impact.
  • How applicable the option is for New Zealand farmers.
  • The cost of implementing the option on a farm.
  • When the option will be available for New Zealand farmers.

While government targets have historically been the main driver for agricultural emissions reduction, industry and businesses are now bringing in commitments. These will need to be met by farmers or they may face challenges selling their products.

New Zealand’s agricultural sector is a dynamic mosaic. It is constantly changing to adjust to outside pressures and its methane emissions have grown and shrunk over time. It’s mosaic nature also means different parts of the sector are further through realising methane reductions than others. Beef, sheep and dairy all face the same challenge, but are at different stages of responding to it. Not all options can be applied equally.

Farmers already have some tools to hand which can be used to reduce methane emissions. These need to be embraced early if methane is to be reduced in time. Some technologies are under development for the future, which may be easier to implement, have lower costs, or achieve greater reductions, but they are also still unproven. Significant research is still required for these to become useable options for New Zealand farmers.

It is recommended that:

  • All groups work together to ensure methane reduction options are adopted on farm as early as possible.
  • Farmers consider the full impact of methane reduction options on all emissions and the wider environment, how the different options may fit with their farm, and how they will operate in a changing operating environment.
  • Government and industry work together to encourage and enable farmers to reduce their methane emissions as rapidly as feasible.

There is still significant progress to be made on reducing methane, but some change has already occurred. Each year, new ideas and technologies become a reality, so the options for farmers needs to be regularly reviewed. There is a low methane future for New Zealand’s farmers.

William Aitkenhead