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...

kellogg

The impact of exotic carbon forestry on rural Aotearoa New Zealand.

Craig Fellowes Kellogg report image
Craig Fellowes Kellogg report image

Executive summary

“We are not anti-forestry – exotic plantings can be integrated where appropriate – but it is about planting the right tree in the right place”

Sam McIvor B+LNZ Chief Executive, 2021

With Aotearoa New Zealand’s commitment to the Paris Agreement of a reduction in emissions to net zero by 2050, the practice of planting faster growing, quicker carbon sequestering trees (Pinus radiata) has boomed.

The continued rise in the Aotearoa New Zealand Units (NZUs) price and Government’s lack of regulations around permanent exotic carbon forestry have further contributed to planting more exotic forests on productive land where previously the land value would have been too high to be considered for forestry.

The new permanent forestry category will be added to the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) on the 1st of January 2023. This applies to both exotic and native forests that will not be clear-felled for fifty years. Forests must be planted post-1989 to qualify, any trees planted or established pre-1989 do not qualify for entry into the NZ ETS.

Aotearoa New Zealand’s land area is 26.8 million hectares of which 8 million hectares is native and indigenous forests and 2.1 million hectares are exotic forests, mainly Pinus radiata.

Only 333,000 hectares of post-1989 plantings are registered into the NZ ETS, leaving a vast portion of pre-1989 forests excluded from the NZ ETS, all of which are still holding and continuing to sequester carbon.

Key findings of the research around the potential effects of exotic carbon forestry on rural Aotearoa New Zealand are as follows:

  • As the NZU price rises (currently $77) stockholders will be able to out-compete farmers for productive farmland sales.
  • Returns on investment for permanent exotic forests far outweigh relative competing land uses and native trees.
  • Large-scale permanent exotic forests would allow Aotearoa New Zealand to meet their emissions targets and at a lower direct economic cost.
  • To reach our 2050 goal, the area needed for planting exotic trees would be less than if native trees were planted.
  • Higher economic returns due to the faster sequestration rate of exotic trees.
  • Higher economic returns on marginal to steep land compared to traditional farming in these areas.
  • Long-term damage to the biodiversity and ecology of the land.
  • Increased pest burden, risk of wildfires and spread of wilding pines.
  • Direct financial impact through job losses on farms and indirect financial impacts on rural towns and businesses.

The short-term fix of planting permanent exotic forestry will become a long-term problem for future generations.

Key recommendations from this research are as follows:

  • Government should be encouraging industry to reduce emissions rather than taking the easy option of offsetting them.
  • MPI allowing pre-1989 native forests and natural carbon sinks (Fiordland) into the NZ ETS.
  • Research into alternative ways to sequester carbon such as the use of our oceans and seaweed to sequester carbon.
  • Power companies should be increasing investment into alternative power sources such as wind turbines, building more hydro lakes and harnessing geothermal energy.
  • The Ministry for the Environment and local councils encouraging partial farm plantings which will improve profitability on marginal land and will have environmental benefits on-farm if waterways and marshy areas are locked up and left in native plants.

Bringing New Zealand’s food science to the world.

Coralie de La Fage Kellogg report image
Coralie de La Fage Kellogg report image

Executive summary

Background

Food science in New Zealand is an important contributor of the Science and Innovation ecosystem and helps maintain a positive international reputation in this field. However, international stakeholders are looking in, the food crisis, accentuated by a growing population, is worsening and scrutiny is increasing across every sector.

Thus, our food science sector must show clear direction, collaboration, and thought leadership. Therefore, New Zealand’s science industry needs to be reshaped to help find solutions to the pending global food crisis identified by the United Nations and other organisations.

The COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to restart the clock and implement some changes. Te Ara Paerangi Future Pathways’ consultation is addressing a wide range of issues and looking at solutions while keeping an open mind and including many voices. This is an excellent step in the right direction and a welcome review of New Zealand’s research system.

Internationally, New Zealand is described as harder to justify, far away and laid back. Moreover, New Zealand faces the issue of ‘local is the new global’, meaning that when available, most stakeholders would prefer to engage with a science provider closer to them geographically.

However, commercial revenue for New Zealand’s food science sector is not only important financially, but also critical to maintain a global reputation.

Method and Focus

This report focuses on international business development and ways to better integrate New Zealand’s food science globally. The purpose of this research includes providing a clear picture of the New Zealand’s food science ecosystem and the opportunities and challenges that organisations in the industry are facing.

This research was underpinned by two components.

Firstly, a literature review to draw research, articles, industry reports and opinion pieces together to understand the current New Zealand science system, compare it with other models and identify some common challenges and opportunities.

Secondly, a crucial part of the research consisted of semi structured interviews with food science providers. A compare and contrast analysis was undertaken. The interviews formed the basis of the recommendations and shaped the vision for New Zealand’s food science strategy.

Recommendations

The recommendations have been drawn from readings and interviews, and can be summarised as:

  • Support engagement among the science industry and enhance the collective mindset to capitalise on every expertise to create greater impact.
  • Creation of a capability map to identify the focus areas and support world leading capability building.
  • Promote the transition to a single overarching science institute.
  • Leverage New Zealand’s science capability to focus on world leading expertise and attract international business, thus enhancing New Zealand’s economy.

It’s encouraging to see more and more collaborative projects in science, however this research suggests that only a whole sector change would accelerate the rate of exchange of scientific knowledge, increase the delivery outcome to answer global issues and keep New Zealand in a world leading position.

Ultimately, the aim is to draw insights and develop a bold vision and relative recommendations for the future of New Zealand’s food science, to position the country as a leading knowledge and research provider in this sector, globally.

Water resilience.

Conan Moynihan Kellogg Rural Leadership report image
Conan Moynihan Kellogg Rural Leadership report image

Executive summary

New Zealand is extremely fortunate when it comes to natural water resources.

However, under a changing climate our water security is under threat particularly for New Zealand’s rural communities. Our freshwater resource is at the heart of our prosperity and resilience of our communities.

With increasing demand from all sectors, it is crucial that New Zealand efficiently manages our freshwater and that it is allocated to its best uses.

Water capture and storage systems have been identified as key adaptions to climate change. Future systems will need to be multi-purpose to utilise freshwater to its full potential under a Te Mana o te Wai framework (TMOTW).

How we slice the pie of water allocation within these multi-purpose systems will be critical to the success of sustainable growth for rural communities.

This report will focus on how New Zealand’s rural communities can afford to build water resilience through water capture and storage and the implementation of market-based systems to manage allocation of freshwater within catchments.

The methodology includes a literature review of current research on water resource solutions and allocation models, followed by semi structured interviews with eight sector experts to gain insights into their experiences and perceived solutions.

Key findings:

  1. There is lack of specific oversight and strategy for managing New Zealand’s freshwater resources.
  2. Current water allocation models need to go through reform at both national and local policy levels.
  3. Rights of existing users including iwi need to be addressed. Allocation reform will be unable to be successful without tackling this issue first.
  4. Current management of the resource is in silos which is inefficient and costly for both the environment and water users. Collective management of freshwater is needed to create efficient use of the resource.
  5. Costs, planning and perception of building infrastructure solutions are prohibitive to investment in development of water security infrastructure.
  6. Water capture and storage is needed to build water resilience against climate change for rural communities. Solutions will vary between catchments, but significant investment is required.
  7. Market-based systems are a tool for creating efficiency of water use and help to reallocate water to higher value uses. Collective management entities are able to easily implement market-based systems provided the system is closed (e.g. within one aquifer or reservoir etc), they have an accurate optimisation model, and real time data.

Recommendations:

  1. Ministry for the Environment to address and find resolution of iwi interest and rights in water. Allocation reform will be unable to be successful without tackling this issue first. Iwi should have a seat at the governance table of proposed national agency for freshwater management and crown entities for water management to ensure that the TMOTW framework is at a catchment by catchment level.
  2. Ministry for the Environment to establish a National Agency for Freshwater Resources similar to what overseas New Zealand’s roading infrastructure (Waka Kotahi).
  3. National Agency for Freshwater Resources to create a national strategy for water resources that works in tandem with the long-term view of TMOTW. The Agency would create Crown Entities for multi-regional water management in a similar vain to what is proposed under the Three Waters Reform Programme but with further refinement and input from stakeholders.
  4. Regional Councils to facilitate aggregate consent entities within catchments through regional plans. These will allow for the management of the overall resource and can implement market-based solutions such as trading of water allocations and/or pollutant allowances. These entities will also enable the ability to generate sufficient funds to build more efficient infrastructure and storage upgrades if required.
  5. CWME’s to quantify and understand demand requirements for individual catchments and then plan water storage and capture infrastructure accordingly. Implement staged projects so initial costs up front are not prohibitive.
  6. The national agency for freshwater resources must facilitate and define future allocation model options and provide clear classification of new water permits. Regional Councils to facilitate and undertake water allocation reform that adheres to the hierarchy of TMOTW, enables a transitional period for existing rights and undertakes investment in community education.

Greenhouse gas emission consequences of New Zealand’s urban sprawl.

Andrew Myers Kellogg report image
Andrew Myers Kellogg report image

Executive summary

Land use change from agriculture to urban is occurring at record rates. Stats NZ (2021) report that record numbers of stand-alone houses are being built. Emissions from the building sector increased 77% in the decade to 2017 (Stats NZ, 2019).

In contrast, pastoral farming land area is decreasing, and the emissions profile of the industry is flat to declining (Ministry for the Environment, 2021).

Legislation and numerous reports reference agriculture as New Zealand’s largest Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emitter and as the main industry targeted for emissions reduction to meet New Zealand’s GHG obligations under the United Nations Paris Agreement of 2015. The housing sector has significantly less reference within the same documents.

If agriculture is recommended to decrease land area and therefore emissions to help achieve New Zealand’s obligations (New Zealand Productivity Commission, 2018), why is that same agricultural land then allowed to be subdivided and turned into housing which emits potentially more emissions?

This is the context of the data sought for this study’s hypothesis: There isn’t a carbon footprint reason for land use change from primary to urban residential.

The results of the data analysis from a literature review suggest that the emissions from land use change to one hectare of urban subdivision are significantly higher than if the land had stayed as one hectare of primary land use.

Seven interviews with industry leaders were undertaken for discussion surrounding the hypothesis. They were thematically analysed showing the agriculture sector having concerns about the way its emissions are reported and the availability of tools to decrease emissions. This limits the industry’s potential to do what it does well, producing some of the lowest carbon footprint nutritional products in the world, for its growing population.

The housing sector has potential to improve its industry unity to lift its GHG reporting performance. Several solutions are available to reduce housing’s carbon footprint and minimise the use of agricultural land. They are too slowly being taken up for the sector to meet its emissions reductions targets.

Reporting gases on their separate warming potentials would clarify the impact of pastoral farming on the overall emissions. Reporting of land use change emissions associated with subdivisions, and emissions per dwelling should be undertaken.

Resource consent applications for land use change should consider the associated GHG consequences. More research could be undertaken to express the emissions of the civil infrastructure surrounding houses.

Paths to strategically meet our GHG reduction obligations can then be more clearly identified, and decisions made to ultimately improve the planet’s overall goal – reducing global warming.

Leadership during a crisis.

Henry McIntosh_report image
Henry McIntosh_report image

Executive summary

The Covid-19 pandemic hit New Zealand during 2020 and the horticulture sector was immediately faced with an extremely challenging situation. The sector was operating under very strict rules and experienced significant effects to the wider supply chain. But overall, the sector performed very well during 2020.

The aim of this report is to understand how the New Zealand horticulture sector successfully navigated the unknown during the initial phase of the pandemic, specifically focussing on leadership.

The question I wanted to answer was ‘what are the most effective leadership strategies during a crisis?’.

I completed a literature review to analyse some of the previous work done on crisis leadership and interviewed six senior leaders from New Zealand’s horticulture sector. These people were actively involved in directing the industry and leading their stakeholders through the early phase of the pandemic.

The clear answer to my question regarding the most effective crisis leadership strategy was to implement a people-first approach. Removing the controllable worries that people have about the situation. Keeping people busy to maintain a sense of purpose and continuing a level of social interaction are all key parts of a people-first strategy. 

With this approach, people are motivated to continue as normal and will often create better results. A lot of the interviewees reported better team engagement, efficiencies, and overall business performance during this period.

It is clear, that without this people-first approach, New Zealand’s horticulture sector would not have managed this period as successfully as it did.

Communication was also a significant part of the successful leadership strategy. There was no fear about potentially over-communicating. Getting the correct and most up to date information out to all stakeholders quickly was a focus. Many communication systems have been completely refreshed as a result.

The pandemic situation was developing so quickly, that often learnings from previous weeks or from other businesses were very useful to handle new challenges. Being conscious of the learning opportunity was challenging for businesses, but once embraced, systems and processes improved significantly.

Recommendations:

  • Cultivate a company culture that puts people first and ensure that staff can recognise this prioritisation.
  • Invest in professional development and networking opportunities to continually upskill staff and create opportunities for pan-industry connections.
  • Review and re-create the existing communication plans to ensure the best tools and strategies are being used.

Kellogg Rural Scholar Series: ‘Dairy Insights’.

Here’s an introduction from Rural Leaders CEO Chris Parsons, on the new Dairy Insights report.

Dairy Insights - Kellogg Reports

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

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

The set of reports précised in this edition are penned by Scholars from the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme. The Kellogg programme has been equipping rural leaders for strategic impact since 1970. The selection of reports is just a sample of reports by Scholars from the Dairy Industry.  

They grapple with the big issues facing New Zealand Dairy and are written by people living and working in the Sector. Many Kellogg and Nuffield Scholars go on to live their research. They build businesses. They advance community and social enterprises. They influence policy and advocate for animal and environmental outcomes, informed by an ability for critical analysis and their own research-fuelled passion. Rural Scholarship is about impact.  

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

The reports traverse topics as wide and timely as innovation, markets, people, sustainability and social issues.  

Ngā mihi,  
Chris Parsons

and the NZ Rural Leaders Team 

Download report

Download and read the full report here:

Kellogg Rural Scholar Series: ‘Dairy Insights’.

More issues from the seriess

Kellogg Rural Scholars Series: Horticultural Insights

Kellogg Rural Scholars Series: Horticultural Insights

Read More →

Kellogg Rural Scholar Series: ‘Dairy Insights’.

Read More →

Kellogg Phase Two – what does it look like? 

Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme - Wellington week

One of the highlights of the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme is the Wellington based, Phase Two. Scholars of the 48th Kellogg Programme (internally referred to as K48), will begin their Phase Two in September.

The week is delivered in a specific order designed to reveal the political and economic context carefully, each step building on the last.  

Dr Scott Champion, will facilitate, expertly introducing Scholars to this part of the Programme. Phil Morrison facilitates on other Kellogg Programmes. Dr Champion deftly fills the spaces between influential speakers, encouraging discussion and imparting his own extensive knowledge, so that the whole experience is as seamless as it is inspiring.  

So, what will Phase Two look like for the Scholars of the 48th Kellogg Rural Leadership programme?

Note, this gives an idea of how any Phase Two will flow. Details and speakers are subject to change. 

Kellogg Phase Two - The Political and Economic Context for Leadership.

Day One 

Dr Champion introduces this phase. 

Lian Butcher talks about the role of local and regional government. Lian is General Manager, Greater Wellington Environment Group. 

Jessica Smith is a Kellogg Scholar and talks about Māori governance and management, as well as her role as Regional Director of Te Tai Hauāuru. 

Vangelis Vitalis talks about trade policy and market access.  

Mike Petersen discussion session. Mike wears and has worn many hats, one of which was as SATE, New Zealand’s Special Agricultural Trade Envoy.

He is passionately committed to advancing New Zealand here and on the global stage.  

Day Two

Dr Champion leads each morning with a reflection session, designed to discuss the previous day, draw insights, and connect these with the upcoming speakers. 

Chris Parsons, CEO Rural Leaders will talk Civics (the rights and duties of citizenship) to get the morning underway. 

Nicola Hill and Rachel Groves, cover political structures and processes. Nicola is  Te Whanau a Apanui Takutai Moana Application Lead and was formerly nearly five years with the department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Rachel is a Principal Policy Analyst with the Ministry of Justice. 

Barbara Kuriger, a Member of Parliament for the National party, gives some insights into the inner workings of government. 

Hon. Damien O’Connor, MP for West Coast-Tasman, Minister of Agriculture, Minister for Trade and Export Growth, Biosecurity, Land Information, and Rural Communities. 

Question time, followed by networking at PWC.

Kellogg Wellington phase 2022

Day Three

Reflection session.

Ewan Kelsall and Kevin Hackwell, speak about the role of NGO’s, interest groups and lobbyists. Ewan is a Senior Environmental Policy Advisor for Federated Farmers and Kevin is Group Manager Campaigns and Advocacy for Forest and Bird.

Sam Halstead, speaks about the role of journalism and PR. Sam is Director at Latitude, Strategy and Communication.

Leaders Meetings. Small groups have one-on-ones with Sector leaders. This is a no-holds-barred discussion where leaders share their good decisions, their bad ones and what they would do differently if they could.

Networking function at PWC. The programme dials up the networking during phase two with this opportunity to get in front of industry leaders and policymakers.  

Day Four

Reflection session. 

Anna Rathe, Submissions Workshop 1 and 2. In two parts and delivered either side of lunch, Anna leads this workshop. Anna is a Strategy and Risk Policy Leader with Horticulture New Zealand.  

Sam Halstead, Communications Skills Workshop. Also delivered in two parts, this workshop expertly covers a lot of ground, focusing on the pieces that matter. 

Day Five. 

Reflection session. 

Martin Workman, Chief Advisor at the Ministry for the Environment. Martin leads a ‘big issues’ discussion and talk.  

Project Workshop. This 90-minute session is designed to help develop project topics. It’s a good time to air any challenges Scholars might be facing.
 
Goal setting and Phase Two close.

Kellogg Wellington phase 2022_group photo

Want to experience this for yourself. Register your interest in the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme today.  

2023’s January and June intakes at Lincoln. 

Kellogg Programme One, Lincoln: 24 January – 7 July 2023 

Applications close: Sunday, 30 October 2022. 

Kellogg Programme Two, Lincoln: 13 June – 30 November 2023 

Applications close: Sunday, 16 April 2023.

The carbon credit currency

Carbon credits
Carbon credits

By Sam Mander, Environmental Consultant, The AgriBusiness Group and 2022 Kellogg Scholar.

The article is reprinted from the Real Estate Magazine, with permission from the publisher The Real Estate Institute of New Zealand.

Indigenous forest land and the carbon sequestration opportunity for New Zealand landowners always seems to be downplayed — deemed too expensive, too hard, or inferior compared to exotic forests.

Sam Mander, Environmental Consultant at The AgriBusiness Group, debunks this myth and provides an understanding of how to identify the indigenous carbon opportunity.

Kanuka, manuka, regenerating native vegetation or planted native restoration sites hold a significant opportunity for carbon sequestration. But fundamentally, where the opportunity really lies in this space is where a natural seed source is present.

Land with naturally regenerating indigenous forest requires no capital input, eliminating the usual barriers of expensive planting regimes and delicate forest management.  

We don’t want to discourage the planting of new native areas, particularly around areas of ecological significance, but to capitalise on the low hanging fruit, landowners must take advantage of existing native seed stocks and develop these areas to accelerate the growth of regenerating New Zealand’s indigenous landscape.  

Determining eligible indigenous forest land

Indigenous forest areas are eligible to enter the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) if they meet the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) forest land definition. 

What is carbon sequestration?

Carbon sequestration is the process by which carbon dioxide is absorbed during photosynthesis, and is stored as carbon in biomass (trunks, branches, foliage, and roots). Source: nzfoa.org.nz 

Sam Mandes_Carbon Credit Currency

MPI’s forest land definition states that forests must: 

  • Reach at least one hectare in area 
  • Reach at least 30 metres average width 
  • Have species that can grow five metres high 
  • Have the potential to reach 30% canopy cover
  • Meet the above as of 1 January 1990 or after 
  • Have met all of the above as of 1 January 1990. 


If a landowner has property that has manuka, kanuka, mixed podocarps, or areas they are thinking of planting native species (including in riparian zones — the interface between land and a river or stream) carbon credits can be earned if the areas meet the forest land definition. 
 
One carbon credit is equivalent to one tonne of carbon sequestered; therefore, the tonnes of carbon sequestered by the forest each year are the total number of annual carbon credits available.

Tonnes of carbon are calculated on a per hectare basis, and the value of one tonne is equal to the current carbon price ($76/NZU/tonne). 
 
You’re typically looking for a natural seed source present with conditions that favour natural dispersion, growth and succession. Any native species can be included if it has the potential to reach five metres in height at maturity. 
 
The most common example of opportunity is regenerating kanuka and manuka forest land areas.  
 
To earn carbon credits, landowners need to electronically map the land to certain standards and capture aerial imagery to prove the forest area meets the forest land definition. 

The value of credits a landowner can receive and for how long they will receive them largely depends on the species growing on the land.

The MPI carbon lookup tables determine that indigenous forests can earn carbon credits from sequestration in the first 50 years of growth. 

How to assess the native forest area

This can be a difficult process for landowners; fortunately, professional forestry companies and environmental consultants like myself have developed methods for assessing forest land definition and providing the result of the assessment to MPI for a successful ETS application. 

“The value of credits a landowner can receive and length of time they will receive them largely depends on the species growing on the land.” 

Depending on the forest scenario, we use a combination of ground vegetation sampling, plotting, and integrated drone imagery to determine and prove this. In most cases, this is where an expert may need to be involved. 

A recent example is a property with an indigenous natural seed source. An assessment found it had 35 hectares of post-1989 indigenous forest land that had regenerated since 1990, with a forest age of approximately 17 years.

Forest species were predominantly kanuka, manuka, among other mixed podocarps. Carbon credits can be claimed for the remaining 33 years of carbon sequestration. 

Economically speaking, at the current carbon price, this equated to an average annual cash flow of $16,000, or cumulatively, $539,000. In summary, the opportunity to earn carbon credits for indigenous forest land is significant, particularly where a natural seed source is present.

The property mentioned above is among many that we have worked on which provides a great example of the type of property that is common around rural New Zealand and one that holds value from indigenous carbon sequestration. 

Planting trees to offset carbon isn’t a silver bullet against climate change.

However, carbon credits allow landowners to balance the scales for those unavoidable emissions on the path to reduction and has potential to generate financial benefits for those who wish to engage in these sustainable practices.

Download Sam’s report Carbon Sequestration Potential.

How Resilient Farmers Thrive In The Face Of Adversity

Resilient Farmers_Jack Cocks_Joanne R. Stevenson
Resilient Farmers_Jack Cocks_Joanne R. Stevenson

By Jack Cocks and Joanne R. Stevenson.

Article is reprinted from The Journal with permission from the publisher, NZ Institute of Primary Industry Management

Farmers face adversity from multiple sources and additional challenges to other sectors of society. To date, there does not appear to be a simple high-level resilience-focused model for how farmers can be more resilient ‘personally’.

This article, which is the result of a Kellogg Rural Leadership Study on ‘How Resilient Farmers Thrive in the Face of Adversity‘, is a first step towards developing that model.

The study found there were three key strategies that facilitated farmer resilience – purpose, connection and well-being.

Adversity affects farmers from multiple sources

Like all members of society, farmers face adversity in a range of forms from health crises to financial volatility, family challenges and personal loss. Due to the nature of their business, however, farmers are more vulnerable than those in other industries to climate challenges and global market shifts. They are also often toiling at the coalface of legislative changes and can have less access to appropriate support services. 

More than other industries farmers have strong identity ties to their land and business, meaning that disruptions to the farm are de facto disruptions to the farming family. They also typically live at their place of work.

The current global environment (autumn 2022) – experiencing climate, a global pandemic and a war in Eastern Europe – highlights the dynamism, volatility and interconnected global marketplace in which New Zealand farmers operate. 

Developing strategies to recover quickly from adversity, or ‘building resilience’, is essential to achieving long-term success in farming. While there are a number of tools and resources available that address social-emotional resilience, there does not appear to be a simple, high-level resilience-focused model developed specifically for farmers.

Such a model could be used by farmers when facing adversity to ask themselves, ‘Are we implementing the key strategies and techniques (both as an individual and as a team of individuals) that we need to be resilient in the face of this adversity?’ 

More than other industries farmers have strong identity ties to their land and business, meaning that disruptions to the farm are de facto disruptions to the farming family.

Context

The lead author, Jack Cocks, an Otago high country farmer, experienced adversity from a life-threatening brain injury which saw him in a coma, suffer a cardiac arrest, a seizure and a pulmonary oedema.

On day one in hospital Jack’s family was given a prognosis that their husband, dad and son would likely be dead today. The best case scenario was that he would survive but spend the rest of his life in an institution.

He obviously did survive, and the following six years saw him undergo 15 major surgeries and spend eight months in hospital re-learning to talk, and several times re-learning to walk. 

Through this experience and recovery Jack has been told that he is a resilient character. He has been asked to give several talks to farmers on his experience and how he developed resilience through adversity.

He found that giving these talks was a humbling and surprising experience for the feedback received.

However, the presentations were based on just one farmer’s thoughts and he had two questions he could not answer from them: 

  • The adversity he had faced, while bad, was it any worse than what many people face? 
  • Were his ideas on resilience applicable to all farmers, or were they just the ideas of one farmer who had faced some adversity? 

Five areas of adversity

The five areas of adversity and a brief synopsis of each case are given below: 

Health

Doug, who farms on the East Coast, faced severe adversity in the form of depression. This was primarily brought about through farming in what became an eight-year drought.

Natural disasters, climate and weather

Andy, who farms in Canterbury, has farmed through a succession of major weather events, snowfalls and droughts. He has a great deal of knowledge about how to farm through adversity.

Financial

Kevin and Jody, who farm in Otago, have faced a very high amount of adversity in their lives starting from before they emigrated to New Zealand.

Their major adversity in this country has been financial, in the form of a very low dairy payout in their first two seasons as 50:50 sharemilkers. 

Family 

Brent and Jo, who farm in Southland, experienced a number of challenges to farm succession early in their farming career. Communication and a desire to split assets evenly among all children, farming and non-farming, were the major challenges.

They have since done everything right to complete succession with Brent’s siblings and are an example for how farm succession can successfully be completed with their own children. 

Personal loss 

Melissa lost her husband to cancer and has since done tremendous good for her community. 

It would be impossible and unfair to compare each of these stories. The level of adversity and the situations they have faced are so different that any of them would have responded differently, perhaps better, perhaps worse.

The choice of case study participants provides representation of the common sources of adversity farmers in New Zealand face and a cross-section of the likelihood of adversity from the ‘wow, that is incredible’, to ‘yes, our neighbours have been in that situation – I’ve seen it many times.’

The most remarkable story of resilience is notable for the breadth of the sources of adversity and the severity of the situation they faced.

One of the case studies is therefore an important reminder of the possibility of compounding disruptions, where adverse events seem to stack up, showing the way that resilience can be repeatedly eroded and then built back up.

Jack was able to identify some of the case study participants because they have shared their stories publicly, mobilising the power of story-telling to process their own adverse event and improve the lives of others by sharing their message.

Interviewing and examining their stories collectively revealed common themes that underpinned this diverse range of experiences. 

Resilience strategies and the ‘Resilience Triangle’

Analysing the interviews revealed the common resilience strategies that the five case study participants knowingly or unknowingly put in place in their lives.

These strategies are captured in the form of a three-level triangle, the ‘Resilience Triangle’: 

Purpose 

This is the reason we are doing what we’re doing; the ‘direction’ of the triangle, the ‘why’. 

Connection 

This is the middle of the triangle; the ‘glue’ that holds it together, or the ‘who’. This is keeping connected with other people – friends, family, farming networks and local communities.

These connections are the people in our lives who buoy us up and encourage us to achieve, to rise above, and to have courage when going through adversity. 

Well-being 

This is the base of the triangle. It is, ‘what do I need in my life to be well’ or to be happy and content? It is the ‘foundation’ for resilience, the ‘what’. 

Participants in the study placed different weighting and had different consciousness of the use of these strategies, but they are common across all five cases.

Key to the effectiveness of these resilience building strategies is the combinations of approaches across the three levels and how the participants have implemented the strategies in their lives. 

For each of these strategies there were four ‘enabling techniques’ below each one that the farmers used to enable resilience at each level.

There are different enablers that underpin their sense of purpose, connection and well-being. We could identify enablers that, when missing, eroded resilience at different levels of the triangle. 

The resilience triangle_Jack Cocks_Joanne R. Stevenson

The lead author cites that after brain injury induced balance issues, having sufficient stability to be able to dress standing up was a cause for celebration after having to sit on the bed to do this for so long. Enjoying the little things such as seasonal foods, a sunrise, or the first birdsong in the early spring were all cited as enablers of well-being.

Conclusions

This study was concerned with developing a theory for how resilient farmers thrive in the face of adversity. It found that the case study participants employed three strategies in their lives to be resilient: 

  • they lived with ‘purpose’ in that they had a clear understanding of ‘why’ they were doing what they were doing 
  • they were very good at keeping ‘connected’ with those people around them who would and could help them through periods of adversity 
  • they also understood what they needed to do to keep ‘well’ – what they needed in their lives to be happy and content. 

Also, for each of these three strategies there were four enabling techniques which these farmers employed to facilitate each strategy. 

Rural professionals supporting our farmers need a clear understanding of not only the causes of adversity, but some of the strategies and techniques they can use to be resilient. 

The future global environment in which New Zealand farmers operate will face significant volatility, turmoil and potentially subsequent adversity. 

Rural professionals supporting our farmers need a clear understanding of not only the causes of adversity, but some of the strategies and techniques they can use to be resilient. We believe this study is a first step in crystallising how resilient farmers thrive in the face of adversity.

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme for developing and delivering such an excellent programme. Also, to the five case study participants who have openly shared their stories of adversity and resilience, as they are remarkable and inspirational farmers. 

Jack Cocks is a sheep and beef farmer in the Otago high country and previously a partner in AbacusBio, a Dunedin agribusiness and science consultancy. Dr Joanne R. Stevenson is a Principal Consultant with Resilient Organisations Ltd and farms in partnership with her husband on a North Canterbury sheep and beef property. 

Corresponding author: jackcnz@icloud.com 

Wahine toa, Wahine ahu matua.

Sharleen Temara Kellogg report image
Sharleen Temara Kellogg report image

Executive summary

“ Whaia te iti kahurangi ki te tuohu koe me he maunga teitei, ki nga whetu rawa”

__

“Seek the treasure that you value most dearly, if you bow your head, let it be to a lofty mountain, let it be beyond the stars”.

This whakataukī is about perseverance and endurance. Refusing to let obstacles get in your way while striving to reach your goals.

This research paper looks at the need for women in leadership, the need for te ao Maori and tikanga Maori in the workplace, the current resistance to change and posits how this might change.

Traditionally and historically the leadership role has been the domain of men in Maori and mainstream organisations. Progress is happening, glacial as it feels at times.

Although there has been little research into gender bias in New Zealand, overseas studies have concluded it is prevalent at all levels.

 In 1993, Dr Sheilah Martin, Dean of the University of Calgary, “identified five commonly alleged sources of gender bias. While conceding that bias can arise in many situations and can assume a number of forms, she maintained that it typically occurs where decision makers:

  • fail to be sensitive to the differing perspectives of men and women;
  • apply double standards or rely on gender stereotypes in making decisions;
  • fail to recognise harms that are done to one group only;
  • apply laws or make decisions that exclude people on grounds of gender;
  • are gender-blind to gender-specific realities;
  • rely on gender-defined norms;
  • make sexist comments.” (New Zealand Law Commission, 2003).

AAUW (2016) report Barriers to women leadership that occurs due to the qualities of leaders are based on male models; (stereotypes) that the traits associated with leadership are viewed as masculine; men surpass women in networking to find mentors and sponsors; bias and discrimination and the lack of flexibility balancing family and work as women are viewed as the primary carer.

The purpose of this research paper is to identify potential pathways, for wahine and business, to enable Maori women with the potential to move into leadership positions.

The research has sought to understand the experiences and perspectives of successful wahine leaders and the barriers they faced.

The objectives of the research are set out in section 4.1, the methodology used in section 4.2, the findings in section 6 and the conclusions in section 8. The research provides a snapshot into the relationship Maori business and primary sectors have with the Maori economy; Explains the importance of kaupapa Maori in business and leadership; Provides an insight on the status of women and Maori women; Maori leadership, Maori women leadership and governance. Section 4.2: Research Methodology, focus on research method. Section 6 offers a brief and the voices of the Maori women who are the focus of this research. Section 7 weaves together the research by providing a discussion and interpretation of the overall findings. Section 8 presents the conclusions. Section 9 presents the recommendations.