nuffield Archives | Rural Leaders

A larger-than-life Nuffield alum passes.

The New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust (Rural Leaders) and Nuffield New Zealand are saddened by the recent passing of Garrick Murfitt, 1977 Nuffield Scholar.

Garrick was a hill-country farmer first and foremost and was involved with Horizons Regional Council since joining as statutory member in 1992. He went on to be elected to represent the Tararua District and served as Chair from 2006 to 2010.

Garrick was involved in a number of collaborative initiatives involving local government, iwi and hapū and was also a driver of the improved health of the Manawatū River.

Horizons CE, Michael McCartney said of Garrick, “He was a larger than life chartacter … a joy to work with, and loved by everyone. He was a wonderful person and a man of real public service.”

Garrick is survived by his wife Jane, sons Simon, Richard and Daniel, daughter Emma, and grandchildren Taylor, Ben, Grace, Ellen, Beth, Anna, Tobias, Jack, Lucy, Poppy and Beatrice.

You can leave a message for Garrick’s family here.

You can read a Herald article here.

Rachel Baker – Insights (from an insider) on the Nuffield Global Focus Programme.

In this podcast, Rachel Baker, 2024 Nuffield Scholar talks to Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor, Farmers Weekly, and gives a unique perspective from inside Nuffield.

Rachel speaks about about some of the similarities and differences between the farming systems in the countries she has visited with New Zealand’s.

Rachel discusses insights from Indonesia’s primary industries, France’s love of food, Denmark entering an emissions scheme, California’s water challenges and Chile’s low rates of Research and Development.

This is a must listen for anyone considering a Nuffield Scholarship in 2025 or beyond.

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

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.
You’ve joined Rural Leaders’ Ideas That Grow podcast. In this series, we’ll be drawing on insights from innovative rural leaders to help plant ideas that grow so our regions can flourish. Ideas that Grow is presented in association with Farmers Weekly.

Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly.
Welcome to Ideas That Grow, a podcast from Rural Leaders. I’m your host, Bryan Gibson, the Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. We’ve got a very special guest today, a current Nuffield Scholar, Rachel Baker. G’day, Rachel, how are you?

Rachel Baker, 2024 Nuffield Scholar
Yeah, good. Thanks, Bryan. Thanks for having me.

BG:
Now, where are you calling in from? Where’s home for you?

A Nuffield Scholar with a background in many industries.

RB: Home for me is Central Hawkes Bay, tucked up near the Ruahine Ranges. My husband and I graze just under 500 dairy heifers. I guess in my day job, I’m portfolio manager for pit fruit for my farm investments. And also with a dairy background, I do some consulting with dairy farmers.

BG: Quite a range of farming industries involved there.

RB: Yeah, life isn’t a straight line. It’s a wiggly line. There are a few stories behind those changes. But I’ve been fortunate. I’ve got a foot in agriculture, and I guess a foot in horticulture as well. So, it keeps me busy and keeps life interesting.

BG: Was that always going to be the path for you? Did you grow up on a farm or was it something you found?

RB: I grew up on a small farm, but my mother was from a large sheep and farming family here in Hawkes Bay. So, I’ve always been involved in farming, but I actually did a veterinary degree. So, I worked as a veterinarian for a short period of time and then morphed into dairy consulting. Then my husband and I took an opportunity to go share milking. So that’s how we entered the dairy sector and had some really good experiences there and actually sold our cows and bought a dry stock farm. That’s how we ended up grazing dairy heifers.

The transition to horticulture really came about through dairy connections within my farm investments. Because I live in Hawkes Bay, I said yes to an opportunity to oversee some of those early apple developments. That was seven years ago and still involved, yeah, still learning and enjoying it along the way with the dairy.

BG: Attracting more investment into food production sectors is pretty vital. So, you’ve got a big job.

RB: It is a good story because it’s bringing capital into the agriculture and horticultural sector, largely from New Zealanders, which is a really positive story. So, yeah, I’m really pleased to be involved in managing their investments.

Halfway through a Nuffield Scholarship.

BG: Now, you’re smack bang in the middle, I guess, of your Nuffield Scholarship Programme. How’s it going for a start, and what subject area are you looking at?

RB: Yes, I am part way through my scholarship at the moment. I’m interested in looking at New Zealand’s global proposition in terms of being a food exporter. In terms of Nuffield itself, the programme really is comprised of three parts. The third part is that research project and doing individual research, which I’m yet to do.

The Nuffield Contemporary Scholars Conference (CSC).

The first part is a conference where all the scholars from that year from around the globe meet together in a country, which changes every year. It’s a conference looking at global issues as well as the host country itself. We were fortunate that Brazil was the host country for 2024.

We went to Brazil in March and had our global scholars conference there. The second part to Nuffield is a global focus programme, and I’ve just come back in early July from that, which is a small group travelling together through five countries in five and a half weeks looking at food production.

The Nuffield Global Focus Programme (GFC).

BG: Can you tell us more about the Global Focus Programme?

RB: There are a number of different Global Focus Programmes based on different times of the year to try and give an opportunity to fit within your own farming and work calendar, and also different countries as well. The countries our group visited were: Indonesia, France, Denmark.

We also went to California and to Chile. The group was made up of 12. They were a good representation of countries as well. We had six Australians, two from Ireland, a Brazilian, a Chilean, and a Zimbabwean. We all travelled together through that time, and obviously got to know each other really well, as well as looking at the challenges and opportunities in all of those countries.

BG: First up, I mean, having that range of people from diverse farming-related backgrounds must be really cool to just talk while you’re travelling and understand how other people think about things.

RB: It was a really diverse group not only in terms of the countries but also what sectors people were involved in. We had tulip grower from Tasmania through to a pig farmer from Zimbabwe. Also, people involved in international fertiliser and the food trade. We had a really nice cross-section, good conversations, and learning together as a group.

That farmer, peer-to-peer learning, you just can’t beat it. When you’re on the road together for that time, you get to know each other well. You learn a lot from each other as well as, obviously, who you’re meeting day to day.

GFC - first stop Indonesia.

BG: Tell us a little about Indonesia. We forget that it’s one of the most populous countries on Earth. It’s not that far away, but when you think of it, you think of some beaches and things like that. But what food production facilities or operations did you take a look at?

RB: Indonesia was our first country, and it was fascinating. A huge population, well over 200 million. So compared to New Zealand, you couldn’t get a better contrast to start. We were hosted by an Australian who had set up cattle feed lots there over 30 years ago.

We’re really fortunate that we got good insights into a lot of different food sectors as well. We did see cattle feed lots, imported cattle from Australia being finished there in Indonesia, through to spice and pepper processing.

We went out on fishing boats with some local fishermen, right through to seeing pineapple plantations being harvested by hand in 40 plus degree heat and 90 % humidity. So, we got a really good range of scale, but also some real subsistence farming as well – from a single man climbing up trees and harvesting palm sugar and making a living out of that.

BG: And where did you head next? Scandinavia?

Nuffield GFC – France.

RB: So, from Indonesia, we headed to France. We spent our time in Normandy, in the north. And again, we got some good insight into French farming. France is just a wonderful food culture. They really celebrate food and they’re really proud of what they produce. A lot of it is artisan. It’s got provenance associated with it. And so, we got a real feel for that.

French farming is in a challenging place at the moment. They feel they’re under threat from imported food products coming in at a cheaper cost to what they can produce. That’s a challenging time for them. But by the same token, there are a lot of strong cooperatives in France. We got a good insight into some cooperative models, which, of course, having a number of strong cooperatives in New Zealand was really interesting.

BG: Yeah, what you were saying about the narrative that goes along with French food, it is so strong. A lot of people think this is something we could try to emulate here. I guess, put some real culture around our food production. I mean, is that something you see as worthwhile?

RB: As a New Zealand food producer, I think we produce high-quality food. It’s safe food from a food security viewpoint. So, any opportunity I had, I was looking for New Zealand produce in the countries we were visiting. There’s quite a buzz when you actually find New Zealand produce in a store or a supermarket when you’re travelling. So, I think from that regard, the food that I saw, the quality that was in front of the consumer was largely very good.

As food producers, we need to be high quality. There’s a lot of challenge coming to us or at us from countries with lower costs of production. I think quality is paramount and I think we should be proud of that. The provenance of New Zealand, it came up-time and time again. New Zealand was mentioned a lot – that it’s a beautiful country and we produce lovely food. So, we should leverage off that.

BG: Yeah. Now, where did it head next?

Nuffield GFC – Denmark.

RB: Next, we went to Denmark. So, it was an interesting time actually being there because not long after we left Denmark, they announced that agriculture would have an emissions tax from 2030. It was great timing for us. I think while I was away, New Zealand pushed pause on agriculture entering emissions trading scheme. So, the timing to be there in Denmark when they were deciding, they’d made the commitment they were going to go. It was just the uncertainty for farmers around what it actually looked like.

I found Denmark very similar to New Zealand in many ways. So, that was quite a good insight. They have a very high wages, and a high tax rate in Denmark, but obviously they have a very strong education, health, welfare system as well. In terms of trying to make a profit, it was a challenge for Danish farmers at this time.

BG: I’ve read a little about the plan that Denmark has to introduce that emissions levy. I know the agreement was nutted out by the government with stakeholders, and that includes some industry groups from the farming sector, so they did get to help mould it. On the ground there, were there farmers you spoke to? How were they feeling about it? Uncertain, I guess?

RB: I think they just wanted to have some certainty. There’s a great quote that uncertainty is the cancer of business. I think they just wanted to be certain about what the plan and the future looked like for them.

I think from a Danish farmer perspective, they do get good support, and they’ve got some excellent programmes in place around, say, a green accelerator programme. This is where they can get up to 70% rebate on any investment in technology that’s going to advance them towards sustainability and a green future.

It was clear that even though they were going to be entering an emissions tax, there was no doubt they wanted to maintain their food production and their productivity. In terms of entering the scheme was – it was not to reduce the amount of food that they were going to produce. It was just that they were going to produce it in a more environmentally sustainable way. From that perspective, I think that they felt there was support available to them to make the transition, and that’s quite refreshing.

BG: That’s really interesting. When I think about incentives for more sustainable production, you often think of planting and retiring land and that sort of thing. But having subsidies for technology, which is a completely different proposition, seems a bit more enticing to both sides of the equation.

RB: I think they’re looking at multiple solutions. They’re going to pump billions into retiring some peat lands in Denmark to help with their emissions transition. I also think biodiversity came up a lot in most of the countries we visited. And again, that’s a real opportunity for New Zealand, because if you look at the land area that we have in native forest and also in farmed land, what area has actually been retired or riparian planted?

We really need to map that and leverage off that because I believe it’s going to be a global food currency – biodiversity in the future. So, we have it and we’re making really good progress. I think we need to leverage that to our advantage.

Nuffield GFC – California.

BG: Now, California, a big state, a food basket in many ways for the United States. That must have been fun.

RB: Yeah, it was really interesting. It’s the fifth largest economy in the world, if it was to be treated as though it was a country. So, we spent time in California, in Fresno, up through to Sacramento.

It was very hot. We had a heatwave while we were there, which was uncomfortable for most of us. But the big story there is water and really getting a good insight into the water challenges they’ve got in California. With less ice melt out of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, more rain, more precipitation, more growing cities, all demanding more water.

California - the water scarcity challenge.

Their sources of water are surface with allocation rights for deep-water, groundwater takes. They’ve got real challenges around a six-inch rainfall in Fresno County. Maybe they get 50% of their allocated volume from surface water. They’re needing to take groundwater as well. So, there are big recharging programmes in place. One farm we went to had spent $15 million USD on a recharge system, which may only be used every three or four years.

Then further up, closer to the Delta, the Government’s proposing putting in a $25 billion USD pipeline in to pump water through to Los Angeles and San Francisco. So, you’ve got real contention around water rights and water use and what priorities should be in place.

So, it was really good for us to see that. But also, you do wonder what areas may not be in horticulture in California in the future. So, there’s some real challenges there for them around not only the infrastructure, but just the allocation of water as well.

BG: Yeah, the last few years, they’ve been focusing on some pretty thirsty crops there, haven’t they?

RB: They have. I guess also the challenge is they’ve had real success growing almonds and selling almonds. But again, they’re almost running the risk of commoditising their own value product by planting more and more hectares. So, it’ll be interesting to see how that plays out.

Nuffield GFC – Chile.

BG: And further down the Coast of Americas, Chile, it always amazes me that place. I’ve not been there, but it’s so long and thin.

RB: It is the longest and thinnest country in the world. Narrow, I think, in diameter than New Zealand, from border to border. So, that was our last country. We left 40 plus degree heat in California and went into the single-digit temperatures in Chile, which was a bit of a shock for us all. But hey, what a great country.

We had some really good insight into Chile and, I guess, in policy to start with. Also, looking at Chile as a country that is open to foreign investment. We saw examples of that in Chile. But again, similar challenges, less ice melt, more precipitation, lack of infrastructure, investment, a slow consenting process.

On-farm storage of water was not really progressing very quickly at all. It’s a low-wage economy. We went to an avocado plantation on very steep country that in New Zealand would be sheep and beef or planted in forestry. Their staff were harvesting with football boots, with sprigs, because it’s so steep. So, they were harvesting avocados by hand. Just to see that on that steep country was quite mind-blowing. They’re a real powerhouse of cherry production and apple production too.

I’m involved in the apple industry with the work that I do so, it was really interesting. Just the scale of some of their operations was really significant. One thing I found interesting was that levy-funded R&D didn’t appear to exist in Chile. That’s a real challenge for them in terms of keeping pace with, say, countries like New Zealand. We could fund more, of course, but we have a real focus on research and development and advancement of varieties, et cetera. So, I felt we certainly had a competitive advantage there.

What’s next on the Nuffield Scholarship Programme?

BG: So, you’re back in Aotearoa, and you’ve got a lot to digest from all that, I guess. Next up for you in the Nuffield Programme is putting pen to paper?

RB: Yeah, that third part of the Nuffield Scholarship is individual travel. So, I’m starting to develop my travel and research plans. I plan to spend some more time away looking, as I said before, that value proposition for New Zealand into the future. So, visiting countries that maybe operate in the same markets as us or maybe they’re customers of ours, and really drilling deeper into that.

BG: Sounds really exciting. Thanks for that, Rachel. All the best for the rest of your Nuffield journey.

The 2025 Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship applications close 18 August.

RB: Thank you. And for those that are thinking about applying for Nuffield, I’d really encourage them to really think strongly about applying because from my perspective, this is filling that global piece I really wanted to develop, being involved in food production.

This really is unparalleled. It’s an amazing opportunity. For those people that are thinking about applying for a Nuffield Scholarship, put that imposter-syndrome to the side and put your best foot forward because it really is an amazing opportunity.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast presented in Association with Farmers Weekly. For more information on Rural Leaders, the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship, the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, and the Value Chain Innovation 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

Kate Scott: Front footing the fast-moving regulatory environment.

Carlos Bagrie

Carlos Bagrie has been across multiple ends of food production and the value chain, including primary production, distribution, retail and media.

He recently founded Royalburn Station, a renowned high-country farm that has carved a niche for itself by distributing premium quality food to some of New Zealand’s top-tier restaurants.

Carlos further diversified influence in the food sector when he co-founded My Food Bag. This innovative food distribution company helps answer the ‘what’s for dinner?’ question for tens of thousands of Kiwis every week. During the COVID lockdowns, Carlos played director and videographer, filming TV1’s hit ‘Nadia’s Comfort Kitchen’ on his iPhone.

In 2022, Carlos found himself in front of the cameras on TV3’s ‘Nadia’s Farm’, a TV show that highlighted the intricacies of farm life and food production at scale.

Alongside his wife, Carlos delved into the world of books and media. Together, Carlos and Nadia self-published a series of Number 1 best-selling cookbooks that resonated with home cooks.

Carlos can usually be found on the farm, either in the butchery, on the combine harvester, or moving mobs of sheep across the property.

“I’m humbled to be selected as a Nuffield Scholar and will be focussing my research on circular farming systems that reduce waste while improving the bottom line.”

For Rachel Baker, the Primary Sector is both a passion and growth enabler. Her path has always involved the people, communities and business of food production.

Rachel’s extensive professional experience includes working as a dairy veterinarian, a dairy farm systems consultant, sharemilker, dry stock farm owner, educator, and more recently, an asset manager for horticulture investment businesses.

“While being relatively new to horticulture, my role as Portfolio Manager of MyFarm Investments’ Hawke’s Bay apple syndicates, has enabled me to learn, understand and challenge the grower model. I have been involved with development and management of 100ha of Rockit® plantings in Hawke’s Bay and Gisborne.”

Rachel’s current governance experience includes serving as a trustee of the Rockit Apple Growers Trust and directorships of horticulture and commercial property. Rachel is a 2016 Kellogg Scholar, a 2018 NZ Dairy Woman of the Year finalist and past Chair of the NZ Dairy Industry Awards.

On Rachel’s proposed Nuffield research, she states, “My research topic will explore the impact, challenges and opportunities of existing and proposed global food strategies on food producers, with particular interest in the applications for New Zealand.”

Rachel’s recent focus has been the response and recovery of properties impacted by Cyclone Gabrielle.

Rachel Baker

Jenna Smith

Jenna is the current Chief Executive of Pouarua – a diverse Māori Agribusiness encompassing Dairy, Arable, Beef and Horticulture on the Hauraki Plains.

Jenna serves as a trustee for DWN, on the board of BEL Group and chairs St Francis Catholic School in Thames.

Jenna has extensive corporate agriculture experience across Waikato, Canterbury, Otago and Southland, having previously worked for SOE Pāmu, and syndicated overseas investment farming portfolios. During this time, she has always “kept a gumboot in the grass” through her and her husband’s farming businesses.

Leading Pouarua Farms to be awarded as finalists in the prestigious Ahuwhenua Trophy for excellence in Māori Farming in 2021, Jenna was also named a finalist in the 2021 Zanda McDonald Award which recognises talent and passion for Agriculture across Australia and New Zealand.

“I am looking to study economically and sustainably viable alternate land uses for lowlands and peatlands that are highly susceptible to climatic pressures.”

Passionate about creating environmentally sustainable agribusinesses – Jenna regularly contributes to advisory boards for MfE, MBIE and MPI.

Peter Templeton is a 5^th generation dairy farmer based on the south coast of Southland. 32 years old, Peter is passionate about southland dairy farming.

Peter has been dairy farming for 11 seasons, working his way up from 2IC to farm manager before returning to the family farm in 2016. Peter began his ownership journey as a 50/50 sharemilker for five seasons, before leasing the farm for two seasons and finally owning the farm in August 2023.

Peter is interested in focusing on the future of farming, what it is likely to look like on an individual farm basis – in particular on new technologies to implement on farm.

“I am always curious to see other systems and challenging myself to see what I could use in my own environment.”

Peter also states he is excited to see and gain a better understanding of New Zealand’s value chains, understand how they intend to innovate to compete.

Peter Templeton

Julian Reti Kaukau – Bridging the connection between our people and the whenua.

In this podcast, Julian Reti Kaukau, 2021 Kellogg Scholar, talks with Farmers Weekly’s Managing Editor, Bryan Gibson, about his Kellogg research and to share insights from his work with MPI Māori Agribusiness.

In reference to his research, Julian reflects on the historic prowess of the Waikato Maniapoto Māori in the agriculture and horticulture sectors and suggests that by harnessing the wisdom of the ancestors who once nurtured the Whenua, today’s Kaitiaki can make profound and impactful economic and sustainable decisions for the Whenua and their futures.

Julian believes that Māori who have been disconnected from their homelands can better reconnect with their Tupuna Whenua, fostering a profound sense of Tūrangawaewae, enhancing the Mana of the Whānau and Hapū, honoring important Tīkanga such as Manaakitanga and be given the ability to uphold the crucial role of Ahi Kaa.

Julian completed his Kellogg research on how can Waikato Maniapoto Māori landowners increase productivity whilst improving the environmental protection of their land?

Listen to Julian’s podcast here or read the transcript below. As always, the transcript has been modified for readability.

Bryan Gibson – Managing 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 I am talking to Julian Reti Kaukau, a 2021 Kellogg Scholar and currently the Facilitator Programme Lead for Māori Agribusiness at the Ministry for Primary Industries. How’re doing Julian?

Julian Reti Kaukau – 2021 Kellogg Scholar, Facilitator Programme Lead for Māori Agribusiness at MPI.

I’m doing great. Thank you, Bryan.

BG: Cool. Where are you calling in from today?

JR: I’m calling in from Rotorua in the sunny Bay of Plenty.

BG: Now, you were a 2021 Kellogg Scholar. How did you find that experience?

Completing Kellogg and settling on a research topic.

JR: The Programme was geared up to bring out the most in terms of that academic space within myself, that may have been neglected since I left high school. In all reality, having gone into the workforce pretty much as I turned 18, having the opportunity to go into the academic space was quite onerous.

I felt the Kellogg Programme helped guide and shape me. Patrick Aldwell was instrumental in assisting me to basically learn how to write, how to write well, and get my writing out there in the public space so that I could share what was on my heart and mind. In summary, I think that’s what the Kellogg Programme helped to do – is to really get those thoughts out.

I think those thoughts were really great ideas – at least to me – the Programme enabled me to get these out there in a more public domain and allow others to provide some feedback, thoughts and alignments on some of those ideas. I think that’s what Kellogg really did for me.

BG: Now, what did you focus your studies on? What was your report about?

JR: Initially, it was a bit of going around in circles trying to flesh out your topic. I actually started wanting to do a report around Māori Agri-business. But as you get further into the Programme, you realise you might have to go a little bit deeper, more specific and compartmentalise your particular subject because Māori Agri-business is quite broad in general.

I specifically chose to focus on the area that I whakapapa to, or have genealogical ties to, which is the Waikato and Maniapoto area, namely the King Country.

Embracing history for an informed future as Kaitiaki of the whenua.

JR: My topic was around what’s happened over the last 150 years with having a thriving agricultural primary sector within the Waikato, Maniapoto. Then leading into the 1860s period with the land wars and then the following land confiscations of almost 1.2 million acres of land being confiscated between 1860 and 1865, and a further 1 million acres being confiscated through various legislative policies between 1870 and 1970.

I think what really made me want to focus in on my own people, my own backyard, if you want to call it, is that we were once a powerhouse in agriculture. Our people were quite fast and quick to pick up the knowledge around agriculture, and I always felt that the future for our people is within the land.

So in order for us to be good stewards or kaitiaki of the whenua moving forward, we have to know a thing or two about how to look after the land. Whether that be in primary production or in an environmental capacity. That’s why I chose to go deep on around how our people could embrace the history that we once had, take those learnings and knowledge of our elders, right through the pre 1860 period, the post 1860 period up to about 1970, and having 1970 till today.

Then really look at the leadership that we had within our hapu and our iwi and our whana and take learnings out on how we could maintain our mana, maintain our footprint, our foundations of our land. For me, I believe that’s through making the land sustainably economical, whether it be a dairy, sheep and beef, forest, plantation, horticultural enterprise, whatever. But doing it right, doing it properly, pretty much, Bryan.

BG: There seems to be a movement to obviously the sustainability movement in farming is finally, I guess, getting momentum. That links beautifully to some of the things you’ve been talking about in terms of kaitiakiakitanga, and manaaki whenua. Is that something you found in your studies?

Kaitiakitanga and the sustainabilty movement.

JR: I wouldn’t say that I found it in my studies. It’s probably a concept that I’ve always grown up with. I’ve seen it enacted or lived out by my grandmother, my grandfather, out there on their quarter acre with the most beautiful garden, the māra, that you would ever see, feeding the masses.

Then as I got older and went to visit the cousins in the rural areas and seeing them out on the land and seeing how they connect and relate to our whenua, be it partaking in a mahinga kai, which is the collection of watercress, pūha, and eels. Or collecting kai moana, seafood, and just really acknowledging that the sustenance of all human life and animal life comes from Mother Earth.

There’s a reciprocity philosophy that co-joins guardianship of the land where we acknowledge that our life comes from the land. Therefore, we must do what we can to ensure that that life is going to be enjoyed by our children and our grandchildren, but at the same time, they create a life of some type of bountiful sustenance while we’re here on Earth.

In terms of the kaitiakitanga, I know there’s a huge movement towards sustainability that’s probably more in light of the impacts the rapid industrialisation of the primary sector has had. Now we’re now starting to see those impacts visibly, be it with nutrient-dense rivers or waterways or underground aquifers being depleted, and in the erosion of our soils.

It usually just comes hand-in-hand when you’re seeing those types of impacts, whether you’re Māori or non-Māori. You feel a deep sense to try and protect and restore that so that your children and your grandchildren can enjoy the same economic sustainability that you currently or once enjoyed yourself.

So in terms of kaitiakitanga, it’s wrapped around those points I’ve just mentioned Bryan, and more. And when I say more, so for Māori, it comes to whakapapa, which is the connection that you have through your ancestors to particular land and the efforts that your ancestors put into their land to maintain it for the future generations – to have a living of it.

There’s a dual concept of sustainability, but also protecting what was set out by your forefathers and mothers and making sure that’s passed down to the next generation. There’s probably a lot in there.

BG: Yes. And you’re still involved in some projects in that region, aren’t you? You were working for a Haukinga mai ki te whenua. Can you tell me a little bit about that?

Reconnecting our people with the whenua.

JR: Yeah, when you work in the Māori space, if you don’t have a proper employment contract, then you’re pretty much a volunteer. I’m volunteering on a number of trusts and boards.

Probably the one that’s the closest to my heart is Hokianga mai ki te whenua, which is a project initiated by my whanau to bring relations brought up in urban settings, in cities, or even overseas, like Australia, and connect them back to their foundational roots.

It gives them a sense of where their ancestors once dwelled and lived, and a sense of their own belonging and where they come from. Basically, just to answer the question, who am I?

Then it’s a journey. We have multiple engagements, which we call wānanga, which can be also called workshops, over a period of years. Then it’s building on each wānanga. One could be around, where do we get this land from? How did we come to be where we are today? Currently, 95% of our people live outside of our land-based areas. How do we bring our people back?

To do that, you need to have some type of economic base. All we have is land. What can we do with the land we have to ensure we can bring at least some of our people back home so that the mana, the mana whenua of our whenua is upheld and our fires, or what we call ahi kā, continue to burn.

BG: Also in your day job, you work in the Māori Agribusiness section of MPI? Is that right? What does that involve?

JR: It involves a number of jobs, mainly listening, first and foremost. Listening to the many pātai and ideas of our people. Being in a special place where we stand as conduits between Crown funds, the Crown support, and the aspirations of our people.

Mahi in Māori Agribusiness.

What I have found to date, depending on which groups that I’m working with, is that a lot of our people don’t have a strong understanding on how to seek support to assist them with their land aspirations. Whether this be to potentially take over a long-term lease of their land leased out to the local neighbour for the last 60, 70 years. Yes, I’ve seen a few of those. What do I do with this land now?

A good example here would be to be able to get some expert advice, some sound feedback on what to do with their land. Usually, it requires a person of knowledge and experience on certain areas, such as land use options, which requires a bit of money to pay someone to get that done.

Now, whanau that have been in those situations, where they’ve had no money coming into a land block, have the opportunity to work with Māori Agribusiness, to work with the experts that we currently have employed within our team, and also the networks that we have outside of MPI, to assist them in making sound decisions for the future of their land. That’s just one small aspect.

We cover a number of areas within the directorate of Māori Agribusinesses, but the main overall objective is to assist our people with their economic, sustainable aspirations. That is, producing healthy produce from their whenua that’s going to sustain their people, their whanau, their communities, and ultimately, New Zealand as a whole.

BG: That’s excellent. Māori agribusiness in New Zealand is currently a powerhouse, but as you mentioned, with the history that we share in New Zealand, it’s also in some ways just still getting started. What are your hopes for the future on how Māori agribusiness can thrive?

Future hopes for Māori Agribusiness.

JR: It’s a good question, Bryan. I’ve been involved in Māori agribusiness for most of my working life, almost 22 years. What I’ve seen over this time is probably the lack of capability and capacity within our own people, Māori, to be able to work within their iwi organisations. Especially in relation to the primary sector assets they may hold and to really drive from the front.

That could either be a member in the executive team or governance team, being able to make tupuna or mukapuna decisions, as future decisions that impact on our children.

The reason why I highlight that is because a lot of our organisations, they are currently hiring the best people to run our primary sector assets. The best people may not necessarily be Māori people. I find that some of their thinking that comes from running a multimillion-dollar enterprise is largely economic thinking, not necessarily Māori thinking.

That’s why I have mentioned that the lack of capacity and capability within our people being an area of focus I would like to see be invested in and to continually improve on. This, so we have more of our people, their whakapapa to the whenua, making decisions about the future of their whenua.

BG: That’s great. Just circling back to the Kellogg Programme, is it something you’d recommend for others?

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and digging deeper.

JR: Most definitely. It was a challenge and something that I had a peripheral understanding of. I’ve seen others go through the Programme over the years, but it was something I thought that was maybe a little bit out of my league. That’s mainly because I don’t have a strong academic background.

I pretty much left school 16, 17, and went straight into the labour workforce. That’s where I felt was my place and I really loved it there. But over the years, you come across great mentors and you build great relationships, and you start to realise that you could probably do more than you think you can.

Joining the Kellogg Programme for me was a bit of an out-of-the-box experience, putting myself out there. I’m quite introverted by nature, so having to promote myself amongst others that were also vying to be a part of the Kellogg Programme at the time I joined. It was out of my comfort zone. But then being a part of the process, being part of the cohort, you meet some great people, some awesome people that are up and coming and doing big things in the primary sector today.

You make some great mates; you make some great friends. But also, the Programme is well thought out in terms of the people that are leading it. Scott Champion comes to mind. The way that he facilitated and drove the cohort from start to finish, keeping us all on track, keeping us all to the tasks, that helps you dig deeper and brings out the best in you. If I can encourage anyone that’s thinking about wanting to do the Kellogg Programme, do it if you have the opportunity to do so.

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

Hamish Murray podcast - Building stronger on-farm teams

Hamish Murray: Building stronger on-farm teams by getting out of the way.

Dan Eb, 2021 Nuffield Scholar, is based in Auckland. Dan runs Dirt Road Comms, established to support those building a more just food system. He is also the founder of Open Farms.

With one foot on a Kaipara farm and one in the city, Dan is well placed to talk about the importance of re-connecting urban kiwis with our land, food and farmers.

Awarded a Nuffield Scholarship in 2021, Dan completed his research on
The Home Paddock: A strategy for values-led redesign of the domestic food system.

Listen to Dan’s podcast or read the transcript below.

Bryan Gibson – Managing 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. I’m the Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly and this week we are checking in with a recent Nuffield Scholar, Daniel Eb. How’s it going?

Daniel Eb – 2021 Nuffield Scholar, founder of Open Farms and marketing specialist.
Kia Ora. Very well, thanks.

BG: And where are you calling from?

DE: I’m calling from Auckland, but half the time you’ll find me at the family farm up in Kaipara.

BG: And is that where you grew up, in Kaipara?

Work fuelled by rural and urban perspectives.

DE: I mostly grew up in the city. I was very lucky to have a foot in both camps. We bought a farm when I was a teenager, and I would normally spend the weeks in the city. Then, either most weekends or every second weekend up at the farm. The older I’ve got, the more time I’ve been able to spend up there.

BG: I know a little bit about your work over the last few years. I mean, you’ve married those two aspects of your upbringing into a career, haven’t you?

DE: That’s exactly it. My mother’s been in public relations for a long time and my father’s a farmer. So I thought, you know what, let’s do agri-comms.

BG: You run Dirt Road Communications. Tell me a little bit about that.

DE: Dirt Road Communications is a purpose marketing agency. I’m selective of the people I work with. They need to be driving towards a shared mission of mine, which is a just and regenerative food system in Aotearoa, New Zealand.

I have the privilege of working with people like AgriWomen’s Development Trust, who are really focused on building capability amongst farmers. I work with local food system advocates as well. We’re looking more at systemic issues and big changes in food and farming. I support these people with digital marketing and brand positioning, helping them understand their value proposition, building big projects, that sort of thing.

Forging stronger connections to food and our farming system.

BG: That is in the same wheelhouse as your Nuffield Scholar Report, isn’t it?

DE: The report was an opportunity to slow down and look at the big picture as to the change these organisations are driving for. It was about articulating, well, what the future looks like when we achieve a food and farming system in New Zealand that benefits producers and every kiwi, because food is really important and it doesn’t just drive our economy, it drives our families, it drives our culture, and it drives our health.

The report was an opportunity to step back and paint a picture of what success could look like when we change that system.

BG: Yeah. It’s a criticism or a challenge often talked about in terms of our food production sector that it’s so good at certain things, but that it’s lost the connection to its own community, if you know what I mean? Because we export 95 % of all the food we produce. Therefore, all our food prices are driven by international market forces, like the price of cheese, which gets on everyone’s nerves. Is that something that you were looking to address?

DE: I think you’ve explained it really well. I like to tell stories to explain these big concepts. The thing I think about is, if you’re a kiwi mum living in, I don’t know, Auckland, Wellington, or Christchurch, 84 % of us live urban lives now, so you’re one of that big majority. You’re aware that in the background food and farming is important to New Zealand as an economic driver. But, the thing that you’re most worried about is, what are you feeding your child for dinner? Is it healthy? Is it nutritious? Has it been grown as sustainably as possible? Is it affordable?

As growers and producers, we’re really good at the production side of things, but that relationship is really important. That Kiwi mum’s kids are going to be the people that we want to recruit into food and farming later on. If they’ve got a broken relationship with food and farming, it’s going to be really difficult to encourage them into food and farming careers. That Kiwi mum’s a voter. She might end up voting for parties that want to be more restrictive on food production.

We’re seeing that now with all the regulation that’s coming through. There’s a missed opportunity that she’s not going to jump on social media or when she’s overseas, badmouth food and farming in New Zealand. There’s a missed opportunity to turn her into an advocate for what we’re doing because she has a broken relationship with food and farming or with farming.

How do we strengthen the connection to food and food production?

We can’t think about farming without thinking about its role in society, and this is now an urbanised society. Until we start building things to rebuild that connection and start taking that relationship seriously, we’re going to continue to see bad results. I think those three big areas; recruitment, social license, and the ability to tell a cool, authentic, proven story overseas.

BG: So how do you go about unpacking this, or solving this, or moving the dial on this problem in a Nuffield Scholar Report? Where did you start? How do you go about it?

DE: Slowly and painfully is probably the best description. The first place I went to was to take a really zoomed-out view, and think, how do we often think about food and farming, and how should we think about food and farming? We often think about it as a business and as an industry, but I feel that food and farming doesn’t necessarily belong just there. I think it should be thought about more as a public good.

Food and farming as a public good.

An example for public good is health care and education. These are sectors within our society that have a high degree of touch with everyday New Zealanders. There’s a whole lot of trust, like social license is almost unquestioned. No one questions whether we need education. It’s just there.

I’ve had the privilege of having a lot of time on farm, so I know that the farm can be a place of healing, it can be a place of learning, it could be a place of inspiration, it could be a place of health. In my eyes, farming has the ability to transcend just a mere industry: shoes, iPhones, socks, handbags, and actually sit in a public good space.

I think that reframe is really important because it opens up a lot of potential. Now you can start saying, well, how would we make farming more like education? Why is education such a trusted sector? It opens up more opportunities for things like funding, because now you can say, can we go to the Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Social Development, and the MPI together and do system change. Because it’s really good for society. So, you’re suddenly in a different ball game just from that mindset shift. So that was the first bit.

BG: And you’re not talking about, for example, if we look at education, a lot of the schools are run centrally. You’re talking more about a partnership in a way of looking at things. So farming businesses go, my bottom lines are met by making a profit on these animals that I raise, but also taking these things off in a social or environmental sense. Is that the idea?

DE: Yeah, that’s the starting place. Then you start to think about what concrete solutions would look like. Education might not be the best example in this instance. Healthcare is probably a better example. To me, healthcare is quite interesting because you effectively have two models that sit side by side. You’ve got a private health care model where people pay for service, and then you’ve got a public health care model. Interestingly, doctors flip between the two. You can have public doctors that operate privately and vice-versa.

Regardless of which system you play in, every doctor gets paid well. It’s a very respected role in society. To me, they’re solutions that mindset will prompt you into.

A relatively concrete solution that I could see is if there was an organisation set up to encourage farmers who are farming close to cities to transition to local food economies and local food business models. Whether that’s community supported agriculture or technology driven food distribution, like Happy Cow Milk, which is the Fonterra factory-in-a-box model. That has some government support because it would be required to reduce the amount that some consumers are paying for food and it could operate on something like a postcode system where, depending on your postcode, you pay a different amount for your food.

But alternatively, a farmer who’s further away from town would probably participate in the more status quo export model running through your processor and then selling our kai overseas. There’s no reason why those two things can’t sit well blended together. But by having that, some farmers incentivised to operate in that local system, you’re solving all these other big issues like social license, like recruitment, like people understanding where their food comes from, and also creating this really fertile ground to tell a really compelling international story about food security and how important kai is to New Zealanders, and this is how we treat it. You’re creating content and you’re building this overseas provenance story as well.

So, a lot of it really does sit within that reframe that, you know what, smart investment from industry and government into these public good food system models, particularly local, can net some massive results in the long-run.

Opening farms for a win-win.

BG: I guess we should mention, since you’re the bright spark behind Open Farms, that programme was run on a lot of farms and most of them were relatively close to urban centres. That showed that there was appetite from both farmers and from the general public to come together and engage on this food journey.

DE: Exactly, and I think if we could build local food models that by design connect urban kiwis with the sources of at least some of their food production, then there’s an economic rationale to a farmer to host open days. Now there’s an economic rationale for a farmer to connect with a local school, and maybe there’s some financial incentives that go along with that. Suddenly, you’re breaking that barrier, that 60-minute barrier between city limits and where farming starts.

You start blurring that line and I think the blurring that line is really important if we’re going to solve some of these entrenched issues that urbanism has created over the last 50, 60 years. But we need new models to do that. We can’t just hope a couple of open farm days are going to do it. We actually have to do relatively large system change to design the outcomes that we want.

BG: What else did you find in your report that you think could help in this values driven food transition?

DE: I think it’s important to believe this change is already happening. This isn’t something we have to manufacture. This idea of citizen connected businesses or new business models; this stuff’s already happening organically. It’s about latching on to that. Instead of seeing that as a threat to the export talk, dominated, centralised system of food, we see that as a really supportive ancillary model that the two can gel well together. I do just want to reiterate that these two models aren’t in competition at all. Quite the opposite. I know when we talk about public good, it starts getting into the realm of politics and words like socialism get thrown around and stuff like that, I think that’s a side track.

At the end of the day, we’ve got to focus on the outcomes we actually want and be a bit ideologically agnostic. This is 2023, and we need every tool we’ve got on the table to fix some of these deeply entrenched problems. In terms of other stuff, I think there’s a whole lot of smart tactical plays that we can do to get us there as well.

The Nuffield Global Focus Programme and public good overseas.

These are things like social diversifications that we can layer on to farms. I’ve just come back from my Nuffield GFP travel, and one of the things that really stood out was a bunch of people in the Netherlands who are using their farms in partnership with local health care providers or local schools. These are financial business transactions and having kids come onto the farm regularly as a partnership with local schools. It’s becoming an education platform.

There was one farmer who had partnered with a local healthcare provider to bring kids with learning disabilities onto the farm. It was a collaboration between a healthcare provider, a learning disability specialist, and the farmer. They were all co-collaborating to create this programme for those kids. Now, the funder is the Ministry of either education or health care in that instance. But that diversification costs the farmer to build a hut to make sure they don’t get rained on and some time to build the system. But at the end of the day, that’s a revenue generating diversification that he’s layered onto his farm. That costs him very little and it’s returning him a good profit.

We’re desperate for these ways to eke out some more margin off our landscapes. I just think that these community connection diversifications are an unearthed gem. They cost very little to do. Yes, there’s some soft skills that are required, and there’d be some upskilling, and you’d have to get relatively comfortable with new people coming onto the farm too. But it’s a lot cheaper than putting in kiwifruit for example. Then you’re also running the risk of a bad harvest and all that stuff. There’s very little risk here.

I think in a time when traditional food production on our farms is becoming harder; pick a reason: government regulation, higher import costs, climate change, poor returns on global markets, this social diversification is just gold. I just don’t feel that enough farmers, particularly in those peri-urban areas, are seeing that. That’s what a large part of my work is, building projects that make it easy to move into this new citizen-connected farming model, which I think is going to be really valuable for farmers who are cash-strapped.

BG: Now, you mentioned your travels. That’s obviously a big part of the Nuffield. Any other highlights from your trips you abroad?

DE: Heaps. I’m trying to write up a bit of a reflections document now. It’s hard because I keep trying to add stuff in instead of taking stuff out. We had a great group. We went to Japan, then Israel, then the Netherlands, then Washington DC, and the Central Valley in California. To me, a highlight was seeing what the driving force behind agriculture in these different contexts was. We’d go to Israel where water infrastructure was at the scale and of the excellent standard that it is, not because of government policies or anything like that, but it was all done for security reasons. Security is the number one driver in Israel. So, agriculture is almost a by-product of security. That’s what happens when you fight three existential wars in the last 70 odd years.

Interestingly, the big driver in a place like Japan was tradition. They’ve actually inadvertently figured out through trial and error and population growth in a relatively restricted coastal plain, that they have to fuse agriculture and urban life together. Outside of downtown Tokyo, the landscape is a mix of residential business, rice paddies, vegetable gardens.

They don’t have a social license problem because their geography represents that breaking of the barriers and fusion of urban and rural and food production and the lifestyles that I’ve been talking about. The geography has pushed them into a space. It’s interesting to look at those places and think, Well, what’s our driving force? If we’re honest with ourselves, right now, it’s agribusiness. It’s an economic powerhouse. There’s nothing right or wrong with that. But to me, that feels very limited. I think there’s a lot we can explore and experiment on top of it as just an economic powerhouse.

I think food and farming can be a public good. Interestingly, I think our geography, this idea that we’re basically restricted as Kiwis to our urban centres, and there’s a whole lot of farmland in between, that’s a huge barrier. We’ve got to build little strings and break little gaps in that wall, particularly in our peri-urban areas, to get where we want to go. That being a society where people are really proud of food and farming, are healthy, and see food and farming not just as a viable career, but as a mission and a purpose for something that they want to do for the rest of their life.

I think that’s entirely achievable. We just got to build things to do it.

The Nuffield Scholarship experience.

BG: How have you found the Nuffield experience overall?

DE: Awesome. Honestly, I can’t recommend it highly enough. I think everyone’s experience is a little bit different. I think it can give you what you’re looking for, even if you don’t really know what that is. For me, it was time. It was a forced requirement to sit down and write out my manifesto, almost. These thoughts are running through my head. How are they all working together? What am I aiming for? And that was really valuable for me. It’s enabled me to articulate some of these things, which are pretty hard ideas to describe. And so Nuffield gave me time, whereas I can say that for a lot of my fellow scholars, Nuffield gave them experience, or some learning about themselves that they wouldn’t otherwise have got. For me, it was time.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas that Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, AGMARDT and Food HQ. 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

Hamish Murray: Building stronger on-farm teams by getting out of the way.

Vocational pathways from the grassroots up.

Download the report »

Aotearoa, finds itself in a moment of profound transformation, where uncertainties and new prospects intertwine. This juncture offers a truly unique opportunity for vocational pathways within the primary industries to align themselves with the ever-evolving demands of the industry and deliver meaningful outcomes for all whānau (families) and hapori (communities).

The time has come for various stakeholders, including Industry, Iwi (Māori tribes), Government, Community, High schools, and Tertiary/Vocational Education providers, to gain a deep understanding of our current position and grasp the essential requirements for collective progress. By joining forces, we can effectively navigate the shifting landscape and work collaboratively towards a brighter future.

Our industries are in a constant state of progression, fueled by the seamless integration of cutting-edge technology, artificial intelligence, and innovative cultivation systems. Recognizing the significance of pastoral care and responding to the community’s aspirations for viable career opportunities, as opposed to mere jobs, holds utmost importance. To cater effectively to these rapidly evolving industries, we must ensure that our vocational pathways are adaptable, well-suited to emerging opportunities, and capable of keeping pace with advancements.

By embracing this paradigm shift, we open doors to a world where traditional wisdom and contemporary knowledge converge. It is a world where we foster sustainable practices, nurture talent, and cultivate the next generation of industry leaders. This collaborative effort enables us to craft vocational pathways that not only address the immediate needs of the industry but also empower individuals to forge fulfilling and prosperous futures.

Together, let us embark on this transformative journey, where Industry, Iwi, Government, Community, High schools, and Tertiary/Vocational Education providers come together in synergy. Through comprehensive understanding, shared goals, and dynamic adaptation, we can shape a future where vocational pathways serve as gateways to success, prosperity, and harmony in Aotearoa.

Mel Poulton – Transformation before transaction: The potential of NZ’s Food and Fibre IP.

Listen to "Mel Poulton - Transformation before transaction: The potential of NZ’s Food and Fibre IP." on Spreaker.

Mel Poulton is a farmer first and foremost, running a sheep and beef farm based in the Tararua District. She is also finishing her tenure as New Zealand’s Agriculture Trade Envoy.

Awarded a Nuffield Scholarship in 2014, Mel completed her research on
Capturing Value: Building a sweet spot between trade negotiations, market access and the exports of expertise.

Listen to Mel’s podcast above or read the transcript below.

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

Welcome to the ‘Ideas that Grow’ podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. This week I’m talking to agricultural trade specialist and farmer Mel Poulton. Now, you were a Nuffield scholar in 2014, is that correct?

Mel Poulton – 2014 Nuffield Scholar, farmer, Special Agricultural Trade Envoy.
Correct.

BG: I understand you did your Nuffield Scholar Report on agricultural IP and how to best send it out into the world and also get the best value for it. Can you tell us a little bit about what you found out?

The untapped potential of New Zealand’s agricultural IP.

MP: At the time, as a food producer and somebody who, through our levies was investing in New Zealand science, research, and development for New Zealand farming to give us a competitive edge in the world, it was a concern to me to hear that our IP was being effectively given away in the hope of an FTA for market access. That was how I was certainly interpreting it at the time.

I spent a bit of time traveling to different nations around the world looking at IP trade, market access, and looking at what went well and what didn’t, what could we learn from that, and is this even a good idea for New Zealand? I came back with the conclusion that actually, given who we are and what we do and our constraints, leveraging our IP is a really good strategy for New Zealand.

But I wasn’t convinced that we were doing it well, and I felt like we needed to better value or recognise our IP, value our IP, package our IP, and then be able to leverage value from it, not just by way of the hope of market access through an FTA, because we’ve seen in recent years what can happen with economic coercion and suddenly markets being closed to us.

Food and Fibre’s intellectual property opportunity.

So, if you end up giving away your IP and then those markets close, what have you got left? Some people might disagree, but I think that’s a relevant concern that New Zealand needs to be really mindful of with regard to its strategy and how it navigates its way in the world and how it leverages its IP.

How do we do it in such a way that those that have invested in that IP can extract value from it, short, medium, and long term, for the good of New Zealand and for the good of our Food and Fibre Sector and our people who have invested.

BG: A better strategy needed on the intellectual property front. Very good. Now, of course, you’re just finishing up a term as the Special Agricultural Trade Envoy (SATE), which means in terms of market access and trade deals and the world food system, you’d have widened your scope on things to more than just intellectual property, to food itself. But are there similar themes at play there as we try and extract value from our agricultural sector.

MP: There’s an enormous amount of opportunity for us to extract value from our IP in ways that we haven’t really considered before, or broadening it a whole lot more than what we do. Thinking about that in the context of a growing global population with a real concern around food security and even more importantly, nutrition security.

Then given the challenges of climate change and the environment and the constraints that’s putting on food production in different parts of the world, I feel confident given what I’ve seen in recent years and the travels that I’ve done both on my Nuffield Scholarship and since then as SATE for New Zealand. I think there’s an enormous opportunity for food production to increase in many parts of the world and especially those countries with developing agriculture. I think there could be small changes made that generate big gains.

Working together with developing agricultural nations for mutual benefit.

Some of these countries with developing agriculture have potential to really lift production. Whereas New Zealand and parts of Europe, for example, feeling more and more constrained as to how much more food production they can actually lift.

The talk is that New Zealand feeds 40 million people. Well, that’s barely feeding one city. Mexico City itself is 40 million people. When you think about the scheme of things in our place in the world, how do we strategically position ourselves to be good in the world and good for the world and continue with a transaction strategy that grows really awesome food and beverages that are highly nutritious and safe?

And also has the integrity behind it with regard to environment and climate and all the other factors around labour and all of the environmental, social, and economic factors that make up the back story to our product.

So we’ve got to be able to have that integrity, but also recognise what our potential for lifting things further for New Zealand. How do we leverage off the strengths that we have as a nation? I think there’s huge potential to be able to work with, learn together with, and build together with, other countries with developing agriculture and leveraging our IP, but not selling it as it is, but leveraging it and adapting it to create something new.

BG: So, it’s far more than just selling a product or an idea and leaving it at that. It is working with the people on the other end of the transaction long term.

A shift to transformation before transaction.

MP: Well, it’s effectively transformation before transaction. If you were to put value on or weighting on it, historically, we’ve had a transaction approach to things. I think there’s still a future for us in that because we grow and sell food to the market – that earns us revenue. I think it’s going to be for the growing needs of New Zealand and the economic growing needs of New Zealand, that we need to figure out how we grow further.

If we’ve got constraints here, then how do we grow together with others being good for the world and good in the world? It’s actually going in there with humility and saying, well, we’ve learned some stuff in our context, we recognise that you’re operating in a different context, we understand you’ve got goals and vision for growth for yourselves, so how can we work together, learning from our IP and a principles approach, to develop something entirely new that could actually help you achieve your goals and help us achieve our goals.

BG: That makes sense. In a finite environment, if one sector has reached their limit, then the only logical place to go is to help others up their production to a level where they can sustain themselves better.

Further trade ties with India and the role of humility.

MP: I was just in India a short while ago, and they really want us to be investing there. The challenge for New Zealand is that we’ve got stories, we’ve got examples, we’ve got experience investing in other countries. Some of the challenge around that is sometimes we’ve gone in a little bit proud and arrogant, taking a copy and paste approach that hasn’t necessarily worked because you’re operating in a completely different system, a completely different environment, and operating context.

Copy and paste won’t work. It won’t work in many countries because New Zealand is unique in that it is an island nation, small, tight-knit ecosystem, driven by a temperate maritime climate. Just copying and pasting that, there’s very few places in the world you can do that in. That’s why we’ve got to shift our thinking to learning, growing and working together with others to create something entirely new that works in the operating context for them and also works for us.

BG: When you read about the possibilities of doing more trade with India, quite often the first thing you hear is, ‘yeah, but they won’t take our dairy products’. And so deal’s off the table. But I think what you’re saying might be that it’s a bit more nuanced than that, and there are things we can do and we should be doing?

MP: It’s most certainly more nuanced than that. I suppose my take home message from my time in India is – there’s a bunch – the first one is, we really do have to conduct ourselves with humility. I think from those that I engage with in India, they have an allergic reaction to anything remotely arrogant, remotely hinting of a colonialism approach. So, if we even begin to think that we can conduct our way without humility and without deep, deep respect and without a hunger to learn and understand and focus on building relationships, I think we’re going to go nowhere fast.

At the same time, they really do want to grow. They’re grappling with some big challenges, and they’ve got enormous potential to lift by doing small things really well. Talking to the Indian High Commissioner to New Zealand, they really do want us to be investing there.

But again, this is where we’ve got to be thinking about a broader picture than just a single process investment. We’ve actually got to be thinking about how do we grow the whole ecosystem. It’s government to government, industry to industry, farmer to farmer, company to company, people to people.

It’s building all of the ecosystem that is an Indian centric one, or whatever country it might be in the world, something that really works so that whatever investment we do there, it’s going to be successful. But we can be guaranteed it’s not going to be a copy and paste of what we see here in New Zealand. We have to completely shift our thinking altogether.

BG: Now, I mean, our food production ecosystem here in New Zealand is pretty well developed and pretty really well thought of, do you think it’s well placed to meet some of these global challenges?

The value of New Zealand’s Food and Fibre ecosystem and its people.

MP: I have no doubt in my mind that one of our greatest strengths and most undervalued strengths is our ecosystem. By that, I mean all of the folks that are working for New Zealand and in New Zealand companies and the Food and Fibre Sector offshore, including our diplomatic teams. I think we’ve got amazing people in the MFAT and MPI and different government ministries who are working hard for the success of our sector offshore when they’re engaging on the certification and standards and all sorts of things.

We’ve got great people across our sector, good organisations who are absolute experts in doing things that food producers wouldn’t even dream of doing. These people are technically competent, highly skilled, and very effective at their job. Then we have all the folks working in our industry good organisations. You’ve got all the processors, exporters, packers, all exceptionally good at what they do for our sector. Then we’ve got all of our service sector too. No farmer would be able to operate without our service sector.

Then underpinning the whole lot is the science, academia, and research that goes on, that’s delivered the knowledge over the years. We’ve got to keep investing in that science, research, and development because they underpin our success. Then without the food producers themselves who are innovative, creative, solutions focused, businesspeople who are juggling so many variables and navigating their businesses without subsidies, to generate revenue for New Zealand. It’s just an exceptional ecosystem that works together.

The ecosystem is tight, it’s well linked, and relative to similar ecosystems in other countries, New Zealand has something special where we can turn on a dime, we can make decisions, and we can react and can also pre-empt and get ourselves on the front foot to capture opportunities globally as well. I think that was most recently best demonstrated through COVID – just watching how the whole ecosystem came together to navigate it. I’m not saying it was easy. But relative to other countries, New Zealand navigated that well. Our sector navigated it well. There’s a lot we can be proud of about that.

Staying nimble, flexible, and adaptable in a fast-changing world.

BG: And as we know, there are a lot of other shocks around the world now that need to be navigated. So it looks like it’s all shoulders to the wheel again, isn’t it?

MP: It’s all on. What we’ve got to work hard to do is make sure the top two inches of our thinking and our head space is in the right place, make sure we’re positive, we’re constructive, we’re focused on the priorities, we’re rational and logical in the decision making that we’re doing. That we’re taking an integrated systems approach to it, and that we stay nimble, flexible, and adaptable.

Sometimes life happens where a shock is something you can bounce back from. Sometimes it’s a shock where things are forever changed and it’s never going to be the same again. That’s where we’ve got to have plasticity, where we’ve got to be able to be sure of our core values, who we are, what’s important, and be able to reshape ourselves to be optimally placed to navigate what’s in front of us.

A Food and Fibre Sector under the pump.

BG: So, Mel, we’ve been talking about big picture issues for global farming, how does that square with what New Zealand farmers are facing at the moment? How will that work for them?

MP: I suppose when we’re talking about a big picture strategy for New Zealand, we really need to be thinking about how we strategically position ourselves on the global stage in the long term in such a way that we try to deliver short-, medium-, and long-term return back to New Zealand. We’ve also got to acknowledge the fact that right now, there are many farmers, food producers, packers, exporters that are really under the pump big time right now, especially those that have been hit by the weather.

There are folks down in Ashburton and West Coast that are still recovering from the damage that they sustained in recent severe weather events. We’ve got to be mindful that people are under enormous environmental, social, and economic pressure right now.

We need to keep in mind that when we discuss these big picture strategies, we’ve got to be able to look after our people, look after our businesses, look after our environment with the here and now. And how we build the recovery to be able to be best positioned from a market facing point of view, but also just how do we find our place here in New Zealand in this new operating context we’re in at a domestic level, but also at an international level too.

There’s a lot of balls that we’re juggling and it’s complex. I suppose my point really is it’s all fine and well talking about big picture strategy, but we’ve got to look after the people and be acutely aware that we need to be able to get the support, the enabling infrastructure, the enabling business environment, and context to be able to help people recover and stand back up.

Remoulding and reshaping to fit a changed environment.

In some cases, that whole plasticity piece, we do have to remould and reshape, and that might look entirely different to what it was in the past. Because in some cases, with some life events it’s never going to be the same again.

So we need to be giving people scope and space to be able to remould, reshape and create something that is still true to its core values, but looking quite different because it’s in a different operating context – it can’t go back to what it was before.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders Podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, AGAMRDT and Food HQ, 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

Kate Scott: Front footing the fast-moving regulatory environment.

Hamish Murray: Building stronger on-farm teams by getting out of the way.

Listen to "Hamish Marr - Glyphosate, Nuffield, and cropping today." on Spreaker.

Hamish Marr is a fifth generation mixed arable farmer from Methven, Canterbury. He received a Nuffield Scholarship in 2019, completing his research on the topic
Can we farm without glyphosate?

Hamish is Vice Chairman of the New Zealand Seed Authority and is involved in two groups at the foundation for Arable Research, the Research and Development Advisory Committee, and ARG – the Arable Research Group here in Mid-Canterbury.

Listen to Hamish’s podcast above or read the transcript below.

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

Welcome to the ‘Ideas that Grow’ podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. With me today is Hamish Marr. G’day, Hamish, how’s it going?

Hamish Marr – 2019 Nuffield Scholar and mixed arable farmer.
Good thanks, Bryan.

BG: And where are you calling from today?

HM: I’m calling from Methven, about an hour, southwest of Christchurch. Lovely winter’s day here.

BG: And you run a farming operation there?

One farm, five generations of farmers.

HM: Yes, we’ve got a 500-hectare mixed arable farm, 400 hectares of different cereal crops and small seed crops, and we have pasture enterprise on the side of that. So, we run dairy heifers twelve months of the year, and we have finishing lambs in the autumn and dairy cows in the winter.

BG: How’s the year been for you so far?

HM: Well, it’s been mixed. I mean, we had a tremendous harvest with great weather at harvest time and good yields across the board, and a pretty good autumn. So Canterbury is flush with feed this year as opposed to other seasons just gone.

BG: That’s good to hear. And have you been doing that for a while?

HM: Yes, our family has been on our place since 1873. I’m the fifth generation. If any of my children decide to carry on, they’ll be 6th generation. So, you were here for a wee while.

BG: It’s great to see a farm that’s handed down through the generations and is still thriving.

HM: Yeah. I mean, me personally, I did a BCom Ag in the late the late nineties. And then was a Field Officer for Ravensdown Fertiliser for four years and then came home to the farm in about 2005. So, I’ve been farming not quite 20 years now.

The Nuffield experience.

BG: You were a Nuffield Scholar a couple of years ago. How did you find that experience?

HM: Look, there’s probably not words that can describe it.

A once in a lifetime, life changing, very humbling, eye-opening, eye-watering year of my life. Looking at everything in food production, how we live, farming and politics and everything in one year, it was amazing. Fascinating. I think you ask every Nuffield Scholar; they would say the same thing – beyond their wildest dreams.

Glyphosate use in New Zealand.

BG: Now, your studies focused on the use of glyphosate, which is often a contentious issue in agriculture these days, isn’t it?

HM: Well, it’s very contentious, and that’s the reason why I chose it. I chose it because it was in the news a lot at the time, and there were rumours in New Zealand and certainly around the world, that it was going to be deregistered.

Our farming systems, certainly the farming systems in Canterbury here, and most of New Zealand, where the use of Roundup underpins how we do things and how we move between pastures and crops. If we took that away, it would completely change the way we do things. I wanted to understand how our production systems would look if we were to do away with it.

BG: Obviously, as part of your studies, you do a bit of travel abroad. What did you find out about how different nations use glyphosate around the world?

Glyphosate use overseas.

HM: I spent a year looking at farming systems all around the world, and I hate the term conventional farming, but I looked at conventional farming: organics, regen Ag and inverted commerce, rice farming, horticulture orchards, vegetable production, indoor animal agriculture, extensive and intensive farming all around the world.

There’s a whole lot of conclusions, and the first one is that everywhere you go around the world is different. New Zealand is unique in the way we do things. Unique in the fact that we’re dominated by animal agriculture.

Our animal agriculture is predominantly outside, so the animals go to the food, as opposed to many countries where the food goes to the animals. Because those countries are cutting and carrying feed to animals, their systems are predominantly arable based. By very nature of that, the usage of Roundup compared to what we do here in New Zealand is significantly higher.

We have a real point of difference in this country. If you think about the Roundup story in isolation, we don’t use a lot of it just because of the way our farming system is. And also, the fact that our farming systems are pasture based is, again, another point of difference compared to a lot of other places.

BG: Do you think it’s one of those situations which quite often comes up when global conversations around food production make their way to New Zealand, that we’re not really part of the mix because we have our own way of doing things?

Glyphosate application rates in NZ compared to abroad.

HM: Yes. Look, I visited a place in the UK, a large place, and this was a lightbulb visit for me. They reduced their glyphosate usage on this farm. Big place. When I say big, about 30,000 ha. They reduced their glyphosate usage by 90% simply by adding sheep into their farming mix. And I suddenly thought, well we’re already doing that in New Zealand. That’s standard practice.

So, when you look down into the numbers and the application rates on a total per hectare basis in this country, we’re so far down compared to a lot of other developed countries for that fact.

I also saw the impacts of the other extreme Roundup ready crops in the Northern Hemisphere, United States and Canada, where applications of four or five times a year are not uncommon. When you multiply that up by the millions of hectares involved, it’s easy to understand how Roundup is now in the food chain in a lot of those countries.

BG: Now, despite finding out about the issues with some of those Roundup ready crops and those problems that they can have in some parts of the world here in New Zealand, while we don’t have those, Roundup is still pretty important to some of our farming systems, isn’t it?

Glyphosate as a strategic farming tool.

HM: I think in that sense we are a real outlier. That starts from the simplest of things. We’re a small island nation in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, so we’ve got this lovely temperate maritime climate. A lot of our competitors are continental countries. So in its simplest form, their weather patterns are completely different. And the weather patterns dictate what you do.

The way people farm, say, in Europe, it’s evolved over 2000 years. Well, agriculture in this country, we’ve only been really at it for a couple of hundred years. We’re a very young country compared to a lot of other places. With that, when some of the things aren’t ingrained in us as a population of people.

BG: And then you have the flow on effects of tilling the soil, which has been found to be bad for soil loss and releases carbon.

HM: Yeah, all that stuff. The nuts and the bolts of it is that we can’t on a global scale or even a national scale, do away with that as a strategic tool. Because what it does in sort of broad-acre farming, and I term pastoral farming in this as well, is that it reduces the amount of time in between crops because it takes away the work that cultivation used to do prior to its use.

Prior to Roundup’s use the way to control weeds and to establish a new pasture or a new crop, it involved about six-months-worth of cultivation because it was the cultivation that killed the remnants of the pre pasture, as it were, or crop. Roundup does that in one application, and you can sow your next pasture or crop or whatever it is that day.

To go backwards, away from that, you think about take six months of production out and that has huge impacts. I’m not saying that’s true in every situation because it 100% isn’t true in every situation, but it is a reality in a lot of cases.

BG: How did the report received? Once it came out?

Taking the Nuffield research to the people.

HM: Well, I have done probably between 50 and 60 little talks around the country and town halls and to Lions clubs and to farm groups. I’ve been to two garden clubs. All sorts of different groups have been interested in what I have to say.

I think I just tell the story of exactly how farming systems work and how all these things that we do on farm work and why we do them. I found myself, in a lot of cases, having to compare farming to your vegetable garden and to think about a cropping farm as a vegetable garden, and your dairy farm or your sheep farm as your lawn. Your lawn stays down for infinitum, as does a lot of pasture. So, we don’t actually do anything to them.

Your vegetable garden, on the other hand, is being turned over all the time into something new. There’s a very clear rotation involved and all of those things I had to think about things a wee bit, but hopefully I got the story across.

BG: Now you’ve completed your report. What’s life been like for you since then? You back on the farm?

Nuffield, Kellogg and giving back to the Sector.

HM: I have been on the farm, and that keeps me very busy. But also, I am the Vice Chairman of the New Zealand Seed Authority. That’s an industry good group involved in setting policy within the certified seed industry. I sit on that board as a representative from the herbage seed subsection of Federated Farmers. We, as the name suggests, represent the farmers that grow herbage seeds: ryegrasses, clovers, cocksfoots, fescues, etc.

I’m involved in two groups at the foundation for Arable Research, the Research and Development Advisory Committee, and ARG – the Arable Research Group here in Mid-Canterbury. I’m on a couple of other things in our local town, so, no, I keep pretty busy, to be honest.

BG: They don’t call it rural leaders for nothing, I guess. Certainly sets you up to be one.

HM: Yeah, it’s a privilege. It’s a privilege to represent farmers on those things, and I do enjoy it.

Anyone involved in food production should consider a Kellogg or a Nuffield. It opens your eyes to so many other things and it challenges your perspective. I went away with these preconceived ideas about what we do and why we do it, and then went and looked at all these other things and came home with a completely different understanding and perspective of how things are done. Also, how things fit together and what we’re doing right and what we’re doing wrong.

BG: Just before we wrap up Hamish, what are some of the issues you’re facing right now as an Arable farmer?

The main issues facing arable farmers.

HM: Well, that’s a great question, Bryan. I think the first one, and I think every arable farmer would agree with me on, is one of viability. I mentioned at the start we had a great harvest, and we did. But we face, like a lot of other farmers, increasing costs, and very static prices for our produce at the other end.

So, yes, our prices have increased a wee bit, but nowhere to the extent that our input costs have. And a lot of crops we grow now, we are barely breaking even when you consider our fixed costs of production.

We grow a lot of high value small seeds in this country for our own export, but also for domestic use. Our domestic production takes up about 20% of the total produced of the 80% that’s left.

Prices have really fallen away, and demand has fallen away over the last twelve months. To the extent that there is seed sheds full of seed that would have been exported, that is not going to be exported in the next twelve months.

Those supply chain issues will have effects on the ground for farmers, and there will be challenges with what arable farmers do produce on their farms in the next twelve months, two years, three years, because these things take a little while to unwind.

“It’s not all beer and skittles out there.”

Options for cropping farmers in the next two years are going to be challenged by not only profitability, but actually by options as well. It’s not all beer and skittles out there.

It’s interesting, we had a wonderful harvest, as I said, but that wonderful harvest has filled up the stores in this country, and we’ve seen prices drop domestically for grain because of the surplus. So what’s good on one hand is not so good on the other. The industry has got its own challenges.

I would finish that by saying now, of course, that the world wants plant-based food, so the future variable farming I see is rosy. We just have to get there.

BG: Hopefully just a matter of waiting out this next couple of years and you can thrive after that.

HM: Yeah, that’s it.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders Podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, AGAMRDT and Food HQ, 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

Hamish Murray: Building stronger on-farm teams by getting out of the way.

Nuffield Scholars belong to a unique, vibrant, and strong community that continues to create positive change in our Food and Fibre Sector and country.

Increasingly there will be a need for leaders here in New Zealand who have an ability to think critically, who can generate insight and who have a global perspective.

So, tell us about the talented people you know in your industry or region you think have the potential to grow further as a leader. Or suggest they apply.

If you do have someone in mind, they don’t have to be ready to apply for a Scholarship in 2024, but they should be the people you think have the potential to be a Nuffield Scholar at some point in the future.

Tell us about them, so we can tell them about Nuffield. You can email us at nuffield@ruralleaders.co.nz or quickly fill out a form here.

If the talented person you have in mind is you, even better.
Nuffield and a healthy dose of self-confidence are a good fit. Register your interest today to receive an application form and to keep up to date on the programme.

Dr Scott Champion – Seeing beyond the boundary fence: Strategic leadership development for Food and Fibre now.

Listen to "Dr Scott Champion – Seeing beyond the boundary fence: Strategic leadership development for food and fibre now." on Spreaker.

Dr Scott Champion has a wealth of sector knowledge, gained not just from tenures at the top of organisations such as Beef+LambNZ, but from possessing a genuine passion for helping our rural leaders grow.

As Facilitator and Programme Director of the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, Scott plays a vital role lifting rural leadership capability.

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

Welcome to the ‘Ideas that Grow’ podcast. I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. With me today is Dr Scott Champion, who is the programme leader for Kellogg. G’day, Scott. How’s it going?

Scott Champion – Facilitator and Programme Director of the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme

Yeah good thanks Bryan. Great to be with you.

Bryan: We often talk to the scholars themselves about their individual research projects, but with the Kellogg Programme, you’re in charge of running the programme as a whole. How long have you been with Rural Leaders?

Running the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme – what’s involved.

Scott: I’ve been running the programme for about five years now and had actually spoken at the programme as a guest speaker prior to that. So it’s been a real delight to be involved over the last five years. And it’s a programme now that’s been going for close on 50 years and has put through over 1000 graduates in that time.

Bryan: What’s involved in running the programme? Obviously, there’s attracting people to get involved, there’s organising their meetings and get-togethers and what they’re going to study and marking assignments. What else is there?

Scott: The focus really, from my time as course director, is on the face to face interaction and the way we connect between what we call phases. So the programme itself is divided into three of these phases.

The Kellogg Programme’s three phases – Phase One.

Scott: The first one is nine days long, second one is five days long, and then the third one is five days long. So they’re quite intense, particularly that first phase, across the nine days. So we run two programmes a year.

Each programme has about 24 participants. Sometimes it’s a little bit less, sometimes it’s a little bit more. And the focus in each of those, really the nine day intense phase one, is all about getting to understand concepts of leadership. Where also we use the analogy of a toolbox. We’re trying to give our Kellogg participants tools that they can use to go out and be more effective and contribute both into their own businesses or the business that they work in, but also in the sector more broadly.

We think about things like presentation skills, leadership models, and tools. And then also in that first phase, we’re trying to introduce them into aspects of the different components of the broader food and fibre sector that they might not be aware of.

For example, if you work in Horticulture, giving you an opportunity to understand what are the big picture issues that are happening in dairy and vice versa across that sort of plethora of industries that are operating in New Zealand. So that’s our focus around phase one.

Kellogg Phase Two.

Phase two is completely different. We come to Wellington, so I should say phase one and phase three are both typically held at Lincoln.

We come to Wellington for phase two, and that’s all about the economy, politics, and concepts of influence, models of government communications, the role of media, things like that.

Kellogg Phase Three.

Then in phase three, we come back to Lincoln again. I think you might have mentioned earlier, the Kellogg Scholars are undertaking a project through the five or six months that they’re on the Kellogg Programme and that’s on a topic of their own choosing.

It’s quite a significant piece of work and they’re presenting those back to the group. We also get some industry people coming along to those presentations and then we tie the programme together. So that’s the broader structure across the five or six months of the Kellogg Programme.

Bryan: So someone turning up, as a newly minted Kellogg Scholar, and that first phase one, those nine days, it’s sort of full on workshops and a lot of listening and a lot of talking, and you bring together people from all around the Sector, and all around the country into that?

What to expect on Kellogg.

Scott: Absolutely. We’re deliberately trying to do that and to get a real mix of different industries. So one of the things we’re trying to do is expose people beyond the boundaries of their day to day and give them an opportunity to think more broadly. So that’s pretty important to us.

It’s really interesting when you talk to the Kellogg Scholars at the end of the programme about what’s been most valuable. One of the things that they often talk about is the fact that they got to understand things outside the boundaries of the industry they typically work in.

What many of these people will do is they’ll be in that transition from technical roles to general management and focusing more on people and managing teams and those sorts of things. So creating that broader understanding and giving them an opportunity to think beyond their technical skill set is one of the things that we’re really trying to do. But the first nine days is quite full on. It’s a real immersion.

One of the things we try to do is have lots of speakers coming to present. We might have Chairs or CEOs or Directors, quite senior people from around the sector and make sure in those sessions we’re opening up lots of time for discussion and Q and A. It’s not just that monologue from the front.

One of the things I always say, is at the start of phase one, that you’re going to learn as much from one another as you do from those that you hear presenting at the front of the room.

The Kellogg Final Research Project.

Bryan: Do people applying to be Kellogg Scholars have an idea in mind of what they’re going to do their project on, or are those formed as the programme goes forward?

Scott: I guess the answer to that question is yes and no. So we do get Kelloggers to think about their project topic prior to joining us in Phase One. We kicked off a couple of weeks ago, and we actually ran a video conference prior to the start of the face to face programme to give them an opportunity to get more information on the nature of their projects, to do a bit of thinking about what they wanted to focus on when they came into Phase One.

Some of the conversations we have around project topics happen here. But often what people do is they’ve got a broad idea of the area that they want to work in, but as they get exposed to some of the content in Phase One, even as we head sometimes towards phase two, they’ll refine the topic, narrow it down, and get more focus. I think the answer, Bryan, is yes, they do. But often the interactions with one another, the interactions with the content, will help refine that and give it a real impact as they go through the programme.

Bryan: I’ve interviewed 20 or 30 of the Rural Leaders Scholars and a number of them said to me, I had what I thought was a fantastic idea for the project and after sitting through this or talking to one of my fellow Scholars, I realised that my angle was wrong and it went this way – and it was much better for it.

Scott: Absolutely. And you’re right, that’s often a point of feedback, and we talked about that at the start, just saying, this is probably going to happen and that’s fine. Be aware that your topic might change and shift a bit as you go through and you learn more and you start to think about things from other perspectives you might not have been exposed to before.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship. What are the differences?

Bryan: Maybe it may not be clear to some, but what is the difference between a Kellogg and a Nuffield Scholarship?

Scott: Sure, it’s a great question which we get asked all the time. They’re quite different programmes. So the Nuffield Programme is a year-long experience. It’s individually directed.

The Nuffield Scholars are really focusing on a project topic and then designing their own experiences – gathering information and data as they write the report. So there’s a report that comes out of a Nuffield Scholarship as well. They design that themselves in conjunction with the trust and mentors that they’ve put together. Obviously, travel is a big component of a Nuffield. So going offshore, immersing in other agri-contexts is a really key part and has always been a key part of Nuffield.

The Kellogg Programme is six months long and more structured in the sense that we are running the phases I described previously. Where we have content that we’re putting in front of Kelloggers and getting them to think about and interact with. And their project is obviously shorter in duration and more compact in terms of what’s required. So Kellogg is more structured and shorter.

Scott: They’re different rather than staircasing one way or the other. In fact, recently we’ve had someone who had previously done a Nuffield Scholarship, come back and do the Kellogg Programme. There have been a number of people who’ve done Kellogg Programmes and then gone on to do Nuffield Scholarships. So, different in scope and focus, and I guess, the degree of self-direction that there is in them.

What academic support is available to Kellogg Scholars?

Bryan: I guess there are lots and lots of people in the food and fibre sector who would get really excited about leadership training and being in the room with all these people. They might be a bit daunted by the sort of academic aspect of putting together a large project. Is there support for that and how academic are they? How does that work?

Scott: There is support, absolutely. So I’m really fortunate to have a colleague, Dr Patrick Aldwell, who was previously one of the Deans at Lincoln. Patrick is involved in the programme. He was the Course Director prior to me and he still looks after the project component. Patrick’s enormously experienced in the sector, but also in terms of just how do you do a really good piece of research?

One of the things we say to our Kellogg Scholars is, look, you might not have done one of these before, and actually, you might not have to do another report like this again.

If you think about the core skillset that we’re trying to encourage you to experience and build into your toolkit, it’s about how do you identify a really great problem?

How do you define a solid research question or a problem definition around that?

How do you go out and collect data and talk to people and assemble information to analyse that? And then, how do you craft a really compelling response to what it is that you’ve been working on over the last six months and to respond to that research question?

If you can generalise those skills, they can be used in a really significant array of different contexts, whether that’s a family, farming or growing business. Whether that’s working with a bunch of colleagues, whether that’s reporting up to a management team, a senior leadership team, or a board. That logic and argument is something we’re really trying to give people an opportunity to experience.

Yes, lots of support, and I think, as we say, even if you haven’t done it before, and even if you’re not doing it again, there are really core skills here about logic and how you create really compelling arguments to have impact and influence as well.

Kellogg Programme Director Scott Champion – background.

Bryan: Now, you yourself have a background in academic study, and you’ve been at the top of industry good groups in New Zealand. Tell us a little bit about how your journey to where you are now.

Scott: As you can probably tell, I’m an Australian from the accent, which hasn’t faded. I’ve been here for about 20 years now, so I’m a city kid who did agriculture, sort of stumbled across agriculture when I was trying to work out what I wanted to do when I finished school.

I’ve just had a really wonderful professional career and opportunities to date. I love the broader food and fibre sector and have had fabulous experiences here in New Zealand. I did an undergraduate degree at the University of New South Wales in Sydney and it’s actually a programme that doesn’t exist anymore. It was called Wool and Animal Science. It had a sort of a textile component – as well as an Ag component.

My technical background is in wool and I then did a PhD in Animal nutrition and ended teaching after that in the School of Agriculture at the University of Tasmania in Hobart.

The school had lots of really close connections with industry and Tasmania’s economy was a lot like New Zealand’s. Very food and fibre dependent. I was teaching Animal Nutrition and Physiology and Introduction to Ag and Hort. I did that for six years.

New Zealand and the path to Kellogg.

Scott: I then came across here to New Zealand to work for the New Zealand Merino Company, as Research, Development and Product Innovation Manager. I had four and a half years there. Again, wonderful experience working with a great bunch of people who were doing interesting things and really trying to think about Merino fibre in a different way and that tight connection to growers.

Then I went to the industry body, which was then Meat and Wool New Zealand, which then became Beef+LambNZ. I had ten years there. I had a GM role, looking after policy and promotion, and then the last seven and a half years as CEO.

Then almost seven years ago now, we started a little consulting practise called Primary Purpose. There are three of us in the business. We describe ourselves as sort of a niche research, advisory and analytics firm, working across food and fibre in New Zealand.

So, yeah, we work across all of the sort of major industries and then for about probably a quarter to a third of my time, is the Kellogg work. So it’s a lovely mix.

Bryan: Now, having led Beef+LambNZ for quite a long time and then being away from it for a while, what are your thoughts on the industry group’s advocacy efforts in the last few years and do you think the criticism of them is valid?

Common challenges beyond the boundary fence.

Scott: I’ve been thinking about this a bit lately having had a number of conversations with people, that in my time, so almost seven years ago I left, a lot of the focus was around productivity improvement.

In my time with Beef and Lamb, I think from memory, it was the 2006/2007 season, was sort of the worst year in 50 years in real terms for profitability in the sheep and beef sector.

So that’s, how do we stay profitable as individual farming businesses and how do we stay in the game? The challenges around that was a real theme that ran through my time there. One of the things that really strikes me now is, we look at the dominant conversations that hit the front pages of your publications, and we talk about them in the Kellogg Programme too.

There are these big cross sector issues around environment, animal welfare, social licence and all of the different components of that. How do we maintain that social licence with the public onshore and offshore in our export markets to continue to be able to export and deliver the products that people want?

It’s a really significant shift. The boundaries of the problems now and the things that we talk about, they don’t line up with the boundaries of an individual business. They don’t stop at an individual farm or an orchard’s fence line. How you deal with that is quite challenging. The ability of the sectors to work with one another and operate with one another, I think is really critical.

We’ve seen various models and approaches like that developed over the last while. That feels like it’s quite different to what it was ten years ago, 15 years ago, in terms of what’s required, in terms of focus, but also at an individual farm and business level. Of course, there’s still the requirement to make those individual productivity improvements and to focus on the business and stay in the game.

So one of the things that has been pretty challenging, both for individual businesses, and for the service sector and also for the industry bodies, is it’s an ‘and’ conversation as well as supporting individual businesses to continue to improve. We have to connect across the sector to address these big cross sector issues as well. So it’s a pretty full agenda.

Gaining perspectives on the sector’s big challenges with Kellogg.

Bryan: I think that point you made about these issues being far wider than the boundary fence is quite important, because I almost feel that if more in the industry did the Kellogg Programme, they’d realise at the moment, a lot seem to take the ‘my farm’ attitude to an all of world issue.

Whereas if you had a more holistic view of what consumers are feeling overseas, the social licence position in New Zealand, then there would be a different perspective on things.

Scott: Yes. I think one of the responses we often get, and we run a little activity on the last day of the Kellogg Programme with a conversation about what was most valuable to you as you’ve gone through the programme. One of the responses we’ll often get from participants is ‘I got insights into other sectors beyond my own and I learnt that I can generalise and they’re actually dealing with many of the same issues that I am’.

So the context might be different if I go from horticulture, to dairy, to sheep and beef, to forestry, whatever it might be. But if I push that level up, that issue up, and think about it at a slightly more strategic level, there are really similar things here that we’re trying to grapple with.

I think when you do that, it does give you opportunity to connect with others, to get different insights, to think about things in different ways.

So, in terms of the context of the Kellogg Programme, what we’re trying to do with our 50 or so Scholars each year, is to get them to think about ‘how do I look across to other sectors and other places and beyond the boundaries of food and fibre as well other things going on in tech or manufacturing or whatever it might be.

Where I go, the context is a bit different, but actually, there’s an analogy there. There’s something I could really learn from that. I think about how to adapt it. I might be able to bring it back into my own context and do something a bit better, or a bit faster, or with a bit more impact, or whatever.

The Kellogg Programme in 2023.

Bryan: All right, so two and intakes a year into the Kellogg Programme. So I guess you’ve got another cohort kicking off mid-year, is that right?

Scott: Yeah, sometimes three intakes, but that’s right. We kicked off our last programme two or three weeks ago, last week of January, first week of February. That programme goes through to July, and actually we start our second programme of the year just before we finish our first programme of the year. So we’ll have a programme running from mid-June through to the end of November. Applications are closing, I think about 16 April, for that second programme of the year.

Bryan: So anyone interested can get all the details on the Rural Leaders website, I guess?

Scott: Absolutely. If they go and have a look at the Rural Leaders website, they’ll see some blue coloured links there through into the Kellogg Programme, and that will give them all the details.

Thanks for listening to ‘Ideas that Grow’ the Rural Leaders Podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln Universities, and Agmardt. This podcast was presented by Farmers Weekly.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme has been developing leaders for the rural and agri-food sector since 1979.

Key Information

Our Alumni

2026 Applications

The Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship is one of the most valued awards in New Zealand’s primary sector.

Key Information

Our Alumni

2027 Applications

Innovating for our fast-changing value chains.

Key Information

2027 Applications

Fast-track your food and fibre skills, knowledge, and confidence.

Key Information

2026 Applications

Develop horticulture-specific leadership knowledge and skills.

Key Information

2026 Applications

Popular Keywords

Categories

The New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust (Rural Leaders) and Nuffield New Zealand are saddened by the recent passing of Garrick Murfitt, 1977 Nuffield Scholar.

A Nuffield Scholar with a background in many industries.

Halfway through a Nuffield Scholarship.

The Nuffield Contemporary Scholars Conference (CSC).

The Nuffield Global Focus Programme (GFC).

GFC - first stop Indonesia.

Nuffield GFC – France.

Nuffield GFC – Denmark.

Nuffield GFC – California.

California - the water scarcity challenge.

Nuffield GFC – Chile.

What’s next on the Nuffield Scholarship Programme?

The 2025 Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship applications close 18 August.

Carlos Bagrie

Rachel Baker

Jenna Smith

Peter Templeton

Completing Kellogg and settling on a research topic.

Embracing history for an informed future as Kaitiaki of the whenua.

Kaitiakitanga and the sustainabilty movement.

Reconnecting our people with the whenua.

Mahi in Māori Agribusiness.

Future hopes for Māori Agribusiness.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and digging deeper.

Work fuelled by rural and urban perspectives.

Forging stronger connections to food and our farming system.

How do we strengthen the connection to food and food production?

Food and farming as a public good.

Opening farms for a win-win.

The Nuffield Global Focus Programme and public good overseas.

The Nuffield Scholarship experience.

The untapped potential of New Zealand’s agricultural IP.

Food and Fibre’s intellectual property opportunity.

Working together with developing agricultural nations for mutual benefit.

A shift to transformation before transaction.

Further trade ties with India and the role of humility.

The value of New Zealand’s Food and Fibre ecosystem and its people.

Staying nimble, flexible, and adaptable in a fast-changing world.

A Food and Fibre Sector under the pump.

Remoulding and reshaping to fit a changed environment.

One farm, five generations of farmers.

The Nuffield experience.

Glyphosate use in New Zealand.

Glyphosate use overseas.

Glyphosate application rates in NZ compared to abroad.

Glyphosate as a strategic farming tool.

Taking the Nuffield research to the people.

Nuffield, Kellogg and giving back to the Sector.

The main issues facing arable farmers.

“It’s not all beer and skittles out there.”

Running the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme – what’s involved.

The Kellogg Programme’s three phases – Phase One.

Kellogg Phase Two.

Kellogg Phase Three.

What to expect on Kellogg.

The Kellogg Final Research Project.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarship. What are the differences?

What academic support is available to Kellogg Scholars?

Kellogg Programme Director Scott Champion – background.

New Zealand and the path to Kellogg.

Common challenges beyond the boundary fence.