podcast Archives | Rural Leaders

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

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

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

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

Bryan 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, we are talking to Otago sheep and beef farmer, Emma Crutchley.

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

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

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

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

BG: Sounds like a lot of work.

Maniototo sheep, beef and arable farming.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Farming and the environment.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The art of making the tough conversations easier.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

EC: Yeah, 100 %

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

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

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

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

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

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

An innovation story that covers the journey from an idea to the challenges of development, and to implementation. Julia Galwey, 2020 Kellogg Scholar, talks about Pearl Veal NZ, a new sustainable utilisation of the bobby calf resource.

Pearl Veal NZ was the winner of the Silver Fern Farms Market Leader Award at the 2023 Beef+LambNZ Awards in mid October.

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

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

My name is Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly and this week I am talking to the recent winner of the Market Leader Award at the Beef and Lamb New Zealand Awards, Julia Galwey.

Bryan Gibson:
G’day Julia, how’s it going?

Julia Galwey, 2020 Kellogg Scholar and Co-Founder Pearl Veal:
Good, thank you Bryan. How are you?

BG: Pretty good, where are you calling from today?

JG: I am calling from my home office in Christchurch.

BG: Nice. Have you been getting all the wind we’ve been getting up here?

JG: Yeah, it’s been pretty mixed bag at the moment. Very much spring weather.

Winning at the Beef+LambNZ Awards.

BG: Yeah. Now, it was a pretty big time for you, the Beef and LambNZ Awards.

JG: Yeah, it was pretty neat for Pearl Veal to be recognised at such a wonderful event. Just have an evening of celebrating lots of positive things happening in the industry with the various finalists and category winners. A big thank you to Beef and LambNZ for hosting the event, and also to Silver Fern Farms for sponsoring the market leader category.

BG: Yeah. Now, can you just tell us a bit about your background in the food and fibre sector?

Background - Julia Galwey, 2020 Kellogg Scholar.

JG: Sure. I grew up on a sheep and beef and deer farm near Fairlie in South Canterbury. Then I headed off to Lincoln to do an Ag Science degree. Following that, I had six years in the agribusiness team for ANZCO Foods based in Ashburton, which was a neat team to be involved in, and a really varied role, that got me going in the meat industry.

Then in 2018, Alan McDermott and myself, we set up Agri-Food Strategy, which is our own agribusiness consultancy company. It focuses on working with farmers and agribusinesses to address strategic challenges and opportunities. I guess, again, it’s been pretty varied in terms of the work I’ve been involved with in that space.

BG: Now, you took on a Kellogg Scholarship in 2020, which, of course, was the year of the lockdown, if I remember correctly. You chose to do it on a value chain for veal. What made you think of that subject?

Kellogg research into the potential of the bobby calf resource.

JG: Good question. Yeah, I guess the idea to look at this for my report was just being around the meat industry and the bobby calf topic continues to come up in conversations. There just wasn’t really a lot of information that I could see here in New Zealand in terms of looking at older veal animals as an option for this resource, a by-product of the dairy industry. I didn’t really want to focus on the discussion or debate around the bobby calves themselves. I did for some context in my report, but I just wanted to focus on looking at one potential solution or opportunity for utilising some of that resource.

BG: Then, of course, it’s one thing to write a report about this stuff, but you carried that on and started a business. How did that get off the ground?

JG: I guess while I was doing my research report, there’s a few things that came up in terms of some learnings and drivers or motivators. One of them was probably around learning how much of a bigger risk the bobby calf thing was here in New Zealand. Especially compared to other countries in terms of the scale, with our couple of million versus Australia would be the next biggest, at around 400,000.

The report highlighted we were out there on our own in terms of how big of an issue it might be going forward. Some of that, was a bit of a driver. I learned a bit around the varying types of veal markets that there were internationally and saw some opportunity, but I really struggled to find any information on pasture-fed veal systems.

So, it became obvious that maybe there was an opportunity for New Zealand to diversify in terms of our offering in the veal space with what we’ve got here. Also, in terms of some of those credence attributes – pasture-fed, free-range, rather than copying some of the international veal systems.

From research to innovation.

As I was doing the report, Alan McDermott, who’s my business partner, was keen to have a go. We could test out what opportunity there really might be. I mean, it’s all very well, like you say, writing a report, but you just must have a go to see whether something might work or not. Halfway through my project, that’s what we started doing.

We had a quick brainstorm for a name so we could get a company set up. There are quite a few negative connotations around the name ‘veal’, which I learned a bit about while I was doing my report, in terms of some of the historic practices that used to happen in terms of how veal was raised internationally.

There was, I guess, some questions around whether we should even call it veal or not. But we talked to a few chefs, and they pointed out that we need to call it what it is. That’s what they know it is. A lot of them have trained internationally and used it before, so just stick with what it is, but make sure you build a story you can underpin your brand with. We sourced some under 12 months of age, a whole 12 of them, and found a processor that was happy to process them for us.

We set up cut specs and went along to the plant to see how it would go and then started sending some products to chefs to see what they thought. We had a development chef that we were introduced to through a contact, and he kindly took us around Wellington for a couple of days. He introduced us to a few chefs and helped us learn how that world works in terms of getting into restaurants and talking to chefs – and how to get on their menus.

Building scale.

The feedback on the product was great. We started working with the team at Synlait, including one of my fellow Kellogg cohort members, which was quite cool. They’ve been supportive in what we were trying to do and helped us connect with some of their dairy farm suppliers who were keen to give it a go and rear some calves. It’s been a nice fit for us to work with the Synlait team and some of their suppliers.

BG: How difficult is that process? You’ve got a prototype product and you’ve started with a small number of animals to begin with, then you’ve got to scale that up to something that’s a viable business. What’s the process there?

JG: It’s one of the trickier things to balance. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg in terms of you’re not quite sure in terms of what market you’ve got, but you need to get enough product that you’ve got enough to supply to a restaurant to put it on their menu. Yeah, it is a difficult balance, and some of that is just to take a risk. I guess for us, one of the things that we were quite focused on was building around the story and attributes we wanted to go around our brand. With some of that starting with animal welfare for us in producing the best calf possible.

The rearing regime and how it works.

There’s quite a lot of challenge in terms of veal as anything must be produced before the calf is 12-months old, so a lot of the challenge is around getting it to grow as fast as possible and to reach a heavy weight in that time. It needs a good start in life as a calf, to be able to do that. Some of our system was built around a particular rearing regime in terms of good colostrum.

Then we only use whole fresh milk rather than milk powder, which has had a lot of the good bits taken out of it. Milk is what’s designed for the calf, so let’s just give it that and obviously some pasture as well. But because of that rearing regime, we can’t just go out and get any calf on the market.

It starts right from the start in terms of what we’ve built to underpin our brand. That also is a little bit harder in terms of, like you say, we’re planning what we need over a year in advance, and you don’t necessarily know what your market is then. A bit of risk, I guess, and just a balance of starting smallish so that you learn the risks, learn the things you need to iron out as you go.

BG: Getting back to your rearing regime, that must mean you need to work pretty closely with the farmers who are actually doing this stuff?

Collaborating for success.

JG: Definitely. I think the other thing in that space is the Synlait farms that we’re working with are all certified ‘Lead with Pride’, which again, helps underpin animal welfare and the colostrum management. Obviously, our contracts have got the rearing regime outlined in them, and we talk them through what that looks like and why. We also don’t have meal as part of our rearing regime. Part of that is around wanting to remain grain-free, so 100% pasture-fed and antibiotic-free, so that we can look at going into the US market in time.

Again, it’s the whole fresh milk, no meal. It is a bit of a change to how calves are traditionally reared here. We’ve got to work closely with the farmers on what that looks like. We’re thankful for those first few farms that were willing to take a bit of a risk and rear and finish calves for us.

We were a couple of random people saying, here, we want to contract you to rear these calves in a particular way and finish them through to an age and weight that’s not traditional here. They had to trust a bit that we would take them when we said we would and have a processor to process them and pay them.

I guess that’s probably also part of what’s been quite helpful working within the Synlait team. That helped farmers have a go. There’s just some great farmers out there that are keen to try something different and learn with us, which has been nice.

BG: Yeah. Now, who are you selling to now? What are your export markets, or locally?

JG: Currently, we are pretty much mostly domestic market into high-end restaurants. We’ve just started doing a little bit into some smaller retailers here, and we’ve just started a little bit of export.

BG: Now, obviously, the bobby calf issue is one that New Zealand’s farming industry is grappling with. Do you see this type of initiative as part of a solution?

A new veal value chain.

JG: Yeah, I mean, the bobby calf issue is obviously a big social license to operate topic in the dairy industry, and it’s a pretty tricky thing to navigate with the views of community here and also our customers and consumers globally.

I guess we just have to keep asking ourselves if we’ve got practices that we’re comfortable and being transparent about, and if not, then what are our opportunities and solutions to do something differently? I guess that’s really what we’re trying to do with Pearl Veal is.

I don’t like to focus too much on the bobby calf aspect of it. But more the opportunity that exists to take some of that resource and add value to produce a really quality veal-based product with a story and a brand that’s underpinned by animal welfare standards and a pasture-based system that we believe in. We’re proud to share with chefs and customers and consumers here.

BG: Of course, back to where this all started, the Kellogg Programme – how did you find it? Is it something you’d recommend to others who were thinking about doing it?

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme - where it started.

JG: Yeah, absolutely. It was such a good course and I guess a real opportunity to network too. We had such a great cohort of people. It was a good cross-sector group of people. You get to meet people that you wouldn’t normally be working with and the people and the speakers that come in are incredible. It really broadens your thinking and opens your networks and I would highly recommend it to anyone considering it.

That’s why I did it. It’s something that once people have done it, they’re always recommending to anyone that hasn’t. If you get that opportunity, jump at it. I think it’s one of those things that probably never feels like the right time when you’re in your working career because you’re always busy or home life as well. You just have to jump in and do it.

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

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

Dr Alison Stewart – FAR and the role of arable systems in agriculture.

In this podcast, Dr Alison Stewart, CEO at the Foundation for Arable Research, talks with Farmers Weekly’s Managing Editor, Bryan Gibson, about the role of arable in agriculture, her role at FAR and the delivery of research that benefits growers.

Dr Stewart also discusses her involvement with the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme and the importance of exposure to diversity of thought for leaders in Food and Fibre.

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

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

My name is Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly and this week I am talking to Dr Alison Stewart, CEO at FAR, the Foundation for Arable Research, and a regular speaker on the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme.

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

Dr Alison Stewart – Chief Executive Officer at the Foundation for Arable Research (FAR).
Yeah, great. Thanks for having me.

BG: Great to have you here. Now, you’re the Chief Executive of Far. What’s been happening in your world lately?

The current arable context.

AS: Well, we’ve just had a referendum. So, every six years, our levy peers vote to decide whether FAR is doing a good job and they want to continue paying their levy. So that happened just last month. I guess for the last year, we have been focused a little bit on the referendum and making sure that the growers know what we’re doing and what value it delivers. And fortunately, yes, we got good support.

Although I have to say getting growers to vote was the biggest challenge. They’ve just got so much happening in their lives at the moment and so much information being thrown at them that they’re almost in a situation where finding the time to vote in a referendum was not a high priority. That actually was the biggest challenge, convincing them to get onto their computer and vote.

BG: And running the organisation, what does your job entail? What do you do in a week?

AS: My job is to make sure that everybody else in the company is doing their job really well. I’m joining all the dots. We’ve got some amazing research staff who are out there doing applied research, trying to find new management systems, new tools, new technologies that will assist our farmers.

We also have a lot of extension people focused on trying to support them with all of the compliance regulations that are coming down the track. And then we also have to deal with the biosecurity incursions. We’re dealing with two at the moment.

Amongst all of that, we’re just trying to promote to the general public, to the other sectors, to the government, the value of arable systems and the value that they bring to New Zealand agriculture. I jump around a lot, getting involved in lots of things, across lots of areas, at different levels of responsibility. It’s never a dull day.

BG: Yeah. Our Food and Fibre Sector is dominated by the big two animal proteins. I guess, as you say, the animal sector is as big and successful of its own accord, but in some ways plays second or third fiddle sometimes?

AS: Oh, very much so. That frustrates me in the sense that we actually underpin the livestock sector because we produce all of the seed and the grass seed that they need to grow their pastures to feed their cows. If we go under, then the livestock sector is going to be substantially worse off.

We also produce a large amount of the animal feed the dairy sector and the beef sector and the poultry sector need. So, I’m not sure that we ever get full recognition for the important role we play, not only in our own right through producing milling wheat and quality seed crops, but also underpinning the livestock sector. I try to remind my colleagues in the dairy and beef and sheep sector that they need us as much as we need them.

World-leading seed production.

BG: I guess a lot of people do just think of fields of maize or barley or wheat, but that seed production part of things is really important, but also quite an opportunity and a success for New Zealand, isn’t it? We’re quite good at it.

AS: Absolutely. It does help that the big global seed companies can see that they can get out of Northern Hemisphere seasons and they can get seed crops being produced in New Zealand. We have really good environmental conditions.

We have good quality certification, verification and accountability systems. We’re seen to be a very important seed producer. That’s really good from the perspective of an arable farmer because it provides a really nice rotation.

We’ve got our foundational cereal crops, but then we’ve got the seed crops in the foundation of the rotation and that gives a nice diversity, but it also introduces the opportunity to capture another revenue source.

Dr Alison Stewart - A CEO’s career path.

BG: Now, how did you get to the position you’re in now? What’s your career been like? What did you do when you left school?

AS: Well, I mean, gosh, I’ve been around the block. I’ve always been interested in plants. Even as a child, I was always out in the garden with my mum planting and looking after plants. I did botany at university, and then I did a PhD in plant pathology, and then I came to New Zealand.

Obviously, I’m Scottish, and I came to New Zealand, got a lecturing job at Auckland University, and it was the old Botany department. That was how I started off my career being an academic, and I had 10 years at Auckland. Then I moved down to Lincoln University because I wanted to be doing more applied research and more closer to the actual farming sector. I was 18 years at Lincoln University as an academic, running a big research centre, looking at sustainable production systems.

Then I decided to challenge myself a little bit more and I went off to California and ran a biotech company. Then I came back to New Zealand and headed up forestry science in Rotorua with Scion. Then I moved from there and came to be the CEO of FAR.

I’m probably relatively unusual in the sense that I’ve been in academia, I’ve been in the CRI system, I’ve been in a commercial company and I’m now working in an industry body. I’ve worked across horticulture, vegetable cropping, herbal cropping, and forestry. So it gives me a nice broad perspective on what’s happening, particularly in the plant-based sectors in New Zealand.

FAR - delivering the arable research that benefits growers.

BG: Well, that’s quite a CV. I’m interested in your interest in applied science and knowledge transfer. That’s something that’s been talked about in our sector as something that works pretty well, but does need work, if you know what I mean. Is that something that you think is moving the dial over the years?

AS: Oh, most certainly. I mean, there isn’t much point in doing research if you’re not going to get the results of the research out, being taken up and used by farmers and growers. FAR in particular, over the last 25 years, has been an exemplar of an organisation that has effectively delivered its research to benefit the growers.

It’s becoming more difficult because the environment is so much more challenging for growers. I won’t say the good old days, because I never think that the old days are actually that good. But in the past, FAR would do research and it would be identifying a new plant growth regulator or a new fungicide or a better fertiliser programme. And you’d go out and you’d say, if you do X, Y and Z, that will deliver a one-ton increase in yield.

That’s a really easy story to tell. The growers will go, that’s a good idea. I’ll do that. The growers get a one-ton increase and they think, Oh, my levy is good value for money for us doing a good job. But we’ve driven yield optimisation pretty close to the optimum.

A challenging arable environment.

Now the challenge is, how do we maintain those optimum yields given all of the constraints that growers now have around input costs and compliance around fresh water and climate change. That’s a much, much harder knowledge exchange programme because you’re potentially, and quite often, telling the growers something that they don’t want to hear. So you’re always trying to find a way in which you can present that information in as positive a way as possible.

At this moment in time in New Zealand, farmers feel as if they’re really under the pump with people throwing compliance regulations at them, their cost of production is going up. So often their headspace is not necessarily that favourably inclined towards hearing some quite difficult messaging. It’s challenging. It’s a really challenging space for the growers, and it’s a really challenging space for the labour organisations.

FAR and the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme.

BG: Very much so. Now, turning to Rural Leaders, you have a bit to do with the Kellogg Programme, is that correct?

AS: Yeah. I mean, they roll me out twice a year where I come and I talk to the new cohort of rural leaders. I’m one of these people that, and it causes me a lot of angst over the years, I tend to just say exactly what I think. That can get me into a lot of trouble!

I really enjoy challenging young people around what they’re thinking, why they’re thinking it, and what they want to achieve in their careers. I love having discussions around what leadership actually means, because leadership means quite different things to different people.

In New Zealand agriculture at this moment in time, with all of the challenges that are coming up, it’s really hard to be a leader because levy organisations, for example, are reliant on doing what their levy peers want them to do, and that sometimes prevents you from being able to take a true leadership position.

I really like talking about some of those challenges, and it’s a good environment because it’s not out in the public arena. You’re not going to get hung out to dry on social media, but you’re able to have some really honest and sometimes quite painful discussions about how New Zealand agriculture needs to move into the future and the changes that need to be made. And that young cohort of Kellogg leaders are up for those kinds of discussions, and I just love it.

BG: I mean, it’s an interesting group because most of them already have a career and then they have a day job, and then Kellogg is back to school. So I guess it’s different from your previous work in academia, where it was 9:00 to 5:00 learning. And that has some upside, I think, of the Kellogg Programme, do you think?

Kellogg exposes leaders to diversity of thought and opinion.

AS: I think it’s a fantastic programme because it provides an opportunity to bring multiple thought processes to the table. Scott Champion, who’s one of the key Facilitators on the Programme; he’s very well connected and he can bring quite disparate views to the discussion.

That’s really important because if you stay in your own industry, in your own space, in your silo, then all that happens is that everybody validates preconceived ideas and it’s really good to be challenged.

I think that’s what the Kellogg Leadership Programme does. It makes you realise that what you thought you knew and what you thought was a valid belief, there may actually be alternative viewpoints. You have to open your mind to different ways of thinking and different people’s perceptions of agriculture and different conclusions that you can draw from the vast amount of research that’s out there.

It’s a fantastic learning opportunity for young people to avoid getting into a siloed mantra of just believing the here and now and what people they tend to engage with think. It’s a bit like when you google something, the algorithm sitting in behind Google can work out what your preconceived ideas are, and therefore they tend to give you links to things that validate those preconceived ideas.

I think we’ve always got to try and make sure that we don’t get into that mentality of thinking that because we believe something now, that means it must be true.

BG: Cross-discipline research or work in real time, isn’t it?

AS: Absolutely, yeah.

BG: So, you’d recommend the Programme to anyone thinking about the big issues facing the sector, and thinking about leadership?

AS: I think you have to be prepared to put time and effort into it. It’s like anything in life that if you don’t commit and put your passion and energy into it, you’re not going to get the same amount of benefit out of it. I think you have to be prepared to come to the table and listen to those diverse views and be prepared to change your opinion about things.

If you come to the Kellogg Programme with a preconceived idea that you’re right and everyone else is wrong, you’re not going to get the benefit out of the Programme.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

Kate Scott: Meeting food and fibre’s challenges, together.

Listen to "Kate Scott - Meeting food and fibre's challenges, together." on Spreaker.

Kate Scott is a 2018 Nuffield Scholar and Chair of the Board of the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust and is part of the team behind Forefront: 2023 Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit and its line up of speakers and panelists.

Pulling together a speaker ensemble of this calibre has been no easy task, but as Kate explains the chance to bring industry together for one day – makes the effort well worthwhile.

Forefront, the Summit theme, will focus on those businesses making change now – those providing solutions to the sector’s and the world’s biggest agribusiness challenges and opportunities.

Bryan Gibson – Managing Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly. And with me I have my first repeat visitor to the podcast, Kate Scott. How’s it going?

Kate Scott – 2018 Nuffield Scholar and Chair of the Board of Rural Leaders.

I’m good. Thank you, Bryan. And yourself?

The 2023 Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit - Together for a day.

Bryan: Yeah, really good. So, today we’re here to talk about the upcoming Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit, which is at the Christchurch Town Hall on the 27 March. Kate, you’ve been involved in putting this together.

Kate: Yes, I have. There’s a great team of people have been working hard to bring not only the one-day, Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit together, but also the Nuffield Triennial Conference together too.

We started planning this event back in 2020, but we were a casualty of Covid like many events. And so, we’re now looking forward to March when we can host our Summit. It’s going to be amazing to not only welcome some of our international guests who will be attending the as part of their involvement with the Nuffield Triennial, but also really looking forward to getting a broad and diverse range of New Zealand farmers, agribusiness and rural professionals along to hear our great line up speak at the Agribusiness Summit.

Bryan: Now, when we talked a while back, your [Nuffield] research was on the evolution of New Zealand farming into a more sustainable place and I guess that’s something that’s going to be a focus of the [Summit] day, isn’t it?

Challenges and opportunities in a fast-changing world.

Kate: Yeah, it is. And it will probably be of interest to some of the listeners that we’ve chosen to theme our conference for the day ‘Forefront’.

The reason behind choosing Forefront was about not only getting in front of all the challenges that the primary sector are facing, but also looking at it through a lens of opportunity.

How can we be at the front of this change and find ways to innovate and take advantage of a changing world? I guess that’s then gone on to help us to create the speaker themes for the conference.

Summit day themes and speakers – Our World.

Kate: We’ve split the day into three broad topic areas. The first is taking a more global picture. It’s called Our World. Here we’re talking about some of those big challenges in our natural environment.

We’ve got some speakers touching on climate change. Doctor Harry Clark will share his incredible breadth of knowledge [on climate change] with us.

We’ve got a speaker talking to us about the role of solar, particularly from a farming perspective – a woman by the name of Karin Stark. Karin and her husband farm in Australia. She’s done a lot of work using solar energy and developing solar panels within their farming business and how they integrate that more generally. So that’s going to be an interesting part of that first Our World theme.

Then we also have a speaker talking about the opportunity the sea brings and how we utilise our oceans as a resource and as an opportunity to grow our primary sector.

Summit day themes and speakers – Our People.

Kate: Then we move into our second, which is Our People. That will look at consumer trends and trade. I guess we’ve seen a massive shift in international trends and how that’s changed over the last few years, particularly on the back of COVID and what other trends might emerge around the agrifood and the consumer side of things.

So, to help us to understand both the challenges and the opportunities there, we have Vengalis Vitalis who many of you will know as our Deputy Secretary of Trade here in New Zealand. He’ll be talking about a global view of trade from a New Zealand perspective.

We have Lain Jager joining us to talk about what the role of future food and genetic modification might mean for food production in New Zealand. Then we’ve also got Emma Parsons from Fonterra who’s going to be talking to us about what Fonterra see from that consumer trends and trade perspective. Already a great line-up of speakers.

Summit day themes and speakers – Our Future.

Kate: Our last session for the day is called Our Future. We’re wanting to try to change that up a little bit. So, we’ve got four or five speakers who are going to talk for a shorter period of time – a little bit snappier – talking about all those opportunities around entrepreneurship, leadership, the future, social, economic and environmental wellbeing.

We have Traci Houpapa talking to us about future leadership and a Te Ao Maori perspective – and possible new business models. We have Angus Brown from Arepa, Mark McLeod Smith from Halter, and we also have Dr Ellen Nelson, who will be talking to us about the future of work.

I’ve just given you a big download of the programme! But it’s exciting to have a broad range of topics and people to be able to come together to look at our sector in a positive light. To take some motivation and opportunity to challenge what we’re doing, look for what’s new and the what next? for our sector.

Bryan: It’s great that with the world opened up again, getting some of these global perspectives on the shared challenges that agriculture faces. Some of those people will be in the room. Sometimes these changing consumer perceptions, along with the ins-and-outs of trade deals and that sort of thing, sometimes is second hand knowledge to a lot of the agricultural community here – so it’s good to get a view from the ground, but a different ground.

Devry Boughner Vorwerk - Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit Keynote Speaker.

Kate: Exactly. I think it’s an integral part of what we do, but unless we’re actively doing it, it’s almost one of those back-end functions. We don’t always think about these things if we’re down on the farm driving our tractor or milking our cows.

To that point, our keynote speaker is a woman by the name of Devry Boughner Vorwerk. Devry is coming out to see us from the States and she has amazing background in terms of having been Chief Communications Officer and Global Head of Corporate Affairs at Cargill.

She has her own sustainability entrepreneurship business and is going to be talking big picture setting for us around international business and development. She’s going to be able to do an amazing job of setting the scene initially and then helping us to draw in all the pieces of the puzzle as we hear from our other speakers throughout the course of the day.

Bryan: I did some reading on her earlier in the week and sounds like she’s going to bring some real amazing insight. I mean, Cargill is one of the biggest meat producers in the United States – and then she moved to, I think, Grubhub for a while, didn’t she?

Kate: That’s my understanding as well. And then having done both that policy side of things and the international business, I’m really looking forward to hearing Devry speak. The fact that she’ll be able to join us in person is really a good outcome given only a few years ago we were having to cancel the Summit.

Bryan: In that last session too, when we talk about challenges, quite rightly, I guess people often see that as cost and loss of opportunity. But in fact, there are people out there capitalising on meeting those challenges and there’s going to be some real-world examples of how you can do that.

Kate: Listeners may have heard of Ellen Nelson through her role in helping to secure places for the Afghani refugees last year. Ellen has done a world of research into the way in which we work. She challenges us to think about can we look at the world with ‘can we work school hours’?

Ellen has some interesting insights on how we leverage a lot of our mums and dads who might want to actually be able to work different hours, and how do we do that within our farming business? So, a slightly different perspective, but one that is as applicable to agriculture as any other sector.

Open to farmers, growers, agribusiness professionals and anyone who cares about the future of food and fibre.

Bryan: So, what sort of people are you hoping to attract?

Kate: We’re open to all comers, but we’re keen to make sure that our on-the-ground farmers have the opportunity to attend. I guess one of the reasons we decided to make the Summit a one-day event was that we know how difficult it is for people to get off their farm for too long. We’re wanting our farmers to come. We’ve had a great number of registrations already, as you’d expect.

We’ve got a bunch of our agribusiness representatives from our food companies, from other consultancies, we’ve got bankers, we’ve got some of our more senior leaders from government organisations. A real cross section of our sector. I think that’s where we’re trying to go – that the more views and perspectives we can get in the room, the greater the conversation and the questions.

One of the key things that we wanted to be able to do through the Summit was to provide the platform for a safe and robust conversation, where when you break out from morning tea, you can pick up one of these interesting topics that we would have heard about, talk to some people about their views and get the conversation going.

So, trying to kickstart the conversations on some of these big topics.

Bryan: And of course, everything will be kept on time, on track and on message from some pretty cool people running the show.

Bringing the Summit to life and the sector together.

Kate: Yes, we have got Corin Dann, an experienced journalist most will probably have heard of through the National Program – on breakfast in the mornings. Corin has very kindly agreed to come and facilitate our sessions for the day. A big part of the sessions will be the panel discussions and the conversations.

At the end of the day, we’re going to have a wrap up session where we get Devry back on stage with our other guests and Corin, to have an in-depth conversation around what’s happening, what the future looks like and the opportunities.

[From] the back end, the chair of the Summit, Murray King, and a small committee of volunteers will all be working hard in the to make sure people are well fed and well-watered, and that everything is kept to time.

For those who haven’t been to an event at the Town Hall in Christchurch before, one of the highlights is always the food. They do a great job there of showcasing local produce – they try to support their local Canterbury growers. The food is also something that’s always good to look forward to in those events.

Bryan: The building itself is something quite special. It’s such a wonderful piece of architecture.

Kate: It is iconic, so it’s great.

Bryan: And there’s a dinner.

The Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit Dinner.

Kate: Yes, we have a dinner that will be hosted after the Summit. So, there are still some tickets available for that, although they are selling out very fast. The dinner will allow people to come together and to take the conversation to that next step. We will also be joined at the dinner by Minister O’Connor, who is going to be speaking. And we have some evening entertainment from Te Radar.

Another exciting part of the Summit is that it will include our international Nuffield guests who are actually going to be here in New Zealand as part of a ten day conference – where we kick off on the Saturday or the Friday night actually, prior to the Summit. It’s a bit of a traveling trip from Canterbury all the way [down the South Island] and finishing in Queenstown the following weekend. So, it’ll be a great opportunity to connect with a wide audience from around the globe.

Bryan: Excellent. Well, that sounds [like] something for everyone to think about attending. How do people go about getting tickets if they’re interested?

Kate: Yeah, go and have a look on the Rural Leaders website. There’s a big headline that flashes up that says Forefront. Click on that to head to the registration page to attend the Summit and/or the Dinner.

Click here to visit Forefront Summit page for more details.

Rebecca Hyde – Collaboration, cooperation and finding the common ground.

Rebecca Hyde - Ideas that grow podcast interview

Listen to "Rebecca Hyde: Collaboration, cooperation and finding common ground." on Spreaker.

Ideas That Grow: Rebecca Hyde, 2017 Nuffield Scholar and 2021 Kellogg Scholar

Lynsey Stratford has discovered farmers make a few assumptions that aren’t very helpful – like accepting the fact that work might be dangerous and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. As Lynsey explains, “There are changes we can make, but those assumptions and those mindsets have been deeply held for quite some time.”

As a consultant, Lynsey helps the primary sector with people management and development services and training. And, when it comes to health and safety she says, “We shouldn’t expect people to just know this stuff, but rather teach them and support them as they develop skills.”

Lynsey’s research report unpacks the paradox that while farmers care about their people, farms as workplaces are overrepresented in fatal accident and injury statistics. So, what can be done to improve this?

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, Farmers Weekly Editor. And with me today I have Rebecca Hyde.

Rebecca Hyde – 2017 Nuffield Scholar and 2021 Kellogg Scholar, Oxford, North Canterbury.

Thanks, Bryan.

Bryan: So, where are you calling in from?

Rebecca: I’m based at Oxford in North Canterbury.

Bryan: And what keeps you busy down there?

Working with Catchment Groups.

Rebecca: I’m a Farm Environment Consultant, so I spend a lot of my time dealing with farmers and actually at the moment I’m working predominantly with a catchment group. It’s great to be dealing with farmers in the same area and focusing on the catchment within that region.

Bryan: And with catchment groups, it’s a system that really seems to be working quite well in a lot of places.

Rebecca: Yes, it is. What I’m enjoying about it is you’re getting a good idea of what farmers are really facing, the challenges within the catchment or sub-catchments, and then you’re able to be quite tailored and specific to those areas. So, you see a lot of common themes coming through when you’re talking to farmers in the same area, which then allows you to be quite specific and help the catchment group or farmers in the best way possible, all working together.

Bryan: Yes, and all for positive outcomes, really, isn’t it?

Rebecca: Yes, absolutely.

Nuffield research into collaboration.

Bryan: Now that kind of works in quite nicely with your Nuffield Scholarship, doesn’t it? Because you looked at collaboration for environmental gains.

Rebecca: Correct, yes. So actually, the catchment group I’m now working on, we’ve had an MPI funded project for the last two-and-a-half years, but that was established back in 2016. It came off the back of a plan change for the Hurunui District Landcare Group. It was a plan change for the Hurunui regional area. It was through that the collaboration or collaborative process was being worked through.

At that time, I was working across other areas in Canterbury, but they had the zone groups set up and the word collaboration kept coming up a lot. It was often used in the frames of how do we collaborate better, or why aren’t we able to collaborate on this? So, this word continued to come up and at the time I was involved in a few other things with Beef+LambNZ as well, and I thought, well, what’s happening globally and how can we better understand this? So that was really a key trigger for me to look at Nuffield.

Same, same but different.

Bryan: So what did you find when you went around the globe looking at this issue?

Rebecca: I looked at a lot of places within land use, but also outside of it. I met with some people in Silicon Valley, for example, because collaboration isn’t something that’s unique to agricultural land-based activities, it is something that is right across the board. What I found was there was often a common good or a common purpose, that people were trying to achieve.

The other thing that was common was that often there was sort of a burning platform, so some decisions were needing to be made and that was where collaboration was being used. But the other thing that stood out quite a lot was the word collaboration gets used regularly or often, but it might be partnership or cooperation that might be needed.

It’s understanding how you’re needing to work together and then working in the most appropriate way. There are some key differences between, say, a partnership, collaboration, and cooperation. So even though they’re just words, there is quite a difference there.

Bryan: Yeah, I guess in some ways people might need to work together to reach a singular goal and in other cases there are people doing the same thing who could get efficiencies if they work together.

Rebecca: Exactly. So, for example, cooperation might be working together for those efficiencies, but you’re working in isolation still. Whereas collaboration really is about coming together for a common good. So, let’s say you’re a catchment group with some dairy farmers and sheep and beef farmers and maybe some Iwi there as well – you might be all representing your certain areas, but once you start collaborating, it’s about that mutually beneficial area.

Let’s say a water body, that becomes the key purpose as opposed to what you might have been representing. That’s often where we get it a bit wrong because we’re still strongly aligned to what we were representing. It’s a change of focus.

Bryan: I guess if you bring other stakeholders into a situation, then what success looks like changes, doesn’t it? Because you’re sort of ticking boxes that you wouldn’t have ticked on your own.

The foundations of successful collaboration.

Rebecca: The other thing too is that is quite time consuming – collaboration. One thing I noticed was where there were some good examples of it abroad, a lot of time put into building the relationships, the understanding, getting on that common ground.

Often in New Zealand we were just rushing through that foundation piece and then with human nature, we’re very good at focusing on what you don’t agree on rather than what you do agree on.

We tend to get into the stuff we don’t agree on a bit too soon because that sort of foundational trust and understanding is not there yet. That was one of the key things we saw when it was successfully happening – there was a good base understanding of what was all agreed on and then sort of reflecting back on it as well. Like, are we still on the same track? Are we still trying to achieve the same goal? Has the goal changed? Because things can change when you start a project. It’s that conscious effort of reflecting and reviewing on the process.

Bryan: Is it just a matter of taking the time and getting an understanding of all the players involved? Or are there frameworks or structures you can put in place to help you along the way? Or both?

The importance of neutral facilitation.

Rebecca: Yeah, both. The other thing too was having someone that can facilitate it. A couple of examples that I saw where the facilitator worked effectively – they had government backgrounds, so they had been quite familiar about how the structure works within government. These were in areas like environmental regulation so that facilitator knew what needed to be bundled up to get it back to government.

They were very neutral with the parties that they were all dealing with. Having that person as neutral as possible in that Facilitation process – that was something that I observed coming back home. I’m just talking about the Environment Canterbury (ECAN) examples that I was dealing with at the time. But the Facilitators were often ECAN staff members, so they weren’t neutral in the process. There again, that trust piece wasn’t quite there with the stakeholders. The person that’s trying to pull together everyone’s thoughts and help with the direction of the group is pretty key as well.

Bryan: Catchment groups seem to work because you have the common goal. You have support from people who are like you, and they face the same challenges. You also have that kind of almost friendly competition thing going on. You don’t want to be the one who’s not doing the work, I guess. Is that fair?

Rebecca: Are you meaning like peer pressure?

Bryan: Sort of, yeah.

The strengths of Catchment Groups.

Rebecca: Yes but hopefully in a positive way. We’ve noticed that in the project that I’m working on now in the Hurunui, we’re doing a one-on-one approach. We’ve found that once we got to that critical mass, there were farmers that were just wanting to be involved because everyone else was and they didn’t want to be the odd ones out.

There’s absolutely that effect that catchment groups can have. I suppose it’s a bit of FOMO – people do want to be involved and it’s a good thing to be involved with as well, because to me, it’s sort of about putting all the pieces to the puzzle together. It’s a real strength of catchment groups as well, because you are across a common area, say a sub catchment – you can then work with everyone within that and that’s a real strength.

Bryan: Yeah, I guess it’s also a way of switching things from having to live up to regulations or expectations and turning it into, here are some goals we want to reach, and it will help us in these ways and so it’s more of a positive mindset, I guess.

Rebecca: It is. I think the beauty of a catchment group and working with the community is that you’re working with the people that live there and they want the best for the environment that they’re living in. Often there’s generational farmers there as well, or people living within those catchments, they’re not necessarily doing things intentionally wrong, but there’s some tweaks or improvements that can be made to get a better outcome.

That’s the beauty of a catchment group as well, because farmers are very good at dealing with what’s in their farm gate, but sometimes struggle beyond the farm gate. Where a catchment group also has a real strength, is around pulling together all those pieces of that puzzle to get an overview, to then help those farmers understand what occurs beyond the farm gate and how they can help to minimise those risks or improve the environment around them.

On Nuffield and Kellogg.

Bryan: Now, I think you are one of the first two-time scholars we’ve had on the podcast because you did the big one first at Nuffield, then you went on and did a Kellogg sometime later. Can you tell me about why you wanted to do that?

Rebecca: Sure. When I did my Nuffield, I was at a bit of a crossroads. Do I want to look more high level on New Zealand and its place in the world? I certainly felt at the time a Nuffield was more appropriate for what I was wanting to do than a Kellogg and so I was fortunate to get my Nuffield. That was 2017.

Fast forward about three years and I’d started my own business and we went into COVID, and I’d been an Associate Trustee on the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust as well. So, I got a bit more exposure to the Kellogg Programme and I was particularly interested in the second module, which is Wellington based, looking at how Wellington operates.

I thought it was a great opportunity to have a go at a Kellogg because I had started my own business – I knew the value of a network. And the cohort you have on Kellogg is a very broad network within Food and Fibre in New Zealand. That was appealing to me. Understanding Wellington or getting a bit of a front row seat into Wellington for a week in a sort of post COVID environment.

Professional and personal development.

Things have changed quite a lot and I’ve always been quite big on personal development, so I saw Kellogg as a great opportunity for me to do that within my own business. That was one of the key reasons I looked at a Kellogg and I did have people go,” …is this not (a step) backwards?” A few people made comments like that – and it’s like, no, they’re just very different programmes. They absolutely complement each other – they are standalone programmes.

I thoroughly enjoyed my Kellogg, and (as part of my research) I was able to collaborate between Iwi and Farmers in the Hurunui District where I’ve been working. So that was just an opportunity as well. I do quite like the research aspect as well in these programmes. I suppose, looking at a specific topic that I could do a bit of a deep dive into.

Bryan: As I was going to say, you came back for a second crack. So, you must really value the Rural Leaders ethos and programmes?

Rebecca: I absolutely do. I’m a big believer that if you ever put yourself into something, you will only get as much out of it as what you put into it. I think certainly the Kellogg is such a well put together programme, and that it was really appealing for me at the time. And having, as I said, started my own business and wanting to expand some networks into other areas as well – it was great.

Is the food and fibre sector collaborating well?

Bryan: So do you think in the last five or six years, that word collaborate, is it being used as intended now? Are we doing a better job at it in the Food and Fibre Sector?

Rebecca: I think we are. I must admit, every time I hear a news story or something like that and the word collaboration comes up, my ears certainly prick up. I think we are getting a lot better regarding how it’s being used, when it should be used, and what we need to do to make it effective. I do see improvements. I think we’ve still got a wee way to go, though, in ag. I think the last 18 months, probably twelve months, we’ve got a bit fragmented again.

That was another comment that came from people I was meeting abroad (on Nuffield). They’re like, “God, New Zealand is so small, how can you all not be on the same page together?” And you would think that, but we do seem to be quite good at that fragmentation within the sector. Hopefully 2023 might see us a little less fragmented. I think what’s good for the Food and Fibre Sector is good for New Zealand. We need to remember that.

Bryan: 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.

Dame Jenny Shipley: On Leadership. On Point.

Listen to "Dame Jenny Shipley - On leadership. On Point." on Spreaker.

On leadership. On point.

Bryan Gibson, editor of Farmers Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, Farmers Weekly Editor. This week, I have a very special guest, Dame Jenny Shipley. How’s it going?

Dame Jenny Shipley, 1984 Kellogg Scholar, Bay of Islands.
Very well, thank you.

Bryan: Good. And where are you calling in from today?

Dame Jenny: Well, I live in Russell in the Bay of Islands now. And while I still do a lot of traveling domestically and when I can internationally, this is where we call home.

Bryan: Oh, wonderful. The winterless north.

Dame Jenny: The winterless north, and it couldn’t be a greater contrast really, from my beautiful Canterbury electorate. But even learning to garden in the north is an entirely different process. But I’m enjoying it very much.

Bryan: Now, you grew up down in the Deep South, is that right? And spent a lot of your political career at least, in Mid–Canterbury?

Strong South Island roots.

Dame Jenny: Yes, I was born in Gore and my father was a Presbyterian Minister in Pukerau at the time. So many of those early roots were in a truly rural area. And interestingly, I’m going back there this weekend to take part in a nice ceremony. So I stay connected with a lot of those old roots, even though I’m now living somewhere else.

I spent a lot of my time in the South Island, and the early part of my life, in Nelson and that also has transformed. I don’t think there was a grapevine in Blenheim, or in the Marlborough area when I was a child. It’s a magnificent example of intense of horticulture today.

As a student I went to Canterbury and met Burton and the rest is history. We farmed and then I went into politics and had the great privilege of representing one of the most productive electorates in the country in that central and Mid-Canterbury area.

Bryan: Such a powerhouse of a rural area isn’t it?

Dame Jenny: Very much, yes.

Kellogg and the desire to lead.

Bryan: You connected with Rural Leaders for the first time doing a Kellogg Scholarship back in the early eighties, is that correct?

Dame Jenny: Yes. We were young and farming, and I was already involved in a lot of community leadership. At that time the challenges for agriculture in New Zealand were huge. The change was immense, the economic viability was demanding, interest rates were horrifying. Rural communities were very active, with a lot of emphasis on leadership.

I got given the opportunity to apply for the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, which was an emerging force at that stage. I forget whether it was year three or four that I was a member of – but it was a fabulous experience and in many respects it clarified my desire to lead.

The Programme taught me a lot about what else I needed to focus on in order to be effective. But it definitely gave me the strength and sense of impetus to get on – initially as a Counsellor in my local Malvern area and then into politics.

Is sector history repeating?

Bryan: We talk about the early to mid-eighties in the farming world. It was obviously, as you say, such a disruptive time. Many people think that we’re going through a similar sort of thing now. Do you see those comparisons?

Dame Jenny: Well, I think the commodity cycle is much stronger at the moment, although it’s clearly able to be volatile depending on what happens both at home and abroad.

The other difference, I think, is that agriculture today in New Zealand is not dependent on government subsidies. At that stage you’ll recall, there were multiple transitions going on – the support for agriculture was being removed, the markets were extremely volatile and the farming community was really facing challenges on multiple fronts.

Even in my early years as a Member of Parliament, the residual effects of that period flowed through – it was a very difficult period. Today I think that while there are huge challenges coming up economically, I personally think the agricultural sector is in a very resilient state.

But what is different now, is that there are so many regulatory pressures coming on farming which I don’t think were present in our era. And so, yes, there are huge challenges, but I think the economic viability overall gives at least some ability for farmers to confront those. I think the leadership question is different too, though, and perhaps that’s something that needs to change. So it’s relevant for where we are now.

Bryan: How is that, do you think?

Dame Jenny: Well, when we were farming, all of us belonged to Federated Farmers. It was a widespread group. Husbands and wives turned up and it was an active process in most local communities. I’m not familiar with whether that’s the case now. But like many organisations, I think that they’ve become more professional.

But whether the grassroots element of representation is as strong, I don’t have such a feel for that. But I think that what we’re coming into is that we have to have both the agricultural leaders reflecting the experience of farmers on the ground and making the case very clearly about what can and can’t be done, and indeed what has been done.

We need to share our good news more often.

If I can just pause on this point for a moment. I’ve observed enormous change by farming in response to public pressures. I travel quite a lot around the country and have just have been down through the Waikato – right into the West Coast part of it.

One of the things that struck me over the last five years is that what started off as tree planting on agricultural land for emissions purposes, now the work around wetlands and the fencing of streams and things. New Zealanders can be very confident that the farming community is not only responding but leading in some of these areas.

To come back to the point, I think that for farming to advocate for itself, it’s not only advocating for what’s annoying and frustrating them, but there’s also a huge need for us as an agriculturally strong community to continue to share both the gains and the commitment of the agricultural community to farming well both for themselves, the community, and the future. I think that’s a big change.

When we were farming, many were just farming to survive. Now, I see farmers all over the place investing not only in best practice for themselves, but I do see a lot of change. I think the voice of that needs to be shared across the community much more broadly so that the urban New Zealand population both values agriculture and understands that it’s moving in response to many of the concerns that urban communities have.

Bryan: Farming, as you say, is always evolving for the most part in New Zealand because we are very good at it, and improving. That gets lost sometimes.

Dame Jenny: Well a lot of it is a social response. I mean, farmers will tell you that they are fencing streams and planting for their own benefit and the benefit of their own environment. But there’s a huge public good element in it which unless people either have a chance to see, or you share how much is being done, or see the change that’s going on.

A sector supporting New Zealand through tough times.

I think that urban-rural split has always been a risk in New Zealand and it’s one we can’t afford to give airtime too. Because, frankly, if you just thought that even in the COVID period, if we had not had a strong agricultural sector during the last three years when the global economy had been disrupted, New Zealand’s position economically would be far more dire than it is at the moment.

Tourism collapsed, a number of other productive areas were compromised and yet agriculture was able to carry a huge proportion of the earnings, as it’s always done. But thankfully, on a strong commodity cycle at this particular time, and again, I think we should name the value of agricultural exports. The effort agriculture puts into the New Zealand economy to support our way of life, in a broad, holistic sense – not a them and us sense.

We’re in this together, being the best we can be at home and selling the best we can abroad in a best practice sense. I think if we keep sharing that over and over again, there’ll be a better understanding between rural and urban communities.

Leadership needs to reflect the people on the ground.

Bryan: Just touching on what you mentioned earlier about how historically, people like Federated Farmers, organisations like that, had a very, kind of a, grassroots focus. It’s quite evident at the moment around the emissions pricing process that a large number of those grassroots farmers think that the farming leadership has, if not deserted them, then certainly not represented them well. What’s your take on how they go about that? And what are the challenges that those farming leaders have in engaging with the government on things like this?

Dame Jenny: Well look, I’d be the last one to criticise them because I know how hard it is. I have admired the agricultural leadership, that they have taken a more inclusive, let’s find solutions together approach. I have been involved in a number of significant working parties not only on emissions, but in a number of areas that I can think of which I’ve simply been a distant observer. But I’ve noticed that level of engagement.

The problem is, in any leadership model, if you aren’t both working with, and then reflecting the people on the ground who actually live agriculture every day and have to implement the stuff, not only physically but also economically, then you have to test whether your leadership is in isolation as opposed to being able to carry people forward.

I do think we have to support the leadership group because unless they are able to foot it with the officials and the government ministers and be supported at that level, then they’re clearly not serving their constituency anyway. But every organisation, and I don’t want to make a judgment on Federated Farmers because I simply am not close enough to it, but there have to be systems where it’s not only consultation.

Often we say, well, we consulted, or we sent out a document and gave them a chance to comment. I think that for people to genuinely become supporters of a regime, they have to have a deep sense of ownership. They need to be able to see themselves in whatever is proposed as opposed to seeing something being imposed on them, which they don’t or can’t relate to.

So the test of high quality engagement and consultation has got to be that measure of – can the people we’re representing see themselves in the proposed solutions or are we just saying, well, regardless of what you think, you’ve got to be there in five or ten years’ time. That’s not easy to do. I think in New Zealand’s circumstances, whether it’s agriculture or Maori – Pakeha relations, or any of the other demanding spaces, we’ve just got to put the time and work into it.

The power of industry at the highest level of decision-making.

Bryan: Now, just digging into that a little more. I mean, you were obviously in central government for a long time. What’s it like in those meetings with industry? How much power do the industry leaders from the agricultural community have when they sit down around the table with the likes of MPs, Prime Ministers, officials?

Dame Jenny: The answer is, it depends. And I’m thinking back on two or three occasions where the agricultural sector and governments were working intensely. When a government decides, for example, to break up monopolies, I think the conversations are quite demanding.

I recall at the time that we decided to break up a number of public organisations, the electricity sector and of course the dairy industry was in the line of sight. That was never an easy conversation and the agricultural leaders, and particularly the directors of the original company very much resisted that. In those moments, you’ve got to put the economic argument of why these particular sectors needed to be able to face competition, not only in their growers interest, but also in New Zealand’s market in the world. The resilience and flexibility to attract investment.

We were trying to grow the New Zealand economy and grow the efficiency of the New Zealand economy in the world. So to some extent, in those big strategic moments, it’s tense, because sometimes you’ll have agricultural leaders with you as champions. Sometimes you’ll have small players wanting you to act and take on the big players.

So there’s many dynamics going on.

Usually before those moments, if it’s a strategic question, the ministers will have debated the relative merits of this before they go barging in and say, well, look, the government has decided to strategically move forward and create competition in the agricultural marketing sector, or whatever it is. And then you try and engage.

It’s a wee bit like the emissions environment where you’re having to say, look, we have to work out a way in which to change. It is going to be different from what is the case now, so let’s try and work out where the mechanisms are and how we can move forward.

Sometimes you’re responding to requests from the agricultural sector to solve problems and then it’s straightforward. Your meet as equals at the table. You put the facts on the table, you get the officials to work through and come up with a solution. Often in the majority of cases, things just get sorted out. But in the big, complex policy issues, where big change is required, there’s higher degrees of tension, but generally you get there in time.

The Kellogg Programme and leadership pathways.

Bryan: Now, you mentioned to me before we came on that as well as the Kellogg Programme, you’ve been involved in a number of other leadership programmes. Do you think there are good pathways into leadership positions in New Zealand at the moment?

Dame Jenny: The Kellogg Programme is fantastic. I’d encourage any community to keep identifying young leaders and to promote them into those Programmes. Often people think, these people are too young. I must have been, I don’t know, 32 or thereabouts when I went into Kellogg. Often at that stage, you haven’t identified your leadership purpose and your particular intentions as to how you will use your leadership skills. But others often see leadership potential in those young people.

There’s no question that our political environment, our economic and social environment, need younger people coming through all the time in order for us to be able to shape the future successfully. I would encourage people to look for those chances and look for individuals who they can sponsor or promote and make sure they support them. Because often these are the young people, male and female, who have got kids and are trying to run a farm and all that. So the programmes themselves are a big commitment, but it’s worth it.

Supporting leadership development.

The other programme, I was actually involved in establishing, was Rural Women Stepping Out, I think we called it at the beginning. It was run out of Lincoln and was only initially a two or three day – and sometimes only a one day programme.

But it was at a time where there was huge economic stress on many farming communities. Lots of women came and had lots of examples of how women entrepreneurs were establishing small rural businesses to supplement the income of farms at that time.

Much of it was in the cottage industries, or services – many aspects of agriculture. I think that sharing and bringing together helped a lot of those women sustain the pressure of that period. I guess my point here is, rural communities are very important to New Zealand and keeping both men and women well and supporting them to be as engaged as they can be, both in running the farms and running the rural communities of which they’re a part.

Any support in leadership and leadership development is well worth the investment. So whether it’s the leaders at universities or the sponsors that are the companies who make these things happen, so that these families can make the choice, I think agriculture and New Zealand benefit from programmes like Rural Women, the Kellogg Programme and the Field Scholarships. All of those platforms are invaluable in terms of the legacy and the investment that they’ve made.

Bryan: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow. 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

Katie Vickers: Banking on a sustainable future.

Listen to "Katie Vickers - Banking on a sustainable future." on Spreaker.

Ideas That Grow: Katie Vickers: Banking on a sustainable future.

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, the Farmers weekly editor. This week, I’m with Katie Vickers. How’s it going?

Katie Vickers – 2019 Kellogg Scholar.

Good, Bryan.

Bryan: And where are you calling in from?

Katie: I’m ringing in from Fairlie today.

Bryan: And that’s where you call home at the moment?

Katie: Yes. Recently moved down here from Christchurch. So getting back into the rural life. But loving it.

Bryan: And you are currently working for Rabobank as a Sustainability Manager, is that right?

Supporting producers through changing times.

Katie: Yes, I am. My role is around helping to support the banks sustainability ambitions and supporting our clients, in what is a reasonably challenging environment out there – just helping and supporting them, understanding what changes are coming and how that will impact their businesses and I guess wrapping our arms around them and helping them through that.

Bryan: You’re right, there’s a lot of stuff going on in that space that farmers have to deal with. So it’s kind of cool that the banks are arm in arm with them facing up to that challenge, isn’t it?

Katie: Yes. And I guess the changes are pretty complex, but we probably need to start thinking slightly differently around how we tackle some of those challenges.

One of the reasons I wanted to work for a bank was that you can see that they’ve got quite a strong lead in terms of how they can support clients. I guess at Rabobank we’re committed to the agri-sector and I love that kind of passion they’ve got for the sector.

Our role is around how we support them, but also how we link them up with the right knowledge and networks. Because it’s such a complex topic and so different for every farming system. So it’s important for us to be able to understand their unique needs and make sure that we’ve got the right toolkit to support them in making good decisions for their business.

Researching food nutrients on Kellogg Programme.

Bryan: Have you always worked in the agri-food sector or is it something you’ve evolved into over time?

Katie: No, I’ve always been in the agri-sector. I grew up on a sheep and beef farm just north of Kaikoura, went to Lincoln University and then decided after Lincoln, that I definitely wanted to stay in the agri-sector.

So I managed to land a job at Farmland’s Cooperative, and I worked there for eight years. About six of those years was actually in marketing, so I’ve come from a marketing and comms background and then spent my last two years there in a sustainability role. Then just recently moved to the bank, so it’s been an awesome journey.

Bryan: Now, while that was going on, you applied yourself to the Kellogg Programme, and you took a look at nutrients in food. Is that correct?

Producing food to positively impact human and the planet’s health.

Katie: Yes. So my topic was around putting the food back into food. The question I was looking to answer was what would it take for our primary industry to produce nutrient dense food? I think the reason why I wanted to explore that was I’ve always been brought up with a really holistic approach. I care deeply about the health of our planet and health of our people.

I’ve got a twin sister who is a holistic health practitioner, so she works on the how do we help people’s health, because we’ve got a massive crisis in that space.

So my passion has always been, what role does agriculture have to play in that? How do we work with our soils better to influence the food that we eat, which in turn influences the health of our people? It’s a massive topic. It was hard to even scratch the surface on a lot of that stuff.

I did a lot of interviews and research with soil scientists, nutritionists and industry leaders, and I got some really cool insights out of that. No real answers, but lots of different things to consider.

Bryan: People would think the food that New Zealand food producers make is nutrient dense and natural and grass fed and all that sort of thing already. So is there more that can be done at the farm level to enhance that?

Kellogg research and the impact of soil on the food we produce.

Katie: I’m not an expert in this space and I will never claim to be, but my thinking was really expanded when I read Nicole Masters’ book – For the Love of Soil. She talks about the relationship that we have with the soil. In this day and age, there’s so much more we’re learning about the soil and the microbiology of the soil, and the knowledge we have of that is growing.

As we understand more, we need to do more on-farm. So the role that my research played was understanding that today we use a lot of synthetic fertiliser, and we have quite a strong reliance on that, and that hasn’t been a terrible thing, but moving forward, how do we understand how to use our soils better so we don’t need to have such a reliance on some of those synthetic inputs coming into our farm systems.

I you look at the kind of environment we’re in today with the rising input costs, it’s about how do we create more resilient farming systems, and having a different lens on what that might look like in the future. So the research I did was, okay, how do we understand our soil more to understand the impact it has on the food that we produce?

Bryan: And what sort of insights did you get from some of the people you interviewed?

The shift to quality over quantity and premium pricing.

Katie: One of the really interesting ones I did, I didn’t actually interview him, but I did a whole lot of research on the work that Dan Kittredge has done out of the States. He’s got a business called The BioNutrient Food Association.

His role is looking at some tools consumers could use in the future to be able to scan Apple A and Apple B as an example and see the different nutrient composition of those apples and therefore make a decision as to why they might be paying $2 more for Apple A because it’s got a higher nutrient profile.

Those tools aren’t in market and in bulk yet, but I have absolutely no doubt they will be in the future. So that’s the kind of thing could change the landscape of farming, when consumers have got the power in their wallet to be able to make those decisions, to say, well, you know, I want to know why I’m paying more for this apple, because I’m getting the nutrients that I need. With that, you’re hoping there’s been less environmental degradation to produce that product, whether that be apples or meat or whatever.

Bryan: Yes, I guess that sort of thinking has become more prevalent with the pandemic, with people really thinking a lot about what they eat and keeping their base level health as high as it can be. So it’s really top of mind for a lot of people.

A food system under stress.

Katie: For sure. I think it’s pretty obvious our food system is under stress. And whether it’s talking about a climate crisis, a human health crisis or health crisis, a biodiversity collapse, there’s all these different things that play in to each other. One of the key points I like to think about is that we don’t want to look at these things in isolation.

If you look at the human health crisis we’ve got, and even the latest pandemic, these pieces have a real interconnectedness and it’s quite a different way to think about it.

I think the more that we think about the connection between the crisis of our planet and the crisis of our human health at the moment, it might help us to think differently around how we handle these things in the future.

Bryan: That sort of thinking ticks a few boxes at once, as you say. It can do more for people’s health – and a focus on soil can also do more in terms of freshwater quality and in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity. All sorts of things do come together as one.

A lot of people, when you talk about, say, regenerative agriculture or related fields, a farmer might say, well, I’ve yet to see the value-add for me. So if I’m going to reduce production to adopt these things, I need to make that up somewhere else.

So how does a sustainability manager at Rabobank approach these things?

Planting seeds – one conversation at time.

Katie: That’s a great question. I guess my personal mission is to just plant little seeds in people’s minds around how they think about these things. I guess I’ve always believed that you’ve just got to approach it conversation by conversation and people will take different things from the conversations that they have with you.

My role at the bank, is to just support and understanding and what role Rabobank needs to play in this space and how we support our clients. That’s going to look different for every client we have.

We have some clients that are in the regenerative space and really loving it and seeing benefits. We’ve got others that will want to be exploring it and others are saying, that’s not for me – there’s no right or wrong, it’s just how do we help create resilient farming systems in the future and make sure that people are profitable, sustainable and enjoying the life they lead. Because at the end of the day, if they’re not doing that, there’s not a huge amount of value in it.

So I guess my role is just to have these conversations and I see business having a really important role in influencing the way we think. And as a young leader, I guess we can help create the future and it’s important that we are part of that. I want to be part of creating that future.

Katie Vickers, Kellogger, Rabobank Sustainability Manager.

Bryan: I guess Rabobank being a global, agriculturally focused bank would have a sort of a long term view and a strategy around where things are going and what needs to be done to continue to do business in this space. So that would feed into a lot of the work that you’re doing?

Katie: Yeah. We are lucky to have that global aspect. I guess it’s one of the pros of working for such an awesome business because we’ve got all these insights from across the globe to help our thinking. But I definitely reckon New Zealand is leading the way, particularly in the climate space and understanding at a farm systems level, what we’re dealing with.

Bryan: Yeah, it is. And another thing I guess we need to remember is that it’s not just a value proposition, it’s increasingly become a cost of entry and market access, isn’t it?

Katie: Yeah. I was late with that because I’m not a technical expert, but I come from a marketing background but when you have tricky conversations with people who might not agree with some of the changes that are happening, or are struggling to comprehend it, which I totally empathise with.

One of the pieces I always lead with is the market. We export 90% of what we produce here in New Zealand. So whether we like it or not, what’s happening, what consumers are demanding and what the market is saying, is really important to how we respond. So we have to understand those market signals to make sure we’re producing what’s going to be valuable and what’s needed from our customers.

Bryan: Yes, I used to work a little bit in PR as well, (we used) the old adage, if you’re explaining, you’re losing, quite often. It’s got to be obvious and it’s got to be transparent. You’ve got to front foot these things, otherwise someone will front foot it for you.

Katie: Exactly.

Bryan: So what made you apply to the Kellogg Programme in the first place?

Kellogg, equipping today’s leaders for tomorrow’s challenges.

Katie: It was part of my development plan when I was at Farmlands, and I am eternally grateful for the opportunity to do the Programme. It was such an important time … the Programme really helped to widen my thinking around what influence business could have in helping to solve some of the challenges I could see coming in the agriculture sector. Having the opportunity to do that was just incredible.

I know that I probably wouldn’t be where I am today if I hadn’t had the opportunity to do that Programme. I guess it was the people we were exposed to and the time that was carved out to really explore some of the ideas that came up – that was the really valuable stuff for me.

Bryan: I’ve been to one or two of those Kellogg alumni conferences, and just the feeling in the room is quite different to a lot of places. You know what I mean? There’s such a good sort of camaraderie between the alumni of the Programme.

Staying connected with the Kellogg network.

Katie: Yes. I think for me, I’m a people person, so the connections with people in the industry were just phenomenal. Even now, if I really want to talk to X, Y or Z to find some information and you said you did Kellogg, people are so willing to talk to you. I guess it just gives you the opportunity to speak to people who will challenge your thinking.

As I’ve grown up and matured, I love having that. I love having people who will challenge my own thinking because it helps deepen my knowledge and my thoughts. Being able to have the opportunity or the exposure to speak to different people and have different perspectives is just so invaluable.

Bryan: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders Podcast in partnership with Massey and Lincoln University AgMardt and FoodHQ.

Ben Todhunter: Farming, conservation and Nuffield.

Listen to "Ben Todhunter - Farming, conservation and Nuffield." on Spreaker.

Ideas That Grow: Ben Todhunter, 2006 Nuffield Scholar.

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I am Bryan Gibson, the Farmer’s Weekly Editor, and this week I’m joined by Ben
Todhunter. How’s it going?

Ben Todhunter – 2006 Nuffield Scholar, Rakaia, Canterbury.

Yeah, good thanks Bryan. Yep.

Farming, Conservation and Nuffield.

Bryan: And where are you calling in from?

Ben: I’m at home on the farm, Cleardale on the Rakaia Gorge, about an hour west of Christchurch.

Bryan: Your family’s been there a while, I understand.

Ben: We’ve been here for close to a hundred years. The boundaries have moved around a little bit in that time, but yeah. I’m the fourth generation farming this location.

Bryan: Can you tell us a little bit about the place, what your farm looks like and what you farm?

Ben: So we’re on the north slopes of Mt Hutt. The farm runs down to the Rakaia River. It’s got a big chunk of boundary with the Rakaia River. It’s got loessal soils, thousand mill rainfall, lies to the northeast – so it’s got a good aspect. It’s well located, running about five and a half thousand ewes and 300 breeding cows, finishing all replacements. We do a little bit of cropping, milling wheat and feed barley and a significant genetic business in sheep and cattle.

Bryan: So a pretty big operation.

Ben: A lot of farms are getting bigger nowadays, but yeah, there’s a lot going on and it takes a bit of keeping the moving parts ticking away and working properly.

Bryan: Have you been involved in the family farm right through, or have you been away and done other stuff?

Ben: Been back on the farm since about 1992. I’ve been overseas, did a Master’s in Dublin and I’ve worked for an Irish dairy cooperative. Done a bit of farm work in other parts of the world and worked on other farms. My father’s hips were buggered and I gave him a hand, then and I did a little bit of lecturing at university while I was trying to farm, but I’ve been at home ever since.

Nuffield Scholarship - integration of conservation into farming.

Bryan: We were talking before we came on about your Nuffield Scholarship report. You did it a little while ago now, when was that?

Ben: 2006.

Bryan: You took a look at integrating conservation into farm systems. Can you tell me a little bit about why you chose that?

Ben: Yeah, absolutely. At that stage I was representing high country farmers/pastoral lease farmers in their battles with the Crown really. Helen Clark was very keen on a network of high-country parks. The model that was being explored at that stage was to separate conservation and farming.

I thought the model was wrong. It didn’t fit high-country landscapes at all. So I wanted to look at that model and how it was carried out in other parts of the world to see if there was anything I could bring back that we might be able to learn from to help those farmers.

Bryan: From my reading, you mentioned some work that was going on in the United States that seemed like it was achieving the right results.

Ben: The bits that were interesting to me were if you look at how the conservation-farmer battles go in our country, if a conservationist like Fish and Game or Forest and Bird wants to get an outcome, they almost have to paint the existing owners of the land or of a property in a bad light so that they get some legislation change.

So it becomes a contentious battle. And that’s a bit how the system is. So the insight that I got in the states was more around where there’s clear property rights and those actors or participants are forced to talk to each other and then they will negotiate, inform outcomes that benefit both people rather than becoming polarised positions. So I think that principle was quite a useful one to carry forward. If you understand what I mean when I say that.

Bryan: Totally. In some ways, a lot of people want the same things, but it’s better to sit down with the other affected party and map a positive path forward rather than tell on them and try and get someone else to hit them with a stick, I guess.

Learning from the United States.

Ben: Yeah, very much so. You do have to remember the history of the settlement for each place in that respect. So when the west was settled in the States, it was settled around the rivers and those sort of places and that was where a lot of the biodiversity was, so their ownership vested with the farmers.

Whereas in New Zealand, a lot of the biodiversity has been retained in the wild areas, so slightly different settlement, but I think the principles are still reasonably applicable going forward.

So some of the really good outcomes you got through there were spawning habitat for fish, ensuring there was sufficient water in the creek at those times. So paying the irrigators not irrigate at that time, but the owner needed to pay them in the dry years. So it created quite fixable solutions and reasonably efficient solutions to some problems without the contention and those things we seem to get in our discussions.

Bryan: And in the time since you wrote this, how do you think things have been? Is there any change for better or worse?

Conservation and finding the value add.

Ben: I’m optimistic there’s been a slight maturing of approaches between NGOs. I’m not sure that the farmers themselves have matured in their approach on how to deal with some of these things.

One of the solutions that I looked at was market-based solutions to some of these issues where you’d pay a higher price for products. And that’s a bit of what we’re working with through the New Zealand Merino Company, to try and link positive climate action on the ground through to customers. That’s something that I’ve always been interested in, but it does seem really hard to get and maintain a premium for that over time.

Bryan: That is something that a lot in the farming world debate whether the value add is actually there for doing some of the sustainability and traceability and all that sort of thing.

Ben: So with a lot of the wool that we’re getting from Merino, we are getting significant premiums for the ethical wool that’s treated with good animal welfare standards in the current market. So there are some premiums with specific customers at certain times.

Bryan: That’s good to hear. So what made you want to do a Nuffield Scholarship? What drew you to it?

Why Nuffield?

Ben: I’ve always been interested in what happens outside of New Zealand in a wider sphere of the world. I probably didn’t have the capacity to do it at the time, but you probably never do. I always enjoy being around people that like to make change, that actually make things happen and think about the world and have got some energy to do that. The Nuffield people are certainly people who will question things and can make change.

Bryan: The actual travel and that sort of thing, the process of doing it, what was that like?

Ben: Vaughan Templeton was the other scholar in that year, we had a conference in the Netherlands in the Rabobank headquarters and met all the other Nuffield scholars from around the world. That was an amazing experience. Then we traveled for six weeks through Europe, the States and Canada with a bunch of Australians in a minivan – an amazing experience as well.

You get into a whole lot of agricultural businesses, spend a week in Washington, D.C. learning how that country operates – or doesn’t operate. Going to some of the bigger flower markets in the Netherlands like the Ellesmere Flower Market. The Dutch people are really good at logistics.

Looking at the scale of the agricultural production that happens in America and the scale of the systems and the specialisation that goes on in some of those businesses compared to our generalisation over here. Understanding from the other farmers that the issues are common around the world. Labour, environmental impacts, markets, profitability, succession, all those issues are common in some respects. So learning about that and stuff. It’s an amazing experience.

Bryan: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow. 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.

Lynsey Stratford: Changing how we work for better outcomes.

Listen to "Changing how we work – a Nuffield Scholar’s perspective." on Spreaker.

Ideas That Grow: Lynsey Stratford, 2021 Nuffield Scholar.

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, editor of Farmer’s Weekly. Today, I’m talking to former lawyer, consultant, and dairy farmer, Lynsey Stratford. How’s it going?

Lynsey Stratford – 2021 Nuffield Scholar, Curio Bay, Southland.

Good thanks. Nice to talk to you.

Digging deeper with a Nuffield Scholarship.

Bryan: What have you been up to?

Lynsey: I’ve been up in Christchurch with Rural Leaders, to celebrate the end of the scholarship programme for the 2020s and the 2021s.

Bryan: Fantastic. As you mentioned you are a recent scholar. What made you choose the Nuffield Scholarship?

Lynsey: To be honest, I applied just after our first COVID lockdown. Like everybody, I’d been thinking about what I enjoy doing during that time – being stuck inside. I love to travel and learn new things. I’ve always looked at the Scholarship and thought that the stories from previous scholars sounded like a great experience and opportunity.

I didn’t really think I’d get a scholarship, but I thought, what the heck, let’s give it a go, and if nothing else it’ll be an interesting experience. I was very surprised and honored to be selected as a scholar for 2021.

Bryan: And what sort of area did you want to study?

Lynsey: I love working with people in the primary sector. I went into the scholarship thinking I would look at health and safety and providing better workplaces for people that are more productive and engaging for better health and wellbeing outcomes.

My project ended up being called ‘Super Humans, Not Superheroes’. It looked at how we do all this fabulous stuff in the sector, but we’re probably asking a bit too much of ourselves. We expect to be superhuman, and our teams too.

With a slightly different approach to structuring work, we could support better outcomes that are more engaging, create better work, more productivity, and still improve the health and safety of our people.

Challenging and changing mindsets toward on-farm workplace safety.

Bryan: Working in the farming world, it’s a relatively dangerous place and it can be somewhat isolating at times. What sort of strategies do people need to try to work into their businesses to make it better for people?

Lynsey: I guess the good thing is most are low, or no-cost, so you can make quite big changes without spending a lot of money. The key to it all is mindset.

What I found was that farmers have some assumptions that aren’t very helpful. We accept the fact that work might be dangerous. We assume there’s nothing we can do about it. And that’s not right. There are changes we can make, but those assumptions and those mindsets have been deeply held for quite some time.

Farmers don’t think they’ll ever get hurt. They think other people might. Generally, we don’t think that we are prone to accidents. So, we don’t really take any steps to manage the risks that there are in our work. We tend to normalise the fact that it is a dangerous occupation and so we don’t try and challenge that by changing how we work.

If you’ve got family or team members who think that way, that’s a good place to start. We need people to help us understand that there are things that we can do to organise work better. So, lots of the time, we’ll be told what to do, but not necessarily the why or the how. And that’s just good team communication.

We shouldn’t expect people to just know this stuff, but rather teach them and support them as they develop skills.

Bryan: I guess an engaged work team is probably going to not only be more productive, but also be happier and safer, would you expect?

An engaged farm team means thriving workplaces and better outputs.

Lynsey: Absolutely. There’s some shocking statistics from Gallup, who looked at engagement across the world. For New Zealand, only 20% of our workforce, and this is across all sectors, is fully engaged. If you’ve got a team of five people, that’s only one giving everything they’ve got.

So, yeah, if we can tap into engagement, it’s better for people. They feel like they’ve got some control and they’re growing – they like to be there. So, if you’re an employer, those people will go that extra mile for you because they want to be at work and they feel passionate about it.

And engagement is, if they feel you care about them, that they’ve got some control over how they themselves can organise their work. That they’re growing and developing – those are all things that we can improve if we start to think differently about how we organise work.

Bryan: I guess what you’ve just been talking about feeds into the ‘why’ you’re there. If there’s a bigger goal that everyone is working towards, then that can help, can’t it?

Lynsey: I guess that’s where we’ve gone a bit wrong. In the past we’ve focused on compliance, but we haven’t seen these wider benefits of good work. And there’s some interesting stuff that’s been done by the Business Leaders’ Health & Safety Forum by Hillary Bennett. It said that if you improve how you set up work, train people, you’ve got good processes, so they understand their role, and their responsibility, and how to change how work gets done – if you do all those things well, you improve mental health as well.

So, that’s another component of this, that we’re looking at wellbeing as well as physical health and safety.

Bryan: People who are engaged, feeling good about themselves are probably going to produce better work and be safer when they do it, aren’t they?

Lynsey: Yeah. And be on the thriving end of the spectrum of mental health, instead of the just surviving space – or not surviving at all. So, that’s what we want. We want good work that sets us up for thriving people and great farming.

Bryan: So, you’ve just finished then?

A different kind of Nuffield Scholarship experience.

Lynsey: Yes. We had an experience that was interrupted somewhat by COVID. So, it’s been a very weird scholarship experience because it’s kind of backwards. Usually, you do your international travel, and then you produce your report. Ours will be the other way around. But I think our experience, although different, has been just as good.

What we did was travel as a cohort. So, the 2021 scholars linking in with the 2020 scholars. We traveled through New Zealand, from Northland right down to where I farm in Curio Bay, Southland. We did the length and breadth of New Zealand together.

Then we did our research independently, but with as much as we could face-to-face. A lot of it had to be remote via Zoom. So, now I get to go and do my international travel through August, September, and October.

Bryan: You might want a rewrite afterwards!

Lynsey: I think that’s the aim. We kind of validate what we’ve seen, and if there’s anything we need to change, we’ll revisit.

Bryan: And that’s exciting. I mean, the travel component is a big part of the scholarship. Where are you off to?

Lynsey: My group goes to Japan, Belgium, Ireland, and California.

Bryan: Well, that’s an exciting thing to look forward to.

Lynsey: Yeah, it is. It’ll be a Northern Hemisphere trip in the summer. So, that’s also quite exciting now, as we sit here in Invercargill.

Bryan: When you’re not knocking out your report as part of your Nuffield Programme, what does life look like for you?

Lynsey: I’ve been married to a Kiwi dairy farmer for nearly 20 years now. Being on farm with him was a big part of life until recently. We sold our farm effective 1st of June. Now, we’re kind of redefining where we go and what we do, but I’m also a mum, which is very important to me.

I’ve got two children that I like to focus on. I like to try and support them with school things and support our local community too. And then I also have a small consulting business that helps primary sector businesses – but all sorts of businesses manage their people.

From cows to consulting – a farmer advising farmers.

Bryan: What sort of consulting or advice do you offer businesses?

Lynsey: So it’s interesting because I started out as an employment lawyer in the UK. There I was focused on compliance and getting agreements, policies, procedures and following all the legal requirements.

I still do all those things, but I’m much more focused on trying to improve work setup so that we’ve got engaged teams, great communication, good processes. We’re training people and developing them, making sure that the behavior we’ve in the workplace is setting up a great culture that engages people. So, I’ve moved away from just focusing on the compliance.

Bryan: I think that’s a move the agricultural and horticultural industries in New Zealand need to complete still. A lot of the reaction I get at the newspaper to health and safety reform, or regulation is that it’s just a hassle, a box-ticking exercise, whereas if you do change that mindset into creating a space where everyone can thrive, then that’s when the goal is going to be reached.

Lynsey: That’s one of the things I concluded in my research. It has been sold to us as a compliance exercise – but it takes a lot of resource to change mindsets. It’s not that easy. And so, the easier thing to do is to set us up for compliance, make sure we’ve got the plans in place. But if we really want to make change, it’s that mindset that we need to focus on. We need resources to do that.

We need great people connecting farmers with good information that helps them understand the opportunity and ‘the why’ for them, whatever it is. That then supports them to develop the skills they need. And it’s not something that we can nail in one workshop or one interaction. The resourcing really needs to be there, and it needs to be long term. We’re talking about generational change if we want to change mindsets.

I guess I’ll just give a shout out to Ben McLachlan. He’s a 2020 scholar and his report is about mindsets that help us change. He’s looking at the growth mindset, which I found was critical to getting great workplaces.

A workplace where we’ve got a growth mindset is one where we understand that people can develop new ways of thinking and new skills if we give them the opportunity and the right support. I was stoked when I saw his work, as it aligns nicely with mine as well.

Bryan: That leads into my next question about the community that being part of the Rural Leaders team builds among those who are working through the same cohort?

Lynsey: We were lucky. Talking to previous scholars, they have often got their scholarship, briefly met the New Zealand cohort, then gone overseas and developed relationships internationally – but not quite as tight a relationship with the New Zealand scholars.

I think we’ve been lucky that we got that chance to spend time together, because of COVID. It’s the silver lining. It’s been amazing to see the projects that the scholars came up with across those two cohorts. Some of the best opportunities were the discussions that we had in the van as we toured New Zealand visiting leading businesses. Thanks to all those scholars who talked to me and shared their views.

Bryan: Excellent. So, the programme is something that you’d recommend to other people?

Lynsey: Absolutely. It’s not easy. To do anything like this where you are basically challenging things that you thought or your beliefs in how the world works, that has been a challenge. But it’s been a unique opportunity too. I just can’t think where you’d get the chances that we got to visit all these amazing businesses.

We went to certain Rocket and Aerospace businesses. I didn’t even know we had these kinds of businesses in New Zealand. If you want to stretch your assumptions and learn some new things and meet some awesome people, I thoroughly recommend it.

Bryan: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast. 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.

The future of food and fibre is in the hands of our bold and our grounded people – those who give back to their communities and industries.

Sound like you?

Register your interest to find out more.

Julian Raine:
The apple of a horticulture robot’s eye.

Julian Raine podcast_apple orchard_featured image

Ideas That Grow: Julian Raine, 1997 Nuffield Scholar.

Julian Raine is a 1997 Nuffield Scholar who quietly gets on with things worth shouting about.

Julian runs a mixed Dairy and Horticulture operation and no matter what he’s producing, the one constant is innovation. From robots to getting back to milk in glass, Julian has an entrepreneur’s motivation and an innovator’s foresight.

In this podcast, Julian talks with Farmer’s Weekly Editor Bryan Gibson about his diverse operation, some of the challenges he faces and some of the innovations he’s making to meet them – including moving to robot-ready on horticultural sites.

Julian also talks about his Nuffield travel, what he learned and how his research played a role in helping shape an industry.

The interview took place in May 2022 and the version below was edited for clarity. Listen to the podcast above for the original conversation.

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, editor of the Farmer’s Weekly. And today we are talking to Julian Raine. How’s it going?

Julian Raine – 1997 Nuffield Scholar, Dairy and Horticulture farmer/grower, Nelson.

Good. Thanks, Bryan.

The apple of a robot’s eye.

Bryan: And where are you calling in from today?

Julian: I’m in Nelson. We have a farming operation, which includes dairy and horticulture, just south of Nelson in the Tasman region.

Bryan: That’s quite a diverse business you got going there?

Julian: Yes, it is. The agricultural bit has been in the family for 180 years, so we’ve been around a while. Whereas the horticultural bit, I started with my business partners about 40 something years ago.

Innovating in a diverse operation.

Bryan: What do you focus on in the horticulture side of things?

Julian: We have about 200 hectares of apples. I’m just trying to do the quick numbers off the top of my head – about 40 hectares of berries, all boysenberries. About 45 hectares of kiwifruit, and about five hectares of a new crop for us, feijoas.

Bryan: Fantastic. And how have things been going this year?

Julian: It’s been a good year in terms of growing. Been a lot more difficult to get things harvested with the shortage of staff. We completed harvest nearly a couple of months ago for all crops, so that’s good to have that behind us, although we were still packing apples well into July.

There’s plenty of challenges with shipping and trying to get containers. We were running about a month behind with our shipping program, so that’s been a bit of a worry.

Bryan: You haven’t had any of the weather or climate related yield issues they’ve had up in the North Island?

Julian: No. No, we’ve been a bit fortunate thankfully, there was enough to contend with from COVID.

Bryan: And the agriculture side of things, can you just tell me a little bit about that?

Julian: Yes. We operate a fresh milk business. We deliver to about 3,000 households in the top of the South Island, Marlborough-Nelson-Tasman. We operate two dairy farms, and we buy and milk from another two dairy farmers.

Bryan: So, it’s direct to the consumer.

Julian: Yes. The home delivery is to the letter box, or to the back door, or front door. To cafes, restaurants. And we have several vending machines dotted around Nelson as well.

Bryan: That seems to be a growing industry, isn’t it?

Julian: It’s kind of back to the future really. When I was a lad, all the milk was basically bought at the front gate. And occasionally when you ran out, you went down to the dairy. So, we’ve kind of gone back to that model.

Bryan: My first job I did all through high school was pushing a milk cart round the streets. I was there for the change from glass to the tetrapaks.

Julian: Right. We’ve gone back to glass as part of what we do.

We visited Julian at his apple orchard in April, where he has trees producing mostly the variety ‘Pink Lady’.

Julian spoke briefly about a new 500 cow, all-weather shed he has built, giving his operation ‘the tick’ from the SPCA, one of the first dairy farms in New Zealand to receive this endorsement. This dairy operation supplies Appleby Farms (Ice cream), a business collaboration between himself and Murray Taggart, a fellow Nuffield Scholar.

A Nuffield report creating impact.

Bryan: Now, it’s been a little while since you did your Nuffield report, 1997 I think you did it. But integrated fruit production, still relevant, I think. What do you remember of writing that report?

Julian: As you say, it was 25 years ago. So, a bit of a distant memory, but many of the issues are still relevant today. What came from that report was a system I wrote called Green Grow, which was to deliver three things: Fruit with no residues, have some environmental indicators, and have a food safety system under something relatively new then called HACCP.

This was a hazard analysis control point, which was what NASA used to send their astronauts into space. Because if you’re sick up there because of food, you’ve got a major problem. So, they wrote a food safety programme, and I adopted the bones of that, or the principles of that.

They wanted to know whether the product was safe. The only way that we could guarantee the product being safe was essentially to take residues away. So, in terms of how we produce it, it’s up to us to battle the elements, with insects and fungi.

When the consumer comes to consume it, they want to know that there’s nothing on there that can harm them or their kids. And then as part of that, some environmental indicators that say we haven’t harmed the environment in producing that fruit.

Bryan: Space age fruit production, that sounds awesome.

Julian: Yes, years later, I chaired the Apple Futures Programme, that was a three-year programme to deliver wider systems to get to the same point for the average grower. That’s pretty much about 80 something percent of the New Zealand industry now, with a fair chunk of the balance being organic. I wasn’t pretending to be organic. And yeah, we converted a whole industry in less than a decade.

Bryan: The industry as a whole – horticulture, pip fruit and candy fruit, and that sort of thing has come a long way in the last decade or two, hasn’t it?

Julian: It has. That was late 2000s, and since then it’s advanced even further.

Setting up for horticultural automation.

Bryan: Do you have any other observations on how things have changed, running a kiwi fruit growing business in that time?

Julian: We’ve set up our orchard systems now for being robot ready. We can’t keep going how we are. And so, investing in an orchard production system is a long timeframe. We must think about what the future will look like when we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a hectare setting up an orchard.

We’ve set our orchards up in anticipation for robots to be able to harvest. We think about how they’ll optically see the fruit, how they’ll pick it, and then how they’ll get that fruit from the tree into a bin. That’s what we’ve been busy at in the last decade. About 30 something percent of our orchards, anything we’ve planted in the last 10 years, are robot ready.

Bryan: That’s interesting. You often think about building robots to pick the fruit as it sits. But there are a lot of things, I guess, row spacing and the way you propagate the trees, that sort of thing.

Julian: Yes, and how we set the structure up. So single plane trees. It’s like a single plane hedge row, so the robotics and the sensors sensing the fruit, can’t go through the tree. So, it’s got to be on a single plane essentially.

Bryan: That’s amazing. How far off do you think you are from getting the robots? Are you involved in any of that?

Julian: The Americans and the Europeans are leading that race. We don’t have the technology here that’s needed for it. Although, there’s a small group headed by Steve Saunders in the Bay of Plenty who are working on kiwifruit robotics. They’ve tended to go more into the pack house and look at optics and how you pack fruit.

In ten-years-time, we’ll have lights out factories packing apples. Again, to try and get 24 hour a day, seven day a week packing businesses going, we need to do the same thing with our harvest processes. When the sun goes down, we don’t all go home – robots will carry on.

Bryan: Sounds very high tech and quite cool.

Julian: There’s a lot of work to get it to that point. A few of us, I suppose, think about these things in the middle of the night, when other people are sleeping.

You’ve got to work out where your business is going. About how you make it more efficient and keep a lid on cost. Because everyone is really cost conscious now, the consumer wants to buy more for less. And we’ve got to get cost out of our business and keep a high standard, because that’s really what our New Zealand brand is built on.

Nuffield and the international travel experience.

Bryan: Now, going back to 1997, you also did a bit of travel as part of your studies?

Julian: Yes. Through Southeast Asia, Europe, and Eastern Europe. It wasn’t long after the wall came down, I was in Hungary looking at soft fruit production. I was also in South America looking at what they were doing in Chile and, North America, in Washington.

Really interesting to get a handle on what the leading lights were doing at that point in terms of their growing systems.

Bryan: And in the time since, how would you say being involved in the Nuffield Programme has informed what you’ve done in those years?

Julian: Well, for me it was about the personal experience and honing my leadership skills and trying to lead producers through changes. Also, trying to think about things holistically, looking at a problem, not from just a single plane, but being able to not only go around and see the other person’s view, but be able to walk right around that issue and look at several points of view.

I’m probably not finished yet – I’m always willing to give back to the industry.

Bryan: The Rural Leaders, Nuffield Programme would be something you’d recommend?

Julian: Without Nuffield I wouldn’t have got to where I am today. It gave me not only a critical thinking ability, but it’s also given me a lot of resilience as well.

I am also able to call on the experiences I saw around the world – the interactions not only with other primary producers, but also government officials and how government thinks.

And how the EU operates, rightly or wrongly. And then most importantly, how consumers think, and always interacting with your customer to keep yourself up to date with what the customer wants to pay for, and what they don’t want to pay for.

Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast. This podcast was presented by Farmers Weekly.

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

The future of food and fibre is in the hands of our bold and our grounded people – those who give back to their communities and industries.

Sound like you?

Register your interest to find out more.

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

From Bluff Station to Cambridge University and back.

This transcript of the podcast was edited for clarity.

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.
I’m Bryan Gibson, editor of the Farmer’s Weekly. And this morning I’m talking to Hamish Murray. How’s it going?

Hamish Murray – 2019 Nuffield Scholar, Bluff Station, Marlborough.
Good. Thanks, Bryan. And you?

BG: You’re in Marlborough, is that right?

HM: We are an hour south of Blenheim, 45 minutes north of Kaikoura on the east coast, inland at Kekerengu.

We’re a high-country sheep and beef farm that stretches into the Clarence Valley. The Homestead is about five minutes from the coast and goes all the way into the base of Tapuae-o-Uenuku. It’s about 35 km’s to the back boundary. We run Merino sheep, Hereford Angus cattle, and we have about 800 beehives.

BG: How have things been going this year for you?

HM: We’ve had a great season with 300mm of rain through late January, early February. It’s meant our autumn has been incredible, and stock are in good condition. We’re through the bulk of our work now. It’s starting to quiet down for the next five weeks before we look at shearing ewes at the start of August.

BG: I noticed from your bio you went to Cambridge University?

HM: Yeah. I suppose like many farmers at one point, you were told to get out and go and do something other than agriculture. And so, I spent a lot of my former years trying to give myself an opportunity to do anything other than be a farmer.

I was sitting on a train on the way to a job interview in London, after graduating from Cambridge. It was then that I realised I really wanted to be back in New Zealand chasing stock around and being part of the farming community. I wanted to give our children the opportunity to grow up with the same experiences as we had.

BG: How was that time in the UK at university for you? Must have been quite eye opening.

HM: I was fortunate to get the opportunity to study there. I played a good level of sport playing in the varsity match on a couple of occasions while studying economics.

It was an incredible experience. It pushed me mentally as far as I could have been pushed. The expectation to perform and to be part of that was a great challenge. I thoroughly enjoyed it and look back on it fondly.

Pushing your limits and personal growth.

BG: And in 2019 you went through the Nuffield Scholarship Programme.

HM: Again, fortunate to be given the opportunity to do some travel. I felt that when I was in the UK, I was on a student budget. So, I didn’t really get the opportunity to do the travel that I would’ve liked while I was there.

The Nuffield Farming Scholarship gave me the opportunity to look at agriculture in different parts of the world with a whole lot of like-minded people.

My topic was to look at teams and what made certain businesses successful or workplaces more enjoyable and engaging for staff.

I had a real challenge about five years after coming home from overseas. We had a significant drought here in Marlborough and North Canterbury, and it pushed me to an emotional breaking point. I’d played top level sport so I knew, physically, how far I could push myself.

Studying at Cambridge I’d reached that mental breaking point also. My limits had been challenged there. But I’d never had an emotional breaking point like this drought caused. I’m not unique in that. Everybody has these challenges. At that time, I exhausted myself trying to keep our team, our staff, and our family going.

That was a significant point for me. I became focused on how to better lead myself first. That grew over the next couple of years as we recovered and then grew into how to better lead our teams.

Nuffield study and building better teams.

My focus at the time of the Nuffield was around productive, efficient, and effective teams. What makes some places more engaging and motivating for staff to work in.

Then with Nuffield I was lucky enough to look at businesses all around the world that were held up on those pillars. What made them different, what made them tick, and what might that mean for the future of work in New Zealand – in the ag space, especially.

BG: So can you talk a little bit about who you looked at and what some of the keys to building a successful team might be?

HM: With my Nuffield travel I got to see businesses in the Netherlands healthcare industry that had developed these self-managing teams called Buurtzorg. I spent time in Silicon Valley too, looking at a lot of tech companies.

Everywhere I went, I was looking at teams and what made them successful. And then coming home, I spent time with the Crusaders looking at what made them different. How have they been able to win multiple championships, seemingly pulling from the same talent pool as the rest of New Zealand.

BG: And were there some takeaways from that can be applied to the agriculture situation? What sort of changes did you end up making, say, in your own business to overcome the sort of challenges you had with the drought?

Building self-awareness and self-aware teams.

HM: A lot of what I learned was building on those challenges we had been working through. Self-awareness was a huge one. Building self-awareness together as a team was significant for all these businesses. They found their own individual ways to work together on the soft skills that make teams work well together.

People don’t leave a job necessarily because they don’t like it. They leave the job because they don’t like the boss or their workmates.

“So much of what we focus on is the technical stuff in doing the job, rather than working on working together.”

How do we best understand the individual attributes that people bring to a team? Little things as simple as how do people like to learn? How do they like to communicate? For example, what do I look like on a good day? What do I look like on a bad day? And how to come up with strategies as a team to overcome those things.

BG: You mentioned the Crusaders and Scott Robertson’s approach to coaching and team culture. He seems to find out, as you say, the best way to do knowledge transfer, depending on that person’s mental makeup. And that’s part of the success, isn’t it?

HM: Absolutely. One example for me was the way every business or every super rugby franchise has their values in big print somewhere in their changing room so that everyone sees them. It’s kind of the way that people do it.

The real gold comes from when you spend time to work out with people what those values look, sound, and feel like.

Until you dig deeper with your individuals. As the people in your team change, how does that look, sound, and feel for those particular people at that time? That makes these things come alive and become more of an ingrained part of your culture.

BG: It seems that the world we live in now seems to be more challenging for both individuals and workplaces. So, this kind of approach and strategy, if you are running a team, is only going to become more important.

The Nuffield Scholarship and creating the space to grow.

HM: Wellbeing is important but being able to bring your whole self to work is even more so. As you get away from the hierarchy of things, people want to be able to turn up. They don’t want to be a different person at work than at home.

To truly understand people, we’ve got to listen and ask better questions, and get to the bottom of truly understanding them. Then we can build a safety network of people around them, allowing them to flourish in our workplaces.

BG: So you obviously enjoyed the experience of going through the Nuffield Programme?

HM: I couldn’t recommend it enough. One of the greatest challenges for me, and one of the biggest learnings, was being able to set our business up with our team to create the opportunity for staff to step into that space. Then I could be away for nearly five months.

They really grew into that opportunity, by me getting out of their way, yet still giving them enough support.

I think that’s been one of the greatest growth opportunities for me – is create the space for our team to step into. They’ve thrived in that opportunity.

We haven’t gone back to where we were before. That has been significant and enjoyable for me. And when I look back on the opportunity, the travel, the study, and the chance to look around and gain many ideas from many businesses around the world – it was fantastic.

“When I think back on what the greatest significance has been, it would be the growth in our team and in our business, simply because of being able to get my own ego out of the way.”

BG: Among all of what we’ve been speaking about, there was the earthquake down your way, too. That must have been a massive challenge.

HM: It was, yes. We had four of six houses rebuilt. I was away, so my wife and three kids were living in a cottage while our house was being rebuilt. Jess managed the rebuild, looked after three kids who were just five, three, and one – while I was traveling around the world with Nuffield.

Yes, there were lots of challenges in that – but lots of growth for all of us too.

BG: Teamwork with a capital ‘T’ there. Good grief.

HM: Yeah. Very lucky, very grateful. And it’s nice to be able to repay some of the faith that people have put in me.

BG: Thanks for listening to Ideas That Grow, a Rural Leaders podcast. This podcast was presented by Farmers Weekly.

For more information on Rural Leaders, the Nuffield New Zealand Farming Scholarships, please visit ruralleaders.co.nz/nuffield.

Connect with Hamish on LinkedIn.

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

Ideas That Grow: Kate Scott, 2018 Nuffield Scholar.

The interview with Kate Scott took place in May 2022 and the version below was edited for clarity. Listen to the podcast above for the original conversation.

Bryan Gibson – Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

I’m Bryan Gibson, editor of the Farmer’s Weekly. And today we are talking to Kate Scott who is calling from central Otago. Is that right Kate?

Kate Scott – 2018 Nuffield Scholar and Landpro Executive Director.
Yes, it is. I’m based in, what is typically, sunny Central Otago. So, a little place called Bannockburn is where I call home, which is just out of Cromwell for those listeners who aren’t familiar with the area.

Bryan: Good stuff. And what took you to Bannockburn?

From dairy farming in Taranaki to environmental consulting in Otago.

Kate: A little bit of a strange story. So, some people will know that I hail from Taranaki originally. I grew up on a dairy farm in Taranaki and some 16 years ago, my husband and I packed up our life to go and milk cows in central Otago. So probably not the most usual journey to dairy farming – was shifting from dairy farming central to Central Otago. But that’s how we ended up in the South Island.

Bryan: And enjoying the journey down there?

Kate: Yeah, look, it’s been an amazing journey for us. So, my husband, who coincidentally, his first name is Scott – it confuses a lot of people when I refer to him. But Scott and I shifted down and we were on farm, milking cows for about seven or eight years all up. Then we took the opportunity to pursue some other avenues at that point, after a year of working together on farm. We moved off-farm and started Landpro, which is a consultancy business that’s been growing since 2007, now to a team of about
80 people.

We’re an environmental consultancy business and probably 60 to 70% of our work would be in the primary sector, working with farmers and growers to help them to navigate what are not insignificant hurdles and challenges in the environmental space. And now we also happen to call a small vineyard home too. I can’t say I know a heck of a lot about vineyards, but it’s been a pretty quick learning curve and something that we are really enjoying. Being able to have a little bit of space in such a beautiful part of the country.

Bryan: Wow. So, you are making wine now!

Kate: Yeah. To be fair. I don’t really make it, the only thing I’m probably good at is the drinking bit, but we do have some wonderful winemakers that work with us to make the wine from the grapes we are growing on our land.

Bryan: Well, that is um, a terribly important skill to have.

Kate: It is.

The Nuffield Scholarship and gaining new perspectives.

Bryan: And amongst all that, I think it was 2018 when you did your Nuffield Scholarship, is that correct?

Kate: That’s right. So, I was a 2018 Nuffield Scholar. That was an amazing journey, you know, having that opportunity to travel the world and to not only undertake, a research project, which I’ll tell you about in a little bit, but also that opportunity for personal growth and reflection and understanding. And I think as much as anything, to understand how the world works.

For me, probably one of the standouts was learning about the role of geopolitics within food and within agriculture. And I call on the things that I observed and learnt during that process often – now in my day job. But yeah, it’s certainly been one heck of a journey since that time. That’s for sure.

Bryan: Now your topic seems to me to be a little bit related to your consultancy, is that right? Um, taking a look at how New Zealand farmers can embrace, and improve sustainability, that sort of thing.

Kate: Yeah, that’s correct. What I did my research on was enabling better environmental outcomes in agriculture. Back in 2018, I was starting to see a bunch of the challenges that certainly a number of my clients were facing. How could they ensure they continued to have profitable businesses, but deliver better outcomes for the environment too? So those challenges that we’re all probably feeling more acutely now.

I took that opportunity to go and have a look to understand what things we were doing well. I asked, what are the areas where we can do things better? Some of the findings I identified in my research were things like, you know, I felt that we had to have an overarching strategy for sustainable agriculture within New Zealand, because if we’re not all on the same page, in terms of where we are wanting to go, how are we going to get there? How do we create that coherence?

I also identified during that study, that there’s a bunch of barriers in the way. And look, it’s perhaps a little odd for the consultant to say, but in my view, sometimes I think, if we could change our approach and view the world with a ground-up perspective and have less regulation, not more, we might actually end up with much better outcomes for our communities, for our environment and for our businesses. And so all these things that are just as relevant then as they are now.

I think the importance of supporting and enabling farmers to continue to do really great work is hugely important to me. That’s what drives me to get out of bed in the morning. It’s knowing that by working with those clients, we’re actually helping them to showcase and demonstrate the good things they are doing and identify the areas where they can continue to work on to do more.

And I think it’s been a real shift in the view of farmers in that space, since 2018. You know, the amount of knowledge and understanding that farmers have gained in that time has also been quite significant.

The Nuffield Research and a global context.

Bryan: Now, obviously you did a bit of travel. What did you see out there in the big, bad world, that either worked or didn’t as far as this goes?

Kate: One of the things I found really fascinating at the time, that was probably quite reassuring, was that New Zealand farmers for a while there were certainly getting a really bad rap about all the terrible things they did. But when I went out and had a look at the way that agriculture was being undertaken and other parts of the world, it pretty much highlighted for me that there was a lot of things we were doing very well.

In terms of managing the effects of our activities on the environment. I think one of the other things that stood out for me is that we actually have quite different challenges in terms of our environmental impacts from farming here in New Zealand compared to elsewhere.

An example of that would be that we run a predominantly pastoral agricultural system and therefore our impacts on fresh water, they will be some of the core concerns we see, and still see, here in New Zealand. Whereas if you go to other parts of the world there’s a whole lot more of their agriculture undertaken in indoor systems.

The impacts and the challenges that were top of mind for those farmers at that point in time were more along the greenhouse gas and emissions space. Identifying that we all have the same top 10 issues and challenges we are trying to overcome. They just came in a different order, depending which parts of the, the world we were undertaking our activities. I found that quite fascinating.

The other thing that I found interesting was the differences in scale. Some of the solutions I might have seen that were being deployed around some of the climate-smart agriculture in places like Denmark, for example, where, you know, you’re talking about very small-scale farms, perhaps those solutions aren’t likely to gain much in the way of traction in New Zealand. So, look, I think that was a really fascinating observation – that there isn’t a one size fits all in terms of an approach. I don’t think there’s any one silver bullet out there.

Bryan: You mentioned earlier about the pros and cons of having quite a strict regulatory framework. Did you see anything abroad that was better or worse than what we have?

Kate: It’s fair to say the deep-dive that I did into the regulatory space, around controls relating to agriculture in the environment – it’s probably fair to say that as a general rule New Zealand has some of the more stringent requirements. Obviously, some regions are different to others, but if we go into some of the more stringent regional requirements around land use controls on farming, it often wasn’t the case that those same level of controls were necessarily required through parts of Europe, where I spent a lot of my time. They had other controls and measures in place.

So, for example, it might have been the P caps that might’ve been in place. Yes, they had some controls, but they probably weren’t quite as stringent as some of the challenges we were facing here.

But they’re also quite difficult to compare because there were different layers of government, and different issues and challenges that were trying to be overcome. That was probably one of the challenges when I was trying to do a more in-depth analysis. It became quite difficult cause you weren’t always comparing apples with apples.

Tackling agriculture’s regulatory challenges.

Bryan: Seems to me, sticking with that regulatory sort of avenue, that the market itself seems to be starting to move farmers and food producers in that direction. And you know, maybe you can get more buy in that way. Is that something you’re seeing?

Kate: Yeah, look, I’ve seen a really big shift. I spend a lot of time talking to a broad range of farmers from a range of different sectors and catchment groups. And one of the things I often talk about is the fact that we need to make sure that from a mindset point of view, if we stop thinking about all of this change being regulatory driven.

It’s not just central government or local government making the rules to say that we have to change. If we actually think about it in the context of the consumer and those people that want to buy our meat or our milk, or our wood, those people are wanting to see, and be confident, that the products that they’re buying are doing the right thing. Whether that’s by the environment, or by people, or by animal welfare.

I very much believe that there’s a real market-driven change occurring there. But again, if we come back to our mindset, if we view the change in the construct of a market-driven change, then instead of doing it because someone’s telling us to do it, which we inherently don’t like to do, then our reason for doing it is a little bit different.

So, it becomes a lot easier to think, well actually, the reason I want to show why I’m doing a good job is because I want such and such, you know, and, you know, let the market actually value what I’m doing, and what I’m delivering, and how I’m doing a good job. The perspective shift actually helps to drive people along towards the change piece.

Bryan: I guess, chasing premium is a lot better than avoiding fines.

Kate: Exactly. It’s a pretty strong incentive there.

Sustainability and the speed of change.

Bryan: Yeah. Obviously, it’s been three or four years since you carried out your studies, and as we’ve been talking, the journey along this sustainability path is continuing – how do you feel about where we are at the moment?

Kate: I think one of the biggest challenges we’ve got at the moment is the speed at which things are changing. It doesn’t matter whether you’re in the rural sector or you’re in any other sector – the speed and pace of change is getting quicker. One of the challenges I have in my job is things are changing so quickly, that sometimes it feels like you are trying to drink from a firehose. I think that’s the overwhelming bit that everyone’s probably feeling and the pressure that everyone’s feeling.

I think that there’s an amazing amount of good work being done by farmers, and by catchment groups and communities coming together to actually understand how they can do a better job. That’s not always recognised for what it is either.

My advice to farmers is keep doing a good job, keep striving for change and improvement. If you take little steps, you’ll actually get there. That’s something we’ll start to see bed in a little more.

One of the challenges everyone is facing is this lack of certainty, particularly when we look in the regulatory space, how do we plan for what’s coming? Or how do we plan to implement change when we don’t know if it’s stopped, or is it still coming? I think that’s the part that people are finding hard to overcome in terms of taking that next step in the progress space.

Bryan: As you say, the pace of change seems to be quickening and people in my line of work are probably somewhat responsible for some of that. But one thing you can’t make go faster is the physical and biological processes of the environment, so you know, it takes a while for changes to filter through, doesn’t it?

Kate: Yeah, it sure does. And you know, we also need to make sure that if we want change to be a long and enduring change, I strongly believe that that change needs to be led from the ground up, rather than the top down.

A really big part of my Nuffield research was about taking that, that ground up approach and leading everyone along with you rather than telling them what to do. I think, where we are starting to see some of that meaningful change is from those communities and those areas where they’ve actually seen the value in coming together as groups to support the change.

That comes back to the fact you need to have a profitable business to be able to implement change. There’s still a lot of work going to have to continue to happen around how we adjust our farm systems to meet the challenges from both a climate change, and from a biodiversity point of view. But it’s a matter of how we find ways to work together and support that together, rather than the loneliness of trying to do it on your own the whole time?

The Nuffield Scholarship – positive, life-changing, challenging, and giving back.

Bryan: So now it’s quite obvious that in your Nuffield studies you’ve learned a lot, but how was the experience for you?

Kate: Hmm, you’ve spoken to a number of scholars through the podcast series you’ve been doing, but they all, well the ones I’ve listened to, talk about the fact that it was this life changing moment. That’s completely true. But I often try, when people ask me about it, to describe it as being this event that is kind of a positively disruptive thing in your life, that at the time.

Sometimes when you’re living it, you are, not sure what it means. It tips your world upside down and you feel very uncomfortable about your place in the world. But as you work your way through that, and you get the opportunity to reflect on it, then you see it as this hugely positive experience.

For me, that positivity comes from the people you meet, the family of other scholars that wrap around you. That you have this network of people, of Nuffield scholars open to you picking up the phone or flicking them an email. And they’re immediately interested in connecting with you on any range of issues or challenges.

And that’s about that whole challenging of your perspective and your knowledge and your understanding – building yourself.

The people have been the amazing part of the opportunity and that personal growth, that business growth too, certainly that also comes from that experience. It’s been one of the most amazing things that has happened.

I think sometimes we can get or fall into the trap where we think we do our Nuffield Scholarship, and then that’s that – the end. But actually, I would probably view Nuffield, and once you complete your travels and your report, that’s kind of the start of the journey. It’s asking what next? and how we apply what we’ve learned, and how we give that back to our sector – to the primary sector, that’s the really exciting piece.

The future of food and fibre is in the hands of our bold and our grounded people – those who give back to their communities and industries.

Sound like you?

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

Maniototo sheep, beef and arable farming.

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

Farming and the environment.

The art of making the tough conversations easier.

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

Winning at the Beef+LambNZ Awards.

Background - Julia Galwey, 2020 Kellogg Scholar.

Kellogg research into the potential of the bobby calf resource.

From research to innovation.

Building scale.

The rearing regime and how it works.

Collaborating for success.

A new veal value chain.

The Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme - where it started.

The current arable context.

World-leading seed production.

Dr Alison Stewart - A CEO’s career path.

FAR - delivering the arable research that benefits growers.

A challenging arable environment.

FAR and the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme.

Kellogg exposes leaders to diversity of thought and opinion.

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?