2026 Nuffield NZ Farming Scholarship. Apply by 17 August 2025. Read More...

Apply for 2026 Nuffield NZ Farming Scholarship by 17 August 2025. More details...

The Rabobank People Development Award – Beef+LambNZ Awards 2023.

The Beef + LambNZ Awards were held in Christchurch last night (October 19). The Rural Leaders Team are proud to have won the Rabobank People Development Award. It’s a win that represents the mahi and support of so many, including our board, our investing partners and our alumni. 

The judges said, “The Trust, which manages the Nuffield Farming Scholarship and the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme alongside other initiatives, offers high quality, fit-for-purpose leadership programmes for the primary sector.

They added that the Trust was well known, highly regarded and had demonstrated longevity in the sector. The Trust had impact across all primary industries.”

Lisa Rogers, Rural Leaders CEO, said of the win, 

 “Our programme alumni continue to make a positive impact in communities, businesses and for industries across food and fibre. We’re honoured and humbled to receive this award, and privileged to be part of so many people’s leadership journey.”

On the night, Rural Leaders shared a table with all the 2024 People Development Award finalists – Growing Future Farmers and Whangarei Agricultural and Pastoral Society Farm Intern Programme, “The work both organisations are doing for young people entering the sector; giving them a sense of purpose, direction and pride, is inspiring”, said Lisa Rogers.

Congratulations to Beef+LambNZ for organising such a successful and enjoyable event. And congratulations to all the finalists and winners across all eight categories. 

The full results are available here. 

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 GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

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

My name is Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly and this week 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

Independent Trustee – New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust.

The New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust (NZ Rural Leaders) is seeking an Independent Trustee to join its board. This is an exciting opportunity for a food and fibre leader with strategic and governance experience, strong industry networks and a passion for leadership development, to build on their governance journey.

Background summary

NZ Rural Leaders is a registered charitable trust. The Trust’s purpose is to: Establish and operate leadership programmes for New Zealand’s food and fibre sector, advance education in agricultural practices, and contribute to the general welfare of New Zealand’s rural population.

In pursuit of this NZ Rural Leaders aim to grow world-class leaders for our country.    

Board meetings

The Board meet up to 8 times per year with some meetings coinciding with longer events. 4 “in person” meetings are typically held in Christchurch or Wellington, with video conferencing utilised for the balance.

Meetings are scheduled where possible around Kellogg and Nuffield programme events to enable Board members to be introduced to each cohort of both programmes and contribute as per above role. Meeting dates for the year are set at least 6 months in advance.

Please note, this is an unpaid, voluntary role. Air Travel, accommodation, and meals are covered (where required).

The core competencies sought in all Board members are;

  • Strategic focus and experience.
  • Previous governance experience.
  • Innovative thinking and entrepreneurship.
  • Professional expertise in one or more of the following areas: food and fibre sector, adult education or training, business skills, marketing.
  • Passion for and understanding of leadership development.
  • Strong industry networks and connections.

Applicants with one or more of the following attributes are particularly sought;

  • Strong financial skills and understanding.
  • Affinity for leadership in Māori and Pacifica agri-business.
  • Horticultural, forestry or aquaculture industry knowledge.
  • Regional capacity building.
  • Partner engagement including local, regional, and central government.
  • Global perspective.

You can find more information on the Terms of Reference here.

Applications close on 15 November 2023.

CV and cover letter should be sent to Lisa Rogers, Rural Leaders’ Chief Executive at lisarogers@ruralleaders.co.nz

For any questions, please feel free to contact Chairperson, Kate Scott at kate@landpro.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 GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

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

My name is Bryan Gibson, Managing Editor of Farmers Weekly and this week 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

Dan Eb – Moving to citizen-connected food and farming.

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 GibsonManaging Editor of Farmer’s Weekly.

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

My name is Bryan Gibson. 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

A principles-centred leadership model for Aotearoa New Zealand’s Food and Fibre sector. 

In 2022, the Food and Fibre Centre of Vocational Excellence commissioned New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust to research and design a leadership development ecosystem for Aotearoa New Zealand’s Food and Fibre sector.

The first report looked at the state of leadership development in the sector.

This new report, A Principles-centred Leadership Model for Aotearoa New Zealand’s Food and Fibre Sector, builds on the findings of that first report.

The Principles-centred Leadership Model proposes three impactful elements. Each element can be considered separately, though real power comes from all three elements being applied together.

The Model states that leaders who truly lead unleash their potential and that of those around them. In doing so, they create an exponential impact for the Food and Fibre sector and for Aotearoa New Zealand.

The Model combines three major elements to be applied holistically:

  1. The Food and Fibre context, which is significant to New Zealand’s wealth and wellbeing, is founded on an entrepreneurial spirit and requires leaders to be grounded practically, environmentally, culturally and in their communities.
  2. Food and Fibre Principles. Feedback from the sector has been distilled down into three leadership principles, people, service, and teams.
    1. Leadership starts with knowing and understanding people – if you wish to influence others, first know yourself.
    2. Leadership is about the service and accountability, not status – you wish to lead, serve.
    3. Leadership is a team sport. Leaders build teams and teamwork – if you wish to generate power, share it.
  3. Three dimensions of true leadership.
    Who we are is at the core of why, what, and how we lead. To truly lead requires more than physical and practical behaviours, it requires more than the psychology of hearts and minds, true leadership requires the leader to do the internal work to truly know themselves, their wairua, and lead from within.

    The best leaders then also see beyond the horizon and lead those they serve through the changing context, for the purpose of a thriving future and in a way that unleashes the potential of those they lead.

If we create pathways for people to develop and take on increasing responsibility in the Food and Fibre sector can have a multiplier effect on Aotearoa’s future prosperity that goes beyond the impact that leadership systems in other sectors can create.

The next phase of this project is the development of the leadership handbook – available 2024.

We look forward to sharing more on the project over the next few months, but should you wish to discuss the leadership model further, please reach out to Lisa Rogers, CEO Rural Leaders, at lisarogers@ruralleaders.co.nz

Click on the image to access the report.

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

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 GibsonManaging 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

The Mackenzie Study – Nuffield and Kellogg latest results.

The Mackenzie Charitable Foundation have initiated research alongside the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust, in collaboration with Otago Business School and the Department of Economics, to investigate the contribution of Kellogg and Nuffield Alumni to Food and Fibre.

Research covering 72 years of Nuffield and 43 years of Kellogg Rural Scholarship.

The objective of the research has been to collect data measuring within-person gains in entrepreneurial leadership and capability-building that occurs because of the Kellogg and Nuffield programmes.

The first survey was conducted with the New Zealand Nuffield Alums (178 at the time of the survey – with 68 survey participants). Through this process, the Team learned several ways to refine the survey and then ran a similar survey with Kellogg Alums (960 at the time of the survey – with 234 survey participants).

Entrepreneurship is frequently measured as the proportion of people in self-employment. By that broad measure, the Study has found that rural entrepreneurship is very much alive and well among alums.

This latest Mackenzie Study report builds on the progress report from February 2022 and as such, offers a recalibration of some earlier published headline results.

The methods used to measure entrepreneurial leadership skills (ELS) draw on international peer-reviewed academic literature in experimental economics, psychology, and management science.

The Study measured real-world entrepreneurial achievements by counting new business starts, FTE jobs created, export revenues, and leadership roles. This contributes to the participant’s ELS profile.

Characteristics of the Nuffield and the Kellogg Scholar.

Nuffield Scholars are, on average, in their 40s. They are rigorously selected and undertake a self-guided international exploration of Food and Fibre challenges and opportunities.

The Nuffield Scholarship is runs over 15 months and includes at least 16 weeks of international travel.

Nuffield aims to develop the insight and foresight to keep New Zealand at the global forefront of Food and Fibre-producing nations. Leadership development is an outcome of each Scholar’s experiential journey rather than an output of the Programme.

By contrast, Kellogg Scholars are, on average, in their 30s. The Kellogg

The Programme is facilitated and runs over six months. Each programme can take up to 24 Scholars, meaning more Kellogg Scholars graduate than Nuffield Scholars. Leadership capabilities are a defined learning output of the Programme.

This is likely a first-of-its-kind cross-sectional study, designed to compare each participant at multiple time points and will give New Zealand’s Food and Fibre sector a world-leading insight into the art and science of building entrepreneurial capability.

Here are the headline results from the Study.

Nuffield.

The average Nuffield alum has started 3.6 businesses, played a direct role in creating 47.0 FTE jobs, and served in 14.0 senior leadership roles.

Over 40% of Nuffield alums have served in government-appointed or elected leadership roles. At the time of survey, 178 Nuffield alums had collectively served in an estimated 2,488 leadership roles (other than government roles), played a direct role in creating an estimated 641 businesses, and 8,295 FTE roles. 

Kellogg.

The average Kellogg alum has started 1.7 businesses, created 35.0 FTE jobs, and served in 14.0 senior leadership roles.

Approximately 26.9% of Kellogg alums have served in government-appointed or elected leadership roles. Since the inception of the New Zealand Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, 960 Kellogg alums have collectively served in over 26,858 leadership roles (other than government roles), played a direct role in creating an estimated 1,632 businesses, and 33,600 FTE roles.

The collective Nuffield and Kellogg Alum’s results.

These collective results include the creation of an estimated 2,273 businesses, 41,895
jobs,
 and service in 29,347 leadership roles.

Just as importantly, both alum groups reported better personal outcomes after attending the programmes, including better well-being, expanded social networks, and higher earnings. This is an impressive contribution.

Both alum groups demonstrated economic, social, and environmental contributions to New Zealand’s Food and Fibre sector. One of the notable findings is the very high rate of self-employment compared to New Zealand as a whole (over 60% for Nuffield and Kellogg, compared to 7.5% nationally, 28% in the dairy industry, and 30% in the red meat and wool industry).

The Team have seen very few data sets in New Zealand with self-employed proportions this large.

Where to next for the Mackenzie Study?

The Mackenzie Study also includes foundational data for longitudinal research. The analysis of this is currently underway. The longitudinal study is focused on collection of before-after survey data for just the Kellogg Programme.

The intention is for this data collection to continue as future cohorts’ baseline and exit surveys are added. This, in order to achieve greater statistical precision and an ever-strengthening evidence base documenting gains in entrepreneurial leadership associated with participation in the Kellogg Programme.

Download the full Mackenzie Study Report here.

Hamish Marr – Glyphosate, Nuffield, and cropping today.

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 GibsonManaging 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

A Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit Summary.

By the time 2023 Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit attendees heard from Devry Boughner Vorwerk, she had spent two days visiting local farming operations and attending functions on the Nuffield Triennial Conference’s opening weekend. There was also an interview with Rural Exchange – REX too. 

As Keynote Speaker at Monday’s Summit, Devry helped set the tone of the day, with ‘Getting Grounded in the Humanverse’. The Humanverse, as Devry explained it, is this, 

“The Humanverse challenges us to remain focused on the human condition and to end human suffering.” 

It does this by “…disrupting today’s business practices, profit models, static industry infrastructure, organisational cultures and designs, investment strategies, leadership decisions, public policies, and all other underlying factors impacting food security and nature, to ensure that humanity flourishes now and into future generations.” 

You can learn more about the Humanverse by listening to March’s Ideas that Grow Podcast. Or, take a look at a recent post below. In the lead up to the Summit, Devry outlined the concept stating that [in the Humanverse], 

“We’re not anti-technology. We are not anti-capitalism. We are pro-humanity.” 

Here’s a recent LinkedIn post giving more detail

Devry’s talk was pitched well and provided a plausible and actionable reframe of the ‘how do we do this’? 
 
What is humanity asking of you? What are people asking of you? What is nature asking of you? 
 
Here’s a breakdown of the Summit’s speakers through the posts and thoughts of those in the audience.  

Our World: Our Natural Environment.

Erica van Reenen: Climate Change 101. 

Erica bravely stepped into the programme after a speaker withdrew at the last-minute. Erica delivered a fantastic talk, summed up in a post by Ariana Estoras here, 

“Erica put the extensive facts on the table on what farmers have to work with to lower methane emissions (not a lot, yet), in a compelling and pragmatic way without any spin or agenda. Except to remind us all that there is still a long way to go and we need to be bold and brave and stay the journey together. 

Ka mau te wehi e hoa!” 

Karin Stark: The Power of On-Farm Renewables. 

Karin flew in from Australia to deliver an excellent talk on the role of on-farm renewables in reducing energy costs and emissions. It was a strong example of the real solutions that underpinned the Summit. 

Tom Sturgess: Balancing the Needs. 

Tom discussed the importance of embracing global challenges through conversation, innovation, and collaboration, as well as changing behaviour at scale.  

As Olivia Weatherburn summed up in a post, 

“Tom Sturgess, owner of Lone Star Farms and founder of methane mitigation ventures, woke us up with his insightful and to the point thoughts on food production and emission reductions. ‘We can do this but let’s use the science.’” 

And Penny Clark-Hall offered her take out too, quoting Tom in a post, 

“We can do it without gutting the Ag sector. History has shown it comes down to the consumer, their perception, and desires.” 

Simon Love enjoyed this quote from Tom, on his focus on on-farm sustainability: “It’s good for the animals – they have a lovely life. Except one bad day…” 

Volker Kuntzsch: Algae and the Blue Wave Economy. 

Volker spoke about the potential value of algae and the sustainability opportunities that lie within our oceans which make up an unbelievable 96% of our economic zone. 

Penny Clark-Hall quoted Volker in a post, “We’ve got an indigenous knowledge base which is amazing.”   

Our People: Consumer Trends and Trade.

Vangelis Vitalis: New Zealand Agriculture and Global Trade. 

Discussing a global view of trade, from a New Zealand perspective, Vangelis delivered an informative talk. Penny Clark-Hall’s key take out, in her post, “The environment is featuring strongly in FTA’s and we need a China+ strategy.”

Simon Love enjoyed this quote from Vangelis Vitalis on maintaining and growing our exports through sustainable practices:  

“Doing nothing is not an option, and we have to be able to prove that we’re taking action”.

Lain Jager: GM and the Future of Agriculture. 

Lain looked at the current conversation on alternative proteins, innovation and genetic technology. Within that, where the opportunities are and the critical conversations required to grow value for New Zealand’s Food and Fibre Sector. 

Penny Clark-Hall posted a quote of Lain’s, “Our sector is like a big dining room where we have the privilege of knowing everyone.” 

Lain also issued a challenge, captured in an image by Hamish Marr. 

‘Doubling export revenue – while halving emissions.’ 

Emma Parsons: Managing Sustainability and Change. 

Emma discussed how customers are playing a greater influence on what happens behind the farm gate and how farmers can and need to adapt to changing customer expectations.  

On Emma’s talk, Penny Clark-Hall posted her take-out, 

“What is good for the environment needs to be good for the farmer and the cow.”  

David Foote: Alternative Sources of Capital for Food and Fibre. 

Chairman of the Australian Cattle Council, David talked about how businesses in the food and agriculture industries access capital. 

On the business of running a farming operation, we love this quote from David,  

“The best form of fertiliser for a farm is the owner’s boots.”  

Our Future: Entrepreneurship and Leadership.

Chris Parsons: Developing our Future Leaders.

Chris spoke about the current state of leadership development in New Zealand’s Food and Fibre Sector. He drew on some of the findings from recent research conducted between Rural Leaders and the Food and Fibre Cove.  

Chris also discussed the roles of Kellogg and Nuffield on rural leadership.  

Penny Clark-Hall’s key take-out from this talk was, “The real value of leadership is to unleash the potential of others. [We need to] Move from an ego-system to an eco-system.” 

Olivia Weatherburn added a quote from Chris in her summary of his talk, “‘We need to grow people like we grow hoggets’, nurture them from the start, unleash their power and build on their potential.’” 

John Penno: Innovation and Entrepreneurship 

In a post Olivia Weatherburn said, “John Penno from Leaft Foods highlighted the importance of holding our decisions up to the lens of climate change as it isn’t going to go away and every decision will influence it.” 

John’s work in developing Rubisco Protein Concentrate from the leaves of common forage crops, is another tangible example of real solutions in practice.  

Mark MacLeod-Smith: Modern farming – Thinking Differently. 

Mark MacLeod-Smith, CEO of Halter, talked about modern methods of farming and their role in simplifying farming while also combating issues like climate change. 

A key take out from Mark’s talk, for Penny Clark-Hall was, 

“If you want abnormal results you have to act abnormally.”

Dr Ellen Joan Nelson: The Future of Work. 

Dr Ellen Joan Nelson spoke about her research and ideas on the future of work in New Zealand and further afield.  

As Olivia Weatherburn eloquently summed up in a post,  

“Dr Nelson was a bundle of energy and passion that just jumped off the stage at us. 

She highlighted that if you give leaders belonging, autonomy and purpose they will have the ability to be authentic and authentic leaders are the best leaders because they are themselves.” 

Julia Jones: Working Together for the Greater Good. 

Julia spoke about collaboration in order to meet customer needs and sustainability goals while remaining profitable. 

Olivia Weatherburn neatly sums up her talk in a post, 

“…the powerhouse known as Julia Jones gave everyone’s abs a workout with her to the point yet humorous and thought provoking talk. It’s pretty simple, ‘…Life is not fair get over it and get on with it. Support people on how not to fear change. If you’re driving the fear then you are not leading.’” 

And from Julia herself, in a post-Summit post on her talk, here are three key points,  

“😥 Life isn’t an eternal road of joy, (be super boring if it was). Shit really does happen, pretending it doesn’t, or trying to side step it never ends well. Trust me it’s good for the soul to hit it head on sometimes. 

🤷‍♀️ If we want to attract talent into your sectors, let’s not spend 90% of the time complaining about it. It’s cool to be honest about some challenges but there is a fine line between complaining and explaining. 

💨 It’s healthy to vent but be aware of the impact your venting is having on those around you. If you are reinforcing fear you are not leading.” 

In summing up the entire 2023 Rural Leaders Agribusiness Summit. 

In a post by Emily Walker, the top takeaways for her were: 

The time to change is now. To get to where we need to and want to be is going to require radically different action.

Take people on the journey, tell the story, empower teams and communities. Be transparent, evidence-based, share the data. (This applies locally, nationally and to our international customers).

Get out of the ruck and into the helicopter.

Simon Love gave this summation in a post-Summit post, 

“The conference on Monday was an incredible line-up of speakers. A couple of highlights for me were the infectious energy (and to-the-point language) of both Tom Sturgess, and Julia Jones, the insights from Mark MacLeod-Smith into Halter’s journey, and Dr Ellen Joan Nelson’s insight of belonging, autonomy and purpose being at the core of a healthy and exciting workplace.” 

And the final word to Julia Jones,  

“Thanks for this opportunity Rural Leaders to be part of this event, it was such a special gift to make a pig of myself at the trough of knowledge is hugely appreciated. Lessons galore were gleaned from speakers and attendees a like 🙏”