My take-aways from a month of Nuffield travels – Vancouver to Christchurch
For most of the month of March, I was privileged to travel with the 2023 Nuffield Ireland Scholars to the week-long annual Contemporary Scholars’ Conference (CSC) held this year in Vancouver, BC, and then to the Nuffield Triennial which this year was hosted by Nuffield New Zealand in Christchurch – and will be hosted by Nuffield Ireland in 2026.
The Contemporary Scholars’ Conference is the first step in the Nuffield Scholarship programme, a sort of super-induction for the newly recruited Scholars, with a focus on helping them develop their interpersonal and analytical skills, increase their self-awareness, and offer a unique opportunity to network with fellow-2023 Scholars from all over the world. It is also the opportunity for the Scholars to learn all about the hosting country’s agrifood sector.
The Triennial, as the name suggests, is held every three years in one of the Nuffield member countries, and allows alumni of all generations and countries to network and continuously learn about the most recent developments in agriculture, through a combination of conferencing and field visits.
These are some of my take-homes from the Canadian and the New Zealand events.
“I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you!”
This was said as a joke twice in the space of a single day in New Zealand, by Vangelis Vitalis, the Deputy Secretary, Trade and Economic at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, then by Minister for Primary Industries Damien O’Connor. That this got the majority of the attendance giggling was revealing: the State, which is in charge of developing and implementing policy around agriculture and its climate performance, is in New Zealand “normally” seen as at best a hindrance by the farmers on the land – certainly not as a partner in sustainable development.
A similar tone was struck in Canada by Reg Stewart, a ranching health and safety consultant from British Columbia with AgSafeBC. Reg is an engaging, colourful, ten-gallon-Stetson-wearing ex-Mountie, and among many more clever soundbites, he said: “Shoes on the carpet should not be telling boots on the ground what to do.” This was said in the context of preparing for extreme crises on farms, such as wildfires, tornadoes or floods. It was deeply relatable to all in the room because farmers the world over can feel that policy makers are far removed from their daily realities.
But we live in a time of environmental emergency, when governments have legally binding climate obligations, and agriculture and farmers are coming under both legal and commercial pressure to take, and be seen to take action on climate, biodiversity and water quality.
Farmers, landowners and policy decision makers need to find ways of partnering so boots on the ground and shoes on the carpet can sit around the table, having walked the land together, to make sensible, progressive decisions and put them into action.
While we visited a dairy farm part of the Pamu network in central Canterbury, it did not seem to have a clear research and/or extension mission comparable, for example, to a Teagasc research centre or a SignPost farm in Ireland.
Our Canadian, New Zealand and other international colleagues often chide European farming for its “subsidies”, and I would be the first to recognise the many shortcomings of the Common Agricultural Policy. However, I would argue the CAP has over the years helped develop EU and national frameworks through which the boots and the shoes can meet, negotiate policy and agree action plans. For all its flaws, it enables the delivery of policy on the ground while offsetting its cost by supporting incomes, funding technical support and incentives for necessary practice changes or technology adoption.
It now looks like New Zealand is engaging in a national policy He Waka Eke Noa (We’re All In This Together) to support farms in delivering on climate action and to speed up uptake of sustainable technologies on Kiwi farms.
Climate action for the climate’s sake, but also to secure market access
In Ireland and Europe, few farmers would question the reality of climate change, and most understand and accept they need to act to reduce their environmental impact, even as they rail against the cost, the intrusion, and most of all the toxic public commentary they are subjected to.
I found in both Canada and New Zealand that the sustainability message has not been integrated quite as deeply at farm level as it has in Europe. The “right” key words are repeated by farmers and agribusiness representatives, but the depth of engagement behind the catchphrases is less convincing.
In order to gain farmers’ buy-in for climate action in both countries, farmers are (rightly) told that they need to act because the consumer wants to purchase sustainably produced food. Either engage or lose your access to the market – that’s pretty persuasive.
While I feel farmers, as custodians of the land, need to be more engaged than that into the process of climate action, this is a way to at least start the conversation where the buy-in is insufficient.
The NZ agrifood strategy in the era of the climate urgency is about “reducing emissions while maintaining the sector’s economic sustainability”. By putting the focus on economics, the national focus should be something all stakeholders can get behind – provided of course it yields measurable CO2 and CH4 emissions reductions rapidly.
The world has reached “peak trade deals”
Speaking at the Rural Leaders International Agribusiness Summit, Vangelis Vitalis, Deputy Secretary Trade and Economics at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, stated that the golden era of trade deals ended in 2015. Until then, meaningful deals could be signed, albeit after lengthy negotiations, which delivered significant trade opportunities, and were positively perceived by the public.
Since then, greater geopolitical uncertainty has made both negotiations and implementation more difficult, and the marginal additional value of new trade deals has diminished. With import tariffs highest in agricultural products, this is particularly critical for our sector.
Environmental non-tariff barriers are now much more important, with far more regulation internationally, including measures such as the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) which directly impact the price/value of potential exports to the EU. The EU defines the CBAM as its “landmark tool to put a fair price on the carbon emitted during the production of carbon intensive goods that are entering the EU, and to encourage cleaner industrial production in non-EU countries.” Environmental considerations are increasingly important in the implementation, not just the negotiation, of trade agreements – and the EU leads the charge.
The EU/NZ trade deal, signed by both parties last June, now needs to be ratified by the parliaments of individual EU member states. Examples of questions asked by the Dutch Parliament to help with their deliberations showed almost all relate to the relative environmental performance of NZ agriculture v. European standards. Clear and persuasive answers, mostly about sustainability and climate issues, must be provided to the parliaments to obtain ratification and full implementation, well after the agreement has been negotiated and signed.
Optimism on feed additives to reduce methane emissions from cattle, even on grass
One of the most striking reports during the Rural Leaders International Agribusiness Summit was an intervention by Tom Sturgess. He is a US/NZ businessman, owner of Lone Star Farms, and founder of Methane Mitigation Ventures. He is charismatic, forceful and entertaining, and though he intervened by video link, he made a huge impression on the attendance. I am very aware that his engagement in the sector is commercial – and what a salesman he is! – and that he is selling solutions, rather than reporting objectively.
However, his optimism on the development of feed additives as effective long-term solutions to reduce methane emissions from cattle, by his own companies, appeared well documented and persuasive. Most impressive, and encouraging, was his assertion that effective bolus-type long term solutions – 90-day boluses with 90% efficacy, and 180-day boluses with 75% efficacy, according to him – which can function even on grass-fed cattle, could become commercially available within 18 months.
Time will tell…
Labour recruitment and retention
Recruiting and retaining talent is currently challenging the world over, and in all sectors, and agriculture and agribusiness are no exception.
Providing leadership to teams of talent is challenging at the best of times, but it is becoming increasingly clear that what is required is the creation of a favourable environment which is more employee-friendly. “An Ecosystem, not an Egosystem,” as Chris Parsons, CEO of the New Zealand Rural Leadership Trust put it.
Attracting and retaining talent is yet another reason for agribusinesses, including farms, to engage with sustainability in earnest. Young, talented employees who have their pick of jobs will proactively look for employers who share their values, and those increasingly include environmental sustainability, ethical business behaviour, community responsibility, animal welfare, etc. Salaries are rarely the only, or even the main motivation. Communication with staff to establish what motivates them is paramount to retain quality workers in your agri-business or farm.
And to finish…
Back in 2010/2011, the Canterbury region of New Zealand was shaken by two earthquakes measuring respectively 7.1 and 6.2 on the Richter scale which (we were told) destroyed or rendered unsafe 70% of Christchurch’s central city buildings. Within the first 24 hours, 185 people were killed, and over 6,500 were injured. The earthquake destroyed or damaged over 13,500 homes.
The locals advised us that, 12 years on, the rebuilding programme had come on in leaps and bounds. But looking to the multitude of “public car parks” all around town, and other unrepaired scars, it was obvious to us that there is still a long way to go. At the very core of the city, the Cathedral is still being propped by massive steel buttresses and wrapped up in scaffolding with work ongoing from morning to night.
Even prior to the earthquake, Christchurch was known as the Garden City, for all the fabulous parks and green spaces, including along the gorgeous Avon River, which meanders through the centre of the city. Not wasting a crisis, the citizens and authorities in Christchurch decided to improve the public, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure of their city. There are now protected walking and cycling paths everywhere, and I can testify the small city is safe and delightful to explore on foot.
In Ireland, we seemed to have done good, clever things in towns and cities during COVID, creating footpaths, pedestrianised areas, urban furnishings to facilitate outdoor socialising and cycle lanes to promote outdoor living and active travel. But many were piece-meal, frankly half-baked efforts, and there was an unseemly rush to dismantle much of it – a shamefully squandered opportunity. We have much to learn from Christchurch on facilitating active travel and improved wellbeing in Ireland.
One Maori expression will stay with me:
What is the most important thing in the world?
It is the people, it is the people, it is the people.
© Catherine Lascurettes, Cúl Dara Consultancy
