Introduction
Agricultural land use in Aotearoa New Zealand has a significant impact on rural landscapes as well as the social, cultural, environmental, and economic wellbeing of the nation. However, agriculture in New Zealand – in particular, intensive agriculture – contributes significantly to greenhouse gas emissions, nutrient pollution in surface and groundwater, land clearance and loss of biodiversity, among other environmental issues (Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment 2004, 2015; Ministry for the Environment and Statistics NZ 2022). Given the negative impacts of agricultural land use on New Zealand’s environment, there is interest in how on-farm change may be stimulated to encourage a transition towards more sustainable and environmentally friendly land use practices.
This article summarises recent and ongoing research examining on-farm change in New Zealand. It describes two projects: one completed and one ongoing. The completed project examines different on-farm drivers of change, with a focus on the Canterbury region, and explains how these drivers are mediated by individual farmer willingness and ability to make changes. The ongoing project examines the different agents of change which are encouraging sustainability transitions in New Zealand, including both human and non-human agents. The conclusion to the article, raises some implications of this research for impact assessment.
Drivers of change
Two reports were recently written for Environment Canterbury – a literature review examining drivers of change (Kirk et al. 2022a), and a follow-up report which conducted interviews with 29 farmers to see how drivers have (or have not) triggered on-farm change in Canterbury (Kirk et al. 2023). In these projects, the authors classified different drivers into broad categories: policy and regulation, environmental, economic, knowledge and technology, and social drivers. Different drivers were then identified within these broad categories (see Table 1).
The research confirmed that drivers of change do not act in isolation, with farmers typically responding to multiple, simultaneous, and interacting drivers at any given time. This complexity makes it difficult to identify which driver(s) influence on-farm change. Even if farmers experience the same driver simultaneously – such as a new pest species, a natural hazard, or the signing of a new international trade agreement – the impact on individual farms will vary depending on farmer ability and willingness to adopt change.
Ability to make on-farm changes was shaped by the cost of those changes, with certain pro-environmental changes such as fencing and planting costing more than many farmers could afford. Ability to change is also affected by size, with farms of smaller land area and smaller cash flows having fewer options to change in response to drivers.
Willingness to make on-farm changes was strongly influenced by farmers’ sense of self-determination and agency. Farmers may seek external input, advice, or information on changes – and they may ratify advice and information they receive with informal networks – but they see themselves as the ultimate decision maker, rather than being influenced by outside drivers or events (Kirk et al. 2022b).
Typically, the changes we observed were made to ensure the continuity and persistence of the current farm system, rather than changes which substantially reshape their farm system (Kirk et al. 2022b). The interview data confirmed that farmers in Canterbury are willing and able to make various on-farm changes in response to different drivers, such as upgrading technology for efficiency gains (e.g. shifting to centre pivot irrigation, or investing in variable rate irrigation), as well as keeping reserve feed and equipment in preparation for different natural hazard events. Farmers were also driven to make on-farm changes out of concerns for soil health, livestock welfare, and biodiversity. However, the interviewed farmers were not typically contemplating radical alternative land uses or major on-farm changes.
These projects highlighted the complex relationship between external drivers of change, and individual farmers’ willingness and ability to make changes in response. The ongoing Agents of Change project further explores this complexity.
Agents of change
An ongoing Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment funded research project – Moving the middle: empowering land managers to act in complex rural landscapes – seeks to enable and encourage farmers and land managers to make voluntary changes to improve the sustainability of their practices. It will do this by identifying and using intervention points for change in systems affecting land manager decisions.
One project research area examines agents of change on land. These agents are broadly conceived either as individual people, collectives, or non-human agents. The researchers target agents that have not been commonly researched and/or agents that have not been commonly recognised and supported in their roles. The aims are, first, to understand which agents are effective at supporting a shift towards more sustainable practices on the land, and second, to devise methods to understand these agents and make them more relatable and supportable.
When people typically conceive of agents of change in agriculture, they often think of agricultural advisors and extension agents. These agents have a long history of research, both internationally (Black 2000) and in the New Zealand context (Ministry for Primary Industries 2015). Other conventional agents, such as financial advisors (Hilkens et al. 2018), have also been studied in a New Zealand context. These conventional agents typically conceive of on-farm change as a top-down process whereby information, advice, and technology are transferred from scientists, engineers, and other specialists to farmers.
The agents of change research projects look beyond conventional agents towards more unconventional agents. The research team think there is a greater diversity of agents than is currently being supported and recognised. Thus, the agents of change project is examining seven different case studies of agents. In order, these agents include: 1) information / knowledge brokers; 2) technology; 3) community mobilisers; 4) the voice of the environment and future generations; 5) youth; 6) agents who change relationship between humans and the environment, and 7) spiritual and physical reconnection of Māori with land.
Cases have been chosen to highlight a range of agents that work at different depths of systemic intervention, from shallower interventions to those with deeper interventions. The concept of ‘leverage depth’ has been adopted from systems thinking (Meadows 1999). Further ‘down’ or ‘within’ a system, the greater the leverage an agent is able to apply to influence the situation. Deeper leverage points often work on mindsets or values which help establish the system or keeps the system in place. It’s for this reason the research team theorises that agents who work on changing people’s relationship with nature, or reconnecting them to nature, will operate at the deepest leverage point – as they have the potential to change people’s values or mindsets.
Some of these case studies will also examine non-human agents. We found evidence from previous research that non-human agents use their agency to influence change on land. For example, in Contesse et al. (2021) the authors trace the impact of the invasive bagrada bug (Bagrada hilaris), and its role in provoking changes towards sustainable pest management in Chile by creating and mediating relationships between different human actors. In a New Zealand example, Dwiartama (2017) examined Psa-V disease as an agent that effects the New Zealand kiwifruit industry.
Our first step in analysing the effectiveness of these different agents has been to initiate a survey amongst non-farming entities: local government staff as well as others with an interest in or mandate to manage and protect the environment. The survey examines different conventional and non-conventional agents, assessing how relevant, recognised, and supported they are in New Zealand at present. Analysis of the survey results is ongoing, and we hope to publish the findings later in 2024.
Conclusions
The impacts of drivers and agents on agricultural land use and rural landscapes is complex and multifaceted. Diverse agents and drivers can influence farmers to make changes, but farmers remain the ultimate decision makers. Individual farmer ability and willingness to change mediates their response to different external drivers or agents. This complexity makes it difficult to predict and model or even attribute how diverse agricultural land users will respond to different influences.
An implication for impact assessment is that the future consequences of current or proposed legislative or regulatory changes aimed at farming, agriculture, or rural land use will be difficult to predict. This may drive more demand for impact assessment to better understand the social and environmental effects of legislative and regulatory change. The influence of non-human drivers – such as climate change, disease species, or new technologies – will also be difficult to predict.
Another implication is that a wider range of agents than typically conceived of may affect land use. These include: agents who have not been well recognised or supported – such as youth; agents (like artists) who can change the relationship between humans and the environment; and agents who enable spiritual and physical reconnection of Māori with the land (whenua).
Addressing the long-term environmental issues related to intensive agriculture – such as greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater pollution, land clearance, and loss of biodiversity – will require farmers to contemplate and then make major on-farm changes, changes that are likely to reshape their farm system fundamentally. The farmers we interviewed in Canterbury were willing and able to make minor changes, but few appeared to be contemplating major changes at this time. However, we argue that the agents of change that may be able to encourage and enable this system change are currently not well supported. Rather, agents whose work enables farmers to retain the continuity of their farm system – such as farm advisors, agricultural extension agents, financial advisors, and fertiliser representatives, etc. – are typically better supported, more visible, and well researched.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the help provided by Flo van Noppen and Dean Stronge (both from Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research) in reviewing early drafts of this paper.
References
Black, A. W. 2000. Extension theory and practice: a review. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 40: 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA99083
Contesse, M., Duncan, J., Legun, K., & Klerkx, L. 2021. Unravelling non-human agency in sustainability transitions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 166: 120634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120634
Dwiartama, A. 2017. Resilience and transformation of the New Zealand kiwifruit industry in the face of Psa-V disease. Journal of Rural Studies 52: 118–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.03.002
Hilkens, A., Reid, J. I., Klerkx, L., & Gray, D. I. 2018. Money talk: how relations between farmers and advisors around financial management are shaped. Journal of Rural Studies 63: 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.09.002
Kirk, N., van Noppen F., Robson-Williams, M. 2022a. Understanding drivers of on-farm change: a literature summary. Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research Contract Report LC4233 for the Canterbury Regional Council.
Kirk, N., Duncan, R., Booth, P., Robson-Williams, M. 2022b. Shifting knowledge practices for sustainable land use: insights from producers of Aotearoa New Zealand. Frontiers in Agronomy 4: 991853. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2022.991853
Kirk, N., van Noppen F., Robson-Williams, M. 2023. Drivers of on-farm decision-making and change in Canterbury. Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research Contract Report LC4337 for the Canterbury Regional Council.
Meadows, D.H. 1999. Leverage points: places to intervene in a system. Hartland, VT, USA: Sustainability Institute
Ministry for the Environment and Statistics New Zealand. 2022. Environment Aotearoa. Ministry for the Environment and Statistics New Zealand, Wellington, NZ.
Ministry for Primary Industries 2015. Over the fence: designing extension programmes to bring about practice change. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/9920-Over-the-Fence-Designing-extension-programmes-to-bring-about-practice-change. (accessed 25 July 2024).
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 2004. Growing for good: intensive farming, sustainability and New Zealand’s environment. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Wellington, NZ.
Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 2015. Update report. Water quality in New Zealand: land use and nutrient pollution. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Wellington, NZ.