Dr Jacqueline Rowarth is an adjunct professor at Lincoln University. She is a farmer-elected director of DairyNZ and Ravensdown, and a producer-appointed member of Deer Industry New Zealand.
OPINION: It is important to re-evaluate business when factors change. It is also important to acknowledge factors are changing all the time.
Sometimes the changes are part of a pattern, like seasons, ageing or the exchange rate.
Sometimes there are perturbations like hurricanes, pandemics or war.
READ MORE:
* What it takes to get New Zealand red meat to your plate
* Pavlova made from grass, and other foods of the future
* A fake meat future? Yeah right
* Kiwi milk is greener than other countries’
In farming, the perturbations on top of natural cycles are complex and are being made even more difficult to navigate by policies resulting in regulations, the consequences of which are not always understood by the regulators.
The fundamental confusion for many farmers is the statement from Government ministers that farmers are the bedrock of the economy, and the statement from environmentalists, some of whom are MPs, that they must reduce animal numbers.
They are being told by ministers that the future requires low carbon products, and that they know that farmers are already producing animal protein with a low carbon footprint, but they want farmers to do even better by trying new things.
To help, the Government is investing millions into research, development and technology uptake through on-farm advisers.
For farmers, knowing that the world is facing food insecurity, some of the “new things” are confusing.
Research has already indicated that they are not likely to result in “even lower” carbon footprint – just reduced food with, possibly, a higher footprint.
Reducing food would be against the intent of the Paris Agreement of 2015, which put the onus on developed countries to find solutions.
For some countries, learning about soil quality and recycling of nutrients will help with pasture management and animal management.
Improved pasture availability will enable animal health to improve, and that means more production over a longer lifetime for the breeding animal.
Part of achieving high pasture quality is choosing the species adapted to the environment and then grazing it at the appropriate moment, to optimise both quality and quantity.
The New Zealand ryegrass-white clover-chicory-plantain mix common on lowlands is relatively easy to maintain at optimal quality. Hyper-diverse pastures are not, because the different species are vegetative (high quality) and reproductive (lower quality) at different times.
It is the combination of optimal soil-plant-animal management that reduces the carbon footprint of the production system, and is part of the reason behind New Zealand’s low-carbon meat and milk.
The question might then be whether the plant-based proteins can achieve the same lower carbon proposition. Because of technologies, which many countries do not have, the answer is probably yes.
However, countries changing from monoculture cropping to integrated systems involving crop rotation and animals can probably increase soil carbon and so provide an offset to emissions.
In contrast, New Zealand already has integrated systems and has two to three times the soil carbon that other countries have in their soils.
Cover crops (to reduce risk of soil erosion, including the carbon in the soil) and minimum tillage (reducing the fossil fuel required for cultivation) are also used extensively in New Zealand when conditions are appropriate.
The ability of New Zealand farmers to judge environment and soil, and then identify the appropriate technique, is part of why yields of crops are high.
At the moment, however, yields of protein crops and cost of production do not make us cost-competitive with other countries. This is likely to change in future as temperature and rainfall changes, and if people are prepared to pay more for food.
It might also be possible to grow sugar crops at an economic yield in the future. Until then, it is unlikely that cultured protein (via vat fermentation) will be a prospect here.
But the factor often overlooked in the plant-based protein discussion is that crops require flattish land, cultivation, agrichemicals and a reliable harvesting season. Most animal protein occurs on land which does not meet these basic requirements.
Future changes in technologies and climate will change the economic equation, and re-evaluation is part of the New Zealand farmer DNA.
The No 8 wire mentality born of being a pioneer has enabled farmers not only to survive since the 1980s without farming subsidies, but to become world-leading in production systems.
The challenge of how to lower New Zealand’s carbon footprint further without reducing food production is real; we are already doing what is suggested, and fine-tuning to do better is constant.
This is the message that must reach our customers such as Nestle, McDonald’s and Danone, all of whom are trying to create a low-carbon product and are requiring their suppliers to assist. We already have the low-carbon products they want.
But trade agreements, such as those with the UK and EU, depend on us doing ever better as a country.
Taking a hard line with fossil fuel, the use of which has been the sector growing most rapidly in the greenhouse gas inventory, is warranted – but as it is school holidays and people like motorsports events, that is hardly likely to be a popular message.
Unpopular doesn’t make it wrong.
© 2022 Stuff Limited