MAF's Outcome Framework
Revised Outcomes
MAF contributes to whole-of-government outcomes through our own outcomes of Economy, People and Environment. These outcomes are shown in context on page 10. Last year we adjusted and refined our outcomes to align our activities, outcomes and mandate to “protect and grow” New Zealand's natural advantage while balancing environmental and social responsibilities. Achieving these long-term outcomes is reliant on multiple preconditions, processes, activities and intermediate outcomes - some less visible or measurable than others.
Developing the Framework
During 2006/07 we focused on producing a robust Outcomes Performance Monitoring Framework based on intervention logic models developed with our business groups. This year, we aim to further refine the current Outcome Framework and to then use the Framework to identify major (and important) data gaps. This will be supported by the development of an organisational research and evaluation programme to fill “priority” information gaps.
Monitoring Performance
MAF's activities are not necessarily the primary influence on our outcomes. However, the intermediate outcomes (under each end outcome) contain impact measures that quantify the difference MAF's actions have made. These can be measured over a shorter period and show the extent of MAF's progress towards the end outcomes. Impact measures also let us assess the contribution of each of our business groups, enabling us to prioritise investments and maximise capability development.
The intermediate outcomes and their impact measures on the following pages are a selection from MAF's Outcomes Performance Monitoring Framework due to be published in June 2007. The Framework identifies all the outcomes (end and intermediate) MAF is pursuing and the measures that assess our contribution. The particular intermediate outcomes on the following pages were selected on the basis of eight criteria. The first six criteria covered the general characteristics of a “good” performance indicator (relevant, specific, consistent, economical, intuitive and sufficient). The other two focussed on how the indicators explain MAF's performance in relation to its outcomes. One was about whether if focussed on MAF's core activity, the other about the level of MAF's influence - i.e. could changes in the outcomes be attributable to MAF's activity.
Gauging our impact
Expected intermediate Outcome |
Why this outcome? |
What is MAF doing to achieve this outcome? |
|
What would success look like? |
How is MAF measuring progress towards this outcome? |
impact measures of progress |
| Prevention and reduction of harm to the New Zealand economy, people and environment from pests and diseases and their management 1.4, 2.2, 3.2 |
New Zealand's unique biodiversity and current biosecurity status are central to its economic performance, our culture and the lifestyles of New Zealanders. Ensuring exotic pests and diseases (i.e. foot and mouth disease, poisonous or potentially harmful insects, invasive flora) are not introduced to New Zealand is therefore of paramount importance. | MAF is one of the few government agencies with a statutory responsibility to protect and manage New Zealand's biophysical environment. As such, MAF (via MAF Biosecurity New Zealand) is responsible for leading, co-ordinating and implementing New Zealand's biosecurity system while balancing other social, economic and cultural costs and benefits. | Exotic pests and diseases with the potential to harm the economy, people or the environment are stopped at the border or are detected early and kept from establishing in New Zealand. | MAF continually monitors its border control and biosecurity systems to determine whether interventions have been successful in detecting all potentially harmful pests and diseases. System or “pathway” detection failures are recorded as slippage - meaning the proportion of potentially harmful pests and diseases not detected by MAF interventions. | A decrease in the extent of slippage of potentially harmful exotic pests and diseases at the border (or other identified detection “pathways”). A decrease in the number of notified exotic vector-borne diseases in New Zealand. | |
|
Market access (technical or non-tariff related) for New Zealand's animal and plant products are maintained or enhanced 1.1 |
New Zealand's economy is heavily dependent on international trade in animal, plant and food products to support the living standards of its citizens. The global marketplace is, however, governed by significant tariff and non-tariff barriers which restrict market access and thereby impede the potential benefits countries could derive from trade activities. | MAF, including NZFSA, participates in multilateral and bilateral trade negotiations to negotiate less restrictive market access for New Zealand animal and plant products. MAF is also responsible for establishing export certification requirements, negotiating sanitary and phytosanitary equivalency agreements and assuring consistent application of these protocols to imported and exported products. | New Zealand increasingly faces less restrictive and less costly conditions of trade, including sanitary and phytosanitary agreements and protocols governing the trade in New Zealand animal and plant products. | MAF/NZFSA measures success in achieving this outcome by monitoring the progress, and downstream fiscal benefits, associated with less restrictive trade, sanitary and phytosanitary agreements and protocols governing the trade in New Zealand animal and plant products. | An increase in the number (and fiscal benefits) associated with: new bilateral or multilateral free trade agreements; instances where MAF/NZFSA intervention enabled New Zealand to maintain or enhance market access it risked losing; and successfully completed market equivalency agreements. | |
| Safe and suitable food for New Zealanders 2.1 |
Consumers everywhere increasingly demand assurance regarding the quality and way in which food is produced. The Government therefore seeks to ensure all food for sale in New Zealand meets the highest quality food safety standards, thereby reducing the incidence of foodborne illness and enabling consumers to make healthy dietary choices. | MAF (via the NZFSA) is responsible for developing, implementing, monitoring and reviewing safety and suitability standards for the production, processing, importation, transportation, storage and sale of food and food-related products in New Zealand. NZFSA is also responsible for developing and co-ordinating processes for responding to foodborne illness emergencies. | There is a measurable reduction in foodborne illnesses in New Zealand. There is widespread awareness of food-related health risks and lower levels of foodborne illness from home-cooked foods. New Zealanders have confidence in local and imported food. | MAF/NZFSA measures success in achieving this outcome by monitoring the domestic compliance with food safety standards via periodic systems audits. MAF/NZFSA also monitors the nature and incidence of (a) agricultural and other chemical compound residues present in food and (b) foodborne illness in New Zealand. | A long-term decrease in the level of foodborne illnesses in New Zealand. An increase (decrease) in the number of weighted system audits passed (failed). A decrease in potentially harmful agricultural and other chemical compound residues present in food. | |
| Sustainable use of resources, and the natural systems on which they are based, by the agriculture, food and forestry sectors
3.1 |
New Zealand's biophysical environment is integral to New Zealanders' lifestyle, culture, recreational activities and is a major driver of economic performance. However, the sectors' use of the environment can create negative impacts. These impacts have to be mitigated to ensure the sustainability of the economic and non-economic use of the biophysical environment over time. | MAF monitors the environmental impact of sectors' activities, discourages environmentally harmful practices, supports the use of sustainable farming and forestry activities and promotes ways in which to increase the productivity of current resource use. MAF is also developing a sustainable development framework for the agriculture and forestry sectors. | Sectors' use of, and impact on, the biophysical environment are sustainable in the long-run.
New Zealand is a recognised leader in the sustainable use of biophysical production resources in agriculture, food, forestry and related activities. |
MAF measures success in achieving this outcome by monitoring sectors' current use of, and impact on, the environment as well as sectors' progress toward adopting sustainable practices which will, over time, lessen the negative impacts associated with sectors' activities. | An increase in the priority actions and performance targets met associated with the Dairy and Clean Streams Accord. A decrease in agricultural emissions of methane and nitrous oxide per unit of output. An increase in uptake and participation in the Permanent Forest Sink Initiative. | |
| New Zealanders are informed and involved participants in MAF's regulatory systems 2.3 |
Government is not in a position to police or control all aspects of the biosecurity and animal welfare systems. It is increasingly recognised that in order to achieve a range of public policy objectives, citizens will have to willingly change their behaviour and become co-producers of desired policy outcomes. | MAF uses social marketing activities to influence New Zealanders' awareness of biosecurity and animal welfare systems as well as the penalties/likelihood of being caught for non-compliance. MAF also promotes and develops standards for the humane treatment of animals appropriate to society's expectations. | New Zealanders (a) are confident in our biosecurity and animal welfare systems, (b) have a widespread understanding of reasons for biosecurity rules, (c) actively report suspected biosecurity pests (d) voluntarily declare risk items at the border and (e) are aware of the complexity, trade-offs and ethical issues concerning animal welfare. | MAF uses (a) non-compliance rates among discrete target groups as proxies to gauge its success in generating awareness of the biosecurity system, and (b) the current reach of codes of animal welfare applicable in New Zealand and measuring progress towards full coverage. | A decrease in seizures of undeclared risk items at the border. A decrease in the number of border infringements by air passengers. An increase in the number of codes of animal welfare in New Zealand. | |
| Effective stewardship* of Crown forestry assets * management and investment 1.6 |
The Crown is actively seeking to exit commercial forestry activities in New Zealand. As a result of contractual commitments, the Government (via MAF) is responsible for managing, and selling off, a portfolio of commercial forestry assets on behalf of the Crown (until such time as the Crown no longer holds any commercial forestry assets). | MAF (via Crown Forestry) actively manages (via subcontractors) the remaining forestry assets of the Crown. Periodic management audits are undertaken to ensure forests are protected, and potential financial and/or physical loss have been minimised. MAF also works with other agencies to resolve Treaty of Waitangi claims. | MAF has sold off the Crown's commercial forestry assets while, in the interim, having ensured assets have been managed and administered in a prudent manner. | MAF measures success in achieving this outcome by establishing whether Crown forestry assets (a) have been effectively managed, and (b) whether or not it has been able to exit from commercial forests or forestry-related leases as circumstances permit. | A reduction, over time, in the area (hectares) and value ($ million) of Crown forestry assets. |
Contact for Enquiries
Strategy and Performance Group
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526, Wellington
Tel: +64 4 894 0100
Fax: +64 4 894 0738
Contact this person
