Abstract

Bridging the gap between environmental knowledge and research, and desired environmental outcomes to achieve sustainable land management

Executive summary

Bridging the Gap is a three-stage project commissioned by MAF Policy. The project is being undertaken by a consortium, led by Nimmo-Bell, which includes Corydon Consultants Ltd, AgResearch and Massey University’s Department of Applied and International Economics.

The aim of the project is to identify ways to bridge the gap between environmental knowledge and research and desired environmental outcomes, to achieve sustainable land management. The objectives of the project are to:

  • identify successful and sustainable approaches for bridging the gap
  • analyse why these approaches work
  • identify key characteristics of successful models
  • develop methods that will enable the replication of key characteristics.

The principal audience for this report is MAF Policy. Other government departments, players in the agriculture industry and regional councils will also benefit from the information contained in the report. The purpose of the report is to provide direction to policy needs in relevant areas of sustainable land management.

Project structure

Phase One of the project involved a literature review to identify key lessons on what influences behaviour change in the context of land management. The report noted the importance of taking a holistic and participatory approach to bring about sustainable change in land management practices. Phase One also considered how science and environmental knowledge have been used to achieve desired environmental outcomes. The report identified key lessons for policy makers and designers of land management programmes. In particular it identified those factors which are most influential in the achievement of environmentally sustainable land management practices.

This current report sets out the findings of Phase Two of the project. The purpose of Phase Two is to test and evaluate the conclusions reached in Phase One for relevance to the New Zealand context, by analysing the results of in-depth case studies undertaken around the country.

Phase Three is the implementation phase of the project where the key messages from this research will be discussed with industry and leading stakeholders to assist in identifying where existing policies, programmes and initiatives can benefit from the findings. The key messages that have emerged from the analysis of behaviour and adoption theory, an analysis of overseas policy approaches and the responses from the farmers interviewed for the case-studies provide useful guidance to those engaged in fostering sustainable land management on how to improve their effectiveness in achieving that task.

The issues addressed

Achieving sustainable environmental outcomes for land management requires input from science, policy, those who manage the land and the wider community. Achieving synergies between the various players is important in New Zealand where the wellbeing of the agricultural sector is integral to the country’s social, cultural and economic wellbeing. In exploring the relationship between science, policy and application, Bridging the Gap focuses on three environmental issues of particular relevance to New Zealand agriculture; soil erosion, nitrate leaching and possum control.

Methodology

Phase Two of Bridging the Gap tests the conclusions reached in the Phase One report, for relevance to New Zealand farmers and the context within which they operate. This involved a comparative analysis of case studies for each of the three environmental issues, to identify what approaches work, and why and what barriers were being encountered in the effort to improve the sustainability of land management practices.

The methodology involved six stages

  1. The commissioning of a nationwide telephone survey of 1,000 dairy farmers to gain an over-view of farmer attitudes to nitrate leaching and nutrient management. The results were used to test and add weight to the findings of the case-studies on nitrogen. This component was undertaken by CINTA Research as part of its Nationwide Farmers’ Omnibus February 2007.
  2. The establishment of a stakeholder working group to ensure a wide range of knowledge and experience was incorporated into the analysis at key stages. Stakeholders represented included Landcare Research, Department of Conservation, Landcare Trust, Federated Farmers, Dexcel Environment, and two regional councils.1
  3. The literature review carried out for the Phase One report was supplemented by a review of additional articles and reports.
  4. Thirteen case-studies addressing one or more of the three selected environmental issues were conducted. The case study selection ensured that together the cast studies covered a range of approaches, different physical challenges and farming communities, and provided a wide regional distribution. Farmers, regional council staff and other stakeholders (such as agri-business professionals and farmer group facilitators) were interviewed in each of the case study areas.
  5. A comparative analysis of the case studies was undertaken to determine those factors which seem to be key to achieving successful and sustainable implementation, impediments to good practice and the extent to which context and approach affects success.
  6. Findings of the case-studies were compared to the findings of the Phase One report and the CINTA research.

Reducing the impact of nitrogen

The detrimental impact of nitrate leaching on the environment has been known for decades but public concern is mounting and gathering pace. Justifiably, concern is due to environmental health risks and deteriorating water quality in aquifers and in some of New Zealand’s popular lakes.

Nitrate leaching was traditionally linked to fertiliser application. Fertiliser use has increased significantly as farming has intensified. Increased applications of fertilisers have boosted productivity and farm profitability. Prior to 1984 government support, (including fertiliser subsidies) distorted the relationship between intensive production and impact on the environment. The introduction of the Resource Management Act in 1991 was aimed at ensuring that environmental effects became the basis of permitted landuse. The number of dairy farms and the intensity of their operations have increased significantly in recent years – potentially this has detrimental effects on the environment. Some of these effects are already occurring in several regions.

Although nitrogen fertiliser application is a significant contributor, the main cause of nitrate leaching from pasture systems is urine patches. This is not being addressed directly and mitigating measures arguably conflict with industry growth goals. The future relies on the cooperation of all stakeholders along the value chain, and will require strong political and industry leadership. Although the science focus has shifted from production to understanding, quantifying and mitigating the impact of nitrogen, the science is relatively immature and evolving.

Five dairy farming case studies were selected from both the North and South Islands. They covered new and traditional dairying regions and a range of approaches to address concern. The case study findings closely matched the Cinta Research results and provide interesting insights into the motivational factors and barriers to improved practice.

Across the nitrogen-focused case studies there was a limited awareness of the impact of excessive nitrogen. Scepticism and uncertainty are fuelled by farmers not understanding the basis or reasoning for policies and standards set by regional councils to deal with the problem of non-point sources of nitrate leaching. The credibility of regional councils was questioned as they too grapple with keeping up to date with the latest science and convey this to land managers without being thought to be shifting the goal post. Rules and standards change as new research and technologies are introduced. The farming industry is accustomed to proven, reliable and demonstrated science. Changes in rules and regulations to deal with a problem that is not visible and where results are not easily demonstrated cause scepticism.

Economic benefit is a primary motivator in effluent irrigation and riparian management decisions. This was followed by concern for observed environmental degradation. Some farmers did not associate dairying with environmental degradation because nitrate leaching tends to be an invisible issue. Consistent water quality standards need to be implemented and enforced. However to achieve consistent standards, robust science, regular monitoring and effective extension services are required. On its own, the Clean Streams Accord will not address, nor was it intended to address, all nitrogen issues.

Environmental monitoring and measurement is critical and needs to be ongoing, consistent and conveyed to farmers in a form they understand. Farmers need to understand and take ownership of the problem, understand how nitrate leaching impacts on the wider community and be able to measure the benefits of the actions they take to address the issue.

Support from local councils can make a difference. Where councils have harmonious relationships with land managers this can significantly increase the level of on-farm compliance with rules and regulations. However, it is recognised by both farmers and local councils that in some cases, farmer compliance requires enforcement and penalties. Enforcement is time consuming and, depending on the approach, can undermine the relationship between the regional council and land managers who feel they are at times unfairly blamed. Non-compliance may be (and according to farmers interviewed usually is), accidental. Where non-compliance is deliberate, the penalty is insignificant compared with the savings of not applying best practice in respect to the environment, which can often be more costly. A key lesson from the case studies was the need to balance enforcement with more effective information transfer and advisory support to farmers and their employees.

Relating sustainable land management to economic benefits is fundamental to success and its importance is a key lesson of this research. The need to approach nitrogen issues in a wider context which includes the social and economic aspects of the farmer’s situation, is also a key finding.

Compliance was found to be more likely when scientists and technical advisors worked alongside farmers, implementing locally relevant science. On-farm demonstration of new science and technology was also linked to success, reducing the risk to farmers associated with the adoption of new practices.

Soil erosion

New Zealand's soils are particularly vulnerable to erosion given their skeletal nature and the pressures placed upon them. Erosion is a naturally occurring process although the clearance of woody vegetation has exacerbated erosion in sensitive areas. Soil erosion leads to a number of economic and environmental costs. Erosion control is therefore an essential component of sustainable land management.

Five case studies were undertaken in both North and South Islands. The approaches to erosion control varied. The farmer discussion group approach used face-to-face interactions between farmers, scientists and consultants to develop new farming systems based on the technical recommendations produced by the group. The regional council approach centred on cost-sharing and advice. Officers assisted farmers to develop farm plans for implementation over a number of years to avoid placing a financial burden on the farm business. The central government approach used grant funding to incentivise land managers to plant trees (mainly plantation forestry) in areas that would otherwise have been uneconomic to develop as commercial forest.

Perceived financial costs of erosion; concern about the visual effects and being able to see results were key factors motivating farmers to act. The profitability of pastoral farming relative to forestry; the provision of institutional support through financial assistance and the encouragement of farmer discussion groups; and strong leadership within these discussion groups were also identified as important in the uptake of erosion control. Farmers responded well to clear, common goals, and targets that were seen to be achievable within the local farming context. Providing scientific justification for recommended practices to treat soil erosion, and placing the farm within the larger context of environmental sustainability helped strengthened farmers’ motivations to undertake erosion control.

Science has a critical role to play in the uptake of erosion-control measures. Utilising local knowledge; creating links between sustainability and farm business success; producing locally relevant science in a usable form, and ensuring that the science was delivered by credible experts, were all identified as important factors in achieving uptake. Regional councils, as credible experts with local knowledge and experience, had an important role to play in the transfer of information. Several gaps in the available research were identified. These included the value of pole planting and the importance of tree management in combating erosion. In two of the case studies, a lack of consistency on some of the technical advice being given has led to a degree of scepticism among farmers.

Other key lessons that emerged from the case studies included:

  • institutions have an important role to play in maintaining farmer group momentum and encouraging the integration of erosion management into everyday farming practices
  • agribusiness professionals have not bought into the concept of sustainability and technical expertise and experience on erosion control is being lost from regional councils - economic drivers often prevail despite a genuine concern for environmental protection (financial sustainability is an essential factor in farmer’s decision-making on erosion control)
  • farmers need a range of options for addressing erosion so that they can tailor practical solutions that best meet their economic and social circumstances
  • whole farm business plans reduce the risk of decisions being made based on short-term financial goals
  • farmers need improved technical information to support recommended practices.

Possum control

Possum control involves the use of hazardous substances in sensitive environments. The social and environmental contexts are complex and at a scale involving significant numbers of properties and diverse land uses. Effective possum control requires well integrated delivery and sustained effort. Science and technology and their appropriate use in the context of Bovine TB vector control, biodiversity protection and sustainable land management is critical in achieving desired outcomes. The case studies suggest that the effectiveness of possum control techniques is rarely in doubt but acceptability is often in question.

Three case-studies were undertaken – two in the North Island and one in the South. Land managers acknowledge a broad range of benefits from possum control but many are hard to measure and account for in farm budgets. The benefits extend beyond the boundaries of individual properties and need to be recognised by the wider community as a basis for equitable cost sharing. The role of science in possum management needs to be expanded to better capture, verify, and measure these wider benefits. The aerial application of 1080 to contain Bovine TB and protect indigenous biodiversity is widely accepted among the farming community on the basis that the benefits outweigh the costs, and the risks. A similar weighing of costs, risks, and benefits is needed in the context of sustainable land management. At present the science is not adequate to achieve this.

Ground operations now account for more than half of the possum control work undertaken. Targeted areas tend to be at the interface between conservation land and the farmed landscape so that poisons pose threats not only to indigenous fauna but also to farmed animals. The poisons used, as well as the application techniques, vary from region to region. The benefits for landowners are similarly varied with many claiming benefits for the health of vegetation in erosion-prone areas and along waterways. Native bird populations and lowland indigenous biodiversity are enhanced. There is however uneasiness among some land managers about the effects of some poisons and a questioning of the benefits. Although 1080 has received a lot of attention, many of the poisons used for ground control have not.

The threat of Bovine TB was seen by land managers as an imperative to control possums and they felt well supported in taking action by their regional councils, the Animal Health Board and the Department of Conservation. Without this imperative however the motives became more complex, as did the institutional arrangements and delivery mechanisms. Developing strategies and operational systems as joint ventures between landowners and agencies, with clear feedback mechanisms, were essential to sustaining farmers’ interest and commitment in these case studies.

For the benefits of possum control to be recognised within the broader context of sustainable land management there is a need for more comprehensive monitoring. If vegetation health is improved with pest control, and bird life is enhanced, there needs to be objective measures to capture these benefits. If carbon sequestration has a value and this is enhanced with fewer possums then this too needs to be accounted for, as do down stream benefits for water supply and flood mitigation.

Regional councils are a conduit for science and technology on this issue and land managers tend to depend on them for information and advice. Councils are also relied on to coordinate the delivery of pest control and to provide financial support where this is justified. Regional councils are however, often insufficiently resourced to carry out these roles. Land managers are more likely to adopt new practices which have been tried and tested in a situation similar to their own.

Leadership is important to ensure well coordinated operations and sustained effort. This needs to come from within the community, or from individuals who have a regular presence within it and are trusted by land managers. Engagement with landowners to understand their circumstances, draw on their knowledge, and develop operational goals and working relations contributes to success. The knowledge of landowners provides a context for the integration of possum control, the management of effects, and monitoring.

Coordination across agencies is critical. Because successful pest control requires consistent and sustained effort across large tracts of land, it is essential that agencies work closely together to integrate their operations, and that control is equally effective on all land. This is particularly important where Crown owned and managed land, borders private farmland. Suitably mapped information can be a valuable tool in informing and locating landowners within the wider landscape.

Conclusions and recommendations

The cross-cutting themes that have emerged from the three topic areas are noted below. The recommendations responding to the key issues emerging from the research are highlighted in the final section of this report. The recommendations are largely intended for MAF as the major client.

Drivers of sustainability

  1. The diagram in section 7.4 depicts a number of the drivers for and against sustainability identified in the case studies. The nature and direction of these drivers show that:
    • markets do not reflect the true costs of sustainable or unsustainable land management practices
    • inadequate investment in, and management of research, and inadequate institutional capacity-building both of which have resulted in knowledge gaps and a lack of options for land managers
    • there is poor awareness and recognition among the wider community of the environmental improvements generated by land managers and
    • quantifying environmental impacts (both positive and negative) and monitoring progress towards outcomes is difficult for farmers in.

Institutional support

  1. Institutional capability and support to land managers is essential for providing credible technical advice; translating current science into practical solutions; maintaining the momentum of group events and projects; raising awareness of environmental issues amongst the farming community; and establishing targets and standards to be achieved over a defined time period.
  2. Regional councils were found to fulfil an important role in the transfer of science from scientists to land managers although threats and deficiencies to the capabilities of these councils were highlighted.
  3. Cost sharing between councils and land managers is a key success factor for encouraging voluntary action.
  4. Rules and regulations are needed for a minority of land managers especially where economic benefits are insufficient to provide an incentive.

Current knowledge and transfer of science

  1. The science on reducing the environmental impacts of nitrogen is still developing and unproven and there is a degree of uncertainty and scepticism among farmers regarding recommended best practice.
  2. The main cause of nitrate leaching (urine patches at high stocking rates) is not being addressed directly and current strategies are only dealing with the problem around the edges.
  3. Measurable goals for reducing nitrate leaching are needed.
  4. Land managers need locally relevant science and solutions.
  5. Involving farmers in the identification of problems and solutions and in monitoring outcomes, and fostering interaction between scientists, technical advisors and land managers was found to be effective in bridging the gap. Skilled facilitators are an essential part of that process.
  6. Visibility of the problem and of environmental improvements is essential for awareness and sustained action. Innovative ways to improve the visibility of environmental outcomes is required.

The role of industry

  1. Current agriculture industry goals can be a barrier to bridging the gap. Increasing productivity can conflict with the environmental sustainability goals of regional councils.
  2. Leadership at all levels is important. Champions for the environment and for sustainable development are needed to generate support and understanding of environmental issues.
  3. Agri-business professionals and supporting sectors need to incorporate environmental sustainability into the service they provide farmers.
  4. Public acknowledgement of good practice is important.

Multi-disciplinary research is required

  1. There are gaps in the science needed to achieve sustainable land management. The separation of environmental research from traditional fields of agricultural research (e.g. productivity) emphasises short-term financial costs rather than long-term opportunities. The traditional focus of environmental research needs to be reassessed in terms of its contribution to the achievement of sustainability of land management.
  2. Economic and social research is critical to improving the effectiveness of market driven economic incentives and to help allocate the cost of environmental improvements between landowners and the wider public more equitably.
  3. Multi-disciplinary research is required on sustainability issues. The analysis of behaviour and adoption theory and the case studies demonstrate that changing land management practices requires an integrated approach.
  4. The research has shown that in dealing with farming-related environmental issues there are gaps in knowledge, understanding and application and drivers for sustainable land management do not always work in the right direction. However, it has also identified key factors that can help put things right. The answers are complex and require the engagement of policy makers, educators, researchers, regional councils, government departments and industry representatives. Through a combination of science, information, good practice, monitoring and regulation, sustainable land management can be achieved.

1 The Parliamentary Commission for the Environment (PCE) and Ministry for the Environment were also invited but unable to participate.

Contact for Enquiries

MAF Information Services
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND

Fax: +64 4 894 0721
Contact this person

 
Print this page Print this page