AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

Introduction

Water quality issues related to poor farming practices have become an important topic of focus, particularly in areas where fresh water resources are both limited and of already noted poor quality. Reports have shown that a high percentage of monitored sites around New Zealand have had a significantly large increase (52%) in nitrogen levels in freshwater ways, which has generally been linked to the intensification of agriculture (MFE, 2015.) Water quality concerns as a result of poor farming practices is faced in the Whangarei region (Northland Regional Council, 2012). and, as a result, more attention has been placed on independent farmer’s practices. At a national level, it is now largely considered “good” practice for landowners to exclude stock from water bodies (NZPI, 2014) and thus the Northland Regional Council is working towards achieving this through a variety of measures which will be discussed (Northland Regional Council, 2016).  This research aims to examine the relationship between the Northland Regional Council and farmers in the Northland region, gaining an understanding of the way this relationship shapes the actions of farmers.

This will be achieved through the following objectives;

• To explore the relationship between the key stakeholders;

1. Northland Regional Council and
2. Dairy/dry stock farmers within the Whangarei area

• To identify the key influencing factors which motivate farmers to adopt sustainable practices such as water way fencing.
• To evaluate the current land management plans in place and assess farmer’s response to such initiatives.

Literature Review

Within the literature, it is shown that farmers motivations towards adopting sustainable farming practices tend to be a factor of both their personal circumstances and the perceived risk (Pannel et al., 2006 as cited in Greiner et al., 2009). When choosing to adopt a conservation technique, farmers will tend to evaluate the merit of the practice on the basis of several factors which may include- and are not limited to- the various social, economic and environmental goals of the landowner (Greiner et al., 2009).  Given the relative variability in the agriculture sector, not all individuals will be influenced by the same factors and thus adoption of techniques is highly situational (Small et al.,2015). The type of farm- for example an agri-business versus an active family farm- will have different goals and thus different land management decisions (Blackstock, 2010).

Often times, farms are run in a family situation and therefore management tends to be a shared decision which can influence adoption (Pannel et al., 2006).  Social practices, such as the sharing of information within a community can also influence the decision making process (Pannel et al., 2006). Economic motivations tend to play a large role, especially where a landowner feels that the adoption of technology will be of little value to their land use (Pannel et al., 2006). Where financial factors are concerned, those who seek to adopt either have greater capital (Small et al., 2015) or have stronger environmental motivations over farm profit (Pannel et al., 2006).

Risk also plays a factor in a land owners decision to partake in conservation practices (Marra et al., 2003), particularly when the adoption of some methods- such as stream fencing- can be seen to have long time lags between treatment and effect (Griener et al., 2009). That is, there is no immediate quantifiable benefit from choosing to go ahead with the methods proposed (Pannel as cited in Marra et al., 2003). A recurrent theme tended to surround around the financial risk of implementing new, and unknown technologies and the value that adopting a technology may have (Marra et al., 2003).

As the state of our environment continues to receive on-going attention, the literature also debates the best tool for encouraging land owners to adopt sustainable practices. Given that most of the environmental impacts resulting from agricultural practices are invisible and occur off farm, it can sometimes prove difficult to communicate the need for agri-environmental schemes to be put in place, and thus a need to strategize how best to influence the adoption of sustainable methods (Blackstock et al., 2010). The literature finds that the two most commonly applied approaches tend to include financial incentive and the use of information provision. Studies within the literature found that often the monetary contribution to environmental schemes, prove to be the favoured tool in encouraging landowners to adopt conservation techniques that improve the quality of the environment (Baerenklau, 2005), particularly when considering the high upfront costs that some practices are perceived to have (Pannel et al., 2006). One study within the literature noted that often times, the financial incentive tended to result in a change in opinion and the perceived risk associated with conservation technologies, and had a supposed advantage over peer-based sharing in which knowledge is passed down or acquired (Baerenklau, 2005). This may be because of the affordance of experience which a financial incentive is seen to have, with minimal financial risk associated given that the farmer has not had to contribute solely to implementing and ‘trialling’ the technology. Extending on this idea, one study found that by way of first-hand experience, sustainable actions tend to become more deliberate and thus behaviours change (Vankerhoff and Lebel, 2006).

Blackstock et al., (2010) notes that within the current literature, farmers tend to be grouped homogenously which is perhaps a downfall when it comes to encouraging agri-environmental schemes amongst landowners through the provision of information. By grouping all farmers as one, some may feel that they are exempt from the issues that result from certain farming practices and thus their actions are not part of the contributing problem (Blackstock et al., 2010). Despite this, the role of learning is still found to play a valuable role in the adoption of technology and often times the degree to which a farmer will choose to adopt a new technology will increase with the experience he has about a given technology (Pannel et al., 2006) (Baerenklau, 2005) (Cocklin et al., 2007). By providing a farmer with well-reasoned, logical data it may be possible to encourage a landowner to understand the wider issue at hand and how they can be a part of the solution, and in Australian studies is the top preferred tool for motivating change amongst landowners (Cocklin et al., 2007) (Blackstock et al., 2010). The literature also notes that the more educated an individual, the more effective land management will be and thus the greater capacity to adopt appropriate farm management techniques (Defrancesco et al., 2008 as cited in Small et al., 2015).

Negative attention surrounding the current dairying practices within the New Zealand context are duly noted, and pressure has been placed on the industry through campaigns such as the 2002 Fish and Game ‘Dirty Dairying’ which seek to improve the environmental performance of the sector (Small et al., 2015).  A report compiled by Abell, Hamilton and Paterson explains that dairy farming in New Zealand has contributed to the decline in ecosystem services, including the provision of fresh water (2011). Whilst New Zealand reports highlight that a large proportion of farmers have adopted farm management techniques such as stream fencing (Small et al., 2015), the issue of conveying the importance of good farm management practice is hindered by the “lag effect” that has also been noted in international literature (Duncan, 2013) (Marra et al., 2003).  

As identified in Pannel et al., 2006 at the international scale, the New Zealand context for the key motivators tend to also centre on the individual characteristics of a farm and personal situations (Small et al., 2015). New Zealand literature has highlighted that often times, debt is a constraining factor in the decision of a landowner whether to uptake a more sustainable farming approach (Rhodes et al., 2002) (Small et al., 2015). and funding tended to be an important tool in motivating changes in behaviours (Rhodes et al., 2002). As explained in Pannel et al., (2006) and reiterated in Rhodes et al., (2002) farmers tend to be discouraged by the immediate upfront cost of adopting technology, rather than ongoing costs. Rhodes et al., (2002) also found that much like international examples, the ignorance of poor water quality and the lack of ownership towards the problem was another factor in whether a farmer participated in sustainable practices.

As examined in international literature, the role of education and provision of knowledge also plays an important part in the adoption of sustainable farming practices in the local setting, and in some cases could be more important in influencing initial adoption of sustainable practice, over financial incentives (Rhodes et al., 2002). Local literature also tends to highlight the importance of community based groups, used for prompting “voluntary action”, and providing a network for ideas to be shared and motivate change amongst farmers (Abell et al., 2011). New Zealand examples have also shown that with greater exposure to knowledge, farmers often times intend to or are more willing to consider participating in practices such as stream fencing and riparian planting (Rhodes et al., 2002).

Contextual Analysis

Before undertaking this research, it is important to ensure that I have a sound understanding of the area in question and understand any factors which may influence certain practices that occur within the region.  Given that this research will focus on practices within the farming sector; it is thus important to look into agriculture in more detail within the Whangarei setting. Whangarei is located approximately 2.5 hours north of Auckland, and is ranked 13^th in size of the 73 districts in New Zealand (Statistics New Zealand, 2013).

 The Agriculture industry is an important contributor to Whangarei’s economy, with an estimated 80% of the regions rural land used for grazing (Whangarei NZ, 2016). A report published in 2015 suggested that Whangarei has seen a population growth of around 9.4%, with a majority of this increase occurring within the rural areas, which may account for the relative size of the industry (Whangarei District Council, 2016). Whangarei supports a stock count of around 100,000 dairy cattle and a further 850,000 beef stock, with farmers having the advantage of the “winterless north’s” warmer winter conditions, enabling them to grow stock in the lucrative, cooler months (Whangarei NZ, 2016). This is perhaps an option not shared by many of the countries farming regions, and thus may be a further influencing factor in the industries size. New Zealand’s largest exporter Fonterra, also locates one of its processing plants just north of Whangarei, in Kauri (Whangarei NZ, 2016). As of 2012, the agriculture industry in the region contributed to 6.3% of New Zealand’s GDP (Whangarei NZ, 2016).  
Despite the large economic benefits of the agriculture industry in the region, it is not without its pitfalls. Stock can have direct impacts on the quality of water bodies and can also impact local habitat quality (NPI, 2014), thus the exclusion of stock in water ways has become a priority under the “Sustainable Dairy Water Accord” which aims to lift the environmental performance of New Zealand dairy farms (Dairy NZ, 2016).  Following on from this, Government requirements under the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 required that local councils work alongside communities to both set standards for and work towards improving fresh water quality (Northland Regional Council, 2016).

This is evident within the Whangarei and wider Northland region, with the formation of groups and Regional Council land management plans, in order to ensure that water quality issues are addressed. Waiora Northland Water is one of such groups devised to work at a catchment level with stakeholders to manage fresh water quality (Northland Regional Council, 2016). The Northland Regional Council also offer free land use advise to farmers through a land management team, which work to both maximise productivity on private land, whilst ensuring minimum damage to natural resources such as fresh water, through solutions such as stream fencing (Northland Regional Council, 2015). If land owners choose to uptake land management solutions such as the fencing of waterways, there is an incentive in the form of the “Environment Fund”, in which landowners can apply to for partial funding (Northland Regional Council, 2016).   

Despite the Northland Regional Council’s attempt to work with landowners to combat the issue of stock in waterways, there are currently no specific regional council rules which prohibit stock access from fresh water bodies (Northland Regional Council, 2016). While the councils land management team do encourage landowners to uptake practices -such as stream fencing -in order to minimise the impact of stock on waterways, the plans are non-compulsory and thus action does not actually have to be taken (Northland Regional Council, 2016). Given that this could then be seen as a voluntary initiative, it perhaps begs to question the legitimacy of the approach in improving fresh water quality within the Northland Region, and more specifically in Whangarei.

Research Question and Objectives

How does the relationship between Northland Regional Council and farmers influence the actions of farmers?

• To explore the relationship between the key stakeholders;

1. Northland Regional Council and
2. Dairy/dry stock farmers within the Whangarei area

• To identify the key influencing factors which motivate farmers to adopt sustainable practices such as water way fencing.
• To evaluate the current land management plans in place and assess farmer’s response to such initiatives.

Research Design

1. Research Strategy

Data for my research will be collected during the September field trip to Whangarei. I intend to collect most of my data through semi-structured interviews, and use secondary sources such as council reports and key policy documents to illustrate what has been discussed in the interviews. In order to answer my question and objectives, I will need to talk to both representatives from the Northland Regional Council and farmers within the Whangarei area.  These people are key to my research given that I intend to explore the relationship between the two stakeholders. Farmers opinions are vital to my research as I intend to explore they key motivating factors for the uptake of sustainable practices, like stream fencing.

2. Sources of Information and Research Methods

Semi-structured one-on-one and group interviews

I intend to collect a large proportion of my data through semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews, both individual and group will allow a conversational type flow with my key informants and may also allow for improvisation if needed. By undertaking my data collection through semi-structured interviews, I am allowing myself the ability to understand the key informant’s experiences and personal observations which I feel a questionnaire would not fully capture. This approach I feel is more suited to my question and key objectives, which seek to understand the relationship between and experiences of the stakeholders involved. A limitation of this method is the potential for an individual to “say one thing and mean another” particularly if the question asked is misinterpreted or for fear of being identified through what they have said.

Documents and texts

Given that time and resources available during this research may be limiting in terms of data collection and access to key informants, it may be necessary to consult popular media or any relevant archival data. Local newspaper reports may offer an insight into the experiences and opinions of others, which may provide support for, or comparison of any opinion I collect through key informants.  National newspaper reports can offer a wider scale reach and allow me to make connections between the local and national scale opinions of farmers on the issue at question. Local newspaper reports may also provide a source of “success” stories, touting any progress made within the farming community surrounding the fencing of water ways on private land.

Statistical and other secondary sources

In order to gain any supporting facts or figures that may help to illustrate my research, council reports such as State of the Environment reports and key policy documents surrounding current policy on water way fencing will also be referred to. This will also act as a reference point for what is discussed during the interviews.

Ethical Considerations

Given the nature of my research question and objectives, the information I am primarily seeking is based on the personal experience and opinions of the stakeholders. It is my understanding from prior discussion with representatives of the NRC at an earlier date, that land management plans are devised on an individual basis between NRC and landowners. With this in mind, there is the potential that any information gathered and shared between myself and the stakeholders interviewed, may be of a sensitive or potentially negative nature, and that the one-on-one approach may result in key stakeholders being recognised through any opinions expressed. It is my job as the researcher to ensure that I not only ensure the key informants are willing participants, but also consent to having any opinions expressed in the final research report that will be compiled. I must ensure that key informants are also aware that they will not be directly identified in the final report and that at any stage they may withdraw any comments made and are under no obligation to answer any question they feel uncomfortable answering.

My research also deals with the relationship between two stakeholders, and thus I as the interviewer must remain neutral. Given that I will be seeking the opinion on the service received by landowners from the Regional Council, I need to ensure that stakeholders are entirely aware of my position as a researcher from the University and that I am not in any way acting on behalf of the Regional Council. When posing questions to either party, I must ensure that I do not at any stage frame my own opinion or ask questions in a judgemental or value laden way. I will ensure participants have my contact details available and may have a copy of the data collected which will allow them the ability to express any feeling of violation and thus enable me to withdraw the information. Given that we are also dealing with an area where funding is available through the council, I must ensure that questions do not put stakeholders at risk of potentially losing access to this funding through their opinions expressed.

When asking questions, particularly around issues involving finances, I must ensure the question is asked in a sensitive manner. I will ensure I remain conscientious and professional at all times to ensure that the key informants feel comfortable throughout and that trust is maintained between myself and those I interview.

References

Abell,J.M., Hamilton, D.P. and Paterson, J. (2011). Reducing the external environmental costs of pastoral farming in New Zealand: Experiences from the Te Arawa lakes, Rotorua. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 18(3), 139-154. doi: 10.1080/14486563.2011.591520

Baerenklau, K.A. (2005). Toward an understanding of technology adoption: risk, learning and neighbourhood effects. Land Economics, 81(1), 1-19. doi: 10.3368/le.81.1.1

Blackstock, K.L., Ingram, J., Burton, R., Brown, K.M. and Slee, B. (2010). Understanding and influencing behaviour change by farmers to improve water quality. Science of the Total Environment, 408 (23), 5631-5638. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.04.029

Cocklin, C, Mautner, N and Dibden, J. (2007). Public policy, private landholders: Perspectives on policy mechanisms for sustainable land management. Journal of Environmental Management,85 (4) 986-998. doi:

Dairy NZ. (n.d). Fencing Waterways. Retrieved from http://www.dairynz.co.nz/environment/waterways/fencing-waterways/ Date accessed: 10 August 2016.

Duncan, R. (2013). Regulating agricultural land use to manage water quality: The challenges for science and policy in enforcing limits on non-point source pollution in New Zealand. Land Use Policy, 41, 378-387. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.06.003

Greiner, R., Patterson, L. and Miller, O. (2009). Motivations, risks perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers. Agricultural Systems 99, 86-104. doi: doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.06.003

Marra, M., Pannel, J.D. and Ghadim, A.A. (2003). The economics of risk, uncertainty and learning in the adoption of new agricultural technologies: where are we on the learning curve? Agricultural Systems, 75(2-3), 215-234. doi: 10.1016/S0308-521X(02)00066-5

Ministry for the Environment & Statistics New Zealand. (2015).New Zealand's Environmental Reporting Series: Environment Aotearoa 2015. (ME 1215). New Zealand: Ministry for the Environment & Statistics New Zealand.  Retrieved from http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/environmental-reporting/environment-aotearoa-2015-fresh-water/state-our-fresh-water

New Zealand Planning Institute. (2014). Exclusion of Stock from Waterbodies. Retrieved from

https://www.planning.org.nz/Category?Action=View&Category_id=1254

Northland Regional Council. (2012). State of the Environment Report 2012. Retrieved from http://resources.nrc.govt.nz/upload/12661/Foreword%20and%20Introduction%20-%20SOE%202012.pdf

Northland Regional Council. (n.d) Fencing Stock Out of Waterways. Retrieved from http://www.nrc.govt.nz/Environment/Land/Managing-riparian-margins/fencing-stock-out-of-waterways/ Date accessed: 10 August 2016.

Northland Regional Council (2015). What is Farm Water Quality Improvement Plan (FWQIP)? Retrieved from http://www.nrc.govt.nz/resources/?url=%2FResource-Library-Summary%2FPublications%2FLand%2FFarm-Water-Quality-Improvement-Plans%2FWhat-is-a-Farm-Water-Quality-Improvement-Plan-FWQIP%2F

Northland Regional Council. (n.d). What is Waiora Northland Water? Retrieved from http://www.nrc.govt.nz/Your-Council/Council-Projects/Waiora-Northland-Water/What-is-Waiora-Northland-Water/ Date accessed: 10 August 2016.

Northland Regional Council. (n.d). Waiora Northland Water. Retrieved from http://www.nrc.govt.nz/Your-Council/Council-Projects/Waiora-Northland-Water/ Date accessed: 10 August 2016.

Pannell, D.J., Marshall, G.R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanlcay, F. and Wilkison, R. (2006). Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landowners. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 46(11), 1407-1424. doi: 1071/EA05037

Rhodes, H.M., Leland Jr, L.S. and Niven, B.C. (2002). Farmers, streams information and money: Does informing farmers about riparian management have any effect? Environmental Management, 30 (5), 665-677. doi: 10.1007/s00267-002-2714-7

Small, B., Brown, P. and Montes de Oca Munguia, O. (2015). Values, trust and management in New Zealand agriculture. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 14(3), 282-306. doi: 10.1080/14735903.2015.1111571

Statistics New Zealand. (2013). Quick Stats about Whangarei District 2013. Retrieved 14 August 2016 from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/AboutAPlace/SnapShot.aspx?id=2000002

Van Kerhoff, L. and Lebel, L. (2006). Linking knowledge and action for sustainable development. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31, 445-477. doi: 10.1146/annurev.energy.31.102405.170850

Whangarei NZ. (n.d). Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry. Retrieved from http://whangareinz.com/business/agriculture-horticulture-forestry Date accessed: 9 August 2016.

Whangarei NZ. (n.d). Economic Indicators. Retrieved from http://whangareinz.com/business/economic-indicators Date accessed: 9 August 2016.

Whangarei District Council. (2015). Demographic Profile for the Whangarei District June 2013. (TRIM 15/11260). Whangarei: Policy and Monitoring Department of Whangarei District Council. Retrieved from http://www.wdc.govt.nz/PlansPoliciesandBylaws/Plans/SustainableFutures/Documents/Sustainable%20Society%20and%20Culture/Demographic-Profile-of-the-Whangarei-District.pdf