More work needed to protect prime horticultural land, says industry
Supplied
The horticulture industry says more work is needed to protect prime horticultural land.
New research looking at the ability to get by with domestic production if global food supply chains are disrupted ranked New Zealand was one of the most self-sufficient countries.
The paper,
published in the journal Nature Food
, analysed 186 countries ability to feed their citizens and achieve dietary guidelines if supply chains were disrupted by trade tariffs, wars, pandemics or other crises.
The research found over a third of countries cannot meet self-sufficiency for more than two of the seven essential food groups, while New Zealand was fully self-sufficient in five of the seven - fruit and vegetable, meat, dairy, fish and seafood supply - but would struggle to produce enough starchy staples and legumes, nuts and seeds.
Industry group United Fresh spokesperson Dr Hans Maurer told
Morning Report
while the report bodes well for New Zealand's food security, there's an imbalance in protecting prime horticultural land, citing housing development at Pukekohe.
"[That's] very good volcanic land and a lot of that land over the last twenty years has been built up with new housing," he said.
"Horticulture - particularly the protection of vegetables - is very dependent on land that can be intensively farmed. We have plenty of land in this country, but not land of the same quality of Pukekohe or Horowhenua, where the soils are just ideal."
Dr Maurer said the industry was working with the government on new legislation.
"We need to create a legal framework that protects production," he said.
New Zealand has traditionally "boxed above it's weight" when it came to the adoption of technology and innovation, he said.
"You only need to look at the kiwifruit industry or the way the apple industry has maintained its edge globally."
But he said there needs to be continued investment, especially as new on-farm and orchard technologies come online, including artificial intelligence.
New Zealand's reliance on seasonal labour was also problematic, as it would become harder to come by as the population aged, he said.
United Fresh figures showed the country's fresh fruit and vegetable exports reached $4.3 billion dollars last year, an increase of 8 percent from 2023.
The group said there was an industry-wide push underway to increase horticulture production, with an aim of doubling the farmgate return by 2036.
Consumers spent roughly $1.3 billion dollars on New Zealand-grown produce in 2024.
While shoppers were increasingly suffering from sticker shock at the price of some produce, the sector is heavily impacted by other markets, particularly energy and gas, instability in those markets puts a lot of pressure on supply chains.
Maurer stressed the weather dependent nature of the industry, including challenges from extreme weather events, pests and diseases, noting that last month's
widespread flooding in the Nelson Tasman region
will impact next season's apples.
Despite New Zealand's relatively good showing in the research, a map summarising the results contained a significant glitch - the country did not feature at all.
"That is not a reflection of the work that has been done, they certainly analysed New Zealand as well," Maurer said.
The researchers had apologised for the unintentional omission, he said.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

RNZ News
13 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Defence spending is like insurance – how will NZ pay the higher premiums?
By Stephen Hickson* of NZ Army Bushmaster 5.5 armoured vehicles. Photo: Supplied/ NZ Defence Force Analysis : Defence spending is like insurance - you have to pay for it but you hope you never have to use it. And the higher the risk you face, the higher your premium will be. New Zealand has now committed to paying those higher defence insurance premiums. The government's 2025 Defence Capability Plan , released in April, includes NZ$9 billion in extra funding over the next four years. That's a sizable increase on a current annual budget of just under $5 billion. Read more: The multibillion-dollar boost for New Zealand's military: What you need to know New Zealand is not alone, of course. Driven by geopolitical tensions and US President Donald Trump's demand that other countries spend a higher proportion of their GDP on defence, global military spending rose for the tenth year in a row to US$2718 billion (NZ$4530b) in 2024, with huge increases in Europe and the Middle East. How much "insurance" a country should buy in the form of defence spending will vary. Too little, and it cannot respond when it needs to; too much, and resources are needlessly wasted. For New Zealand, it is a matter of finding the right balance. The country needs to find the right balance for its spending on defence. Photo: Supplied/ NZ Defence Force Economically, however, defence spending is more complicated than simply buying weapons and recruiting more personnel. There can be benefits beyond basic security considerations. One involves what economists call "technology spillovers". Past innovations developed for military use - such as jet engines, GPS and the internet - often found important civilian applications. The challenge is to design defence investments to deliberately build skills and technologies with wider economic benefit: advanced manufacturing, cybersecurity or clean tech. New Zealand's defence plan includes this kind of spending, including between $100 million and $300m on cybersecurity. On the other hand, promises of new jobs from large projects are often overstated, with New Zealand's best known example being the "Think Big" policy of the 1970s. Rather, there can be job substitution as people move from civilian roles into military ones. A NZ Defence Force Vector Scorpion drone. Photo: You Tube / NZ Defence Force In the end, of course, increased defence spending must be funded - through higher taxes, more debt or reduced spending on other items. Higher GDP growth would make the expenditure more affordable, but even then we face the same tradeoffs. It's not possible to have lower taxes and debt as well as higher government spending. Most of the expenditure set out in the defence plan will be on equipment. But any increase in the output of the defence industry will likely crowd out other consumer and investment goods. While clearly an extreme example, one only has to look at how defence spending rose during WWII. The increase in military output came at the expense of other goods, leading to shortages and rationing. New Zealand doesn't face that scale of change, but there is still likely to be some shift in production from "butter to guns". We might also see a shift in how businesses spend their research and development money, towards military and away from civilian applications. New Zealand does not have a large defence industry and will need to import much of the new equipment. This implies a need for higher exports to pay for those imports, meaning fewer goods for New Zealanders to consume. A New Zealand Defence Force plane arrives in the Middle East earlier this year during the Iran-Israel conflict. Photo: Supplied / New Zealand Defence Force Most countries are understandably reluctant to cut spending on health, education and other things voters care about in order to boost defence. Hence, governments can be tempted to label new expenditures as "defence" when it could otherwise be classified as "updated infrastructure". Spending on dual-purpose capital works is likely to increase, therefore, with projects earmarked for defence more likely to be funded. The New Zealand defence plan already allows for housing, airfield and port facilities that can all have multiple uses. There are also ethical considerations. Many consumers prefer not to invest in the arms trade, but components used in weapons manufacture often have non-military uses as well. Similarly, many consumer items, such as phones, vehicles and food, can be purchased by the military but clearly have non-military uses. We may see more of the output of companies that also produce non-military items directed into defence. All of this can make it difficult to classify a company as a defence contractor, and may be challenging for large investors (such as superannuation funds) with ethical investment policies. At the same time, the cost of not investing in defence firms might also rise as demand for their products or services increases and they become better investments. Like people in general, countries prefer lower insurance premiums. But when risks increase, so too does the price of insurance. Voters will disagree on how much should be spent on defence, but that is largely a political question. What economics teaches us, however, is that if you want to reduce your insurance premium, then reduce your risk. And that is something easier said than done. *Stephen Hickson is a Lecturer in Economics and Director, Business Taught Masters Programme, University of Canterbury. This article was originally published by The Conversation .

RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
No future climate adaptation assistance would leave NZers 'on their own'
NZers are being told they are "on their own" after recommendations to withdraw financial assistance for property buy-outs and climate adaptation measures, says one expert. Photo: RNZ Phasing out government assistance for climate adaptation and property buy-outs would be "morally bankrupt", a climate policy expert says. An independent reference group set up by the Ministry for the Environment on Wednesday released a suite of recommendations to help the government shape climate adaptation legislation. Following a 20-year transition period, homeowners whose houses are flooded or damaged by weather events should not expect buy-outs, the group recommended . The group also recommended that funding for adaptation measures such as flood schemes, sea walls and blue-green infrastructure, should follow a 'beneficiary pays' approach in most cases. "This would mean those who benefit most from these investments contribute more." Central government should only invest in adaptation if it would protect Crown assets, "or where broader national benefits can be realised". "Central government investment or other financing strategies may be appropriate to help overcome challenges in particularly vulnerable areas, where there is less ability to pay." Victoria University emeritus professor Jonathan Boston, who was part of a previous expert working group on climate adaptation, said the message from the latest report to New Zealanders was clear: "You are on your own." The report rightly recognised the need for urgent action on climate adaptation, and to make consistent, reliable information about climate hazards available, Boston said. However, the recommendations to withdraw financial assistance for both property buy-outs and adaptation measures, and to leave decision-making up to individuals, were "fundamentally flawed". "One of the core responsibilities of any government is to protect its citizens and to deal with natural disasters and so on. That is above almost anything else." To put an end-date on that was "morally bankrupt and highly undesirable", he said. The report wrongly assumed that people would act rationally if they were properly informed of the risks, he said. "We know from vast amounts of literature that people suffer from all kinds of cognitive biases... and that these have a profound influence on whether people make sensible decisions or not. "And quite apart from cognitive bias, lots of people lack choices. They lack the [financial] resources to make good decisions." Boston also criticised the recommendation of a transitional period, saying the risks from climate change would continue to evolve well past 2045 or another hard end-date. He and others had previously warned against the 'moral hazard' of creating expectations of generous property buy-outs every time there was a severe weather event. "We certainly need to be ensuring that we don't create incentives for people to stay in risky areas or indeed to build in areas that are going to become risky because of climate change," he said. "But the idea that you can just sort of leave it to individuals to decide what's going to happen and have no oversight or involvement in helping people to make good decisions and helping people to move where they have to move, I just think it's bizarre." Environmental Defense Society policy director Raewyn Peart said the report seemed to be moving away from the concept of "managed retreat", where communities moved out of harm's way in a coordinated fashion. "The approach seems to be unmanaged retreat, where we'll give people information and a transition period - they're on notice - and at that point, people can make their own decisions about whether to move or not." That would be unworkable, Peart said. "Some people will move, some won't, councils [will have] to provide services to a community that's gradually emptying out, people there who can't afford to move will be trapped into a risky situation - they may be facing regular floods of their properties. "I just don't think it's in the best interests of the country to essentially leave it to the market and people's individual decisions." The report recommended handing over responsibility for adaptation planning to local councils, but it was unclear whether central government would provide any financial or administrative support, she said. "Some councils are really on to it and are already doing it - they have the resources. It's the small councils who may only have one planner, who have no expertise in adaptation planning." The latest report echoes previous warnings that insurers could increase premiums to unaffordable levels, and even withdraw from some areas, as the risk from climate change hazards continued to increase. Insurance Council chief executive Kris Faafoi - whose organisation has long called for greater national direction from central government on climate adaptation - said it was good to see the report authors recommending urgent action. "There's still some very difficult issues to work through - but these extreme weather events are going to happen, and being able to protect communities and to keep insurance affordable and available is really important in the long-term." There was little appetite anywhere on the political spectrum for expensive buy-outs of properties to continue, he said. The question of who would actually pay for adaptation measures still needed to be answered, Faafoi said. "In the report itself, there was an expectation that councils will do a lot of the heavy lifting and where some communities might find it a challenge to be able to pay for some of the protections … then investment from the Crown might be necessary." But following a 'beneficiary pays' approach could see the costs of adaptation fall heavily on some communities. "I think reading between the lines, there could be the likes of targeted rates in some areas. "Again, that has to be floated with communities and as to whether or not people who benefit from that might be able to pay for that." The report noted the financial difficulties many councils faced. "Funding will be a challenging proposition if councils' ability to increase rates is constrained," the authors wrote. Climate Change Minister Simon Watts told RNZ the government welcomes the independent recommendations for how New Zealand can adapt to the impacts of climate change. "We will now take the time to review recommendations and announce decisions in due course," Watts said. "The report is not government policy, however the Government is considering the group's recommendations, alongside the findings of last year's cross-party climate adaptation inquiry and other advice, as it works to put in place the building blocks for a national adaptation framework." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.


Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Top US Team HMD Motorsports Confirmed For Castrol Toyota FR Oceania Trophy
Top US racing team HMD Motorsport will join forces with TJ Speed Motorsports to field a three-car line-up in the 2026 Castrol Toyota Formula Regional Oceania Trophy. The team will race under the name HMD Motorsports with TJ Speed and will join the New Zealand Championship's existing four teams for the new-look four-round championship when it begins in January 2026. HMD has campaigned in Indy Lights and INDY NXT since its inception in 2019, and also an alliance in the NTT INDYCAR SERIES from 2022 to 2023, and in the Formula Regional Americas championship in 2020. It's best known, however, for its INDY NXT campaigns, where it has run drivers including current INDYCAR racers Christian Rasmussen, Linus Lundqvist, Kyffin Simpson, Benjamin Pedersen and Nolan Siegel. It has won the team's championship twice and has also been runner-up twice, as well as two drivers' championships since 2021. Rising INDYCAR star David Malukas is the son of team owner Henry Malukas and is another to have raced in INDY NXT with the team. The New Zealand-based single-seater series has served as a critical development platform for many HMD-affiliated drivers, both past and present—including Josh Pierson, Liam Sceats, Tommy Smith, Callum Hedge, Bryce Aron, and Nikita Johnson—all of whom have progressed to race in INDY NXT. The championship has also contributed to the careers of drivers who have advanced to the NTT INDYCAR SERIES, including Louis Foster and Jacob Abel. As an FIA-certified category, the Castrol Toyota Formula Regional Oceania Trophy awards Super License points to its top drivers, creating a strong pathway for drivers' progression within the sport. 'We are looking to strengthen the Castrol Toyota Formula Regional Oceania Trophy grid in New Zealand by prioritizing a competitive driver line-up that represents HMD and TJ Speed,' explained HMD Motorsports Team President Mike Maurini. 'With two strong and growing programs, joining forces to compete abroad, we will be able to combine our efforts and help get some drivers that could potentially compete with us in 2025, with some additional track time.' Indycar drivers Santino Ferruci, Devlin DeFrancesco, Jacob Abel, Louis Foster, Marcus Armstrong, and Robert Schwartzman are all graduates of New Zealand's premier single-seater championship. 'We have built a strong reputation in the United States as a great feeder series for IndyCar feeder series such as IndyNXT and the USFPro Championships,' explained TOYOTA GAZOO Racing NZ Motorsport Manager Nicolas Caillol. 'Removing the clashes in the NZ racing calendar and the US testing calendar cleared the way for more teams in key markets to join our championship, and the speed with which HMD Motorsports and TJ Motorsports have committed is reflective of the interest in New Zealand. Their addition will only make that pathway stronger both ways.' 2026 Castrol Toyota Formula Regional Oceania Trophy