It’s also now anticipated, rather than a surprise, when our farmers are told they have to play by a new set of rules, whether dictated by a bank, a supplier, a council or a government.
What’s concerning, however, is the industry attitudes and commentary that often come alongside this, such as “well, it’s about time those at the bottom caught up,” “we can’t wait for the laggards,” and “you either evolve, or you’re out”.
But what does “out” actually mean? That the farmer is fined into bankruptcy? Or subject to losing their livelihood through a mortgagee sale? Or is lost through a challenge with mental health? I don’t see any of those results making our sector more appealing, supportive or inclusive.
As a sector, the perceptions of food and fibre industries are often controlled by those who may be struggling to adapt to change, or sometimes referred to as bad eggs.
But letting these farmers slowly lose their battles as they struggle to implement change or new required practices will not have positive outcomes for agriculture’s financial, environmental or mental health statistics.
NZ loves sport and most of the population have been either a player, coach, supporter, or combination of the three. When there is a rule change in the Rugby Union, the All Blacks spend significant time, effort and resources supporting their players to adapt. Firstly, they acknowledge that rule changes will affect different players in different ways depending on their position and way of playing. Secondly, they work together as a team, combining both players and support staff to ensure that everyone can adapt and improve for the benefit of all.
A penalty on the rugby field costs the whole team. The All Blacks wouldn’t leave the players to individually read the updated Rugby Union rule code, then show up to the game and hope they implement it. The All Blacks wouldn’t deliver a letter in the mail, hold a one-off meeting and expect that the player will now fully understand the changes. The All Blacks certainly wouldn’t leave players struggling on the field, letting down the whole team and putting those individuals at risk of losing their rugby career.
Yet, the All Blacks are an elite group of athletes who perform to best practice standards, and, even in this circumstance, they would receive considerable support.
If a farmer is completely unwilling to adapt to any form of change, is knowingly causing harm to the industry’s reputation and won’t give any consideration to a social license to operate, then perhaps there isn’t a place for them in the sector. However, these types of individuals are few, if any at all in our sector.
As the pace of change in farming continues to accelerate, so does the importance of supporting those on both ends of the spectrum. Information dissemination, knowledge transfer and skill development should be provided in a range of methods and formats even if this increases expense. If a first attempt at providing support doesn’t work, we should try a second, third and a fourth time.
It’s relatively easy for a rural banker to become a rural insurer, a fertiliser rep to become a farm consultant, and a business manager to pivot from one whole industry to another. Farmers, however, are often intrinsically connected to their farm businesses; it’s both their livelihoods and their way of life.
Let’s change our conversation and the language we use when discussing the evolution of the food and fibre sector, and let’s choose to empower those who are struggling with change rather than dismissing them.
It’s time to treat our sector as a team of 30,000 farmers, 150,000 employed support staff and 5,000,000 supporters – it feeds more people than the All Blacks.
Who am I?
Jack Keeys is a KPMG agrifood research and insights analyst.
