Future Farmers believe that designing ecologically diverse farms has the potential to strengthen New Zealand's entire farming system. Ecological diversity refers to the biodiverse presence and abundance of native and endemic species within agricultural landscapes, but also the diversity of species grown for their productive values.

New Zealand has the highest rate of at-risk or threatened native species in the world. The agricultural sector is a critical player in achieving regional and national conservation goals and it is clear that our native flora and fauna can play a much larger role in our farming landscapes. Agricultural land currently makes up 60% of New Zealand's total land use (approximately 40% sheep and beef, 10% dairy, and the remaining 10% is a mix of deer, lifestyle blocks, arable and horticulture10). Yet there is currently no national strategy for managing or restoring biodiversity on farms. Nor is there current regulation or consistent mechanisms for measuring and improving biodiversity despite farmland, particularly pastoral landscapes, being a significant habitat for New Zealand endemic species11.

Providing habitat for native plant species so they are commonplace in agricultural landscapes is essential. But native species could also be fully integrated into the active farm system itself as medicinal and grazed species. Land sharing approaches must be encouraged so biodiversity thrives across agricultural and conservation landscapes.

Similarly, the exotic species we grow, harvest and farm can be diversified. For example, at the farm scale, increasing the diversity of plant species growing together supports the growth of healthy and diverse soil microbiota. Where different species above and below ground can share resources they contribute to the creation of a healthy, more resilient farm ecosystem.

By creating farm systems that have both high native biodiversity and crop diversity, there is greater ecological redundancy in times of climatic stress. Beneficial invertebrates and insects attracted by these habitats also provide protection from fungal, bacterial and pest insect attack on fragile crops, potentially reducing reliance on chemical intervention. Diversification can provide farmers with additional economic security as they have a variety of species on the farm to draw revenue from.

The more simple a system, the more fragile. While it is important to balance the trade-off between diversity and efficiency, we must diversify our landscapes to ensure New Zealand’s food and fibre systems are fit for a more challenging and changeable future.

What would this look like in reality?

● Shelterbelts contain either native or harvestable food-producing species

● Stock shelter trees are diverse, ecologically suited to the land and contribute to biodiversity outcomes (e.g. nectar)

● Farmers increase financial stability as they have the ability to access multiple revenue streams from multiple harvestable (crop, tree, livestock diversity), or non-harvestable (biodiversity or carbon credits) sources.

● Knowledge about the integration of native species into farming landscapes is driven by a partnership between western science and mātauranga.

● Native biodiversity flourishes on the farm and in the catchment while being integrated to support multiple economic, amenity, ecological and cultural values.

● New Zealand endemic and native species population sizes improve and move down risk categories

● Strong support from industry, regional authorities and farmers enables implementation of Te Mana o te Taiao at regional and farm level

New Zealand’s agricultural landscapes are highly diverse. From the year-round grass growth in the Waikato to the brittle tussock-lands of Central Otago, a highly nuanced approach to farming practice is needed. Not only can there be variation within a catchment on best practice, but there can be a need for variation of practice within farms.

We want to see improvements being made to the accuracy at which we can determine the best land-use and practise for our whenua. Taking an approach to land use that ensures that the right animal or crop is in the right place, at the right intensity, is crucial to creating a farming industry that can support our natural ecosystems and our farmers to thrive.

A no-one-size-fits-all approach to land-use and practice inevitably means that there should be no one-size-fits-all approach to the way we plan and manage those landscapes either. The national approach to managing the environmental impacts of agriculture must take into account the diversity of agricultural land and how it will shift due to climatic and other factors over time. Approaches that ‘fit’ a locality now, may not in the future, so we must be ready to adapt our ‘best practices’ and land use to meet market demands, shifting climatic factors, and the development of knowledge and technology available to us.

What would this look like in reality?

● Policy and regulation is adaptable and flexible in the face of a changing climate, advances in our biodiversity goals, and shifting consumer preferences

● ‘Best practice’ is determined at local (potentially catchment) levels, rather than through national regulations

● Different regions suffer from varying levels of biodiversity loss and restoration should be treated with varying levels of urgency based on threat to species in each region.

● User-friendly, scientifically evidenced databases available to help guide farmers through complex decisions for land-use management and farming type suitability.

● Robust and experienced network of extension specialists held to a high standard, available to assist farmers with complex decision-making processes.

For effective land use management, it is essential to have catchment and cross-catchment level design approaches. Currently, biodiversity and water quality considerations are considered primarily within farm boundaries. However, farm boundaries constructed by concepts of land ownership are arbitrary when it comes to managing wildlife, critical habitats and hydrological systems that span entire landscapes.

For this reason, a mountains to sea design approach is needed so that we can plan on a scale that crosses fence lines and regional borders. This will allow the whenua and the life living upon to be cared for through much larger and more integrated spatial scales.

Rewilding offers a novel approach to restoration across catchments, letting look after itself and enabling natural processes to shape the land, restore degraded landscapes and repair damaged ecosystems. Rewilding does not exclude land stewards, rather it relies upon our assistance through stock management, pest control, woody weed control and supplementary planting.

Only 10% of New Zealand’s wetlands remain12. These ecosystems offer critical ecosystem services including erosion mitigation, flooding prevention, eutrophication alleviation, carbon sequestration and biodiversity support.For example only 2% of the Canterbury podocarp forest remains13. This is a national travesty. This and other degraded ecosystems should receive significant restoration attention.

Sufficient habitat for native biodiversity must be provided so that 30% effective protection for each ecosystem is given by 2030 as aligning with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This will require regional strategic plans for biodiversity restoration and protection, land optimisation models with a focus on restoration on low production value and public land. This can build on existing projects such as the Te Ara Kakariki project in Canterbury.

What would this look like in reality?

● Conservation goals are shared between farms to have impact at scale. This can be achieved through active catchment groups, including multiple stakeholders.

● Nature corridors are facilitated across farmland to connect Department of Conservation reserves and other sites of significant biodiversity.

● Migratory pathways of native fauna are maintained and improved through effective large scale planning.

● Every ecosystem has planned restoration projects to restore them to a minimum of 30% pre-human settlement extent by 2030 if they are below the 30% threshold.

● Water quality legislation is developed in partnership with all stakeholders and administered by regional councils

● Real-time water quality measurements enable tracking of pollutants across landscapes for more effective landscape-scale management.

● Water-use allocation for all users is developed through a whole catchment design framework in partnership with all stakeholders in the catchment

New Zealand’s agricultural industry was founded on being an exporting food basket, first for Britain, and then the world. As such, for a long time our farming has been tied to an ideology of contributing toward global food security. As the global population increases and land prices continue to rise beyond inflation, it is increasingly important that our land use is optimised to a balance of production and environmental outcomes. We have historically externalised the environmental costs of a production-driven system. This system has provided us with many benefits as our country developed, but it is clear that it is not sustainable. As we move into a new era of agriculture, we now have both the privilege and the responsibility to shift toward a new system: one that can find balance between production and the limits of our ecosystem.

In some cases finding balance may require shifts in land use. We acknowledge that this may be confronting for some areas of the industry which may need to shift or even be replaced by more efficient farming systems for that locality. But without appropriate land-use, we cannot hope to create an industry that meets our social, economic, climatic and ecological goals. Ecosystem services, conservation, effective food production and economic return are all factors which must be considered in synergy.

Tenure review is a contentious policy topic inland use management. Trade-off between public access, conservation value and maintaining agricultural production needs to be optimised in the uncertain future of the remaining 100 or so high country farms still under pastoral lease. There needs to be an updated cross-party consensus on the future of these leases, which considers a consultation process built on the principles discussed in this document.

What does this look like in reality?

● Land-use is determined by the ecosystem limits of any given locality. A doughnut economics approach is embedded into land-use management and design approaches.

● Commodity prices do not completely dictate land use design (as is the growing case for carbon forestry) and diversity is maintained despite fluctuations in market prices.

● Non-extractive resource use is encouraged and local resource utilisation remains within ecological limits.

● Regulations adapt and change with our conservation goals, climate volatility and consumer trends

● The future of remaining high country farms under pastoral lease is debated, and cross party consensus is developed on the future of their leases.

Our landscapes must transition from uni-functional spaces, to well planned multi-scapes with overlapping industries. Pastoral agriculture, forestry, horticulture and other primary industries cannot occur in silos, instead being well designed landscapes which enable different businesses to share resources and infrastructure while supporting each other to achieve biodiversity, health and community goals.

Collaboration across industries such as tourism, agriculture and urban spaces can similarly allow for effective land-use in a multi-scape. For example, in rural areas, tourism and agriculture are already beginning to develop as overlapping and nested industries with the explosion of ecotourism. It is important that the development of different industries to create multiscapes is supported going forward to ensure these collaborations create the best outcomes for restoring ecosystem services and contribute to thriving communities.

However far more opportunities come from multiscape design than ecotourism alone. Agricultural innovation is enabling different production systems; vertical farming and hydroponics are increasing in feasibility and scale in New Zealand. These types of farming could be integrated into urban spaces far more efficiently than traditional pasture and crop farming. As such, New Zealand science and policy should be ready for the increasing prevalence of hydroponics and vertical farming. Urban agriculture must increasingly be considered, to integrate food production into urban settings. Cost benefit analysis for these kinds of farming Should include social, environmental and economic impacts. Farming in urban spaces has the potential to reconnect urban people with often distant farming systems, increase understanding and appreciation of food production realities and particularly improve urban food security. Food waste can also be sourced more easily from cities, which may provide opportunities to design more circularity into our farming systems. Farming should not be limited to rural areas and must increasingly happen on street curbs, high rise buildings and throughout cities, bringing people closer to their food.

What does this look like in reality?

● Effective cross-industry collaboration to enable pooling of resources for the achievement of shared goals.

● Communal land-use solutions are created such as the integration of silvopasture where appropriate so horticulture and pastoral farming businesses can overlap.

● Spatial landscape planning to balance different industry, community, and ecosystem priorities.

● Urban agriculture is supported to develop into commercially viable systems that improve local food security and community resilience (particularly in times of supply chain disruption).

● Funding is provided for research on integrating multiple land-uses into a locality.