Dialogue: Prosperity feeds on green grass of home

JACQUELINE ROWARTH* says that changes in research financing threaten the competitive edge enjoyed by our core business, primary agricultural commodities.

Prosperity throughout the land is being forecast as the boom in the rural sector filters to the cities, following consistent increase in the value of our exports.

The September-quarter trade figures stated that the value of seasonally adjusted exports increased for most commodities. Fruit and nuts recorded a 44.7 per cent increase, milk powder, butter and cheese were 12.4 per cent ahead and meat and edible offal were up 2.4 per cent.

The total value of exports was 2.3 per cent higher than the previous quarter, which, in turn, was 6.7 per cent up. The trend in the value of monthly exports has been growing since January last year.

Clearly, commodities are our core business, and their importance to the economy is increasing. And although commodities may not be glamorous, they are predictable and relatively stable. We all need high-quality food, and we want it at a low price.

As Dr Jim Salinger, of Niwa and the Royal Society Council, says, New Zealand's strength in primary resources comes from the environment.

Primary production has given us our reliable export base. In fact, it is our added value to our natural environment.

The added value is based on the knowledge that our farmers have, founded on a century of scientific research. It is the ability of our farmers to manage ryegrass, in combination with white clover, that means we can produce forage at a quarter the cost of production in Europe. This gives our meat, milk and wool the competitive edge on the European market, despite our transport costs and their subsidies.

Furthermore, our production, slaughter and transport systems mean that our commodities are high-quality. They are safe, and with the advent of new technologies such as AgResearch's easi-Trace, meat in a supermarket in Britain can be traced back to the farm where it grew.

Traceability is increasingly desired by the consumer because it is part of food safety reassurance. New Zealand's research history means we are at the forefront of developments in this area.

Our competitive edge has not happened by accident, and it is under threat from other countries.

Australia has already overtaken us in efficiency of production. Argentina is not far behind. Although there is considerable comment about the fact that we can supply niche markets in Europe, particularly for the organic market, most supermarket shoppers are guided by price.

We all know the story of a large supermarket store in Britain which could not keep up with demand for tomato puree of a particular brand, even though it was labelled as genetically modified, because it was a few pence cheaper than other brands.

People make ideological statements, but reality is governed by the dollar and apparent value for money.

To maximise the value of our exports, by increasing the added-value component, we must have continued applied research.

Pete Hodgson, the Minister for Science, has said that traditional agricultural and horticultural science will always be relevant. Even with the fanciest molecular biology in the world, we still need to know how new crops will grow in different soil types and different climates and how they will respond to different pests and management regimes.

This is particularly important in the organic arena, where chemical pesticides used over the past 50 years are frowned upon, and where the problem of nutrient inputs to match production outputs has not been solved.

Returning to production systems of 100 years ago is not the answer because quantity of yield will suffer. And the argument about increased quality of product has yet to be proved.

To maintain yields, plus quality of environment, will require more research in sustainable production systems, where the best of all technologies (traditional and new) are used to achieve the desired outcome of a productive, sustainable, prosperous and pleasant country.

Clearly, we need continued research in the primary resource area to ensure that our increases in production occur more rapidly than the global value of commodities decreases, and that the production systems are sustainable.

Yet changes in research financing direction by the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology mean that applied research is under threat, that new crops will not be tested in different soil types, climates and latitudes, and we will not know how they respond to different pests and management regimes.

The Government-financed foundation proposes, instead, to invest in new areas where an immediate profit is envisaged. These areas include gene technology and information technology, which can also be protected.

As we sit down to enjoy the prosperity that this year has brought, as we tuck into our high-quality and safe turkey, new potatoes (once a luxury but now affordable and expected - research has created management systems for early crops), cranberry sauce (still being investigated as a crop for New Zealand) and strawberries (now available almost all year round), we would do well to reflect who produced them, and what research underlies their production.

What would it would mean to our lifestyle if we didn't have this climate and the ability of the primary producers to capitalise upon it or those in research who dedicate their lives to improving it.

Primary production is the basis of our economy. It is our core business. Decreasing research in this area, and lack of research in sustainable production systems, will ensure our slide into Third World status. Is this what we, the public, really want?

*Jacqueline Rowarth is president of the Institute of Agricultural Science and Unitec's director of research.