A collaboration platform called The Common Ground has been launched by AGMARDT and KPMG, for the food and fibre sector to tackle shared problems.
It is aimed at the 150-plus industry good organisations in the sector, AGMARDT general manager Lee-Ann Marsh said.
“The call is to everyone to join a constructive conversation about our collective future,” she said.
“We are proposing one potential vision on The Common Ground platform, to stimulate discussion and debate on how to break down silos and meet the many shared challenges and opportunities ahead.”
A 40-page report on the platform is available on thecommonground.org.nz website, written by Marsh and three KPMG authors, Ian Proudfoot, Andrew Watane and Brig Ravera, and citing input from 26 industry subject matter experts.
Proudfoot, who has led the annual KPMG Agribusiness Agenda publication for the past 12 years, said The Common Ground concept can help unlock new funding opportunities and reorient the sector’s focus.
It needs to be aiming outwards towards global markets than inwards behind the farm gate.
Although the industry-good structure has been successful in the past, its constraints can no longer be ignored, he said.
“An erosion of trust, short-term decision-making, siloed inefficiency and the lack of focus on global markets are limiting our ability to confront risks and compete for global capital and market share.”
The Common Ground approach will pool resources and act as a back-office engine room.
Areas of collaboration include on-farm energy, rural wellbeing, high value exporting, zero carbon production systems, sustainable oceans, protection of Taonga (IP/mātauranga), water quality and quantity, diversification of producer income, future workforce and agri-education, soil health, rural prosperity, biodiversity, animal welfare and adapting to climate volatility.
The engine room functions include a standard enterprise platform shared by all participating organisations, cutting the estimated $9-plus million spend annually on duplicated back-office services like software, accounting, legal or HR.
Another goal is to reduce data entry duplication for individual producers.
Marsh said The Common Ground is just one vision of the future of industry-good in the sector and the proponents would like to hear back from all corners, especially from producers.
The authors considered alternative industry-good structures and models here and abroad and while all had their strengths and weaknesses none were able to address the collective issues.
The nine-month exercise began with a question: Are industry-good organisations good for industry?
The 150 organisations are mainly producer funded with 33 commodity levy orders gathering about $164m annually, plus $16m of membership subscriptions.
Biosecurity levy orders account for $75m of the $183m total annually.
In other countries industry-good organisations are majority funded or co-funded by the government. For example, in Australia $300m annually goes into rural research and development.
In NZ, duplication of effort and resource is a commonly identified problem and organisations, both levy-funded and subscription, must regularly demonstrate their value.
Increasingly, populism has taken over value demonstration, and addressing the immediate needs of producers has become the focus rather than addressing the most critical needs.
“Organisations are choosing not to address complex needs in order to prioritise remaining relevant and surviving.”
The report found duplication of advocacy by different organisations on behalf of the same producers and sometimes with contradictory positions.
There is an evolutionary trend from research-led productivity drivers to advocacy-led lobbyists, the report said.
From the published accounts of over 40 organisations, some $9m was identified as expenditure on administrative services like finance functions, legal fees and property leases.
Four key constraints appear to be holding the sector back from its potential, the report says.
These are a lack of trust, inadequate aspirational thinking, turf wars and inward thinking, not outward.
The belief that industry-good organisations are acting in the best interests of producers has been eroded.
Lack of trust between organisations and with regulators means no confidence that anyone else would have the capability or credibility to do the job better.
“Too few are thinking of an aspirational future for New Zealand.”
Territorialism around land use is creating barriers to working together and encourages siloed thinking.
The export sector is oriented upside down, missing connections to customers and markets.
The proposed Common Ground structure would be voluntary and host communities of action that identify the right people and seek funding to find solutions.
Each constituent organisation would retain its independence with agreed rules of engagement.
Leadership would be appointed rather than elected and be based on skill rather than representation.
With less overlap and more collaboration for efficiency, producers would gain more value from their levy paying, the report says.
