The Ministry's Outcomes

Outcome 1: Sector Development - New Zealand s economic growth and prosperity are enhanced through high-performing and innovative agricultural, horticultural, forestry and food sectors

This outcome is directed at enhancing and facilitating the contribution that the sectors can make to economic growth and prosperity. The key elements are profitability and development. Profitability recognises the need (both for the sectors themselves and for New Zealand) for the sectors to retain, enhance and capitalise on their long-term competitive and comparative advantage. Development recognises the desirability of identifying and facilitating the contribution the sectors can make to a growing economy through the development of new and improved products and services. The sectors and associated businesses have a critical role to play in delivering a growing, innovative economy. This will require a strengthening of the underpinning role of science and technology in innovation, encouragement and support for entrepreneurialism and risk taking, and increased production where appropriate.

Additional and important elements relate to rural communities and Maori economic development. There is a strong interdependence between the infrastructure that viable rural communities provide for the sectors, and the contribution the sectors make to that viability. Likewise, Maori are key players in the sectors and the development of the sectors provides a strong basis for Maori economic development generally.

We will know that this outcome is being achieved when New Zealand and the sectors experience:
  • A growing contribution to GDP and export revenues.
  • An ability to attract high-quality investment.
  • Measurable innovation new products and services being created through relationships involving agribusiness.
  • Sustainable productivity growth rates.
  • Sector institutions that are adaptable and innovative.

The attainment of growth, innovation and new opportunities is inevitably associated with some degree of risk. The need to manage these risks, together with unintended outcomes will be a critical element of the Ministry's strategies supporting this outcome.

Identified potential risks include:

  • New policies and regulatory regimes impose undue costs on the sectors.
  • The focus on the Growth and Innovation Framework strategic priorities diverts resources from opportunities for growth within the broader sectors.
  • A failure to grasp effectiveness and innovation possibilities in food safety regulation results in undue costs and missed opportunities.

Intermediate Outcome 1: Policies that manage risk, minimise costs and empower innovation

Businesses need to be free to create new and improved products and to find more effective and efficient ways of doing business. Regulation is imposed to achieve public good outcomes by controlling activity. In doing so, it imposes costs and rigidities. Regulation that balances the need to control with the need for businesses to be dynamic and innovative is required. Regulation must be implemented as efficiently as possible to minimise costs to taxpayers, businesses and consumers. MAF administers a number of regulatory regimes (including food safety, biosecurity and sustainable management e. g. privately owned indigenous forests) that are significant in this context.

Flagship Objective: Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the regulatory interventions MAF administers

We will:

  • Monitor and review the effectiveness and impacts of the regulations we administer by developing and implementing objective performance measures.
  • Increase the transparency of regulatory development work with a view to minimising compliance costs and enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of delivery.
  • Consider a range of ways to address issues with no presumption that regulation is preferred.
  • Develop policy frameworks that promote whole of government representation and consultation as well as meaningful stakeholder participation in the development of policy.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are:

  • Implementation of the Animal Products Act 1999 covering the primary'sectors (including its extension to the dairy industry) and the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines (ACVM) Act 1997.
  • Rethinking the fundamental performance criteria and food safety objectives, implementation tools and administrative mechanisms for the domestic food regulatory programme.
  • Development of Animal Welfare Codes under the Animal Welfare Act 1999.
  • Implementation of the Biosecurity'strategy, including the development of performance indicators and criteria that will ensure emerging trends are identified and managed pro-actively.
  • Respond to the Primary Production Select Committee report on Indigenous Forestry.

For details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for: Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Classes D1, , D2 and D3. Vote Biosecurity ( Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7 and D8. Vote Food Safety Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D5 and D6.

Intermediate Outcome 2: Institutions and relationships that facilitate high performance and innovation

The Government has expressed a willingness to partner with business to facilitate enhanced growth and innovation. Mandated industry'structures for the effective and efficient provision of industry-good activities may have a stifling effect on innovation and risk taking. Equally, the absence of structures and relationships, especially in nascent sectors, may impede the timely pursuit of opportunities. MAF will continue to work with industry in the interests of enhancing microeconomic flexibility and innovation in the sectors.

Flagship Objective: Continuing the evolution of sector institutions in accordance with sector interests and consistent with the overall public benefit

The impact of changes to statutory industry structures will be evaluated, further reform pursued and consideration given to improving existing provisions which facilitate industry- good activities. Particular emphasis will be placed on issues to do with the:

  • Administration of country-specific tariff quota market access arrangements.
  • Evolution of the meat and kiwifruit industries.
  • Adequacy of arrangements to facilitate industry-good activities, particularly those related to research and innovation.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are: Progress applications from industry groups seeking to come under the Commodity Levies Act 1990 or Horticulture Export Authority frameworks. 

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for:

Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Class D1. . Vote Biosecurity ( Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1 and D7. . Vote Food Safety Output Classes D1 and D2. .

Intermediate Outcome 3: Sectors, businesses and communities actively contributing to a growing and innovative economy

The agricultural, horticultural, forestry and food sectors and associated businesses will provide much of the basis for national economic growth and innovation strategies. The sectors have much to gain from strengthening New Zealand s capability in these areas.

Rural communities provide the infrastructure to support successful sectoral enterprises. In turn, those communities rely on the sectors for much of their viability. Rural New Zealand is changing dramatically in terms of the diversity of its economy and society. This diversity is a strength but carries with it a need to manage the tension which diversity brings, for example between lifestyles and between different production systems.

There is evidence that a great deal of potentially productive Maori land is not utilised or is under-utilised. Improving the utilisation of this land will help Maori to meet their aspirations from within their own resource base. Maori also have particular cultural and environmental interests that need to be built in to decision making.

Flagship Objective: Maximising the engagement of the sectors, rural communities and Maori with a growing and innovative economy

MAF will work with the Growth and Innovation Advisory Board, those responsible for the Skills New Zealand elements of the Growth and Innovation framework and with the forestry industry (in the context of the Wood Processing Strategy) to:

  • Ensure that the sectors, rural communities and Maori are aware of and participate in the Government s growth and innovation programmes.
  • Identify barriers and opportunities.
  • Develop policy opportunities for the Government.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are: 

  • Selling the Crown s interest in forests planted on land leased from Maori landowners to individual lessor groups. Achieving the phased elimination of remaining tariffs by 2010.
  • Improving information availability for all New Zealanders through electronic documentation for all regulatory and market access requirements.
  • Developing policies to enhance the contribution to Maori development of Maori agriculture and forestry assets and skills.

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for:

Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Classes D1 and D3. . Vote Food Safety Output Classes D1 and D5. .

Outcome 2: Safe and Freer Rules-Based Trade Profitable and safe export and import of agricultural, horticultural, forestry and food products

This outcome is directed at those international trade initiatives to be advanced in order to enhance the contribution the sectors can make to economic growth and prosperity. There are two key elements to this outcome trade ( ( imports and exports) and maintaining confidence in our biosecurity programme. The agriculture, horticulture, forestry and food sectors are export oriented and provide the bulk of New Zealand s export earnings. The rules governing international trade in these products are of vital interest to New Zealand and hence, of close interest to MAF.

The volume of international trade and the number of people travelling to New Zealand continues to increase. Consequently, New Zealand s biosecurity and food safety mechanisms are under greater pressure than ever before. Maintaining the integrity of our biosecurity and food safety programmes is imperative for maintaining our current trade status. The country's high health status is a major asset gaining us market access and minimising inspection costs.

The SPS Agreement ratified as part of the Uruguay GATT Round in 1995 signalled a move to a more robust rules-based trading environment and the establishment of effective mechanisms for dealing with unwarranted technical barriers to trade. Codex, OIE and IPPC are recognised under the WTO as the organisations responsible for developing international standards covering food safety, animal health and plant health. Opportunities exist to move the traditional prescriptive standards to ones with a science-based and outcome focus. Flexibility in achieving the outcomes is key to New Zealand s agricultural, horticultural, forestry and food sectors expressing their innovation and creative abilities to grow New Zealand s economy.

We will know that this outcome is being achieved when New Zealand and the sectors experience:

  • Liberalisation of trade rules.
  • Increased exports and reduced costs of compliance.

The management of technical barriers to trade is a complex, multi-agency issue. The consequences of failing to secure further international trade reforms or to maintain our current preferential arrangements will have significant economic impacts for New Zealand. Some of the major risks associated with managing for this outcome include:

  • Low level of ambition achieved in agricultural and forestry negotiations.
  • Failure of New Zealand assurances regimes.
  • Unjustified and costly new border measures required by trading partners.
  • Major failure of New Zealand s border protection system.

Intermediate Outcome 1: Enhanced market access for our products and reduced distortions in trade rules

Reform of international agricultural trade rules, particularly those covering SPS issues, is required to enable New Zealand businesses to take full advantage of their comparative and competitive advantage. Agriculture policies in many countries protect their domestic industries through heavy subsidies and import barriers, subsidising exports and utilising non-sustainable health requirements that either block trade or create increased costs of compliance. International rules and disciplines are needed to eliminate, reduce or modify these practices.

The existence of international rules alone does not always guarantee their application. Nor does it remove debate about their application in specific circumstances. As such, ongoing government-to-government negotiations are needed to address the large range of both economic (e.g. tariff and subsidy) and technical (e.g. health ) trade and market access issues that confront New Zealand's exports.

Flagship Objective 1: Maximising the gains from the Doha Development Round

MAF, working with MFAT, will pursue the following objectives: 

  • For New Zealand agriculture the key objectives in the negotiations include substantial improvements in market access, the elimination of export subsidies and substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support, while making special allowances for developing countries.
  • For forestry the key objectives are to reduce significantly or eliminate all remaining tariff barriers, including tariff peaks and tariff escalation, as well as eliminating non-tariff barriers.
  • Ensuring that the scientific, evidence-based construct of the SPS Agreement is preserved.

Flagship Objective 2: Ensuring a science-and risk-based approach to international health related trade rules with a focus on outcomes rather than process

MAF will:

  • Provide leadership and effective international representation to influence international trading standards set under the auspices of Codex, OIE and IPPC.
  • Ensure international standards set are not prejudicial to Government policy and the needs of New Zealand consumers and industry.

Flagship Objective 3: Ensuring that New Zealand s agricultural, horticultural, forestry and food exports are not restricted by unjustified trade barriers

This will be achieved by:

  • Identifying and assessing potential barriers to market access and challenging those we consider unjustified either bilaterally or through the WTO.
  • Ensuring that regulators use scientific evidence, or accord with other provisions in the
  • SPS Agreement such as an assessment of risk, to justify any import restrictions they impose.
  • Working proactively to ensure that our trading partners accept our SPS measures as equivalent, even if those measures differ from their own, if our measures achieve the same outcome.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are: 

  • Ensuring technical standards are based on internationally accepted science and are consistent with international trade obligations. 
  • Contributing to international workshops and expert consultations in areas of interest to New Zealand s agricultural, horticultural, forestry and food sectors. 
  • Emphasising the separate but mutually reinforcing roles of the SPS Committee and the work of the international standard-setting organisations. Negotiating with importing countries (particularly China) to achieve building standards that accommodate Pinus radiata .

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for:

Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Class D1.

Vote Biosecurity (Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D4 and D7. Vote Food Safety Output Classes D1, D2, D3 and D4.

Intermediate Outcome 2: Credible and trusted animal and plant product assurance

Consumers and governments (in New Zealand and in our trading partners) are concerned about the safety of the food they eat. Consumers expect their governments to provide credible assurances about food safety. Foreign governments are concerned about the health of their animal and plant populations and require official health assurances as a condition of access for agricultural, horticultural, forestry and seafood products. Market access is impacted by the credibility of those assurances. As part of a country which exports most of the food it produces, we recognise that domestic food safety issues impact on foreign governments and their consumers perceptions of New Zealand products.

Flagship Objective: Implementing New Zealand s strategy for product assurance that is designed to protect and promote public health and facilitate access to markets for agricultural, horticultural, forestry and seafood products

This will be achieved through: 

  • Administering a programme that protects and promotes the health of consumers and facilitates and enhances New Zealand's trade in agricultural, horticultural and seafood products.
  • Ensuring that safety'standards are based on sound science and risk assessment, provide consumer choice and adequately reflect consumer and market access requirements. . Implementing standards in a consistent manner and within a seamless paddock-to-plate programme that places the primary responsibility for producing safe and suitable products on industry.
  • Ensuring imported food meets New Zealand safety and suitability requirements.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are:

  • Implementing a communication and consultation strategy that is inclusive of all stakeholder groups, ensures fair representation of all stakeholder interests and provides appropriate information to all relevant parties.
  • Applying a generic risk management framework when addressing safety issues.
  • Providing effective representation of New Zealand s regulatory interests.
  • Maintaining and enhancing policy and technical capacity and creating a centre of excellence in risk management. Establishing productive strategic alliances and networks with external science providers and other bodies, in addition to counterpart competent authorities in countries with which New Zealand trades agricultural, horticultural and seafood products.
  • Providing official health assurances to trading partners.
  • Strengthening accountability through a national focus using quality systems as a basis for demonstrating compliance.

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for:

Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Classes D1 and D2. . Vote Biosecurity ( Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D5, D6, D7 and D8. Vote Food Safety Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D4, D5 and D6.

Intermediate Outcome 3: Protection of New Zealand s primary production systems and trade through effective pre-border and border management, surveillance and incursion response programmes

In order for New Zealand to gain the full benefit from trade into and out of the country, the biosecurity risks to New Zealand inherent in the transport of goods and people across our borders must be effectively managed, thereby protecting our economy.

Flagship Objective: Implementing the Biosecurity strategy (including the completion of current reviews)

Implement the policy and regulatory outcomes of the Biosecurity strategy, in particular:

  • An effective end-to-end and whole of government biosecurity management structure.
  • A risk management framework that is underpinned by scientific analysis.
  • Technical standards that are based on high quality, internationally accepted science and are consistent with international trade obligations.
  • An informed decision-making process that facilitates a full range of stakeholders and which incorporates significant non-economic considerations.
  • A monitoring and surveillance regime that provides early warning of an incursion and supports the development of sustainable import health standards. An incursion response capability which provides the best opportunity to effectively and efficiently eradicate or control unwanted pests and diseases.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are:

  • Maintaining and enhancing a biosecurity programme underpinned by research delivering sound science, which incorporates pre-border and border protection, surveillance, incursion response, pest management, awareness and enforcement.
  • An effective regime for the management of pests and diseases of production animals and plants of national and regional significance. Ensuring animal identification systems and a national database that enhances pest and disease prevention and control programmes.
  • Surveillance programmes that maximise the probability of early detection of high-impact exotic organisms and supporting efforts by the sectors to develop and implement their own surveillance programmes.
  • Governance arrangements that ensure a whole of government approach to the
  • implementation of the biosecurity programme.

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for:

Vote Biosecurity ( Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D4, D5, D6 and D8. Vote Food Safety Output Classes D2 and D3. 

Outcome 3: Protection and Enhancement of Natural Resources Management of natural resources so that the environmental bottom lines are met, long-term economic benefits accrue and the aspirations of New Zealanders are met

This outcome focuses on enhancing the contribution that the sectors can make to the environment and society. Prosperity is not just about growth and innovation and improved market access; it s about valuing our flora and fauna and valuing aspects of our lifestyle and national identity. The two key elements of this outcome are sustainability and biodiversity

New Zealand s productive industries have a major influence on issues concerning sustainable development of natural resources. The agricultural, horticultural and forestry sectors collectively manage almost 60 percent of New Zealand s land area and use around 77 percent of all water currently abstracted from lakes, rivers and groundwater. Sustainable production requires the sectors to manage their use of natural resources (land, water, climate and gene stocks) and the impact their activities have on the environment and biodiversity in a way that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable.

Increasing trade and tourism means that New Zealand is under ever-increasing threat from exotic organisms that pose significant risks to our natural environment as well as our production base. Additionally, there are a number of endemic pests, weeds and diseases that are equally as damaging to our natural resources and which must be effectively managed.

We will know that this outcome is being achieved when New Zealand experiences:

  • A demonstrated level of sustainable management and environmental performance through the commitment to deliver on society's expectations an attitude of good business practice.
  • Confidence that risks to indigenous flora and fauna are being taken into account in biosecurity decisions.
  • A strong market demand for New Zealand's products recognised as being sustainably produced to the highest quality standards.

The key risk to be managed (by all stakeholders) is that of polarisation of attitudes through a focus on perceived trade-offs between economic, environmental and social outcomes rather than a focus on win-win outcomes.

Factors that could lead to polarisation include:

  • An undue emphasis on prescription.
  • An undue focus on short-term costs as opposed to long-term benefits.
  • A perceived failure to recognise and give due priority to economic, environmental or social factors in decision-making.

Intermediate Outcome 1: Best practice implemented for: The sustainable use of resources Avoiding or mitigating environmental risks Managing the welfare of animals

Maintaining the ongoing ability of soils, water and gene stocks to support production is fundamental to the ongoing viability of the sectors. Sectoral resource management practices can also have adverse external impacts that should be avoided or mitigated. Achieving best practice in terms of environmental and animal welfare management is required to meet the expectations of society generally, and neighbours and consumers in particular. Additionally, the voluntary pursuit of best practice in all aspects of the supply chain (paddock-to-plate) will enhance New Zealand s product image, trade facilitation, market advantage and price pay-off. Market success as distinct from market access, is a positive, strategic position- ing strategy which can lead to social, environmental and economic benefits.

Flagship Objective 1: Facilitating sustainable economic growth by developing a policy framework for water allocation that takes account of environmental, social and cultural values

MAF, working in conjunction with the Ministries for the Environment (MfE) and of Economic Development and the Department of Conservation (DOC) will:

  • Inform debate and decision-making on freshwater issues through improved data and information.
  • Taonga or treasure can relate to indigenous flora and fauna. .
  • In conjunction with other government agencies, address the overall framework for decision-making on water management, allocation and quality issues, including the trade-offs between competing uses (e.g. energy generation; agricultural production; recreational uses; and environmental, social, and cultural values).
  • Provide input into work being undertaken by other departments (e.g. identifying waters of national significance for natural, cultural and tourism values) .

Flagship Objective 2: Lifting the image of New Zealand as a supplier of quality products through adoption of quality processes to command brand loyalty and premium prices through promotion and facilitation

MAF will:

  • Encourage voluntary pursuit of best practice in all aspects of production cycles (e.g. paddock-to-plate) .
  • Work closely with sectors to:
  • generate enhanced product image;
  • facilitate trade;
  • gain market advantage; and
  • achieve price premiums for products resulting from superior environmental and management practices.
  • Ensure that animal welfare policies, regulation and practice contribute to the international market success of our exports.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are:

  • Work with the sectors to develop strategies and technologies to reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Delivery of sustainable land management through the East Coast Forestry Project.
  • Achieving sustainable management of privately owned indigenous forests.
  • Promoting the inclusion of animal welfare standards in industry quality assurance programmes. Contributing to the MfE s work on defining environmental indicators.

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for: Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Classes D1, D2 and D3. Vote Biosecurity (Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1, , D7 and D8.

Intermediate Outcome 2: Protection of taonga and society's environmental and cultural values

Pests and diseases have the potential to seriously harm our valued flora and fauna with significant environmental, lifestyle and social consequences. While New Zealanders benefit from inward trade, tourism and the ability to travel, the regulatory process must also ensure that potential risks to our valued biodiversity associated with these activities are effectively managed.

Flagship Objective: Protecting New Zealand s valued indigenous biodiversity and ensuring that stakeholders, iwi, communities and individuals are valued and informed partners in managing animal welfare and biosecurity risks and impacts

This will be achieved through:

  • Governance arrangements that ensure a whole of government approach to reducing risks to indigenous flora and fauna and human health.
  • Decision-making processes that ensure meaningful participation and involvement by'stakeholders, iwi, communities and individuals. Effective co-ordination of programmes relevant to both central and regional government.
  • Ensuring animal welfare practice reflects national and international standards, is ethically based, and supports market acceptance.

Other examples of objectives that contribute to this intermediate outcome are:

  • A risk management framework that is underpinned by scientific analysis and which incorporates environmental and societal values.
  • Risk assessment policies and processes that effectively manage biosecurity risks to indigenous flora and fauna.
  • An education and awareness programme that facilitates wide engagement, participation and support for the biosecurity programme.
  • Animal welfare regulations and practices that reflect the values of New Zealanders and best-practice international standards.

For further details of the outputs that underpin this intermediate outcome see the Output Class Specific Performance Measures in Part B for:

Vote Agriculture and Forestry Output Classes D1 and D2. . Vote Biosecurity ( Agriculture and Forestry) Output Classes D1, , D2, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7 and D8.

Forest Management 

The Ministry has forestry responsibilities which are a key component of our business but which do not necessarily directly contribute to our identified outcomes. These responsibilities arise from past Crown initiatives of a long-term forestry nature and are a Crown commitment that must be managed well by dedicated staff with specialist skills.

Crown Forestry is the business unit within the Forest Management Group that administers the Crown s interest in: 

  • 25 forests geographically'spread throughout New Zealand s North Island. Of these forests, 17 are on land leased from Maori landowners. 
  • 17 afforestation leases where Crown land has been leased to other parties for forestry purposes. 
  • Tarawera Forests Ltd and Haparangi Trust joint ventures between the Crown and other parties, where the Crown holds the shareholders interest. 
  • A portfolio of Forestry Encouragement Loans established under the Forestry Encouragement Loan Regulations 1967. This portfolio has a value at July 2002 of $ 28.6 million.

This is fundamentally a commercial operation and represents 20 percent of MAF Departmental and Non-Departmental expenditure and 27 percent of MAF Departmental and Non-Departmental revenue. Crown Forestry is currently the eighth-largest forest grower in New Zealand, responsible for managing a commercial forestry business that will deliver expenditure of $ 62 million and revenue of $ 82 million during 2002/ 03. These sums will increase significantly over coming years.

In respect of the forestry assets including the forests planted on land leased from Maori landowners the Crown has a policy of being prepared to sell its interest. . Crown Forestry has already sold a number of the assets or, in the case of some of the leases, has had the leases significantly shortened. Negotiations to effect similar lease variations are underway with several other lessor groups.

Crown Forestry's core responsibilities of achieving the best long-term returns from the forestry assets and selling these assets for a commercial return as and when able, do contribute indirectly to MAF outcomes. Specifically, the work of Crown Forestry contributes directly to both the Maori development aspects of the Ministry's Sector Development outcome and the sustainable management aspects of the Natural Resources outcome.

Moreover, the work of Crown Forestry provides considerable benefits to MAF s overall capacity. In particular: 

  • A direct entrée/insight into the planted production forestry sector and linkages with key players in the forestry industry.
  • Direct linkages with a number of Maori trusts and incorporations.
  • Staff who are experienced forestry and forest land experts.

Capability 

MAF wishes to be seen as providing a unique and valuable contribution to the prosperity of our primary industries, and consequently to the protection and enhancement of the environment and the achievement of societal expectations and aspirations. This sets the objective for how we will operate and for the development of our capability as an organisation.

Our organisational development strategy focuses on:

  • Identifying what our unique contribution is and should be i.e. what should MAF be bringing to the table that no other organisation can contribute?
  • Determining what we need to do in terms of people, resources, systems, structures, culture, leadership and relationships to build, maintain and enhance that unique contribution.
  • Ascertaining what will cause us to be valued.
  • Deciding how we need to operate to ensure that we convert that unique contribution into value.

We believe that the Ministry's unique contribution is derived from our knowledge of the primary industries, their institutions and people, practices, technologies and markets. Our challenge is to take that raw knowledge and convert it into analysis and influence. The quality of our information, analysis and presentation will determine the extent of our influence and the value MAF is perceived as contributing. The key issues for MAF are about:

  • Leadership.
  • Planning capability what strategies.
  • People capability the right people, with the right skills, doing the right things.
  • Information capability collecting, storing, sharing and using the right information.
  • Systems and processes capability measuring and monitoring performance for quality and efficiency.
  • Culture appropriate values, behaviours and attitudes aligned with the new directions as signalled by this Statement of Intent.

In respect of the forestry assets including the forests planted on land leased from Maori

Monitoring and Reporting 

Effective implementation of the strategies will require regular evaluation of progress against the intended targets, and, where appropriate, the implementation of improved management practices. To this end, MAF will: Adopt an outcomes-based approach to management that will progressively shift the management focus from what MAF is doing to the impacts our activities are having on the broader community.

  • Access current performance levels and establish performance targets across the three outcomes. Improve governance arrangements.
  • Develop a measurement framework to provide appropriate and timely information on performance standards, organisational learning needs, stakeholder requirements and financial needs.
  • Establish best practice and benchmark.

Previous PageTable Of Contents

Contact for Enquiries

Strategy and Performance Group
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526, Wellington

Tel: +64 4 894 0100
Fax: +64 4 894 0738 Contact this person

 
Print this page Print this page




Biosecurity New Zealand Web Site