Hunting for the next 10%

There’s an old saying that 80% of people think they’re in the top 20% of performers. It’s human nature. But are farmers any different? Fonterra tells us we’re the most efficient producers of dairy protein in the world. Yet recent water quality results suggest there’s still room to improve. So how efficient are we, really?

The tricky thing about “data” is you can make it say what you want. Take the often-quoted link between nitrates in drinking water and bowel cancer. It’s frequently repeated, but when ESR reviewed all the available research, they found the evidence to be inconclusive — even “unlikely” — given how little of our nitrate intake comes from drinking water. With so much data available, it’s easy for vested interests to pick and choose the figures to suit their argument.

So who can you believe when science seems to conflict at every turn? The truth is, we can’t be certain. Farming has always meant operating under uncertainty — weather, prices, regulations — and focusing on what we do know and can control can take us a long way.

Even if you’re already doing well, there’s always something you can do to be better. Think of the likes of Richie McCaw or Sam Whitelock — did they ever leave the field without thinking about what they could do better? High performers don’t see improvement as a task to finish; it’s a mindset.

That mindset is just as important when it comes to environmental performance. Which brings us to the idea of hunting for your next 10%.

Every input on your farm that doesn’t end up in your product — fertiliser, feed, or water — is likely lost to the environment. Chasing better environmental outcomes is simply good business. You’re saving money on what might otherwise be washed or “farted” away.

It’s easy to believe you’re already in that top 20% and keep can doing what you’ve always done. In some ways, the system even rewards that behaviour. Water take consents, for instance, are based on historic use — meaning less efficient users can get access to more water. Farms with higher nitrogen baselines or winter grazing “rights” tend to have higher land values, regardless of the impact they have on their catchment. And when reduction targets are announced, some farmers hold back easy improvements so they can “keep something up the sleeve” for later, protecting land value in the meantime. From a business point of view, that’s understandable — but it doesn’t move us forward.

As we move into a new era of freshwater regulation, it’s time to shift that mindset. Real progress depends not on the top 20% getting even better, but on the 80% understanding where they truly stand — and rewarding, not hindering, those who keep hunting for their next 10%.

Eva Harris is Principal Environmental Advisor at Enviro Collective