Introduction

Changing climate will have an impact on agriculture (Howden et al. 2007). The greatest consequence of climate change on agriculture is the threat to food security (Tchonkouang et al. 2024). This threat is compounded by a growing global population and associated food demand (Nelson et al. 2009; Gregory et al. 2005). Additionally, agriculture is a major economic, social, and cultural activity, that delivers multiple ecosystem services so the impact of climate change on agriculture is not confined to production alone (Howden et al. 2007). Around the world agricultural systems are being forced to adapt to changes in climate, while concurrently responding to demands for ecological, economic, social, and cultural reform (Gori Maia et al. 2018; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005; Mooney et al. 2009). These dynamics are playing out in Aotearoa New Zealand (AONZ). Many of the dominant land–based production systems are reaching a range of environmental, social, and economic limits (OECD 2017). Recognition of the contribution of the agricultural sector to climate change, declining water quality and biodiversity, is resulting in growing regulation and social pressure (Edwards and Trafford 2016). This is leading to an increasing interest in alternative types of systems, requiring a shift from a single productivity focus to a multi-faceted focus including environmental and social considerations (Knook and Turner 2020).

AONZ’s primary industries have experienced exemplary economic success worldwide. This success is driven by a focus on economic efficiency through specialisation and an eye to prioritising the demands of export markets. This focus comes at the expense of diversity, with 90% of commercial forests growing Pinus Radiata (Scion n.d.), 50% of dairy farms depend on Holstein–Friesian Jersey crossbreds, and 74% of vineyards produce Sauvignon Blanc (New Zealand Winegrowers 2022). Lack of biological diversity at the genetic and landscape levels makes specialised systems increasingly vulnerable to the impact of external stresses, e.g. political crises, changing consumer preferences, and climate change. The impact of specialisation on land and water ecosystem services as well as community and cultural cohesion is becoming increasingly apparent across AONZ.

Increased land-use diversity at the landscape scale has been proposed as a mechanism to address the environmental, social, and cultural challenges that current systems have generated. Concepts of multi-functional landscapes (Chakraborty et al. 2022), or ‘mosaics’ of land use (Paul et al. 2017; Lindenmayer et al. 2008) emphasise the benefits of diversity in reducing the negative environmental outcomes of agricultural production, while also having potential to create social and cultural benefits (Alcon et al. 2020; Sun et al. 2022; Huber et al. 2020).

In AONZ, Mātauranga Māori (traditional indigenous knowledge and wisdom)Footnote 1 and approaches to land use have the potential to restore the health of the environment, yet through the process and legacy of colonisation Māori no longer own significant areas of land and are often excluded from mainstream land-use decision-making. Mātauranga Māori includes traditional Māori belief systems (Harmsworth and Awatere 2013; Awatere et al. 2011) as well as dynamic and evolving knowledge (Harmsworth 1997; Durie 1998) with meaning for the present as well as the future. Māori knowledge, belief, and values systems operate together to encapsulate ways of knowing and doing within customary guardianship practice; this is referred to as kaitiakitanga. Kaitiakitanga can be thought of as guardianship of the environment, and is an intricate cultural system founded on the belief that all people are part of and guardians of nature, and thus have an active relationship with the land and environment (Marsden and Henare 1992; Roberts et al. 1995). Including Māori knowledge and wisdom in land-use decision-making has significant potential to address the environmental challenges that AONZ agriculture faces.

Many of the challenges mentioned cannot be solved at the farm level alone and would benefit from a landscape approach that includes the entire community in planning, designing, and coordinating solutions that transcend a single-farm focus. Applying this approach to landscape diversification could also achieve social license for agricultural production systems in the communities upon which they depend.

As a step towards holistic ways to identifying and beginning a process of landscape diversification in AONZ, this study explores the potential for a place-based approach. In this exploration, the study applied certain key processes and principles synonymous with a place-based approach to determine the elements of a shared vision for land use in Wairau Marlborough. A place-based approach was also assessed in its ability to create change. The study focuses on the Wairau Marlborough region of AONZ. Wairau Marlborough is located at the top of the South Island. A small number of highly specialised agricultural land uses dominate the Wairau Marlborough landscape (forestry, viticulture, beef and lamb, dairy), and share land and water resources with other communities nested in the landscape. The following section describes the case study region, including its history and land use. The ‘Place-based approaches’ section reviews place-based approaches, while the ‘Method’ section describes the methods used in this study. The ‘Findings and discussion’ section presents the results and discusses their implications, while the ‘Conclusion’ section concludes.

Case study region: Wairau Marlborough

This study focuses on the Wairau Marlborough region, located in the northeast of AONZ’s South Island. Part of a place-based approach requires developing an understanding of the region, specifically land use and associated environmental and socio-economic challenges.

Historic context

Wairau Marlborough has been inhabited by Māori since the thirteenth century, with Europeans arriving in AONZ from 1769. In 1840, representatives of the British Crown and about 540 Māori leaders signed te Tiriti o Waitangi and the Treaty of Waitangi, AONZ’s founding document. The principles of the Treaty include partnership, active protection, participation, and redress, and are often material in the Crown’s dealings today around natural resource allocation and land use in respect to Māori possession (ownership) of property; commercial rights to benefit from that property; and inherent rights to development (Ruru 2012). Before the Treaty was signed, Māori still held most of the land in AONZ. In the sixty years following the signing of the Treaty, Māori were alienated from most of their land. By 1870, the majority of the South Island had been taken by the Crown, and by the early 1900s, most of the North Island had too. By 1920, around 8% of New Zealand land remained in Māori ownership (Tupu n.d.). Land loss led not only to the exclusion of Māori from land use decision-making but also social issues such as poverty, overcrowding, and malnourishment due to lost access to traditional food sources (Pool n.d., Tupu n.d.).

Although Māori have inhabited the Wairau Marlborough region for over 800 years, they make up only 13.3% of the population in the region (StatsNZ 2018). The population has increased gradually in recent years (~ 47,340 at the last census), with the Māori population increasing at a greater rate in the last five years. About 2.4% of the region are Te Reo Māori speakers (lower than the national average of 4%). The region comprises eight Māori tribes (iwi) (Ngāti Kuia, Ngāti Apa ki Te Rā Tō, Rangitāne o Wairau, Ngāti Toa Rangatira, Ngāti Tama ki te Tau Ihu, Ngāti Koata, Ngati Rarua, Te Atiawa o te Waka-a-Maui).

Land use in Wairau Marlborough

The Marlborough region spans just over one million hectares. Land use has evolved to include a blend of natural areas, pasture, production forestry, and horticulture and urban areas. While most of the land in Marlborough is privately owned, a portion is under government ownership. Large agricultural firms, especially those in the wine industry, make a significant contribution to the region. In addition, the region also contains natural areas (conservation land/native bush), which make up the largest portion of the land use at over 600,000 hectares. These natural areas include protected areas, biodiversity hotspots, and wildlife habitats. Pastoral land use is the next largest category, covering approximately 300,000 hectares. Other land uses in the Marlborough region include exotic vegetation such as scrub, which covers smaller areas of the region. Land use in Marlborough is shown in Fig. 1 and summarised in Table 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Changes in land use in Marlborough, New Zealand, based on the Land Cover Database (LCDB) Version 5 (Landcare Research 2021). The horizontal axis represents time in years, and the vertical axis shows the area of land cover for each category. Vertical lines indicate the points at which the assessment of land use was completed in the LCDB. The graph highlights the increase in production forestry and horticulture, as well as the decrease in pasture over the period covered

Full size image
Table 1 Land use (in 1000 HA) in the Marlborough region by private and Department of Conservation (DoC) ownership (Dairy NZ 2020; Beef and lamb New Zealand 2021; Horticulture New Zealand 2021; DoC 2017 & 2019b)
Full size table

While Māori freehold land exists in several areas in Marlborough, it does not constitute a significant portion of land ownership in the region (Māori Land Court 2010). Māori have a range of ownership and interests in Marlborough including in marine farms, farming enterprises, forests, forestry land, vineyards, and commercial buildings (Ngati Apa 2022; Ngati Koata 2022; Ngati Kuia 2022; Ngati Rarua 2022; Ngati Tama 2022; Ngati Toa Rangatira 2021; Rangitane 2021). Iwi impact on land use is evident through ownership of land and assets, as well as participation in governance. Co-governance agreements exist for specific conservation areas, as well as in land-use regulation more generally, including district planning through the local authority, Marlborough District Council (MDC).

Marlborough is predominantly non-urban and relies heavily on agricultural production. As in other parts of AONZ, the agricultural industry in Marlborough has undergone intensification and increased specialisation, with associated environmental consequences. Land use in Marlborough has evolved over time, with recent changes documented in Fig. 1. From 1996 to 2018, there was a noticeable increase in forestry and horticulture, with pastoral land use decreasing, particularly between 1996 and 2008. Production forestry gained area predominantly from pastoral areas (7200 hectares), as well as from natural vegetation (3000 hectares) and exotic vegetation (900 hectares), according to Rutledge et al. (2010). The growth of viticulture is the primary driver of horticultural expansion in Marlborough, with new viticultural areas coming from pasture (3800 hectares), arable land (1300 hectares), and production forestry (170 hectares). The expansion of viticulture since the 1970s was due to a combination of factors including low land prices, suitability of the physical environment, changing legal and cultural attitudes towards alcohol, technological advancements in the industry, and investment for critical mass. The rapid deregulation of the agricultural sector in the 1980s with the removal of agricultural subsidies also contributed to land-use change away from pastoral systems (Forney and Stock 2014). Viticulture is now becoming the region’s fastest-growing high-value land use. Current land use in the region is illustrated in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2
figure 2

The Land Cover Database (LCDB) version 5 data representing land cover for the Marlborough region in 2018 by seven land use classes relating to the land use and ownership described here. The location of the Te Hoiere Catchment is marked in orange

Full size image

Place-based approaches

Place-based approaches aim to contribute to the sustainable development of communities and regions (Horlings 2015). Place-based approaches have evolved to comprise several underlying theories including Place-Based Theory (Norton and Hannon 1997), Place Attachment Theory, and Place-Based Education (Schweizer et al. 2013). Overall, the approach is underpinned by the relationship between individual and collective cultural values, and place. Such a values-oriented approach can provide greater insight into what people value, feel responsible for, and are willing to commit to in the context of their own place (Horlings 2015; Masterson et al. 2017).

In practice, place-based approaches have come to be described as collaborative, long-term approaches to build thriving communities delivered in a defined geographic location (Queensland Council of Social Service 2022). Their most salient characteristic is the partnering with local people in the shared design, stewardship, and accountability for outcomes and impacts on their own communities (Queensland Government 2022). The targets of the initiatives are often some complex issue or challenge affecting the community, generally with a focus on its needs and specificities. They seek to affect systemic change, coordinating efforts across the communities, and transcending silo-boundaries between disciplines and institutions (Jenkins et al. 2018). Place-based approaches have been applied across a wide range of research fields including environmental policy, economic development, politics, health, and climate change (Valluri-Nitsch et al. 2018; Curran-Cournane et al. 2021).

Place-based approaches have appeared in several recent studies from AONZ (Stokes 2021; Curran-Cournane et al. 2021). Curran-Cournane et al. (2021) applied a place-based approach to assess the impact of regenerative agriculture in New Zealand. The application of a place-based approach was determined as appropriate as other studies on regenerative agriculture had highlighted the context specificity or locality of regenerative agriculture. Stokes (2021) identified 11 insights for successful place-based initiatives in AONZ to revitalise communities and environments. Researchers did not apply the underlying theories of a place-based approach but instead applied grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967). The emerging insights included (1) A Treaty of Waitangi lens is foundational to the design of place-based initiatives, (2) The environment as a basis for change, (3) Respecting all knowledges, (4) Values (Tikanga), (5) People and community-led change, (6) People and Place—sense of place, belonging and wellbeing, (7) Collaboration and participation, (8) Leadership and management, (9) Broad measures of success, (10) Interconnected solutions, and (11) Access to resources. Similarly, other practitioners and proponents of place-based approaches have identified and summarised key principles and process to aid adoption and implementation (TP4D, 2018; Queensland Council of Social Service 2022; Queensland Government 2022; Swagemakers et al. 2019). These key principles and processes are summarised in Table 2. Of particular importance to the research aims of this study is the principle of Engaging with traditional custodians and the key process of Finding shared vision. Similarly, Schwann (2018) married this key principle and process within a place-based approach to highlight the need for the development of a shared vision, that respected Indigenous expert knowledge. The study’s overall aim was similar to study’s, in that it sought to ensure the development of ‘…a productive and experientially rich cultural landscape that protects the long-term viability of the region’.

Table 2 Categorisation of key principles and processes of place-base approaches (TP4D 2018; Queensland Council of Social Service 2022; Queensland Government 2022; Swagemakers et al. 2019)
Full size table

Overall, place-based approaches are locally initiated, aim to benefit the people, are representative of the community, contain legitimate input from entrusted long-term vested interests in ‘place’, and are given full power and authority to make decisions. For these reasons, they have the potential to create and regenerate significant broad-based long-term living systems and have been used to underpin the approach in this study, described in more detail in the following section.

Method

Key principles and processes synonymous with a place-based approach were applied in the research design and selection of methods for this study. The research team (local individuals with in-depth knowledge of the region) and the selection of interview participants were identified using principles of a place-based approach, and the interview structure (two interview groups and questionnaire design) was also informed by the key principles. Through our methods and research questions, we implemented these key processes Growing an understanding of place and Finding shared vision to answer research questions 1 (develop an understanding of the community’s vision of land use in the Wairau Marlborough region) and 2 (identify and understand the elements necessary to develop a pathway to achieving a shared vision for land use in the region). Building a plan for change was applied to answer research question 3 (assess the potential for place-based approaches to support land use and diversification where there is high potential for conflicting interests between different groups, or in contexts with a history of colonisation). Key principles were applied in the design of the research team (Committing to place, Engaging with traditional custodians), interview structure (Committing to place, Engaging with traditional custodians, Flexibility), and participant selection (Cross-sectorial, Being inclusive, Engaging with traditional custodians, Being citizen-led, Multi-stakeholder, People-centred, Committing to place).

We sought to answer research questions 1 and 2 through a series of semi-structured interviews, and research question 3 through an assessment of a place-based initiative within the study region. Two sets of interviews were carried out to capture Māori and wider community responses. Māori interviews, referred to as Te Ao Māori (TAM) (Māori world view) interviews, were carried out by local Māori researchers. For the wider community, the interviews were conducted by a researcher from a local institute. This approach was adopted to create an appropriate space for Māori place–based perspectives to be acknowledged and shared inside a wider community project. A local place–based project was identified during the interview process and assessed against the categorisation in Table 2, and in its ability to support land use diversification.

The central questions and geographical boundaries for interviews were defined by the research questions described above. Two parallel interview guides were created, reflecting the different cultural needs of both interview groups. Question topics and structure were the same in both interview guides (please see supplementary material). Questions sought to understand interviewees’ connection to the place, perceived regional challenges, their vision for the place, the role of diversification in their vision, and the types of partnerships that need to be created to develop a pathway to the vision. Ethical approval was sought and achieved for the project from the New Zealand Ethics Committee. Please see Appendix 2 for additional information. 

Interview process

Participant selection and recruitment

The main target for the semi-structured interviews was individuals who captured the range of views and interests on land use in Wairau Marlborough. TAM interviewees held roles in commercial businesses within the primary sector, whenua (land), moana (sea), and environmental management, and in iwi management and governance. Māori participants were selected from five of the eight iwi, in Marlborough Wairau. Some of the TAM interviewees were not of Māori heritage but worked for Māori entities. A total of 12 interviewees participated in the TAM interviews. The wider community interviews targeted individuals (farm and vineyard owners, technical experts) working directly in the dominant primary industries in the region (viticulture, forestry, dairy, sheep and beef farming, and aquaculture), regional government officials and employees working in environmental management, and residents involved in environmental interest and advocacy groups. A total of 14 interviewees participated in the community interviews. The drafting process relied on convenience sampling, utilising researchers’ existing contacts within the region, and snowball sampling methods. This sample size was sufficient to reach saturation of codes, consistent with findings from Hennink and Kaiser (2022).

Interview process

In advance of the interview, participants were provided with a project information and consent sheet. Interviews were held in person or online. For the TAM interviews, customary Māori practices, such as the performance of a karakia (incantation) at the beginning and end of each interview, and the offering of a koha (donation) to each participant for their contribution, were observed. For the Community interviews, participants were offered tea, coffee, or water before beginning. Interviews were recorded. Interviews were conducted in December 2022 and January 2023 and were two hours in length on average.

Interview coding and analysis

Each interview was fully transcribed. Community interview transcripts were imported into Delve Tool to perform deductive coding while TAM interviews were coded manually using Microsoft Excel. Primary analysis consisted of the development of an analytical framework derived from interview questions and used to deductively code interview notes and transcripts. A second round of coding applied inductive coding to identify additional themes. Finally, thematic aggregation was undertaken to identify the different elements of the community’s vision for land use, and the connections and relationships necessary to develop a pathway to the creation of a vision. Following these steps, findings from both sets of interviews were compared to determine similarities and differences between responses to the same questions in the analytical framework descried previously.

Place-based land use diversification example

Place-based example selection

During the interview process, the Te Hoiere Catchment Restoration Project (referred to as Te Hoiere) was cited by several interviewees as an example of a place-based project in the region. Information on Te Hoiere was collated from interviews and online resources detailing the project’s objectives and activities.

Place-based assessment

Te Hoiere was assessed against the categorisation of key place–based principles and process in Table 2 to (1) determine if the project aligned with a place-based approach and (2) if found to be the case, had a place-based approach been successful in supporting land use diversification.

Findings and discussion

Here, the findings from both sets of interviews are reported in parallel to provide an amalgamated response to research questions 1 and 2. As outlined in the background section, a place-based approach is a values-oriented approach that can provide insight into what people value, feel responsible for, and are willing to commit to in the context of their own place (Horlings 2015). Therefore, the interviews focused on exploring interviewees’ connection to place and how that influenced their vision for the place. Similarly, collaboration and partnership are key principles and practices of a place-based approach (Queensland Council of Social Service 2022) so the interviews identified barriers and enablers of partnership. To provide an answer to research question 3, the Te Hoiere Catchment Restoration Project was assessed to determine its alignment with a place-based approach, and whether the Te Hoiere project contains the elements necessary to develop a pathway to achieving a shared vision for land use in the region (answer to question 2).

Vision for land use and diversification

Connections to place

Te Ao Maori

The TAM interview participants highlighted the importance of connectivity, balance, and treating the environment as a taonga (treasure). All TAM interviewees emphasised the spiritual and practical connection to place through whakapapa (genealogy and heritage) highlighting their obligation and responsibility to protect Iwi (tribes), whanau (families), land, and water in the region. All participants stressed the significance of mauri (life force energy) and balance, describing how upsetting the natural balance affects people, land, and water. Last, they viewed mother earth as taonga (gift or treasure) and expressed concern over the negative impact of specialisation, commercialisation, and intensification on the region, illustrating how historic sustainable practices are no longer viable or practiced due to changes in land use and management.

Wider Community

WC interviewees describe their connection to Wairau Marlborough in three ways: as a home (n = 13), through a relationship with nature and reliance on the land for their livelihood (n = 13), and by witnessing changes in the region over time (n = 9). This was articulated by interviews stating that the primary sector is dominant in the regional economy and is reliant on the land, and changes in the region were attributed to intensification of agriculture, extreme weather events, population growth, and housing developments.

Summary

While articulated in very different ways, there are some similarities in interviewees’ descriptions of connection to place and how these influence their vision of the place. This overlap can be most strongly seen where both sets of interviewees voiced concerns over how the place has changed and attributed the change in the region to the same factors, specifically, agricultural intensification, specialisation, and housing developments. Both sets of interviewees expressed a desire to restore and or conserve the landscape for future generations, to treat mother earth as a treasure.

…but I guess it’s, we want to still be able to, you know, sustainably operate our primary businesses into perpetuity…we still want to be able to do what we are doing into next year, ten years, a hundred years, a thousand years into the future. – Vineyard and farm owner

For both groups, the Wairau Marlborough region was home, but the articulation of what this meant was different. Māori interviewees whakapapa to the region (descend from the region); they have an obligation and connection to the region regardless of whether they live there or not. This connection is different to WC interviewees’ description of home, which was articulated through a sense of responsibility to, and appreciation of the place, but not a connection transcendent of generations or location.

This has been in our whānau for so long, so many years, it will always be here. So really, it’s about conservation of the land, looking after Papatūānuku, we’re only here for a short time and while it passes through whakapapa, it will always be here, long after we’ve gone. We want to ensure it is kept in a state that will sustain us. Without the land you’ve got nothing really. – Local Iwi environmental manager

Vision for land use

Te Ao Māori

TAM vision for land use centred around three core themes: (1) acknowledgment and protection of indigenous knowledge and traditional practice (n = 12), (2) conserve and increase native biodiversity (n = 12), (3) limit the adverse effects of current agricultural practices (n = 11) these included commercialisation, monocultures, lack of diversity, food insecurity, seasonal production model, impact on local people, and soil erosion.

Wider Community

The Community’s vision for land-use also centred around three core elements: (1) diversification of agricultural production systems (n = 13), (2) regeneration, conservation, and restoration of natural habitat (n = 13), (3) diversification of housing stock in the region (n = 7).

Summary

Despite the similarities described above, the TAM and Community interviewees have different visions for land use.

The TAM vision for land prioritises acknowledging and protecting indigenous knowledge and traditional practices as a pathway to a diversified shared landscape.

Māori can’t go back to living how indigenous cultures would prefer to live in harmony with mother earth, but there needs to be better understanding—what it is that indigenous cultures know that the western world has lost since the advent of the industrial and manufacturing revolutions and no longer know, so that long term solutions can be found in shorter timeframes to ensure there is succession for future generations. – Iwi board member

Both groups want to conserve and increase biodiversity and diversity of agricultural production, specifically reducing monocultures and increasing food security.

There’s talk around food security and access to good food. We know we can grow good food but the access to good food that is affordable is a problem, and that came out in the research we have done…Can we hand on heart say, if another catastrophe happened, will we be able to feed our community and have good access to food? – Iwi board member

They also want to see natural habitat regenerated, restored, and conserved. Better management of housing developments through regulation around the type, location, and quantity of housing.

I sit in conversations about, um, we need more land because we need more houses because the, uh, population of, of Blenheim, for example, is going to grow. And I understand that. And we need to provide houses. And we know that there is a housing shortage across New Zealand, but it's about where do you put those houses? – Local councillor, business owner

As previously mentioned, place-based approaches are underpinned by the relationship between individual and collective cultural values, and place (Horlings 2015). In this study, application of a values-orientated approach has unearthed insights into what interviewees value, feel responsible for, and will commit to, that are derived from their connection to place. The results describe how interviewees connect to place in different ways. How interviewees connect to Wairau Marlborough drives their vision for land use in the region. In describing their connection to place, TAM interviewees articulated a responsibility to protect land, water, and people in Wairau Marlborough. The need to act upon this responsibility is illustrated in TAM interviewees’ vision to acknowledge and protect indigenous knowledge and traditional practice as part of the diversification of the landscape. This synergy is also present in interviewees’ concerns over ‘how the place has changed’, and their vision to restore and conserve the landscape for future generations by protecting and increase biodiversity, diversifying agricultural production, specifically reducing monocultures, and increasing food security. In both examples, identifying and understanding connection to place are essential in understanding the resulting vision. This later example also illustrates how historic land use in the region influences a future vision for land use, with a desire for food security and conservation intersecting with memories of less intensive agriculture, centred on food production as opposed to wine and timber. Creation of the community vision for land use would result in some changes in land use in the region. Overall, the historical context intersects with connection to place and current land use challenges to inform a future vision for land use. Identifying the interconnectedness of these elements helps to understand the current reality and to begin to identify the pathways to change.

Identify pathways to transition

Barriers to partnership

Te Ao Māori

Barriers to partnership include the difficulty of working with traditional lore versus the established legal structure (n = 6), Māori long-term strategic perspective (n = 12), legislation that does not incorporate Te Tiriti or true partnership (n = 12), lack of information and data sharing (n = 5), lack of understanding of Māori leadership capacity, short election cycles (n = 10), and differences in the concept of mana (prestige) (n = 12) between Māori and Western perspectives (n = 12). These barriers pose challenges in creating sustainable partnerships and collaborative working relationships.

Wider Community

The factors that inhibited individuals and the wider community partnering to achieve a shared vision around land use change can be broadly grouped into three categories: individual barriers, institutional barriers, and organisational barriers. Individual barriers include a lack of understanding of environmental and cultural issues (n = 4), motivation, time (n = 5), prejudice, and individual egos that inhibit forming partnerships (n = 6). Institutional barriers relate to short election cycles (n = 7) and changing government officials, which affect prioritization and action. Organisational (e.g. private companies and community groups) barriers include internal factors such as time (n = 5), funding (n = 6), and labour, and external factors such as trustworthiness, integrity, and competition for funding.

Enablers of partnership

Te Ao Māori

According to participants, building relationships based on balance, equity, trust, and collaboration is important for effective partnerships. They emphasised the need for future thinking around collaborative solutions (n = 12), shared values (n = 12), effective communication (n = 12), representation, and a voice at all levels of partnership, real consultation processes (n = 12), education about the Treaty (Te Tiriti) (n = 11), recognition of Iwi Māori capacity and capabilities, and the central importance of mana (prestige) (n = 11). It was also mentioned that understanding Māori culture and perspectives is crucial for successful partnerships.

Wider Community

Key enablers of successful partnerships included genuine and intentional partnership (n = 5), acceptance of both cultures (n = 6), shared goals and values (n = 9), education about the Treaty and environmental issues (n = 10), open discourse, and communication (n = 12). Proactive engagement (n = 4) with Māori and community stakeholders was seen as an essential element in creating change and envisioning a shared future. There is less agreement among WC interviewees on the barriers to partnership.

Summary

In summary, the barriers and enablers of partnership are similar in many ways for both WC and TAM interviewees. However, there are distinct differences, especially with respect to the barriers faced by TAM interviewees due to cultural differences and acknowledgement of the Treaty of Waitangi.

I’ve asked the Council where’s your 100-year plan, because we might need to retreat, where’s housing going, where’s the food going? There’s nothing. It’s about being a good ancestor. You start to think about what those future crops might be, how much would you need for your region, how much will be available for exporting? What needs to happen to make the soil well. – Iwi manager

Factors inhibiting individuals and the community from partnering to achieve a shared vision around land use change include a lack of understanding or apathy about issues, a lack of time, prejudice, and ego.

…we wanted to create a hub essentially that supported all of those small groups and bring people together. And we've ended up going down a slightly different route because even though that's what we were trying to provide, there were some groups that felt we were just another competitor…and really fought against us even though our intentions were very honest and open and we want to benefit everybody. – General manager of local environmental organisation

Across both sets of interviews, the need for better communication and more education on the Treaty and environmental issues were identified as the main enablers of partnership.

But I don't believe that there's enough understanding and enough trust and enough back and forth and enough, um, openness to utilize what Te Triti stands for to benefit the land use…I whole wholeheartedly think that, uh, the, the treaty foundations and the beliefs would, would benefit land use immensely. – Vineyard owner, wine industry board member, professional director

Synergies exist between both sets of findings and Stokes (2021), specifically around the Treaty and Values. Stokes (2021) identified application of certain Treaty principles as foundational to the design of place-based initiatives. This study identified a lack of knowledge and recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi as barriers, while education around the Treaty was identified as an enabler of partnership. It may be that to apply Treaty principles to place-based design, projects would first have to invest in education on the Treaty to ensure that lack of knowledge was not an ongoing barrier to the creation of place-based solutions. Collaboration was identified as an enabler of partnership and the creation of place-based approaches in the TAM interviews and by Stokes (2021). The need for collaboration is also present in Table 2 which lists Multi-stakeholder, Cross-sectorial, and Being Inclusive as key principles and Enabling local collaborative governance as a key practices. Table 2 does not list the development of shared values explicitly as a key practice or principle and neither source identified communication as key element in place-based processes, while it was identified in both sets of interviews in this study. Given AONZ’s historic context, specifically Māori land loss and subsequent alienation from land use decision making, this study reiterates Stokes (2021) in identifying application of Treaty principles as an integral component in the creation of successful place-based partnerships and initiatives in AONZ. Beyond the Treaty, the establishment of shared values, collaboration, and communication is key element when establishing partnership and pathways to diversified shared landscapes.

Te Hoiere Catchment Restoration Project

The Te Hoiere Catchment Restoration Project (Te Hoiere) is facilitated by Kotahitanga mō te Taiao Alliance (working as one for the environment) (the Alliance). The Alliance consists of 15 partners, including councils, Iwi, and the Department of Conservation, across the top of the South Island focused on landscape-scale conservation projects that also have environmental, social, economic, and cultural benefits (Nature n.d.). The Alliance aims to facilitate collaboration and collective action to achieve shared outcomes that enhance and protect the environment. The Alliance applies kaitiakitanga (guardianship) as a leading philosophy and a set of agreed guiding values (manaakitanga, kaitiakitanga, mātauranga, kotahitanga, rangatiratanga, mauri, arohatiaFootnote 2). The Alliance strategy was co-developed by partners and the community. The strategy describes success at a high level for the region, and for its eleven defined places (sub-regions). It describes the Alliance’s shared vision, conservation goals, and actions to achieve the envisioned outcomes for each of the eleven places (Department of Conservation 2019a).

Te Hoiere was cited by several interviewees as an example of effective diversification and land use change. By focusing on landscape-scale projects and applying a holistic and collaborative approach, Te Hoiere proposes to address land use–derived social, economic, and cultural issues in the catchment. The project benefited from a $7.5 million Government investment in 2021 (The Beehive 2021). It aims to achieve the following outcomes: (1) Culture and partnerships: Taonga are being managed and protected through partnerships, (2) Ecological integrity: Ecological integrity of terrestrial, estuarine, and river systems is maintained and enhanced, (3) People and communities: People and communities enjoy the well-being of the rivers and estuary, (4) Thriving economy: Resilient, environmentally sustainable, and thriving primary sectors. Interviewees described how the project applied co-governance (two co-chairs one Māori and one from the wider community) and decision-making by consensus. Interviewees conceded that this approach may take longer but it results in a robust discussion and planning to achieve the desired transformational outcomes. Different interviewees described how the project aims to engage all members of the community, not just landowners, and described a community workshop at the commencement of the project where community members were invited to share their vision for land, water use, and conservation in the catchment. Additional measures were deployed to support community involvement including the hiring of a catchment care coordinator (Te Hoiere Pelorus Project 2021), community-based sub-catchment groups formed, sub-catchment coordinators, and industry and community champions identified (Te Hoiere Pelorus Project 2020). Building a plan for change, enacting the plan, and finding a shared vision and local collaborative governance are key process elements of the Alliance and Te Hoiere. Throughout the interviews, the project was repeatedly referenced as an example of success in land use and diversification due to the operational and governance structures the facilitate acceptance of different cultures, leading to genuine partnership.

I co-chair the catchment restoration project…and that is an exemplar catchment restoration project. So, there's a lot riding on that in terms of we really want to improve from the mountains to the sea. – Local councillor, business owner

Neither interviewees nor project literature stated that Te Hoiere was a place-based project. However, this study has determined that Te Hoiere is a place-based project as all key processes, as detailed in Table 2, have been applied in the project. Key principles applied include engaging with traditional custodians, inclusivity, cross sector, multi-stakeholder, multi-dimensional, citizen-led, people-centred, and multi-level. Additionally, all 11 insights identified by Stokes (2021) are evident in the project. Finally, many of the enablers of partnership identified in this study (‘Enablers of partnership’ section) are also embodied by Te Hoiere and the Alliance. These synergies indicate several things; Te Hoiere and the Alliance are living examples of a successful, place-based approach to achieving land used diversification, and therefore place-based approaches can be successful in supporting land use diversification, even where there is a high potential for conflicting interests between different groups, or in contexts with a history of colonisation.

Implications and limitations

The findings of this study contribute to the overall body of research on place-based approaches by establishing that they can be successfully applied to support land use diversification in a specific region. However, application of place-based approaches cannot overcome significant structural issues to diversification such as the right of private landowners to choose to do what the like with their land (within the bounds of regulation) and the need to operate financially viable farm businesses. Future research could identify mechanisms to overcome this financial barrier to diversification, specifically in countries such as AONZ where there is no subsidisation of agricultural production.

This study has identified elements of a shared vision for land use in the region, highlighted key principles and processes to apply, and identified enablers of partnership while considerable to the application of place-based approaches outside of research these steps do not aid in overcoming tensions that exist between different groups and individuals that can arise during the research process. Future research should focus on approaches to manage these tensions during the research process. An additional limitation includes the omittance of traditional Māori assembly structure’s where issues such as land use would traditionally be debated and discussed before reaching a consensus, i.e. a shared vision for land use; subsequently, this study only identifies elements of a vision and not a communally shared vision. Engaging with local indigenous customs and practices may be necessary to overcome similar limitations in other regions.

Conclusion

This study found that vision for land use varies depending on individual and collective connections and relationships with a particular place. No single vison for land use and diversification in Wairau Marlborough was identified, but there is a shared desire across both sets of interviewees to increase native and agricultural diversity, and restore and conserve the landscape for future generations. Diversification and land use change are under pined by partnership. To create meaningful partnerships, multi stakeholder and cross sector collaboration are required along with effective communication, shred values, and goals. In the AONZ context, application of Treaty principles to guide place–based approaches to diversification is appropriate but education on Treaty principles maybe required before this can be effective. Place-based approaches have been found to be effective in creating change where there is high potential for conflicting interests between different groups, or in contexts with a history of colonisation. Limitations of this study include interviewee type; we targeted individuals who were involved in agriculture, conservation, and other community initiatives as a result our sample may have excluded individuals who were not supportive of change.