NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 1 of 10
Assessment Schedule – 2014
Agricultural and Horticultural Science: Demonstrate understanding of land use for primary production in New Zealand (91297)
Evidence Statement
Question ONE: Marlborough region
Achievement
Achievement with Merit
Explains, using BOTH environmental and economic
factors, why the land in Marlborough was used for
traditional primary production.
Explains in detail, using BOTH environmental and
economic factors, why the land in Marlborough was
used for traditional primary production.
OR
OR
Explains, using BOTH economic and workforce
factors, why Marlborough land is being converted to
viticulture.
Explains in detail, using BOTH economic and
workforce factors, why Marlborough land is being
converted to viticulture.
Achievement with Excellence
Justifies the continuing trend in converting land to
viticulture over the traditional land uses of
Marlborough, in terms of economic and workforce
considerations.
N0/
No response; no relevant evidence.
N1
Some writing, but does not explain the factors that determine why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary productions, or why it is being
converted to viticulture.
N2
Partial or insufficient explanation of the factors that determine why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary production, OR why it is being
converted to viticulture.
A3
Explains, using BOTH environmental and economic factors, why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary productions, OR, using BOTH
economic and workforce factors, why Marlborough land is being converted to viticulture.
A4
Explains, using BOTH environmental and economic factors, with some supporting data, why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary
production; OR explains, using BOTH economic and workforce factors, with some supporting data, why Marlborough land is being converted to viticulture.
M5
Explains in detail, using BOTH environmental and economic factors, why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary production. ONE factor
explained in detail, the other factor explained; OR explains in detail, using BOTH economic and workforce factors, why Marlborough land is being converted to
viticulture. ONE factor explained in detail, the other factor explained.
M6
Explains in detail, using BOTH environmental and economic factors, why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary production (BOTH factors
explained in detail); OR explains in detail, using BOTH economic and workforce factors, why Marlborough land is being converted to viticulture. BOTH factors
explained in detail.
E7
Justifies the continuing trend in converting land to viticulture over the traditional land uses of Marlborough, in terms of economic and workforce considerations.
Comprehensive evidence given for ONE factor, with another factor well supported.
E8
Justifies the continuing trend in converting land to viticulture over the traditional land uses of Marlborough, in terms of economic and workforce considerations.
Comprehensive supporting evidence given for BOTH factors.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 2 of 10
Q1
(a)
Evidence
Explains, using BOTH environmental and economic factors, why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary production
Economic
The traditional land uses were easy to manage, cheap to set up, did not rely on structured infrastructure, and had a limited need for mechanisation. This past
primary production was economically viable.
Environmental
The climatic conditions of Marlborough, such as warm temperatures, high sunshine hours, and adequate rainfall, ensured that the traditional types of primary
production were profitable. The dry climate suited small-scale ventures that required limited irrigation.
Explains in detail, using BOTH environmental and economic factors, why the land in Marlborough was used for traditional primary productions
Economic
The small-scale traditional horticultural and agricultural operations were easy to manage without formalised infrastructure. Fresh produce could be sold quickly
and profitably, both locally and overseas. The limited need for mechanisation made profitable production more likely. Income available from these smallerscale ventures could be taken as personal income, rather than having to be used for loan repayments. Typically, other financial demands were also reduced.
Environmental
The dry climate of the area meant that these small-scale ventures required limited irrigation and were easy to manage for growers. Marlborough has some of
the best soils, especially for cropping, vegetable production, and small seeds. Silt loam soil types predominate; they are generally deep, extending below two
metres, and typical characteristics are very high soil moisture-holding capacities and potentially poor drainage during the winter months. Warm temperatures
are good for plant growth. The topography of flat plains is ideal for easy harvesting and management. Vegetable production requires the use of machines,
which are far more productive (and safer) on flat land.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 3 of 10
(b)
Explains, using BOTH economic and workforce factors, why Marlborough land is still being converted to viticulture
Economic
The production of viticulture is profitable, and there is a high demand for a quality product, so economic viability still continues.
Workforce
Skilled viticulture workers are attracted to the area, due to the high volume of production and the pleasant climate for living. Seasonal work force is available
with working tourists, and there are government initiatives to attract workers.
Explains in detail, using TWO factors (economic or workforce), why Marlborough land is still being converted to viticulture
Economic
The industry of wine-making is more profitable than other small-scale enterprises. There is money to be made from both the local market and export markets.
The land available for wine-making in Marlborough has very good attributes for producing wine, and the grapes produced are suitable for high-value wine. The
demand for a quality product is high, so the returns can be good.
Workforce
By changing the land use to viticulture, work force requirements also changed. Viticulture demanded a more skilled workforce which needed to be attracted
and brought in to the area, where previously small-scale agricultural and horticultural operations were run – primarily by landowners. Some of the workers
required can be unskilled, which means tourists can be used. The area’s natural beauty can be used to attract tourists, who can provide a readily available
extra workforce.
Justifies the continuing trend in converting land to viticulture over the traditional land use of Marlborough, in terms of economic and workforce considerations
Viticulture has continued to expand in the Marlborough region, as grapes and wine that are produced can be sold for more profit than produce from other
horticultural or agricultural industries. The only other agricultural industry that would equal or exceed viticulture in profit is dairying, but this would have high
set-up costs, and high rainfall or irrigation requirements in a low rainfall area. Marlborough is a low moisture and soil fertility environment, which had previously
been marginal economically for pasture-based enterprises, but it is ideal for viticulture, and more profits can be made from producing this commodity.
With the expansion of the viticulture sector, the seasonal labour force also needed to grow. Most of these workers come from outside the Marlborough area
and / or are brought in from overseas under the government-assisted Recognised Seasonal Employer Work Policy. However, a large number remain in the
Marlborough area. The high number of seasonal workers creates a demand for accommodation and other infrastructure needs, which benefits the surrounding
area. The current workforce is all skilled in viticulture, so any changes in primary production would see employees needing to be retrained or re-skilled, or new
people employed.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 4 of 10
Question TWO: Future use of the high country
Achievement
Achievement with Merit
Explains what economic reasons may have
contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country
for pasture-based production.
Explains in detail what economic reasons may have
contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country
for pasture-based production.
AND
AND
Explains the political reasons for changing land use.
Explains in detail the political reasons for changing
land use.
Achievement with Excellence
Justifies the effects that changing the land use of
high or steep hill country to conservation land will
have on economic returns, and on the environment.
N0/
No response; no relevant evidence.
N1
Some writing, but does not explain the factors that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based farming, or returning high
and steep hill country to conservation land.
N2
Partial or insufficient explanation of the factors that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based farming OR returning
high or steep hill country to conservation land.
A3
Explains ONE economic and ONE political factor that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based farming OR returning
high or steep hill country to conservation land.
A4
Explains ONE economic and ONE political factor, with some supporting data, that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasturebased farming OR returning high or steep hill country to conservation land.
M5
Explains in detail, ONE economic and ONE political factor that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based farming OR
returning high or steep hill country to conservation land. One factor explained in detail, the other factor explained.
M6
Explains in detail, ONE economic and ONE political factor that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based farming OR
returning high or steep hill country to conservation land. BOTH factors explained in detail.
E7
Justifies the effects that changing the land use of high or steep hill country to conservation land will have on economic returns and on the environment.
Comprehensive evidence given for ONE factor, with the other factor well supported.
E8
Justifies the effects that changing the land use of high or steep hill country to conservation land will have on economic returns and on the environment.
Comprehensive supporting evidence given for BOTH factors.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 5 of 10
Q2
Evidence
Explains what economic reasons may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based production
High or steep hill country is land of low economic value, due to its topography, variable weather conditions, farm access, remote location, and the soil being of
low fertility and expensive to use machinery on. Therefore the purchase of steep hill country is cheaper than other types of land. However, in order to farm, it
must be profitable over the long term, and therefore pasture-based farming practices are the only option, such as low-input sheep and cattle farming, which
are profitable, particularly as labour costs are low.
Explains the political reasons for changing land use
There is pressure from government agencies such as regional councils and Department of Conservation (DoC) to return land to its natural state. This is due to
the high and steep high country having a natural character of high intrinsic value. This natural character is seen as being important to the cultural identity and
well-being of New Zealanders. It derives this character from its landscape, predominance of indigenous biota, natural processes, its traditional uses, and the
perceived lack of human impact. These agencies are seeking to protect the public’s access to the mountains, lakes, and rivers, and provide areas for
recreation, parks, and reserves. There is an increasing appeal for these areas to become tourist destinations to appreciate the natural quiet and grandeur of
the high and steep hill country setting.
Explains in detail, economic reasons that may have contributed to farmers using high or steep hill country for pasture-based production
Low economic value land was easy to obtain by farmers, and the best was made of what they had. The land was difficult and expensive to use machinery on,
due to the steep slopes, leaving low-intensity farming as the major option. The soil was of low fertility, and the expense of the addition of fertiliser was
unjustified. Sheep, beef, venison, and velvet undergo price fluctuations, however the production process cannot be changed and farmers have to accept the
price changes. Farmers are not in a position to hold stock till better prices come, due to weather conditions, and often sell store animals to down-country
farmers. Fortunately, a mix of product for sale softens the blow of a low price for a particular product. The labour requirements in the high or steep hill country
have been reduced by the use of technologies such as helicopters, so the costs per hectare or person are reduced. In addition, many high or hill country
properties have introduced tourism activities and pig-hunting experiences to boost income. New Zealand high and hill country farms are a critical part of our
economy. These farms are stocked by cattle and sheep, and form nearly 50% of the total commercial sheep and beef farm land in the country. High and hill
country farms deliver exports of sheep meat, lamb, beef, venison, velvet, and wool.
Explains in depth the political reasons for changing land use
The regional councils and DoC are making decisions in the context of the whole ecosystem, encompassing the range of environments, indigenous biodiversity,
landforms, and landscapes, waterbodies, and their margins. They are ensuring that the high and hill country management regimes are ecologically
sustainable, acknowledging the importance of ecosystems, including vegetation, soils, and water, to the downstream environment and communities. They are
taking a precautionary approach where past and current farming decisions may result in irreversible change to soils and water. The appeal of the land in its
natural state adds to the “clean, green” image of New Zealand, increasing its popularity as a tourist destination.
Justifies the effects that changing the land use of high or steep hill country to conservation land will have on economic returns, and on the environment
High and steep hill country farming causes land to be cleared, which reduces soil stability and can lead to erosion. Frequent poor weather causes slips and
loss of valuable topsoil. A return to conservation land will stabilise the soil, as tree and shrub roots penetrate it and bind the soil together, reducing erosion and
the subsequent nitrogen run-off into streams. Also, retiring land reduces the remaining land’s carrying capacity, thus reducing the nitrogen run-off.
Huge areas of New Zealand’s hills and mountains were unsuited to arable farming, but pioneers couldn’t resist trying. Sheep farming methods from the
Scottish highlands, especially, seemed applicable. In the decades before refrigeration, sheep wool was a valuable commodity that did not spoil in transit
across the globe. Thus began the business and culture of the “high country sheep station”. It gained considerable impetus with the introduction of fencing wire
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 6 of 10
from 1868 that facilitated basic flock and pasture management. Prosperity peaked around 1950, and hill country farming has devolved in recent decades.
Returns from sheep farming plummeted, labour costs rose, subsidies disappeared, and unsustainable environmental factors became more apparent.
At present, DoC is involved in a process of high country tenure review, where unsustainable land reverts to conservation management by DoC. Through this
process, DoC is progressively acquiring sites of high country farming historic heritage, in some areas of New Zealand. This model has provided the councils
with ways of making the land more sustainably and economically viable, particularly when using the Land Use Capability Classes. A cleaner river can boost
tourist visits and economic viability of the area. The economic returns of the farms are greatly diminished, whereas conservation land can attract tourists.
These short-term visitors come from outside of the area and create a demand for accommodation and other infrastructure needs. This can create more jobs
and greater prosperity in the area.
High or steep hill country farmers must make a profit in order to stay in business over time. They are finding it harder to compete with lower, flatter land, and
often have poorer returns with increasing inputs. It is justified by regional councils and DoC to convert the land back to its natural state, but it can have
devastating effects on farm economics. Depending on the amount of land removed from a farm, it reduces the land size of the property and therefore the
number of stock units that can be carried, reducing overall profit. Some farms will cease to be profitable and therefore cease to exist. However, farms may
change structure, with some income being gained by attracting tourists through other business ventures, such as hunting, fishing, heli-skiing, tramping, etc.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 7 of 10
Question THREE: Land intensification
Achievement
Achievement with Merit
Explains how technological and economic factors are
affecting the rate at which the intensification of land is
developing.
Explains in detail how technological and economic
factors are affecting the rate at which the
intensification of land is developing.
OR
OR
Explains how TWO of the following factors
(economic, environmental, or social) may contribute to
increasing land use intensification through ensuring
long-term water supplies.
Explains in detail how TWO of the following factors
(economic, environmental, or social) may contribute to
increasing land use intensification through ensuring
long-term water supplies.
Achievement with Excellence
Analyses the advantages and disadvantages of
increasing land use intensification through ensuring
long-term water supply by the following factors:
economic, environmental, and social.
N0/
No response; no relevant evidence.
N1
Some writing, but does not explain the factors that are affecting the rate at which the intensification is developing, or the factors that are increasing the
intensification through ensuring long-term water supplies.
N2
Partial or insufficient explanation of the factors that are affecting the rate at which the intensification is developing, OR the factors that are increasing the
intensification through ensuring long-term water supplies.
A3
Explains TWO of the factors that are affecting the rate at which the intensification is developing, OR TWO factors that are increasing the intensification through
ensuring long-term water supplies.
A4
Explains TWO of the factors, with some supporting data, that are affecting the rate at which the intensification is developing, OR TWO factors that are
increasing the intensification through ensuring long-term water supplies.
M5
Explains in detail, TWO of the factors that are affecting the rate at which the intensification is developing, OR TWO factors that are increasing the
intensification through ensuring long-term water supplies. ONE factor explained in detail, the other factor explained.
M6
Explains in detail, TWO of the factors that are affecting the rate at which the intensification is developing, OR TWO factors that are increasing the
intensification through ensuring long-term water supplies. BOTH factors explained in detail.
E7
Analyses the advantages and disadvantages of increasing land use intensification through ensuring long-term water supply by the following factors: economic,
environmental, and social. Comprehensive evidence given for ONE factor, with another factor well supported.
E8
Analyses the advantages and disadvantages of increasing land use intensification through ensuring long-term water supply by the following factors: economic,
environmental, and social. Comprehensive supporting evidence given for TWO factors.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 8 of 10
Q3
(a)
Evidence
Explains how technological and economic factors are affecting the rate at which the intensification of land is developing
Technological
There has been a lot of new technology in the dairy and horticultural industries, such as irrigation systems, which allow for greater plant growth, enabling the
farms or orchards to produce larger quantities of product. This enables successful production where normally it would be unsuccessful or not profitable.
Economic
Due to the good economic situation of dairying and / or orcharding, it is profitable to invest in the latest technology, such as rotary cow sheds. This means that
higher numbers of cows can be milked through the shed in the same amount of time, increasing milk production and therefore profit. A higher intensification is
more profitable than lower. The workforce required, and infrastructure needed, is already in place for dairying and orcharding, meaning that there is limited retraining needed, and investment can be used to increase production.
Explains in detail, how technological and economic factors are affecting the rate at which the intensification of land is developing
Technological
Technology that has been developed in the last 20 years (eg improved irrigation methods like centre pivots) ensures that dairy production or orcharding can
occur, as the land can be irrigated to produce large quantities of product. If this new technology was not available, then dairy or orchard intensification would
not be possible in either region, as the land dries out in the summer, and quality of fruit and grass growth are restricted.
Economic
The grower has a permanent workforce and infrastructure, increasing intensification. Intensification using the same crops means that workers are already
skilled, and limited re-training is needed. The intensification is profitable, mainly due to the environmental factors, and whilst these are unlikely to change, they
can be modified in the future to allow further intensification and profit, so economic viability is likely to continue.
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 9 of 10
(b)
Explains how TWO of the following factors (economic, environmental, or social) may contribute to increasing land use intensification through ensuring longterm water supplies
Environmental
Where climate and soil conditions are ideal, but water is limited, a water storage system ensures that water is no longer a limiting factor, and production will
increase. The relatively flat topography aids harvesting and management of the product.
Economic
More water availability means that more intensive farming / orcharding can occur, so a higher profit can be made.
Social
Local families that have been in the area for generations are now able to stay in the area, as higher water availability means that more work will be available.
The workforce can be further utilised, and skilled workers will be a valuable asset.
Explains in detail, how TWO of the following factors (economic, environmental, or social) may contribute to increasing land use intensification through
ensuring long-term water supplies
Environmental
Water storage facilities lead to a number of issues, including environmental and social issues relating to the flooding of land and the relocation of people in the
area. The loss of land is outweighed by the gains in irrigated land now available. Continued production is sustainable, due to the profits available from the
beneficial environmental conditions and infrastructure in place for intensification.
Economic
The increased availability of water means that products can be produced in greater amounts for a longer period of time. The continuous supply means that
contracts can be met more easily and a higher-quality product can be produced. Increased production provides an enhanced ability to meet bigger orders and
contracts, and a continuous supply to these customers becomes a reality.
Social
Local families that have been in the area for generations are able to continue to stay in the area, as higher water availability to plants means that more
produce is grown and therefore more work will be available. The current skilled workforce can continue to be utilised to enable the current primary products to
be produced at their maximum capacity. The local infrastructure in place will ensure delivery to market. Jobs would be increased, more people would be able
to stay in the area, and services such as doctors and schools would be retained or increased.
Analyses the advantages and disadvantages of increasing land use intensification through ensuring long-term water supply by the following factors:
economic, environmental, and social
The decision to continue intensification, and water storage projects, must be based on the profitability of production. Production is suited to the climatic
conditions in this area, and the economic returns make sustainable production viable. Long-term contracts with supermarket chains, Fonterra, or exporter
chains make a continuous supply both profitable and necessary.
Social factors are not as important as the economic returns seen. The grower’s family will be settled in the area, and many have passed through several
generations in the same business. Increasing intensification, thereby increasing production, leads to higher profits.
Water storage facilities lead to a number of issues, including environmental and social issues relating to the flooding of land and the relocation of people in the
area. The loss of land is overshadowed by the gains in irrigated land made available. Continued production is sustainable, due to the profits available from the
NCEA Level 2 Agricultural and Horticultural Science (91297) 2014 — page 10 of 10
environmental conditions and infrastructure in place for intensification.
Improvements to milking shed designs have made large-scale conversions more viable, and worth the capital investment in activities such as irrigation. Due to
the good economic situation of dairying, it is profitable to invest in this new technology and convert to dairying. Dairy production is currently making a high
profit per hectare. Even with the high costs associated with converting to dairying in the short term, the farmer will in the long term see more money earned
from dairying than from sheep and beef farming. There are social implications, such as technology freeing up the farmer, so dairying is now less intensive for
the farmer per head.
The agricultural advantage of both the Hawke’s Bay and Canterbury lies in their temperature and climate, and the availability of production land, as well as
their potentially abundant water supplies. The geography of these regions leads to droughts, and both regions have experienced droughts in the period from
2006 to 2009, with significant negative economic impacts. In these regions there has been water over-allocation, and existing levels of consents are
unsustainable without negative environmental impacts. Construction of long-term water storage means there will be a supply of water to much of the Hawke’s
Bay and Canterbury regions, allowing new consents and further growth in the agricultural and horticultural sectors.
Cut Scores
Score range
Not Achieved
Achievement
Achievement with Merit
Achievement with Excellence
0–6
7 – 12
13 – 18
19 – 24