Posts

The Therapeutic Products Bill: A step forward for natural health products?

22 Feb 23/in Features, Free Online, Magazine Articles

Natural health products are included in the Therapeutic Products Bill which was presented to Parliament at the end of last year. Dr Sandra Clair looks at the reasoning behind it and says that, if executed well, this could be a step in the right direction for pluralistic medicine in New Zealand.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us to access more, exclusive members-only content.

The Therapeutic Products Bill intends to establish a new regulatory regime for therapeutic products, including plant-based medicines and dietary supplements (Natural Health Products). Submissions closed 15 February 2023. The Health Committee is due to report back to the House of Representatives on 14 June 2023.

Health is the biggest asset we have, an asset that many people wish to actively support. Until now, this has been rather difficult to do using herbal medicines or dietary supplements due to outdated regulatory restrictions that prohibit the description of their therapeutic purpose.

Take the example of cough medicines. You have a debilitating chronic cough, you go into a store and look for a natural product to help you to get rid of this cough. However, no natural product describes this complaint. At best you can only find products labelled with vague descriptions such as ‘relax and soothe a tight chest’.

In contrast, if you were in Australia, Canada, or countries in the European Union (EU), you could select a product that clearly references your condition: ‘Traditionally used in Western herbal medicine to relieve both dry and mild chesty coughs’. If you were in Switzerland, the basic public health insurance would even pay for a natural cough medicine, as such remedies are listed as effective and safe medicines.

History

Traditional plant medicines (TPMs) are therapeutic substances derived from plants that grow naturally in our environment and are used according to long-established medical customs. Over centuries they have been the mainstream medicines on all levels of care, grounded in an impressive body of empirical evidence. For example, seventy-five percent of 119 widely used modern drugs are either compounded directly from medicinal plants or synthesised based on plant structures, and they have the same or similar therapeutic purpose as they originally had in traditional medicine.

Fit for the future?

The Therapeutic Products Bill replaces the Medicines Act 1981 and Dietary Supplements Regulations 1985. More than 10 years in the making, it is intended to be a flexible regulatory framework for how therapeutic products are manufactured, prescribed, imported, advertised, supplied and exported, and make the regulation of clinical trials more robust.

Health Minister Andrew Little said it will enable New Zealand to take advantage of advances in medicine, such as cell and tissue therapies, emerging gene therapies, and the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning software.

“Having risk-proportionate approval systems will improve access to necessary and life-saving medicines, such as vaccines in a pandemic.”

Fit for the future?

“Having risk-proportionate approval systems will improve access to necessary and life-saving medicines, such as vaccines in a pandemic.”

Popularity

Legislation and consumer trends have clearly forked in New Zealand over many decades. The upsurge in organic food consumption is directly linked to an increasing awareness that our bodies function best when they are well nourished and maintained whilst minimally exposed to foreign and toxic chemicals. The same principles apply when it comes to healthcare, where natural medicines are successfully applied as a first line of defense in common and non-life-threatening illnesses.

The World Health Organisation estimates that about 80% of people around the world use traditional therapeutics to care for their health. Notably, the prevalence of their use is also high in countries where access to pharmaceutical medicine is subsidised, chiefly because they are used to prevent health issues from arising in the first place and are seen as safer than drugs to deal with self-limiting or chronic health complaints.

In New Zealand, traditional systems of medicine are used to address primary healthcare needs, as is broadly consistent with the majority of countries around the world. Studies estimate that about 50% of adults and 70% of children use therapies and preparations from sources outside pharmaceutical healthcare, with plant medicines being the most prevalent non-pharmaceutical form of self-medication.

Legislative background

Despite their prevalent use, the current New Zealand legislation does not recognise traditional plant medicines as therapeutic products and does not acknowledge their positive contribution to care.

There have been several attempts over the past decades to address the outdated regulatory framework regarding natural health products (NHPs).

Most notable was the failed pursuit of a joint regulatory authority for medicines and other therapeutic products in partnership with Australia under the joint Australia New Zealand Therapeutic Products Act and the subsequently proposed stand-alone domestic bill last debated in 2016. The trans-Tasman regulatory system met strong concern from consumers and politicians for being overly restrictive and potentially harmful to New Zealand consumers and the natural health industry. The subsequently proposed New Zealand-only regime (the Natural Health and Supplementary Products Bill) acknowledged the low risks of herbal medicines and dietary supplements. It intended to protect consumer choice by providing an appropriate, low-cost access regime to NHPs that are safe, effective, and suitable for use in self-treatment. It enjoyed wide political cross-party, industry, and consumer support, and had passed the second reading in Parliament, despite a minor but vocal opposition. It was a surprise when the incoming Labour government shelved this bill in 2017 due to coalition talks with New Zealand First.

From an international perspective, the current New Zealand legislative framework is out of step. It is a legacy of our colonial past, and does not align with World Health Organisation directives to support and integrate traditional and complementary medicine as a vital part of state-supported or state-funded healthcare to universally cover primary health needs of all residents.

From a domestic perspective, current regulations contravene provisions in the Treaty of Waitangi and also do not adequately support patient choice of healthcare, which is protected under the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights Regulations 1996 of the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994. This is because the scope and purpose of traditional, non-pharmaceutical medicines cannot be accurately stated due to clauses in the Medicines Act 1981. Although the Dietary Supplement Regulations 1985 (part of the Food Act 1981) provides a framework of a sort for quality requirements, they too disallow therapeutic health claims on NHPs, even when a long-standing empirical knowledge-base or scientific evidence is available. Such restrictions impede appropriate use of these low or non-toxic health products and may even promote the inappropriate use of them through the resulting paucity of appropriate consumer information.

This contrasts with health policies in Australia, Canada and European countries that legally protect the status of traditional medicines. For example, the EU Directive 2004/24/EC grants traditional medicines their own regulatory classification as Traditional Herbal Medicinal Products. Switzerland has gone a step further: since the binding constitutional referendum in 2009, phytotherapy (plant-based medicine) is a treatment option that must be adequately integrated into public healthcare services for its citizens. This constitutional guarantee enables plant medicines to be funded through basic health insurance and secures patient-centred and cost-effective treatment options alongside pharmaceutical drugs and technological interventions.

Rongoā

While all traditional and herbal medicines and dietary supplements such as vitamins and minerals are included under natural health products, it is not clear yet how rongoā, the holistic healing practices based on tikanga and mātauranga Māori, and in particular rākau plant-based remedies, will be treated under TPB and its regulations.

Rongoā Māori is a Te Tiriti-protected taonga, however, there is no explicit reference to Te Tiriti o Waitangi protection clauses in the released draft. At the first reading in Parliament the Minister of Health Hon Andrew Little noted that he has since commissioned a workstream to consider how the ‘regulatory settings support the traditional practice of rongoā while balancing this objective against the need to provide assurances for patient safety and export market access for rongoā practitioners’.

It will be essential that Māori have input in line with the intent of the Crown-Māori partnership model.

Therapeutic Products Bill

The Therapeutic Products Bill (TPB) intends to establish a new regulatory regime that includes plant-based medicines and dietary supplements under the category of natural health products (NHPs). It repeals all secondary legislation made under the Medicines Act 1981 and revokes the Dietary Supplements Regulations 1985, with the aim to provide comprehensive, risk-proportionate regulation of the various categories of therapeutic products and technologies.

While the current Medicines Act is administered under Medsafe, the TPB proposes to establish a new Therapeutic Products Regulator that would be responsible for ensuring the safety, quality, and efficacy of regulated products, including natural health products, across their lifecycle. The TPB acknowledges the generally lower-risk of NHPs, which are therefore intended to be evaluated against different standards than those for higher-risk pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices.

It is positive that the TPB recognises plant-based medicines and dietary supplements as therapeutic products as this will allow informed consumer choice, e.g. a herbal remedy for cough will be able to say so.

The TPB also recognises that herbal medicines and dietary supplements are generally low risk. Based on this, it aims to enable a cost-effective regime that gives New Zealanders confidence that their trusted natural health products will remain available, are true to label, and provide the health benefits claimed for them.

If the TPB is passed by Parliament, it will potentially take another 1-2 years to develop the detailed regulations required to complete the regulatory scheme before it comes into force, with a backstop date of 1 September 2026. If done well, TPB could pave the way for a pluralistic healthcare system that – in the words of WHO – finally emphasises people’s rights to quality health services that are available, accessible, affordable, and culturally acceptable.

TPB detail

There is still a significant amount of detail that needs to be determined in secondary legislation to be made under the TPB. It will be imperative that these regulations reflect a regime that is appropriate, feasible, practical, and affordable for NHPs. Dr Clair points out some areas that need clarification and resolution to ensure the objectives of the Bill:

The list of approved ingredients is as wide as possible.

In the absence of negative safety reports evidence, a natural health product should be grand-fathered into the system by granting market authorisation if it has been in the New Zealand market for a minimum of 10 years. This ‘well-established use’ principle is a recognised regulatory principle.

Traditional plant medicines are distinct in their healing purpose and long-standing evidence base from modern dietary supplements which were developed in the 20^th century to address nutritional deficiencies. Therefore, they require separate considerations. The right to formally access and use them needs to be adequately protected.

A definition is needed for ‘Traditional Medicine’ and ‘Traditional Practice’. This should include Rongoā Māori and all WHO-recognised medical traditions.

The TPB permits health benefit claims with scientific evidence or traditional use. It should also permit those health benefit claims trusted by overseas regulators (e.g. Australia, Canada, EU, UK, Switzerland). Such regulators permit reference to therapeutic uses recorded in authoritative clinical textbooks and monographs as this professional body of literature is the most comprehensive and clinically relevant repository of traditional and empirical evidence. In oral traditions, e.g. Rongoā Māori, recognized traditional experts embody this medical knowledge, and this should be admissible as evidence of traditional use.

The regulations should allow flexibility in description of conditions. For NHPs, the naming of conditions should not be solely based on the International Classification of Diseases (the ICD) but also by their equivalent in traditional or lay terms, so that they can be related back to traditional evidence and be generally understood by members of the public.

Practitioner-only category : professionally trained Medical Herbalists and Naturopaths need to be able to maintain access to stronger acting practitioner-only products (not sold over-the-counter). In addition, Schedule 1 of the current Medicines Regulations prevents medical practitioners from legally accessing several traditionally used plant species because they are regulated as pharmaceutical substances in conjunction with their synthetic isolates, regardless of their distinctly different risk profiles and applications. In other jurisdictions, e.g. the UK, such plant species and their whole-plant extracts are available to suitably trained natural health practitioners. Dietary supplements will need to be allowed to contain adequate therapeutic levels of active constituents.

Many of the ingredients listed under the previous Permitted Substance List (PSL) for natural health products are in fact synthetics. Other jurisdictions, e.g. Switzerland, request the identification of a substance to the public as either natural or synthetic due to their different characteristics, i.e. relating to risk and bioavailability, and consumer preferences. Labelling of New Zealand NHPs should be similarly transparent.

It is essential that the yet to be appointed advisory committee and proposed dedicated authority is filled with formally engaged subject matter experts on all aspects of traditional and nutritional medicine, namely its products, practices, and professions, and that the administration of these products is separate from pharmaceutical medicines and medical devices.

The cost recovery framework needs to ensure that compliance costs are fair and equitable for the low-risk NHPs regulated under this Bill so that they remain affordable given that they are presently non-subsidised but used as primary healthcare remedies.

Have your say

Closing date for submissions on the proposed Therapeutics Products Bill has been extended to 5 March 2023. Go to the New Zealand Parliament website for an online submission form to make your opinion count.

Soil & Health Association NZ have published their submission regarding the Bill. View this here: https://soilandhealth.org.nz/submissions/submission-of-the-soil-health-association-on-the-therapeutic-products-bill/

References

Farnsworth NR, editor. Ethnopharmacolgy and drug development. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons; 1994.
Barnes J, McLachlan AJ, Sherwin CMT, Enioutina EY. Herbal medicines: Challenges in the modern world. Part 1. Australia and New Zealand. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2016;9(7):905-915.
Chrystal K, Allan S, Forgeson G, Isaacs R. The use of complementary/alternative medicine by cancer patients in a New Zealand regional cancer treatment centre. The New Zealand Medical Journal (Online). 2003;116(1168).
Wilson K, Dowson C, Mangin D. Prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine use in Christchurch, New Zealand: Children attending general practice versus paediatric outpatients. N Z Med J. 2007;120(1251):U2464.
Medsafe. Australia New Zealand Therapeutic Products Agency (ANZTPA). 2012.
Ellena KR. The uncritical enthusiasts versus the uninformed sceptics: Regulation of complementary and alternative medicines. J Law Med. 2005;13(1):106-124.
Ministry of Health. Natural health and supplementary products. 2017.
World Health Organization, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). Declaration of Astana. 30.04.2019 ed2018.
Legislation Direct. Ko Aotearoa tēnei: A report into claims concerning New Zealand law and policy affecting Māori culture and identity. Te taumata tuatahi (Waitangi Tribunal report). Wellington, New Zealand2011.
Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights Regulations 1996, Pub. L. No. 08.10.2018.
Schweizerischer Bundesrat. Komplementärmedizin: Vergütung neu geregelt. Complementary Medicine Research2017. p. 268.
World Health Organization. The regional strategy for traditional medicine in the Western Pacific (2011-2020). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2012.
Parliament NZ. Therapeutic products bill — first reading. Hasard (Debates) [Internet]. 13 Dec 2022. Available from: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansDeb_20221213_20221214_20.
Organization WH. WHO Drug Information. 2002;16(2).
Colquhoun I. Medicines with a ‘well established use’. The Journal of the European Medical Writers Association. 2009;18(1):18-20.
Linnenbrink N. International comparison of specific requirements for registration of phytopharmaceuticals with focus on the European Community. Planta Med. 1990;56:502-503.
The Medicines (Retail Sale or Supply of Herbal Remedies) Order 1977, (1970).

About the author

Dr Sandra Clair (PhD Health Sciences) established the multiple award-winning plant medicine business, Artemis. Using her skills in health sciences and Swiss medical herbalism, underpinned by academic research into a rare Renaissance medical textbook, Dr Clair formulated plant medicines for her clients, then after 1998 sold these directly to health stores, pharmacies, and practitioners and eventually exporting.

Until July 2021, Dr Clair had a strategic management and governance role overseeing the quality and leading the research and development program of Artemis. She is now a presenter, writer, regulatory advisor and a noted voice for medical herbalism. Watch her TedX presentation on Integrating plant-based medicine into New Zealand’s healthcare system.

The Bill in full

Soil & Health NZ life member Philippa Jamieson, reviewed the 288 pages of the Therapeutic Products Bill

The bill seeks to regulate the manufacture, sale, importing, exporting, prescribing, dispensing, and other activities involving therapeutic products. It covers three classes of products:

medicines – e.g. pharmaceutical drugs, vaccines, gene therapies, cell and tissue therapies, and ‘biologics’ (such as donated blood, tissue, organs, microorganisms),
medical devices – anything from bandages to pacemakers, dental crowns, surgical mesh, software used therapeutically, robotic surgery machines,
natural health products (NHPs) – e.g. vitamin and mineral supplements, herbal remedies, tinctures, homeopathics, probiotics.

Many people are concerned that the bill – and the accompanying regulations that are yet to be written – could result in fewer and costlier natural health products. Smaller businesses could struggle with the time and expense of compliance.

“[The bill] gives a blank cheque to a regulator to tell us what herbs and supplements we can use and in what quantity [or dose],” says food safety and natural medicine advocate Dr Guy Hatchard. “They are also allowed to tell us what herbs we can’t use.”

Rongoā Māori are not mentioned in the bill, but the regulator must ‘give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and take account of mātauranga Māori and Māori perspectives’.

The bill gives wide decision-making powers to whoever is appointed regulator, with no guarantee that person will have expertise in natural health, traditional medicines and different cultural approaches, or consult with appropriate people who do. It’s more likely a Western medical and pharmaceutical framework will dominate.

In 2017 Medsafe drafted a list of over 7000 NHPs to be permitted substances (which may be adopted and adapted for the new regulations) that included many synthetic substances such as additives with known health risks.

It’s not only about natural health products. Some are concerned the bill could allow increased use of biotechnology, such as gene therapies. Regulation is needed, but can it keep up with this rapidly changing field?

Another question is around liability: currently the Crown can’t be held criminally liable for breaches of the current Medicines Act – should this be changed in the new bill, as the Crown is a large user of therapeutic products in our health system?

Also, the bill would continue to allow direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines. What do you think about this?

The scope of the bill is wide and there is much to consider. The regulations have to be workable for small businesses and practitioners such as naturopaths, and allow for safe, effective, affordable, culturally appropriate healthcare products and a range of choices.

“We can’t sell laxative teas, or at least can’t say a tea has that effect,” an organic shop staff member said recently. “How does that help people who could really benefit from it?”

Health benefit claims are just part of the Therapeutic Products Bill currently before parliament. The bill would allow the makers of those herbal teas to claim laxative effects on the label – if they gain approval of the product, approval of the therapeutic claim, and pay whatever fees are set.

Tourism doesn’t have to cost the earth

21 Dec 22/in Building and Technology, Free Online

The tourism dollar is coming back, but at what cost?
Claire Brunette investigates how New Zealand can, and does, balance the effect on the environment while still reaping the rewards in our economy.

We hope you enjoy this free article from Organic NZ. Join us for access more exclusive, members-only content.

With vertiginous snowy peaks, pōhutukawa-fringed beaches and geothermal areas it’s not hard to see why Aotearoa New Zealand attracts tourists.

In the year ending March 2020, tourism was our largest export industry, representing $16.4 billion, or 5.5 percent of GDP. Though still only half of pre-pandemic levels, since the border reopened in July 2022, international visitors have been returning in rapid numbers with international arrivals reaching 172,269 in August 2022. With this new bloom of travellers comes a significant environmental impact. A 2018 study estimated that tourism is responsible for around 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Construction, energy use, transport, souvenirs, food consumption and waste all impact the local area and global climate.

It’s not all bad news. Done well, tourism can benefit local communities and their economy, raise awareness and funds for wildlife, increase happiness and well-being and create a rich understanding of other cultures.

So how do we find the balance? How can we benefit from the positive aspects of tourism while minimising the detrimental ones?

The answer might lie in ecotourism. Sustainable tourism or ecotourism is defined by the International Ecotourism Society as ‘responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, and involves interpretation and education’. They define ecotourism principles to be followed.

The International Ecotourism Society’s list of ecotourism principles

Minimise physical, social, behavioural, and psychological impacts.
Build environmental and cultural awareness and respect.
Provide positive experiences for both visitors and hosts.
Provide direct financial benefits for conservation.
Generate financial benefits for both local people and private industry.
Deliver memorable interpretative experiences to visitors that help raise sensitivity to host countries’ political, environmental, and social climates.
Design, construct and operate low-impact facilities.
Recognise the rights and spiritual beliefs of the indigenous people in your community and work in partnership with them to create empowerment.

Treading lightly

About half of the emissions produced by tourism are from transportation. If you are helicoptering into your eco-lodge, are you really engaging in sustainable tourism?

New Zealand’s scale and diversity make it a paradise for getting around using your own, eco-friendly, muscle. Walking, cycling trails and kayaking spots run the whole length of the country and are a great choice for low- emission transport. One such jewel is the Mountain to Sea cycle trail which takes riders from the stark magnificence of Tongariro National Park, along the culturally and historically significant Whanganui River to the wild west coast.

Te Araroa, the walking path that runs from Cape Reinga to Bluff, is growing in popularity. Executive director of the trail, Matt Claridge, anticipates, “over 3000 walkers on Te Araroa this season, nearly double previous numbers”. They’ve seen that the success of the trail is already having an economic impact on small towns along the trail. There’s something very pleasing about being able to walk the length of New Zealand and if you don’t have the time to put aside for the whole thing at once you can complete small sections over time.

Showcasing the sea

Aotearoa is blessed not only with breathtaking scenery, but unique geographic features that enable us to interact with marine wildlife.

The Hikurangi Trench rises to its southern end just off the coast of Kaikoura, creating a feeding ground for the spectacular parāoa sperm whale, amongst others.

Whale Watch Kaikoura is 100% owned by the local tangata whenua. The business has been a driving force in the local community’s development into an ecotourism destination. Their boats have propulsion systems that reduce the underwater noise level (an important precaution as whales are sensitive to sound). In keeping with ecotourism values, they give back to the local community through sponsorship and contribute data and financial support to scientific research on marine mammals in the local area.

In New Zealand, whale-watching and dolphin-swimming operators must secure a permit from the Department of Conservation (DOC). They must prove that their business is in the interest of ‘conservation, management and the protection of marine mammals’. This limits the number of operators in the area and ensures that the animal’s natural behaviour remains unchanged. And interaction with humans does have an effect on animals. In 2021 DOC implemented extra measures to protect local bottle-nosed dolphins in the Bay of Islands as identifiable dolphins declined from 278 in 1999 to just 26. The dolphins were spending too much time interacting with the boats, leaving them with limited time to eat, rest and care for their babies. When you are selecting a company to observe or interact with our marine mammals, ensure they have certification.

Founded in 1954, family-owned RealNZ employs more than 500 people and opens up the south of the South with a range of cruises, ferries, tours, and ski resorts and include activities such as jet boating, scenic flights and a coal- powered steamship. To reduce their CO2 footprint they are founding members of Hydrogen New Zealand (promoting hydrogen technology), are investigating battery and fuel cell technology for both their road and marine fleet and have already established a number of electric charging stations and renewable energy systems. They say their biggest impediment to reducing their carbon footprint is the historic steamship, TSS Earnshaw, which uses one tonne of coal every hour.

Involved in conservation from the beginning with the Save Manapouri Campaign in the 60s, RealNZ have a dedicated conservation and sustainability team who oversee a number of restoration, pest-eradication, research and education projects throughout Fiordland.

As co-founder Les Hutchins said in 1998, “Tourism and conservation need each other for mutual survival”.

Actively auditing their procurement and waste, RealNZ prioritise buying local, promote product stewardship, and recycle or reuse wherever possible. Amongst many other awards and recognitions, RealNZ holds Qualmark Enviro Gold status.

Sustainability Certifications

Tiaki – Care for New Zealand

A collaborative effort between seven groups, including Tourism New Zealand, Air New Zealand and DOC. Tiaki encourages domestic and international visitors to care for New Zealand while travelling.

Qualmark New Zealand

Qualmark is New Zealand tourism’s official quality assurance organisation. Tourism operators displaying a Qualmark award provides assurance of a sustainable quality experience. An independent evaluation assesses an operator’s commitment to the environment, people and safety.

New Zealand Tourism Sustainability Commitment

Developed by Tourism Industry Aotearoa with the aim to see every New Zealand tourism business committed to sustainability by 2025. They have a Carbon Challenge to track carbon use so businesses can show their progress.

Balancing the budget

Marine social scientist Jessica Giannoumis says on her podcast, Jess explores, that ecotourism is often “painted as a prestigious thing that only people with a lot of money could afford.” Giannoumis thinks this is an odd way of looking at eco-tourism and believes you can have eco-tourism everywhere. She recommends that you “look out for local tourism providers who can show you a different way of experiencing the area you live in.”

Fortunately, there are very affordable options available all over New Zealand.

DOC oversees our thirteen national parks in addition to other conservation areas and many reserves. They run a number of huts and campsites that offer accommodation with very low climate impact (composting toilets!) and are located in both accessible and isolated spots throughout the country.

Set in Northland, the privately run, family-friendly Russel-Orongo Bay Holiday Park is one place to consider if you have young children as it offers classic holiday park fun while offering the chance to get up close to weka, pāteke and the brown kiwi. They have long been dedicated to conservation and sustainability practices, and as part of their eco-statement, they say that “We also want to provide our guests with the mātauranga (knowledge) they need to continue their own journey in kaitiakitanga and conservation”.

In 1975, Fred Dagg famously sang ‘We Don’t Know How Lucky We Are’. Hopefully, we are starting to understand. Making choices that protect what we have and repair what we’ve lost might be the best way to give back to the land we live in.

Claire Brunette is a writer, keen camper, owner of a potted organic garden and increasingly desperate advocate for sustainability living in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Hydroponics: can it count as organic?

22 Oct 22/in Farming and Horticulture, Magazine Articles

Ahead of the government passing the Organic Products Bill, the Soil & Health Association’s former general manager Pete Huggins talks dirt and water with horticulturists.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us for access to exclusive members-only content.

When this magazine was launched in 1942 it was called Compost Club Magazine. Many are attached to the name – and for good reason. Regenerating soils with organic matter and protecting their fertility for future generations remains a core value for many of you, as well as for us, and for the publisher of Organic NZ – the Soil & Health Association.

Today, the importance of soils is headline news – for food security, for biodiversity and for carbon sequestration.

Soil fertility is a core value of organics and this commitment is shared with the wider concept of regenerative agriculture, which organics is part of.

But some would have it a different way, and want to see organics embrace other growing mediums including hydroponics. And in the USA, a long-running court case is being fought over the inclusion of hydroponics under the umbrella of organics.

What’s the deal with hydroponics?

Hydroponic systems don’t use soil at all. Instead, they use a solution of nutrients to grow crops like lettuces or berry fruit. This can be good for water conservation, and can be energy efficient, but undoubtedly there’s no soil involved, so you can’t improve its fertility.

But among those calling for a rethink is retired New Zealand academic Dr Mike Nichols. Mike is an Honorary Member of the International Society for Horticultural Science, and in 2015 was presented with a lifetime achievement award by Vegetables New Zealand. He was one of the first to grow strawberries and blueberries hydroponically in New Zealand. Mike says organics needs to evolve, especially in light of climate change.

“Hydroponics did not exist when organics was founded. Decisions were made that because hydroponics used only inorganic fertilisers it should be excluded. But organic hydroponics systems using organically derived nutrients overcome this objection.”

Defining organics matters

Later this year, the New Zealand government is expected to pass the Organic Products Bill. This bill will establish a government-backed organic standard. For the first time, we’ll have a legal framework around the term organic in Aotearoa.

This is really important, for a number of reasons. Firstly, our international trade partners are getting serious about organics and we need to keep up. The EU plans to have a quarter of their agricultural land area using certified-organic production methods by 2030 (in case you wondered, European crops that are grown hydroponically cannot be labelled as organic). Japan recently threatened to raise trade barriers against New Zealand in response to glyphosate residues in our honey exports. Even the US government is subsidising farm conversions to organics.

Our export dollars aren’t the only reason we need a strong legal standard for organics. More important is the issue of trust. Organics is about trust in where your food comes from. Organic consumers will tell you they want their food grown in a way that protects nature. They want pesticide-free, GE-free, high animal welfare standards, good employment conditions, and action on climate change. Without a rigorous standard, you can’t trust your food. If we get this wrong in New Zealand, we will lose that trust. And then all the trade deals in the world can’t save us. Certified-organic food in New Zealand is reliable, but at the moment there’s nothing stopping someone using the name falsely. That’s why it is so important to check for a certification label on what you buy.

Unfortunately, experience from the US shows us that legislating for the word “organic” can still go seriously wrong. The relevant US law is the Organic Foods Production Act, which contains a clause that organic production “shall contain provisions designed to foster soil fertility”. However, in 2019 the US government refused to crack down on organic certifiers who were approving the use of hydroponic systems. This is now the subject of expensive court appeals in the US.

Dr Nichols thinks the US organic regulations are much more realistic for the twenty-first century by allowing hydroponics. He is worried the New Zealand standard might exclude hydroponics, thus making soil-based organics uncompetitive.

This worry is shared in a different way by the Real Organic Project, a US group established to reassert soil-based organic values in America. They say that real organic farmers in the US are struggling to compete in a dishonest marketplace. They believe that the inclusion of hydroponics is driven by the large industrial players, saying: “Big Ag ultimately won, allowing the . . . hydroponic industries to bend the rules for their own benefit.”

Bringing it back to soil

Soil-based agriculture is also a central value behind regenerative agriculture (regen ag) which has attracted serious attention in recent years. But Dr Nichols makes the point that regenerative agriculture by itself isn’t enough to deliver healthy food: “The concept of regenerative agriculture is good, if it means reducing the use of agricultural chemicals and of cultivation. But if it means not supplying minerals, which may not be present in the soil, and ‘hoping’ that the bed rock (or the soil) will supply them, then it is away with the fairies. Nitrogen is the only element that can be imported into the soil naturally.” The addition of organic fertiliser (certified-organic inputs for organic farming) are the answer to this constraint in any farm system, whether hydroponic or not.

None of the current organic certifiers in New Zealand allow hydroponics and have no plans to do so. BioGro
chief executive Donald Nordeng was unequivocal, saying, “There is no such thing as organic hydroponics, so we don’t certify any.”

This stands us in good stead when it comes to our own legislation. Organic leaders in Aotearoa are focused on healthy soil and nature-based food systems. Hua Parakore, the indigenous verification and validation system created by Te Waka Kai Ora, the national Māori organics authority, is similarly soil-based.

So it seems unlikely that hydroponics can fit under the umbrella of organics in Aotearoa. The Ministry of Primary Industries is currently working with sector leaders to reach agreement around the organic standard. Ultimately, it is ministers that will decide. MPI told Organic NZ that they are listening to what the sector says on a range of topics, including what should be in or out of the scope of the standard. MPI will be writing up the proposals that have come out (including where the sector has agreed to disagree). The debate will continue well into next year.

Marco’s sister Marije harvesting organic blueberries. The de Groots have been growing blueberries in Cambridge since the mid-1980s.

An organic grower’s perspective

Marco de Groot is the general manager of Monavale Blueberries in Cambridge, which has been BioGro-certified since 1993. Here’s his perspective on hydroponics.

Ideally, organic growers need to choose a location best suited for growing a particular crop, which includes soil type and climate. Emphasis should be on feeding soil biology, which in turns break down organic matter into nutrients; creating humus rich in microbiological activity; and maintaining a diverse sward, which aids in providing nutrients and as habitat for beneficial insects.  If this is carried out successfully over a period of years, then this system produces an improved biological cycle and provides more resilience to adverse effects such a droughts, pests and diseases. The ultimate goal is to achieve a high-brix environment and to create the best-tasting product that is high in nutrition and antioxidants, with a longer shelf life.

Hydroponics and non-soil substrate fertigation systems rely on synthetically derived inputs and non-organic mediums, which are often imported from overseas, and for the reasons explained above do not align themselves with “traditional” and industry-accepted organic management practices. These systems tend to be used by conventional growers with unsuitable soil and challenging climatic conditions. It has a direct economic advantage to the grower as crops often are produced within a year rather than several years in the case of blueberries grown conventionally or organically in soil-field conditions.

Both hydroponic and non-soil substrate fertigation systems force feed plants to create fast growing large plants, and fruit, require relatively high-energy inputs systems, and often lack a fully balanced nutritional complement. 

These systems do have a part to play in food security but these are systems are not organic!

The wellbeing of food in Aotearoa

17 Aug 22/in Features, Magazine Articles, Organic Week

We produce enough food in New Zealand to feed 40 million people, yet one in five Kiwi kids live in households that experience food insecurity.

Gareth Hughes talks about his new role as lead of the Wellbeing Economy Alliance Aotearoa.

How do you get a cabbage? My book, A Gentle Radical: The life of Jeanette Fitzsimons, was recently published, and in researching the biography I stumbled upon an unusual speech the late Green Party politician had given at the Fourth New Zealand Energy Conference entitled “Two Ways to Get a Cabbage”. What on earth did cabbages have to do with a late 1970s energy conference? Fortunately, I was able to track down a faded typewriter-written copy of her speech where Jeanette used the vegetable as an example of the very different approaches society takes to provide things like cabbages.

The mainstream approach, even back then, was energy intensive, relying on artificial fertilisers, chemical pesticides, insecticides and fungicides, and complicated fossil fuel-dependent transport and retail chains. The embedded energy and resources that went into growing a commercial cabbage was huge, and if it wasn’t the uniform size, shape or appearance it would be thrown out rather than sold at the market. She contrasted that cabbage with the home-grown organic variety planted and tended with no need for machinery and pesticides, saying “It represents time, effort, caring and an exchange with the earth.” The home-grown cabbage was fresher, tastier and more nutritious but she pointed out that only the commercial cabbage was represented in official economic statistics of progress.

Gareth Hughes and the late Jeanette Fitzsimons, 2018.

Reader support keeps us going

Please support our work by joining with a membership subscription (print or digital). Organic NZ is independently published by the Soil & Health Association, a charity devoted to healthy soil, healthy food and healthy people.

Our independent journalism relies on support from people like you!

What does our food really cost us?

We’ve never had more volume of food produced globally than now but our connection to that food is at its lowest point in history. Are we looking at the bigger picture when we buy a cabbage or any item in our modern food system? The current paradigm is dominated by corporate giants, global trade networks and is dependent on huge inputs of energy and chemicals. While we might complain about the high cost of food in the supermarket as inflation rates rise, the really staggering cost is being paid by earth systems – soil, water and atmosphere. How we produce food is a major driver of climate change and biodiversity loss. Every year we draw down further on nature’s balance sheet while too often only valuing the financial one. 

Across my 20-year career as a progressive campaigner and Member of Parliament, food has remained as a major theme across all my mahi. I’ve led the engagement work for New Zealand’s food rescue sector, been arrested dressed as Ronald McDonald, which triggered the fast-food giant to ditch GE-fed chicken, protested palm oil ships and Fonterra’s gigantic use of coal, passed the Country of Origin of Food Act so Kiwis can know where their food has come from, and for our moana achieved a ban on shark finning and negotiated in government for cameras on fishing boats. Food touches every part of our lives, society and economy – how it’s grown, how it’s sold and who gets it.

I’ve recently started working for the Wellbeing Economy Alliance, a global collaboration of organisations, individuals and governments to transform the economic system into one that prioritises shared well-being for people and the planet, as the Aotearoa country lead. A wellbeing economy would deliver purpose, nature, fairness and participation – what would that look like for food in New Zealand?

Right now we have an unhealthy relationship with food. We export a volume of food that’s estimated to feed up to 40 million people yet one in five Kiwi kids live in households that experience food insecurity. There’s real hunger and malnutrition in New Zealand. Despite the cost of food – highlighted recently by the Commerce Commission’s staggering estimate that $1 million dollars a day in excess profit is being taken from consumers by the supermarket duopoly – on average, each New Zealand household throws out an estimated $1520 worth of food every year. Collectively, that’s more than $3 billion worth of good food rotting away and contributing to climate change. Agricultural production is responsible for half of New Zealand’s emissions, and dairy’s impact on our rivers and lakes, and nitrate contamination of water supplies are well-known problems. Every year 192 million tonnes of our most precious resource – soil – washes out to sea as a result of our land-use practices. New Zealand still sprays chemicals banned in Europe and uses destructive bottom-trawling fishing techniques, smashing ancient deep sea coral.

Making progress

Despite the gloom, there are bright spots emerging. We see the growth of food cooperatives and farmers’ markets where consumers can have a closer relationship with producers. The organics sector grew 20 percent between 2017 and 2020. Regenerative farming has become a household name, and more farmers are experimenting with reducing stocking rates and finding that their profits are increasing.

Food-rescue organisations report 30 million meals were provided in the last year, turning an environmental problem into a social solution. Pātaka kai (free pantries) are popping up all over Aotearoa to facilitate sharing food. New products are hitting the market, from pea-protein meat alternatives and bread made from crickets to delicious oat milk brands. Growing numbers of New Zealanders are eating more plant-based meals for health, environmental or ethical reasons, and as a nation dependent on food and fibre exports, international consumers’ desires to purchase food with lower climate and higher animal-welfare standards continue to drive change.

It could be said that today’s problems were once yesterday’s solutions. Around the turn of the millennium, farmers were actively encouraged to convert to dairy and expand into regions totally unsuited to hit exponential growth targets. A focus on volume over value has come with real costs. As we deal with today’s problems – dependence on milk powder exports, environmental degradation, the cost of food, genuine food poverty, and reliance on unethical inputs like palm kernel expeller and phosphate from occupied Western Sahara – we need to ensure we aren’t creating tomorrow’s problems.

What would a fair system look like?

A wellbeing economy of food would look at broader outcomes than just growth rates or profit; it would value wider issues as well – resiliency, sustainability, fairness and access. 

One positive example of this happening right now is the fact there is such a thing as a free lunch in New Zealand. Currently 220,000 kids are receiving free lunches in low-decile schools. The primary objective was to make sure children going without were fed, but what schools report are additional benefits for students’ health and food awareness. It’s impacting their attendance, ability to learn and participate in class and is building a sense of school community. It’s a solution-multiplier that was avoided for many years just on the question of cost, and is delivering significant benefits. Ideally we will build on the success and ensure the food used is organic, grown locally and that students can connect with growers.

Another example is Wakatū, a company owned by 4000 Māori families in the Nelson region. Wakatū has a 500-year strategy focused on their tikanga, or values, the taonga that is the land and water, and manaakitanga for the people. Kono, their food branch, is one of the region’s largest employers and exports to more than 80 countries.

Imagine if New Zealand and our food system had a 500-year strategy! We have made a start – factoring in well-being in our national budgets, and now we need to do that in all the decisions government and business make. How we grow a cabbage, produce milk or catch a fish matters more than just the quarterly profit and loss statement.

I believe thinking long term and holistically from a wellbeing perspective would encourage regenerative, restorative agriculture and food sovereignty. Tangata whenua would be able to harvest kai from healthy rivers and seas. We’d see more food forests and community gardens. We would eat food in season and we would know its provenance and how it was produced. Food poverty would be consigned to history and nutritious organic food would be available for all – not just those who can afford it. Let’s move from just counting commercial cabbages to valuing everything that matters.

Gareth Hughes is a former Green Party MP and the country lead for the Wellbeing Economy Alliance: weall.org.

Banned pesticide impacting New Zealand youth

01 Jul 22/in Health and Food, Magazine Articles

An insecticide called chlorpyrifos, banned in the US but still widely used here, is again under the spotlight due to risks of exposure in New Zealand children. An alliance of NGOs made an appeal to government on 5^th June (World Environment Day) for regulators to start an urgent reassessment of chlorpyrifos – the next step towards tighter controls. The chemical is currently undergoing a UN process for a global ban because of its environmental and human health impacts.

“Children are particularly at risk from exposure to even tiny amounts of chlorpyrifos, such as residues in food”, said Dr Meriel Watts of Pesticide Action Network.

Dr Chris Hill of the EPA says chlorpyriphos has been identified on the Environmental Protection Authority’s priority chemicals list for reassessment. “Working through our priority chemical list is dependent on our assessment of need and our availability of resource. When considering a potential reassessment, we look at the information available about the substance and about its use in New Zealand. We also consider the technical evaluations of international regulators. If overseas information suggests we act sooner, we will.”

Fashion: the good, the bad, and the greenwashed

21 Jun 22/in Building and Technology, Magazine Articles, Organic Week

If you’re feeling overwhelmed and bewildered about what constitutes planet-friendly fashion, you’re not alone. Claire Brunette unpicks the multilayered environmental and ethical issues within the fashion industry.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Sign up now for a print or digital subscription and get the latest from us each issue.

Clothing is powerful and necessary, and a handwoven burlap sack just doesn’t do it for most people these days. The right clothes can help get you the job you want, keep you safe, change how you see yourself and how others see you; they can be a source of joy.

If clothing production ceased tomorrow, there would be enough clothing in the world to keep us going for a very long time, but we keep producing more than we can use. It’s getting harder and harder to process the wall of information about clothing that is out there. What is actively environmentally harmful? What is exploiting the people making the fabric? What seems sustainable, and says it is, but shimmering below the surface has the nasty tint of greenwashing?

An oft-repeated statement is that the most sustainable piece of clothing is the item you already own, but what if that item is releasing tiny microplastics into the ocean every time you wash it? Microplastics are now found in our kaimoana, our honey, our salt and our blood. A report published by Scion in 2019 showed that 87 per cent of microplastics found on Auckland beaches were likely to be from fabric fibres released during laundering.

So how do we get dressed in the morning in a world that’s tugging us in different directions? Information is empowering, so before you buy anything, especially anything new, let’s explore fabrics. It’s important to note that no fabric is perfect and all have their own unique impact. It is still an essential tenet of sustainability to use what you have and to seek items that are already circulating.

Synthetics

The big bads of fabric. Derived from fossil fuels and irresistibly cheap to make. Polyester, nylon, acrylic and their ilk are to be avoided whenever possible. They continue their dirty work post-production, shedding microplastic fibres into the marine environment every time they are washed. Many vegan alternatives are simply plastic. Companies are rushing to make garments out of recycled polyester, turning plastic bottles into tracksuits, but as these items are still capable of fibre shedding, it’s best to save your recycled polyester purchases for items that don’t need to be washed, such as shoes.

Semi-synthetics

Viscose, rayon and bamboo all come under the umbrella of semi-synthetic cellulose. The wood pulp, bamboo or other raw plant material is put through rigorous, chemical-intensive processes to break the fibres down into a product that can be spun and woven into fabric. The resulting fabric is biodegradable, breathable and silky on the skin, making it extremely popular with consumers.

Unfortunately, the environmental and human cost of producing cellulose is high. According to the non-profit environmental organisation Canopy, 3.2 billion trees are cut down every year for cellulose production, up to 30 per cent of which is from ancient and endangered forests. The Changing Markets Foundation released a report in 2017 revealing that viscose factories in Indonesia, China and India were dumping highly toxic wastewater into local waterways, destroying marine life and exposing workers and local populations to harmful chemicals. Awareness around these issues has increased, and manufacturers have been making changes, so when purchasing cellulosic fabrics, look for brand names, such as EcoVero, that encourage responsible, closed-loop production.

Flora Collingwood-Norris is an ethical, low-impact knitwear designer based in Scotland, and a champion of visible mending – a technique where repair work is deliberately made into a feature.

Please support our work by joining with a membership subscription (print or digital). OrganicNZ is independently published by the Soil & Health Association, a charity devoted to healthy soil, healthy food and healthy people.

Our independent journalism relies on support from people like you!

Get the magazine ($55/year)

Become an online reader ($5/month)

Natural

Cotton

Soft and smooth, cotton allows air to circulate, keeps you cool in summer and is an ideal inner layer in winter. We love cotton! It also is an incredibly thirsty crop using often inefficient irrigation systems that divert water from natural sources. According to WWF, cotton cultivation severely degrades soil quality, leading to expansion into new areas and the attendant destruction of habitat. Cotton production is heavy on pesticide use, threatening the surrounding ecology of cotton-growing areas and the people that live there. It is hard to forget the dark past of cotton production, and bonded and child slavery are still of concern today.

GMO cotton has long been touted as an alternative and now accounts for close to 100 per cent of cotton grown in Australia. It is designed to increase both insect resistance and herbicide tolerance (so products such as glyphosate can be applied for a longer period of time) while reducing the need for water. An obviously controversial choice.

If you want fresh cotton in your wardrobe, organic is the best choice. Check for labels with GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard) certification. GOTS is a non-profit that prohibits the use of GMO cotton while maintaining high organic, labour and welfare standards.

Most recycled cotton comes from pre-consumer waste, scraps and excess from factories. These are shredded and woven into new fabrics, which often have a pleasing speckled appearance. There are innovations that are creating a pulp out of those scraps by dissolving them with a solvent, so it’s worth looking into how the garment you are buying is recycled, but luckily most producers have this information prominently displayed on their websites.

Linen

Breathable, moth-resistant and durable, linen is grown from flax (Linum usitatissimum – a different species from Phormium tenax, our native harakeke), a resilient, ancient plant that can thrive in poor soils and requires a fraction of the water that cotton does. Organic linen is even better, as nitrates and toxic dyes aren’t used in its production. GOTS certification is also available for linen. Overall, linen is an excellent choice. The con is that all this comes at a premium price.

Wool

Our beloved national fibre is natural, warm and biodegradable. But is it sustainable? There are currently over one billion sheep in the world. That’s far too many to be considered planet conscious, and sheep farming is resource-intensive. According to Circumfauna, who do research on the impact of animal-derived materials, more than 367 times the amount of land is required for wool than for cotton in Australia, and an Australian wool-knit sweater emits about 27 times more greenhouse gas emissions than a cotton-knit sweater. The wool industry comes with a host of issues relevant to those interested in animal welfare. If you are looking for wool, check for accredited or organic wool to mitigate concerns. It may be easier for hand knitters to trace their wool through small suppliers. Recycled wool is often blended with polyester for durability, so beware. There is nothing like the warmth of wool, so consider looking for second-hand items to keep the chill off.

Silk

The fanciest fabric of all, silk biodegrades and keeps rural artisans in business in an almost zero-waste industry. Unfortunately, it’s a fussy fabric to maintain, with the care instructions usually demanding dry cleaning. Its animal welfare credentials are nil, thanks to the traditional step of boiling the silkworms alive to separate the silk from the worm. Sericulture requires very little land use but unfortunately is water-intensive. The dyeing process is where toxic chemicals can shimmy their way into production, so look for naturally dyed items. New alternatives, such as peace silk (where the silkworms aren’t killed), spider silk and silk made from fruit fibre are being developed and offer exciting possibilities for the future.

Second time round

Cost can be a significant barrier to accessing responsibly produced clothes for many. Making beautiful clothes in a way that takes the planet and its people into account is unavoidably expensive. Natural, organic fibres cost more than synthetic, and fair labour costs more than exploitation.

Purchasing second-hand clothing is a lower cost option, but generally requires a larger investment in time. Op shops can sometimes be a challenging place to shop as the racks are becoming increasingly filled with the poorly constructed, synthetic-heavy clothes of recent years. There are a number of people selling second-hand clothing online, curated according to particular needs or aesthetics. However, for some people, the stigma of second-hand clothing is hard to shake. And if you are at either end of the size spectrum, finding quality second-hand clothing can be close to impossible. It’s easy to see the allure of shops that stock your size, in your style, at a price that won’t eat too far into the weekly shop.

Hamilton-based sustainable fashion label KoiNo’s garments are made to order and range from size 8 to size 28.

Slow wins the race

Where the sustainable industry fails, where fashion fails in general, is in providing for a plus-sized market. Amanda Matthews, owner of KoiNo, a Hamilton-based, size-inclusive, sustainable fashion label, agrees that many brands don’t see the value in extending their sizing. “Increasing a size range to include plus size is not always as simple as extending sizing by taking standard sizes and making them bigger. Often new patterns are needed, with adjustments made to make the style fit well on a bigger body.”

To avoid this problem, and its associated costs, Amanda bases her patterns on an XL, grading up or down from there, as she finds this creates a better fit on a wider range of sizes. This isn’t the only clever model that Amanda has adopted. Her garments are made to order, essentially eliminating unsold pieces. “I don’t need to invest in making every size in every style in every colour. I only make what is needed.”

In Aotearoa, we are lucky to have a raft of fashion designers who are eco-conscious and innovative, from I Used To Be, who make frankly adorable bags out of discarded pool toys, to the chic Kowtow, whose clothes read as a love letter to the rain-fed, fair-trade organic cotton they are made from.

Change is coming to fashion. Technology is firmly focused on future solutions. It won’t be long until we are wearing mushroom leather and lab-grown wool. Until then, choose your clothes wisely and love them well.

Claire Brunette is a writer, worrier and textile enthusiast who lives in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Kūmara recipes from Hapī

20 Jun 22/in Health and Food, Magazine Articles

Kūmara is something we need in our community. It’s an abundance crop, says Gretta Carney, owner of Hapī Ora organic café and māra in Ahuriri–Napier. She shares some of her favourite kūmara recipes.

Stuffed kūmara

This is a Hapī favourite. Salt baking the kūmara seals the skin, allowing the insides to bake into a melt-in-your-mouth mash.

Serves 4

4 medium kūmara
Fine sea salt
1 medium onion
4 cloves garlic
Oil, for frying
4 large leafy greens (kale, silverbeet, collard, puha, watercress)
½ cup cream cheese (dairy or nut)
Salt and pepper
½ cup sour cream (dairy or nut)
Karengo salt

Scrub each kūmara well and liberally sprinkle the wet skin with fine sea salt.

Place the kūmara on a baking dish. Don’t crowd them too much, as they need a bit of room for the skin to crisp up. Bake in a moderate oven at 180°C until soft to touch – about 30-45 minutes depending on the size.

Gently fry up some diced onion and thinly sliced garlic (we use deodorised coconut oil for most of our frying). Once the onions have softened, add some finely chopped leafy greens from your garden. We mostly use kale but puha would also be good. Only fry the greens for a minute so they have softened but still retain their bright colour, and turn everything out into a bowl.

Cut a strip off the top of each kūmara and carefully scoop out the flesh leaving enough intact so the kūmara holds its shape. Put the kūmara flesh into the bowl with the onion, garlic and greens and mash together. Add the cream cheese (we use our mushroom or cultured cashew cream cheese), mix to combine and season to taste. Stuff the mash into the kūmara shells, piling it up high.

Reheat as required and top with a dollop of sour cream and a sprinkle of karengo salt to serve.

Reader support keeps us going

Please support our work by joining with a membership Join us here. Organic NZ is independently published by the Soil & Health Association, a charity devoted to healthy soil, healthy food and healthy people.

Our independent journalism relies on support from people like you!

Roroi

This traditional pudding can be made with little or no sweetener given the sweetness of the kūmara.

Serves 4-6

2 large kūmara
Honey – a couple of tablespoons

Preheat oven to 180°C. Grease a shallow baking dish with butter or coconut oil.
Peel and grate kūmara. Press kūmara into the greased baking dish. Drizzle or dab with honey.
Cover with a lid or tin foil and bake for an hour until the kūmara has the texture of a soft mash.
Serve hot or cold, with cream or custard.

Kumara canapés

Kūmara can be turned into a versatile dietary friendly canapé base. Use medium-sized kumara for bite-sized canapés.

Cut kūmara into 2mm slices, skin on.

Place onto a baking tray and brush with olive oil and sprinkle with salt. Bake
in a moderate oven at 180°C until just cooked and slightly browned.

Allow to cool to room temperature and top with your favourite canapé toppings. We have been sending them out with smashed blue cheese topped with pan toasted walnuts in a honey reduction and dusted with toasted thyme salt, but you could also use slivers of roast beef with chutney, or pesto and roasted cauliflower.

Gretta’s roroi and stuffed kūmara recipes have been reproduced with permission from:

Te Mahi Māra Hua Parakore: A Māori Food Sovereignty Handbook by Jessica Hutchings

Te Mahi Oneone Hua Parakore: A Māori Soil Sovereignty and Wellbeing Handbook, edited by Jessica Hutchings and Jo Smith.

jessicahutchings.org

The history of GE in New Zealand

14 Jun 22/in Features, Magazine Articles, Organic Week

Bonnie Flaws investigates New Zealand’s ongoing debate on the regulation of genetic modification

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us for access to exclusive members-only content.

The question of whether we should allow genetic engineering in New Zealand has been raging for almost as long as the technology has been around – since the 1970s. By the late 1990s and early 2000s, the sentiment among the public was decidedly anti-GMO, with protest a regular feature of the political landscape, including famous hīkoi that travelled from Northland to Wellington. Now the topic is in the headlines again after the Productivity Commission recommended in its 2021 report that New Zealand’s strict laws regulating genetic engineering ought to be reviewed, in part because the techniques used have evolved.

GM, GMO, GE, GEd – what exactly does it all mean?

New Zealand law defines a genetically modified organism (GMO) as any organism in which any of the genes or other genetic material have been modified by, inherited or otherwise derived through any number of replications, by in vitro techniques.
Genetic engineering (GE) is the use of in vitro techniques to make genetically modified organisms.
Genetic modification (GM) is used interchangeably with the term genetic engineering by experts in the field.
Transgenic techniques, what we traditionally think of as genetic engineering, use a foreign “gene of interest” that has been cultured and inserted into a cell of the host organism. Today, it’s more common to hear about gene editing (GEd) techniques, such as CRISPR-Cas9, TALENs and ZFNs.
Gene editing (GEd) techniques have been around since the late 70s, but some tools (nucleases) like CRISPRCas9, TALENs and ZFNs are new.

The use of language in the GM debate

The language used to describe genetic engineering has often been contested by those who would like to see it deregulated. For example, it’s been argued that conventional and selective breeding of plants is a form of genetic engineering. More recently, it has been argued that the biochemical processes of gene editing are similar to those that cause natural mutations.

Jack Heinemann, a professor at the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Canterbury, who promotes regulation, says the “equivalence to nature” argument is a semantic obfuscation, but a High Court ruling in 2014 made it unambiguous. New Zealand became the first country to make it explicit in law that gene editing is a technique of genetic modification, meaning it must be regulated. Heinemann was the expert witness in this case. This ruling hinged on the ability of the technique to make changes at scale that wouldn’t happen in nature, he says.

Reader support keeps us going

Our independent journalism relies on support from people like you!

A potted history

This tension between those for and against regulation has been a continuous thread in the national discourse, with the public generally wanting controls, and industry and parts of academia wanting more freedom to experiment.

After a field trial moratorium was lifted in 1987, the public became increasingly agitated about GE experimentation, particularly around the issue of contamination of agricultural crops, and demand for tighter regulation grew. The first big breakthrough for activists came with the 1996 Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act, leading to the creation of the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA). This was the body responsible for overseeing importation, development, field trials and releases of GMOs. The act allowed scientists to experiment with GM techniques in the lab and in contained field trials.

But GE experiments began to cross lines that many people found distasteful and unethical. The worry that GMOs might escape from the lab and contaminate and self-propagate in the environment, or that food with foreign genes inserted might end up on their plate kept activists like Zelka Grammer motivated.

“You have this whole nefarious history of incompetence and slackness, and then even worse, MAF and MPI not adequately monitoring to catch significant breaches of ERMA’s rules of approval,” says the chair of GE-free Tai Tokerau. “People like Stefan Browning from the Green party and local orchardists had to go and find secret field trial locations, take photographic evidence, march down to MAF and MPI and say, ‘WTF! Why are these brassicas flowering out of doors when it’s not allowed under the conditions of approval?’ It was shut down in disgrace over and over and over.”

There was a strong feeling that regulators were not adequately monitoring trials, and the rapid development of the biotech industry was seen as a threat to New Zealand’s agricultural sector. Despite this, industry and academic voices were keen to see the technology liberated for use in both the biomedical and agricultural spheres. Without deregulation, New Zealand would be left behind in the technological and economic race.

Organisations such as the Royal Society Te Apārangi, Plant & Food Research, Scion, NZBio, Malaghan Institute of Medical Research, Agcarm (New Zealand Association for Animal Health and Crop Protection) and Federated Farmers have all advocated for greater deregulation of genetic engineering over the years.

A petition signed by 92,000 Kiwis called for a Royal Commission to investigate and establish a way forward for the controversial technology. This was done, and in 2000 the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification validated many of the concerns voices by activists. The overall recommendation was to “proceed with caution”, while also rejecting the unrestricted use of genetic engineering. Within a year, a voluntary moratorium was put in place – all in all a landmark year for people power.

Several memorable hīkoi in 2001 and 2003 followed the Commission’s findings. Māori played a big part in their organisation but the movement was broad-based and many New Zealanders took part. Groups like GE-Free New Zealand and Mothers Against Genetic Engineering (MAdGE) had a prominent public voice. In 2015 the Northland and Hastings regions were successful in asserting their own “GE free” status in their district plans.

It is clear that everyone is in it for the money. The risks can be dismissed by appealing to the benefits, and when the benefits are not forthcoming, the promises have to be kept alive. Biotechnology is the south sea bubble at the end of the millennium.
A quote from “The Biotechnology Bubble”, an article by Mae-Wan Ho, Hartmut Meyer and Joe Cummins, originally published in The Ecologist and reprinted in the July 1999 issue of Organic NZ.

However in 2012, CRISPR, a new gene editing tool, had been discovered. Proponents argued it was more precise than transgenics, and led to changes similar to what might happen naturally. Proponents said the technology should be set free to fulfil its potential. It could be applied not only in food production, but also in medical research, pest control and even to tackle climate change.

At the same time, a growing body of scientific literature showed that gene editing gave rise to numerous unintended genetic mutations, and was not as precise as claimed. The Sustainability Council of New Zealand took the Environmental Protection Authority (formerly ERMA) to court to challenge industry claims that gene editing was not genetic engineering.

The 2014 High Court ruling, which determined gene editing was legally a form of genetic modification, also established that the rate and specificity of change was what made the technology risky.

Key dates in the history of GE

1973	First recombinant bacteria is developed in the US.
1978	The New Zealand government places a moratorium on field releases that remains in place for 10 years.
1980s	The early 1980s sees GE technologies begin to be applied in laboratories in New Zealand, largely for biological and medical research purposes.
1988	The moratorium on field release is lifted and an Interim Assessment Group (IAG) is established for the field testing and release of genetically modified organisms.
1996	Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 passes in law, which leads to the establishment of the Environmental Risk Management Authority New Zealand (ERMA).
1999	The Independent Biotechnology Advisory Committee is established to assess and provide independent advice on the use of GE technology.
2000	The Royal Commission on Genetic Modification is established and a voluntary moratorium put in place.
2008	Activists chop down GE pine trees at a Scion forestry research site near Rotorua in 2008 and 2012.
2011	ERMA becomes the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).
2012	CRISPR is invented, adding a new tool to the GE toolbox.
2014	The High Court rules that gene editing is a form of genetic modification.
2015	Both the Hastings and Northland regions become GE free.
2016	Auckland becomes GE free.
2021	Productivity Commission report recommends a full review of HSNO.

The Māori world view

Māori have largely been vocal opponents of GE from the beginning. “The issue is that using GE will have an impact on the mauri of our food and the soil,” says Lahni Wharerau, kaiwhakahaere of Te Waka Kai Ora, the National Māori Organics Authority. “Mauri is what gives us life force and underpins wellbeing. GE interferes with that.”

Wider news reporting since the Productivity Commission’s report shows that attitudes aren’t set in stone. Maui Hudson, associate professor at the University of Waikato, said a national survey of Māori on the issue of genetic modification and gene editing was done last year, showing a wide variety of perspectives were held. “For some people it’s all the same, whether it’s genetic modification or gene editing, while for others they get that there is a difference and that may change the way you think about it.” However, a “proceed with caution” approach was still valued. “In the context of the conversations we’ve had, there is no appetite for a totally unregulated environment for gene editing.”

The Productivity Commission and the global push for GE deregulation

The New Zealand Productivity Commission last year called for a complete review of HSNO, as well as the legislative framework and institutional arrangements governing genetic engineering, suggesting separate legislation or a standalone regulator.

“Technologies have moved on significantly over the last 20 years. In particular, advances in gene editing have produced technologies such as CRISPR, which enable much faster and more precise modification than earlier tools,” it says in its 2021 report.

Once again, proponents have seized the opportunity to promote deregulation. Jack Heinemann says the push for deregulation is happening globally. Pulling no punches,
he calls it an orchestrated campaign by vested interests – industry and those parts of academia aligned with industry outcomes – that follows the same pattern everywhere, drowning out voices of scientific doubt.

As a geneticist, he is immensely positive about the benefit to society of regulated genetic engineering in the lab, but says both the utopian promise of genetic engineering – how it’s promoted to the public and the regulators – and the risk profile remain unchanged since regulations were put in place. What gene editing does is change the scale and speed at which interventions can be made in nature, he says. “That is precisely what makes a technology risky.”

President of GE-Free New Zealand Claire Bleakley says the HSNO regulations follow a clear pathway to ensure products are safe. “Because GMOs are living organisms they might contaminate the indigenous flora and fauna, the economic crops, or have serious health effects. Our biggest concern is that the Productivity Commission report was basically minimising the dangers of GMOs and highlighting the simplicity of them.”

Sociologist Jodie Bruning agrees the report obfuscates risk, and doesn’t represent what the bulk of submissions had been asking for – just two out of 80 submissions (both from the medical industry) that fed into the Productivity Commission’s 2021 report argued that HSNO should be opened up.

The main fear Jack Heinemann, Claire Bleakley and Jodie Bruning convey is that without the appropriate checks and balances, and careful scientific oversight, niche experimentation with the ability to change organisms at pace and scale would proliferate, and with them, unintended consequences.

“Regulation is not a ban. It isn’t stopping anything. Good science is like good democracy – it needs accountability and transparency. No dark corners,” Bruning says.

Horopito: how to use our hottest native herb

26 Apr 22/in Health and Food, Magazine Articles

Herbalist Sara Mertens celebrates our hottest native herb and peppers us with ideas on how to use it in the kitchen and medicine cabinet.

If you are unfamiliar with the native flora of Aotearoa’s bush and go walking with somebody who wants to treat you to a “taste of the bush” sensation, they will undoubtedly invite you to nibble on a leaf from an attractively coloured shrub. A nibble is all it takes! It will be an unforgettable moment as your taste buds encounter a peppery punch not unlike chilli spice.

Horopito, our native pepper tree boasts an ancient endemic New Zealand genus, Pseudowintera, and a primitive flower structure originating from the Winteraceae plant family. Unsurprisingly, introduced animals, such as wild deer find the hot-tasting leaves unpalatable, a quality that has nurtured its longevity in our forests. Similarly, it is fungi resistant and insects are not attracted to it.

There are four endemic horopito species. Pseudowintera colorata (pictured above) is a shrub variety that grows up to 3.5m tall and has distinctly identifiable foliage of red splotches on the topside of the pale green leaf, with a blue-grey underside. P. axillaris is not as peppery, has no colourful markings and grows 7m tall. P. colorata and P. axillaris are often found growing in the same regions but in different parts of the bush due to P. colorata thriving in areas of adequate light to enhance its highly coloured leaves, and P. axillaris preferring cold, damp conditions. The other two horopito species are harder to find. P inseparata is critically endangered and only grows in Northland and P. traversii is found on the West Coast of the South Island and near Nelson.

Reader support keeps us going

Please support our work by joining with a membership. Join us here. OrganicNZ is independently published by the Soil & Health Association, a charity devoted to healthy soil, healthy food and healthy people.

Our independent journalism relies on support from people like you!

Apothecary

P. colorata is known for its medicinal uses, and forms an important part of rongoā Māori. The fresh leaves can be chewed or simmered in water to make a medicinal decoction drink for tooth and stomach aches. Circulatory and respiratory conditions, such as coughs, colds and asthma, were once managed with this warming herb. It can also be used topically to treat skin diseases. The leaves and tender branches were steeped in water and used in a lotion for ringworm, and the bruised foliage was applied as a warming poultice to wounds and joint injuries.

In the early 1980s, University of Canterbury research isolated the active constituent polygodial, which gives the distinct peppery taste to the foliage and has strong anti-fungal and antibacterial properties. It compares favourably to pharmaceutically compounded antifungal medicine, and can be used to treat Candida albicans, which causes infections such as thrush. Horopito has also been effective against other fungal organisms, such as Trichophyton, which causes ringworm, athlete’s foot and fungal nails. The pain killing action, analgesic, of the leaves is attributed to one of their 29 essential oils, called eugenol.

Marlborough-based company Kolorex use horopito as their hero herb ingredient, and grow it to use in a range of efficacious antifungal products.

Garden to pantry

Grow horopito in your garden and the birds will love you when it bears its dark red to black berries in autumn. Meanwhile, you can be adventurous with the leaves in your kitchen. The peppery action of our native bush spice has found its way into the condiment range of chefs – what better way to “let food be your medicine, and medicine be your food” in the words of the great Hippocrates. You can dry them at home and grind them to use as a substitute for ground black pepper. It will take meat-rub seasoning to another level, and refreshingly uplift your favourite hummus For a ready-to-use horopito supply, visit Forest Gourmet’s website.

Horopito is a botanical example of the land’s way of caring for us and providing a resource for health in life. Let it be reciprocal where we acknowledge how te whenua (the land) and ourselves are interconnected – if we care for the land, the land provides in return.

Sara Mertens is a registered medical herbalist living in Rangiora (symphonyofherbs.nz).

Investigating Aotearoa’s e-waste footprint

18 Feb 22/in Building and Technology, Magazine Articles

Electronic waste is the world’s fastest growing waste stream, and in Aotearoa most of it ends up in landfill where it can leach toxins into soil and waterways. The good news is that we are taking steps to reduce our e-waste footprint. Bonnie Flaws investigates.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us for access to exclusive members-only content.

Mobile phones, old computers, toasters and jugs, whiteware, batteries, televisions, gadgets, even children’s toys. We’ve probably all gone through numerous editions of each of these products in our lifetime. I run a little inventory and establish that I am on my fifth mobile phone, my fifth computer, and probably my fourth television. I’m only on my second GHD though after 20 years of hair straightening – pretty good, I reckon. My 30-year-old dishwasher is working but it’s falling apart, and it won’t be long before I’ll be replacing it.

Electronic waste is increasing globally, and here in New Zealand it’s estimated we produce about 80,000 tonnes a year, of which only 2000 tonnes is recycled. “It’s a significant problem,” says AUT senior lecturer in the School of Future Environments, Jeff Seadon. And it’s everyone’s problem – it’s estimated each person produces about 21 kg every year, he tells me.

Reader support keeps us going

Our independent journalism relies on support from people like you!

What is it and why is there so much of it?

E-waste comprises “anything with a plug or battery” that has reached the end of its life, Jeff explains. As the world has become increasingly digitised, the amount of e-waste continues to pile up and it has become the fastest growing waste stream in the world. Another culprit is ‘planned obsolescence’, a business strategy with an ethics problem.

Manufacturers want repeat customers and so longevity is not a priority. It costs manufacturers money to repair products, and it’s often cheaper to simply replace broken items. It’s also profitable to dictate who can do repairs, sometimes under threat of nullifying the warranty if something is repaired by an unauthorised party.

“There is now a backlash occurring, and as a result, manufacturers are having to change their products so that there is a ‘right to repair’,” Jeff says. The ‘right to repair’ concept is becoming more widespread. Consumer NZ says it’s going mainstream, with companies like Apple making supportive noises, and legislators in Australia and the United Kingdom forcing manufacturers to repair cars through independent garages and supply spare parts for gadgets. Minister for the Environment David Parker is a fan and Kiwi businesses could soon be legally bound to ensure old devices can be repaired too.

Jeff says this policy may force a rethink. “Producers are thinking, ‘If we have to repair it, that will cost us a fortune and that will come back on us. So, therefore we need to make things that are more useable’.”

Environmental and health impacts

E-waste contains a variety of minerals and elements, including precious metals and heavy metals. Many of these are contaminants, says University of Canterbury professor of environmental chemistry Brett Robinson. Elements like lead, cadmium, mercury and copper bind very strongly to soils where they stay forever or are taken up by plants.

But Brett says there are many other chemical elements that are not well understood – such as gallium and indium, which are used in the manufacture of flat panel displays. It is not known just how mobile they are in soil or how harmful they can be. At some level, all of these contaminants are toxic to microbes and plants, he says.

Some types of flame retardants that are used in plastics on electronic devices are also extremely toxic and very mobile, so can leach into groundwater. Air pollution can also be a problem. “If e-waste is burned, you get chemicals called dioxins forming – the same chemical that caused environmental damage in Vietnam with Agent Orange.”

Brett says most of what is collected at recycling centres usually goes overseas to places like Japan, Singapore and South Korea, where it can be recycled more cost-effectively.

Sadly, in New Zealand most e-waste ends up in landfill. There are upsides and downsides to this, he adds. On the downside, resources are being lost – there is far more gold, silver and palladium in landfills than there is in virgin mines, such as the one in Waihi. On the upside, since the 1990s, landfills have been required to be sealed, so the e-waste doesn’t leach out, although some of it ends up as leachate which is collected and reprocessed by the operator, he says.

Farm dumps

The biggest problem in Aoteroa is the amount of e-waste illegally disposed of on farm dumps, of which there are estimated to be about 30,000 around the country, Jeff tells me. “It’s very hard to regulate because if you have a little valley in the back of beyond, who is going to be there to check it?”

Unlike landfills, these dumps do leach. As water passes through valleys, decaying metals pass into the water system and into vegetable and animal life, where it accumulates. Some elements can also get into groundwater, he says. Their accumulation in humans and animals via water and food can lead to side effects including kidney and bone disease, central nervous system damage and elevated blood pressure.

Product stewardship for e-waste will become mandatory

Spark, Vodafone and 2degrees have a recycling programme for phones called Re:Mobile, and there are collection points for e-waste recycling in many places that you can find out about through your local council or at ewaste.org.nz. However, options for responsible disposal of electronic waste are still limited. But this is set to change.

The Ministry for the Environment is currently in the process of setting up a product stewardship scheme under the Waste Minimisation Act, and e-waste is one of the priority waste streams. Once in place, it will oblige producers to recover e-waste at the end of life and recycle it. There is no date set yet for its implementation.

What we do know is that it will be a user-pays system. “When you go and purchase a piece of electronic equipment covered under the scheme, you’ll pay an extra amount that will pay for its recovery at the end. The scheme will build up money to capture goods at the end and it should be self-supporting,” Brett says.

Not-for-profit TechCollect NZ was established by a group of global technology companies to support the development of a regulated product stewardship scheme in New Zealand, and is working with the government on delivering the scheme at present.

Auckland based company Computer Recycling will likely to be collecting much of this waste once the scheme is up and running. Director Patrick Moynahan has imported a high-tech piece of kit called Blue Box. One of only eight in the world, this machine will increase the amount of e-waste the country currently recycles to 5000 tonnes per year, he says. “That will go quite a long way to recycle the ‘hard to recycle’ material – things like flat screens, small electronics, laptops. We’ll be able to handle the vast majority of what New Zealand produces,” he says. Hard-to-recycle material is anything that can’t be disassembled by hand,
he explains.

The $3 million machine, a 40 foot container-sized shredding unit, operates in a negative vacuum environment, meaning nasties like mercury and cadmium will be contained and the recycling process won’t contribute to the contamination of the workers or the land. The metals will be exported as commodities, where they will be reused in manufactured goods. It also separates out the precious metals into pure commodity streams that can be sold back to refineries.

Computer Recycling collects e-waste from all over the country at one-day-events via business networks and a fleet of trucks and vans that collect waste. “We also work with general waste companies to encourage the collection of e-waste at the point of landfill,” Patrick says. The company will be working with TechCollect and companies implementing the mandatory product stewardship programmes when the time comes.

But Patrick doesn’t think it will be realistically operational for two to three years. Once the regulation is in place, the e-waste recycling sector will expand significantly especially with the help of Blue Box, he says.

“We are hoping to import a few more machines [for other e-waste streams] in a couple of years. If stewardship is introduced and there is a conscious effort to educate the public then there is no reason why we can’t hit 50–60 per cent recycling of waste. Right now, we’re are at about 2 per cent,” Patrick says.

Posts

Natural health products are included in the Therapeutic Products Bill which was presented to Parliament at the end of last year. Dr Sandra Clair looks at the reasoning behind it and says that, if executed well, this could be a step in the right direction for pluralistic medicine in New Zealand.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us to access more, exclusive members-only content.

History

Fit for the future?

Fit for the future?

Popularity

Legislative background

Rongoā

Therapeutic Products Bill

TPB detail

Have your say

References

About the author

The Bill in full

Soil & Health NZ life member Philippa Jamieson, reviewed the 288 pages of the Therapeutic Products Bill

“We can’t sell laxative teas, or at least can’t say a tea has that effect,” an organic shop staff member said recently. “How does that help people who could really benefit from it?”

Health benefit claims are just part of the Therapeutic Products Bill currently before parliament. The bill would allow the makers of those herbal teas to claim laxative effects on the label – if they gain approval of the product, approval of the therapeutic claim, and pay whatever fees are set.

The tourism dollar is coming back, but at what cost? Claire Brunette investigates how New Zealand can, and does, balance the effect on the environment while still reaping the rewards in our economy.

We hope you enjoy this free article from Organic NZ. Join us for access more exclusive, members-only content.

The International Ecotourism Society’s list of ecotourism principles

Treading lightly

Showcasing the sea

Sustainability Certifications

Tiaki – Care for New Zealand

Qualmark New Zealand

New Zealand Tourism Sustainability Commitment

Balancing the budget

Ahead of the government passing the Organic Products Bill, the Soil & Health Association’s former general manager Pete Huggins talks dirt and water with horticulturists.

What’s the deal with hydroponics?

Defining organics matters

Bringing it back to soil

An organic grower’s perspective

Marco de Groot is the general manager of Monavale Blueberries in Cambridge, which has been BioGro-certified since 1993. Here’s his perspective on hydroponics.

We produce enough food in New Zealand to feed 40 million people, yet one in five Kiwi kids live in households that experience food insecurity.

Gareth Hughes talks about his new role as lead of the Wellbeing Economy Alliance Aotearoa.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us for access to exclusive members-only content.

Reader support keeps us going

What does our food really cost us?

Making progress

What would a fair system look like?

If you’re feeling overwhelmed and bewildered about what constitutes planet-friendly fashion, you’re not alone. Claire Brunette unpicks the multilayered environmental and ethical issues within the fashion industry.

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Sign up now for a print or digital subscription and get the latest from us each issue.

Synthetics

Semi-synthetics

Natural

Cotton

Linen

Wool

Silk

Second time round

Slow wins the race

Kūmara is something we need in our community. It’s an abundance crop, says Gretta Carney, owner of Hapī Ora organic café and māra in Ahuriri–Napier. She shares some of her favourite kūmara recipes.

Stuffed kūmara

This is a Hapī favourite. Salt baking the kūmara seals the skin, allowing the insides to bake into a melt-in-your-mouth mash.

Serves 4

4 medium kūmara Fine sea salt 1 medium onion 4 cloves garlic Oil, for frying 4 large leafy greens (kale, silverbeet, collard, puha, watercress) ½ cup cream cheese (dairy or nut) Salt and pepper ½ cup sour cream (dairy or nut) Karengo salt

Reader support keeps us going

Roroi

This traditional pudding can be made with little or no sweetener given the sweetness of the kūmara.

Serves 4-6

2 large kūmara Honey – a couple of tablespoons

Kumara canapés

Kūmara can be turned into a versatile dietary friendly canapé base. Use medium-sized kumara for bite-sized canapés.

Gretta’s roroi and stuffed kūmara recipes have been reproduced with permission from:

Te Mahi Māra Hua Parakore: A Māori Food Sovereignty Handbook by Jessica Hutchings

Te Mahi Oneone Hua Parakore: A Māori Soil Sovereignty and Wellbeing Handbook, edited by Jessica Hutchings and Jo Smith.

Bonnie Flaws investigates New Zealand’s ongoing debate on the regulation of genetic modification

We hope you enjoy this free article from OrganicNZ. Join us for access to exclusive members-only content.

GM, GMO, GE, GEd – what exactly does it all mean?

The use of language in the GM debate

Reader support keeps us going

A potted history

Key dates in the history of GE

The Māori world view

The Productivity Commission and the global push for GE deregulation

Herbalist Sara Mertens celebrates our hottest native herb and peppers us with ideas on how to use it in the kitchen and medicine cabinet.

Reader support keeps us going

Apothecary

Garden to pantry

The tourism dollar is coming back, but at what cost?
Claire Brunette investigates how New Zealand can, and does, balance the effect on the environment while still reaping the rewards in our economy.

4 medium kūmara
Fine sea salt
1 medium onion
4 cloves garlic
Oil, for frying
4 large leafy greens (kale, silverbeet, collard, puha, watercress)
½ cup cream cheese (dairy or nut)
Salt and pepper
½ cup sour cream (dairy or nut)
Karengo salt

2 large kūmara
Honey – a couple of tablespoons