Korea’s economy is much larger than New Zealand’s. Korea’s R&D expenditure is also much higher, and the agricultural sector has more than three times the ratio of R&D to GDP. Therefore, agricultural R&D is very large compared to New Zealand. However, it is difficult to say that Korea’s agricultural technology is more competitive than New Zealand because there is nothing propagating in the export market. I wonder why this happened.

Feeling frustrated, I’m looking at some of New Zealand’s cases. New Zealand’s apples are evaluated as having the best competitiveness in the world. The climate is good, the variety is good, and the industrial composition and export strategy are excellent. On the government site, you can easily check the list of producers, refrigerated warehouses, packing houses, and exporters required for export by each country. This country is systematic enough to feel like it is doing it to export agriculture.

Looking at the composition of the value chain of New Zealand agriculture, the role of R&D research institutes and the role of associations and self-help organizations (companies) are well divided. National research institutes do inventory and agricultural sites do innovation. There is a poor distinction between inventory and innovation in Korean agricultural R&D. It is mixed up. In addition, it emphasizes cooperation between value chain actors that cooperate with agricultural producers.

“We have to work together, with your food basket and my food basket, people will thrive.”

Agricultural producers establish organizations (companies), invest in value chain-related companies, and provide education and consulting necessary for exports. Korea has a similar structure formally in the form of self-help or associations. However, it seems that it does not even invest in companies. In addition, the operation is supported by the government rather than the contributions of members. Other large budgets and small farm sizes may have also had an impact. There seems to be a difference to this extent.

It explains BAU, destructive innovation, and changes in proportion by period in the emerging future. Looking at our agriculture, I feel like only BAU exists. We are all shrinking it together.

What impressed me in the report “Science and innovation in New Zealand Agricultural (2022)” was the separate use of the concepts of science and innovation. It was obvious that I didn’t do it well. There was a tendency to think of science as innovation. Inventions without innovation are of little use.