New Zealand’s Science and Innovation Reforms Driving Agritech and Bioeconomy Growth

It’s a pleasure to be here at the Sprout Summit, surrounded by people who are quite literally designing the future of agrifood, ag‑tech and deep‑tech innovation in New Zealand.

The theme of this year’s summit The Catalyst: Connecting Industry, Innovation, and Investment, is timely.

It speaks to the kind of system New Zealand needs to build: one where science, ideas, and capital connect seamlessly, and where innovation can move quickly from concept to commercial reality.

New Zealand is at an important economic turning point.

After several difficult years, marked by high inflation, weak productivity and declining business confidence, the economy is slowly turning a corner, notwithstanding external shocks.

Strengthening that recovery, and our ability to rebound after shocks, and lifting New Zealand’s long-term economic performance is a priority for the Government.

That is why two of this Government’s major agendas - Going for Growth and the Science, Innovation and Technology System Reforms - are deeply intertwined; the latter being one of the five key mechanisms in the Going for Growth agenda.

Nowhere is that more obvious than in the sectors represented here today: agritech, agrifoodtech, deep tech, and biotechnology, sectors where New Zealand has natural advantages, deep expertise and global potential.

We need smarter, more resilient technologies in energy, transport, and food production. Agritech and agrifood innovation are important components to resilience.

Opportunities in advanced technologies Advanced technologies are already reshaping the agrifood economy — from AI enabled automation, to climate resilient crop systems and precision fermentation.

We also see it through companies like Halter, which is demonstrating how locally developed technology can scale globally while delivering tangible productivity gains on farm.

As you know, Halter has pioneered virtual fencing and precision livestock management through its solar-powered smart collars and software platform, enabling farmers to herd, monitor and manage cattle remotely without physical fences.

Adoption across New Zealand’s dairy and beef sectors has been rapid, driven by clear benefits including reduced labour pressure, improved animal welfare, better pasture utilisation and increased farm system flexibility.

Backed by significant venture capital - just last week the business attracted funding valuing it at more than $2 billion - and led by a strong, farmer-focused product vision, it has become a flagship example of agritech commercialisation. It shows how advanced technology, when deeply grounded in real farm needs, can achieve strong market traction and global growth potential.

I am pleased to have Halter founder and chief executive Craig Piggott on the PIMSITAC board, which I will speak more of shortly.

A further example of agritech success is last year’s Prime Minister’s Science Prize awards that went to AgResearch for developing an endophyte microorganism which enhances the health and productivity of the ryegrass common on New Zealand farms.

We need more of these stories across the economy.

Innovation is critical to resilience Our ability to turn research into innovation, and innovation into growth is going to be critical to economic resilience and building our future success.

In Denmark – a country like New Zealand of around five million people – recent pharmaceutical breakthroughs have delivered a modern economic miracle – creating a tidal wave of growth, employment, and opportunity.

When I came into this role, one thing was immediately clear: New Zealand produces excellent science, but our system does not consistently turn those ideas into commercial success.

The Science Advisory Group report identified this as one of many problems to fix, including too much competition, too little competition, underutilisation, poor collaboration, poor connection with industry, poor alignment with government priorities, complex disconnected funding panels, and poor commercialisation. Apart from that, everything was fine!

Too many promising ventures stall at the research and proof of concept stages and cannot develop to a stage in which they can access venture capital.

They can also lack the capability support and capital they need to scale.

Too much intellectual property is left on the shelf, including IP disclosures that become effectively dormant.

Comparing public science funding with Australia suggests we do well at the discovery phase but do not push on into spinouts and start-ups, as well as they do.

Changes to science system Part of this is in our hands, where capital flows in our economy have been misaligned for years. Not enough investment has been targeted at the creation of new technologies, new products, and new companies.

That is why the Government is undertaking the most significant modernisation of the science, innovation and technology system in more than three decades.

Our goal is simple: A science system that produces world‑class research and turns it into world‑class companies.

Key reforms in the past year alone show the huge amount of work that's been done in just one year holding the portfolio, including: A shift to a strategy‑driven funding system that aligns public investment with national research priorities A new national intellectual property framework to strengthen incentives and pathways for researchers to commercialise breakthrough ideas.

Consolidation of the seven CRIs into three Public Research Organisations, including the Bioeconomy PRO, which will be pivotal for agrifood and agritech innovation.

Creation of PMSITAC as the national strategic science council.

Creation of Research Funding New Zealand, aligning investment with national priorities and economic opportunity.

Establishment of the New Zealand Institute for Advanced Technology, backed by $231 million, with a statutory mandate to commercialise frontier technologies such as quantum, AI and synthetic biology.

Our science reforms must be matched with strong support for businesses at every stage of the commercialisation pipeline.

At the early stage, our revamped science system will ensure public R&D investment is maximised.

At the scaling stage, tools like Elevate, the R&D Tax Incentive, InvestNZ and NZTE are helping firms grow globally.

In the middle, the critical point between proof of concept and investability, we see great opportunity for improvement.

This is where capability support such as incubators, accelerators, commercialisation coaches; and early capital such as PreSeed‑ Accelerator Fund, Technology Incubators, Aspire; must be aligned.

We are now working to ensure a joined‑up, coherent pathway so founders can get the right support at the right time.

Role of PMSITAC Last year in his state of the nation speech, the Prime Minister also announced the establishment of the Science, Innovation and Technology Advisory Council (PMSITAC) to set research priorities and ensure funding is targeted for maximum impact. I chair that council and acknowledge deputy chair and chief science advisor John Roche from MPI who is also in the room.

Earlier this year, the Prime Minister asked the Council to be bold; to tell the Government how to build a system that is focused, effective and equipped for the future.

He said that the prize – if we can get it right – could be game-changing for New Zealand.

The council’s role was not simply to diagnose long-standing issues, but to chart a path forward.

The Council has done just that and delivered recommendations which the Government is backing.

Today, I am pleased to announce the release of the Prime Minister’s Science, Innovation and Technology Advisory Council (PMSITAC) Report on Prioritisation in New Zealand’s Science, Innovation and Technology System.

It sets out how we will refocus science investment into areas that will make the biggest difference for New Zealand.

This report focuses on science funding in the portfolio and not the almost equal amount of science funding in other portfolios including MPI, DoC, TEC, Centres of Research Excellence, and TREF – previously PBRF. Those funds are outside this report.

This report focuses on science funding in the SIT portfolio, and not the almost equal amount of science funding elsewhere, including MPI, DoC, Callaghan, TEC and MoE funded centres of research excellence, and TREF previously known as PBRF, the $315 million a year which funds university research. Those funds are outside this report.

The key elements of the report are: Four priority pillars Investigator-mission led reweighting Rebalancing agriculture and environmental investment with advanced technology A simplified strategic and funding pathway with reduced bureaucracy.

1 - Priority pillars The Council’s report signals four areas, or pillars, where Government’s science investment can make the biggest difference for New Zealand.

These are: Primary Industries and Bioeconomy Technology for Prosperity Environmental Sustainability and Resilience Healthy People and a Thriving Society These four pillars reflect where New Zealand has existing strengths and capability, but also where there is opportunity for us to do more. The SAG report consistently focused on science prioritisation that we are or should be good at.

For investors, the PMSITAC report is a strong signal of long-term‑ policy alignment.

The Council’s advice is clear: New Zealand under invests in advanced technology research, and is overweighted in agricultural and environmental research, compared to similar economies, including taking into account the primacy of our agricultural sector.

Some of this reflects how our system and economy has evolved.

However, if we want science and innovation to more strongly drive economic performance, wellbeing and national resilience, we need a different balance of investment.

At the heart of the report is a new Technology for Prosperity pillar, which will crosscut across all science endeavours.

It is not designed to grow a single sector, but to build national capability.

Investments in areas such as quantum technologies, AI modelling, next generation sensing and engineered biological systems, will enable innovation across all four pillars, including agrifood and agritech.

2 - Investigator/mission-led reweighting The Council recommends adjusting the funding balance within these pillars to be 60 per cent mission-led (aligned to national priorities and outcomes) and 40 per cent investigator-led (competitively funded, curiosity-driven research).

This replaces the current approximate 45 per cent mission-led and 55 per cent investigator-led balance, and positions New Zealand alongside other leading small, advanced economies who are similarly positioning towards more mission-led science.

3 – Rebalancing agriculture and environmental investment with advanced technology The Council recommends that we increase investment in advanced technology through a gradual reallocation of some of the agriculture and environmental research funding.

Cross cutting will clearly position some of this funding back into those areas, just from a different pillar and with an emerging technology lens. For example, through something like AI-driven robotic harvesting technology.

This does not mean starting again or discarding what we do well.  Rather, it is to build on our existing strengths and direct more investment toward areas where New Zealand has a genuine comparative advantage, where we need research that addresses the unique needs and challenges of New Zealanders, and where emerging technologies are shaping future opportunities.

In short, redirect resources for an outsized impact.

Will humanities and social sciences still be supported?

Yes. It is a whole pillar in itself; one of the four.

Is matauranga still supported?

Yes. The $42 million biodiversity platform is evidence of that.

Will investigator-led, foundational research still be supported?

Yes. Up to 40 per cent of research funding would still fit into this category.

4 – Simplified science funding with less bureaucracy The fourth key to the report is simplified science funding with less bureaucracy. The PMSITAC Priorities Report provides a clear path forward. It will inform the development of the Science Investment Plan or SIP, which will set New Zealand’s long‑term research priorities and align public investment with national missions. This plan will be released later this year.

The upcoming Science Investment Plan is the response to this report and will direct Research Funding New Zealand – RFNZ - as the one-stop-shop that operationalises the the PMSATIC strategy. This will be done through Pillar Investment Plans – PIPS.

The simplified system then has: PMSITAC, sets out national priorities SIP, to detail the strategy RFNZ, to operationalise the national strategy PIP, to operationalise pillar strategies.

I know that is a few new acronyms, but this aligns with simplified science funding structures in other small, advanced economies. That is less bureaucracy and more funding for researchers.

This more aligned approach will help ensure New Zealand’s deep‑tech, agrifood and advanced‑technology sectors are positioned to take full advantage of future opportunities, here and globally.

Shifting investment priorities This transition must be supported by the foundations of the system — our workforce, our research infrastructure, our commercialisation pathways, and our global partnerships.

It strengthens the fundamentals of New Zealand’s agrifoodtech opportunity by shifting investment toward the data, biology, engineering and automation layers that form the foundation of globally scalable agritech companies.

This moves public investment toward platform technologies, for example AI, genomics, sensors, synthetic biology and digital twins, that can generate intellectual property and global revenue.

For the investment community, this alignment reduces policy risk and increases confidence that New Zealand will continue to produce agri-tech companies at scale capable of competing in large international markets.

The changes also aim to improve the efficiency of the innovation-to-commercialisation pipeline. A more mission-led system, clearer national priorities and simplified funding architecture mean fewer fragmented projects and more concentrated effort behind technologies with real market pull.

These proposals improve the risk–return profile of agri-tech investment. Stronger upstream public investment lowers technical and regulatory risk, clearer priorities support better capital allocation, and a growing advanced-technology talent base strengthens the founder pipeline.

This aims to translate into higher-quality deal flow, faster time to scale, and increased potential for international partnerships, follow-on capital and exits.

Shifting our funding in this way will mean we see more of the benefits that investments in advanced technology is already delivering – boosting farm productivity, reducing environmental impacts, and enabling smarter, data-driven decisions that improve health, resilience and sustainability across New Zealand.

In a tight fiscal environment, public investment must be targeted, efficient and evidence-based‑. Every dollar must do real work.

Funding needs confidence This report describes reprioritisation and not a reduction in science funding.

We all agree that more funding is important if we are to retain research capability and deliver on the potential New Zealand has. That funding needs to come from both private and public sources.

As you all know, funding for any venture requires a business case.

In a sense, the science and research reforms we are undertaking is part of a developing business case that the Government needs, to give it the confidence to consider putting more funding into the sector.

It’s a highly competitive process getting the attention and time of politicians that is needed for consideration of any new money. The case has to be strong.

We all need to prove that we are fixing the basics – by establishing these new entities, having them running smoothly, making sensible and informed decisions that support the national interest and the priorities laid out.

The Government is committed to building a prosperous future.

We can make policy and create interventions, but it will also require evidence, to build confidence that the sector is contributing and worth investing more in.

Evidence that is easy to digest, links to national benefit and demonstrates that it is delivering real results and returns.

Close In closing, I want to thank the Council for their expertise and contribution. Their advice is helping ensure New Zealand’s science and innovation investments deliver enduring value for the country.

To everyone here today, founders, CEOs, researchers, farmers, investors — thank you for the ambition, creativity and drive you bring to this sector. You are building the future of New Zealand’s bioeconomy and delivering solutions the world needs.

Alongside you, I have built the second largest biotechnology Institute in the world and a focused, simplified funding mechanism to advance those goals.

With a modernised, prioritised science and innovation system, aligned investment signals, and a growing advanced technology capability base, I am confident that New Zealand can remain a global leader in agrifood and agritech-‑innovation.