You’d be hiding under a rock if you haven’t noticed that there’s fierce disagreement about the growth of pine plantations on rural New Zealand. On the one hand, we need fast growing permanent forests to act as carbon sinks. Lots and lots if we’re meet our net zero goals. If grown on marginal these forests make welcome additional income for farmers and reduce reliance on sheep and beef – a win for landowners, win for climate, win for New Zealand. On the other hand, we need more permanent pine forests like a hole in the head – they lack biodiversity, they’re fire risks, harbour pests and are poor at creating rural jobs. Lose/lose/lose.

So, which is it: win or lose?

This is just the sort of trade-off that interests Geoff Simmons. Working as the chief economists of the office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Geoff has been wrestling with the complexities of rural land use – what’s good for farmers, what’s good for communities, for biodiversity, for Māori, for the climate and for the future generations. What we do with land, the rules and policies that govern it, has huge implications for all of us. That’s all captured in a new report from the Commissioner called ‘Going with the grain: Changing land uses to fit a changing landscape’ He spoke to Vincent.