crude form of voodoo economics. It doesn't give a realistic overview of progress toward the real goal of sustainable prosperity. Our agricultural sector relies heavily on our waters and land as a prime asset. But we need to see New Zealand as not only a place to house as many cows as possible, but a living ecosystem from which crucial benefits are derived. They include carbon sequestration, erosion control, water regulation, nutrient cycling, and recreation. Mostly, those benefits are unaccounted for. We know that overburdening ecosystems changes them to the point that the benefits we derive start to diminish, often rapidly. I have seen this firsthand in recent years through my involvement in a project to protect and enhance water quality in the Manawatu River. The evidence is piling up. Already, erosion and nutrient runoff issues are adversely affecting both the long-term resilience of agricultural land, and streams, rivers and coastal areas. It is time to ask the hard questions. What will happen to our dreams of export billions when we push our lands and waters to their limits, to the point of losing them altogether? What if the indirect (often invisible) costs of eroding ecosystems outweigh the benefits from increased agri-food exports? We estimate that land ecosystems provide an annual value of around $52 billion. If the current export growth and additional growth strategy diminishes that value, we will reach a point where this strategy becomes uneconomic; the costs of exports are higher than the benefits. Which brings me