This paper revisits the issue of deregulation in New Zealand, and sugg
ests that a previous account by the author in 1989 was overly influenc
ed by the ethnocentricities of a British perspective which viewed New
Zealand as a 'laboratory' for what might happen following agricultural
deregulation in Europe. A revised account based on interviews conduct
ed in 1994 suggests an approach to research which is more sensitive to
different discursive narratives of agricultural change. Evidence of p
ost-deregulation adjustments by farmers is reviewed, and the major dis
cursive accounts of post-subsidy agriculture by government, by Federat
ed Farmers, and by academics - are discussed. These narratives have te
nded to 'come together' to present a mutually cohesive story of short-
term pain and long-term gain. However, they tend to cloak the prospect
s for further painful adjustment in a 'free market' agriculture prone
to fluctuating commodity prices, reorganization of the financing of ag
ro-commodity production and prioritization of ethical issues in food p
roduction.