New Zealand in the world
It’s not easy being green. Kermit the frog knows it, we all do. New Zealand‘s political and business leaders do, too. After all, much of the country’s success is built on a ‘clean, green’ reputation, nurtured by the idea of a pristine environment. Surely they’ll do anything to maintain and protect this USP, priceless as it is in an eco-concerned world? In reality, it only takes a bit of scratching on the brand’s ‘clean, green’ surface to have black spots appear.
Unlike Canada (which entirely lost its environmental credibility due to tar sand operations and run away from climate responsibilities under the Kyoto protocol) and China (paying hard and bitter to make its air breathable again), New Zealand’s green coat is still its main asset, a beacon of lived environmental consciousness to the outside world. Or why would tourists endure 20 hours and more in uncomfortable airplane seats if not to get a glimpse of this nature wonderland? Likewise, grocery shoppers in the UK buying New Zealand apples because they believe in this purer, better place where cows graze on real pasture? Huge opportunities are waiting to be seized, a green, sustainable economy to be started.
NZ Prime Minister John Key
Surprisingly – and to the amazement of the curious observer – the government is pursuing an entirely different path. Coal mining, gas fracking and off-shore oil drilling seem to be more attractive to the current prime minister John Key and his crew. Now what do you expect, some might say, New Zealand has always been seen a bit behind in terms of grasping new developments. Surely nobody would expect this far-away country to lead a low-carbon world?. Fair enough. If it wouldn’t be for the constant ‘clean, green’ proclamations, people mightn’t even notice. Just for how long New Zealand will be able to maintain its environmental image – who knows. Environmentally conscious tourists and overseas food importers might have long moved on by then.
For more reading:
New Zealand’s energy outlook
New Zealand, quo vadis: Two views on the business of sustainability
Maybe your PM has already seen studies that show pollutants from Australia showing up in NZ glaciers http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/persistent-organic-pollutants-found-on-new-zealand-glaciers/3810428 and thinks fatalistically that since we’d already polluted the wild places of the earth when Rachel Carson wrote Silent Spring he might as well get what profits can be had now since its only a matter of time until the entire earth ecosystem collapses on the human population. Is Clean and Green possible in a world where Product Stewardship does not extend beyond the industria processes?No I haven’t given up though I’m making down- stream ecologocal impact part of the decision making in my household.its all I can do. Or maybe not…
I think it was Robert May who worked out the greater the number of species in a biosphere the wider the margin for error exists to protect it. Biodiversity appears to be the best remedy for the already contaminated wild places.
Posted by Sue Ni | February 6, 2012, 13:24Good points, Sue. However, resignation (i.e. scrapping the clean, green brand because we’re doomed anyway) is a luxury New Zealand can’t afford. Both tourism and food exports (by far the most important economic sectors in Kiwiland) strongly depend on this. A risky strategy indeed to gamble nation brand credibility against potential (short-term?) profits made from oil and coal. Once the good reputation is gone it will be difficult to get it back.
Posted by Florian | February 7, 2012, 18:47That is quite a risk that your PM is taking. As you highlighted with the example of Canada, it doesn’t take much to lose that “green coat”. One majority government is often all it takes.
Our majority Conservative government isn’t just allowing the extraction of tar sands. It is planing the expansion of the project, planing major pipelines (through pristine ecosystems) to export the bitumen and has systematically gutted Environment Canada is order to remove any kind of scientific obstacle to the irresponsible extraction of oil, gas and minerals from our country. All in the name of the economy. And the sad part is that none of those resources are actually used by Canadians. Canada has no energy policy. All we have is an exportation policy.
In the meantime, there is little to no effort going into the transition to renewable energy or the infrastructure improvements needed for that transition. There is also little research and literally no funding available for new research into climate change adaptation. (And that is a big problem for places like Prince Edward Island where I live. We are already seeing incredible rates of soil erosion – our island is made of soft sandstone. And since 65% of the land value on the island is coastal, the financial impact could be catastrophic.)
All in all, it is a sad state of affairs. I can only hope that your government can be convinced off the path it seems to be on.
Posted by jpgreenword | March 12, 2012, 12:27