Closing the Deal: Principals, Agents, and Subagents in New Zealand Land Reform

Brower, Ann; Meguire, Philip; Monks, Adrian

doi:10.3368/le.86.3.467

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the prices agreed to in negotiation closely resemble the runholders' demand curve for freehold land. In other words, the Crown paid whatever it took to close land reform deals (Brower et al 2010). Again, this is inconsistent with the assumptions of the encroachment narrative.…”

Section: Landscape Transformation Financial Gains and Bargaining Skillmentioning

confidence: 43%

“…This conversion to freehold (hereinafter privatisation) has allowed for much of the new viticulture near the resort town of Queenstown, residential subdivisions along Lakes Wakatipu and Wanaka, and the 'for sale' signs that sprinkle the Central Otago hills (Brower 2008, Brower et al 2010, 2011. The privatisation is also instigating a landscape transformation.…”

Section: Landscape Transformation Financial Gains and Bargaining Skillmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the face of it, it seems that what the Crown soldthe option to develop land -would be more valuable than what it bought -the option to graze the unforgiving, high altitude country deemed incapable of other economic use. Yet the Crown paid runholders NZ$22,682,991 more for the grazing option than runholders paid the Crown for the development option (Brower et al 2010).…”

Section: Landscape Transformation Financial Gains and Bargaining Skillmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The myth of encroachment

Brower

2012

Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars of pastoralism often refer to changes of pastoral land tenure as 'encroachment.' The New Zealand case of pastoral land tenure reform suggests that this is incorrect for several reasons. First it takes the point of view of the pastoralist, which introduces unnecessary bias. Second, it assumes that all changes in land tenure are situations in which the state, or another powerful agent, takes land away from the less powerful pastoralists. Third, it assumes a single immutable power relation between the state (or other external actor initiating land tenure reform) and the pastoralist in which the state is more powerful and is only too happy to exercise its power whilst expropriating the pastoralists of the land they use. The term 'encroachment' implies that there is just one pattern of land tenure change. I suggest that land tenure reform is a more apt, less biased, descriptor.

show abstract

Section: Landscape Transformation Financial Gains and Bargaining Skillmentioning

confidence: 43%

Section: Landscape Transformation Financial Gains and Bargaining Skillmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Landscape Transformation Financial Gains and Bargaining Skillmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The myth of encroachment

Brower

2012

Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Drier areas require more inputs (such as irrigation and fertiliser) to sustain moderate to high productivity because they are naturally less fertile and growth is seasonally limited by soil moisture (e.g. Brower et al 2010;Monks et al 2012). Interestingly, in 2001Interestingly, in -2008 there was a weak trend for much of the increase in clearance probability taking place at sites with lower rainfall variability, whereas this effect had disappeared again by 2008-2015 ( Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…However, land protected for conservation purposes was mostly not initially suitable for agriculture, and so mountainous regions are over-represented and lowland areas are poorly represented (Cieraad et al 2015). This pattern has continued through the tenure review process, which has overseen the retirement of thousands of hectares of Crown pastoral lease into public conservation lands, mostly at higher elevations (Brower et al 2010;Cieraad et al 2015) and the privatisation and often consequent subdivision and development of land at lower elevations (Walker et al 2008a;Brower & Page 2017). As a result, indigenous cover that now remains on low-elevation private land is critical to landscape-scale ecological integrity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attrition of recommended areas for protection: clearance of ecologically significant vegetation on private land

Monks¹,

Hayman²,

Walker³

2019

NZJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The area of indigenous vegetation and habitat remaining on New Zealand's primary agricultural lands continues to decrease, but it has been difficult to obtain reliable estimates of the extent and causes of loss. We assess change and identify predictors of vegetation clearance in 856 recommended areas for protection (RAPs) from 35 ecological districts in the North and South Islands, New Zealand, for the period 1989 to 2015. Over 27 years, 7152 ha of these RAPs were cleared (2.3% by area), with rates varying over space and time. Native forest was least commonly cleared (422 ha removed), followed by native non-woody vegetation (1294 ha), native shrubland (1378 ha), and 'other' vegetation (4058 ha). The probability of clearance peaked during 2001 to 2008 at 0.14% yr-1 , but it was still nearly double the 1989-2001 levels (0.06% yr-1) from 2008 to 2015 (0.11% yr-1). The annualised clearance probabilities after 2001 were comparable to the rates of deforestation in the pre-1840 period of human settlement and about a third of that recorded from 1840 to 1970, the most intensive known period of anthropogenic clearance in New Zealand. Clearance rates were higher around the edges of small RAPs without legal protection and in drier, cooler areas, generally and increasingly over time. Amount of surrounding cropping/horticulture was negatively associated with clearance, as initially was dairy before developing a slightly positive association. Forestry was positively associated with clearance up until 2008. Our results show proportionally greater clearance of marginal agricultural land with high biodiversity values as time goes on, probably facilitated by the increasing use of technology, such as irrigation and fertilisation, to circumvent environmental limitations to plant growth. These results demonstrate ongoing attrition of the highest-value native habitat remaining on private land, and the inadequacy of the current protection framework to safeguard it.

show abstract

The Value of Validated Vulnerability Data for Conservation Planning in Rapidly Changing Landscapes

Weeks

Walker

Overton

et al. 2013

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data needed for informed conservation prioritization are generally greater than the data available, and surrogates are often used. Although the need to anticipate threats is recognized, the effectiveness of surrogates for predicting habitat loss (or vulnerability) to land-use change is seldom tested. Here, we compared properties of two different vulnerability surrogates to validated vulnerability-validated prediction of habitat conversion based on a recent assessment of land-use change. We found that neither surrogate was a particularly effective predictor of vulnerability. Importantly, both surrogates performed poorly in places most imminently threatened with habitat conversion. We also show that the majority of areas protected over the last two decades have low vulnerability to the most active threatening process in this biome (habitat conversion). The contrary patterns of vulnerability and protection suggest that use of validated vulnerability would help to clarify protection needs, which might lead to the improvement of conservation decisions. Our study suggests the integration of validated vulnerability into conservation planning tools may be an important requirement for effective conservation planning in rapidly changing landscapes. We apply our results to discuss the practical considerations and potential value of incorporating validated vulnerability into conservation planning tools both generally and in the context of New Zealand's indigenous grasslands.

show abstract

Closing the Deal: Principals, Agents, and Subagents in New Zealand Land Reform

Cited by 10 publications

References 24 publications

The myth of encroachment

The myth of encroachment

Attrition of recommended areas for protection: clearance of ecologically significant vegetation on private land

The Value of Validated Vulnerability Data for Conservation Planning in Rapidly Changing Landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About