Fragmentation or Evolution? Understanding Change Within the New Zealand Environmental Movement

Abstract

The contemporary New Zealand environmental movement emerged in the 1960s to challenge large-scale development projects, represented by the 'Save Manapouri' campaign. The movement grew in the 1970s and 1980s before subsequently declining in scale, reflecting partial success with the institutionalization of environmental issues. Concurrent with institutionalization and declining levels of activism has been growth in the number and range of community-based environmental groups. This article draws on interviews conducted with activists and officials to develop an understanding of the relationship between these trends. The aim is to (1) outline the factors that have shaped the character of the New Zealand environmental movement and (2) determine how the movement has evolved in relation to external pressures. The findings suggest that although the environmental movement is less visible than in earlier periods, it retains an important position, with latent potential for future mobilization.

Moving at the Speed of Trust: Radical and Progressive Change through Climate Justice Movements in Aotearoa

“…Beginning in 1969 in Invercargill, the campaign mobilised in response to government negotiations to damn Lake Manapōuri in Fiordland National Park without public consultation (Mark et al, 2001;K. Mills, 2009;Nathan, 2015;O'Brien, 2012O'Brien, , 2013b. A petition to preserve the level of the lake was launched in 1970, and it gathered over a quarter of a million signatures, making it the largest at the time, and, as a result, the Labour Party government conceded (Downes, 2000;Memon, 1993;Wilson, 1982).…”

“…In the 1970s, movement focus then shifted to native forest logging, which required more direct action and disruption (O'Brien, 2013b). Major protests against the logging of native forests occurred between 1975 and 1985, prompting the creation of several environmental, forest-focused groups (Nathan, 2015).…”

“…The Accord subsequently became a catalyst for division within the movement, notes Downes (2000), between those who entered and those who did not. Many groups devolved or merged to create new ones, creating internal tension, with some activists leaving the movement altogether (O'Brien, 2013b). The movement was revived in the late 1990s in the West Coast by Native Forest Action when a lack of political elite consensus enabled a sustained campaign to shift public opinion and, subsequently, the incoming government (O'Brien, 2012).…”

“…The RMA made the relationship with the state more ambiguous, and while it outlined responsibilities for government and encouraged localisation, participation, and consultation, it was overly technocratic (Downes, 2000;T. Jackson & Dixon, 2007;O'Brien, 2013b). Downes (2000) found that movement imperatives happened to be compatible with elements within the Lange Labour government and, as such, were included, but other government imperatives (economic; in this case market liberalisation) remained primary.…”

“…They are 'routinised', 'scientised' and made inaccessible to the public, which reduces the drama that enables mobilisation (Downes, 2000). With increased inclusion and complexity of issues, it has become harder to articulate clear positions in relation to the state (O'Brien, 2013b). Furthermore, while overt state exclusion enables movement unity, limited inclusion undermines it (Downes, 2000).…”