Carnivalesque activism as a public relations genre: A case study of the New Zealand group Mothers Against Genetic Engineering

Camping, climbing trees and marching to Parliament: spatial dimensions of environmental protest in New Zealand

“…This expression of concern led to the establishment of a Royal Commission on Genetic Modification (RCGM) in July 2000 and the imposition of a moratorium on field trials (Wright & Kurian 2010). Reporting back in July 2001, the RCGM recommended allowing commercial field trials (Weaver 2010), going against the majority of submissions and public opinion (Henderson 2005). To allow time to develop the necessary regulatory frameworks, the government put in place a temporary moratorium on field trials until October 2003 (Weaver 2010).…”

“…Reporting back in July 2001, the RCGM recommended allowing commercial field trials (Weaver 2010), going against the majority of submissions and public opinion (Henderson 2005). To allow time to develop the necessary regulatory frameworks, the government put in place a temporary moratorium on field trials until October 2003 (Weaver 2010). In the face of the drive towards the likely resumption of field trials, protests continued through 2001 and into 2002.…”

Environmental protest in New Zealand (1997–2010)

“…In July 2001 RCGM recommended, ‘New Zealand should “preserve opportunities” and allow medical research and commercial field trials of GE products’ (Weaver : 36). This finding was contrary to the overwhelming majority of submissions that opposed GE in food and the environment, as well as a ‘public survey showing that over 50%…felt that there were disadvantages in using genetic modification’ (Henderson : 120).…”

“…During this time, opponents organized a series of protests involving gatherings across the country (McClean ) and novel displays, such as a giant GE‐free sandwich ( New Zealand Press Association ), to raise awareness and put pressure on the government. In October the ‘moratorium on GE research was extended until 30 October 2003, while regulatory frameworks for the science were developed’ (Weaver : 36). This signalled that the campaign by the anti‐GE free groups had been effectively lost, as the government appeared to take the position that ‘no potentially lucrative aspect of the ‘knowledge economy’ should be allowed to pass New Zealand by’ (Bale 2002: 142).…”

“…In addition to established environmental groups, new groups such as Mothers Against Genetic Engineering (MAdGE) emerged. MAdGE undertook a range of high profile actions and focused specifically on encouraging mothers to oppose GE technology in food, adopting a carnivalesque strategy centred on ‘creating an emotional space for protest that other anti‐GE groups … were unable to occupy’ (Weaver : 37). During September and October 2003 there was an increase in the number of actions taking place in the lead up to the lifting of the GE moratorium, as the groups tried to force the government to make the moratorium permanent.…”