Contesting governance of indigenous forests in New Zealand: The case of the West Coast Forest Accord

Abstract

This paper uses the concept of 'governance' and the related notion of 'multi-layered' forest management decision making as an overarching framework for analysis of conflict between different stakeholder groups with contrasting perceptions about 'appropriate' use of indigenous forests in a New Zealand case study. In New Zealand, recent institutional reforms inspired by neo-liberal policy agendas have led to substantial conflicts between segments of society over the 'appropriate' governance of remnant indigenous forests. This study focuses on the West Coast Forest Accord (WCFA) as an illustration of the attempt to change governance structures of indigenous forest management by re-regulating the indigenous forest industry. It is argued that by seeking to accommodate multiple stakeholder interests, in particular industry, community and environmental groups, the WCFA was doomed to fail, as multiple, and often conflicting, stakeholder agendas focused on the goal of 'sustainable management' of indigenous forests could no longer be reconciled. Notwithstanding the shift in emphasis from government towards governance in the recent literature, the study findings confirm a continuing strong role by the state as an actor in the forestry sector in New Zealand.

The contested environmental governance of Maori-owned native forests in South Island, Aotearoa/New Zealand

“…Chipmilling on SILNA lands lasted from 1979 to 2004 when an export ban was put in place by the New Zealand government on environmental grounds (Memon and Wilson, 2007;NZMAF, 2009). Simultaneously, Japanese demand for New Zealand native timber woodchips ceased, as both the source from New Zealand became too uncertain on political and environmental grounds, and as Japan shifted its interest towards woodchips from other countries.…”

Environmental protest in New Zealand (1997–2010)

“…This period of relative calm was broken by the decision of Timberlands West Coast Limited (TWCL; a state agency tasked with harvesting native timber) to apply to resurrect the sustained yield of native beech trees in 1996. Although the application did not violate the terms of the WCFA, it ‘galvanised an alliance of environmental groups led by the newly formed Native Forest Action, a group of dedicated “deep green” young activists, who demanded immediate termination of logging’ (Memon and Wilson : 755). In pursuing its campaign, Native Forest Action (NFA) relied on direct action and was supported by more moderate groups such as the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society (Gullette ).…”

“…This sustained campaign saw a split within the political establishment, providing an opportunity for campaign success. The governing National party continued to back TWCL and gave formal approval for the Beech scheme in 1998 (Memon and Wilson ). The opposition Labour party (together with future coalition partners, the Green and Alliance parties) supported the campaign to end native logging on the West Coast and ‘drafted the conservationist position onto their election platform and declared that if elected they would end all harvesting of indigenous forests species’ (Gullette : 8).…”

“…The opposition Labour party (together with future coalition partners, the Green and Alliance parties) supported the campaign to end native logging on the West Coast and ‘drafted the conservationist position onto their election platform and declared that if elected they would end all harvesting of indigenous forests species’ (Gullette : 8). Following the 1999 elections the Labour‐Alliance coalition moved to end native forest logging, setting a date of 2002 (Memon and Wilson ).…”

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

“…Although the campaign focused on the preservation of an ecologically sensitive area, it was also linked to groups and actors focused on issues of climate change. The location of the mine on the remote West Coast meant that there was little local support, as mining was seen as a necessary industry following the end of native forest logging in the region (Memon & Wilson 2007;Conradson & Pawson 2009). The inability of the campaign to generate local support, coupled with the economic importance of mining in the region, in part explain why it was ultimately unsuccessful in halting the operation.…”