From Low Jump to High Jump: Adventure recreation and the criminal law in New Zealand

Abstract

Until recently, New Zealand law set a very low threshold for culpability under criminal nuisance or criminal negligence and this threatened to impact negatively on the provision of adventure recreation. In 2004, a new interpretation of criminal nuisance was introduced and this, too, is potentially damaging for adventure recreation by raising the bar to criminal culpability too high. In this paper, we consider the implications of the law of criminal nuisance for New Zealand recreation in general, and we take risk recreations (also known as adventure recreations) as particular cases in which the threshold could have far-reaching detrimental consequences for recreation provision and participation. Comparison with interpretations of criminal negligence (and civil in Australia) in other common law jurisdictions and a review of the New Zealand adventure recreation culture shows that the swing from a low jump to a high jump for culpability is not in the best interests of recreation in New Zealand.

Exploring motivations for adventure recreation events: a New Zealand study

“…In both New Zealand and Australia, adventure events are organised and managed by a mix of individuals, clubs and other non-profit organisations, and corporations (Hunter, 2006;Reid & Ritchie, 2011). They provide recreation opportunities and in New Zealand, at least, contribute to a strong culture of active physical recreation participation (Lynch & Jonson, 2007). The capacity for participative choice makes these events attractive to a wide range of individuals, whose motivations may lie in this freedom of choice.…”

“…Breaching the norm is consistent with the concept of adventure (Lynch & Moore, 2004) but can produce problems when practised in events settings. In light of the significant exposure that adventure recreation event managers have to legal litigation should accidents occur (Lynch & Jonson, 2007), closer investigation of this connection is warranted.…”

“…Beside its value for leisure theorising, knowledge about motivations can be used to inform event design and implementation and in policy and planning decisions (as Lynch and Jonson (2007) have suggested in relation to interpreting criminal law in accidental injury cases). In a physical activity and health context, for example, there is some evidence that involvement in organised outdoor recreation activities such as mountain biking motivates novices to become longer-term participants (Reis, Thompson, Lovelock & Boyes, 2010;Zink, 2012), but little is known about the potential for adventure recreation events in particular to have a similar effect.…”

Adventure cultures: an international comparison

“…Higher proportions of New Zealanders participate in outdoor 'adventure' recreations than do Australians and UK citizens (Lynch & Jonson, 2007). Through national trade and tourism promotions, New Zealand-ness has been promoted as risk-taking, adventurous and innovative in fields well beyond, but including, outdoor recreation, outdoor education and tourism (Bentley, Page & Macky, 2007;Blumberg, 2008;Cater, 2006;Cloke & Perkins, 1998;ODENZ, n.d.).…”

“…According to 2006 recreation participation data, New Zealanders were among the most physically active national populations in the Western world (Van Aalst, Kazakov & McLean, 2003;Lynch & Jonson, 2007). Higher proportions of New Zealanders participate in outdoor 'adventure' recreations than do Australians and UK citizens (Lynch & Jonson, 2007).…”