NZ's green image takes bashing

CLEAN, GREEN: The difference between New Zealand and other places is that New Zealand has actively sold itself as "100 Percent Pure", said the Economist.

Relevant offers

The Economist Magazine has criticised the Government's decision to mine on protected land, in part of an article lashing the country's green credentials.

The Government has proposed removing 7058 hectares from the protected status of schedule four of the Crown Minerals Act.

The online article said opening up conservation land to mining was something the dwarves in the Hobbit might like, but "is not popular with more elvish sensibilities''.

"Energetic lobbying by environmental groups forced it to scale back the amount of land under consideration, but on March 22nd it announced that it still intended to open 7000 hectares of conservation land to mining, with other conservation areas to be surveyed for their mineral potential."

The article listed the move as one of several detrimental steps the Government was taking.

It picked up on remarks in an earlier Guardian column criticising New Zealand for Greenwash over its 100 percent pure marketing claims, while the country continued to increase greenhouse gas emissions, had the world's third-highest rate of car ownership, and "methane-belching cows" that helped push agricultural emissions to almost half the country's total.

The Economist said previously New Zealand had been able to combat threats to its green image and had argued against food miles concerns using research showing how efficient local food producers were.

While the article acknowledged there had been improvements in some areas and saw the emissions trading scheme and global initiative on reducing agricultural greenhouse-gas emissions as positives.

"From an environmentalist's perspective, though, these positives are outweighed by much larger negatives."

The article criticised elements of the ETS and the mining proposals.

"In many ways, the dilemma New Zealand faces is no different to that of other rich countries-how to balance economic growth with the need to address environmental degradation. But it is particularly acute in a country so dependent on the export of commodities and landscape-driven tourism. The difference between New Zealand and other places is that New Zealand has actively sold itself as "100 Percent Pure".

"Now that New Zealanders themselves are acknowledging the gap between the claim and reality, and the risk to their reputation this poses, it is time for the country to find itself a more sustainable brand, and soon."

- NZPA