Climate change and Aotearoa New Zealand

Advanced Review

Climate change and AotearoaNew ZealandDebbie Hopkins,1 Colin Campbell-Hunt,2 Lynette Carter,3

James E. S. Higham4 and Chris Rosin1*

With a population of 4.5 million, New Zealand’s contribution to total global green-house gas (GHG) emissions is relatively low. On a per capita basis, however,New Zealand’s GHG emissions are the fifth highest among Annex 1 countries,due in part to the relative size of the pastoral agricultural sector. Biophysical impactsof climate change will largely extend current climate trends, with high regional var-iability. A review of climate change literature identifies three key risks forNew Zealand relating to economic connectedness, perceptions of ‘clean, green’New Zealand, and social equity. Since 2008, New Zealand’s main mitigationresponse has been the emissions trading scheme (NZ ETS), yet the ETS is currentlyproviding little by way of meaningful incentives for behavior change and low-carbon investment. Moreover, since declining to enter the second commitmentperiod of the Kyoto protocol, engagement with global climate governance has beenmodest, and recently released emissions reduction targets have raised questionsover New Zealand’s responsibilities as a global citizen. In this paper, adaptiveresponses are considered in connection to key industries (agriculture, tourism)and communities (coastal, M�aori), and examine the devolved structure of adapta-tion. Mainstream media reporting of climate change in New Zealand appears tobe aligned with the scientific consensus position, yet it continues to frame climatechange as a political issue, prioritizing political over scientific voices. Public percep-tions of climate change provide evidence of continued uncertainty relating to humanattribution, and depict climate change as a spatially distanced risk which could affectsupport for government action on climate change. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

How to cite this article:WIREs Clim Change 2015. doi: 10.1002/wcc.355

INTRODUCTION

As a country with diverse climatic systems, from thesubtropical north to the temperate alpine south,

Aotearoa New Zealanda (New Zealand hereafter) will

be affected by a range of climate change impacts thatlargely extend current climate trends. This is projectedto include; rising mean air and sea temperatures,increasing hot extremes, changes to the frequencyand intensity of flooding and drought events, reducedsnowfall, a reduction to the volume and length of gla-ciers, and sea level rise.1 The risks associated with thesebiophysical changes are heightened by New Zealand’ssociocultural and economic reliance on naturalresources and climatic features. Agriculture, fisheries,forestry, and tourism are all important at nationaland local scales and will be affected by biophysicalchanges to the climate, national and global responsesto climate change, and global perceptions ofNew Zealand’s natural environment. This article pre-sents a review of the impacts and implications of cli-mate change for New Zealand and examines the

*Correspondence to: [email protected] for Sustainability, University of Otago, Dunedin,New Zealand2Department of Accountancy & Finance, University of Otago, Dun-edin, New Zealand3Te Tumu, School of M�aori, Pacific and Indigenous Studies, Univer-sity of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand4Department of Tourism, University of Otago, Dunedin,New Zealand

Conflict of interest: The authors have declared no conflicts of interestfor this article.

© 2015 Wiley Per iodicals , Inc .

risks from and responses to climate change on local,national, and global scales.

NEWZEALAND: LANDOFTHE LONGWHITE CLOUD

New Zealand is a relatively prosperous,b geographi-cally isolated cluster of islands in the South Pacific.At more than 1600 km in length and with a land areaof 270,500 km2 New Zealand is slightly larger thanthe United Kingdom, but with an estimated residentdomestic population in 2014 of just 4.5 million peo-ple.2 Thus New Zealand has a low population density,averaging approximately 15 inhabitants per km2,3 halfthe average of other Organisation for Economic Coop-eration and Development (OECD) countries. YetNew Zealand is highly urbanized, with over 86% ofthe population residing in urban centers,4 presentingsimilar urbanization levels to Brazil, Sweden, andDenmark.

With Australia, the nearest large landmass, lyingmore than 2000 kmaway,NewZealand’s is amaritimeclimate, characterized by two long, thin, mountainousislands extending from the warm subtropical north(~35�S) to the cool temperate south (~47�S). Overall,New Zealand has a highly variable climate, makingthe detection and projection of anthropogenic climatechange particularly challenging.1 Significant climateinfluences include the southern hemisphere storm trackand frequent incursions ofwarm, sometimes verymoistair from the subtropics. Modes of variability affectingNewZealand include the ElNiño SouthernOscillation,

the Southern Annular Mode, and the Inter-decadalPacific Oscillation. New Zealand’s mountainous ter-rain shapes significant local variability, and creates abarrier to the prevailing westerly wind. Microclimatesare common, creating quite distinct climate regions,including semi-arid conditions in some inland areas,extra-tropical rainforest in the Southwest, and areasof intense winds in the central strait between the twolargest islands.

Resource-based sectors are important toNew Zealand’s economy. These sectors rely on exportmarkets with goods and service exports representingabout 30% of New Zealand’s gross domestic product(GDP), close to the OECD average. It is thought that79%of export services and products are sensitive to cli-mate change.5 International markets will have a signif-icant role in shaping the vulnerabilities andopportunities for New Zealand, not only through eco-nomic and market changes but also through percep-tions of New Zealand and its products. A ‘clean,green 100% pure’ global brand has been used to con-struct imagery of sustainability and environmentalismfor New Zealand’s export products.6 Protecting thisbrand is of increasing importance due to growing con-sumer demands for products and services with clearlydefined ‘ecological provenance,’ or value-chain integ-rity.7 This presents an imperative for New Zealandto be engaging with global climate regimes.

New Zealand’s total greenhouse gas (GHG)emissions are comparatively low, accounting forapproximately 0.15% of global emissions. YetNew Zealand’s per capita emissions are high(Figure 1).8 Since 1990, New Zealand’s total emissions

5

10

15

Tons p

er

pers

on

20

25

30

All gases

CO2 only

0New Zealand Australia United Kingdom Japan United States Annex 1

average

FIGURE 1 | International comparisons for per capita emissions in 2011. Source: Ministry for the Environment, 2014

Advanced Review wires.wiley.com/climatechange

© 2015 Wiley Per iodicals , Inc.

have increased by 21%, an average annual increase of0.9%per year. There are five sources that have contrib-uted the most to the increase in total GHG emissions:carbon dioxide (CO2) from road transport and electric-ity generation, nitrous oxide (N2O) from agriculturalsoils, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) released from indus-trial and household refrigeration and air-conditioningsystems, and methane (CH4) from livestock digestivesystems.9 New Zealand’s net GHG emissionsc havealso increased, from 38,065.71 kt CO2-equivalent(CO2-e) in 1990, to 54,200.53 kt CO2-e in 2013.9

Net removals of 20,464.40 kt CO2-e in 2013 arosefrom land subject to afforestation, reforestation, defor-estation, and forest management.9

In comparison to other developed economies,NewZealand presents an unusual GHG emissions pro-file10 (Figure 2). This is the result of the relative size ofNew Zealand’s pastoral agricultural sector comparedto other economic sectors, along with the large shareof low-carbon sources of electricity. Agriculture repre-sents the largest source of GHG emissions forNew Zealand9 accounting for 48% of total emissionsin 2013.d The average CO2 contribution toGHG emis-sions for Annex 1 countries is 81%.11 In NewZealand,however, CH4 and N2O account for over half of thetotal GHG emissions, with CO2 contributing 45%.

A Brief History of New ZealandNew Zealand is an archipelago of islands, the two lar-gest of which account for nearly 99% of the total landarea12 (Figure 3). It was one of the last habitable, tem-perate land masses to be colonized by humans.12 Thefirst settlers of New Zealand were ancestors of theindigenous people, the M�aori, who settled inNew Zealand around 1280 AD,13 much later thanthe rest of the Pacific rim, which was inhabited from12,000 to 60,000 years ago.12 There are a number oforal traditions that explain the arrival of Polynesian

explorers and settlers inNewZealand. AM�aori legend,particularly common to North Island tribes, states thatwhen Polynesian navigator Kupe and his wife discov-ered the land mass of New Zealand, it first appearedto them as land beneath a cloud, and they named theland Aotearoa – the land of the long white cloud –

the original M�aori name for New Zealand.Over a number of years, waves of Polynesian

voyaging led to permanent settlement, rapiddispersal and the development of distinct regionalNew Zealand M�aori cultures and populations. Settle-ment sites were initially restricted by climate.13 Early

1.98

5.98

10.9

45.06

2.45

New Zealand (%) Annex 1 average (%)

CO2

CH4

N2O

HFCs+PFCs+SF6

14.31

38.1881.14

FIGURE 2 | GHG emissions by gas, New Zealand and Annex 1 countries in 2012. Data sourced from: United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change14

North Island/

Te Ika a Maui

South Island/Te

Wai Pounamu

Stewart Island/

Rakiura

FIGURE 3 | Map of Aotearoa New Zealand

WIREs Climate Change Climate change and Aotearoa New Zealand


M�aori settlers had to adjust to cooler temperaturesand different seasonal patterns than their formerhomes. Consequently, they developed ways of moni-toring, planning for, and adapting to their new climate,which contributed to the development of M�aorienvironmental knowledge, or M�atauranga taiao.15,16

A kaupapa M�aori (M�aori principles) environmentalapproach focuses on concepts of connection and bal-ance which views the environment, spirituality, andhuman activity as interwoven. Aparticularly importantfeature of this is Kaitiakitanga; guardianship and pro-tection of the environment in perpetuity. Close connec-tions to past and future generations make M�aoriapproaches to climate change particularly relevant.A range of studies have successfully highlighted thesignificance of this indigenous knowledge,15–17

which represents an important way by which to under-stand hazard and risk in New Zealand. It has beenargued that theM�aori world view needs tomore mean-ingfully inform New Zealand’s responses to climatechange.18

New Zealand’s political system is dominated bythe two largest and oldest political parties; the NationalParty (centre-right) and the Labour Party (centre-left).NewZealand also has political presence from the Greenparty (left, environmental) and several other smaller par-ties. In the September 2014 general election, the threemain parties received 48% (National), 25% (Labour),and 10% (Green), accounting for over 83% of allvotes.19 New Zealand’s dominant political parties havearticulated the need to act on climate change and in the2014 campaign climate change mitigation policiesincluded; maintaining the New Zealand EmissionsTrading Scheme (NZETS) (National Party), strengthen-ing the NZ ETS (Labour Party), and replacing the ETSwith a carbon tax (Green Party).

While rhetorically in agreement over the reality ofclimate change as a risk for New Zealand, there aresome key differences in how climate change has fea-tured in the actions of the political parties, particularlyrelating to New Zealand’s roles and responsibilities ona global scale. For example, former Labour PrimeMin-ister Helen Clarke (1999–2008), frequently spoke ofthe value of New Zealand being a world leader on sus-tainability issues20 and put in place programmesincluding the Carbon Neutral Public Service whichsought to move 34 core government departmentstoward carbon neutrality.21 The National Party gov-ernment (2008–present), on the other hand, has beenmore moderate in response to climate change, evi-denced through their weakening of the NZ ETS andexplicit statements that NewZealandwill be a ‘fast fol-lower’ rather than a global leader in climatemitigation.22

HAZARDS, RISKS,AND OPPORTUNITIES

Climate change is one of many environmental hazardsthat feature in New Zealand’s risk profile. Situated onthe edge of the Pacific and Australian plates, an activeplate boundary, New Zealand is subject to a range ofgeological hazards including earthquakes and volcaniceruptions.23 A history of hydro-meteorological eventsalso expose New Zealanders to frequent occurrencesof flooding, drought, landslides, coastal storms, anderosion. Although these hazards are longstanding,New Zealanders are increasingly exposed to risk dueto transformation of the natural environment andphysical development patterns.23,24 It is not thoughtthat climate change will introduce new types ofhydro-meteorological hazards for New Zealand, butit is likely to affect the hazard drivers and thereby themagnitude and frequency of existing hydro-meteoro-logical hazards.25 In 2015 alone, flooding events haveprovided clear evidence of the social and financial con-sequences of increasing hydro-meteorological risk.

Biophysical Changes toNew Zealand’s ClimateObserved changes to mean air temperature identify anincrease of 0.09� 0.03�C per decade since 1909.1,26

Research has indicated that these trends cannot beexplained by natural climate variation but are consist-ent with a combined climate response to anthropogenicGHG emissions, ozone depletion, and sulfate aero-sols.27 Thus observed change trends can be partiallyattributed to anthropogenic climate change, with amedium confidence.1 The patterns of change over thenext 50–100 years, depending on emission scenario,include projected magnitudes of mean temperaturechange relative to 1990 of 0.3–1.4�C (2040 A1B),0.7–2.3�C (2090 B1), 1.6–5.1 �C (2090 A1FI),1,28

increased risk of high temperatures (>25�C), enhancedwesterly winds, stronger west–east rainfall gradient,increased flooding, decreased soil moisture, risingsnowline, glacier shrinkage and decreased frost events,and sea-level rise.1 There is evidence that extremeweather, damaging storms, and heavy precipitationevents will become more common.1,29 One of the mostconsistent features of climate change projections forNew Zealand is that, due to its deep mixed layer, thesouthern ocean will experience reduced warming com-pared with the global mean, thus fairly moderate shiftsin seasonal and annual mean temperatures areexpected. Yet there are currently only partial under-standings of the biophysical (and socioeconomic)impacts of climate change for New Zealand, as these



understandings are ‘based on limited studies that oftenuse a narrow set of assumptions, models and data andhence have not explored the full range of potential out-comes’1 (p. 5). Developing understandings of the rangeof possible futures is a research and policy priority.

New Zealand also has mixed historical climaterecords. For instance, while there are reliable tempera-ture records from climate stations dating to the early1900s30 and good records of glacier snowlines since1977, a national snow monitoring network was onlyestablished in 2006.31,32 The limitations in historicalclimate data make it difficult to detect changes withconfidence. Moreover, while current projections sug-gest that New Zealand will be less of a climate changehotspot than Australia, this does not necessarily implythat New Zealand will face lower climate change risk.As exposure is comparatively high, and relatively littlethinking has been given to the wide-ranging implica-tions of climate change, including how sectors mightbest adapt, New Zealand’s vulnerability might beincreased as a result of delayed, incremental, or reactiveadaptation.33

There is evidence that national-scale meanchanges will not be useful for determining magnitudesof risk, nor adaptive requirements. With that in mind,while New Zealand has experienced a trend of 0.96�0.29�C per century temperature increase (Figure 4),30

this has manifest differently across spatial scales. Win-ter is forecast to experience the greatest temperatureincreases resulting in changes to the extent, depth,duration, and quality of snow across New Zealand.34

This is expected to have severe implications forhydro-electric generation, agriculture, and tourism.32

Sea level rise is consistent with global mean trendsand is likely to exceed the historical rate

(1971–2010), with a range of implications for the highproportion of low-lying (<10m) urban settlements35

and coastal communities.36 Over the past century,NewZealand’s relative sea levels have risen by an aver-age of 0.16 m, comparable to global rates over the sametime period,25 but with variability across North Islandand South Island ports (Figure 5). At the same time,there has been a marked increase in coastal develop-ment (e.g., homes and infrastructure) alongNew Zealand’s coasts, increasing vulnerability to sea-level rise and extreme weather events.25,37,38

Economic ConnectednessNew Zealand’s economy is interconnected to globalprocesses through ‘international policies, technologies,trade and flow of people, goods, and services’39

(p. 40). The New Zealand economy is export focused,with key markets including China, Australia, the UnitedStates, and Japan. The primary sector contributed 7.6%to New Zealand’s GDP in 2012, and over 50% of totalexport earnings.40 Dairy is the most important exportcommodity worth NZ$13.5 billion in 2013, and with95% of milk produced in New Zealand exported. Thetourism industry is second to dairy in terms of foreignexchange earnings.41 These dependencies have climatechange implications, with far-reaching consequences,and both direct and indirect impacts.42 Impacts includethe effects of extreme weather events on primary indus-try production, of mitigation policy-related costs, vola-tility of commodity prices, the changing consumptionpreferences of overseas markets, and the perceptionsof New Zealand’s products. However, there are alsopotential opportunities,43 particularly where impactsmay be mitigated by short-term commodity pricerises.43,44

NZ seven-station annual average temperature minus 1971–2000 normal

Year

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010196019501940193019201910–1.5

–1

–0.5

Tem

pera

ture

anom

aly

(°C

)

0

0.5

1

Trend: 0.96 ± 0.29°C/century (1910–2010)

FIGURE 4 | New Zealand’s seven-station annual average temperature, minus 1971–2000 normal. Reproduced by permission of NIWA.30



Domestically, the adverse effects of extremeweather events on agricultural production and exportcapabilities are evident. Droughts in 1997/98 and2013/14 led to significant economic impacts,46,47 high-lighting the exposure of New Zealand’s main exportindustries to climate risk. New Zealand’s agriculturalsectors are rainfall reliant, thus droughts can result insevere short-term macroeconomic impacts.48 A studyby the Reserve Bank of New Zealand found that the2013 drought could have lowered the GDP that yearby around 0.3%. But stressed that: ‘… given thisdrought was materially worse in the North Island(where dry weather has a larger impact on GDP), wefind that annual GDP could be as much as 0.6 percentlower’48 (p. 24). Therefore, variability in rainfall couldhave lasting impacts on New Zealand’s primary indus-tries, and supporting the resilience of these industrieshas been identified as a critical policy objective. Never-theless, for the dairy industry, drought-induced reduc-tions in production have been offset to some degree by acorresponding increase in international dairy pricesand reduction in exchange rates, thus moderating theeconomic impact on the industry.

Based on an integrated analysis, it has been con-cluded that a change of one standard deviation in thenumber of days of soil moisture deficit will reduce agri-cultural gross output by less than 5% inmost cases, witha flow-on effect on New Zealand’s GDP of 0.1%.49

However, the effects are not linear and do not factorthe potential resulting from flooding and landslideevents, events which are likely to increase in frequencyand severity as a result of climate change. Stroomber-gen50 suggests that the direct impact of climate changeon New Zealand’s Real GDP/Real Gross National

Disposable Income (RGNDI) as a result of agriculturaloutput, could be in the order of −0.5% to +0.05%.The most substantial effects on RGNDI arise in scenar-ios where New Zealand’s price for carbon emissions isset well above international levels, where reductions ofRGNDI increase to 2.25%,51 and this has been used tojustify a restrained approach to pricing carbon domes-tically, in the absence of a global agreement.

Perceptions of ‘Clean, Green’NewZealandGlobal perceptions of New Zealand as a producer anda tourism destination are critical to continued eco-nomic prosperity. Yet the impact of New Zealand’sactions on climate change on these perceptionshas received relatively little attention in the global cli-mate change literatures.1,52 New Zealand’s ‘naturalunspoiled beauty’ is a leading tourist attraction,53

and since 1999, the ‘100% Pure New Zealand’ cam-paign has been used to promote New Zealand. Whiletourism focused, this brand has transferred acrossNew Zealand’s export markets to mark a high quality,environmentally sustainable ecological provenanceclaim to New Zealand products. However, speciesextinction, degraded marine environments, pollutedrivers and rising GHG emissions have called this brandinto question.54 The ‘clean, green’ image, it is argued, isnow a temporally distant Utopia or a ‘place myth.’55

Media reporting of New Zealand’s environmental cre-dentials in Australia, the USA and the UK provide evi-dence of New Zealand’s global environmental brandbecoming more vulnerable, with ‘growing unrest anduncertainty about the legitimacy of the “clean, greenand 100% Pure” brand positioning’56 (p.ii).

1.6

1.4

1.2

1

0.8 1.9 mm/yr2.3 mm/yr

1.2 mm/yr

1.5 mm/yr

Relative sea-level rise at 4 main ports (1900 to 2007)

Dunedin

Wellington

Auckland

Lyttelton

Annual m

ean s

ea leve

l (m

)

0.6

0.41900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

FIGURE 5 | Relative sea-level rise at 4 main ports (1990–2007). Adapted from: Hannah & Bell (2012).45



Whether ‘clean, green’ is a national identity ormerely a branding exercise,56 it appears to be losing cred-ibility. When announcing New Zealand’s exit from theKyoto process, Climate Change Minister Tim Groserargued that due to the NZ ETS, perceptions ofNew Zealand would not be affected: ‘I don’t think ourclean, green image is tarnished at all by our climatechange position. Only in Europe, Australia andNewZealandhave yougot anything approaching a com-prehensive price on carbon.’However, regardless of theETS, longitudinal evidence has shown that internationalperceptions of New Zealand’s environmental position-ing do relate to its engagement with global climateregimes.56 This indicates some cause for concern regard-ing global perceptions of New Zealand. Indeed it hasbeen argued that ‘climate change, along with the othermajor environmental (and social) problems of theworld,is a global issue. It is no longer feasible for nation statesto act independently of international opinion. This isespecially so for countries such asNewZealand that relyon access to global markets’57 (p. 15).

The necessity to undertake extreme, long-haultravel to reach New Zealand58 is also at odds withan environmentally ‘100% Pure’ image. This is, there-fore, a risk for New Zealand’s tourism industry boththrough the carbon intensity of travel, and through vul-nerabilities associated with global responses to climatechange, (e.g., a global price on carbon). The Depart-ment of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs(DEFRA) (UK) defines air travel over distances greaterthan 3700 km from origin airport as long-haul, andNew Zealand demands two such flights from all ofits European, and most of its Asian and North Ameri-can inbound tourismmarkets. The preparedness of keytourism markets to continue undertaking this travel ina climate constrained world is a key risk to tourism59

and creates a paradox between ‘clean, green’New Zealand as a tourism destination, and the highcarbon intensity of the required travel. Nevertheless,research to date has indicated an ongoing desire to visitNew Zealand, and a corresponding willingness toreduce regional short-haul flights (e.g., betweenEuropean countries), in order to do so.60,61

Equity and InequalitiesTheequityaspectsofclimatechangehave receivedglobalattention; those who have benefited least from the emis-sion of GHGs are being disproportionately impacted.This is also the case on a national scale, inNew Zealand. The equity impacts of climate change inNewZealand include health impacts fromhousing, foodsecurity and nutrition, physical activity, and diseases.62

Responses to address climate change in many cases will

also address each of these issues.63 For example, redu-cing transport-related carbonemissions through thepro-motion of active transport will have health co-benefitsthrough increased physical activity. Nonetheless, theseissues overly affect disadvantaged populations andindigenous people.64 The key issues for disadvantagedpopulations, including M�aori, Pacific and low-incomehouseholds relate to the capacity of these communitiesto respond to climate change, and the degree of impactexperienced. For example, the M�aori economye isdependent on, and invested in, climate-sensitive tourismofferings, and primary industries; fisheries, forestry,dairy, beef, and wool and horticulture, with high levelsof vulnerability to changing climatic conditions.17,65

While the adverse effects from the environment and soci-oeconomic trends associated with climate change willaffect both non-M�aori and M�aori producers alike, theimpacts may be wider reaching for already disadvan-taged M�aori communities resulting in increased unem-ployment, decreased average income, and poorerhealth outcomes,17,66 thereby exacerbating poverty.67

Climate change has been described as one of themost serious health threats of the 21st century, andwillimpact population groups differently depending ongeographic location, age, ethnicity, health status, andsocioeconomic circumstances.62,68 Health threats forNew Zealand include the direct biophysical impactsof rising temperatures and extreme weather events,the biologically mediated impacts of water and foodscarcity, changing patterns of infectious diseases andsocially mediated impacts relating to climate refugeepopulations, economic change, and loss of livelihoodand mental wellbeing.62,69 There are already a numberof diseases in New Zealand that are sensitive to climatefactors,67 and could already be contributing to negativehealth outcomes.62 It is relatively well-established thatM�aori, Pacific and low-income groups withinNew Zealand are at the greatest risk to climatechange-related health impacts.64,70 Thus the healthimpacts of climate change for New Zealand, as else-where, are intrinsically connected to equity issues formarginalized social groups and addressing these dispa-rities will become increasingly important.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND NEWZEALAND SOCIETY

Public Attitudes to the Environment andClimate ChangePublic perceptions of climate change are divided.Whilesome subgroups and social movements have takenleadership in this area, including Generation Zerof

and Wise Response,g perceptions of climate change



in New Zealand are broadly consistent with otherdeveloped nations. Perceptions are closely aligned withpolitical voting preferences71 and differ across genderand age groups.72 A number of surveys have exploredNew Zealander’s perceptions of climate change

(Table 1). These studies find that New Zealandersare generally ambivalent regarding climate change.Concern ranks lower for climate change than for other,more personally or locally relevant, concerns includinghealthcare,poverty,costof living,andeducation.72,73,75

TABLE 1 | Findings from Five Surveys of Public Perceptions of Climate Change in New Zealand

Authors Method and sample Findings

Stuart, 200972,m Telephone survey with500 randomly selectedNew Zealanders

• 43% think climate change is a serious or very serious concern• Climate change is 8th (out of 9) most serious social concern• 44% agree that there is evidence of climate change and proof of

anthropogenic causation• 36% agree that there is evidence of climate change but saw no clear proof

of anthropogenic causation• 17% perceive natural cycles and no evidence of a problem, and 3% were

unsure• 80% agree that there is evidence that the world is experiencing climate

change and that it is a problem

Horizon Poll, 201271 2829 New Zealanders polled,method not given

• 52% think climate change is either an urgent problem (21%) or a problemfor now (31%)

• 20% stated that climate change isn’t a problem• 64% want parliament to do more to address climate change• 64% said citizens should be making more effort on climate change• In responding to the question “Who should act on global warming?,” 74%

said other countries should be doing more or much more

Horizon Research73 Survey of 2246 New Zealanders(members of the HorizonPollnational online researchpanel), aged 18 and over

• 24.7% of respondents listed global warming/climate change/greenhousegases/the environment as ‘themost important problem facing the world inthe future if nothing is done to stop it’

• 6.9% of respondents identified global warming/ climate change/greenhouse gases/the environment as the most important problem facingNew Zealand

• 57.6% of respondents identified as being ‘concerned’ or ‘very concerned’about the effects of climate change on themselves, and 62.9% wereconcerned about the effects of climate change on society in general

Hughey et al. 201373,n Online survey of 2200 randomsample of New Zealanders

• 21% of respondents believe ‘greenhouse gases, climate change, ozone’ isthe biggest issue facing the world, making it the highest rated global issue

• Just over 5% of respondents believe ‘greenhouse gases, climate change,ozone’ is the biggest issue facing New Zealand, placing it 6th after waterrelated issues, agriculture related issues, hazardous chemicals, waste andmining

Sibley and Kurz, 201374 Survey responses from 6518New Zealanders randomlyselected from the 2009electoral roll

• 13% do not think climate change is real (rating of 1–3 on 7-point Likertscale)

• 33.4% strongly agree that climate change is real (rating of 7)• 21.3% indicated that they do not believe climate change is caused by

humans (rating of 1–3)• 60%agree that climate change is caused by humans, of which 22% strongly

agreed climate change is caused by humans• Four profiles of climate change perceptions: Climate Believers (53%),

Undecided (30%), Climate Sceptics (10%), and Anthropogenic ClimateSceptics (7%)



Half of all New Zealanders are seriously concernedabout climate change and consider it to be a current,rather than future, issue.71–73 Climate change isbroadly conceived as a global rather than nationalconcern,75,76 responsibility for action is perceived tolie with ‘other’ countries, and there is continued uncer-tainty relating to human attribution.74

A national probability sample was used by Sibleyand Kurz,74 who found that 53% of New Zealandersbelieve that climate change is both real and caused byhumans. Their research indicated a high degree of con-sistency in reported beliefs insomuch as respondentswho indicated belief in climate change, also reportedanthropogenic causation to approximately the samestrength.74 Another study found high variability inthe perceived level of impact humans are having onthe climate, but 78% of participants believed humanswere having at least some impact (5–10 on a 10-pointscale).72 However, New Zealander’s perceptions of cli-mate change and associated risks and responses appearto be changing. A 2012Horizon poll found a decline inthe number of New Zealanders who consider climatechange to be an urgent ‘problem for now,’ from 75%in 2008 to 52% in 2012, which may reflect changesin government responses to climate change across thesame period and global climate change narratives.

Since 2000, seven surveys have been administeredto assess public perceptions of the state ofNew Zealand’s environment.75,76 The 2013 surveyfound that water-related issues are perceived to bethe greatest environmental issue for New Zealand,while GHG emissions and climate change are the great-est global issue. This highlights a common perceptionof climate change as being distanced from theNewZealand consciousness, perhaps due to narrativesof New Zealand’s small overall contribution to globalGHG emissions, and reports of relatively limited bio-physical changes in the short to medium term.

Perceptions of responses to climate change indi-cate a desire for the New Zealand government to domore (64%), and for other countries to be ‘doing moreor much more’ (74%).71 Yet there does not appear tobe a strong understanding among the New Zealandpublic about climate change responses, which mayindicate generally low public interest in governmentpolicy. Sixty three percent of participants disagreedor strongly disagreed with the statement ‘I feel fullyinformed about the Emission Trading Scheme’72 whichis noteworthy, given that this is New Zealand’smain response to climate change, but not highly sur-prising. A study by Aitken et al.77 found thatNew Zealander’s who perceived a high risk of climatechange were more likely to report intentions to takeindividual-scale actions to reduce emissions. They also

found that perceptions of others taking action on cli-mate change increased preparedness to act on climatechange, which suggests that social determinants of cli-mate change are critical to leveraging action. Partici-pants who perceived themselves to be well-informedabout anthropogenic climate change were more likelyto consider it to be an urgent risk, and reported lowerlevels of powerlessness tomitigate it. Therefore, currentperceptions of climate change as a distanced risk maybe limiting mobilization of individual-scale actionand support for national-scale responses.

Media Representations and ReportingGiven the importance of being well-informed about cli-mate change risks and impacts, particularly in terms ofleveraging support for action on climate change, therehas been surprisingly little by way of government-led climate change awareness campaigns inNewZealand.77 The role of domestic and internationalmedia is twofold, first as sources of climate changeinformation for theNewZealand public,78 and second,as a tool for communicating and examiningNewZealand’s climate change responses and responsi-bilities to an international audience (Box 1). The waymass and alternative media frame climate change hasreceived significant attention overseas,79,80 and somelimited research in New Zealand.81,82 Climate changereporting in New Zealand’s newspapers appears to berelatively well-informed, albeit with a greater politicalrather than scientific presence. A study ofmedia framesof climate change in New Zealand’s three largest dailybroadsheet newspapers82 found that the main sources,quoted or paraphrased within the articles, were politi-cal actors (33%) and scientists/ academics (20%) andNGOs (13%). Sceptics accounted for just 3% ofsources, and there was little evidence of using‘unnamed experts’ (<1%). These findings indicate aprominence of political voices in media reporting of cli-mate change in NewZealand, which could result in cli-mate change being interwoven with political ideologiesand partisan beliefs, rather than being perceived as ascientific issue.

Kenix81 reported 10 framings of climate changewithin New Zealand’s mainstream and alternativemedia, these are (1) new evidence or research, (2) scien-tific background, (3) consequences, (4) economics,(5) domestic politics, (6) international relations, (7) cur-rent weather, (8) sensationalism, (9) conflict, and(10) morality. While these multiple framings couldreflect the range of public engagement with issuesrelated to weather, climate, and climate change, heter-ogeneous framings can also result in contradictorymes-sages, leading to mixed public perceptions of climate



change impacts and implications for New Zealand.When Chetty et al.82 searched for these and otherframes in New Zealand’s news reporting, the mostprominent frames were politics (26%), social progress(21%), and economic competitiveness (16%)82

(Table 2). The prominence of the ‘Politics’media fram-ing could explain political actors being the main sourceof information. Whether this framing adequately por-trays accurate information on climate science isunclear. Moreover, the dominance of a political frameof climate change could focus on international rolesand responsibilities, which may distance the risk of

climate change for New Zealanders. Likewise, the eco-nomic competitiveness framing could contribute to abusiness-as-usual approach to climate responses. Thesocial progress frame does, however, appear to repre-sent individual capacity to enact change which mayresult in higher perceived levels of personal controland influence.

Media reporting in New Zealand appears tobroadly present the scientific consensus position,82

which focuses on the high level of scientific agreementon climate change. This differs from the ‘scientificuncertainty’ or ‘balanced reporting’ frame, which hasbeen identified internationally, particularly fromBoyk-off et al. in the US print and television newsmedia.80,86,87Nevertheless, the capacity and likelihoodof NewZealand’s media to provide detailed and up-to-date scientific information on climate change isuncertain.

MITIGATION ACROSSSPATIAL SCALES

New Zealand has long had a domestic narrative to theeffect that it ‘punches above its weight’ internationally,by becoming involved in, and championing, globallysignificant issues. This narrative draws fromNew Zealand’s geographic isolation and compara-tively low domestic population, as features that areovercome to be at the forefront of global sociopoliticaland technological issues. Cited instances include thedevelopment of renewable energy (1885), universalsuffrage (1893), antinuclear stance (1984), and thedevelopment of an independent central bank (1989).It is leadership in these issues that has contributed toa self-image of New Zealand as a ‘trail-blazing sociallaboratory,’88 and led to domestic calls forNew Zealand to take a leading role in global climatechange governance. However, while New Zealandhas participated in global climate regimes, ratifyingthe Kyoto Protocol and establishing the NZ ETS,New Zealand’s record on climate change has beenmodest.89

Global Climate GovernanceNew Zealand ratified the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1993,signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1998 and ratified it in2002. Five reasons were given by the New Zealandgovernment to justify this course of action90: (1) risksof climate change associated with growing GHG emis-sions, (2) New Zealand’s reliance on a stable climatefor its prosperity, (3) Kyoto as the only viable interna-tional response to climate change, (4) nonparticipation

BOX 1

INTERNATIONAL MEDIA ANDMISREPRESENTATION OF CLIMATEREFUGEES IN NEW ZEALAND

Despite questions relating to the relevance ofmigration as an immediate or preferred responseto climate change for South Pacific communities,there appears to be international interest inmigration and mobility as adaptation strategies.Moreover, there is evidence of misperceptionsthat New Zealand, as a South Pacific nation,is already providing residence on the groundsof climate change, and as such is being heraldedfor progressive policy and action. ThusNew Zealand has been depicted as both a safehaven in the South Pacific; incorrectly reportingof immigration on the grounds of climatechange, and as a country ignoring the plight ofits neighbors.

One well-documented instance relates toAl Gore’s 2006 documentary ‘An InconvenientTruth’ in which it was claimed that ‘the citizensof these Pacific nations have all had to evacuateto New Zealand.’ This misrepresentation ofPacific migration, which occurs largely for family,educational, and employment reasons, has beenused in a range of contexts by both climate acti-vists and climate change deniers. Yet there is noevidence of an evacuation.83 There has also beenreporting of immigration to New Zealand basedon grounds of climate change, which has beenconfusedwith current and ongoing Pacific Accesscategory visa.84 Where residence applicationson the grounds of climate change have beenreceived, New Zealand has received negativepress for denying residence, leading to newsheadlines provocatively stating: ‘No [climate]refugees please, we’re New Zealanders.’85



damaging the credibility of New Zealand and its repu-tation as a global citizen, (5) due to effective negotia-tions, it was argued that New Zealand was one offew developed countries who couldmake small net eco-nomic gains from the first commitment period.h

NewZealand met its first commitment phase tar-gets of the Kyoto Protocol, which limited average netemissions (2008–2012) to gross 1990 emissions andachieved a surplus equivalent to 90.8 million tons ofCO2.

91 The Assigned Unit Amounts (AUA), interna-tional Kyoto units through the NZ ETS, and RemovalUnits (RMU) from forestry contributed to this net sur-plus position.9,91 Thirty five percent of New Zealand’stotal GHG emissions for 2012 were removed from theatmosphere through forestry (26.6 million tonnes ofCO2−e)

92; however, there has been a 29% decline inCO2-e removals since 1990.92 The forestry sector is

expected to transition to a net emitter from 2017 to2023 when forests planted around 1990 are harvested,reverting back to a net absorber in the late 2030s.93

At Conference of Parties 18 in 2012,NewZealand declined to enter the second commitmentperiod on the grounds that Kyoto had become an ‘out-dated and insufficient’ response to climate change.94

Climate Change Minister Tim Groser argued thatdue to the nonparticipation of the USA, and the emis-sions from emerging economies including China, that‘you cannot seriously argue you are dealing with cli-mate change unless you start to tackle the 85 per centof emissions that are outside [of Kyoto].’94 Neverthe-less, the credibility of New Zealand was called to ques-tion, with environmental lobbyists arguing thatNew Zealand had left Kyoto to join ‘an infamous clubof the world’s dirtiest economies and most belligerent

TABLE 2 | The Three Main Frames Identified by Chetty et al.82 With Example Media Stories

Frame % Theme Example of media story

Politics 26 • Political actors and climate policy• Climate change as a policy issue• Climate change as matter of political strategy/

conflict

‘Associate Climate Minister Tim Groser said drafttexts tabled at the conference on Friday wouldnot be acceptable to the developed world. “Allthe onus is now on the major developing-country emitters.” New Zealand and otherdeveloped nations want developing countriesto agree to cuts in “business as usual”greenhouse gas emissions of between 15 and30 per cent on 1990 levels’83

Social Progress 21 • Citizens, community and business• Solutions and innovations• Efforts to curb emissions as part of broader steps

towards more ‘green,’ sustainable future,energy security

• Adaptation to changing climate

‘A Bethlehem mother-of-two is spearheading aclimate change awareness event in Tauranga.Melany Clement has always been interested inthe environment, but it wasn’t until shebecame a mother that she really startedthinking about the long-term impact we haveon the planet. And when she heard aboutclimate change and the 350 movement, sheknew she wanted to be a part of it. ‘It’s justpeople getting together, standing up andsaying “we have to do something aboutthis”’84

Economic competitive-ness

16 • Potential solutions to climate change as boon/burden to economic competitiveness

• Opportunities and costs• Domestic emissions and the economy• Clean green brand• Potential opportunities

“You’d have also thought a business-savvyGovernment would realise the dangers such aweak response poses to our internationalreputation. As an exporting nation we’re veryvulnerable to changes in purchasingbehaviours caused by growing awarenessabout climate change and environmentalperformance. This is particularly so when ourgoods travel long distances to their markets.We could make a real virtue out of being truly100% pure but instead we place our powerful,compelling national brand at risk by a limpresponse”85



climate wreckers,’95 a group including China, the USA,and Canada. Since this time, the US–China JointAnnouncement on Climate Change has put extra pres-sure on New Zealand to make a commitment to deepGHG reductions.

New Zealand has a series of unconditional andconditional targets for 2020, 2030, and 2050.96 First,an unconditional (end point) target of 5% belowNew Zealand’s 1990 GHG emissions levels by 2020.This was described by the New Zealand governmentas ‘New Zealand’s fair share of climate change action.’Second, a conditional target range of 10–20% reduc-tion below 1990GHG emissions levels by 2020 if thereis a comprehensive global agreement.i The third targetrepresents a 50% reduction in emissions below 1990levels by 2050. The capacity to meet this target wasplaced in doubt by Ministry for the Environment pro-jections that net emissions will reach 90 million tons ofCO2-e by 2040, a 50% rise in emissions from1990 levels97 and surpassing the 2050 target of 29.9million tons of emissions,98 highlighting the need forrealistic transitional pathways toward a low-carbonNew Zealand.

A new, post-2020 target was announced in earlyJuly 2015, following a public consultation periodwhich resulted in over 17,000 written submissions.The target, to reduce GHG emissions to 30% below2005 levels by 2030, has been viewed by some as ‘farweaker’ than the 2020 target, with New Zealand‘now doing far less than its fair share.’99 Thus ratherthan making clear and measurable steps to reduceNew Zealand’s GHG emissions based on an ambi-tious-binding target, New Zealand appears to be outof step with the global narrative, arguably damagingNew Zealand’s reputation as a cooperative global cit-izen, ahead of the 2015 Paris climate negotiations.

National Responses

New Zealand’s Emissions Trading SchemeThe NZ ETS came into effect in September 200898,100

through the ‘Climate Change Response (EmissionsTrading) Amendment Act (2008).’ The aim of theNZ ETS was to reduce New Zealand’s GHG emissionsbelow business-as-usual levels, and to help meet Kyotoobligations. Initially designed by a Labour government(1999–2008), it was heralded as an all sectors, all gases,flexible scheme,101 but also received criticism on onehand for its reliance on offsetting and unambitiousdomestic targets,102 and on the other due to costs tobusinesses. The NZ ETS is the only national emissiontrading scheme to include the forestry sector, a movedesigned to promote land use changes toward carbon

sequestration and away from deforestation,103,104

but also due to the important role of forestry inNew Zealand’s emission profile and expected financialincentives associated with a net surplus of units.10,105

This made the NZ ETS a financially beneficial scheme.The National government (2008) continued with

theNZETSbut shortly after gaining office in late 2008,announced a review of the policy. This review wasrequested by a minority partyj on which the Nationalparty depended for confidence and supply.106 Thereview’s recommendations were fairly anodyne, andreaffirmed that the ETS should apply to “all sectorsand all gases”107 (p. 26), making it the most compre-hensive carbon-trading scheme. The forestry sectorwas the first to enter, on January 1, 2008, followedby all other sectors, except agriculture, simultaneouslyon July 1, 2010. The 2009 amendments included a‘transition period’ (July 1, 2010–December 31, 2012)during which participants are obliged to surrenderone emissions unit for every two tons of CO2-e emitted.Further, failure to surrender credits resulted in aNZ$25 fixed price per ton of CO2-e, implying that par-ticipants could purchase unlimited credits. Couplingthis with the one-for-two arrangement means thatthe real price of a ton of CO2 could not exceed NZ$12.50.k

The ETS prices, but does not limit,New Zealand’s emissions of six gases (outside of agri-culture): CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, perfluorocarbons,and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). While the agriculturalsector is responsible for reporting biological emissions,there is currently no obligation to surrenderNew Zealand Units to account for these emissions.The non-inclusion of agricultural CH4 and N2O inthe ETS has proved a point of domestic political contro-versy. Since agriculture accounts for such a large shareof New Zealand’s economy, many politicians areloathed to address the sector’s contribution to GHGemissions. In 2008, calculations of per animal emis-sions indicated that the cost to farmers of the practice,despite being set at 20% of total obligation, wouldlikely require reduction of stock numbers, with associ-ated economic loss. Without well developed or ade-quately promoted mitigation practices beyondafforestation, the proposed policy met with strongopposition from New Zealand farming groups whosecured a total exemption for agriculture. AsNew Zealand’s farmers continue to compete with sub-sidized and protected competitors from Europe andNorth America, which show no inclinations to priceCH4 or N2O, there is substantial political pressure tocontinue the exemption. The way GHGs are accountedfor has high relevance for agriculturally dependenteconomies, and CH4 heavy profiles (See Box 2).



Electricity and Energy in New ZealandWhile New Zealand is well known for renewable elec-tricity generation, there is also a domestic fossil fuel

industry that includes both underground and opencastcoal mines, along with on- and off-shore oil and gasfields. New Zealand’s total in-ground coal resourcesare estimated to be approximately 15 billiontons.112,113 Twelve billion tons of this is in the formof lignite, which accounts for just 6.5% ofproduction,114 of which six billion tons have beenassessed to be economically recoverable.115,116 Domes-tic consumption of coal is low, approximately 8% oftotal primary energy supply (TPES),112 used for elec-tricity generation and cogeneration.114 The majorityof coal is exported, contributing just over 0.06% ofglobal coal production in 2009,117 declining from apeak of 0.1% in 2003. The minerals industry inNew Zealand generates NZ$20 million in governmentroyalties annually and contributes over NZ$1.1 billionto GDP,118 with particular relevance for rural, regionaleconomies. Nevertheless, the development of new siteshas met with strong opposition, particularly whereencroachment into national parks and marine reserveshas been proposed. There are clear complexities relat-ing to the sustainability of regional economies relyingon fossil fuel extraction and climate change mitigation.In the development of a low-carbon New Zealandeconomy, fostering new opportunities for regionaleconomies is critical.

Renewable electricity accounted for 38.2% ofTPES in 2013,119 largely from hydro and geothermal.Yet by fuel type, oil dominates New Zealand’s TPESaccounting for 33%, followed by gas (22%) and geo-thermal energy (20%). Of New Zealand’s electricityproduction, renewables accounted for 75% in 2013,one of the highest contributions in the OECD.120

Renewable electricity production is also a politicallysalient issue which has become increasingly alignedwith GHG emissions reductions targets. The 2007National Energy Strategy outlined a target of 90%renewable target by 2025.77 This target was reiteratedin the 2011–2021 National Energy Strategy, providingthat security and reliability of the national energy sup-ply are assured.121 The ability of NewZealand to reach100% renewable electricity production has beenexplored, with Mason et al.122 proposing a mix of53–60% hydro, 22–25% wind, 12–14% geothermal,0.8–0.9% wood thermal, and 0.2–0.3% biogas gener-ation and 0–12% peak generation, in order to displacethe current fossil fuel generation. There is little evidenceof a strategic move to increase renewable electricityproduction, but decreasing demand and increasing effi-ciencymay ultimately result in a reduced need for fossilfuel generation.

Due to high renewable electricity contributionsand a carbon-dependent transport system,New Zealand’s energy sector GHG emissions are more

BOX 2

GHG ACCOUNTING, METRICS,AND AGRICULTURE

Because of the way GHG emissions are counted,agriculture features prominently inNew Zealand’s emissions profile. It is customaryto use global warming potentials to comparethe effects of gases. This involves comparingthe time-integrated radiative forcing of a kilo-gram of some GHG versus a kilogram of CO2, usu-ally over a time scale of 100 years. Usingthis approach, based on the most recent assess-ment of the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange (IPCC), a kilogram of methane is worth28 kg of CO2

108,l But this is not the only, or neces-sarily the most policy relevant, way to comparegases, even if this metric has been adopted forreporting emissions under the UNFCCC. Indeed,different metrics may be better suited thanothers to achieve specific policy goals.109 Onerecent alternative is provided by Shine et al.110

who developed the concept of global tempera-ture potential (GTP). In this approach the actualtemperature effects in a given year, rather thanthe time-integrated radiative forcings of thegases, are compared. Using the GTP approach(with a fixed time scale) would imply that a kilo-gram ofmethane was worth 4.3 kg of CO2, whichwould result in a significant down-weighting ofNew Zealand’s agricultural emissions.

Some countries,most notably Brazil, which hasan emissions profile similar to that ofNew Zealand, have begun raising the metricsissue in international climate change policy for-ums, though to date New Zealand’s positionhas been to promote the discussion around thechoice of metrics but not to advocate stronglyabout it. While alternative metric choices arethought to have very limited impact on globalmitigation costs (assuming well-functioninginternational markets), it probably has materialimplications for individual agricultural produ-cers, such as New Zealand. Exactly what thoseimplications are depend on whether reductionsin methane are possible at low cost, and whetherother agricultural countries also embark on agri-cultural mitigation,111 but the issue is clearly onethat matters a lot to New Zealand.



heavily related to transport thanotherAnnex1countries(Figure 6). New Zealand is a net importer of oil, withalmost all domestically produced, high-quality oil beingexported at a premium.Cheaper, foreign oil is imported,principally for use in transport, exposing New Zealandto volatile international oil prices.While internationally,opportunities to reduce energy-related GHG emissionsoften focus on electricity production, in New Zealand,transport-related emissions are the largest opportunityfor emission reductions with responses including fuelefficiency, electric and hybrid vehicles and modal shift(e.g., to active or public transport modes).

New Zealand has the highest number of motorvehicles per capita in theOECD,124 a distinctive cultureof second-hand imported car ownership,125 and a pri-vate vehicle fleet averaging over 12 years.126 Despitetransport’s contribution to GHG emissions,New Zealand is the only country in the OECDwithoutvehicle emission standards. While the health, air pollu-tion and carbon emission co-benefits of reduced vehicleemissions are well established, there has been resistancein NewZealand to introduce a fuel efficiency or vehicleemission standardsmeasure. Common objections to anemissions standard include the complexity and expenseof establishment, the existence of the ETS (whichincludes transport fuels), and reliance on internationalemission standards to regulate imported vehicles.127

Despite reliance on the NZ ETS to create an economicincentive,128 it provides negligible pressure. Thus thereis currently little financial incentive for the adoption oflow-carbon transport modes.

ADAPTING TO ACHANGING CLIMATE

Adaptation to climate change has been decentralized,formalized through legislation including the Resource

Management Act (1991) and the Local GovernmentAct (2002). While this could result in fragmented andpiecemeal approaches to climate change, lacking over-riding direction,39 it also presents the opportunity tomake locally relevant, place-specific and fast-paceddecisions while also building local adaptive capac-ity.129 National governments are often the principalactors in decision-making processes, yet climate changerequires coordination across scales and between sec-tors. Devolution can make way for complex overlap-ping and nested systems of governance, steered bypublic, private and other interests across national,regional and local scales. Nevertheless, resources at anational scalemay not translate to high adaptive capac-ity at a local scale, with adaptive capacity being a fea-ture of factors including financial resources, access toinformation and decision-making structures.130 Cli-mate change adaptation has historically received lessattention from New Zealand policymakers than miti-gation measures, yet there is evidence to suggest thisis changing. Reports in the last few years from researchconsortia,131 the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advi-sor66 and others33,132,133 have made various cases forthinking further about adaptation. Nonetheless, indus-try adaptation (e.g., tourism, agriculture) has beensomewhat reactive, and not always explicitly linkedto climate change, but rather framed as ‘good businesssense.’134

The wide variety of biophysical impacts alongwith contextual governance, sociocultural and eco-nomic considerations result in a complex adaptive sit-uation. The range and effectiveness of adaptation inNewZealand are hindered by various factors includingthe different ways in which risks are perceived andstructural inertia in planning processes.33 A decentra-lized approach to adaptation appears to present bothopportunities and threats for New Zealand. Forinstance, there is evidence that when local adaptation

1.68

6.47

12.12 25.21

Transport

Energy industries

Manufacturing

industries and

construction

Other sectors

Fugitive emissions

Other

42.84

16.42

6.8

New Zealand (%) Annex 1 average (%)

10.25

23.7139.66

14.86

FIGURE 6 | Breakdown of GHG emissions within the energy sector, comparing New Zealand and the average of other Annex 1 countries, for 2012.Source: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.123



approaches involves local communities, it can be valu-able not only in reducing vulnerability to climatechange, but also by increasing individual willingnessto reduce carbon emissions.132 Public participation inclimate change adaptation is critical to harness supportfor potentially disruptive changes.135 Research hasshown that a sense of community and self-efficacyare predictors of community resilience and the capacityto respond to change, and this is enhanced by strongsocial relationships,136 suggesting that in theNew Zealand context, community relationships andinclusion in the decision making and disaster prepared-ness processes are vital.136,137 Nevertheless, from botha central and decentralized perspective, compared toother countries, New Zealand will need to respond toa similar range of hydro-meteorological hazards, andcomplexity of issues, yet it will need to do so with farsmaller budgets and pools of expertise.39 This couldresult in delayed adaptive responses, restricting thevariety and effectiveness of adaptive options, or pre-senting an adaptation constraint.138

Agricultural AdaptationNewZealand’s agricultural systems have been success-ful in their adaptation to variable weather,139 althoughwhether such experience is sufficient to deal to thevagaries of weather patterns likely to occur with cli-mate change is questionable.140 Regions with a highdependency on agriculture for employment may be dis-proportionately affected by negative impacts of climatechange. Regionally, extreme weather events haveraised awareness of climatic variability and encouragedthe adoption of more resilient farming practices includ-ing lucerne (Medicago sativa) fodder crops, increasedreliance on supplementary feeds which can buffershortfalls in local feed production, agro-forestry plant-ings for soil conservation and water retention andincreased use of irrigation systems.

Diversification of agricultural product andspreading risk appears to be a particularly popularapproach to risk reduction for farmers.141 CradocHenry142 found that while strategies such as purchas-ing supplementary feed during a drought are often con-sidered a short-term tactical response, these actions arepotentially a long-term strategy involving forward con-tracts or changes to the production practices of thefarm. Recent deliberations of the Ruataniwha irriga-tion scheme143 (among others) also demonstrate thetensions between efforts to develop climate changeadaptation strategies and the impact of such projectson the environment and the economic costs to localcommunities.

Tourism Industry AdaptationThe tourism industry has a particular interest in adap-tation options, especially where the tourism activitiesare closely tied to the natural environment and climatesystems. The ski industry is a tourism activity that isalready adapting to a changing climate, yet as withfarmers, few operators describe their actions as climatechange adaptation.134 Reports have indicated that theNew Zealand ski industry will experience reduced nat-ural snow in the coming decades.34 Low-elevation skifields will be particularly affected, and only ski fieldsover 2000masl are forecast to achieve 100 days perannum with operational snow depths (0.30 m) by2040 without requiring snowmaking. Under an A1F1(fossil fuel intensive) scenario,144 snowmaking will berequired for all but the highest elevations.145 Snow-making has been critiqued due to its water and electricintensity, and use to extend the winter season, withimplications for tourist expectations.

There are opportunities for business adaptationto exploit the opportunities arising from the relativevulnerability of Australia,146–148 and to attractAustralia’s skiermarket toNewZealand. This has beensuccessful and has increased the number of Australianvisitors to Queenstown in particular, aided by directflights from major Australian Eastern seaboard cities.This too is a highly contentious approach to climatechange adaptation due to the increase in air travel-related CO2 emissions. Consequently, tourism’s adapt-ive responses may be viewed through a lens of malad-aptation if they contribute to increase GHG emissions.

Coastal AdaptationNew Zealand’s coastlines have economic and culturalsignificance for New Zealanders.133 New Zealand hasover 15,000 km of coastline and 75% ofNew Zealanders live within 10 km of the coast, there-fore significant infrastructure and assets are vulnerableto sea level rise.35 Perhaps as a result of coastal devel-opment, there has been a steady rise in attention tocoastal adaptation by central and local government,as well as the research community.35,36,38,133 Adaptingto climate change demands more than prescriptive pol-icy solutions, and the fostering of community resiliencehas been shown to be of critical importance.133

There are a number of approaches that are avail-able to coastal communities to adapt to a changing cli-mate, and particularly to sea level rise. A 2003 surveyof New Zealand coastal communities reported 55%support for sea walls or large rocks for defence,12% opted for accommodation policies includingbeach re-nourishment, and 12% supported a ‘donothing’ approach.149 Unsurprisingly, a managed



retreat, moving homes away from the water, is theleast popular adaptive response for coastal commu-nities. Thus there are competing interests and priori-ties at the local level that can result in delayed orincremental action. Inaction and a reluctance to makelong-term decisions can occur where these decisionsare longer than the political term of council members,if it is not perceived to be an immediate, or the mostpressing priority, due to the cyclical nature of coastalerosion and the slow rate of sea level rise.150 Wherecouncils and communities make decisions based onthese factors, a complex scenario of stalled or delayedaction can occur.

Adaptation and Adaptive Capacityof M�aoriWhile M�aori communities have been identified as vul-nerable to the impacts of climate change, they are notpassive players in New Zealand’s climate change dis-course. There are a number of ways that M�aori can,and are, benefiting from climate change, and there isevidence of strong resilience and adaptive capacity asa result of the socialcultural networks based onwhaka-papa (ancestral and kinship linkages between peopleand place).33 This, it has been found, has helped iwi(tribal kin group), hap�u (sub-tribal kin group), andwh�anau (extended family) to historically ‘respondand recover from adverse climate impacts and stres-ses’33 (p. 859).Moreover, resilience to climate stressorsis also embedded in M�aori environmental knowledge,particularly the accumulated knowledge of environ-mental warning signs of imminent extreme events, highrisk areas, and safety zones.33 Many of the adaptationpractices currently being enacted relate specifically tothis belief that Maori are kaitiaki (guardians) of theland and resources and which should be left in a bettercondition for future generations.

In terms of M�aori natural resource management,the traditional structure of multiple or communal own-ership has been proven to provide opportunities forresilience,151 at a local regional and community level.With M�aori tribal groups inextricably linked to land,any adaptation strategies tend to be at regional triballevels rather than through a nation-wide basis and sincelocal, cultural knowledge will differ from place toplace, so toowill resources for adaptation and adaptivecapacity.152 Nevertheless, the increasingly corporatenature of the large Iwi tribal structures (including IwiIncorporations) places more emphasis on the economicoutcomes in Maori business interests, adopting west-ern-style governance and management processes andstructures, with implications for adaptation.

EVALUATION OF CLIMATE CHANGEINTHECONTEXTOFNEWZEALAND

New Zealand is not projected to experience the moresevere biophysical climate change impacts that willaffect other countries. Moreover, total GHG emissionsfrom New Zealand are on the lower end of the spec-trum, contributing just 0.15% of global emissions.These two factors have been used, either explicitly orimplicitly, to reduce the importance of climate changeon a national scale and to hinder the prioritization ofaction to both mitigate and adapt. Over the pastdecade, New Zealand appears to have increasedawareness and discussion of climate change adaptationparticularly relating to reducing risks for coastalcommunities and low-lying urban areas, and exploitingthe opportunities arising from the relatively higher vul-nerability of Australia. By way of mitigative responses,New Zealand looks to be reducing its engagement withglobal regimes (e.g., departure fromKyoto process), yetNewZealand’s primary response to climate change, theNZETS, while not without its flaws,102 has shown thatsuch a system is possible, and has also provided a learn-ing tool for other countries trying to implement anETS.153 The future of the NZ ETS is dependent on aseries of factors including domestic ambition to reduceGHG emissions, and the level of price control,98 but asit stands, it is doing little to drive behavior change andlow carbon investment.

The prominence of agricultural emissions relateto the industry’s economic importance and methodsof accounting (Box 2), rather than pointing to sectorinefficiencies. For example, some studies have indi-cated that New Zealand’s pastoral dairy and sheepand beef farms are among the most efficient in theworld in terms of production per unit of GHG.154

There is strong evidence that the emissions intensity(i.e., emissions per unit of production) ofmeat andmilkproduction has been reducing by about 1% per yearevery year since 1990.155,156 This suggests that not onlyare emissions intensity reductions possible, but they arebeing achieved. Yet with sustained growth in produc-tion, and increasing demand for agricultural products,absolute emissions are still rising. Reduced agriculturaloutput has been identified as central to achieving abso-lute emission reduction, but reducing stock numbers isnot a popular strategy.Moreover, if global demand foranimal protein is met by less efficient producing coun-tries, it has been argued that this move could result inincreased global emissions.157 Thus the importanceof agricultural production to the New Zealand econ-omy raises distinct, but not insurmountable, challengesfor mitigation of and adaptation to climate change.There are clear opportunities for NewZealand towork



with and potentially lead, other agriculturally depend-ent countries158 to find ways to balance food produc-tion and GHG emissions through efficiency gains.Continued engagement and dialog relating to the met-rics used in global accounting is another key role forNew Zealand.

To date, little attention has been paid to changingglobal perceptions of New Zealand as both a primaryproducer and a tourism destination. The economic reli-ance on these two export offerings highlights the neces-sity to know more about the role of global perceptionsofNewZealand, the potential impacts of changing per-ceptions, and ways to protect the ‘clean, green’ image.When New Zealand ratified the Kyoto Protocol, onereason for doing so was because of the risk the then-government perceived of nonparticipation. It wasargued that ‘abandoning the Protocol … would dam-age the credibility of New Zealand, along with its rep-utation as a global citizen.’New Zealanders have longprided themselves on taking strong, progressive stanceson moral, environmental and sociotechnologicalissues. Yet this has not, it can be argued, transferredto the systems of global climate governance. Rationalesfor not signing the second commitment phase of theKyoto Protocol focused on economic and geopoliticalpositioning, but may not have adequately consideredwhat aligning with China, Russia and the USA mightmean for its ‘clean, green’ positioning. Certainly, thosecountries do not rely on their environmental credentialsto sell their exports in the samewayNewZealand does,and recent moves by China and the USA to address cli-mate change could leave New Zealand isolated. Thereis clear evidence of a relationship betweenNew Zealand’s responses to climate change and globalperceptions of New Zealand;

‘In terms of overseas news coverage… contrary to agenerally favourable perception at the beginning ofthe study period in 2008, ending the year 2012 NZwas no longer in the spotlight as an environmentalleader with regard to carbon emissions, but insteadhad become a minor player the global communitylargely ignored in the climate change arena’56 (p. ii).

The international media are raising concernsaround New Zealand’s ‘100% Pure’ environmentalclaims. Concerns relate not only to New Zealand’s cli-mate record, but also to wide environmental issuesincluding water quality and biodiversity loss.159 Thegovernment’s ‘laissez-faire’ attitude toward thesereports, and it’s inaction to protect environmentalassets might prove to be a greater risk toNewZealand than any biophysical impacts in the shortto medium term.

Domestic media reporting of climate change, par-ticularly across New Zealand’s largest broadsheetnewspapers, is a point for cautious optimism. Researchsuggests that domestic media is presenting a scientifi-cally sound argument, using reputable sources, albeitfocusing on political figures as opposed to scientificexperts.82 Framing climate change as a political, social,and economic issue is a departure from the ‘doomsday’framings that have been evident elsewhere, and whichhave been shown to distance the general public fromclimate change. Yet the political framing of climatechange may contribute to the alignment of climatechange ‘beliefs’ and political ideologies, which coulddelay necessary action. The media framings used inNew Zealand appear to focus more heavily on the out-comes of climate change, including both opportunitiesand threats, rather than the biophysical impacts.This approach may be helping New Zealanders to bet-ter comprehend the risks to themselves and theirfamilies which could contribute to a higher willingnessto undertake mitigative actions77 and to supportgovernment-level actions.

Despite the importance of mass media reportingas a tool for raising awareness about climate change,78

reporting does not appear to have evolved into highlevels of public understanding and concern. Thiscould be the result of a globalized and non-traditionalmedia, along with other determinants of climatechange perceptions (e.g., personal experience). Acrossthe five studies listed in this article, approximately halfof the participants measured high levels of concern,and belief in anthropogenic causation. The studiesfound that climate change is broadly perceived to bea global concern (spatially distanced), and the respon-sibility of other countries. This could be the result ofthe two key narratives;NewZealand’s small contribu-tion to global emissions and relatively low biophysicalimpacts. Each of these could be suggesting thatNew Zealand has a low responsibility and need toact on climate change. In order to engender heightenedrisk perception and a need to act, this framing ofNew Zealand’s contribution may need to bereassessed.

Inbound tourism-related emissions arefrequently overlooked and a reduction in these emis-sions is rarely discussed with a focus instead on increas-ing tourist arrival numbers. Tourism emissions relate,in part, to the ‘elephant in the room’ of global airtravel emissions. There is a clear need to consider theair travel emissions arising from arrivals to and depar-tures from New Zealand, which demand extreme longhaul travel for most key markets. The willingnessto undertake this travel in low-carbon world islargely unknown, but research has suggested that in



the near-future, tourist arrivals will continueunabated.59,160

Climate change impacts also highlight a number ofsocial issues, including the asymmetry of vulnerabilityacross the New Zealand population. It highlights theneed to address social inequalities, and through climatechange responses, both mitigation and adaptation, cli-mate change could provide an opportunity to redresssociocultural, economic, and health disparities. Mea-sures including the promotion of active transport, higherquality homes and improved energy efficiency couldcontribute to reductions ina rangeof negativeoutcomes,particularly for disadvantaged communities.64

CONCLUSION

New Zealand is in an interesting position insomuch asperceptionof action andengagementwithglobal climategovernance could be as important as the biophysicalimpacts in the coming decades. Explicit engagementwith global climate governance has waned over time.Beginning with the desire to take a leadership role,and protect its reputation as a globally-responsiblenation, New Zealand established a comprehensive, all-sectors, all-gasses emission trading scheme. Yet theNZ ETS currently places little pressure on high emittingpractices, and thereby fails to incentivize low-carbonbehaviors. Nationally, there is evidence of some effortsto curb emissions through efficiency gains, but theseapproaches will struggle to achieve the rapidly requireddecarbonization of New Zealand’s economy.

Addressing agricultural and transport sectorGHG emissions is critical if meaningful reductions indomestic emissions are to be achieved. Work is under-way in both sectors, but both will require fundamentaland systemic changes to current norms and practices.Yet with an absence of structured mitigation policiesin these key sectors, there is little evidence of the serioustreatment of climate change responses. The knowledgegaps identified in this review, particularly relating tothe full range of possible biophysical and socioeco-nomic outcomes, the impact of global perceptions,and consumer behaviors and preferences, create addedcomplexity. By increasing knowledge in these, andother areas, New Zealand will be in a better positionto engage social actors, and increase support for moreproactive government responses.

NOTESa Aotearoa is widely accepted as the M�aori name forNew Zealandb Gross Domestic Product per capita of US$41,824 in 20132,Real Gross National Disposable Income (RGNDI) per capitaof NZ$47,928 (approximately US$32,000) for 2015 (data toJune)3.c Climate change convention reporting, including emissionsand removals from energy, industrial processes and productuse (IPPU), agriculture, waste and land use change and for-estry (LULUCF).d Between 1990 and 2008, the proportion of agriculturalemissions generally decreased, however between 2009 and2012, the proportion increased due to ‘favourable growingconditions, a greater demand for New Zealand agriculturalproduct… and a favourable milk price’ 11 (p. vii). Droughtin 2013 decreased agricultural sector emissions.eTheM�aori economy is growing at a rate of 4.5%per annumand in 2010 was valued at NZ$36 billion.f http://www.generationzero.org/g http://wiseresponse.org.nz/h It was estimated that offsets provided byNewZealand’s for-estry sinks planted since 1990 would more than compensatefor growth in gross emissions, with a surplus of 50 millionCO2-e.i This target is dependent on a global agreement to limit tem-perature rise to 2 �C, developed countries making a compara-ble effort, advanced and major emitting countries takingaction to their capabilities, the establishment of effective setof rules for LULUCF, and a broad and efficient internationalcarbon market.j The only party in Parliament that actively denied climatechange.k In early July 2015, the price of New Zealand Units sits justbelow NZ$7.00lAccording to UNFCCC reporting to 2020,methane is worth25 kilograms of CO2 as reported in IPCC AR4m The study by Stuart was conducted through the nowdefunct national lobbying group ‘Greenhouse Policy Coali-tion’ with members from a range of industry and sectorgroups including steel, coal, forestry, dairy and aluminium,which could suggest vested interests in the results. Neverthe-less, the consistency with other survey findings provide con-fidence for these results.n Hughey et al. appear to combine ‘Global warming, climatechange, ozone’ together into their line of questioning, whichcould perpetuate misunderstandings and disguise levels ofconcern.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the editor and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive andvaluable comments, and also express gratitude to Dave Frame, Andy Reisinger, Gerry Carrington, Mark



Cooper, Janet Stephenson, Ivan Diaz-Rainey and Dan Tulloch for their feedback on earlier drafts and sections ofthis paper and to Rob Bell for his assistance with Figure 5.

REFERENCES1. Reisinger A, Kitching R. Chapter 5. Australasia. In: Bar-

ros VR, Field CB, Dokken DJ, Mastrandrea MD, MachKJ, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, GenovaRC, et al., eds. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adapta-tion, and Vulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Con-tribution of Working Group II to the Fifth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange, Chapter 24. Cambridge and New York, NY:Cambridge University Press; 2014, 1371–1438.

2. Statistics NewZealand. National population estimates: at30 June 2014. Available at: http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/estimates_and_projections/NationalPopulationEstimates_HOTPAt30Jun14.aspx.(Accessed July 22, 2015).

3. StatisticsNewZealand.NewZealand in theOECD. 2003.Available at: http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/government_finance/central_government/nz-in-the-oecd/population.aspx. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

4. United Nations Department of Economic & SocialAffairs. World urbanization prospects: the 2014 revi-sion; 2014, pp. 1–32. Available at: http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Highlights/WUP2014-Highlights.pdf.(Accessed July 1, 2015).

5. Fitzharris BB. How vulnerable is New Zealand to theimpacts of climate change?NZGeog2007, 63:160–168.

6. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. ValuingNew Zealand’s clean green image; 2001. (AccessedJuly 1, 2015).

7. Bibbee A. Green growth and climate change policies inNew Zealand. OECD Economics Department WorkingPapers No. 893, 2011.

8. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment.New Zealand’s greenhouse gas inventory and net positionreport 1990–2012. Available at: http://mfe.govt.nz/publi-cations/climate/greenhouse-gas-inventory-2014-snapshot/snapshot.pdf. (Accessed September 10, 2014).

9. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment.New Zealand’s greenhouse gas inventory 1990–2013,2015. Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Climate%20Change/ghg-inventory-1990-2013.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

10. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. Review ofclimate change policies; 2014. Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate/policy-review-05/index.html. (Accessed October 1, 2014).

11. UNFCCC. Annex 1 countries’ emissions for 2010. 2010.Available at: http://unfccc.int/di/Indicators.do. (AccessedMay 20, 2014).

12. Smith PM. A Concise History of New Zealand.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.

13. Wilmshurst JM, Anderson AJ, Higham TFG, WorthyTH. Dating the late prehistoric dispersal of Polynesiansto New Zealand using the commmensal Pacific rat. Pro-ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of theUnited States 2008, 105:7676–7680.

14. UNFCCC. GHG emission profiles for Annex I partiesand major groups. Available at: http://unfccc.int/ghg_data/ghg_data_unfccc/ghg_profiles/items/4625.php. (Accessed October 1, 2014).

15. King D, Goff J, Skipper A. Facing natural hazards withMaori environmental knowledge. Water Atmos 2008,16:24–25.

16. King DNT, Goff J, Skipper A. Maori environmentalknowledge and natural hazards and Aotearoa –

New Zealand. J R Soc N Z 2007, 37:59–73.

17. King D, Penny G, Severne C. The climate change matrixfacing Maori society. In: Nottage RAC, Wratt D, Born-man JF, Jones K, eds. Climate Change Adaptation inNew Zealand: Future Scenarios and Some Sectoral Per-spectives. Wellington: New Zealand Climate ChangeCentre; 2010, 44 pp.

18. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. Consulta-tion with M�aori on climate change: Hui report. 2007.Available at: https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/consultation-maori-hui-report-nov07.pdf.(Accessed July 1, 2015).

19. New Zealand Electoral Commission. 2014 GeneralElection – preliminary result. Available at: http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/. (AccessedSeptember 22, 2014)

20. Harré N, Atkinson Q. Carbon Neutral by 2020: HowNew Zealanders can Tackle Climate Change. Nelson:Craig Potton Publishing; 2007.

21. Birchall SJ, Ball A,Mason I,MilneMJ.Managing carbonin times of political change: the rise and fall of theNew Zealand Carbon Neutral Public Service program.Australas J Environ Manage 2013, 20:63–78.

22. ONE News. John Key defends Kyoto decision. 2012.Available at: http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/john-key-defends-kyoto-decision-5209727. (Accessed July1, 2015).

23. Glavovic BC, Saunders WSA, Becker JS. Land-use pla-nning for natural hazards in New Zealand: the setting,barriers, ‘burning issues’ and priority actions. NatHazards 2010, 54:679–706.

24. Pawson E, Brooking T. Introduction. In: Pawson E,Brooking T, eds. Environmental Histories ofNew Zealand. Melbourne: Oxford UniversityPress; 2002.



http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/estimates_and_projections/NationalPopulationEstimates_HOTPAt30Jun14.aspx



http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/government_finance/central_government/nz-in-the-oecd/population.aspx



http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Highlights/WUP2014-Highlights.pdf

http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Highlights/WUP2014-Highlights.pdf

http://mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate/greenhouse-gas-inventory-2014-snapshot/snapshot.pdf



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Climate%20Change/ghg-inventory-1990-2013.pdf



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate/policy-review-05/index.html



http://unfccc.int/di/Indicators.do

http://unfccc.int/ghg_data/ghg_data_unfccc/ghg_profiles/items/4625.php



https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/consultation-maori-hui-report-nov07.pdf

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/consultation-maori-hui-report-nov07.pdf

http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/

http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/

http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/john-key-defends-kyoto-decision-5209727

http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/john-key-defends-kyoto-decision-5209727

25. New ZealandMinistry for the Environment. Meeting thechallenges of future flooding in New Zealand. 2008.Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/land/meeting-challenges-of-future-flooding-in-nz/meeting-challenges-of-future-flooding-in-nz.pdf. (Accessed July1, 2015).

26. Mullan B, Stuart SJ, HadfieldMG, SmithMJ. Report onthe Review of NIWA’s ‘Seven-Station’ TemperatureSeries. NIWA Information Series No. 78, 2010,p. 1–175.

27. Dean S, Stott P. The effect of local circulation variabilityon the detection and attribution ofNewZealand temper-ature trends. J Clim 2009, 22:6217–6229.

28. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. Climatechange effects and impacts assessment: a guidance man-ual for local government in New Zealand. PublicationNo. ME 870, 2008, 149 pp. Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/node/10718. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

29. McMillan H, Jackson B, Poyck S. Flood Risk Under Cli-mate Change: A Framework for Assessing the Impacts ofClimate Change on River Flow and Floods, UsingDynamically-Downscaled Climate Scenarios. Ministryof Agriculture and Forestry: Wellington; 2010.

30. NIWA. NZ temperature record; 2013. Available at: https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/information-and-resources/nz-temperature-record. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

31. Fitzharris BB, Lawson W, Owens IF. Research on gla-ciers and snow in New Zealand. Progr Phys Geogr1999, 23:469–500.

32. Hendrikx J, Harper A. Development of a national snowand ice monitoring network for New Zealand. J Hydrol2013, 52:83–96.

33. Manning M, Lawrence J, Ngaru King D, Chapman R.Dealing with changing risks: a New Zealand perspectiveon climate change adaptation. Reg Environ Change2014, 15:581–594.

34. Hendrikx J, Hreinsson EO, Clark MP, Mullan AB. Thepotential impact of climate change on seasonal snow inNew Zealand: part I—an analysis using 12 GCMs.Theor Appl Climatol 2012, 110:607–618.

35. McGranahan G, Balk D, Anderson B. The rising tide:assessing the risks of climate change and human settle-ments in low elevation coastal zones. Environ Urbaniza-tion 2007, 19:17–37.

36. Rouse HL, Blackett P, Hume TM, Bell RG, Britton R,Dahm J. Coastal adaptation to climate change: aNew Zealand story. J Coastal Res 2013, 65:1957–1962.

37. Bell RG, Hume TM, Hicks DM. Planning for climatechange effects on coastal margins. Report for Ministryfor the Environment as part of the NewZealand ClimateChange programme, 2001. Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate. (Accessed July1, 2015).

38. Peart R. Castles in the Sand: What’s Happening to theNew Zealand Coast? Nelson: Craig Potton Publish-ing; 2009.

39. ReisingerA,MullanB,ManningM,WrattD,NottageR.Global and local climate change scenarios to supportadaptation in New Zealand. In: Nottage R, Wratt D,Bornman J, Jones K, eds. Climate Change Adaptationin New Zealand: Future Scenarios and Some SectoralPerspectives. Wellington: New Zealand Climate ChangeCentre; 2010, 26–43.

40. New Zealand Treasury. New Zealand economic andfinancial overview, 2013. Available at: http://www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/overview/2012/nzefo-12.pdf.(Accessed July 1, 2015).

41. New Zealand Tourism. About the tourism industry.Available at: http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/about-the-tourism-industry/. (Accessed April 23, 2015).

42. McDonald H, Kerr S. Why do New Zealanders careabout agricultural emissions? Policy Q 2012, 8:29.

43. NZAGRC. Impacts of global climate change onNew Zealand agriculture, 2012. Available at: http://www.nzagrc.org.nz/fact-sheets.html. (Accessed July1, 2015).

44. Saunders C, Kaye-Blake W, Turner J. Modelling climatechange impacts on agriculture and forestry with theextended LTEM (Lincoln Trade and EnvironmentalModel). Research Report No. 316, 2009.

45. Hannah J, BellR.G.Regional sea level trends inNewZea-land. Journal of Geophysical Research–Oceans 2012,117:C01004. doi:10.1029/2011JC007591. http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2011JC007591.shtml.

46. New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries. The2012–12 drought: an assessment and historical perspec-tive. MPI Technical Paper No. L 2012/18, Prepared forthe Ministry for Primary Industries by NIWA; 2013.(Accessed 1 July 2015).

47. NIWA. 2012–2013 drought; 2013. Available at: http://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/nz-drought-monitor/2012-2013-drought. (Accessed October 8, 2014).

48. KamberG,McDonaldC, Price G.Drying out: investigat-ing the economic effects of drought in New Zealand.Reserve Bank of New Zealand Analytical NotesAN2013/02, 2013. Available at: http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/research_and_publications/analytical_notes/2013/AN2013_02.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

49. EcoClimate. Costs and benefits of climate change andadaptation to climate change in new zealand agriculture:what do we know so far? Report to Ministry of Agricul-ture and Fisheries, 2007.

50. Stroombergen A. The international effects of climatechange on agricultural commodity prices, and the widereffects on New Zealand. Motu Working PaperNo. 10–14, 2010. Available at: http://motu-www.motu.org.nz/wpapers/10_14.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/land/meeting-challenges-of-future-flooding-in-nz/meeting-challenges-of-future-flooding-in-nz.pdf



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/node/10718

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/node/10718

https://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/information-and-resources/nz-temperature-record



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/climate

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/overview/2012/nzefo-12.pdf

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/overview/2012/nzefo-12.pdf

http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/about-the-tourism-industry/

http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/about-the-tourism-industry/

http://www.nzagrc.org.nz/fact-sheets.html

http://www.nzagrc.org.nz/fact-sheets.html

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2011JC007591.shtml

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2011JC007591.shtml

http://www.niwa.co.nz/climate/nz-drought-monitor/2012-2013-drought



http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/research_and_publications/analytical_notes/2013/AN2013_02.pdf



http://motu-www.motu.org.nz/wpapers/10_14.pdf


51. Landcare Research. Modelling the economic impact ofNew Zealand’s post-2020 climate change contribution.2015. Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions/new-zealand%E2%80%99s-post-2020-climate-change-target-0.(Accessed July 1, 2015).

52. IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, andVulnerability. Part B: Regional Aspects. Contribution ofWorking Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cam-bridge and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press;2014.

53. McClure M. The Wonder Country: MakingNew Zealand Tourism. Auckland: Auckland UniversityPress; 2004.

54. Howe C. Beyond Rio? Paradise Lost. 2012. Available at:http://www.wwf.org.nz/?8941/Paradise-lost-New-report-shows-20-years-of-environmental-inaction-threatensNZs-natural-heritage.

55. Coyle F, Fairweather J. Challenging a place myth:New Zealand’s clean green image meets the biotechnol-ogy revolution. Area 2005, 37:148–158.

56. Kaefer F. Credibility at stake? news representations anddiscursive constructions of national environmental repu-tation and place brand image: the case of clean, greenNew Zealand. PhD Thesis, University of Waikato,2014. Available at: http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/8834/thesis.pdf?sequen-ce=3&isAllowed=y. (Accessed March 1, 2015).

57. Roper J. Environmental risk, sustainability discourses,and public relations. Public Relat Inquiry 2012, 1:1–19.

58. Smith IJ, Rodgers CJ. Carbon offsets for aviation-gener-ated emissions due to international travel to and fromNew Zealand. Energy Policy 2009, 37:3438–3447.

59. Cohen SA, Higham JES. Eyes wide shut? UK consumerperceptions on aviation climate impacts and travel deci-sions to New Zealand. Curr Issues in Tourism 2011,14:323–335.

60. Higham JES, Cohen SA, Cavaliere CT. Climate change,discretionary air travel and the ‘flyers’ dilemma.’ J TravelRes 2014, 53:462–475.

61. Higham JES, Cohen SA, Cavaliere CT, Reis AC, FinklerW. Climate change, tourist air travel and radical emis-sions reduction. J Clean Prod 2015. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.100.

62. Bennett H, Jones R, Keating G, Woodward A, Hales S,Metcalfe S. Health and equity impacts of climate changeinAotearoa-NewZealand, andhealth gains fromclimateaction. N Z Med J 2014, 127:1406.

63. Haines A, McMichael AJ, Smith KR, Roberts I, Wood-cock J, Markandya A, Armstrong BG, Campbell-Lendrum D, Dangour AD, Davies M, et al. Public healthbenefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions:overview and implications for policymakers. Lancet2009, 374:2104–2114.

64. Jones R, Bennett H, Keating G, Blaiklock A. Climatechange and the right to health for M�aori inAotearoa/New Zealand. Health Hum Rights 2014,16:54–68.

65. Nana G, Stokes F, Molano W. The asset base, income,expenditure and GDP of the 2010 M�aori economy.Report for the M�aori Economic Taskforce, 2011,pp. 1–44.

66. Office of the PrimeMinister’s Science Advisory Commit-tee. New Zealand’s changing climate and oceans: theimpact of human activity and implications for the future:an assessment of the current state of scientific knowledgeby the Office of the Chief Science Advisor. 2013. Avail-able at: http://www.pmcsa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/New-Zealands-Changing-Climate-and-Oceans-report.pdf. (Accessed May 24, 2014).

67. Baker MG, Barnard LT, Kvalsvig A, Verrall A, Zhang J,Keall M, Wilson N, Wall T, Howden-Chapman P.Increasing incidence of serious infectious diseases andinequalities in New Zealand: a national epidemiologicalstudy. Lancet 2012, 379:1112–1119.

68. Smith KR, Woodward A, Campbell-Lendrum D,Chadee D, Honda Y, Liu Q, Olwoch J, Revich B, Sauer-bornR.Human health: impacts, adaptation, and co-ben-efits. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Mastrandrea MD,Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M,Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, et al., eds. ClimateChange 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability.Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution ofWorking Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report ofthe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Cambridge and New York, NY: Cambridge UniversityPress; 2014.

69. McMichael A, Woodruff R, Whetton P, Hennessy K,Nicholls N, Hales S, Woodward A, Kjellstrom T. Healthand climate change in oceania: a risk assessment 2002.2003, pp. 33–34. Available at: http://webarchive.nla.gov.au/gov/20080727052932/http://health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-pubhlth-publicat-document-metadata-env_climate.htm.(Accessed May 24, 2014).

70. New Zealand College of Public Health Medicine. PolicyStatement on Climate Change. 2013. Available at:http://www.nzcphm.org.nz/media/74098/1._nzcphm_cli-mate_change_policy__final_comms_version2_.pdf.(Accessed May 24, 2014).

71. Horizon Poll. 22% Slump in Climate Change Concern.2012. Available at: http://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/242/kiwis-who-th. (Accessed May 24, 2014).

72. Stuart D. Survey on public attitudes to climate changeand the Emissions Trading Scheme. 2009, Wellington,New Zealand. Available at: http://www.gpcnz.co.nz/Site/Papers_and_Submissions/Default.aspx. (AccessedJune 1, 2015).

73. Horizon Research. New Zealanders’ ClimateChange Actions and Attitudes. Prepared for Motu



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions/new-zealand%E2%80%99s-post-2020-climate-change-target-0



http://www.wwf.org.nz/?8941/Paradise-lost-New-report-shows-20-years-of-environmental-inaction-threatensNZs-natural-heritage



http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/8834/thesis.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y



http://www.pmcsa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/New-Zealands-Changing-Climate-and-Oceans-report.pdf



http://webarchive.nla.gov.au/gov/20080727052932/http://health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-pubhlth-publicat-document-metadata-env_climate.htm




http://www.nzcphm.org.nz/media/74098/1._nzcphm_climate_change_policy__final_comms_version2_.pdf

http://www.nzcphm.org.nz/media/74098/1._nzcphm_climate_change_policy__final_comms_version2_.pdf

http://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/242/kiwis-who-th

http://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/242/kiwis-who-th

http://www.gpcnz.co.nz/Site/Papers_and_Submissions/Default.aspx

http://www.gpcnz.co.nz/Site/Papers_and_Submissions/Default.aspx

Economic and Public Policy Research and the Sustaina-ble Business Council, 2014. Available at: http://www.motu.org.nz/publications/detail/new_zealanders_clima-te_change_actions_and_attitudes_horizon_survey.(Accessed July 1, 2015).

74. Sibley CG, Kurz T. A model of climate belief profiles:how much does it matter if people question human cau-sation?Anal Soc Issues Public Policy 2013, 13:245–261.

75. Hughey KFD, Kerr GN, Cullen R. Public perceptions ofNew Zealand’s environment: 2013. 2013. Availableat: http://nzae.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Hughey_et_al__A_Decade_of_Public_Perceptions.pdf.(Accessed May 1, 2014).

76. Hughey KFD, Kerr GN, Cullen R. Public Perceptions ofNew Zealand’s Environment: 2010. 2010. Available at:http://researcharchive.lincoln.ac.nz/bitstream/10182/3875/1/Perceptions_2010.pdf. (Accessed May 1, 2014).

77. AitkenC, ChapmanR,McClure J. Climate change, pow-erlessness and the commons dilemma: AssessingNew Zealanders’ preparedness to act. Glob EnvironChang 2011, 21:752–760.

78. Hopkins D. Learning about climate: an exploration ofthe socialization of climate change. Weather Clim Soc2013, 5:381–393.

79. Boykoff MT. Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper cover-age of anthropogenic climate change in the United Statesand United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006. Area 2007,39:470–481.

80. BoykoffMT, Boykoff JM. Balance as bias: global warm-ing and theUS prestige press.GlobEnvironChang 2005,14:125–136.

81. Kenix LJ. Framing science: climate change in the main-stream and alternative news of New Zealand. Polit Sci2008, 60:117–132.

82. Chetty K, Devadas V, Fleming JS. The framing of climatechange in New Zealand newspapers from June 2009 toJune 2010. J R Soc N Z 2015, 45:1–20.

83. The Press. Key to Dine in Palace as Smith Talks. ThePress; 2009, 1.

84. Irvine E. Mum’s plans to help safeguard our planet. Bayof Plenty Times, 2009, p. A026.

85. Taylor G. NZ is now climate change laggard. NewZealand Herald, 2009, p. A007. Available at: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/climate-change/news/article.cfm?c_id=26&objectid=10599933. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

86. Boykoff MT. From convergence to contention: UnitedStates mass media representations of anthropogenic cli-mate change science. Trans Inst Br Geogr 2007,32:477–489.

87. BoykoffMT. Lost in translation? United States televisionnews coverage of anthropogenic climate change,1995–2004. Clim Chang 2007, 86:1–11.

88. New Zealand Ministry for Culture & Heritage.NewZealandwomen and the vote: suffrage and beyond.

Available at: http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/womens-suffrage. (Accessed May 20, 2014)

89. Bullock D. TheNewZealand emissions trading scheme: astep in the right direction? Institute of Policy StudiesWorking paper 09/04. Wellington, Institute of PolicyStudies, 2009. Available at: http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/pub-lications/files/103dbb7f99a.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

90. New Zealand Government. Cabinet paper “ClimateChange: Setting the direction for future domestic policyoptions and ratification of the Kyoto protocol;” 2002.

91. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. Latestupdate on New Zealand’s net position. Available at:http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/reporting-green-house-gas-emissions/nzs-net-position-under-kyoto-proto-col/latest. (Accessed June 28, 2015).

92. Statistics New Zealand. Greenhouse gas emissions.Available at: http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_-stats/snapshots-of-nz/nz-progress-indicators/home/envi-ronmental/greenhouse-gas-emissions.aspx. (AccessedSeptember 1, 2014).

93. New Zealand Parliament. Research papers: climatechange agreements. Available at: http://www.parlia-ment.nz/en-nz/parl-support/research-papers/00PLE-coC5121/climate-change-agreements. (Accessed June28, 2015).

94. Associated Press. Kyoto ‘outdated, insufficient:’ groser.2012. Available at: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol-itics/8027288/Kyoto-outdated-insufficient-Groser.(Accessed July 1, 2015).

95. Greenpeace. Decision to abandon Kyoto puts NZinto club of worst polluters. 2012. Available at:http://www.greenpeace.org/new-zealand/en/press/Deci-sion-to-abandon-Kyoto-puts-NZ-into-club-of-worst-polluters/. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

96. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment.New Zealand’s emissions reducations targets. 2014.Available at: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/climate/emissions-target-2020/. (Accessed May 22, 2014).

97. New Zealand Ministry for the Environment. Report ofthe Ministry for the Environment for the Year ending30 June 2013.AnnualReportNo.ME1126,Wellington,New Zealand, New Zealand Ministry for the Environ-ment, 2013. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

98. Richter JL, Chambers L. Reflections and outlook for theNewZealand ETS: must uncertain times mean uncertainmeasures? Policy Q 2014, 10:57–66.

99. Rotherham F. New 2030 greenhouse gas emissiontarget is weaker: expert. ScoopBusiness, 2015. Availableat: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1507/S00258/new-2030-greenhouse-gas-emissions-target-is-weaker-expert.htm. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

100. BullockD. Emissions trading inNewZealand: develop-ment, challenges and design. Environ Polit 2012,21:657–675.



http://www.motu.org.nz/publications/detail/new_zealanders_climate_change_actions_and_attitudes_horizon_survey



http://nzae.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Hughey_et_al__A_Decade_of_Public_Perceptions.pdf

http://nzae.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Hughey_et_al__A_Decade_of_Public_Perceptions.pdf

http://researcharchive.lincoln.ac.nz/bitstream/10182/3875/1/Perceptions_2010.pdf

http://researcharchive.lincoln.ac.nz/bitstream/10182/3875/1/Perceptions_2010.pdf

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/climate-change/news/article.cfm?c_id=26&objectid=10599933



http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/womens-suffrage

http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/politics/womens-suffrage

http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/publications/files/103dbb7f99a.pdf

http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/publications/files/103dbb7f99a.pdf

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate-change/reporting-greenhouse-gas-emissions/nzs-net-position-under-kyoto-protocol/latest



http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/snapshots-of-nz/nz-progress-indicators/home/environmental/greenhouse-gas-emissions.aspx



http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/parl-support/research-papers/00PLEcoC5121/climate-change-agreements



http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8027288/Kyoto-outdated-insufficient-Groser

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8027288/Kyoto-outdated-insufficient-Groser

http://www.greenpeace.org/new-zealand/en/press/Decision-to-abandon-Kyoto-puts-NZ-into-club-of-worst-polluters/



http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/climate/emissions-target-2020/

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/climate/emissions-target-2020/

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1507/S00258/new-2030-greenhouse-gas-emissions-target-is-weaker-expert.htm



101. Moyes TE. Greenhouse gas emissions trading inNew Zealand: trailblazing comprehensive cap andtrade. Ecol Law Q 2008, 35:911–964.

102. Bertram G, Terry S. The Carbon Challenge:New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme. Welling-ton: Bridget Williams Books; 2010.

103. Adams T, Turner JA. An investigation into the effects ofan emissions trading scheme on forestry managementand land use in New Zealand. Forest Policy Economics2012, 15:78–90.

104. Karpas E, Kerr S. Preliminary evidence on responses tothe new zealand forestry emission trading scheme.2011. Available at: http://motu-www.motu.org.nz/wpapers/11_09.pdf. (Accessed May 20, 2014).

105. Diaz-Rainey I, Tulloch D. New Zealand’s EmissionTrading Scheme: a financial perspective. Accountancyand Finance Departmental Seminar Series, 2015.

106. ACT Party. National – ACT Confidence and SupplyAgreement. 2008. Available at: http://www.act.org.nz/files/agreement.pdf. (Accessed May 20, 2014).

107. New Zealand Parliament. Review of the emissions trad-ing scheme and related matters (1.23A). Report of Com-mittees, 2009. Available at: http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/sc/documents/reports/49DBSCH_SCR4485_1/review-of-the-emissions-trading-scheme-and-related-matters. (Accessed May 20, 2014).

108. Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon F-M, Collins W, Fugle-stvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque J-F, Lee D, Men-doza B, et al. 2013: Anthropogenic and naturalradiative forcing. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, PlattnerG-K, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, XiaY, Bex V, Midgley PM, eds. Climate Change 2013:The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of WorkingGroup I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, andNew York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2014,659–740.

109. Reisinger A, MeinshausenM,ManningM, Bodeker G.Uncertainties of global warming metrics: CO2 andCH4. Geophys Res Lett 2010, 37:L14707.

110. Shine KP, Fuglestvedt JS, Hailemariam K, Stuber N.Alternatives to the global warming potential for com-paring climate impacts of emissions of greenhousegases. Clim Change 2005, 68:281–302.

111. Stroombergen A, Reisinger A. The macroeconomicimpact on New Zealand of alternative GHG exchangerate metrics. In: EcoMod Conference. Seville, Spain,1 July 2012.

112. Kelly G. History and potential of renewable energydevelopment in New Zealand. Renew Sustain EnergyRev 2011, 15:2501–2509.

113. Barry JM, Duff SW, Macfarlane DAB. Coal resourcesofNewZealand.Resource InformationReport16,Wel-lington, New Zealand, New ZealandMinistry of Com-merce, Energy and Resources Division, 1994, 73 p.

114. New Zealand Ministry of Business Innovation andEmployment. Economic Development Information:Coal. Energy Data and Modelling, 2014. Availableat: http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-modelling/data/coal. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

115. Crown Minerals. South Island lignite, New Zealandcoal resources fact sheet. 2006.

116. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.Lignite and climate change: the high cost of low gradecoal. 2010. Available at: http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-Lignite.pdf. (Accessed May20, 2014).

117. Bertram G. Coal and the New Zealand policy context:key issues. In: IPS Symposium: The Future of Coal.Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University ofWellington, 2011.

118. New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development.Guide to government management of minerals andcoal. New Zealand Petroleum and Minerals Factsheet,2012. Available at: http://www.nzpam.govt.nz/cms/pdf-library/minerals/publications/fact-sheets/minerals-and-coal-guide. (Accessed May 22, 2014).

119. New Zealand Ministry of Business Innovation andEmployment. Energy in New Zealand 2013.Modellingand Sector Trends, 2014. Available at: http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-model-ling/publications/energy-in-new-zealand/Energy-in-New-Zealand-2014.pdf. (Accessed June 28, 2014).

120. New Zealand Ministry of Business Innovation andEmployment. Renewables. Available at: http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-model-ling/data/renewables. (Accessed June 28, 2015)

121. New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development.New Zealand energy strategy 2011–2021: developingour energy potential.Wellington, NewZealand,Minis-try of Economic Development, 2011. (Accessed May20, 2014).

122. Mason I, Page S, Williamson A. A 100% renewableelectricity generation system for New Zealand utilisinghydro, wind, geothermal and biomass resources.Energy Policy 2010, 38:3973–3984.

123. United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange. Summary of GHG Emissions for Annex1. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data, 2013. Availableat: http://unfccc.int/di/DetailedByParty.do. (AccessedJuly 1, 2015).

124. OECD. Environment at a glance 2013: OECD indica-tors. Available at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/envi-ronment/environment-at-a-glance-2013_9789264185715-en. (AccessedOctober 1, 2014)

125. Bollard A, Pickford M. Deregulation and competitionpolicy in the transport sector in New Zealand. J TranspEconomics Policy 1998, 32:267–276.

126. New ZealandMinistry of Transport. The New Zealandvehicle fleet: annual fleet statistics 2014. StatisticalReport, August 2014 Release, 2014. Available at:





http://www.act.org.nz/files/agreement.pdf

http://www.act.org.nz/files/agreement.pdf

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/sc/documents/reports/49DBSCH_SCR4485_1/review-of-the-emissions-trading-scheme-and-related-matters




http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-modelling/data/coal

http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-modelling/data/coal

http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-Lignite.pdf

http://www.pce.parliament.nz/assets/Uploads/PCE-Lignite.pdf

http://www.nzpam.govt.nz/cms/pdf-library/minerals/publications/fact-sheets/minerals-and-coal-guide



http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-modelling/publications/energy-in-new-zealand/Energy-in-New-Zealand-2014.pdf




http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-industries/energy/energy-modelling/data/renewables



http://unfccc.int/di/DetailedByParty.do

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/environment-at-a-glance-2013_9789264185715-en



http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/New-Zealand-Vehicle-fleet-stats-final-2013.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

127. New Zealand Government. Govt won’t proceedwith fuel economy standard. Available at: http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/govt-won%E2%80%99t-proceed-fuel-economy-standard. (Accessed July1, 2015).

128. Office of the Minister of Transport. Vehicle fuel econ-omy standard – report back. 2009. Available at:http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Our-Work/Vehicle-Fuel-Economy-Standard-Cabinet-Paper-Aug-09.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

129. Pelling M, High C, Dearing J, Smith D. Shadow spacesfor social learning: a relational understanding of adapt-ive capacity to climate change within organisations.Environ Plan A 2008, 40:867–884.

130. Smit B, Wandel J. Adaptation, adaptive capacity andvulnerability.Glob Environ Chang 2006, 16:282–292.

131. NottageRAC,WrattDS, Bornman JF, JonesK.ClimateChange Adapation in New Zealand: Future Scenariosand Some Sectoral Perspectives. New Zealand ClimateChange Centre: Wellington; 2010.

132. Evans L, Milfont TL, Lawrence J. Considering localadaptation increases willingness to mitigate. GlobEnviron Chang 2014, 5:69–75.

133. Hayward B. ‘Nowhere far from the sea:’ political chal-lenges of coastal adaptation to climate change inNew Zealand. Polit Sci 2008, 60:47–59.

134. Hopkins D. The sustainability of climate change adap-tation strategies in New Zealand’s ski industry: a rangeof stakeholder perceptions. J Sustain Tourism 2014,22:107–126.

135. Lawrence J, Quade D, Becker J. Integrating the effectsof flood experience on risk perception with responsesto changing climate risk. Nat Hazards 2014,74:1773–1794.

136. Paton D, Millar M, Johnston D. Community resilienceto volcanic hazard consequences. Nat Hazards 2001,24:157–169.

137. Adger WN. Social aspects of adaptive capacity. In:Smith J, Klein R,Huq S, eds.Climate Change, AdaptiveCapacity and Development. London: Imperial CollegePress; 2003, 29–49.

138. Klein RJT,Midgley GF, Preston BL, AlamM, BerkhoutFGH, Dow K, Shaw MR. Adaptation opportunities,constraints, and limits. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dok-ken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatter-jee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, et al., eds.Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vul-nerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contri-bution of Working Group II to the Fifth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange. Cambridge and New York, NY: CambridgeUniversity Press; 2014, 899–943.

139. Lee JM,ClarkAJ, Roche JR.Climate change effects andadaptation options for temperate pasture-based dairyfarming systems: a review. Grass Forage Sci 2012,68:485–503.

140. Burton R, Peoples R. Learning from the past adapta-tions to extreme climatic events: a case study ofdrought. A report prepared for theMinistry of Agricul-ture and Forestry. Hamilton,NewZealand, AgresearchFarming, Food and Health. First, 2008.

141. Rosin C, Manhire J, Moller H, Saunders C, McCuskerK, Saunders J, Guenther M, Reynolds D, Busfield W,Chanut P. Intensification trajectories in the context ofclimate change: potential pathways for theNewZealandpastoral sector. Report prepared forMin-istry of Primary Industries, 2015.

142. Cradock-Henry NA. Farm-level vulnerability to cli-mate change in the Eastern Bay of Plenty,New Zealand in the context of multiple stressors.PhD Thesis, University of Canterbury 2011, 403 pp.

143. Environmental Protection Authority. 2014 final reportand decisions. Available at: http://www.epa.govt.nz/Resource-management/Tukituki/final-report-deci-sions/Pages/default.aspx. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

144. IPCC. SRES emission scenarios. Available at: http://sedac.ipcc-data.org/ddc/sres/index.html. (AccessedJuly 1, 2015).

145. Hendrikx J, Hreinsson EO. The potential impact of cli-mate change on seasonal snow inNewZealand: part II-industry vulnerability and future snowmaking poten-tial. Theor Appl Climatol 2012, 110:619–630.

146. Hopkins D,Higham JES, Becken S. Climate change in aregional context: relative vulnerability in the Australa-sian skier market. Reg Environ Change 2013,13:449–458.

147. Hendrikx J, Zammit C, Hreinsson EÖ, Becken S. Acomparative assessment of the potential impact of cli-mate change on the ski industry in New Zealand andAustralia. Clim Change 2013, 19:965–978.

148. Hennessy KJ, Fitzharris B, Bates BC, Harvey N, How-den M, Hughes L, Salinger J, Warrick R. Australia andNewZealand. In: ParryML,CanzianiOF, Palutikof JP,van der Linden P, Hanson CE, eds. Climate Change2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contri-bution of Working Group II to the Fourth AssessmentReport of the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange. Cambridge and New York, NY: CambridgeUniversity Press; 2007.

149. Blackett P,HumeT.Community involvement in coastalhazard mitigation: ‘Some insights into Process and Pit-falls.’ In: NZ Planning Institute Politics of PlanningConference, 28–30 March, 2007.

150. Britton R, Dahm J, Rouse H, Hume T, Bell R, Blackett P.Coastal adaptation to climate change: pathways tochange. 2011. Available at: https://www.niwa.co.nz/sites/niwa.co.nz/files/pathways_to_change_nov2011.pdf.(Accessed July 1, 2015).



http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Research/Documents/New-Zealand-Vehicle-fleet-stats-final-2013.pdf



http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/govt-won%E2%80%99t-proceed-fuel-economy-standard



http://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Our-Work/Vehicle-Fuel-Economy-Standard-Cabinet-Paper-Aug-09.pdf



http://www.epa.govt.nz/Resource-management/Tukituki/final-report-decisions/Pages/default.aspx



http://sedac.ipcc-data.org/ddc/sres/index.html

http://sedac.ipcc-data.org/ddc/sres/index.html

https://www.niwa.co.nz/sites/niwa.co.nz/files/pathways_to_change_nov2011.pdf

https://www.niwa.co.nz/sites/niwa.co.nz/files/pathways_to_change_nov2011.pdf

151. Te Puni Kokiri. A time for change in Maori economicdevelopment. Wellington, New Zealand, Te PuniKokiri, 2007.

152. Strauss S. Climate adaptation: cultural knowledge andlocal risks. Nat Clim Chang 2015, 5:624–625.

153. Kerr S, Duscha V. Going to the source: using anupstream point of regulation for energy in a nationalchinese emissions trading system.MotuWorking PaperNo. 14–09, 2014.

154. Emissions Trading Scheme Review Panel. DoingNew Zealand’s fair share: emissions trading schemereview 2011: final report. 2011. Available at: http://www.climatechange.govt.nz/emissions-trading-scheme/ets-review-2011/review-report.pdf. (Accessed July1, 2015).

155. NZAGRC.NewZealand Agricultural GreenhouseGasResearch Centre: highlights 2013. 2013. Available at:http://www.nzagrc.org.nz/release.html. (Accessed July1, 2015).

156. Ministry for the Environment. New Zealand’s Green-house Gas Inventory 1990–2012. Report No. ME

1148, Wellington, New Zealand, Ministry for theEnvironment, 2014.

157. Clark H, Aspin M, Reisinger A. Financial imperativesin reducing emissions. The Dominion Post, 2014.Available at: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/9942403/Financial-imperatives-in-reducing-emissions. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

158. Kerr S, Dorner Z. Tackling agricultural emissions:potential leadership from a small country. Motu NoteNo. 13, 2013.

159. Christie JE. Adapting to a changing climate: a proposedframework for the conservation of terrestrial nativebiodiversity in New Zealand. 2014. Available at:http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/science-and-tech-nical/sap257.pdf. (Accessed July 1, 2015).

160. Higham JES, Cohen SA. Canary in the coalmine: Nor-wegian attitudes towards climate change and extremelong-haul air travel to Aotearoa/New Zealand. TourManage 2011, 32:98–105.



http://www.climatechange.govt.nz/emissions-trading-scheme/ets-review-2011/review-report.pdf



http://www.nzagrc.org.nz/release.html

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/9942403/Financial-imperatives-in-reducing-emissions



http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/science-and-technical/sap257.pdf

http://www.doc.govt.nz/documents/science-and-technical/sap257.pdf

Climate change and Aotearoa New Zealand

Documents

Transcript of Climate change and Aotearoa New Zealand