Cleaner production in New Zealand: taking stock

Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 716e728www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Cleaner production in New Zealand: taking stock

Greg Brown a, Lesley Stone b,*

a Eco$ense Ltd, New Zealandb Sustainability Uptake Research Group Limited, and University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Accepted 21 June 2006

Available online 9 November 2006

Abstract

New Zealand has seen a significant change in attitude and behaviour toward sustainable business practices since the late 1980s when theintroduction of cleaner production marked the beginning of a change in the way the relationship between business and the environment wasperceived. The context of this change is important. New Zealand is unique in terms of its relative geographic isolation and as a consequencehuman settlers encountered a unique ecosystem, dominated by avian species and without mammalian predators. Subsequent anthropogenicactivity has seriously impacted New Zealand’s biodiversity and sustainability is seen by many as a way of restoring, or at least conservingthe remnant of that unique ecosystem. The country’s natural environment and resources, the shape of business and the health of the economyall colour the way and rate at which sustainability is adopted. This paper charts that change and provides a perspective on relevant policy,research and intervention initiatives over the last 15 years or so and discusses the challenges that face New Zealand in a global market.� 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: New Zealand; Cleaner production; Sustainable business practices; Biodiversity; Global markets; Sustainable societies

1. Introduction

The receptivity of a society to new ideas and the subsequentrate of change away from the status quo are related to context.To understand what motivates, or what may motivate, changehas been the subject of much research, and context is vital toour understanding of how change toward sustainability occurs.It is true that while to many a more rapid and revolutionarychange to a sustainable society would be desirable, thata change is occurring at all is important. Our focus must beon how to nurture and encourage, and if we can, acceleratethe rate of that change. This paper attempts to establish a con-text for, and provide an overview of what is occurring in NewZealand (NZ) with regard to aspects of business sustainability.In this paper, sustainability should be understood as ‘strong’sustainability, meaning that each of the ecological, economic

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ64 9 974 3201; fax: þ64 9 372 8608.

E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Stone).

0959-6526/$ - see front matter � 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.06.025

and social aspects must be maintained in good conditionboth individually and as a whole.

The context is complex and there are probably as manyways to characterise it as there are perspectives. However,this paper focuses only on the two aspects of context thatthe authors believe are the most significant in terms of the sus-tainable business change process in NZ. The first relates to thebroader society/environment interface that sets NZ apart andhas underlying implications for business. It is beyond thescope of this paper to go into significant detail in this regard,but it is touched upon briefly in Section 2 to provide insightinto the unique imperatives of sustainability within NZ. Thesecond is the more traditional (and more universally acknowl-edged) business context discussed in Section 3, within whichsustainability is promoted: economic imperatives and businessdemographics.

Section 4 reviews a range of sustainability initiatives anddiscusses the strengths, weaknesses and lessons learned fromour ‘sustainable’ business history. While the paper givesmore prominence to cleaner production, as a business

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

717G. Brown, L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 716e728

approach it represents but one of many initiatives seeking tomove NZ businesses toward sustainability. Section 5 considersmore recent government responses and the implications theyhave for future direction and progress toward business sustain-ability within NZ.

2. The society/environment interface

Two key features of the broader society/environment inter-face that make NZ unique are its ecological legacy and itsindigenous M�aori people. NZ’s relative geographic isolationmeant that human settlers encountered a unique ecosystem,dominated by avian species. In the absence of any mammalianpredators, a significant number of the bird species were flight-less. Together with accompanying mammals, human arrivalhas had a rapid and devastating impact on NZ’s biodiversity.While biodiversity losses had already begun by the time ofcolonisation, the rate of habitat destruction and devastationincreased significantly with the arrival of European settlers.

Agriculture has, since early colonial days, formed the back-bone of the New Zealand economy. Together farm productionand post-farm manufacturing and processing contributes 17%of New Zealand’s GDP and utilises close to half of New Zealand’stotal land area [1]. Much of the development and early success ofNew Zealand’s agricultural sector is due to the fertile soil pro-duced by once abundant and ecologically rich lowland floodplainforests. As observed by Park (1995), the fenced boundaries be-tween native bush remnants and surrounding pastoral land area place where ‘‘we can comprehend what happens ecologicallywhen humans decide to channel a whole ecosystem’s productiveenergy into themselves’’ [2].

That the natural fertility has been substantially mined to ex-haustion is evidenced by the increasing use of chemical fertil-isers to support the pastoral farming characteristic of NewZealand agriculture. The bulk of these fertilisers are fromnon-renewable resources, such as the petroleum based ureanitrogen supplements and phosphate rock derived products.‘‘It is commonly recognised that the high quality reserves[of phosphate] are being depleted expeditiously and that theprevailing management of phosphate, a finite non-renewablesource, is not fully in accord with the principles of sustainabil-ity’’ [3]. While an extensive grassland system providing natu-ral sources of nitrogen through nitrogen fixing legumes(clover) has served New Zealand well, more intensive prac-tises are evidenced by the increasing reliance on externalfeed inputs, in addition to increasing fertiliser application [1].

However, New Zealanders are in general aware of this richecological heritage and appear to share a view that NZ is rel-atively unspoiled, when contrasted with older and moreheavily developed western economies. The absence of a coreof heavy industry, a low population density and its isolationmean that there is value placed on NZ’s ‘clean green’ image,certainly as a tradable brand, but also as a lifestyle quality. Thethreat to biodiversity is viewed as one of New Zealand’s mostcritical environmental challenges [4] and this concern under-pins a strong conservation ethic.

Evidence of the importance of the environment/society in-terface in NZ can be found in the Resource Management Act(RMA), which provides the primary legislative framework forcontrolling the environmental effects of development activitieswithin the country. Enacted in 1991, and currently underreview, the RMA replaced a plethora of environment-relatedlaws (although there is now also separate legislation coveringspecific areas such as hazardous substances and new organ-isms, biosecurity, greenhouse gases, ozone protection and en-ergy efficiency). The NZ Ministry for the Environmentacknowledges that the RMA is ‘‘the most devolved systemof environmental legislation in the world’’, with the responsi-bility for granting resource consents distributed around 86local government entities grouped within 14 regions [5].With a core purpose of promoting the sustainable managementof NZ’s natural and physical resources, the legislation hasdriven considerable change and improvement since 1991.

One criticism, and perhaps with unforeseen outcomes, hasbeen the environmental effects based emphasis of the legisla-tion. In the absence of national environmental standards oneresult has been a wide variation in interpretation and subse-quent inconsistency of implementation between regions.Recent initiatives have sought to remove this variation withthe gradual introduction of mandatory national standards.

Another related outcome of the effects based approach hasbeen a preference, by applicants, for end-of-pipe solutions tomitigate environmental effects, rather than preventative mea-sures. Although preventative measures are not excluded, thelack of a purpose-built directive has resulted in more familiarand traditional methods being selected. This limitation washighlighted in a 1998 review of the RMA [6].

In addition to the regulatory requirements that it places onbusiness development, the RMA also draws attention to twokey features that differentiate New Zealand’s sustainable busi-ness context from that of other countries. The first is thesignificance that is assigned to the indigenous M�aori peopleof New Zealand, and the second is the fundamental principleof public participation in decision-making.

The European settlement of New Zealand, in common withthe colonial experience elsewhere, involved a degree of op-pression and subjugation of pre-European M�aori inhabitants.The ‘Crown’s’1 agreement with M�aori in 1840, the Treaty ofWaitangi, has had a revived impact on the social landscapesince the latter part of the 20th century, with the partial returnof confiscated land and financial settlement of historic griev-ances perpetrated by the Crown. An important part of thischanged social climate is the institutional eminence that isgiven to M�aori culture and concepts. Under the RMA, individ-uals and organisations wishing to undertake new activities orto change significantly the resource-related aspects of existingones are required to consult with M�aori. While this

1 The term ‘Crown’ was originally used in reference to the British sovereign,

the other party to the agreement, known as the Treaty of Waitangi. Although

British sovereigns now play only a constitutional role in New Zealand’s

government, the term has stuck and tends to be used in reference to the

government.

718 G. Brown, L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 15 (2007) 716e728

requirement is only discretionary for other members of thepublic, it has resulted in a culture of consultation and a de-facto requirement that members of the public be consultedwith and incorporated into decision-making. What this meansfor businesses is that they not only expect to involve M�aori andmembers of the broader public in decision-making regardingtheir activities, but that in doing so they are frequently exposedto broader sustainability-related concepts.

An important example is the concept of guardianship (kai-tiakitanga), which is recognised by the RMA and generallyrefers to the stewarding of natural resources on behalf ofancestors and for current and future generations. This conceptis consistent with inter-generational equity, inherent in theoriginal definition of sustainable development as mooted inthe Brundtland Report [7], but frequently ignored. The NewZealand cultural context, therefore, demands at least in princi-ple that businesses extend the focus of their programmesbeyond sustainable resource use and management to alsoinclude guardianship or responsibility for the stewardship ofthose resources. While this is by no means a mainstream inter-pretation and it is not yet evident as an outcome for the major-ity of business initiatives, it has already been identified as animportant means whereby to test their effectiveness (see [8]).

Public expectations and case law support public involve-ment to such a degree that many businesses have come torecognise the importance and value of engaging with stake-holders in a pre-emptive way.

3. Business-specific context

3.1. Economic imperatives

New Zealand has seen a radical reform of its economy overthe last 20 years, with a rash of privatisation and the removalof a majority of the market subsidies through the 1980s and1990s. The rapid introduction of a market economy for a smalltrading nation removed geographically from most of it marketshas not been without impact. As a result of the economicreforms of the 1980s, including major changes to the socialwelfare system, income inequality rose rapidly over the period1988e1991, and following a brief respite until 1994, has beensteadily rising since. The relatively larger rise in income of thetop 20% has been the main contribution to the increasinginequality, although exacerbated by global recession andincreased unemployment in the late 1980s [9]. The increasinginequality has implications for business sustainability whenengaging with operational staff, where economic benefits areperceived to be unevenly allocated and environmental benefitsnot well understood.

The success of New Zealand’s economy is dependent oncompeting successfully in the global market place. The impor-tance of agricultural or food related exports is illustrated inFig. 1, and this lends support to the need to maintaina clean-green marketing edge.

Economic growth continues to be a pre-eminent goal.Growth of course carries with it the baggage of increasingresource consumption and waste. In 2002 the New Zealand

economy, as measured on a per capita GDP basis, ranked 21out of 30 OECD member countries. A stated objective ofthe current government is to move New Zealand into the tophalf of the OECD countries on a per capita GDP basis. Asat 2002, this target required over a 60% increase in GDP percapita [10].

While New Zealand has yet to adopt an alternate metric toGDP for monitoring economic activity, economic growth isnow framed within the context of sustainable development.Within the context of the economic objective the governmenthas stated [11], ‘‘Implicit in the quality of the growth we areseeking will be integration of the economic, environmentaland social pillars of sustainable development. Sustaininga high quality environment, managing the risks to it and imple-menting efficient resource use policies underpin our competi-tive advantages as a nation. Managing the environmentalpressures from economic growth, while continuing to satisfyhuman needs will require an integrated effort. [.] Sustain-ability will be paramount’’.

Without significant decoupling from resource use, demandson energy supply, material resources and the environment, theeconomic growth target presents significant infrastructural andsocial challenges. By government setting this economicgrowth target in the context of sustainable developmenthowever, there is now an implicit expectation that the NewZealand society will off-set potential resource or environmen-tal degradation by improved utilisation of resources andprotection of the receiving environment.

There is as yet little evidence of any significant decouplingon a national level. Although some individual regions havedemonstrated what is possible (see Fig. 6b), national energystatistics for example have shown decreasing intensity ona per GDP basis (see Fig. 2).

3.2. Business demographics

As discussed above, the agricultural sector is important toNew Zealand’s economy and together with other primary

Meat18%

Dairy20%

Forest products9%Machinery &

equipment8%

Iron and steel 2%

Plastic1%

Optical/medical1%

Other18%

Wool 2%

Petroleum 1%

Textiles2%

Fruit and nuts4%

Other foodproducts

7%

Aluminium3%

Fish4%

Fig. 1. Overseas merchandise trade [45].


industries (such as forestry and fish) comprises over 50% ofexports traded by New Zealand on the world market. Issuesregarding sustainability are of course not limited to agricul-tural practises. All economies develop some measure of diver-sity both to support existing industries and as sectors in theirown right.

There are approximately 365,000 identifiable business en-terprises in New Zealand, including some 70,000 agriculturalproduction units. Of the remaining 295,000 enterprises (lessthe farms), only 4% are directly related to the agricultural sec-tor, although a proportion of the remainder will undoubtedlybe providing services to the agricultural sector. These295,000 enterprises provide full time equivalent employmentfor a little over 1.5 million people, or about 38% of New Zea-land’s population. The distribution of business enterprises inNew Zealand by category and by employment is summarisedin Table 1 [12].

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999

Year

Prim

ary en

erg

y co

nsu

mp

tio

n, P

J

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Real G

DP

, N

ZD

m

illio

n

Primary energy Real GDP, NZD million

Fig. 2. Primary energy use and real GDP [46,47].

Table 1

Distribution of enterprises and employment across business categories [12]

Business category (ANZSIC)a Proportion of

employment (%)

Proportion of

enterprises (%)

Agriculture, forestry and fishing 2.3 4.1

Mining 0.2 0.1

Manufacturing 16.7 7.1

Electricity, gas and water supply 0.4 0.1

Construction 7.7 12.2

Wholesale trade 6.6 5.5

Retail trade 12.5 11.4

Accommodation, cafes

and restaurants

4.8 3.6

Transport and storage 4.5 3.6

Communication services 1.8 1.1

Finance and insurance 3.1 3.8

Property and business services 13.3 33.2

Government administration

and defence

4.4 0.1

Education 7.0 2.1

Health and community services 8.8 4.4

Cultural and recreational services 2.4 3.5

Personal and other services 3.6 4.1

a Australia New Zealand Standard Industry Codes.

Similar to most economies, small to medium-sized enter-prises (SMEs) are the dominant size of business. SMEs aredefined in a New Zealand context as businesses employingless than 20 personnel, and as such represent 96.8% of identi-fied business enterprises and employ 43% of the total full timeequivalent workforce [12]. Fig. 3 illustrates the employmentpattern in the New Zealand economy in relation to businesssize (excluding agricultural production).

Using value added as an indicator of contribution to GDP,Fig. 4a illustrates the relative contributions to the economyby different sized businesses. SMEs (less than 20 FTE) con-tribute an estimated 36% of the value added to the economy.Expressing productivity in terms of added value per FTEemployee, Fig. 4b illustrates the productivity by business size.

4. Sustainable business initiatives in NZ

4.1. Background

Cleaner production was introduced into New Zealand in thelate 1980s. Initially the subject of advocacy by internationaland local environmental groups, it was incorporated into theAuckland Region’s Trade Waste By-law in 1991, the resultof a consultative process involving NGOs, 200 plus industryrepresentative groups and local council officers. It was alsothe subject of a 14-port nationwide tour by Greenpeace’s Rain-bow Warrior II in early 1992. These early initiatives togetherwith the introduction of the concept at a central governmentlevel provided fuel for nationwide involvement by waste man-agement professionals in the publication in 1992 of a documenttitled ‘Our Waste: Our Responsibility’ by the Centre forAdvanced Engineering (a not-for-profit trust) [13]. Widelycirculated within New Zealand, perhaps its most significantfeature was interest sparked amongst the broad range of pro-fessionals from the waste management industry who hadbeen asked to contribute to the publication. An early flush ofinterest in the document’s publication culminated in attemptsto establish a cleaner production foundation, which was unsuc-cessful due to a lack of industry interest or support at that time.

Following publication of the CAE document, the NZ Min-istry for the Environment (MfE) allocated resources to cleanerproduction in the early 1990s, publishing a number of case

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

1-5 6-9 10-19 20-49 50-99 100-499 500+

Business size (full time equivalent)

Em

plo

ym

en

t, F

TE

Fig. 3. Distribution of employment by business size [12].


studies in 1993 in an effort to raise awareness amongst indus-try [14]. While direct allocation of staff to support andpromote cleaner production by the Ministry ceased not longthereafter, this role was effectively transferred to a contestable‘Sustainable Management Fund’ (SMF) established in 1994.Over the period 1994 to 2003, 26 projects actively promotingcleaner production attracted funding totalling NZD2.4 million,with an additional eight projects focussed specifically on solidwaste recycling receiving NZD 0.73 million. The cleaner pro-duction projects attracted 6.2% of the total funding pool overthe 1994e2003 period (see [15]). As the major funding sourcefor cleaner production projects, the level of funding andnumber of projects provides a useful indicator of cleanerproduction activity in New Zealand. These indicators are sum-marised in Fig. 5.

While Fig. 5 indicates a fall-off in funding of cleaner pro-duction orientated projects (waste management and cleanerproduction category) by the SMF mechanism, this has beento some extent mitigated by increased funding by localgovernment. In addition there has been a broadening of theunderstanding and the consequential implementation ofaspects of sustainability within business. In 2000 for example,a dedicated fund was established to address sustainable farm-ing issues and since 2000 has allocated NZD33 million to 265individual projects [16]. The SMF fund was reframed in 2004to emphasise community interaction, requiring business inter-vention programmes for example to be undertaken within thecontext of a broader community outcomes. In addition, anincreasing proportion of the public good science funding is

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

1-5 6-9 10-19 20-49 50-99 100-499 500+


Ad

de

d v

alu

e, N

Z$

m

illio

n

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

1-5 6-9 10-19 20-49 50-99 100-499 500+


Ad

ded

valu

e/F

TE

, N

ZD

/F

TE

a

b

Fig. 4. (a) Added value by business size [12]. (b) Added value per FTE by

business size [12].

being specifically directed at issues surrounding sustainableresource use (10% of total funding, or NZD60 million over2003e2005) [17].

The broadening interest in sustainability within governmenthas resulted in the development of a sustainable industriesgroup focussed specifically on developing initiatives withindustry. Some specific initiatives are discussed in followingsections.

The market economy that developed in New Zealand fromthe mid-1980s forward has resulted in a light handed approachto legislative measures. There is no equivalent of the UK Inte-grated Pollution Prevention and Control legislation in NZ.Neither is there a raft of EU directives providing an impetusfor change. Certainly within the MfE, for example, there hasbeen an identifiable preference for voluntary measures. ‘‘Ifdone well, industry self-management is more effective inachieving positive environmental outcomes than relying onlyon a rule-based regime imposed by regulatory agencies’’[18]. Although a truism, the debate continues to revolvearound the size, scope and difficulties addressing the ‘If’.

As a consequence of a distributed land based agriculturalindustry and low population density, the visible impact ofhuman activity on the environment has not been as evidentas in the more industrialised and heavily populated nations.Whereas the European Union has moved in recent years toadopt a stringent environmental legislative framework to con-trol and mitigate past (particularly relevant since Germanreunification and the collapse of the Soviet Union) and presentenvironmental damage, New Zealand business operates withina less demanding environmental regimen.

While the effects of industrial activity are controlled viaresource management legislation, there is no requirement toadopt a preventive approach, other than those that exist inthe market. With full participation and buy-in voluntary mea-sures, if wholeheartedly adopted, would undoubtedly securedesired results. However, the journey is necessarily slow, as

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year project approved

Pro

je

ct fu

nd

in

g, N

ZD

Maintaining and restoring biodiversityLegislation trainingInfluencing attitudes and behaviourEconomic instrumentsEMS & Sustainable Communities

MonitoringWaste management & cleaner productionContaminated sitesSustainable land managementKaitiakitanga

Fig. 5. Funding of environmental projects by output category [15].


market signals are not strong [enough], and arguably lag be-hind the physical needs of the environment.

4.2. Review of key initiatives: successes andshortcomings

It is important to the future development of cleaner produc-tion and other aspects of sustainability in New Zealand thatpractitioners and policy makers alike continue to look backand learn from on-going experiences. There has been anincreasing range of activities focused on aspects of sustainabil-ity, and evaluating and reviewing progress is essential toenhancing future understanding and progress. While inade-quate resources have precluded evaluation in all too manycases, where there has been opportunity, the learning hasbeen invaluable.

4.2.1. Community-based NGO initiativesThe move toward a more responsible approach to managing

waste in the early 1990s heralded the first cleaner productionorientated activity. The promotion and adoption of a wastehierarchy, as one aspect of sustainability, by government hasyielded significant downstream effects. Alongside and inpart catalysed by government sponsored projects there hasbeen a proliferation since the mid-1990s of NGOs focussingon different aspects of the waste hierarchy (although tosome degree this has been retrogressive, with communitybased NGOs having largely focussed on the recycling of solidwaste).

The introduction of legislation enforcing stricter landfillmanagement requirements resulted in a rationalisation of land-fills and increasing pressure to extend the lifetime of thoseremaining. The number of operating landfills was reducedfrom 327 in 1995 to 115 in 2002 and is expected to reduce fur-ther to 43 by 2010 [19]. In addition, legislation requiring localgovernments to incorporate the waste hierarchy into theirwaste management planning was introduced in 1996 (LocalGovernment Act Amendment no. 4, 1996). As a consequencethere has been a significant increase in the volume of solidmaterial being recycled from both businesses and domesticdwellings. A large proportion of the recycled material is ship-ped overseas for reprocessing, with the relatively smallvolumes in New Zealand limiting opportunities for privateprocessing initiatives.

Recent research evaluating the effectiveness of communityNGOs [20] found that while largely successful in increasingrecycling of solid materials, in general neither the organisa-tions themselves nor their community sponsors were takingresponsibility for addressing other aspects of the hierarchy,specifically prevention, reduction and reuse. While theresearch recognised that individual organisations may bemore effective concentrating in specific areas (such as solidwaste recycling), one of the key recommendations drawnfrom the research was the need to integrate a range of activi-ties that work together to achieve a broader goal.

While the efforts of these many organisations must beapplauded, it is regrettable that their efforts have not been

replicated to the same extent by initiatives focussing on theprevention and reduction of these wastes in the first place.(In mitigation, it is worth noting that research has found thateconomic pressures play a significant role in effectively forc-ing community groups to place more emphasis on incomegenerating activities such as recycling [20].)

The focus on recycling also highlights another issue. Manybusinesses have, following some form of intervention,proceeded to implement solid waste recycling and localgovernment and NGO initiatives have generally been quitesuccessful in this regard. While of itself not a problem, theapparent failure of these same businesses to progress to imple-menting preventative measures is a concern. There is a sensethat these businesses believe they are doing all they candorat least all they were asked. A manager responsible for wasteminimisation within a large corporate commented that an ini-tial focus on recycling within their business may have limitedprogress toward other areas of improvement, as staff came tothink that waste minimisation2 was only about diverting wastefrom the landfill [21].

The community group study also highlighted a more criticalissue. Efficient local government infrastructure has for most insociety generated the unconscious view that waste is somebodyelse’s problem. Whether the disposal of the waste is sustainablehas only recently come into question, but historically the pipeor the rubbish truck just take it awaydsomewhere else.Ultimately, within both business and society as a whole, the pri-mary objective for any programme is to affect sufficient socialchange that individuals, businesses and corporations take re-sponsibility for their waste [20].

4.2.2. Integrated business programmesIn addition to the numerous NGO-based community recy-

cling initiatives there are also examples of more integratedprogrammes that have the objective of improving the resourceefficiency of both business and residential communities. Inte-grated programmes provide an opportunity for observingprogramme change and development that occur in responseto perceived successes or a lack thereof.

One notable example is a local government sponsoredprogramme that has operated in Christchurch since 1997 thatincorporates a business intervention programme and a comple-mentary Recovered Materials Foundation to process and recy-cle a range of solid materials, whether from kerb-side orbusiness collections. The Foundation was established in1997 in response to issues resulting from the collapse of mar-kets for plastic, paper and glass recovered by the Council inprevious years and was established with the aim of developingsustainable end uses for materials recovered from the wastestream.

The original 12 businesses involved in the Christchurchbusiness programme were supported by a central governmentgrant and the outcomes and learning from this initial phase of

2 Note that while waste minimisation is in some countries considered to

refer only to solid waste, in NZ the term tends to have been used in a broader

sense, including liquid, gaseous, and other wastes.


the programme have already been reported in this journal[22e24]. Since the inception of the business programme in1997, in excess of 200 Christchurch businesses haveparticipated in a range of initiatives. The interventions haveincluded:

1. Workshop programmesdpart subsidy from local govern-ment: the workshop programme, in particular, was illustra-tive of the evolutionary nature of the Christchurchbusiness programme. Concern that companies eitherdiscontinued more efficient practices or ceased to makeadditional progress once the formal intervention had fin-ished, was a catalyst for programme change.

(a) Medium to large sized training workshops (1999e2004): a 6 month training programme targeted atmedium sized companies (and larger) was developedout of an initial 2 day intensive format (1997), withthe objective of lifting awareness and providing thebasic skills necessary to undertake waste assess-ments, implement identified options and monitorprogress. A focus on cross-functional team formationwas introduced and functionality was introduced toimprove effectiveness and to combat staff attrition.

(b) The Natural Step (TNS) workshops (2001e2002):the Natural Step framework was introduced ina workshop series with the objective of helping busi-nesses look beyond immediate savings to envisagea sustainable future.

(c) Environmental Management System (2003e2005):programmes integrating cleaner production with theEnviro-Mark Environmental Management System[25] were introduced with the objective of support-ing improvements within a systematic managementframework.

2. Sector specific programmesdfull subsidy from localgovernment: several programmes have been run thathave targeted specific sectors including printers, powdercoaters, electroplaters, education, supermarkets, retailand commercial buildings.

3. Site visit programmedfull subsidy from local government:a wide range of small to medium sized commercial andmanufacturing businesses have received site visits fromresource efficiency specialists. A summary report recom-mending options for improvement is presented to each site.

4. Bi-monthly breakfast meetings on a range of topics relatedto sustainability targeted at a business audience.

5. Web-site based resources.

While this programme, known as ‘Target Zero’, has beenthe most comprehensive to date in NZ, other territorial author-ities have engaged in similar activity, although on a smallerand more limited scale.

The benefit of an integrated approach is illustrated inFig. 6a,b. The landfill history of Christchurch city, in whichTarget Zero operates, is contrasted to that of the Aucklandregion, which has not had an integrated waste minimisationprogramme.

Christchurch is managed by a single local governmentagency (city council) and has a population of 320,000 peopleand since 1997 has developed a coordinated CP programme.Greater Auckland is divided into four separate city councilsand three district councils, with a combined population ofover 1 million people, and has not had a coordinated approachto cleaner production. While a degree of decoupling of GDPgrowth from waste volume is evident in Christchurch, thesame trend is not evident for Greater Auckland.

4.2.3. Environmental management systemsThe rapid uptake by New Zealand businesses of the

ISO9000 quality systems in the early to mid-1990s was largelydue to concerns that a lack of certification may impede tradeaccess. Although a similar trend was expected with regard toISO14001, this did not emerge and as of November 2004 therewere 83 companies accredited to the ISO14001 standard,compared with 1359 to ISO9000 (JAS ANZ, 2004, personalcommunication). New Zealand has lagged other developedcountries in the implementation of ISO14000. World wide,there is approximately one ISO14000 accredited organisationfor every ten ISO9000 organisations. Although the uptakerate in New Zealand and Australia is similar, it is much lowerthan the world average, running at about one ISO14000 forevery 17 ISO9000 accredited organisations.

Christchurch City

600.0

650.0

700.0

750.0

800.0

850.0b

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Year

Lan

fill w

aste, kg

/c

ap

ita

18,000

19,000

20,000

21,000

22,000

23,000

24,000

25,000

26,000

NZ

G

DP

, $/c

ap

ita

kg/capita GDP/capita

Auckland region

400450500550600650700750800850

a

19841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003

Year

$18,000

$19,000

$20,000

$21,000

$22,000

$23,000

$24,000

$25,000

$26,000

MWh/capita GDP/capita

Lan

dfill w

aste, kg

/cap

ita

NZ

G

DP

, $/cap

ita

Fig. 6. (a) Growth of Auckland landfill disposal with GDP (Auckland Regional

Council, personal communication) [47]. (b) Growth of Christchurch landfill

disposal with GDP (Christchurch City Council, personal communication) [47].


Reasons for the slower uptake are largely anecdotal, butinclude:

� A degree of disillusionment with the perceived benefitderived from administration top-heavy ISO9000experience;� Less than anticipated pressure from export markets for

environmental compliance; and� Inability of smaller companies to provide the necessary

resources.

For a more detailed discussion of barriers to EMS uptake,see [26].

The maturing of the management system market hasresulted in a more pragmatic approach to implementationwith the obvious option of integrating ISO14000 with existingISO9000 systems. Environmental expectations, while still notat the same level as food safety, health and safety or quality,are moving up the priority list.

One initiative gaining ground in the NZ market is Enviro-Mark� [25]. Developed in the UK, Enviro-Mark� isa web-based five stage EMS targeted at small to medium sizedenterprises. Designed as a do-it-yourself process, with thirdparty verification of achievement, Enviro-Mark� has beendesigned to be accessible to smaller companies and as ofNovember 2004 had 180 sites representing 143 companiesworking toward an Enviro-Mark� standard (LandcareResearch, 2004, personal communication). Many of thesmaller companies perceive the attainment of the continuousimprovement standard (the third level) as adequate for thescale and scope of their business. Some of the medium to largecompanies are using the Enviro-Mark� process as a route toachieve ISO14000 accreditation.

The promotion of Enviro-Mark� has to a large extent beenthrough formalised programmes working in partnership witheither major business through a supply chain approach, orwith local government. In each of these cases the approachhas been to integrate the EMS with resource efficiency, sothat the principles of cleaner production and pollution preven-tion are embedded into the firms EMS from the start. This hasbeen a deliberate effort to overcome the shortcomings ofprevious cleaner production programmes, where for manybusinesses, participation has been on a project basis, beyondwhich there has been little continuity.

4.3. Review of key issues and challenges

4.3.1. Organisation and cultureMany of the issues confronted in cleaner production and

other sustainability initiatives for NZ businesses appear simi-lar to experiences in other countries. Generic issues such asa lack of time, resources and commitment are commonly citedby NZ businesses as barriers to the successful on-going imple-mentation of cleaner production [27,28]. Many of the internalbusiness issues are universal and linked back to organisationalculture, while others are more specific to NZ and a product ofthe NZ context.

Maintaining continuity from within a formal programmesuch that cleaner production becomes a part of the businessprocess is a major challenge. Programmes providing a mixof training and consultative assistance generally include aproject component whether as a vehicle for teaching or todemonstrate the cost-benefit of cleaner production to companymanagement. In any event, businesses participating in suchprogrammes often fall into the ‘project-trap’, that is, oncethe support is withdrawn and the project is completed the busi-ness returns to the status quo.

The importance of learning styles, and the impact on train-ing within intervention programmes, has also been recognised.The initial Target Zero programme, in particular, was thesubject of in-depth research that highlighted the need for inter-vention to encourage reflective (or double loop) learning (see[29]) in order to more securely embed changed practiseswithin an organisation [23,24].

Staff changes continue as a major threat to continuity,although efforts to establish a broader team approach [28]have attempted to mitigate this effect.

4.3.2. Voluntary frameworkWhile the voluntary focus of sustainable business initiatives

such as cleaner production in NZ makes learning from theseexperiences particularly important, it is also worth drawingattention to the challenges it raises. NZ’s economic reformsof the 1980s and early 1990s were based upon the premisethat Adam Smith’s ‘‘invisible hand’’ [30] would be sufficientto control all aspects of the market. Crediting the marketwith this degree of power continues to impact policy develop-ment in the 21st century (even though it was first postulatedover two centuries ago). While there is now a well recognisedneed to move toward a sustainable economy, in NZ this iswithin a substantially voluntary framework, in contrast tothe regulatory framework evident in, for example, Europe.While NZ’s policy development relating to resource use andsustainability has progressed significantly in the last 5 years,the majority of these policy initiatives still have a significantvoluntary component.

The impact of this voluntary approach, although arguablymore robust in the longer term, is a lack of business impera-tives (outside of participation in a market economy) to becomemore sustainable, or implement cleaner production practices.That is not to say that market pressures do not have an effect,but rather that this effect is delayed and tends to lag behindexport markets. Krarup and Ramesohl [31] commented thatthe effectiveness of voluntary agreements, as a particularexample of a voluntary approach, for improving industrialenergy efficiency are dependent on the policy mix in whichthey are embedded. They suggest the mix of supporting policyneeds to set demanding targets and provide significant incen-tives. In other words, the effectiveness of voluntary measuresis limited when operating in isolation from a broader and sup-portive policy framework. In some cases policies may seek todirectly affect the market by introducing tax incentives (e.g.tax relief for investment initiatives) or levies (e.g. landfill orcarbon taxes).


There is ample evidence of the effect of market require-ments, however. An example is the NZ meat industry, wherea focus on food hygiene and animal welfare has been drivenprimarily by major international customers. While the envi-ronment does feature, it is third on the priority list for themeat sector [32], and has been deprived of resources in viewof the urgency to upgrade food safety risk managementsystems.

4.3.3. Competition, integration and cooperationThe 1990s, and even the early 21st century, have been char-

acterised to an extent by competition between NGOs, both interms of the funding pool and ideology. As sustainabilitythinking becomes more mainstream, there has been a ‘jockey-ing for position’ of pre-eminence amongst some agencies inorder to capture the growing funding allocation. While compe-tition certainly has its place, increasing cooperation and recog-nition of complementarities amongst service providers andresearch agencies indicates a maturing sector.

The NZ Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environmentexpresses the view that NZ is favouring economic efficiencyand environmental pragmatism, a ‘weak’ sustainability (see[33]) that will at best slow, rather than reverse social andenvironmental degradation [48].3 Cleaner production (andthe related eco-efficiency, resource efficiency and pollutionprevention concepts) in the absence of a corporate learningcontext can tend to favour a weak sustainability, with the fea-sibility of projects being defined outside of a sustainable andstrategic context. As observed by de Bruijn and Hofman[34], ‘‘a company needs to appropriate certain capabilities inorder to develop a successful and competitive sustainabilitystrategy’’ that can be provided, at least in part, by cleanerproduction and related approaches. From a perspective of stra-tegic planning, the value of a range of tools and approacheshas been discussed in the context of an integrated planningframework, highlighting the importance of a cooperative, inte-grated approach [35].

Christchurch again provides an example of recent efforts toimprove the level of cooperation amongst agencies and therespective tools and approaches they represent. Christchurchis the largest city in the South Island of NZ and is the mainurban centre within a productive agricultural region. Thecity (government) has recognised that there are many sustain-ability initiatives operating in the city on a small scale andgenerally independent of one another that would benefitfrom integration into a cooperative sustainability frameworkfor the city. To this end a programme is being developedthat draws key NGOs, business associations, local, regionaland central government into a cooperative sustainability clus-ter. The service providers encompass consultants, The NaturalStep, an EMS provider, a CO2 off-set footprint evaluation,a materials recovery operation and a local sustainability

3 Weak sustainability argues for a substitutability between ‘natural’ and

‘manufactured’ capital, where the emphasis is more on managing a balanced

portfolio (of environmental, social and economic capital) rather than maintain-

ing the integrity of each in its own right (see [33]).

network focussing on promotional and awareness raisingevents. Central government agencies include the Energy Effi-ciency and Conservation Authority and the Ministry for theEnvironment.

With a primary objective of building a sustainable Christ-church, the programme will include a regional mandatebeyond the main urban centre. Although the programme isawaiting confirmation (at time of writing), this type of cooper-ative thinking is new in New Zealand and signals a morecohesive approach to sustainability that recognises thestrengths of individual initiatives and the advantage to begained both by the organisations themselves, and the widercommunity.

4.3.4. FundingContinuity of programme initiatives is also an issue within

NZ. While the central government subsidised Target Zero pro-gramme (see Section 4.2.2) achieved continuity as a result oflocal government in Christchurch committing to on-goingresourcing, this programme is the exception rather than therule. As discussed earlier, a majority of business orientatedcleaner production initiatives have been funded by a centralgovernment sustainable management fund. Funding is gener-ally for a fixed period only and most initiatives struggle tocontinue beyond the initial funding period. The limited fund-ing also means that NGOs, who tend to take up the cause,are regularly competing for funds, which can result in anenvironment lacking in trust and cooperation (e.g. see 36]).

4.3.5. Monitoring and evaluationAssessing past performance, managing current perfor-

mance and modifying existing methods to improve futureperformance are all essential to continuous improvement,whatever the field of endeavour. One of the keys to managingimprovement is attention to the discipline of monitoring andevaluation.

A recent review of waste minimisation and resourcestewardship programmes in New Zealand [20] found that eval-uation was generally not targeted at addressing the fundamen-tal objective of bringing about change in thinking and practice,but at sub-measures that were related more directly toeconomic return and benefit. While the latter is importantand should be measured, the usefulness of the monitoring interms of evaluating progress toward the overall goal is limitedat best. The study also suggested that NGOs in particular werevulnerable to economic imperatives favouring income generat-ing activities, with any monitoring reflecting this focus [20].For example, NGOs with a primary focus on landfill diversionwould, naturally enough, measure waste diverted from thelandfill (through recycling), but would not have any measureof the extent their approach was reducing material disposedof at the landfill i.e. landfill volumes were likely to be stillincreasing.

While it may be unrealistic for the small and often under-resourced NGO to monitor the big picture, the failure offunding bodies to pick up this responsibility leaves a gapinghole in the evaluation process.


Business intervention programmes suffer from the samemalaise. To be fair, the paucity of robust programme evalua-tion is as much related to a systemic issue with participatingbusinesses as the programme itself. The authors’ interactionswith business over the last 15 years only serve to reinforcethe fact that a majority of businesses neither measure nor mon-itor resource use effectively, if at all. Consequently, it can bedifficult for the facilitator of an intervention programme togain data adequate to assess a programme’s progress against,for example, resource (water, energy, solid waste, etc.) re-duction targets. The facilitator tends to be reliant, therefore,on predominantly qualitative data that while valuable, pro-vides an incomplete picture of progress toward physical, re-source-based objectives. Notably, one business interventionprogramme has developed a focus on assisting businessdevelop robust monitoring capability.

Issues around inadequate programme evaluation are alsorelated to the programme planning process. A more robustplanning approach, such as Logical Framework Analysis(used, for example, by several aid agencies; see [37,38]) orsimilar, would ensure that activities and objectives and broadergoals are internally consistent and that suitable metrics areestablished before a programme commences. Too often theeasy option of measuring outputs such as companies visited,seminar attendees or reports written are used as substitutesfor the measures actually needed to assess progress againstthe outcomes for which a programme was established, suchas resource reduction or behaviour modification.

From an overview of context and some of the issues fac-ing sustainability within NZ, the following sections look atsome of the more recent governmental responses to thesechallenges.

5. Government response

In this part of the paper we focus on the central and localgovernmental response to sustainability. As observed earlier,an analysis of voluntary measures have indicated that to beeffective they need to be embedded in a strong policy mixthat establishes demanding targets and provides appropriateincentives [31].

5.1. Waste strategy

A waste strategy developed through a consultative processby central and local government in collaboration with industryover the period 2000/2001 sets out a range of objectives andtargets for a wide range of wastes. Waste is defined in the strat-egy as any material, solid, liquid or gas, that is unwanted and/or unvalued, and discarded or discharged by its owner [39].Energy is treated in a separate strategy (see below). The wastestrategy recognises the need for the decoupling of resource usefrom economic growth and clearly states the need for anintegrated approach to improving resource efficiency, fromproduction through to consumption and disposal. The strategyis built around five core policies addressing legislation, pric-ing, environmental standards, information and material use.

As a strategy it contains no legally binding requirements.Although for example targets have been set across a numberof material use areas, the strategy states that these should beconsidered goal statements rather than mandatory require-ments’ [39]. In the same way, statements made regarding theother core policy areas are recommendations for policy devel-opment, rather than legally binding requirements.

While legally enforceable policy may yet emerge, the strat-egy continues a trend of favouring a voluntary approach overa legislative approach. That said, the devolved nature of theResource Management Act allows local bodies the discretionto adopt recommendations and enforce them as law on a re-gional basis.

The targets cover a range of issues including specific activ-ities and reporting on progress in waste minimisation, targetsfor organic waste, hazardous wastes, construction and demoli-tion wastes, organochlorines, contaminated sites and tradewastes. The waste minimisation targets include specific refer-ence to industry, including recommendations that regionalcouncils progressively require industry to have a recognisedwaste minimisation and management programme in place.(Interestingly, these mechanisms mirror to some degree theinnovations included in the Auckland Regional CouncilTrade-Wastes By-law in 1991.)

The role of extended producer responsibility, or productstewardship, is recognised specifically in regard to wastesrequiring special management, such as oil, tyres, end-of-lifevehicles and electronic goods. Product stewardship activitiesare anticipated to be initiated by specific sectors, or by centralgovernment, to ensure national uniformity and access. To datethe examples are relatively few, with the more notable beinga company initiated whiteware take-back scheme (operatingsince 1993), a cell phone take-back scheme, and a PackagingAccord negotiated between central and local government andindustry representatives (see Section 5.1.4).

5.2. Energy strategy

In 2001 an energy strategy was released, also developedthrough a consultative process. In a similar vein to the wastestrategy, targets have been established, that are not bindingbut rather ‘something to aim for’. The energy efficiency targetestablishes a benchmark but is not a mandatory requirement[40]. Two high-level targets specifically address energy effi-ciency (an improvement of 20% by 2012) and the proportionof renewable energy supply available to the end user. The gov-ernment has confirmed a renewables target for 2012 of 30PJ,or a 22% increase over a 2000 baseline [15].

The strategy recognizes the need for a mix of voluntary andmandatory measures, although the general direction is moredependent on voluntary means. Mandatory measures directlyreferred to include:

� Renewable energy obligations on energy retailers;� Minimum energy appliance standards for selected

appliances;� Development of mandatory building design standards; and


� Minimum building performance standards [40].

An act of parliament (the Energy Efficiency and Conserva-tion Act 2000) established a Crown entity, the EnergyEfficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA), to implementthe strategy across all energy forms. In addition, an ElectricityCommission has been established to focus specifically onelectricity which receives funding from a levy imposed onelectricity. Both these agencies should catalyse significantactivity in the business community and civil society over thenext few years.

5.3. The Kyoto Protocol

The impetus to improve energy efficiency has been strength-ened by NZ’s ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in 2002. Ratifi-cation carries with it an obligation to reduce greenhouse gasemissions to 1990 levels over the 2008e2012 period. Emissionsfor 2002 are estimated to be 22% above 1990 levels [34] and NZwill be required to take responsibility for emissions above theagreed 1990 level if reductions are not achieved.

A climate change office established within the Ministry forthe Environment is responsible for developing policy and strat-egy to meet New Zealand Kyoto obligations. The range ofpolices being developed to meet New Zealand’s obligationsare listed below [41].

� An emissions charge system will apply to fossil fuels overthe first Kyoto commitment period (2008e2012). Revenuewill be recycled back into the economy through tax reliefor programme funding.� Carbon credits to be issued to projects reducing green-

house gas emissions, with the prospect of the credits beingtraded on an international market once it has developed.Credits have already been issued to 15 projects includingwind-farms, co-generation, bio-gas and hydro-electricity.� To mitigate against the potential for enterprises to move to

non-Kyoto signatory countries by negotiated greenhouseagreements committing to reducing emissions to worldbest practise in exchange for relief from emissionscharging.� Additional measures targeting small top medium sized

business include education and auditing programmes.

5.4. Sustainable industries

A response of government to the need to promote anddevelop sustainable industry within New Zealand has beenthe establishment in 2002 of a Sustainable Industries Group(SIG) within the MfE. Established to help industry ‘‘think,plan and operate sustainably’’ [18], the group focuses onproviding resources and information, sustainability tools andservices (such as audits) and encouraging industry-driveninitiatives. There is also a work stream focussing on promotingsustainable practises with government departments.

Working within the voluntary framework favoured by theNZ government, the SIG have governmental oversight of

voluntary accords with key industrial sector groups. Twoexamples are the Packaging Accord and the Dairying andClean Streams Accord.

The Packaging Accord has been negotiated between thegovernment and the Packaging Council of New Zealand,together with brand owners, retailers, importers, recyclersand local government. The Accord represents a voluntarycommitment by the signatories to reduce the amount of pack-aging waste in New Zealand’s waste stream from improveddesign and manufacture, selection for appropriate use throughto material recovery and reuse. The commitment of the ninesectors represented within the Accord is expressed throughsector plans that detail the specific steps taken by the individ-ual sectors to conform to the intent of the Accord [42].

The Accord contains targets for the reduction of packagingmaterials expressed in terms of the proportion recovered,which as a KPI falls short as a measure of the decoupling ofmaterial use from economic performance, as the improvedrecovery could of course be of an increasing overall consump-tion. Supplementary monitoring initiatives, while not targetdriven, provide a better indication of decoupling and includea national mass balance reporting on weights of packagingmaterials consumed and recycled and a measure of per capitadisposal of packaging waste to landfill [42].

The Dairying and Clean Streams Accord has been negoti-ated between NZ’s dominant dairy company, Fonterra, andcentral and local government. It has an objective of minimis-ing the impact of the dairy farming industry on natural water-ways, with targets specifying the exclusion of dairy cattle fromwaterways, improved management of fertiliser application andimproved treatment and disposal of dairy shed effluent [43].

There are two identifiable drivers for industry to engageand make progress within a voluntary framework:

1. The Government has clearly stated that ‘‘if a voluntaryapproach does not provide sufficient improvements .Government is prepared to consider doing so byregulation’’;

2. The regular publication of progress toward targets and ofsupplementary KPIs, verified independently, will providethe New Zealand society and the wider market with directknowledge of a sectors progress.

5.5. Funding and research

The focus of funding from the Public Good Science Fundprovides insight into government priorities. Recent fundingallocations signal the emergence of a clearly visible sustain-ability component, made all the more visible by its completeabsence previously. While the broad environment vote hasconsistently averaged approximately 25% of the annual publicgood funding allocation over the last 15 years, the increasedfocus on sustainability is clearly visible within research port-folios that include:

e sustainable production systems,e resilient, functioning and restored natural ecosystems,


e understanding and adapting to global environmental andearth processes change,

e maintaining environmental integrity for sustainableresource use, and

e building sustainable cities and settlements.

The sustainable resource use portfolio includes a focus onbusiness resource use. One programme, with an overall objec-tive of defining ecological footprints for New Zealand’sprimary processing industry, includes a component evaluatingthe role of organisational and cultural structures that maypromote or inhibit behaviour that supports sustainability. By un-derstanding the effect of culture and what sustainability meansto different stakeholders in a value chain, the research has thegoal of identifying the structural changes that would help pro-mote sustainability criteria within industrial decision making.An interesting aspect of this research is that it is framed withina processing company’s existing technical improvement pro-gramme and will seek to integrate and apply a social sciencemethodology directly to the solution of what would otherwisebe treated as a purely technically orientated problem [17].

6. Conclusion

As the last discovered major landmass settled on earth, NZhas developed within a unique contextdunique in terms of itsecological and cultural history and also the speed of its devel-opment. NZ’s unique biodiversity is largely a result of itsrelative isolation. Eighty million years of isolation followingits separation from Gondwanaland resulted in an unusuallyhigh proportion of endemic species that in a relatively shortspace of time have been seriously challenged by human settle-mentdinitially by the Polynesian ancestors of NZ’s M�aoripeople (circa 13th century AD [44]) and more recently bythe mid-19th century influx of European settlers. The uniquenature of NZ’s flora and fauna contribute strongly to thenation’s identity as a clean green land and the threat to NZ’sbiodiversity provided a base for the development of a strongconservation ethic.

In the first instance colonialisation and more latterly global-isation have stripped away the protective shield of isolationand NZ confronts the same threats (to varying degrees) to itsenvironment and quality of life as other industrialised nations.NZ’s response to these threats has been less regulatory focussedthan Europe and more reliant on voluntary participation.

A consultative process has been well established withinNZ’s legislative framework and this approach is also evidentin the development of industry accords (e.g. packaging anddairying) and resource strategies (e.g. waste and energy).

A proliferation of NGOs throughout the latter 1990s and intothe 21st century indicates increasing awareness and activity onboth a community and business level. Competition betweenNGOs, or at least a lack of coordination, has been evident partic-ularly in the business sector where there has been competitionfor funds. At least one recent initiative suggests willingness bya range of groups to work cooperatively within the context ofa funded sustainable business programme initiative.

A conservation ethic, an economy dependent on a buoyantprimary food sector and a large SME business base contributeto a context for NZ to progress cleaner production within busi-ness and more broadly, sustainability within society. That therate of progress has not received the same priority evidencedby the stricter regulatory framework of Europe can in partbe explained by the perception by some in society that NZis still clean and green and the need is not as urgent. Althoughthis perception is losing credence, the reluctance to emulateEurope’s legislative route is evident, but is arguably counteredby policies encouraging voluntary participation in sustainablebusiness practises. Whether the policy mix is sufficiently ro-bust for voluntary mechanisms to move NZ business signifi-cantly along the sustainability journey remains to be seen,but most certainly it is the more desirable route if measurableand sustained progress can be made.

References

[1] PCE. Growing for good: intensive farming, sustainability and New

Zealand’s environment. Wellington: Parliamentary Commissioner for

the Environment; 2004.

[2] Park G. Nga Uruora (the groves of life): ecology and history in a New

Zealand landscape. Wellington: Victoria University Press; 1995.

[3] Steen I. Phosphorus availability in the 21st century: management of

a non-renewable resource. Phosphorus & Potassium 1998;217.

[4] MfE. The State of New Zealand’s Environment. Wellington: NZ Ministry

for the Environment; 1997.

[5] MfE. Information sheet, NZ Ministry for the Environment, Wellington.

Wellington: NZ Ministry for the Environment; 2004.

[6] PCE. Towards sustainable development. The role of the Resource Man-

agement Act 1991: PCE Environmental Management Review No. 1.

Wellington: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment; 1998.

[7] WCED. Our common future: report of the World Commission on Envi-

ronment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1987.

[8] Stone L-J, editor. Resource stewardship and waste minimisation: towards

a sustainable New Zealand. Christchurch: Centre for Advanced Engi-

neering, University of Canterbury; 2003.

[9] MED. The social report. NZ Ministry of Economic Development, Wel-

lington, 2004. http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/economic-standard-living/

income-inequality.html.

[10] Brown GI. Environmental technology sector research project: a review of

economic potential. Christchurch: Centre for Advanced Engineering,

University of Canterbury; 2003.

[11] OPM. Growing an innovative New Zealand. Wellington: The Office of

the Prime Minister; 2002.

[12] StatsNZ. NZ business demographic statistics. Wellington: Statistics New

Zealand; 2004.

[13] CAE. Our waste: our responsibility. Christchurch: Centre for Advanced

Engineering, University of Canterbury; 1992.

[14] MfE. Cleaner production at work: case studies from NZ industry. Wel-

lington: NZ Ministry for the Environment; 1993.

[15] MfE. Sustainable management fund e summary of funded projects. Wel-

lington: NZ Ministry for the Environment; nd.

[16] MAF. Sustainable Farming Fund project summary. Wellington: NZ Min-

istry of Agriculture and Forestry; nd.

[17] FRST. Research abstract and report databases. Wellington: Foundation

for Research, Science and Technology; 2004.

[18] MfE. Wellington: NZ Ministry for the Environment; nd.

[19] MfE. The 2002 landfill review and audit. Wellington: NZ Ministry for the

Environment; 2003.

[20] Stone L-J. Assessment of waste minimisation activities in New Zealand.

Christchurch: Resource stewardship/waste minimisation project Phase 1

report. Centre for Advanced Engineering; 2002.

http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/economic-standard-living/income-inequality.html

http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/economic-standard-living/income-inequality.html


[21] Brown GI. The retail sector. In: Stone L-J, editor. Resource stewardship

and waste minimisation: towards a sustainable New Zealand. Christ-

church: Centre for Advanced Engineering, University of Canterbury;

2003. p. 153e71.

[22] Stone L-J. When case studies are not enough: the influence of corporate

culture and employee attitudes on the success of cleaner production ini-

tiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production 2000;8:353e9.

[23] Stone L-J. Limitations of cleaner production programmes for business I:

Achieving commitment and on-going improvement. Journal of Cleaner

Production 2006;14:1e14.

[24] Stone L-J. Limitations of cleaner production programmes for business II:

leadership, support, communication, involvement and programme de-

sign. Journal of Cleaner Production 2006;14:15e30.

[25] Enviro-Mark. Christchurch: Landcare Research; nd.

[26] Hillary R. Environmental management systems and the smaller enter-

prise. Journal of Cleaner Production 2004;12:561e9.

[27] Brown GI. Coordinating cleaner production programmes: lessons from

Target Zero. Wellington: Ecosense Ltd, NZ Ministry for the Environ-

ment, Meridian Energy; 2000.

[28] Stone L-J. Sustainability programmes for business: place and practice

within the context of relevant developments in organisation theory.

PhD thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland, 2002.

[29] Argyris C, Schon DA. Organizational learning II: theory, method, and

practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1996.

[30] Smith A. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations.

1776.

[31] Krarup S, Ramesohl S. Voluntary agreements on energy efficiency in

industry e not a golden key, but another contribution to improve climate

policy mixes. Journal of Cleaner Production 2003;10:109e20.

[32] Brown G. The meat sector. In: Stone L-J, editor. Resource stewardship

and waste minimisation: towards a sustainable New Zealand. Christ-

church: Centre for Advanced Engineering; 2003. p. 33e50.

[33] Ayres RU, van den Bergh JCJM, Gowdy JM. Viewpoint: weak vs. strong

sustainability. Discussion papers, Tinbergen Institute; 1998, 98e103/3.

[34] de Bruijn TJNM, Hofman PS. Pollution prevention and industrial trans-

formation. Journal of Cleaner Production 2000;8:215e23.

[35] Robert K-H, Schmidt-Bleek B, Aloisi de Larderel J, Basile G, Jansen JL,

Kuehr R, et al. Strategic sustainable development e selection, design and

synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production 2002;10:197e

214.

[36] Stone L-J. Change mechanisms. In: Stone L-J, editor. Resource steward-

ship and waste minimisation: towards a sustainable New Zealand. Christ-

church: Centre for Advanced Engineering; 2003. p. 13e22.

[37] AusAID. AusGuide. Canberra: Australian Agency for International De-

velopment; 2003.

[38] EACO. EuropeAid Cooperation Office; 2004.

[39] MfE/LGNZ. The NZ waste strategy: towards zero waste and a sustainable

New Zealand. Wellington: NZ Ministry for the Environment and Local

Government NZ; 2002.

[40] EECA. Energy efficiency and conservation strategy. Wellington: Energy

Efficiency and Conservation Authority; 2001.

[41] NZCCO. New Zealand’s greenhouse gas inventory 1990e2002: the

National Inventory Report and common reporting format tables. Welling-

ton: NZ Climate Change Office; 2004.

[42] MfE. New Zealand Packaging Accord. Wellington: NZ Ministry for the

Environment; 2004.

[43] MfE. Fonterra Cooperative Group, LGNZ, MAF, Dairying and

Clean Streams Accord. Wellington: NZ Ministry for the Environment; 2003.

[44] King M. The Penguin history of New Zealand. Auckland: Penguin Books

(NZ); 2003.

[45] StatsNZ. Overseas merchandise trade (exports). Wellington: Statistics

NZ; 2004.

[46] MED. Energy data file. Wellington: NZ Ministry of Economic Develop-

ment; 2004.

[47] StatsNZ. Gross domestic product time series: 1956 to 2003. Wellington:

Statistics NZ; 2004.

[48] PCE. Creating our future: sustainable development in New Zealand.

Wellington: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment; 2002.

Documents

Cleaner production in New Zealand: taking stock