New Zealand was ranked 1st (out of 146 countries) by the 2006 Environmental Performance Index (EPI). In subsequent years we’ve slipped down the rankings to 7th (2008), then to 15th (2010).
At the same time New Zealand was ranked amongst the 10 worst countries in the world in terms of its ‘environmental footprint.’(WWF-2006). The lie of our clean green myth is being exposed in the media both here and abroad (see NZ Herald: The dying myth of a clean, green Aotearoa)
New Zealand is ranked amongst the 10 worst countries in terms of its environmental footprint.
- WWF-2006
Challenges to New Zealand’s green image were identified in a 2007 OECD report on the country’s environmental performance:
Though New Zealand’s freshwater is still good overall and rates well internationally, its quality and availability has been deteriorating in many parts of the country. In 2009, a report by the Cawthron Institute found a New Zealand river – the Manawatu – to have the highest levels of dissolved oxygen of those tested. Although this is only one measure of water quality (nitrogen), the report gained wide spread media coverage and brought to light the challenges facing freshwater in New Zealand. New Zealand is in the top ten OECD countries for nitrate levels in water mainly attributed to dairy intensification. New Zealand has no set standards for nitrate levels however, the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) investigates any cases where water contains more than 0.33 milligrams of nitrate per litre.
The majority of New Zealand’s population (70%) receive good quality drinking water, however, as the size of the drinking water supply decreases they become less likely to comply with the New Zealand drinking water standards. Although there is no national reporting system for waterborne diseases, annual cases have been estimated at between 18,000 – 34,000.
The limits for abstraction of our freshwater resource have largely been reached in some areas. With little pricing of water resources, water scarcity is being felt increasingly acutely in some dairy-intensive regions prone to drought and by increased irrigation loads.
Emissions
New Zealand has the fifth highest emissions per capita in the OECD (2008), following Australia, Luxembourg, the USA and Canada. “We are closer to leading the developed world in increasing our emissions than in reducing them,” (MP Dr Nick Smith, 2010).
New Zealand has the fifth highest emissions rate per capita in the OECD.
Despite New Zealand being considered a pioneer in implementing an emissions trading scheme (NZ ETS) covering all sectors and gases the 23% growth of total emissions since 1990 and the failure to reduce emissions per capita demonstrate that very little has been done so far to reduce New Zealanders’ emissions.
At current rates, NZ will account for more CO2 per capita than the USA in just 8 years time.
Despite having 39% renewable profile in energy, New Zealand is a net energy importer principally of oil. Our goal is 90% renewable energy generation by 2025.
In addition to transport CO2 emissions, the emissions profile of generation has increased through gas and coal generation being used to meet high demand to being part of the mix of core generation. Energy efficiency improvements – principally in transport, industry and electricity generation – will be important if New Zealand is to meet its GHG reduction targets.
Among OECD countries, New Zealand has one of the highest percentage of major protected areas of land (30%). New Zealand is considered a leader in the management of parks and protected areas. Mining is off-limits on the 40% of the conservation estate listed on Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act – recent Government proposals to extract minerals from reserves in this land was strongly opposed in New Zealand.
However, the landscape of New Zealand has been undergoing extensive change, and the cost is to our emissions profile.
Recent landuse changes respond to strong dairy prices and water availability for irrigation. The total water allocated for abstraction increased by 50% between 1999 and 2006 with the majority for water for irrigation of farm conversions. As a result, consented irrigated land in New Zealand has increased by 52% – Canterbury has the majority of irrigated land (66%) followed by Otago (14%).
The landscape of New Zealand has been undergoing extensive change.
A lack of complete data and indicator sets concerning the state of the environment and environmental pressure at local and national level impedes efforts to make policy more result-focused. Environmental monitoring at local level should at least rely on a minimum common set of measurements, which would facilitate aggregation for key national indicator development.