 |
|
12 January 2007 Achieving the Dream A ‘dream-catching' survey of 10,000 New Zealanders conducted just on a year ago revealed that our beaches and empty spaces are the number one pride-trigger for Kiwis. Staying ‘unspoilt' and ‘clean and green' also rate highly in our top ten dreams and aspirations. Those of us lucky enough to be going bush this summer would do well to reflect on the threats to those spaces and dreams, and some of the solutions we could be embracing if we want to preserve the Kiwi way of life. A new study released last year by the Business Roundtable offers compelling evidence to support the role of markets in finding solutions to environmental problems, and warns against the impact on the foundations of market economies of ‘command and control' responses to environmental threats. In Environmentalism Versus Constitutionalism: A Contest Without Winners, University of Queensland professor of public law Suri Ratnapala weighs the threats to the environment that, if unattended, can endanger our way of life, against the threats to constitutional government and the economy that can arise from managerial-style responses to the challenges of environmental protection. He argues that in the end such responses will not only diminish our freedom and weaken our institutions but will also end up harming the environment by reducing our capacity to deal with real threats. In backgrounding the arguments, Dr Ratnapala notes that the difference between prosperous and struggling countries can primarily be explained not by disparities in their natural resources or good fortune, but by the difference between their respective institutions. Prosperous countries tend to have a relatively high degree of personal safety, property rights and contractual certainty under the rule of law, while in stagnant economies these things are generally not secure and the rule of law is feeble. He observes that the power of market economies underpinned by strong institutions in helping to move people from poverty to prosperity is well understood. But he notes that the role of markets in helping societies overcome problems created by human activity – including environmental harm – is often overlooked. The report discusses three ways through which markets can help address such problems: the free exchange and vigorous debate of ideas and information; innovation and technology-driven solutions enabled by wealth creation; and An important background feature of the report is a discussion of the current environmental debate which highlights one of the major obstacles to a proper consideration of the legal and policy issues. In Dr Ratnapala's view, a specific impediment to discussion of the issues is the claim of consensus, the perception that the debate regarding the existence and scale of threats to the environment is over, and that we have no choice left but to embrace the command and control agenda. He challenges this claim and argues that we are more likely seeing the beginning of the first serious public debate on the subject, and that it is not in the interest of science or humanity to silence the alternative points of view on these issues. While emphasising that we should aim to have a healthy environment and should prevent harm that is preventable, Dr Ratnapala cautions against extreme environmentalist views that pursue an imaginary, past, pristine condition of the Earth at the cost of all other interests. The study goes on to examine the state and impact of law in New Zealand and elsewhere with respect to the regulation of property use and the question of compensation, as well as the arguments of those who support regulation and the subordination of property rights to other interests. It notes that New Zealand's Resource Management Act 1991 replaces the common law approach with a micro-management control system that is, in Dr Ratnapala's assessment, “a mixture of indeterminate rules, discretions, overarching policies and unstable judicial law generated by breadth of discretion bestowed on the court.” The study finds that New Zealand's current resource management laws and related policies are eroding constitutional government in New Zealand, and impacting negatively on the economy and ultimately on our capacity to find the most appropriate responses to environmental problems. If we consider the biggest environmental problems in New Zealand today – poor water quality, pollution of streams and lakes, use of hazardous substances like pesticides, and the threat to native species and farming posed by uncontrolled pests – a common thread is clear: they all come down to mismanagement, neglect, under-investment and lack of clear enforceable property rights. If New Zealanders are serious about living the clean green dream, there is wisdom in the view that we should back off our current, bureaucratic system of environmental management and place more weight on a framework of clear and fair rules whose management is entrusted to democratic institutions and independent courts. Dr Ratnapala's report can be found at www.nzbr.org.nz .
Roger Kerr is the executive director of the New Zealand Business Roundtable. |