(Sustainable) Development, Environment, and the Relational ‘Third Space’: Lessons from Aotearoa New Zealand’s Fast-track Approvals Act

IF 3.4 1区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Elizabeth Macpherson, Rachael Mortiaux
{"title":"(Sustainable) Development, Environment, and the Relational ‘Third Space’: Lessons from Aotearoa New Zealand’s Fast-track Approvals Act","authors":"Elizabeth Macpherson, Rachael Mortiaux","doi":"10.1017/s2047102526100259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Policymakers often cite a need to balance, or trade off, the protection and restoration of the natural environment on the one hand, and the extractive use of the environment for economic reasons on the other. This tension is inherent in the goal of ‘sustainable development’, which, despite providing a conceptual basis for Western environmental and conservation law, has also been criticized for legitimizing socio-ecologically destructive practices. This tension comes to the fore in the New Zealand government’s Fast-track Approvals Act 2024, which, to prioritize economic development interests, circumvents prior environmental and conservation law safeguards, as well as constitutional protection for the rights of Indigenous Māori. We undertook a contextual legal analysis of the fast-track legislation, demonstrating how it works to undermine conservation outcomes and Indigenous rights. Our findings hold particular significance for scholarly and policy debates about transnational environmental law, especially the contribution of Indigenous knowledge and law in a multi-level governance context. We argue that centring relationality in environmental law frameworks might help to shift away from binary approaches to environmental law, which trade off economic <jats:italic>versus</jats:italic> environmental and cultural interests.","PeriodicalId":45716,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Environmental Law","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102526100259","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Policymakers often cite a need to balance, or trade off, the protection and restoration of the natural environment on the one hand, and the extractive use of the environment for economic reasons on the other. This tension is inherent in the goal of ‘sustainable development’, which, despite providing a conceptual basis for Western environmental and conservation law, has also been criticized for legitimizing socio-ecologically destructive practices. This tension comes to the fore in the New Zealand government’s Fast-track Approvals Act 2024, which, to prioritize economic development interests, circumvents prior environmental and conservation law safeguards, as well as constitutional protection for the rights of Indigenous Māori. We undertook a contextual legal analysis of the fast-track legislation, demonstrating how it works to undermine conservation outcomes and Indigenous rights. Our findings hold particular significance for scholarly and policy debates about transnational environmental law, especially the contribution of Indigenous knowledge and law in a multi-level governance context. We argue that centring relationality in environmental law frameworks might help to shift away from binary approaches to environmental law, which trade off economic versus environmental and cultural interests.
(可持续)发展、环境和相关的“第三空间”:来自新西兰快速审批法案的经验教训
政策制定者经常提到需要平衡或权衡,一方面是保护和恢复自然环境,另一方面是出于经济原因对环境的采掘利用。这种紧张关系是“可持续发展”目标所固有的,尽管它为西方环境和保护法律提供了概念基础,但也因使社会生态破坏性做法合法化而受到批评。这种紧张关系在新西兰政府的《2024年快速审批法案》中凸显出来,该法案优先考虑经济发展利益,绕过了先前的环境和保护法律保障,以及对土著居民权利的宪法保护Māori。我们对快速通道立法进行了背景法律分析,展示了它是如何破坏保护成果和土著权利的。我们的研究结果对跨国环境法的学术和政策辩论具有特别的意义,特别是在多层次治理背景下土著知识和法律的贡献。我们认为,在环境法框架中集中关系可能有助于从二元方法转向环境法,即在经济利益与环境和文化利益之间进行权衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
16.30%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书