Research Commons
      • Browse 
        • Communities & Collections
        • Titles
        • Authors
        • By Issue Date
        • Subjects
        • Types
        • Series
      • Help 
        • About
        • Collection Policy
        • OA Mandate Guidelines
        • Guidelines FAQ
        • Contact Us
      • My Account 
        • Sign In
        • Register
      View Item 
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Arts and Social Sciences
      • Arts and Social Sciences Papers
      • View Item
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Arts and Social Sciences
      • Arts and Social Sciences Papers
      • View Item
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

      Ecological modernization versus sustainable development: the case of genetic modification regulation in New Zealand

      Wright, Jeanette Marie; Kurian, Priya A.
      Thumbnail
      Files
      Wright & Kurian.Ecological Modernisation vs Sustainable Development.pdf
      137.3Kb
      DOI
       10.1002/sd.430
      Find in your library  
      Citation
      Export citation
      Wright, J. & Kurian, P. (2009). Ecological modernization versus sustainable development: the case of genetic modification regulation in New Zealand. Sustainable Development, 18(6), 398-412.
      Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/4024
      Abstract
      Ecological modernization and sustainable development are the two dominant paradigms in environmental policy. This paper assesses the implications of competing understandings of ecological modernization and sustainable development using the case of genetic modification regulation in New Zealand. Although the New Zealand regulatory framework embraces the symbolic language of sustainability, it ultimately adheres to a narrow notion of ecological modernization. By adopting a technically driven risk management process and a diluted precautionary approach, alongside limiting public input into decision-making on genetic modification, it undercuts its commitment to sustainable development definitionally and procedurally. Analysis of the New Zealand biotechnology policy regulatory framework, which consists of the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act and the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA), shows how institutionalization of a narrow conception of ecological modernization can preempt real commitment to sustainable development.
      Date
      2009
      Type
      Journal Article
      Publisher
      Wiley InterScience
      Rights
      This is an author's version of an article published in the journal: Sustainable Development. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
      Collections
      • Arts and Social Sciences Papers [1424]
      Show full item record  

      Usage

      Downloads, last 12 months
      112
       
       
       

      Usage Statistics

      For this itemFor all of Research Commons

      The University of Waikato - Te Whare Wānanga o WaikatoFeedback and RequestsCopyright and Legal Statement