IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v97y2020ics0264837719323580.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pernicious pests and public perceptions: Wilding conifers in Aotearoa New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Edwards, Peter
  • Stahlmann-Brown, Philip
  • Thomas, Simon

Abstract

With significant favourable natural resources, New Zealand has excellent growing conditions for certain exotic conifer species. Although these species have been used for erosion control, and commercial and shelter/amenity plantings for many decades, they do have a high propensity to spread into undesirable locations around the country through natural means. These wilding conifers have become pests. Over the years, these pests have been controlled by landowners, government and community members using various methods, including mechanical and chemical means. Further, new ways of control have also been proposed, including the use of fire, genetics and other technologies. In this paper we examine survey and follow-up focus group data to understand public acceptance of these control methods. Overall, mechanical and selective chemical means were most accepted, while widespread chemical spraying and novel or alternative methods were less acceptable. The survey results and focus group discussions highlight the local, contextual nature of the challenges and opportunities.

Suggested Citation

  • Edwards, Peter & Stahlmann-Brown, Philip & Thomas, Simon, 2020. "Pernicious pests and public perceptions: Wilding conifers in Aotearoa New Zealand," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719323580
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104759
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719323580
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104759?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moffat, Kieren & Zhang, Airong, 2014. "The paths to social licence to operate: An integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 61-70.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    3. Deanna Kemp & John R. Owen, 2022. "Corporate social irresponsibility, hostile organisations and global resource extraction," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 1816-1824, September.
    4. Aleksandra Kozłowska-Woszczycka & Katarzyna Pactwa, 2022. "Social License for Closure—A Participatory Approach to the Management of the Mine Closure Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-26, May.
    5. Marcos-Martinez, Raymundo & Measham, Thomas G. & Fleming-Muñoz, David A., 2019. "Economic impacts of early unconventional gas mining: Lessons from the coal seam gas industry in New South Wales, Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 338-346.
    6. Blesia, Jhon Urasti & Dixon, Keith & Lord, Beverley Rae, 2023. "Indigenous experiences and perspectives on a mining corporation's community relations and development activities," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    7. Measham, Thomas G. & Zhang, Airong, 2019. "Social licence, gender and mining: Moral conviction and perceived economic importance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 363-368.
    8. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Cruz, Thiago Leite & Matlaba, Valente José & Mota, José Aroudo & Filipe dos Santos, Jorge, 2021. "Measuring the social license to operate of the mining industry in an Amazonian town: A case study of Canaã dos Carajás, Brazil," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    10. Bowles, Paul & MacPhail, Fiona & Tetreault, Darcy, 2019. "Social licence versus procedural justice: Competing narratives of (Il)legitimacy at the San Xavier mine, Mexico," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 157-165.
    11. Leena Suopajärvi & Karin Beland Lindahl & Toni Eerola & Gregory Poelzer, 2023. "Social aspects of business risk in the mineral industry—political, reputational, and local acceptability risks facing mineral exploration and mining," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 36(2), pages 321-331, June.
    12. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Moffat, Kieren & Louis, Winnifred, 2017. "Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 137-146.
    13. Leena, Suopajärvi & Karina, Umander & Jungsberg, Leneisja, 2019. "Social license to operate in the frame of social capital exploring local acceptance of mining in two rural municipalities in the European North," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Wright, Susan & Bice, Sara, 2017. "Beyond social capital: A strategic action fields approach to social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 284-295.
    15. Saenz, Cesar, 2021. "The relationship between corporate social responsibility and the social licence to operate: A case study in Peru," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    16. Martin Bohle & Cornelia E. Nauen & Eduardo Marone, 2019. "Ethics to Intersect Civic Participation and Formal Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, February.
    17. Emma Wilson, 2019. "What is Benefit Sharing? Respecting Indigenous Rights and Addressing Inequities in Arctic Resource Projects," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-23, April.
    18. Michael O. Erdiaw‐Kwasie & Khorshed Alam & Enamul Kabir, 2017. "Modelling Corporate Stakeholder Orientation: Does the Relationship Between Stakeholder Background Characteristics and Corporate Social Performance Matter?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 465-479, May.
    19. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    20. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719323580. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.