New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law: Foreword to Volume 29 (2025)
In this piece (reproduced from Volume 29 of the New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law, published June 2026), Professor David Grinlinton reflects on recent events in New Zealand and overseas with implications for the evolution and implementation of domestic and international environmental law. He also introduces the Journal Volume’s contributors and their work, several of which engage with these issues alongside a range of other domestic and international legal developments and challenges.
Find out how to subscribe to past and future issues of the NZJEL.
In last year’s Foreword I wrote that “Geo-political instability and worsening environmental crises have been a continuing theme with international and democratic institutions and the rules-based international order facing increasing challenges”. Regrettably this situation has deteriorated even further with major global and domestic security, economic and environmental consequences. In addition, we have seen a reinvigoration of mineral and hydrocarbon exploration and production, and a rolling back of environmental protections in a number of large economies. On the domestic front the current coalition-government has been encouraging increased development of minerals (including fossil fuels), and other natural resources, as a means to address challenging economic conditions. Measures such as the reversal in August 2025 of the previous Labour government’s 2018 ban on new offshore oil and gas exploration, and the proposals for a major new liquefied natural gas import facility in the Taranaki region are examples of the current government’s drive towards strengthening New Zealand’s energy security and economic growth. Such policies have gained even more impetus recently due to the reduced availability and increased cost of fossil fuels and refined products internationally as a result of the Iran conflict.
As predicted, the new Fast-track Approvals Act 2025 has been heavily used since enactment with a recent update from the government showing that (as at 7 February 2026) nine major projects have been approved including “a new wharf and cruise ship terminal in Auckland, four housing developments across the country, three mining and quarrying projects, and one renewable energy project”.1 A further 17 projects are currently before expert panels with nine decisions expected by the end of March 2026. Altogether (at that time) 76 projects were progressing through the Fast-track process, demonstrating the efficacy of the option, particularly for larger development and infrastructure projects. Concerns voiced are that the Fast-track approvals process will become the preferred route for approval for projects which should go through the normal resource consent process with fuller environmental assessment, and opportunities for oral submissions and appeals on merits.
Resource management reform is proceeding at pace, with the government introducing both a new Planning Bill and Natural Environment Bill on 16 December 2025. Public submissions on the Bills closed on 13 February 2026, and the Environment Committee is expected to report back to the House by 26 June 2026 with the government planning for final enactment shortly thereafter. The Bills will replace the RMA and are intended to separate out the development planning and decision-making process from environmental protection. In his introduction speech the Hon Chris Bishop stated that the Planning Bill will be “…for planning and regulating how land is used, developed, and enjoyed, …”2 with a strong emphasis on the protection and use of private property rights; and the intention of the Natural Environment Bill will be “… to establish a framework for the use, protection, and enhancement of the natural environment.”3 The separating out of development and town planning matters from environmental protection measures seems a retrograde step back to the pre-1991 situation where town planning, water and soil matters, clean air consents and other environmental matters were siloed in separate legislation and regulations. That fragmented policy, planning and decision-making structure led to the adoption of the more integrated environmental management approach of the RMA.
Other concerns include the apparent weakening of environmental protections, including raising the threshold for ‘adverse effects’, requiring local authorities to compensate landowners for certain onerous restrictions on the use and development of their land, and a perceived prioritisation of development over ecological considerations. The latter is reflected in the omission of the ‘sustainable management’ purpose that has been the core guiding philosophy of the RMA for 35 years. Other concerns include a weakening of public participation and input in the planning and decision-making process, the absence of explicit reference to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the Bills, and a reduction of consultation requirements and Māori participation. An intention to enact the measures before the general election in November 2026 also raises the concern of a possible similar reversal of the new legislation - as occurred in December 2023 - if there is another change of government in 2026. With legislation of this scale and importance it is highly desirable that there be a more bi-partisan approach to provide a stable and enduring regime for environmental and resource management matters.
In this volume some of these issues are discussed, along with a range of other topics including both domestic and international legal developments and challenges. Leading off is the 2025 RMLA Salmon Lecture delivered by Retired Chief Environment Court Judge Laurie Newhook. In his paper he considers the interesting question of whether there is a case for access to justice for the natural environment, and if so, how it may be achieved and what challenges there could be in terms of legal and adjudicatory frameworks. The second is the 2025 Tony Hearn QC Memorial Lecture delivered by Environment Judge John Hassan entitled “Environmental Justice: For us and our children after us?” Judge Hassan also reflects on various aspects of access to justice, especially under the RMA 1991, and argues that the path forward requires a better grounding of the law in both science and mātauranga Māori.
The next two articles deal with various law and policy aspects of climate change at both the international and domestic levels. Bella Belcher examines the obligations of State parties under the Paris Agreement 2015 to submit five-yearly ‘nationally determined contributions’ (NDCs) which represent a ‘progression’ and that country’s ‘highest possible ambition’ (Art 4.3). She evaluates the extent to which New Zealand’s second NDC reflects these requirements and concludes that it falls short. The following article by Lily Rose Gholam Hosseini examines Aotearoa - New Zealand’s mandatory climate-related disclosure (CRD) regime which on its introduction in 2021 attracted significant criticism regarding its practical operation. She concludes such criticisms are overstated, and the existing settings are generally appropriate in the New Zealand’s market context, provided they are supported by targeted refinements, appropriate guidance, and proportionate enforcement, subject to incremental and evidence-based adjustments.
In the next article Justine Bendel and Giedre Jokubauskaite discuss problems in the design and use of traditional environmental impact assessment in the context of forest management. They argue that the traditional approach is biased towards development and has enabled developments leading to deforestation and suggest one improvement would be to give greater recognition to the role of tenure rights holders in environmental assessment processes.
The following article by Mark Hamilton and Ellie Stanton examines the use of restorative justice in the context of New Zealand environmental offending. The article provides a two-year ‘snapshot’ of the years 2023-2024 by way of an update to an earlier article ((2024) 4 NZ LawRev 585). It includes an insightful discussion and analysis of the use and value of restorative justice processes, and a valuable repository of such cases for future research and expansion.
The next group of articles focus on Te Tiriti and Māori issues. The first is by Maria Bargh and Estair Van Wagner who argue that the recent ‘critical minerals narrative’ is reinforcing traditional approaches to mineral extraction and undermines Te Tiriti relations. They suggest that building a low-emissions society is a priority, and ‘a just framework for energy transition in Aotearoa’ must incorporate tikanga and Te Tiriti as core elements.
The next article by Faye Busfield discusses the issue of compensating Maori for climate change induced cultural loss. She argues that both international obligations such as those iterated in the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Climate Change, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations support and justify such compensation, with a Te Tiriti-based approach being preferred.
The final article by Ashe Wainui-Mackle examines the issue of managed retreat as a result of climate change-induced coastal inundation and erosion in light of the government’s obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the disproportionate impacts of sea-level rise on Māori. She argues that bespoke Māori managed retreat authorities for iwi and hapū across New Zealand should be established by legislation to reflect principles of tino rangatiratanga, houruatanga, and active protection.
This Volume is rounded out with a Book Review by Caroline Foster of the new book edited by Geraldo Vidigal and Kathleen Claussen entitled The Sustainability Revolution In International Trade Agreements (OUP, 2024). As Professor Foster concludes, the book provides “… a treasure-house of high quality up-to-the moment analyses of trends in trade and sustainable development.”
As always thanks are due to many people involved in the publication of this Volume. First and foremost, the authors are to be congratulated for the excellent quality of commentary on environmental law and policy issues, both internationally and domestically. The Editorial Committee and the Editorial Advisory Panel who provide very helpful oversight and support, and the efforts of the referees who have provided the anonymous and rigorous feedback to authors ensuring the quality of the Journal are gratefully acknowledged. Again, the excellent editing skills of Mike Wagg and the preparation of the electronic copy layout by Amy Tansell of Words Alive are critical in producing the Journal to a very high standard in both hard-copy and electronic form. Finally, the support of the professional staff of the Auckland Law School, the Environmental Law Students Association, and community placement interns Lara Albert and Kiu HeiChloe Yip are gratefully acknowledged.
Professor David Grinlinton
General Editor
Law School
The University of Auckland
March 2026.
1Hon Chris Bishop and Hon Shane Jones, ‘One year on, Fast-track is building NZ’s future’ Beehive Press Release (7 February 2026).
2(16 December 2025) 789 NZPD.
3Ibid.