RELEASED UNDER THE OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT
In 2002, the Government adopted a strategic climate change goal for New Zealand as follows:
“To enable New Zealand to make significant greenhouse gas reductions on business-as-usual and be set towards a permanent downward path for total gross emissions by 2012.”
Cabinet was advised that the Government would be seeking the following outcomes for New Zealand by 2012 if the goal was to be met:
It is arguable whether all of these outcomes are likely to be achievable by 2012 on current policy settings. Some of them are subjective (a and b), although others involve commitments that are less ambiguous (c and e). More importantly, projected greenhouse emissions trends indicate a continuous “upwards” rather than a “downwards” path by 2012 (see Figure 42 below).
Figure 42 - Projected Emissions for 2010, Total Emissions Reported in the National Inventory from 1990-2003 and a Linear Extrapolation of Previous Emissions

Source: Ministry for the Environment
The review has identified a limited number of further greenhouse mitigation options that the Government can consider. These include specific sectoral measures (eg, in transport) and the application of price-based measures (carbon taxes and emissions trading). However, in the absence of imposing a carbon price at a level that will have stringent growth and welfare trade-offs, the available additional measures to 2012 would only allow New Zealand to change the trajectory of the “upwards carbon path”. They would not credibly position New Zealand to move towards a “downward carbon path”. Of course, whether or not New Zealand is, at any point in time, “set towards” a downward carbon path will always be open to debate. As it is a subjective goal, it will always be possible for the Government to maintain that satisfactory progress is being made in its achievement. However, the more important question is whether the goal is credible, and useful as a guide to policy choice.
The Government may wish to consider whether it wishes to replace the current strategic goal with multiple objectives that it can use to guide its choice of climate change policies.
The timeframes that are attached to any new objectives may be important. At this time, it is arguably unproductive (for the reasons outlined above) to establish a revised climate change goal that incorporates either a quantitative, or even a qualitative, “downwards emissions path” or “target”. The review has provided the Government with broad alternative options to meet New Zealand’s Kyoto obligations in the period 2008 to 2012. These options include some further domestic mitigation action and utilising the Kyoto flexible mechanisms to acquire Kyoto units. Meeting New Zealand’s current Kyoto commitments is a manageable task for New Zealand. Importantly, the Government still has choices about how it meets these commitments. However, the point remains that none of the short-term options that the review presents will position New Zealand towards a downwards carbon path by 2012.
While a quantitative goal may not be helpful in guiding policy choice in the next five to seven years, that may not hold in the period beyond the next 15 to 20 years. Over a longer time period, technological change – eg, in agriculture – may allow New Zealand to pursue polices that do deliver an emissions profile that does take the country towards a “downward carbon path”.
The following considerations are pertinent to consideration of an appropriate goal that might provide guidance for the development of climate change policy:
Clearly, if New Zealand agreed to adopt the emissions-reduction obligations to 2020 that are being promoted by the European Union, this would have major implications for the policies that New Zealand needs to consider now, and the type of strategic climate change goal that should be adopted. Section 6 provides detailed analysis of New Zealand’s international engagement on climate change and a strategy for our participation in the Conference of the Parties (COP11) in Montreal in December 2005.
It is important that New Zealand’s domestic policies align with whatever future international targets we agree to (if any). New Zealand’s emissions-mitigation task for the 2008 to 2012 period remains manageable. The future decision for New Zealand, with higher domestic economic stakes, is what “carbon path” we may wish to adopt post-2012. If that path is ambitious, that would mean that early, more ambitious, mitigation action would be desirable. The problem facing the Government in that scenario - “move early to position for post-2012 targets” – is that the review has not identified any policies that would allow New Zealand to achieve the types of 2012 to 2020 emissions-reduction targets that are being advanced by the European Union. Such targets would be achievable by New Zealand only if one or more of the following conditions applied, and were acceptable to the Government:
New Zealand is an importer of many technologies in the industrial, residential and commercial sectors, but also exports a range of products and expertise overseas. New Zealand products and services will therefore have to meet relevant international standards and expectations to be competitive, and to make efficient use of imported technology in domestic applications.
This need for alignment with international trends means that some international greenhouse gas and air pollutant emission, energy-efficiency and technology standards may become de facto standards in New Zealand.
The discussion above highlights just some of the possible international constraints on New Zealand’s choices on greenhouse gas emissions paths over the next few decades.
None of these considerations is sufficient in itself to dictate any emissions pathway that New Zealand must follow. However, it will be important for the Government to avoid raising expectations internationally – through participation in negotiations – that it is willing to adopt carbon paths that are not consistent with the types of domestic policies that it finds acceptable. An alternative climate change goal could be established based around the principles of ‘international engagement’ and ‘policy sustainability
An alternative climate change goal could be established based around the principles of “international engagement” and “policy sustainability”.
If the current climate change strategic goal is unsustainable, the question is: What should replace it? The answer depends in part on how the Government makes choices across different dimensions of this review. These include:
A climate change goal should be a tool to help the Government choose between different domestic policies and international negotiation strategies. It is also important that there are realistic expectations of how long a climate change goal may remain relevant before it needs to be modified. Following this reasoning, the Government may wish to adopt a goal that guides New Zealand’s actions only over the next few years. If it does emerge that an international consensus is reached on future action, and New Zealand has clear obligations in the period beyond 2012, the goal could be updated appropriately.
With such a strategy in mind, this could lead New Zealand to adopt a strategic Climate Change Goal with the following elements: