Contesting governance of indigenous forests in New Zealand: The case of the West Coast Forest Accord

This paper uses the concept of 'governance' and the related notion of 'multi-layered' forest management decision making as an overarching framework for analysis of conflict between different stakeholder groups with contrasting perceptions about 'appropriate' use of indigenous forests in a New Zealand case study. In New Zealand, recent institutional reforms inspired by neo-liberal policy agendas have led to substantial conflicts between segments of society over the 'appropriate' governance of remnant indigenous forests. This study focuses on the West Coast Forest Accord (WCFA) as an illustration of the attempt to change governance structures of indigenous forest management by re-regulating the indigenous forest industry. It is argued that by seeking to accommodate multiple stakeholder interests, in particular industry, community and environmental groups, the WCFA was doomed to fail, as multiple, and often conflicting, stakeholder agendas focused on the goal of 'sustainable management' of indigenous forests could no longer be reconciled. Notwithstanding the shift in emphasis from government towards governance in the recent literature, the study findings confirm a continuing strong role by the state as an actor in the forestry sector in New Zealand.