Public perceptions of New Zealand's environment: 2016

The eighth survey (the series having begun in 2000) of people’s perceptions of the state of the New Zealand environment was undertaken over February–March 2016. The survey is based on the Pressure-State-Response (PSR) model of environmental reporting and remains the only long-running survey of this type in the world. For the second time this survey was undertaken only using the internet and this has made it challenging to compare the 2016 results with our earlier paper-based surveys. New Zealanders’ perceptions of all the main resource areas (e.g., air, freshwater, biodiversity) were tested. Statistical analyses identified the roles of several socio-demographic variables. Amongst many PSR findings, some that are notable include: • New Zealanders continue to consider the state and management of the New Zealand environment to be good, and better than in other developed countries; • The states of air, and native bush and forests were rated highest, while rivers and lakes, and marine fisheries were rated as being in the worst state; • Management of all components of the environment was considered to be adequate to good, with management of national parks rated the highest. Rivers and lakes, and groundwater were judged to be the worst managed parts of the environment; • Management of farm effluent and runoff continued to be perceived very negatively; • Farming is perceived to be one of the three main causes of damage to freshwater by over half the respondents and was also considered an important cause of damage to several other resources; and • Water related issues were again rated as the most important environmental issue facing New Zealand, while Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change was again the most commonly identified global issue. One case study examined a few aspects of conservation. First, respondents were asked about the importance of conservation to them – the vast majority reported it was important. Respondents were asked to name their nearest national park – we had hypothesised that many respondents would name sites other than national parks, but about 70% of those who responded did accurately name a national park. Of course the large number of non respondents may not have known the name of their nearest national park, but this cannot be tested. Two environmentally friendly behaviours were explored to understand why people participated: namely in terms of visiting national parks and taking part in a group or organisation that restores or replants the environment. Lack of time was an important factor driving non participation in visits to national parks, and lack of participation in restoring the environment. The second case study concerned predator control and priority species for conservation. Rats were much more prevalent near respondents homes than were possums, stoats and ferrets. Almost all respondents attempted to control rats near their home, but only 56% of respondents who had possums near their home attempted to control them. Trapping is widely used to control possums, stoats and ferrets, while poison are most commonly used to control rats. Fifty percent of the respondents thought that the Department of Conservation and/or Regional Councils should be doing much more than their current efforts to control rats, ferrets, stoats and possums. We asked survey questions about risks to native species and which species were most in need of protection. Kiwi genera were perceived to be the most at risk and the most in need of protection. There was a tussle between Hectors/Maui dolphins and Kakapo for second and third places, with the Kakapo being more frequently perceived to be at risk than the two small dolphins, but not quite as commonly nominated as a priority for protection