| Abstract |
This article explores how key political parties have operationalised the only three economic models discussed politically in New Zealand, since 2009: green growth (GG); circular economy (CE), bioeconomy (BE). For the later, two approaches are distinguished, given the different sustainability performance expected: a 'natural bioeconomy' (BE-1) and a 'genetic engineering bioeconomy' (BE-2). Findings indicate that all parties and governments have predominantly supported weak and partial sustainability operationalisations of these models. The conservative National Party conflates resource-intensive capitalism with GG and BE-2. The Labour Party's approaches to CE and BE-1 are fragmented and narrow, with no overarching national strategies; since retaking power in 2017, governmental initiatives remain dominated by the timid GG approach of the past. Labour is mildly open towards several types of high-risk genetic-engineering, consistent with BE-2. The National Party supports BE-2 transitions as wholeheartedly as the Green Party opposes them. Surprisingly, Labour's interest in BE-1 and CBE-1 innovations is limited, framed only by climate mitigation goals. It is unclear whether any political party New Zealand currently understands or wishes to implement contemporary conceptualisations of an innovative, ecologically-sound circular natural bioeconomy (CBE-1). |