2. The physical attributes of our country that we sell to the world (encapsulated in the 'clean green 100% pure' line)
Firstly, the 'who we are'. The major attributes associated with this part of our brand are integrity, honesty, hard work and standing up for what is right. So, for example, when we slide in the global 'Corruption Perceptions Index' from first (least corrupt) in 2008 to fourth in 2015 out of 180 countries, it mightn't seem a major issue, but it just chips away at how the world views us.
The second branding point is one we are perhaps more familiar with; that being the physical attributes of the country we call home. This manifests itself in our 'clean green 100% pure' brand.
The '100% pure New Zealand' brand was launched by Tourism NZ in 1999 as a marketing tag line, but I would argue that it has been so successful that it has morphed from a tourism brand to pretty much encapsulating our national identity. Clean, pristine rivers, gloriously fresh lakes, virgin forests, snow-covered mountain ranges, ancient fiords, adventure tourism where you come to challenge yourself in an environmental utopia at the southern end of the earth.
Why wouldn't you buy milk and cheese produced from grass-fed herds grazing under the shadow of Mt Taranaki, or water drawn from a source carved out thousands of years ago by the last ice age, or meat from sheep frolicking in ankle-high clover, or fish raised in pristine water? Of course you would. The problem is this slogan is fast becoming a myth; especially when tagged onto our 'clean green' image.
As Sir Paul Callaghan noted: "We believe that we have a clean economy and a clean green image, and do not see the lack of honesty which surrounds this branding. We are merely a small population spread over a large area which provides an impression of clean and green."
This is where the government has an extremely important role to play. GE free is just one example.
We must say no to GE crops and we must do this though the most powerful tool a government has: legislation. Passing laws that maintain our Nation's GE-free stance. Allowing genetically engineered crops of any description into our soils would be foolish on a grand scale.
When I mentioned this as a speaker at a forestry conference last year, a couple of scientists advised me to reconsider my stance on GE; especially regarding forestry innovations.
My view is the science could be indisputable, but this is not a scientific argument; it is a marketing story and a branding issue. In ten, twenty, thirty years' time if we can label all our exports as GE-Free, it will be a global selling point into the ultra-high-end market segments.
That's why I believe we have only a limited time to get this one right, or the consequences could be disastrous for our economy.
If, however, we do get it right, the benefits to our economy, our country and our future generations are massive. It is worth working extremely hard on this issue and we must start today.
It is not a choice between the environment or the economy because in New Zealand's case, the environment is vital to the global perception of what our economy; our region, delivers.
- Stuart Nash is MP for Napier.
- Business and civic leaders, organisers, experts in their field and interest groups can contribute opinions. The views expressed here are the writer's personal opinion, and not the newspaper's. Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz.
