dc.contributor.author |
West-Newman, Catherine |
en |
dc.date.accessioned |
2012-04-02T02:06:11Z |
en |
dc.date.issued |
2008 |
en |
dc.identifier.citation |
Space and Culture 11(2):160-175 2008 |
en |
dc.identifier.issn |
1206-3312 |
en |
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/2292/16352 |
en |
dc.description.abstract |
Law making can be both a technical solution and an emotional event formed through social context and geopolitical location. When a decision in the New Zealand Court of Appeal raised the question of beach ownership, government rapidly legislated to 'resolve' the issue. Events around the passing of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 brought beaches to the forefront of public attention and showed how deeply they occupy national affections. In theory, this was law making to reconcile the different beliefs and values of two ethnicized groups - indigenou Maori and settler non-Maori. In practice, a common love of place was mediated through cultural differences to produce grief, fear, and nostalgia in public life. |
en |
dc.publisher |
SAGE Publications |
en |
dc.relation.ispartofseries |
Space and Culture |
en |
dc.rights |
Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Details obtained from: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/issn/1206-3312/ |
en |
dc.rights.uri |
https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm |
en |
dc.title |
'Beach Crisis: Law and Love of Place' |
en |
dc.type |
Journal Article |
en |
dc.identifier.doi |
10.1177/1206331208316026 |
en |
pubs.issue |
2 |
en |
pubs.begin-page |
160 |
en |
pubs.volume |
11 |
en |
dc.rights.holder |
Copyright: SAGE Publications |
en |
pubs.end-page |
175 |
en |
dc.rights.accessrights |
http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/RestrictedAccess |
en |
pubs.subtype |
Article |
en |
pubs.elements-id |
94202 |
en |
pubs.record-created-at-source-date |
2010-09-01 |
en |