This book examines the quality of government plan-making in New Zealand following the introduction of the innovative Resource Management Act (RMA) in 1991. The book looks at a number of plans in different fields, published from 1991 to 2000. The research methods used to highlight the successes and failures of relevant plans were critiqued by peer review groups and approved by government bodies. Jointly, the 4 authors contribute a wide range and considerable level of experience in the field of planning, which they have gained both in practice in the public and private sectors and as research academics and teachers. Neil Erickson and Philip Berke have previously co-written several other books in the field of planning and sustainable development.

The book under review offers insight into specific aspects of resource management plan-making in New Zealand. It is well set out into 4 parts and a comprehensive appendix. There are numerous diagrams, charts and tables, along with the occasional map and photograph. All images and illustrations are, however, only in black and white.

Part 1 is preceded by a useful 14-page introduction that explains the birth, establishment and objectives of the RMA, gives a summary of the political structure and agenda in New Zealand, and outlines the content of the rest of the book. Following this, Part 1 itself is split into 2 chapters. Chapter 1 explains that planning mandates, such as the RMA, are one of a number of means of implementing policy goals. It briefly compares the influence of different mandates on plan development in Europe and the USA and, in more detail, in New Zealand. Chapter 2 presents a useful—though short—summary of plan-making approaches, categorized as the extremes of being based either on scientific and research evidence or on evidence gained through participatory consultation, and demonstrates that plan-making should ideally be based on a mixture of the two (rational and adaptive approach). I would expect this aspect of the book to be the most interesting for a wide international audience. Although the statements made are neither new nor radical, theories of good practice plan-making are presented in a clear and concise manner and illustrated with useful diagrams. The chapter goes on to explain the development of a methodology for assessing plan quality that is applied to plans in subsequent chapters.

Part 2 contains 3 chapters. Each concentrates on the impact of the RMA in 3 political spheres: the central government, the regional government, and Maori interests. These chapters are detailed and specific and, whilst providing comprehensive background information, are perhaps of limited interest to a wider international audience.

Part 3 is likewise divided into 3 chapters. The first 2 present an analysis of the quality of policy statements at the regional level (Chapter 1), as well as the quality of district plans (Chapter 2). Using fixed criteria and a scoring mechanism (provided in the appendix), 8 separate aspects of each policy statement are evaluated and then compared with the extent of organizational resources (staff, peer and legal input, public and stakeholder consultation) allocated to its development. Most policies and plans score medium to poor, and unsurprisingly, scores closely correspond with the level of resources invested. The final chapter in this part compares regional policies with district plans. It emphasizes a lack of integration and coordination between these policy levels and suggests a number of reasons for this shortcoming.

Part 4 looks at 4 case studies of how different local governments developed plans for specific geographical areas. These include the Far North District Plan of 1996, the Queenstown Lakes District Plan of 1995, the Tauranga District Development Plan of 1997, and the Tasman District Council Resource Management Plan. Each case study is very (perhaps overly) detailed, providing a full description of the background, the issues, the reactions, and an analysis of the final plan and any lessons learnt.

The final section of the book concludes with a summary of the status of the RMA 10 years after its adoption. This, in brief, concludes that the purpose and principles of the RMA are flawed, and that this has contributed to a widespread reduction in the quality of plan-making for sustainable resource management.