Southern Alps to the Rockies: Comparing Sustainability Goals and Environmental Protections in New Zealand and the United States

As an exchange student at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch from Montana State University, I’ve recognized several overlapping similarities when it comes to environmental protection and sustainability goals, but also many differences. Christchurch and the Canterbury region of New Zealand geographically share a lot of the same aspects that we love and care about in my hometown of Bozeman, MT (with the exception of having the ocean so close).

Both places are surrounded by mountains that hold recreational and ecological value for all that call these places home, and both have a centered richness around this environment. While both countries hold a deep value for the outdoors and keeping our environment healthy and protected for future generations, their approaches are shaped differently by national approaches, environmental changes, and cultural values. 

Since arriving in New Zealand, I’ve noticed a large emphasis on sustainability and a green-way of thinking compared to the United States. New Zealand is a much smaller country, and has other impacts that they worry about compared to the states for emissions, mainly from agriculture use in the area. Despite this, the majority of the campus has many diagrams, signs, and stations for sustainability education and areas where recycled materials can be disposed of.

The campus also has a big sustainability department, with lots of information on sustainability goals, what is being done, and the values and principles that shape the university. The main difference I’ve noticed so far from being a student here and taking many climate-based classes at the university is the general emphasis towards sustainability and recycling, and how many of the other students are more involved in keeping a green space and limiting their negative environmental impact.

Recycling station in the engineering building at University of Canterbury

UC has projected to become carbon net neutral by 2030, compared to Montana State University which claims carbon neutrality by 2040. Both campuses have integrated green buildings, and are building more energy-efficient programs for the updated areas of the campuses. Sustainability is built into the curriculum for many environmental classes at both universities, and have sustainability programs built into the partnerships and campus-wide plans. UC benefits from a national renewable heavy grid, whereas MSU must work within a more fossil fuel-dependent Montana energy mix, making campus emissions reduction more difficult. 

Both universities are deeply shaped by their environments, by the Southern Alps in New Zealand and the Rockies in Montana, which leads to different research priorities and public engagement strategies. New Zealand holds a strong public trust in science and environmental policy, and Māori culture shapes campus projects integrating indigenous knowledge into climate adaptation. In the US, we see individualism and local decision making affecting environmental policy. Outdoor recreation culture drives conservation awareness, especially in Montana. Many conflicting pressures from mining, agriculture, and energy industries influence decision making and balancing economic gain and sustainability. 

Kaikoura, New Zealand (left) and Glacier National Park, MT (right)

As a whole, New Zealand has a strong emphasis on biodiversity protection, freshwater health, and indigenous Māori environmental stewardship principles. The country has a heavy reliance on renewable electricity (80-85% coming from hydro, geothermal, and wind power), though around 45% of energy comes from renewable energy sources. The country has a nationwide policy framework, and a carbon neutrality target of being Net Zero by 2050 under the Climate Change Responses Act 2019.

The United States has a very similar target for carbon neutrality, but there is a much greater variability in environmental commitment due to political polarization and state-by-state policy differences. The U.S. remains one of the world's largest producers of oil and gas, with strong political and economic lobbying from the energy sector. There is a strong push-pull dynamic in the states, with renewables accelerating but fossil fuels remaining ingrained, creating a fragmented and politically charged approach to sustainability (such as the “Big Beautiful Bill” passed in July 2025, as well as eroding protections surrounding sale of public lands, including parks and places that hold high natural significance to the ecosystem). 

Both New Zealand and the United States care about their environments, yet their sustainability goals show different histories, cultures, and political ideas. Being in Christchurch for the last month has shown me how community engagement and indigenous knowledge shape environmental policy.

The goal is similar for both places, yet the United States and New Zealand have different ways of–and different hurdles to–practicing environmental protection. There are a lot of things I think Montana and MSU can learn from New Zealand and UC–and vice versa! I hope to take a lot of New Zealand’s highly-valued sustainability goals and environmental protection practices home with me after the semester. The opportunity to learn about environmental science and policy from a culture that cares so deeply about our planet has been and will continue to be a once in a lifetime experience. 

---

Helena Mazzarella is a junior at Montana State University, studying abroad at Canterbury University in Christchurch, New Zelanad. Helena is majoring in environmental science and hydrology.