Abstract
Despite the appearance of a range of opportunities for formal participation in environmental decision-making in Aotearoa New Zealand, postpolitics is very much present, annulling dissent, upholding dominant neoliberal ideals and delegitimising other voices. Through our analysis of a consent decision about a proposed coal mine on the West Coast of Aotearoa New Zealand and the experiences of opposing environmentalists, we offer empirical evidence that illustrates the fluid shifts between antagonism and agonism (after Mouffe) throughout this 'democratic' process. We argue that while aspirations for agonism should remain, it is important that planning theory pays attention to the role that power and hegemony play in what could otherwise be considered agonistic planning. Antagonism, the undesirable in Mouffe's radical democracy, has a critical role in neoliberal contexts, rupturing postpolitics and creating spaces of dissent so that agonistic contestation can provide for robust and rigorous debate in environmental decision-making.