Volume 4, 2000

Alexander Gillespie

The solution to most environmental problems requires community participation. The levels and extent of this participation varies with the problem in question, which in turn is influenced by both national concerns and international obligations. This context forms the basis for Maori involvement in the debate about biodiversity conservation and utilisation in New Zealand. This debate may have distinct implications. A specific concern is that biodiversity must be utilised "equitably". However, exactly how to achieve this goal is not clear, as the legal mechanisms currently suggested are not necessarily in the interests of the indigenous communities they seek to serve.

Rachel Parr

In early 1999, in reaction to the Kyoto Protocol, the New Zealand government published the Domestic Policy Options Statement, the purpose of which is to outline the range of policy measures that are being considered in response to international commitments taken under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol.

A requirement of those international commitments undertaken by New Zealand is to take actions to abate climate change on the basis of equity. However, the primary objective of the New Zealand government climate change policy is to meet New Zealand's initial and future emissions at least cost. It seems that what is least cost for New Zealand has become what is equitable also. Therefore this article will discuss the least-cost approach and then identify the issues of non-equity that arise when such an approach is applied globally.

Ulrich Klein

Over the last decade there have been a growing number of reports, books and articles addressing the clash between Western and Maori culture. Only a few are related to the widely different belief-systems about nature. This paper focuses exclusively on the issue. It seeks to provide an understanding of how the Western and the Polynesian part of New Zealand's society view their relationship to the natural world. For that reason influential paradigms of both cultures are identified, analysed and finally synoptically compared. Although the comparison is not exhaustive, the paper should serve as a basis for further research and discourse.

Grant Hewison

At the present time many local authorities are considering how best to formalise relationships between the councils and tangata whenua. One of the mechanisms being considered is the negotiation of formal written agreements with tangata whenua. This article is derived from a research report prepared for the Manukau City Council. The instruments in use are examined to provide useful references or models for the development of these types of written agreements.

Rhoanna Stanhope

The concept of sustainable development gained international significance with the publication of Our Common Future by the Brundtland Commission in 1987. The Commission recognised that continual economic development with a deteriorating resource base was not realistic, and developed the concept of sustainable development, which it defined as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs". In principle, the New Zealand government has endorsed the main conclusions of the Brundtland Report, agreed to follow the approach outlined in Agenda 21, and made an international commitment to the concept of sustainable development. New Zealand signed Agenda 21 in 1992 and is a member of the Commission on Sustainable Development. However, this paper argues that the practical reality of New Zealand's approach to sustainable development has been somewhat different.

The use of principles of sustainable development in New Zealand's current laws and policy are analysed and compared to the approach that has been taken in the Netherlands. Although the two countries do not face the same type or magnitude of environmental problems, the comparison is useful because New Zealand and the Netherlands are both regarded as "world leaders" in the development of environmental policies, with forward thinking approaches to addressing environmental issues. It is noted that the Dutch have enthusiastically embraced the concept of sustainable development and have developed some innovative methods of working towards and measuring the country's progress in this regard. In contrast, New Zealand has shown reluctance and sometimes resistance to making practical use of the concept.

The article concludes by noting the urgent need for a review of New Zealand's commitment to sustainable development and for a change in the policies and behaviour towards issues of environment and development.

Stephanie Turner

Coastal ecosystems around New Zealand are under increasing pressure as a result of the growing use of coastal areas and resources. Recognition of the environmental costs of coastal use and development has led resource managers, scientists and communities to increasingly consider the possibility of compensating for adverse impacts with environmental benefits of equivalent worth ("environmental compensation").

The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) establishes a new regime for coastal management in New Zealand. Central to this are the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement and Regional Coastal Plans. This paper explores the provisions for environmental compensation as the sustainable management of natural and physical resources in the coastal environment is translated into policy and practice under the RMA.

A review of the existing legislative and policy framework for the sustainable management of the coastal environment in New Zealand suggests that environmental compensation is implicit in the legislation through concepts such as "avoiding, remedying and mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment", and in the provisions for "services or works " as part of the conditions attached to a resource consent. Nevertheless, in practice it appears that the potential for environmental compensation is not yet being fully realised. If sustainable management of the coastal environment is to be achieved, resource managers, decision-makers and developers need to be challenged to adopt a proactive and creative approach to the opportunities for environmental compensation provided in the RMA.

Malcolm Grant

"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a landowner in possession of a good planning consent must be in want of some means of returning its financial benefits to the community."

So might Jane Austen have written today, were she observing the process of financial exchange that surrounds the grant of planning consent. Requiring developers and landowners to make financial contributions raises quite fundamental issues of equity which have been too readily ignored by governments as being too difficult to handle, or as capable of being disguised behind political rhetoric.

There has been a growing practice in many jurisdictions over the past 20 or more years to require developers and/or landowners to contribute to public goods which previously were provided out of general taxation. These requirements take many forms: they may be in land; in works such as highways improvements; in affordable housing; or simply in money.

Sometimes the relationship of exchange is close, sometimes it is not. It makes little difference whether the contribution is in money or goods (such as land or buildings or public works). When it is money, it may be hypothecated to a particular purpose, or it may be a contribution to general funds. When it is goods, it may be directly related to the development, or it may be quite unrelated. Sometimes the proposal (or requirement) comes from a regulatory or fiscal authority; sometimes the proposal (or inducement) comes from the landowner or developer.

Sometimes the process operates within a clear framework of fixed rules, perhaps with rights of challenge and appeal; sometimes it is the product of nothing more than opportunity and negotiation. Sometimes deals that are actually negotiated in the latter form are then presented as if they were the outcome of the application of the fixed rules.

I have summarised in the Appendix to this paper the variety of different approaches that have been taken to this set of relationships in the US, the UK, Singapore and New Zealand. There is internationally a quite fundamental confusion between theories, objectives, mechanisms and practice, and it is nowhere better observed than in practice in the UK. That is because, unlike anywhere else in the world, we have extended the broad discretionary powers to grant or refuse planning permission, to cover also the quite separate question of whether to require the applicant to make a financial contribution, and if so, how much. There are no fixed tariffs, and no recognisable principles. There is no external supervision. It is all negotiated. Those who find that the system works well for them refer to this as "flexibility" and applaud it; others question its integrity.