The Motiti decision: Implications for coastal management

The recent Court of Appeal decision in Attorney-General v The Trustees of the Motiti Rohe Moana Trust ([2019] NZCA 532) has wide-ranging implications for managing the sustained pressures on biodiversity in coastal ecosystems. The Motiti decision signals a profound change in the way in which regional councils will need to manage the territorial sea. In this article, I explore some of the implications of the decision for environmental management, in light of the recent public notice of decisions on the proposed Marlborough Environment Plan (MEP) by the Marlborough District Council on 21 February 2020

Newly-claimed seascapes: Options for repurposing inundated areas

Sea-level rise is unstoppable. Communities worldwide are facing difficult choices in responding to changing coastlines and estuaries. Understandably, there is little attention on the potential for repurposing inundated areas because retreat and adaptation take precedence. Repurposing may be infeasible for newly-claimed seascapes in exposed and high energy coasts. Nevertheless, for sheltered coastal areas, shallow estuaries and harbours, there may be potential for repurposing some areas for aquaculture, fisheries, wetlands, and/or blue carbon. For example, abandoned and decontaminated structures may provide fish nursery habitat as artificial reefs. Here, we present the results of a systematic literature review of potential options, along with identified benefits and implementation barriers. Our purpose is not to examine the feasibility of such options because these will be place- and context-specific; rather, we explore whether the solution space can be extended beyond the point of impact. We suggest that repurposing could be added to the PARA management framework

Characterising the regulatory seascape in Aotearoa New Zealand: Bridging local, regional and national scales for marine ecosystem-based management

In the face of declining ocean health and marine biodiversity, marine management arrangements may need to change in many jurisdictions. This can occur in a planned process of legislative and institutional reform undertaken by central government, or by an incremental and ad hoc ‘unplanned’ process through court decisions or local actions. In either case, targeted characterisations of the contemporary regulatory seascape are necessary to accurately diagnose what system elements may need major change to address ecological degradation. In this study, we examine the regulatory and institutional interplay between central government, sub-national regional authorities, and Indigenous Māori in the protection and management of marine biogenic habitats in New Zealand. Based on an analysis of government documents, institutional responses to a set of questions, and recent case law, we found generic institutional failings to implement core legislation, at both sub-national ‘regional’ and national scales. In particular, less than half of the regional authorities had given effect to a mandatory national instrument that set environmental bottom-lines, and central government failure to identify and protect significant fisheries habitats. Concurrently, we identified an upsurge in requests for temporary fishing closures through rāhui (traditional customary prohibitions), and the potential for tools enabled in customary marine tenure legislation to play a significant future role in managing marine ecosystem health. Our study highlights that the regulatory seascape is devolving towards a greater polycentricity of management with an increased involvement of Māori at sub-national and local levels, which may hold lessons for Indigenous peoples in other jurisdictions. These ‘unplanned reforms’ are likely to be a key driver of improvements in the management and governance of biodiverse marine biogenic habitats at national and sub-national level, both prior to, and as a consequence of, the New Zealand Government's planned ocean reform programme

Barriers to coastal planning and policy use of environmental research in Aotearoa-New Zealand

Identifying barriers to the effective use of science in coastal management of Aotearoa-New Zealand is easy, due to the present lack of complicated governance and management structures, coupled with an emphasis on funding science that includes pathways to implementation. This opinion piece discusses four areas that still hinder effective use of science, all of which are likely to be problematic for other countries. We initially focus on why the science may not be used related to: misunderstandings (linguistic and conceptual differences including indigenous world views); timing of information delivery; uncertainty surrounding the information (knowledge limitations and funding); and top-down constraints (legal systems, politics and institutional objectives). We use Aotearoa-New Zealand examples to demonstrate the barriers operating within each area and discuss three potential solutions. Importantly our analysis indicates that researchers alone cannot transcend these barriers; rather, we need to work as part of an ecosystem, requiring commitment from all society, extending beyond the usual suspects (management agencies). We believe that ecological and systems education from junior school levels through to universities have an important role to play in setting the context to overcome current barriers

Indicators of natural character of freshwater: Generic approaches to management

New Zealand is a land of diverse landscapes and ecosystems; within short distances the change from sea to plains to mountains is often dramatic. Since European settlement 150 years ago, large parts of the country have been extensively modified, yet there are still landscapes present with little or no sign of human influence. Overall, these natural and cultural landscapes range from pristine and unmodified forests and waterways, to modified rural and urban areas. Lakes, rivers and wetlands are prominent features of both our natural and culturally perceived landscapes, and play an important, often integral, role in ecosystems. Preservation of the natural character of these aquatic ecosystems, and protecting them from inappropriate development, is recognised and expressed in section 6 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). However, natural character is an elusive concept to identify, much less define and assess. This presents difficulties for policymakers and councils who are working on a daily basis with the RMA. Faced with an application for a resource consent, a council has to consider the proposed activity against a number of criteria, not least asking how will it affect the natural character of aquatic systems. This begs some fundamental questions: namely, what is natural character? How is it defined and assessed? What values lie in our perceptions of naturalness? How have natural character issues been addressed by the Planning Tribunal/ Environment Court? And, what approach can councils use to assess natural character of waterways? This paper (1) explores different interpretations surrounding the meaning of natural character; (2) identifies and develops generic approaches towards managing natural character of freshwater ecosystems; and (3) defines a set of indicators for natural character of freshwater ecosystems that local authorities can easily use

Treasure the ocean's bounty on Monday

World Ocean Day is June 8 – a day to celebrate why our oceans are so important to our daily lives

Essential workers, essential habitat

The Government recently ignored its own state of our marine environment report, by considering it essential to continue damaging fragile marine corals and other old-growth seafloor habitats. It is allowing two tranches of foreign fisherman into the country to recommence bottom-trawling

Economic prudence in the age of environmental tempests

A new environment tax may be needed to respond to climate impacts and sea-level rise. This year, taxpayers will pay billions in responding to Cyclone Gabrielle. Past storm costs are also at the Treasury checkout, with Marlborough having its hand out for a second $80 million in two years. Government Minister Damien O’Connor was recently quoted as saying the Government “was hard-pressed trying to find funds to respond to Cyclone Gabrielle”. In determining the taxpayer’s share of regional recovery costs, the Government may need to examine the regional history of land management regulation, such as it has done in Gisborne. This is because of decades of regional mismanagement of highly erodible steeplands has worsened flood damage to communities, contributed to loss of life, and weakened local economies. Infrastructure repair and support for community restoration may therefore need to be, at least, partially-funded by regional environmental and climate recovery taxes

Climate emergency has a twin

The recent declarations of a climate emergency convey the sense of urgency to safeguard our human world. However, there has been a habitat emergency unfolding for many decades in the natural world. We may be more critically affected by habitat decline now than we are by climate change, yet the two are inextricably linked, and we cannot have an ‘emergency’ in one, and not the other. Simply put, we have not made the connection that biodiversity sustains life, our lives and our livelihoods