Environmental assessment in New Zealand is governed by the provisions of the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991. The Act requires persons wishing to undertake certain activities to apply for resource consent from their local or regional council - a procedure termed the Resource Consent Process. The key component of a resource consent application is an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) report; a statement of the environmental effects of a proposed activity.
Problems arise when environmental assessments are complicated by uncertain and abnormal circumstances such as natural hazards. Natural hazards (including earthquakes, floods, tsunami, and coastal erosion) can be catastrophic to an environment. If hazards are not avoided or successfully mitigated, they can result in serious consequences to proposed development and to the environment which the proposal relates. The aim of this study is to assess the adequacy of the resource consent process (as outlined in the Resource Management Act 1991) for dealing with proposed development affected by natural hazards.
This study reviews the context of the resource consent process for dealing with natural hazards to identify potential issues in the assessment process. Guidance criteria for assessing natural hazards (termed Natural Hazard Assessment) are developed to evaluate against two resource consent applications affected by natural hazards. The findings of the consent process review and case study evaluation are discussed to determine the adequacy of the consent process for dealing with natural hazards.
From the review of the consent process it was evident that the process has a number of problems for accommodating natural hazards into the assessment. Although many important traits are provided for in the process, such traits are not always reflected in environmental assessments.
Evaluation of two resource consent applications against the process of Natural Hazard Assessment (NHA) showed that these consent applications did not adequately detail key information relating to natural hazards. Many problems evident in these applications were not amended by the Consent Authorities in the review process and subsequently consent was granted to information-deficient applications. Problematic issues identified in this study include:
• A distinct lack of guidance (legal or otherwise) for the applicant and Consent Authority regarding the boundaries of inclusion of an effect;
• Deficiencies in planning documents are reflected in AEE reports, the review of the consent application and in the end-decision;
• Under-utilisation of "experts" throughout the consent process;
• Minimal identification and account for the degree of uncertainty throughout the consent process;
• Resource consents are being granted even though information in consent applications, and the means for assessing the information is deficient.
These issues reflect that decisions are not being made based on all elements involved in a potential hazard. Subsequently, the resource consent process is not adequate for dealing with all aspects of natural hazards.
The Natural Hazard Assessment process provides educated assessment criteria to assess development affected by natural hazards. By accounting for the problems evident in the consent process, the introduction of a three-tier identification, risk and vulnerability assessment, and evaluation process to account for uncertainties, Natural Hazard Assessment provides a platform for a thorough assessment of natural hazards. The application of the principles of Natural Hazard Assessment to the consent applications affected by natural hazards showed that many key issues were not covered in the assessment under the consent process.
The nature of a natural event is that one may not occur in a given region over many lifetimes, however they will occur at some stage and planning and environmental assessment needs to provide for the associated hazards. Implementation of Natural Hazard Assessment is needed to help provide answers for the problems experienced in the resource consent process. Natural Hazard Assessment would allow decision-makers to make informed judgements on the situation at hand, leading to better planning and land-use options.
Change to current practice is needed, as following the current path of environmental assessment will be the hazard in the end.
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to identify through the application of Actor Network Theory (ANT) the issues and impediments to the implementation of mandatory seismic retrofitting policies proposed by the New Zealand Government. In particular the tension between the heritage protection objectives contained in the Resource Management Act 1991 and the earthquake mitigation measures contained in the Building Act 2004 are examined.
Design/methodology/approach - The paper uses a case study approach based on the Harcourts Building in Wellington New Zealand and the case law relating to attempts to demolish this particular building. Use is made of ANT as a 'lens' to identify and study the controversies around mandatory seismic retrofitting of heritage buildings. The concept of translation is used to draw network diagrams.
Questions to Ministers
1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with Reserve Bank Governor Alan Bollard's assessment that the economic recovery is proving to be "slow and fragile"?
2. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy?
3. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister for Economic Development: What specific actions has he taken since becoming Minister of Economic Development to secure the New Zealand film industry?
4. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Housing: What reports has he received about the stakeholder engagement carried out by the Housing Shareholders' Advisory Group?
5. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Will he support my recommendation to set up an advocacy support service to provide earthquake-affected residents with help in dealing with their private insurers to prevent them being shunted between these insurers and the Earthquake Commission?
6. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Conservation: What steps, if any, is she taking to protect the unique, rare and threatened Nevis "Gollum galaxiid", a native fish species found only in the Nevis River in Central Otago?
7. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister for Tertiary Education: How does removing $55 million from industry training help the growth of the productive economy?
8. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What progress is the Government making in improving New Zealand's freshwater management?
9. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her statements about subsidies and fee controls in early childhood education?
10. Hon RODNEY HIDE to the Attorney-General: Is it Government policy to exempt the holders of customary marine title from the application of the Resource Management Act 1991 and provide the holders with the sole right to give, or deny, a Resource Management Act permission right with no right of appeal or objection against the decision, as described in Bell Gully's Newsletter Update October 2010 on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill?
11. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister responsible for Whānau Ora: Is she satisfied with the process to shortlist Whānau Ora providers?
12. PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Why is the Government funding the Energy Spot advertising campaign?
‘Housing affordability’ has been a term used to refer to a problem that arises when the costs of housing are seen as being unreasonably high in relation to incomes. In the United Kingdom and Australia the local town planning systems have been used to address housing affordability issues. This response in countries that share New Zealand’s town and country planning history raised the question for this research of the local government response to housing affordability issues in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. This research was undertaken during the fifth year after the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquake series. Research conducted by the Centre for Housing Research
Aotearoa New Zealand and the New Zealand Productivity Commission present quite different pictures of the housing affordability problem, suggest different solutions and indicate different roles for levels of government, the community housing sector and the housing market. The research undertaken for this dissertation aimed to address the question of the role of the state, through the lense of a local response to housing affordability issues, in the context of a central government response focused on land supply and reforming the Resource Management Act 1991.
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his answer on Tuesday regarding jobs "I think that the number of 170,000 may come from the initial Budget forecast for 2009, perhaps. I cannot remember the year exactly."?
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Given the recent loss of Māori Party support for his Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, will he consider working with opposition parties on amendments to improve it?
LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government's infrastructure programme contributing to building a more competitive economy?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he agree with the NZIER shadow board that "the growth outlook for the second half of 2012 looks weak and unemployment remains stubbornly high."?
IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made to review Child Youth and Family's complaints process?
Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: What progress has been made in the delivery of the Prime Minister's Youth Mental Health Project announced in April of this year with an extra $11.3 million provided to support it?
JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has she received on the time taken for decisions on notified consents issued under the Resource Management Act 1991?
GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Why did New Zealand pull out of a joint proposal with the United States to create a marine reserve in Antarctica's Ross Sea?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by the answers he gave yesterday to supplementary question 5 on Oral Question No 7 and supplementary question 3 on Oral Question No 12?
NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What progress has the Government made to support repairing damaged houses and infrastructure following the Canterbury earthquakes?
SUE MORONEY to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement on 3News last night, on the subject of Business New Zealand's assertion that women need retraining when returning to employment after extended parental leave that "no. It wouldn't be my view"?
JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Immigration: What is the Government doing to ensure that New Zealanders have first priority for jobs in the Canterbury rebuild?
