diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'assignment1/discussion.tex')
| -rw-r--r-- | assignment1/discussion.tex | 58 |
1 files changed, 37 insertions, 21 deletions
diff --git a/assignment1/discussion.tex b/assignment1/discussion.tex index 42d6c79..62644cb 100644 --- a/assignment1/discussion.tex +++ b/assignment1/discussion.tex @@ -11,6 +11,10 @@ devolved approach to environmental assessment brought about. \subsection{The quality of assessments} +Applicants of resource consents are required to produce ... +The RMA requires an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) to be +prepared for every activity + - poor environmental models / baseline => precautionary principle \textcite{practitioners} @@ -64,14 +68,11 @@ information; failure to influence the decision-making process; poor execution of participation methods; and regulatory constraints. As a review of resource consent processing performance in New Zealand indicates, especially the latter three are significant obstacles to -public participation in New Zealand. According to the 2010/11 survey -of local authorities the New Zealand Ministry for the Environment -carries out every two years, only about 6 per cent of all resource -consents were notified in some way, with only 4 per cent being -publically notified \parencite{rma-survey}. This means that of 36,154 -resource consents that were processed across the country over a period -of two years, the public was able to provide input on only 1,414 -proposals. +public participation in New Zealand \parencite{TODO}. According to the +2010/11 survey of local authorities the New Zealand Ministry for the +Environment carries out every two years, only about 6 per cent of all +resource consents in the two-year period were notified in some way, +with only 4 per cent being publically notified \parencite{rma-survey}. - opportunities for public involvement? - limited opportunity for the public to influence decisions @@ -80,26 +81,41 @@ On the other hand, public participation ... leads to abuse, slow process miller2 -\subsection{Issues associated with devolution} +\subsection{Cumulative effects} What sets apart New Zealand's approach to environmental assessment -from those of other countries is the devolved mandate, meaning that -most resource consents are processed at the lowest level of -governance, by district or city councils. - -- cannot deal well with cumulative effects, because that's best done - on a national/regional level \parencite{eia-state-of-the-art} - -- \textcite[p 267]{furuseth}: little experience or resources to - scrutinise EIA on the local level +from those of other countries is the devolved mandate. The +distribution of responsibilities to the local levels of government, +however, brings about difficulties in effective environmental +management. Project-level EIA usually does not address cumulative +effects well, i.e. individual minor effects of several projects that +result in serious impacts when combined, because this would require +regulation and monitoring at a higher +level \parencite{eia-state-of-the-art}. + +When resource consent applications are processed independently from +one another at the local level, their aggregate cumulative effects are +easily overlooked. Although the RMA specifically includes cumulative +effects in the definition of effects that have to be considered +(Section 3), it is still up to the council to review an AEE with +regards to cumulative effects. The quality of this review crucially +depends on the experience and the resources available at the local +level to scrutinise an AEE that may not properly address cumulative +effects \parencite[p 267]{furuseth}. A joint hearing process has been +used in the past to successfully overcome this limitation for +individual projects that require multiple resources consent +applications to be considered \parencite{fookes}. + +When the cumulative effects of more than one proposal are to be +considered, ... need coverage by plan/policies at national/regional +level + monitoring. + +% This is one of the reasons for the birth of Strategic Environmental Assessment. - very slow publication of NPS and NES at the national level \textcite{miller2010implementing} - hence: few constraints on local plans, leading to regional differences - -\subsection{Monitoring and follow-up work} - - insufficient monitoring (68\%) \parencite{rma-survey} - one-off projects that don't improve the knowledge basis or affect |