1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
|
% background 1000
% - EIA & SEA 400
% - sustainable development 200
% - RMA 400
\section{Background}
\subsection{Environmental Impact Assessment}
The term ``Environmental Impact Assessment'' (EIA) is used to refer to
a set of standardised procedures that are designed to inform the
decision-making processes surrounding development proposals. According
to the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA), a major
objective of EIA is to ``anticipate and avoid, minimize or offset the
adverse significant biophysical, social and other relevant effects''
of such proposals ``prior to major decisions being taken and
commitments made'' \parencite{principles}.
In order to provide decision-makers with sufficiently detailed insight
into the potential positive and negative effects of a project on the
environment, the participation of all parties that would be affected
by the project, as well as the participation of the general public is
explicitly encouraged \parencite{principles}. The involvement of the
public in the decision-finding process is a crucial component of EIA
as those responsible for the project proposal and the prediction of
its impacts on the social and natural environment do not necessarily
share the values of affected communities. Hence, public participation
can provide balance to the biases of developers and the assessors they
hire \parencite{wilkins}.
\subsubsection{EIA activities and procedures}
The EIA process generally involves the following
activities \parencite{principles}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{Screening and scoping.}]
The goal of the \emph{screening} step is to limit the application
of EIA procedures to those projects that are expected to have
significant effects on the environment. What kind of projects require
an impact assessment varies from country to country. When a proposal
is subject to EIA, the \emph{scope} of the assessment is determined by
identifying the key impacts that are associated with the project.
\item[\emph{Consideration of alternatives.}]
Since EIA is mainly intended to be a tool to assist
decision-making, practicable alternatives must be presented for every
proposed activity, including the option not to do anything. This step
ensures that EIA does not turn into an expensive documentation
exercise for planners and decision-makers; it is essential for
effective EIA.
\item[\emph{Impact analysis, mitigation, and evaluation of residual impacts.}]
Identifying and analysing impacts as well as proposing actions to
mitigate them are major steps in preparing environmental impact
statements. These steps are usually performed by the proponents. How
to fairly establish the significance of residual impacts (i.e. impacts
that cannot be mitigated effectively but are also considered to be
minor) is frequently subject of debates. According to \textcite{wood},
``significance evaluation \ldots{} remains one of the most complex,
contentious, and least-understood aspects of EIA systems across the
globe''.
\item[\emph{Reporting, independent review and decision-making.}]
A final EIA report is required to contain sufficient information
to allow for well-informed decisions about the proposed activity. An
independent review ensures that the report is of sufficiently high
quality.
\item[\emph{Monitoring and other follow-up activities.}]
It lies in the nature of EIA that predictions about potential
impacts are fraught with inaccuracies. To improve the often inadequate
knowledge about the state of the environment and the actual impacts of
human activities on it, the implementation of many projects subject to
EIA should be followed by monitoring efforts. Feeding back into the
process as it applies to future projects, monitoring ideally enables
decision-makers and assessors alike to produce higher quality
assessments and approach the ideal of sustainable development.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{The Resource Management Act 1991}
The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) is the overarching
environmental management framework which governs the allocation and
utilisation of New Zealand's natural resources and controls adverse
effects on the environment. The RMA is the result of efforts to unify
and simplify previous legislation relating to environmental management
which had lead to what was perceived as an uncoordinated, complex
network of confusing environmental management
strategies \parencite{twp98}. It consolidated around 70 laws and
statutes and is generally considered to be the first piece of
integrated sustainability legislation in the
world \parencite{rma-guide}.
\subsubsection{The role of sustainable development}
In recognition of the inherent limitations of project-level
EIA---including the difficulty of assessing cumulative impacts, the
lack of integrated assessment of effects at a wider scope, and the
narrow focus on direct impacts of assessed proposals---the RMA does
not institutionalise the standard EIA process but provides for an
integrated approach to ``the sustainable management of natural and
physical resources'' (Section 5). In line with this purpose, the RMA
adopts a very broad definition of the term `environment'---including
communities, amenity values, social and cultural conditions (Section
2(1))---and its mandatory requirement for the assessment of `effects'
applies to policies, plans and projects alike. In principle, the RMA
is thus closer to an implementation of Strategic Environmental
Assessment (SEA) than to ``first generation'' EIA.
The RMA has been described as an ``effects-based approach'' to
regulation \parencite{sadler}, as it does not intend to regulate human
activities per se, but ``focuses on the regulation of the effects of
human activities on the environment'' \parencite{furuseth}. Notably,
the RMA makes no reference to EIA or environmental assessment
procedures. As \textcite{sadler} writes, environmental assessment
under the RMA ``operates within the statutory planning and consent
system rather than as a separate procedure, applies explicitly to
projects and is indirectly specified for policy statements and
strategic plans which local authorities are required to prepare to
guide and implement sustainable resource management'' \parencite[p
31]{sadler}.
\subsubsection{Decentralised environmental management}
Interestingly and somewhat unusually in international comparison, the
RMA shifts the main responsibility of resource management activities
to local authorities rather than imposing a prescriptive management
style. The role of central government under the RMA is purposefully
limited, allowing district and city councils to let their decisions be
guided by locally determined goals. This devolved mandate---the
distribution of management responsibility from the national to the
regional and finally local level---is intended to ensure that
decisions relating to resource usage are made not only within the
national policy framework but also at a level closest to the resources
in question \parencite[p 27]{miller2010implementing}.
Responsible for the national policy framework within which local
authorities are encouraged to develop local plans and evaluate
resource consent applications is the Ministry for the
Environment\footnote{Since the RMA amendments of 2009, the newly
founded Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) is increasingly
taking over the regulatory functions of the Ministry for the
Environment, which is now focusing on policy and regulation under
environmental acts other than the
RMA \parencite{miller2010implementing}.}. The Ministry is supposed to
prepare and publish national policy statements---declaring governance
intent relating to issues affecting the whole country or in
fulfilment of international agreements---as well as national
environmental standards (specific points of reference in the areas of
air quality, water quality, etc.).
According to \textcite{furuseth}, ``among local government units, the
regional councils are presented with the greatest responsibilities and
the most far reaching potential to implement sustainable
management'' \parencite[p 262]{furuseth}. On the regional level,
regional councils are to produce regional policy statements (RPS) and
may also produce more comprehensive and prescriptive regional plans to
support the goal of achieving integrated management of natural
resources. Regional policy statements ``present an assessment of
existing conditions and a direction for resource management in the
region'' and are therefore at the core of the goal to achieving
sustainable development which is implemented through decisions over
resource consents \parencite{furuseth}. As
\textcite{miller2010implementing} notes, the issues every regional
council has to address in plans and policy statements are mostly
related to the sustainable management of natural or physical
resources. Planning at the district level is constrained by these
regional plans and policies. The plans and policies at the national,
regional, and district level provide a framework for regulation of
development activities.
Councils have created ``generous opportunities'' for public
consultation during the initial consultation stage of the plan
formation process by means of workshops and
meetings \parencite{miller2010implementing}. Upon completion the plan
is made available for comments from the public for a period of at
least forty working days, which is followed by a hearing period and
the opportunity to appeal to the Environment Court.
\subsubsection{Resource consents}
For every proposed activity that is not explicitly allowed as a
`Permitted Activity' in the appropriate regional or district plan,
resource consents have to be obtained from the local authorities before
development may commence \parencite{fookes}. Every resource consent
application, in turn, requires the proponent to produce an Assessment
of Environmental Effects (AEE); this requirement is most readily
recognisable as an implementation of EIA. The Fourth Schedule of the
RMA is intended as a most basic guide to assist practitioners in
preparing their AEE; beyond the requirements of the Fourth Schedule,
however, there are few guidelines to assess the quality of an
AEE \parencite{miller2010implementing}. After a review of the AEE, the
council that received the resource consent application may decide to
involve the public by means of public notification or determine that
public notification is not required when the activity is expected to
only have minor effects and all affected parties agree on the
proposal \parencite{fookes}. When an application is publicly
notified, the application is to be reviewed under consideration of
public submissions and the results of public hearings. Participants in
the public submission and hearing steps may also appeal to the
Environment Court.
EIA in New Zealand under the RMA can thus be said to happen on two
levels: first, during the development of regional and district plans
which are a consultation-heavy implementation of the screening and
scoping steps of standard EIA; and second, in the process surrounding
resource consents, involving the actual assessment of potential
impacts, an independent review, and public participation.
|
