Chapter 1 Introduction
The word integration has been an important reference for many
years now in addressing various environmental concerns. In particular,
Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) has been popularly forwarded to
various ecological and environmental management literatures and gained
increasing application by different environmental agencies (Born and Margerum,
1995). The failure of fragmented or sectoral environmental management in the
past has been a major driving force for a more integrated approach to environmental
management (Buhrs, 1995:1). Indeed, IEM has been regarded as an important tool
in formulating and implementing a comprehensive, interconnective and strategic
action in achieving a long-term solution to pressing environmental problems.
Among the natural environment that is continuously being threatened and
significantly affected by various issues is Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere. However,
the case of Te Waihora can be considered unique because of the unresolved claim
of ownerships by the indigenous group Maori, who are considered as the first
settlers of New Zealand.
This research is about analysing and evaluating established systems
of managing Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere through the lenses of IEM. Given the many
issues surrounding management and ownership claim of Maori with respect to Te Waihora,
this research also focuses on the relationship between Maori and the government
on managing the lake.
Thus, the research tries to answer the question whether and
to what extent current management system for Te Waihora provides for an
integrated approach in addressing issues leading to its conservation and
protection. To answer this question, this research draws heavily upon review of
published literatures available with regards to Te Waihora management and studies
conducted by various government agencies and informations available on the web.
This research is structured as follows:
Chapter 1 provides for the introduction and summary.
Chapter 2 provides for a descriptive characterisation of Te Waihora
and its importance to New Zealand and Maori in particular.
Chapter 3 provides for current management practices being
undertaken within Te Waihora.
Chapter 4 provides for the problems on the management of Te
Waihora.
Chapter 5 discusses the principles of integrated
environmental management (IEM). Also, provides for an analysis of issues
identified in different literatures with regards to managing Te Waihora. A set
of criteria based on IEM principles will also be provided to determine extent
of integration.
Chapter 6 provides for the conclusion and recommendation.
Figure 1 shows an illustration on how this research will be
undertaken.
Chapter 2 The Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere
General Characteristics
Te Waihora is a large body of water located in the South
Island region of Canterbury, just south of the largest city in the island,
Christchurch. It is the fourth largest lake in New Zealand with approximate
area of 20,000 hectares. One of its unique feature is the Kaitorete Barrier
which is a long spit of sand and gravel that encloses the lake on the seaward
side. Because of its proximity to Pacific Ocean, the lake harbours a rich
biodiversity (Singleton, 2007).
Te Waihora is also regarded as an unusual lagoon because of its
shallow and brackish water.The lake is becoming eutrophic as it develops to
become a swamp (Wortmann, 2005). Much of water inflowing Te Waihora is from
underground systems underlying the Canterbury planes. Further inflow is
received from surface water provided by the upper catchment of the Selwyn
River.
The lake is one of the country’s important wetland systems.
It boasts of significant ecological, cultural and historical importance. ‘It is
nationally and internationally significant for its wildlife diversity and
abundance and was declared an outstanding wildlife habitat’ (Wortmann, 2005). Specifically,
Te Waihora serves as a sanctuary for various birds and fishes. Up to 168 bird
species and 43 fish species have been recorded in the lagoon and its
tributaries.
Te Waihora, aside from being a sanctuary of diverse flora and
fauna, has long been known as settlement for Maori who develops a strong
connection to it and its resources.‘Te Waihora was one of the most concentrated
occupations in Canterbury’ (Wortmann, 2005). It has been an important food
basket for Maori where fish are most valued, especially the two species of
freshwater eel.
Presently, farms and settlements dominated the lake area with
most of the farmland being grazed. Because of draining, land reclamations and
farming activities, the size of the lake is reduced to about of its original
size (Wortmann, 2005). At present, most of the wetland fauna has been destroyed
or modified as the land in the catchment of the lake was turned into pasture.
As early as 1865, the lake has also become an important
source for commercial fishing. From the early 1900s, trout was harvested
commercially. To meet overseas demand, Te Waihora became the most important eel
fishery in New Zealand during the 1970s (ECan, n.d.) The main fisheries today
include those for freshwater eel, flounder and yellow-eyed mullet (DoC/TRONT,
2004). Other uses of Te Waihora include recreational activities such as bird
watching, recreational fishing, game bird shooting and water sports (James,
1991).
Te Waihora is an outstanding wildlife sanctuary. From a
conservation perspective, it is an area of major importance of national and
international significance. One of the lake’s most distinctive features is its
richness in birdlife. The number of bird species present in Te Waihora is the
highest of all wetland areas in New Zealand, thus regarded as the country’s
largest bird sanctuary.
Te Waihora is also rich in fish, both in species numbers and
abundance. 43 species inhabit the lake, both indigenous and introduced ones,
including many migratory species that spend only part of their lives in the
lake (Wortmann, 2005). The two eel
species found in Te Waihora are indigenous with the long-finned eel being
endemic to New Zealand (ECAN, n.d.). Botanically, parts of the lake margin are
of national importance. The wetland vegetation acts as water storage facility
and is therefore of particular hydrological importance (Wortmann, 2005).
Traditional Importance
and Use
For Maori and Ngai Tahu, Te Waihora is the central feature of
their life history. They have lived by and from the lake for a long time and
are the kaitiaki or guards of this resource. It is an important food source
because of prominent abundance of fish, plants and birds. Te Waihora is
referred to as a life source and therefore a tribal taonga or prized possession
(Wortmann, 2005). Collecting and processing mahingakai is an important economic
and social activity. The importance of the lake’s resources is reflected in its
name. Te Waihora means “spread out waters”,tha lagoon’s ancestral name however
is Te KeteIka a Rakaihautu, meaning “The Great Fish Basket of Rakaihautu”.
Rakaihautu was an ancestor of Ngai Tahu (ECan, n.d.)
‘The lake and its associated values and connections are
inseparably linked to the historic life of Ngai Tahu and the living conditions
of the South Island’ (Wortmann, 2005). Because of difficulty in cultivating
crops due to climate, the people of the South Island relied on foods deriving
from water (James, 1991).Due to the high importance of Te Waihora for Ngai Tahu,
the well-being of this lake is of principal importance to the tribe even today
(Tau, 1990).
Participating in mahingakai activities is an important
expression of cultural identity for Ngai Tahu. Mahingakai is an integral part
of the culture that needs to be continued to sustain the traditions. These
activities depend on a healthy environment, resources, and sufficient access to
mahingakai resources (ECan, n.d.) Therefore, Ngai Tahu is concerned about the
management of Te Waihora, its ecological protection and sustainable resource
management and rangitiratanga (James, 1991). Ngai Tahu concerns include the
depletion of food sources resulting from wetland drainage and land reclamation
for farming, discharge of effluents into waterways entering Te Waihora, their
exclusion from the commercial eel fishery, and difficulties in satisfying their
eel requirements for customary and subsistence purposes, partly due to
legislative constraints. The division of administrative and managerial
responsibilities for the lake is in contrast to the holistic worldview and management
approach of Ngai Tahu (James, 1991). Therefore, Ngai Tahu sees the need for an
improved management of the lake.
Chapter 3 Past and Present Management of Te Waihora
Prior to colonisation, Te Waihora was communally managed by
the local Maori with Taumutu being the first to permanently settle on it.
Historians believe it was established by the Ngai Tahu approximately 300 years
ago (Memon& Kirk, 2012). During the 1840s, Maori exercises management of opening
and closing the outlet of the lake into the sea for the purpose of draining the
Taumutu town as well as helping mahingakai to flourish.
With regard to the day-to-day management of the lake, the
Taumutu people still continued to manage the outlet during the early years of
European settlement. According to
Singleton (2007) the records show that Maori opened the outlet in 1852, 1854,
1856, 1865 and finally in 1867, by which time there was conflict over how much
and at what times the lake should be opened. In 1868, Charles Chapman opened
the lake himself and from then on it became the accepted responsibility of the
new European settlers around the lake to manage its margins (Memon& Kirk,
2012). Since then, farming intensity has rapidly increased in the Waihora
catchment, aided by the advent of mechanised irrigation from the rivers and
groundwater.
In order to promote Ngai Tahu’s aspirations for lake
governance, a four-party collaborative agreement between Ngai Tahu, DoC and the
two local authorities (Canterbury Regional Council and the Selwyn District
Council) was aspired to be established. ‘The Treaty of Waitangi Policy Unit in
the Department of Justice also investigated the options for a partnership
between Ngai Tahu and central and local government representatives to manage
land and wateruse activities in the wider catchment’ (Memon & Kirk, 2012).
Such an institutional arrangement would enable Maori to exercise a formal
governance role over the lake and its catchment within the framework of the
Resource Management Act (RMA). This again proved to be politically
unacceptable, presumably in part due to opposition from local authorities and
rural land owners (Memon & Kirk, 2012).
The Settlement Act, on the other hand, made provision for the
preparation of a joint-management plan between DoC and Ngai Tahu that will
consider mahingakai values and promote co-ordination of activities between the
two spatially contiguous land owners. This is essentially a land management plan,
not an integrated plan for the lake and its catchment (Memon& Kirk, 2012).
Institutionally, the governance of the lake is now fragmented between the local
territorial authority (Selwyn District Council), the regional council
(Canterbury Regional Council), the Crown conservation department (DoC) and
NgaiTahu. As yet there is no integrated catchment plan for the lake (Memon&
Kirk, 2012). Within the RMA statutory framework, the Regional Council and the
District Council exercise water and land use regulation functions respectively,
while DoC regulates the Crown land in accordance with the Conservation Act. All
three authorities are expected to recognise the provisions of the joint
management plan. Even though the RMA enables devolution of management duties to
Ngai Tahu, this option was not deemed acceptable to other water users in the
catchment.
Management of Te Waihora in general is being undertaken by
various government agencies who all take responsibilities for the management of
Te Waihora and its catchment. The DoC exercises jurisdictions over significant
areas of the wetland margins of and near the lake, as the lake is situated in
the Canterbury Conservancy of the department while the Ministry of Fisheries is
responsible for the commercial eel and flounder fishery within Te Waihora. The
Ministry works to achieve sustainability of fisheries within the lake.
Managing, maintaining and enhancing the sports fish and game resources, such as
birds, are under the responsibility of the North Canterbury Fish and Game
Council.
Environment Canterbury, the Canterbury Regional Council, is
responsible for managing and sustaining the natural and physical resources of
the Canterbury region. It is responsible for aspects regarding the lake water
and wider catchment, including water abstractions, and discharges into water.
The regional council also prepares water management plans. The lake openings
that take place about three times a year are also managed by Environment
Canterbury in accordance with the National Conservation Order. Te Waihora and
its catchment lie within districts of three territorial local authorities. The
most part is within Selwyn District Council and smaller parts within
Christchurch City Council and Banks Peninsula District. These councils manage
land use and subdivision in their respective areas of the catchment.
Recent significant management system established for the lake
management was the Te Waihora Co-Governance Agreement which was entered into by
the Ngai Tahu and Environment Canterbury in November 23, 2012. The joint
management aspires to collaboratively exercise the functions, powers and duties
of the Council toward appropriate vesting of decision-making powers as
co-governors over the Te Waihora Catchment. This agreement is to provide an
enduring collaborative relationship that includes shared exercise of functions,
duties and powers under the RMA 1991 and the Local Government Act of 2002. It
is a means to recognise aspirations of the Nagai Tahu. Moreover, Te Waihora
Trust was developed by concerned groups to promote and enhance Te Waihora
management. This Trust develops community strategies which involved various
stakeholders that primarily aim to protect and conserve the lake and its
diversity.
Chapter 4 Problems to Te Waihora Management
There were several issues identified and forwarded by various
literatures with regards to Te Waihora management, protection and conservation.
For instance, Wortmann (2005) raised concerns on the deteriorated water quality
of the lake which has been accumulating for decades now. It has been cause by
extensive farming in the catchment of the lake. Added to this is the increasing
population which leads to more pressure on infrastructure such as waterways.
This is the primary issue being dealt with currently to bring back the health
of the lake. Long-term, consistent information about nutrients sources and
impacts is lacking (Gough & Ward, 1995).
Wildlife has been tremendously affected by the European
settlement. Swamp drainage for instance causes a significant loss of habitat
(Wortmann, 2005). The wetland of Te Waihora is a degraded system that needs to
be improved. Further issues are an insufficient knowledge about the lake and
the values related to it and a lack of public access. A lot of access issues
were identified by tangata whenua, recreational fishers and hunters and passive
lake recreationists such as walkers and bird watchers (ECan, n.d.). Wortmann
(2005) also identified the issue of controlling the lake level to prevent
flooding. The rise of water level would cause flooding in an area of around 15
kilometres around the lagoon, hence, the establishment of artificial openings
today. However, these openings that are designed to control flooding have
adverse effects on the fish population and their quantity.
Conflicts between the Pakeha and Maori farmers have always
been a major issue. For instance, the priorities of the settler farming
community were different from the traditional Maori inhabitants, with the latter
favouring higher water levels to maintain mahingakai and Pakeha desiring the
lake to be as low as possible to maximise the arable land for farming around
the lake side (Singleton, 2007). The lake has been treated as a sink for waste,
with the major causes of degradation being run-off, sewage and the manipulation
of the lake outlets to foster more arable farmland. ‘This was the situation
which faced Maori until a period of restitution for the ills of colonisation
which began in the 1980’s’ (Memon & Kirk, 2012).
During the Treaty negotiation process, Ngai Tahu were
assertive in their twin desires to reclaim ownership and governance of Te Waihora
in order to restore the lake as a source of mahingakai for the local tangata whenua
and made this a key plank in their negotiation strategy. It can be debated to
what extent the lake ownership and governance outcomes sought by Ngai Tahu
negotiators have been achieved. For political reasons, the Crown refused to
consider transfer of ownership of the water in the lake to NgaiTahu. The
NgaiTahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 gives the tribe only partial ownership over
the lake, limited to the lake bed and some surrounding lakeshore properties
(Memon& Kirk, 2012). The lake bed and the lakeshore land were formerly
managed by the DoC (Department of Conservation) on behalf of the Crown. DoC
continues to retain management control over the remaining lakeshore Crown
properties as part of the National Conservation estate.
‘In a 2008 report entitled A Best Use Solution for New Zealand’s
Water Problems, the New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development
recognises iwi as stakeholder and accepts that the current framework was unable
to incorporate customary rights under the Treaty of Waitangi into local water
allocation and use and that iwi rights under the the Treaty of Waitangi in
respect of freshwater resources has yet to be resolved in any catchments’
(Ruru, 2009). This arises to the question whether Maori are simply ‘important
stakeholders’ (Ruru, 2009). In relation to Te Waihora management, an issue with
regards to management participation arises on what role does the Maori plays.
If they will be regarded as merely stakeholders how can they incorporate their
aspirations? How can they decide for that matter? Do they have any control over
Te Waihora’s management? It is unclear in law who owns water and many Maori in
particular stress that this issue must be addressed before any major changes to
Te Waihora management can be considered.
Some
responsibilities of the regional and district councils are overlapping and need
be address for effective management system of the lake. Cooperation between
multiple decision makers is necessary for the establishment of management plans
for the lake. Management of Te Waihora was continuously influenced by property
rights, globalisation and regulation (Memon & Kirk, 2012). Changes in
national policies precipitated by the Ngai Tahu settlement granted limited
recognition of Maori ownership and management rights in Te Waihora but RMA
regulatory regime not only permissive of greater land intensification but also
unwilling to devolve lake management powers to local Maori (Memon & Kirk,
2012). ‘Despite the significant gains
towards indigenous governance of Te Waihora over the last 20 years, effective
Maori agency in the lake and wider catchment continues to be burdened by the
historical forces of institutional inertia’ (Memon & Kirk, 2012). Although
given some authority to lake management, Ngai Tahu’s role does not extend to a
decision making role over matters relating to the issues of water quality and
catchment land use. In other words, the extent of Maori ability to exercise
management over Te Waihora is limited (Memon & Kirk, 2012).
Some
policies that affect management of Te Waihora were also considered short of
integration such as the Resource Management Act of 1991 (RMA) (Munn, 1992).
Other activities in the lake were left to other agencies. The RMA does not
integrate the administration of all natural and physical resources and as such
any decision made by an authority exercising powers under the RMA is made in
isolation from other resources not governed by the Act (Munn, 1992) and this
situation still remains.
Chapter 5 Aspects of Integrated Environmental Management
‘Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) stands for an
approach to the management of the environment that takes into account its
complex, multi-facetted, and interconnected nature’ (Buhrs, 1995). It is ‘a more comprehensive or inclusive approach that
takes into account the scope and scale of environmental and human issues and
their interconnections” (Margerum and Born, 1995). In other words, IEM is a
management tool that considers the environment as a whole including different
factors that is affecting it. ‘It is based on a recognition that “the
environment” is an indivisible whole which cannot be split into self-contained
spheres, areas, or compartments’ (Buhrs, 1995).
More
integrated approaches to environmental management can be traced to an
acknowledgement of the failure (or limited success) of fragmented or sectoral
environmental management in the past where many environmental problems have
grown worse and new ones have emerged (Buhrs, 1995). IEM then tries to provide
better or improved solution to this problem through a more comprehensive
approach. To achieve environmental integration Buhrs (2009) suggested external
and internal consideration of the cognitive, policy and institutional aspects
of the environment. Cognitive refers to ideas, knowledge, interpretations and
frameworks that guide human interactions with the environment. Policy refers to
intentional courses of actions affecting the environment such as aims,
objectives and practices. Lastly, the institutional component of the environment
includes formal and nonformal rules and organizations that guide actions,
behaviour and practices affecting the environment. Buhrs (1995) also discussed
the need for horizontal and vertical integration of these three key components
of the environment in one matrix to achieve integration. For instance,
coordination between equal departments or pursuing a common goal from top to
bottom level of the government must be undertaken.
Implementing
IEM however has been difficult to accomplish. ‘Although everything may be
connected to everything else, we cannot know or understanding everything at
once’. A completely integrated approach to environmental management is
impossible’ (Buhrs, 1995). Recognising difficulties and barriers in realising a
complete integration, Born & Sonzogni (1995) provided four fundamental
dimensions to strengthen the concept of IEM: comprehensive; interconnective;
strategic; and interactive/coordinative.
Comprehensive is inclusive of many things but shall define
the scope and scale. In IEM it may include all critical biophysical, chemical,
and human parts of an ecological system and all entities – public and private –
that affect or can be affected by management (Born & Sogzogni, 1995). Comprehensive may answer the question: have
all relevant aspects/areas of Te Waihora been considered for integration?
Interconnective on the other hand may define interrelationships and linkages
among processes and components of the environment within and among multiple,
cross-cutting, and often conflicting resource uses. One appropriate question
that interconnective dimension may answer is how do management of Te Waihora is
being undertaken. In other words, interconnective may show the linkages of all
processes involve in the lake management. In contrast, strategic or reductive
or scaled-down involve interactions and trade-off decisions among stakeholders.
Question on dispute resolution and prioritisation may be answered under this
dimension. Lastly, interactive/coordinative may address how information is
shared and dispersed between and among agencies and various stakeholders (Born
& Sonzogni, 1995).
These principles of IEM provided by Buhrs (1995; 2009) and
Born & Sonzogni (1995) will be use to develop criteria in evaluating how
much integrated the management of Te Waihora is. These criteria will enable us
to see the problem clearly if whether or not there is integration in
implementing projects and programs for Te Waihora’s protection and
conservation.
Chapter 6 Applying the Principles of IEM
Criteria to Evaluate
Integration
To assess how integrated current management of Te Waihora, a
set of IEM criteria were developed and to identify areas that need be improved.
These criteria have been drawn from literatures on IEM, some of which have already
been discussed Chapter 4. Table 1 shows criteria for evaluating the extent of
integration of Te Wahora management.
Table 1 Criteria for evaluating Te Waihora management with
respect to integration.
|
Dimension
|
Aspects of Te Waihora Management for Integration
|
|
1. Comprehensive
|
a. Integration of lake management
policies, plans and strategies.
b. Consideration of social, economic and
environment plus cultural values of the lake;
c. Integration of the horizontal and
vertical components of institutions or organizations; and
d. Involvement of all key stakeholders
into planning and management;
|
|
2. Process and Outcome Integration
|
a. Goals are clearly defined for
accomplishment;
b. Authority to decide is vested on
one institution; or
c. Decision-making process and power
is agreed upon.
d. Process is linked with the outcome
and objectives.
|
|
3. Horizontal and Vertical Integration
|
a. Ministries and other institutions
are coordinating with each other;
b. Clearer communication and
delineation of power to avoid overlapping of functions;
c. Implementation of policies is clear
from top to bottom hierarchy.
|
|
4. Interconnective
|
a. Consideration for all sectors for
integration: households, farmers, Ngai Tahu, various government agencies and
interest groups;
b. Define functions and
responsibilities of all key stakeholders; and
c. Mapping and structuring to show
interconnection/linkages of all processes and determine the gaps.
|
|
5. Strategic
|
a. Prioritisation of issues;
b. Development of common goal and
strategies;
c. Multi-disciplinary and
multi-stakeholder decision-making; and
d. Public communication and
transparency for effective public involvement;
|
|
6. Interactive/ Coordinative
|
a. Evaluation of the extent of public
participation with regard to Te Waihora management;
b. Institutional coordination;
c. Inter-ministerial,
inter-governmental coordination; and
d. Multi-partite or multi-stakeholder
energy planning and decision-making.
e. Equal access to resources.
|
Discussion
1. Comprehensiveness
An integrated process needs to
comprehensively deal with all the critical biophysical, chemical and human
parts of an ecological system and all entities that affect or can be affected
by the resulting energy policy (Born and Sonzogni, 1995). To ensure an integrated
approach to energy management in New Zealand there is a need to bring together
the stakeholders with an interest in Lake Ellesmere. The interconnection of
different agencies is important at both the policy development and
implementation stages. Coordination and integration of knowledge and data
enable informed decision making and consensus building.
The following criteria questions
below are used to determine the extent of comprehensiveness in the management
of Te Waihora.
a. Are all stakeholders involved in management planning and decision making?
The development of the Te Waihora
Co-Governance Agreement was designed to integrate Ngai Tahu or Maori objectives
with regards to the lake governance. It effectively incorporates and preserves
customary practices into Te Waihora’s planning, management and development. On
the other hand, the Te Waihora Trust involves various stakeholders in the
protection and management of the lake. Thus, it can be said that a certain
degree of integration or involvement of key stakeholders are considered.
However, the claim of ownership or full authority by the Maori to manage the
lake still remains unresolved as the Crown refuses it for political reasons.
b. Is management integrated and holistic?
There were different agencies and
groups which manage specific resources of the lake such as commercial fishing
by the Ministry of Fisheries and biodiversity conservation by the DoC.
Management is considered pragmatic and fragmented. The Regional and the two Local
Councils which have jurisdiction over the lake have overlapping functions.
Lakebeds were awarded to Maori, hence under Ngai Tahu management.
c. Does it consider the triple bottom line (economic, social and
environment) aspect of management?
Continuous effect of farming and
nutrient loading threatens the health of the lake. Moreover, community is
continuously settled within the lake premises which added more pressure. As
Ngai Tahu is concerned with water quality that promotes customary fishing
practices, farming still dominates the use of the lake. Management plans were
develop to improve management. More so, considerations of the economic, social
and environment integration were incorporated in the strategy and management
plans develop for the lake. Added to this is the consideration of Maori’s
culture.
2. Process
In evaluating an approach to lake
management there is a need to consider both the process and the outcomes. This
is particularly important as many of the outcomes are unknown due to long time
frames and uncertainty. A key stage in an integrated process is the development
of a common goal amongst stakeholders and targets to reach that goal (Margerum
and Born, 1995). Once common goals are in place, there is a need to set
priorities to enable strategic decisions to be made. Including a range of
stakeholders with differing interests and values means there is likely to be
conflict between different groups, and dealing with this will need conflict
resolution methods and transparency in how this is handled (Scrase and Sheate,
2002; Bardwell, 1991). The following questions are developed below in relation
to this.
a. Are the
goals and targets with regard to Te Waihora management well defined?
There exist specific goals and targets by different agencies and groups
with regards Te Waihora. For instance the Te Waihora Trust has its own
community strategy implemented to improve current condition of the lake. Since
there were different agencies working, several goals and targets were
formulated. Some of these are overlapping, two or three groups working
separately to achieve improvement of water quality.
b. How issues
being prioritised, addressed and resolved? Who decides on the strategies or
solutions?
There is no single agency who decides in undertaking solutions to
issues with regard to lake management as various agencies work individually
according to their vested powers. However, it can be observed that water
quality is given paramount attention as the health condition of the lake is
crucial.
c. Does this
provide for conflict management? And transparency?
There are no clear mechanisms for
conflict management other than those provided for under the Ngai Tahu and RMA
in relation to resource consents, such as the Environment Court and
environmental mediation. In some instances, conflict may be unavoidable and
even beneficial for raising awareness and discussion but this could be
minimised by having stakeholders getting together to share their interests.
3. Horizontal and Vertical Integration
Horizontal integration of Government
departments has a large impact on policy coordination or the lack of it. This
is a continuing problem for the inter-organisational politics of the public
sector. Vertical integration is required along two separate lines:
international agreements, through national and local government to communities;
and also from the energy generators through to the distribution network and
retailers to end consumers. Key questions to analyse horizontal and vertical
integration are discussed below.
a. Are policies relative to Te Waihora being effectively coordinated and undertaken
by different government agencies (horizontal integration)?
There are some degrees of
coordination being made between different agencies concerned with Te Waihora
management. However, this is not being done on a regular basis. There is no
clear process that indicates appropriate delineation of functions to avoid
overlapping of responsibilities. At worst case, some agencies functions
conflict with each other as in the case of Ngai Tahu and DoC which promote
conservation while ECan undertakes utilisation.
b. Are policy directives implemented effectively from top to bottom level of
government (vertical integration)?
There are indications that policies
that have impact with Te Waihora management are being undertaken with proper
coordination from top to bottom level of government. DoC for example manifested
the importance of protecting and conserving the lake and this is being undertaken
by the regional and local councils.
4. Interconnective
a. How current management system considers interconnections of various
ecosystems affecting the lake? Do they consider stakeholders participation?
Addressing deteriorating quality is
being considered through identifying sources. This are being linked together to
formulate a more viable management plan. Moreover, interconnections of various
ecosystems are being considered since Te Waihora is affected by various factors
connected to rivers and waterways which directly drain to it and by the action
of the sea. Further, the possibility of a watershed to ocean management scheme
is now being discussed by the councils to enhance protection of the lake. Stakeholders
are seen an important part of these activities hence they are being actively
engaged in the process specificall the Ngai Tahu.
5. Strategic
As discussed earlier involves
interactions and trade-off decisions among stakeholders. Establishment of
alternative dispute or conflict resolutions to address confusion with regards
to Te Waihora management is considered. This can be seen in the agreement entered
into by the ECan and Ngai Tahu that incorporates customary rights of Maori over
the lake. The only issue that remain to be resolved is the total ownership of
the lake being claimed by the Maori. Although Maori are empowered to manage the
lakebeds, other resources remain under control of the Crown. If integration is
to pursue claim of ownership must be fully addressed.
6. Interactive/coordinative
Interactive/coordinative addressed
how information is shared and disseminated between and among agencies and
various stakeholders affected by Te Waihora management. How do different
stakeholders work together to achieve a common purpose. The established Te
Waihora Trust is a good example how good interactions and coordination can
effectively empowers the community in protecting and rehabilitating the lake.
Alternatively, assessment of Te Waihora’s management with
respect to integrated practice can be presented and described as shown in Table
2. The author made personal assessment of the current management of the lake and
made personal analysis based on how much integration is being applied: none,
little, mostly and full or complete. None if no integration has been identified
with the current management. Little if there are some efforts but not enough to
consider as integrated. Mostly integrated can be said if most of the elements
of integration are met but few gaps to consider full or complete integration. Full
or complete integration is achieved if current practice applies the principles
of IEM.
Table 2. Evaluating integration of current Te Waihora
management.
|
Criteria
|
Level of Integration
|
|||
|
None
|
Little
|
Mostly
|
Full/ Complete
|
|
|
1.
Comprehensiveness
|
|
|
|
|
|
a.
Affected stakeholders involved
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
b. Consideration of triple bottom line
(environment, economic, social)
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
c. Institutional and organisational
integration
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
d. Involvement of Ngai Tahu in
decision-making
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
e. Integrated approach to water
quality improvement
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
2.
Process
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. Common goals and targets are
integrated
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
b. Single department decides on Te
Waihora
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
c. Conflict resolution established
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
3.
Horizontal and Vertical Integration
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. Involvement of all major
stakeholders
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
b. Government department integration
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
c. Coordination with Ngai Tahu
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
4. Interconnective
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. Functions and responsibilities are
well defined and delineated
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
b. Ecosystems are considered
holistically
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
c. Customary practice are included in
the management plan
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
5.
Strategic
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. Issue of Maori’s ownership claim
been addressed
|
|
P
|
|
|
|
b. Develop alternatives to address
cultural issues
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
c. Prioritise issues/problems of Te
Waihora
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
6. Interactive/Coordinative
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. Coordinated effort in
rehabilitating the lake
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
b. Equal opportunity to be heard
(Maori and Pakeha)
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
c. Sharing of information
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
d. Equal access to resources
|
|
|
P
|
|
|
Does current
management promote an integrated approach to Te Waihora governance?
|
|
|
P
|
|
Based from this evaluation, it can be said that there already
exist an integrated approach to Te Waihora’s management. There is however a
potential for these approaches to be improve in a more integrated way. Thus,
the criteria set in this research can be helpful to achieve a complete
integration.
Chapert 7 Conclusion and Recommendation
Te Waihora or Lake Ellesmere can be considered an important
treasure of New Zealand. It boasts of a very rich culture, history and
biodiversity. It greatly supports economic, social and cultural development
especially of the Maori people. However, like other ecosystems in the country,
it is continuously being threatened by various developmental projects and
settlements. Hence, a viable and effective management system is necessary to
address these threats in order to avoid issue or problems.
This research thus suggested the importance of an integrated
approach to Te Waihora governance. It aims to improve or better current
management practices through a more holistic, complete and integrated system. A
review and assessment of the lake’s importance and uses, problems and current
management has been undertaken and assessed based on some IEM criteria that
have been put forward on various literatures. The rationale for integrated
management is to achieve a more efficient resource allocation of Te Waihora. It
is designed to consider interrelated nature of the lake and thus avoid
conflicts and confusions.
As a result of this evaluation, we find that current
management already undertakes a certain level of integration, as there are
little or mostly considerations for a more holistic or integrated approach in
dealing with the problems confronting Te Waihora. For instance, Ngai Tahu were
involved mostly with regards to planning and implementing strategies and
activities within the lake. The community on the other hand were also engaged
to help enhance and protect the lake and its diversity.
The result of assessment is suggesting however to improve or
strengthen current management practices towards a more integrated management.
For instance in dealing with the claim on ownership by the Maori, resolving
overlapping functions of different agencies and promoting a common or unified
management system for Te Waihora. Moreover, the issue with regard to
considering the Maori as partner in managing the lake shall also be addressed.
The following are recommended to management of the lake more
integrated.
1.
A
more legitimate involvement by the Maori on Te Waihora management which will
empower them to decide not only on the lakebeds that have been awarded to them
but on the whole lake to preserved customary practices. This may promote their
status as a partner and not as a mere important stakeholder only.
2.
A
more committed management group in that implements activities on a
coordinative, cooperative and collaborative approach.
3.
A
more flexible political consideration to completely resolved claims of the
Maori without affecting management in place.
4.
Equal
access to resources including sharing and disseminating information and
engaging of experts.
5.
Mapping
and detailing management scheme for the lake.
6.
Multi-stakeholder
and multi disciplinary management group.
7.
Consideration of possibility of creating a sole
management body that specifically authorised to manage the lake to avoid
multi-agency working on it.
8.
Everyone
should be responsive to changes.
In general, the principles of an integrated approach to Te
Waihora management are already being put to practice. As complete integration
is impossible at the moment, an improvement of the current process may be
undertaken however. The most important thing is that integrated management is
being considered an effective way of dealing with Te Waihora’s problems and
issues.
References
Bardwell, L.V. 1991.
Problem-Framing: A Perspective on Environmental Problem-Solving. Environmental
Management 15:603-612.
Born, Stephen M. and
Margerum, Richard D. 1995. Integrated Environmental Management: Improving the
Practice in Wisconsin. Department of Urban and Regional Planning.University of
Wisconsin.
Buhrs, T. 1995.
Integrated Environmental Management: Towards a Framework for Application.
Environmental Management and Design Division.Lincoln University. New Zealand.
Buhrs, T. 2009. Environmental Integration: Our Common
Challenge. SUNT Press, Albany.
Department of Conservation/TeRunanga
o NgaiTahu (2004).TeWaihora Joint Management Plan – MahereTukutahi o TeWaihora.
Christchurch, New Zealand.
Environment Canterbury
(ECan) (no date).WaitahaWai – water of Canterbury. Section Four: Discovering
your local waterway. Lake Ellesmere/TeWaihora. Christchurch, New Zealand.
Gough, J.D. and Ward,
J.C. 1995. Environmental Decision-Making and Lake Management. Journal of
Environmental Management. 48, 1-15.
James, B. 1991. A
bicultural partnership for TeWaihora (Lake Ellesmere): A case study in management
planning. Department of Conservation.Science and Research Series No. 41.
Wellington, New Zealand.
Margerum, Richard D. and Born, Stephen M.
(1995). Integrated Environmental
Management: Improving the Practice in Wisconsin. Department of Urban and Regional
Planning. University of Wisconsin.
Memon, P.A. and Kirk, N. 2012.
Role of indigenous Maori people in collaborative water governance in
Aotearoa/New Zealand. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Vol.
55, No. 7:941-959
Munn, S. 1992. Integrated
Management verses Fragmented Management. A Case Study: Te Waihora. Centre for
Resource Management. Lincoln University. New Zealand.
Ruru, J. 2009. The Legal
Voice of Maori in Freshwater Governance: A Literature Review. Landcare
Research.
Scrase, J.I., Sheate,
W.R. 2002. Integration and Integrated Approaches to assessment: What Do They
Mean for the Environment? Environmental Policy and Planning 4:275-294.
Singleton, G. 2007. Ellesmere: The Jewel in the Canterbury
Crown. Selwyn District Council,
Rolleston.
Tau Te Maire. 1990.Te Whakatau
Kaupapa: Ngai Tahu resource management strategy for the Canterbury Region. Aoraki
Press. Wellington. New Zealand.
Wortmann, S. 2005.Joint
Management – An Instrument for Involving Indigenous People in the Management of
Protected Areas.The Case Study of TeWaihora/Lake Ellesmere, New Zealand.Diploma
Thesis.University of Dortmund.Faculty of Spatial Planning.
No comments:
Post a Comment