Content uploaded by Wendy Saunders
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Wendy Saunders on Mar 27, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
GNS Science Report 2017/50
March 2018
Investigating the Role of Iwi Management Plans in
Natural Hazard Management: A Case Study from
the Bay of Plenty Region
WSA Saunders
© Institute of Geolo gical and Nuclear S ciences Limited, 20 18
www.gns.cri.nz
ISSN 2350-3424 (Online)
ISBN 978-1-98-853046-8 (Online)
http://dx.doi.org/10.21420/G2VW63
WSA Saunders, GNS Science, PO Box 30368, Lower Hutt, New Zealand
DISCLAIMER
The Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited
(GNS Science) and its funders give no warranties of any kind
concerning the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or fitness for
purpose of the contents of this report. GNS Science accepts no
responsibility for any actions taken based on, or reliance placed on
the contents of this report and GNS Science and its funders exclude
to the full extent permitted by law liability for any loss, damage or
expense, direct or indirect, and however caused, whether through
negligence or otherwise, resulting from any person’s or organisation’s
use of, or reliance on, the contents of this report.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE
Saunders WSA. 2018. Investigating the role of iwi management plans
in natural hazard management: a case study from the Bay of Plenty
region. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 74 p. (GNS Science report
2017/50). doi:10.21420/G 2VW 63.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
i
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................. V
KEYWORDS ................................................................................................................ V
GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................ VI
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
1.1 OUTLINE OF REPORT ................................................................................ 2
2.0 RESEARCH DESIGN ........................................................................................ 3
2.1 SELECTION OF BAY OF PLENTY AS A CASE STUDY AREA ............................. 3
2.2 DESKTOP DOCUMENTARY ANALYSIS .......................................................... 4
2.2.1 Identification of relevant documents ........................................................ 4
2.2.2 Data Collection ........................................................................................ 5
2.2.3 Data analysis ........................................................................................... 6
2.3 CASE STUDIES ......................................................................................... 6
3.0 NATURAL HAZARDS OF THE BAY OF PLENTY REGION ............................. 7
3.1 AVAILABILITY OF NATURAL HAZARD INFORMATION ....................................... 8
3.2 VOLCANIC HAZARDS ................................................................................. 8
3.3 EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS ............................................................................ 9
3.4 COASTAL HAZARDS ................................................................................. 10
3.4.1 Tsunami ................................................................................................. 10
3.4.2 Erosion .................................................................................................. 11
3.4.3 Inundation .............................................................................................. 12
3.5 FLOODING .............................................................................................. 13
3.6 LANDSLIDE AND DEBRIS FLOWS ............................................................... 14
3.6.1 Ōpōtiki District ....................................................................................... 14
3.6.2 Tauranga City ........................................................................................ 15
3.6.3 Whakatāne District ................................................................................ 15
4.0 IWI OF THE BAY OF PLENTY ........................................................................ 16
4.1 TAURANGA MOANA ................................................................................. 16
4.2 TE ARAWA AND NGĀTI TŪWHARETOA....................................................... 17
4.3 MĀTAATUA ............................................................................................. 17
4.4 RAUKAWA .............................................................................................. 18
5.0 BAY OF PLENTY LOCAL AUTHORITY BOUNDARIES ................................. 19
6.0 BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL MAORI GOVERNANCE .................................. 20
6.1 HIMP LODGEMENT PROCESS ................................................................. 20
7.0 INCLUSION OF NATURAL HAZARDS IN IWI MANAGEMENT PLANS ......... 21
7.1 ANALYSIS OF PLANS ............................................................................... 22
7.1.1 Policy Framework .................................................................................. 22
7.1.2 Opportunities for future enhancement ................................................... 25
8.0 FURTHER ANALYSIS OF IMPS THAT INCLUDE NATURAL HAZARDS ...... 26
ii
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
8.1 TE MAHERE Ā ROHE MŌ RANGITIHI (NGĀTI RANGITIHI IWI ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT PLAN) .............................................................................. 26
8.1.1 Inclusion of natural hazards .................................................................. 28
8.1.2 Relationship with other plans and policies ............................................ 29
8.1.3 Consultation ........................................................................................... 30
8.2 MATAKANA AND RANGIWAEA ISLANDS HAPŪ MANAGEMENT PLAN ............. 30
8.2.1 Inclusion of natural hazards .................................................................. 31
8.2.2 Relationship with other plans and policies ............................................ 34
8.2.3 Consultation ........................................................................................... 35
8.3 TE RUATAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA (RAUKAWA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PLAN) .................................................................................................... 35
8.3.1 Inclusion of natural hazards .................................................................. 35
8.3.2 Relationship with other plans and policies ............................................ 38
8.3.3 Consultation ........................................................................................... 38
8.4 NGĀTI RANGIWEWEHI IWI ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ............... 39
8.4.1 Inclusion of natural hazards .................................................................. 40
8.4.2 Relationship with other plans and policies ............................................ 44
8.4.3 Consultation ........................................................................................... 44
9.0 RECOGNITION OF IMP’S IN COUNCIL PLANS ............................................. 45
9.1 BOP REGIONAL POLICY STATEMENT ....................................................... 45
9.2 PROPOSED BOP REGIONAL COASTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN .................. 46
9.3 DISTRICT PLANS ..................................................................................... 48
9.3.1 Tauranga City Plan ................................................................................ 48
9.3.2 Western Bay of Plenty District Plan....................................................... 48
9.3.3 Whakatāne District Council ................................................................... 48
9.3.4 Kawerau District Council ....................................................................... 50
9.3.5 Ōpōtiki District Council .......................................................................... 50
9.3.6 Rotorua District Council ......................................................................... 50
9.3.7 Taupō District Council ........................................................................... 51
9.4 RECOGNITION OF IMP’S IN CDEM PLANS ................................................ 51
10.0 DISCUSSION................................................................................................... 53
10.1 INCLUSION OF NATURAL HAZARDS IN IMPS ............................................... 53
10.2 CALLS FOR ACTION ................................................................................. 53
10.3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF IMPS IN OTHER PLANS AND POLICIES .................. 54
10.4 RESEARCHER OPPORTUNITIES ................................................................ 54
10.5 QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH ..................................................... 54
11.0 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 55
12.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................ 55
13.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 55
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
iii
FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Research programme investigating the role of iwi management plans in natural hazard
management. ................................................................................................................... 1
Figure 2.1 List of IMP’s from Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017).
......................................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 3.1 Location of the Taupo Volcanic Zone, map 3 (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2016). .... 9
Figure 3.2 BayHazards map of active (solid red line) inactive (dotted red line), and offshore (dotted
black line) faults .............................................................................................................. 10
Figure 3.3 BayHazards map showing an example of the tsunami evacuation mapping available ... 11
Figure 3.4 BayHazard coastal erosion hazard zones. ..................................................................... 12
Figure 3.5 Tauranga Harbour 100 year inundation levels ................................................................ 13
Figure 3.6 An example of how flood hazard is mapped in BayHazards........................................... 14
Figure 4.1 Indicative rohe for Ngāti Pūkenga, Ngāi Te Rangi, and Ngāti Ranginui. ........................ 16
Figure 4.2 Rohe of Ngāti Tūwharetoa and Ngāti Tūrangitukua ....................................................... 17
Figure 4.3 Rohe of Mātaatua (source: http://www.tkm.govt.nz/region/mataatua/) ........................... 18
Figure 4.4 Rohe of Tainui, Ngāti Maniapoto and Raukawa ............................................................. 18
Figure 5.1 Regional and local government boundaries of the Bay of Plenty ................................... 19
Figure 7.1 Percentage of IMPs that include issues, objectives, policies, methods and outcomes. .. 23
Figure 7.2 Identification of natural hazards within the policy framework of IMPs ............................. 23
Figure 7.3 Statutory planning documents referred to in IMPs. ......................................................... 24
Figure 7.4 Specific natural hazards included in assessed IMPs. ..................................................... 24
Figure 8.1 Painting of Mount Tarawera eruption by A.D. Willis ....................................................... 26
Figure 8.2 Ngāti Rangitihi rohe boundary map ................................................................................ 27
Figure 8.3 Rohe of Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands. ................................................................... 31
Figure 8.4 Raukawa rohe boundary map. ....................................................................................... 35
Figure 8.5 Relationship of the Raukawa Environmental Plan to external statutory documents (p161).
....................................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 8.6 Core rohe of Ngāti Rangiwewehi with lands where there is an ancestral connection (p9).
....................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 8.7 Aerial photographs showing the inundation of the Papahikahawai area over time (p46).
....................................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 9.1 Example of how IMP links to council plans (Tauranga Moana IMP 2016 p5) ................. 45
Figure 9.2 Context of plans under the RMA, as presented in the Tauranga City Plan (Section 2A, p1).
....................................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 9.3 RMA context for the Western Bay of Plenty District Plan (p1-5). .................................... 49
TABLES
Table 2.1 IMP’s included and excluded from the study .................................................................... 4
Table 7.1 Inland and coastal IMPs considered in analysis ............................................................. 21
Table 7.2 IMPs that included natural hazard objectives, policies, or methods 1 = yes, 0 = no ....... 22
Table 8.1 Specific natural hazard provisions in the Ngāti Rangitihi IMP (p34-36) .......................... 28
Table 8.2 Summary of issues, concerns, policies, outcomes and responsibilities for the Matakana
and Rangiwaea Island HMP (p46-47) ............................................................................ 33
Table 9.1 Recognition of IMPs in CDEM plans of the Bay of Plenty region .................................... 52
iv
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
APPENDICES
A1.0 APPENDIX 1: IMP ANALYSIS PROTOCOL ................................................... 58
A2.0 APPENDIX 2: RESULTS OF IMP ANALYSIS ................................................. 59
A3.0 APPENDIX 3: MATAKANA AND RANGIWAEA HMP PROCESS FOR
CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT ............................................ 60
A4.0 APPENDIX 4: CLIMATE CHANGE AND NATURAL HAZARD SECTIONS OF
TE RAUTAKI TAIAO O RAUKAWA (RAUKAWA ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT PLAN) 2015 ............................................................. 62
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
v
ABSTRACT
This report forms the second stage in a four-stage research programme investigating the role
of iwi management plans in natural hazard management. Iwi management plans (IMPs)
provide a valuable strategic tool for natural hazard management, however their potential
influence and role is uncertain.
To assist in the evaluation of IMPs as a tool for natural hazard management, a case study was
undertaken of IMPs in the Bay of Plenty Region. Of the 29 IMPs lodged with the Bay of Plenty
Regional Council, 21 plans were analysed for their natural hazard provisions, linkages to other
plans and policies, and consultation process. Of these 21 IMPs, only six included reference to
natural hazards, to different degrees; some had specific and explicit information on natural hazard
risks and climate change; others were more general. Based on the content of these six plans, four
were analysed in more detail to ascertain to what degree natural hazards were included.
The findings of this research can be summarised into three key issues: the variable inclusion
of natural hazards in IMPs; calls for action in IMPs; and the variability and lack of
acknowledgement of IMPs in other plans.
KEYWORDS
Iwi Management Plans, Bay of Plenty, Natural Hazards, Climate Change
vi
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
GLOSSARY
Hapū A section of a large kinship group and the primary political unit
in traditional Māori society. It consists of a number of whānau
sharing descent from a common ancestor. A number of related
hapū usually share adjacent territories forming a looser tribal
federation (iwi).
Iwi Extended kinship group, tribe, nation, people, nationality, race
— often refers to a large group of people descended from a
common ancestor and associated with a distinct territory.
Kaitiakitanga Exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in
accordance with tikanga Māori in relation to natural and
physical resources; and includes the ethic of stewardship (as
defined in section 2, Resource Management Act 1991).
Kāwanatanga
Government, dominion, rule, authority, governorship, province.
Mana Whakahono a Rohe
Iwi participation arrangements under the Resource
Management Act 1991.
Mātauranga Māori
Knowledge, wisdom, and/or understanding.
Rūnanga Council, tribal council, assembly, b
oard, boardroom, iwi
authority — assemblies called to discuss issues of concern to
iwi or the community.
Rohe
Boundary, district, region, territory, area, border of land.
Tangata whenua Local people, hosts, indigenous people — people born of the
whenua, i.e. of the placenta and of the land where the people's
ancestors have lived and where their placenta are buried.
Tino rangatiratanga Self-determination, sovereignty, autonomy, self-governance,
domination, rule, control, power.
Wāhi tapu Sacred place or site — a place subject to long-
term ritual
restrictions on access or use, e.g. a burial ground, a battle site
or a place where tapu objects were placed.
(www.Māoridictionary.co.nz)
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report forms the second stage in a four-stage research programme investigating the role
of iwi management plans in natural hazard management (see Figure 1.1). Iwi management
plans provide a valuable strategic tool for natural hazard management. However, although a
legislative document through the Resource Management Act 1991 (see Saunders, 2017), their
potential influence and role is uncertain. As of 1 July 2015, 53 local authorities had one or more
iwi/hapū management plans lodged with them; 190 iwi/hapū management plans had been
lodged with local authorities throughout New Zealand; and 25 local authorities had no iwi/hapū
management plans lodged with them (http://www.mfe.govt.nz/rma/rma-monitoring-and-
reporting/reporting-201415/m%C4%81ori-participation/iwi-management-plans).
Figure 1.1 Research programme investigating the role of iwi management plans in natural hazard management.
Funded through the National Science Challenge “Resilience to Nature’s Challenges”
Mātauranga Māori research theme, the aim of Stage 2 of the research project involves a case
study of IMPs in the Bay of Plenty region. It identifies the iwi management plans that include
natural hazards; reviews and evaluates how those iwi management plans include natural
hazards information; how well that information relates to the regional, district and Civil Defence
Stage 1 - Context
Iwi Management Plans
Legislative framework
Governance
Engagement
Mātauranga Māori
Stage 3 – IMP/Science/
Council interface
Explore the relationship
between IMPs, science
translation, and councils
Stage 2 – IMP Case Study
Bay of Plenty
Natural hazard context
IMP content analysis
Opportunities
Challenges
Stage 4 – Summary
discussion and
recommendations
2
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
Emergency Management (CDEM) group plans and vice versa; and outlines any opportunities
and barriers to the use of IMPs as a hazard management tool.
Bay of Plenty's Māori landscape is culturally rich and dynamic, with the region's population
being 28 percent Māori. Of the region's land area, 38 percent is in Māori ownership, with 1800
Māori Land Trusts managing these assets. There are 34 iwi, over 142 hapū and more than
200 marae located across the region. Te Arawa, Mataatua, Nukutere, Takitimu, Horouta and
Tainui are the Waka groupings (https://www.boprc.govt.nz/council/kaupapa-maori/)
The Stage 1 report provides the context for the subsequent stages. The report outlines
what IMPs are; their legislative context; how IMPs contribute to co-governance and co-
management arrangements; the role of IMPs as an engagement tool; and the inclusion of
mātauranga Māori in IMPs.
Based on the outcomes of this Stage 2 report, Stage 3 will explore the relationship between
IMPs, the transfer of science knowledge into IMPs, and councils. The aim is to understand and
improve the system of knowledge transfer between the IMPs, scientists, and council.
From the findings of the previous stages, Stage 4 will test the hypothesis of an alternative
planning framework that links mātauranga Māori, IMPs, science, and council
responsibilities. It will present final recommendations made in the previous stages,
including a recommended way forward for future research to improve and encourage the
role of IMPs in natural hazard management.
1.1 OUTLINE OF REPORT
The report begins by looking at how iwi management plans fit into the planning context and
what the legal requirements are for including them in the resource management and decision-
making process (Section 3). This investigation also looks at the content of iwi management
plans, and generally their intention for resource management.
Section 4 looks at the process of engagement that has been created under the Resource
Management Act 1991 and the Local Government Act 2002. This section will highlight the
opportunities for Māori to be involved in the planning and decision-making process.
Section 5 will review the natural hazards identified in the Bay of Plenty Regional Plans, district
plans, and Civil Defence Emergency Management Group plans. This section is concerned with
what natural hazards information is provided, and how/if that information has been mapped.
The report then concludes with a summary of the research findings, and based on those
findings, makes a series of recommendations on how the natural hazards information could be
included into iwi management plans.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
3
2.0 RESEARCH DESIGN
The objective of this research is to determine how or if natural hazards information is being
incorporated into iwi management plans. The information will then be reviewed against what
is provided in the regional and district plans, and civil defence emergency management plans.
A toolbox of social science research methods has been deployed to achieve this objective.
The following sections in this chapter describe the methods used to undertake the research,
in particular:
• Desk top documentary research
• Screening criteria
• Case studies of three IMPs.
This combination of methods allows for an in-depth level of information to be gathered from
the research process. The framework of research methods discussed in here will provide a
robust analysis of the effectiveness of the natural hazards information included in iwi
management plans.
2.1 SELECTION OF BAY OF PLENTY AS A CASE STUDY AREA
Due to limited funding available, a case study region was required to enable an in-depth
analysis to be undertaken of iwi management plans. The Bay of Plenty region was selected as
a case study area due the wide variety of natural hazards in the area (i.e. flooding, coastal
erosion, land instability, tsunami, volcanic, geothermal, subsidence, active faults, sea level
rise, outlined in further detail in Section 3), and the large number of IMPs available to be
assessed (see Figure 2.1).
Figure 2.1 List of IMP’s from Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017).
4
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
The combination of natural hazards and number of plans allows for a better understanding of
the priorities, opportunities and challenges for incorporating natural hazard and risk provisions
in IMPs. This will be further explored in Stage 3 of the research programme.
2.2 DESKTOP DOCUMENTARY ANALYSIS
The research will be undertaken according to secondary documentary methods, where
documents that have not been primarily developed for the study (i.e. have been used for other
purposes) are used to inform the research findings (Sarantakos, 1998). In this case, these
documents are iwi management plans. Documentary research can take many forms, however
for this research it will be qualitative in nature. According to Sarantakos (1998, p275), “[In]
Qualitative research … the researcher identifies and interprets information contained in the
documents; ascertains aspects of the issue in question and main ideas, statements and
thoughts on the subject; investigates the main theme of the document, who the author is, when
the document was written, the reliability of the source, and arrives at relevant conclusions”.
This will be the methodological process that will be followed for this research, based on four
key stages of documentary research (Sarantakos, 1998):
1. Identification of relevant documents;
2. Data Collection;
3. Data analysis; and
4. Interpretation of the findings.
2.2.1 Identification of relevant documents
The iwi management plans were sourced from the Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s online list1
of hapū/iwi management plans that have been lodged with the council. While many of the plans
listed were hyperlinked to their respective plans, a number of plans were not, and were unable
to be located through internet searches. These plans were not analysed, and have been
excluded from the remainder of this research.
As shown in Figure 2.1, there are 29 IMPs lodged with the Bay of Plenty Regional Council as
of June 2014, with another six in progress, and eight either on hold, partially completed, or
overdue. This list of plans that were included and excluded are shown in Table 2.1 below. In
total, 21 IMP’s were included in the study, with 11 unable to be located.
Table 2.1 IMP’s included and excluded from the study.
IMP’s included in study
IMP’s excluded from study
Ngati Pukenga Resource Management Plan Te Runanga o Ngati Pikiao Iwi Resource
Management Strategy Plan
Tapuika Environmental Management Plan Tawharau o nga Hapū o Whakatohea
Whaia te mahere taiao o Hauraki - Hauraki Iwi
Environmental Plan
Ngaiterangi Iwi Resource Management Plan
Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu IMP Phase 2 Nga Tikanga Whakahaere Taonga o Ngati Pikiao
Whanui Iwi Resource Management Plan
1 https://www.boprc.govt.nz/about-council/kaupapa-maori/hapuiwi-resource-management-plans/
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
5
IMP’s included in study
IMP’s excluded from study
Motiti Island Native Resource Management Plan Ngati Whakaue ki Maketu Hapū Iwi Resource
Management Plan
Ngati Kahu Hapū Environmental Management Plan Ngapotiki Environmental Management Plan (Draft)
Ngāi Te Ahi Hapū Management Plan Te Whatu: Ngaiterangi Natural Resources
Environment Management Manual
Ngāti Pūkenga Iwi ki Tauranga Trust IMP Ngati Umutahi Whenua Resource Management Plan
Te Mana Taiao O Ngāi Tamarāwaho HMP Te Whanau a Te Ehutu Iwi Management Plan (Draft)
Ngai Tukairangi Ngai Tapu HMP Ngati Manawa Iwi Management Plan
Ngāi Tamawhariua HMP Ngaitai Iwi Management Plan
Waitaha IMP
Tauranga Moana IMP A joint environmental plan for
Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāi Te Rangi and Ngāti Pūkenga
Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands HMP
Pirirakau HMP
Ngāti Rangiwewehi Iwi Environmental MP
Ngāti Tamateatutahi-Ngāti Kawiti HMP
Raukawa Environmental Management Plan
Ngāti Kea Ngāti Tuara Iwi Environmental MP
Ngati Whare IMP
Ngāti Rangitihi Iwi Environmental MP
2.2.2 Data Collection
For this research, the data collection process primarily involved assessing the prominence of
natural hazards in the IMPs. A coding protocol was developed (see Appendix 1) and tested
before undertaking the full coding process.
The coding protocol was adapted from a 2004 KCSM Consultancy Solutions report for the
Ministry for the Environment (MfE) titled ‘Review of the Effectiveness of Iwi Management Plans:
An Iwi Perspective’ (KCSM Consultancy Solutions, 2004). The wider focus of the report was
on improving the effectiveness of Māori participation in the management and use natural
resources. As part of the project, KCSM developed assessment criteria for reviewing iwi
management plans which has been adapted for use in this analysis. The criteria adapted from
the analysis includes the following criteria:
• Purpose of the iwi management plan – why was it prepared, who was it prepared for and
what is it seeking to achieve i.e. environmental, social, cultural, and economic goals
• Rohe – the area covered by the iwi management plan
• Issues the iwi management plan seeks to address – both within a general sense and
natural hazard specific
• Objectives, policies, and methods – both within a general sense and natural hazard
specific
6
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
• Participation – the circumstances when the iwi or hapū seek consultation with an agency,
i.e. a council or consent applicant, the process to be used, and the information the iwi or
hapū need to enable it to assess the agency’s proposal.
Building on these criteria, the coding protocol also applied the following criteria:
• Natural hazards information – what natural hazards are specifically acknowledged in the
plan?
• Reference to the regional plan, CDEM group plan, or district plan
• Emergency management details – does the plan acknowledge any emergency plan for
the iwi, or in conjunction with civil defence emergency management?
Questions were coded according to whether the IMPs contained or did not contain parameters
(i.e. 1 = yes, 2 = no), outlined in the Appendix 1.
2.2.3 Data analysis
A basic content analysis was undertaken to ascertain which IMPs included natural hazard
provisions. The findings of the data analysis were used to undertake a simplistic screening to
understand which plans contained natural hazard information, and of those, what the ‘top three’
were for further in-depth analysis of how natural hazards were incorporated. The results of the
data analysis are presented and discussed in Section 6 of this report.
2.3 CASE STUDIES
The case study method was selected to investigate in further detail how the IMP’s in the Bay
of Plenty include natural hazard information, and how the natural hazard information reflects
what is provided in the district and regional plans. The results of the ‘top four’ IMPs for including
natural hazards are presented in Section 7 of this report.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
7
3.0 NATURAL HAZARDS OF THE BAY OF PLENTY REGION
Te Moana a Toi-te-Huatahi is the recognised Māori name for the region that translates to "The
Ocean of Toi of the First Fruits". The region has a range of pristine natural
landscapes including the Rotorua Te Arawa lakes, Tauranga harbour, Ōhiwa harbour and the
Whakatāne, Kaituna, Rangitāiki and Wairoa rivers. These natural resources are some of the
jewels (taonga) of the region (https://www.boprc.govt.nz/council/kaupapa-maori/).
At the same time, the Bay of Plenty is exposed to a wide variety of natural hazards. This section
will outline the natural hazards information that has been provided in the regional, district and
Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) group plans. These plans identify a number
of natural hazards that can affect the region, which include but are not limited to:
• Volcanic activity
- Ash fall
- Pyroclastic and lava flow
- Landslip, debris flow and lahar
- Geothermal hazard
- Caldera unrest
• Earthquakes
- Fault rupture
- Liquefaction and lateral spreading
- Ground shaking
- Landslide and rock fall
- Tsunami
- Tectonic Subsidence
• Coastal/marine processes
- Coastal inundation
- Coastal erosion
- Sea level rise
• Extreme or prolonged rainfall
- Flooding
- Landslide/debris flow
- Debris flow/flood
To manage the natural hazards, a risk management approach is taken, where the risk of a
natural hazard is determined by a combination of an event’s likelihood (i.e. chance of an event
occurring), and its potential consequence (i.e. amount of damage it would cause should an event
occur). The regional policy statement acknowledges that for some natural hazard events such
as flooding, steps can be taken to reduce the likelihood of an event occurring by providing flood
protection. However, for most hazards, an event occurring is beyond human control. In these
situations, the risk is reduced to ensure the consequences of an event are as low as possible.
8
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
3.1 AVAILABILITY OF NATURAL HAZARD INFORMATION
BayHazards is an on-line GIS map based viewer of the Bay of Plenty's natural hazards, with
the purpose to make natural hazard information open and accessible
(https://www.boprc.govt.nz/residents-and-communities/natural-hazards-living-with-risk/bay
hazards/). The natural hazard layers are based on existing research. Not all areas of the region
have been investigated, therefore additional natural hazards may exist in areas not currently
mapped in BayHazards.
Features of BayHazards include:
• A brief hazard description with a link to Civil Defence and Emergency Management
(CDEM) for key messages on preparedness and what to do in an event;
• Interactive maps displaying natural hazard layers (GIS) made available by the district
and city councils across the region. Type in your address and get to know your hazards;
and
• Technical documents are provided under the resources tab for further information if you
want to dig deeper.
Natural hazards currently included in BayHazards are: earthquake; tsunami; coastal; flooding;
and volcanic. Information in the following sections has been sourced from this website.
3.2 VOLCANIC HAZARDS
The Bay of Plenty area sits within the Taupō Volcanic Zone (TVZ), where the major features
are active volcanoes, geothermal fields, and several earthquake fault lines. The TVZ links the
volcanic cones of Ruapehu and Tongariro to White Island. Figure 3.1 displays the location of
the TVZ, and identifies the volcanic features located within the TVZ. The active volcanic
centres in the region each represent a different level of hazard:
• Okataina – A caldera volcano that produces infrequent moderate to large eruptions
usually every 700-3000 years and will have a significant impact.
• Pūtauaki/Mt Edgecumbe - A young multi-cone complex near Kawerau. The largest
cone erupted as a series of lava flows and volcanic breccias. Geological evidence
suggests that much of the cone has grown in the last 5000 years, with recent eruptions
dating back 2300–3100 years ago.
• Tuhua/Mayor Island – Lies off the coast of Tauranga and Whangamata, and had a
moderate caldera forming eruption around 6300 years ago. Smaller and undated
eruptions around 500–1000 years ago have followed the caldera forming eruption.
Future eruptions could significantly impact the coastal areas.
• Whakaari/White Island – An active volcanic pile off shore from Whakatāne. Past
eruptions have not typically had significant impacts on the Bay of Plenty region, but can
have a significant effect on the island. A sustained episode occurred between 1975 and
2000 which created a new crater complex and lake.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
9
Figure 3.1 Location of the Taupo Volcanic Zone, map 3 (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2016).
The last major eruption was in 1886, when Mt Tarawera erupted resulting in an estimated 120
people killed, many displaced, and the environment completely changed
(https://www.teara.govt.nz/en/historic-volcanic-activity/page-2, 9 August 2017).
3.3 EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS
Running along the eastern side of the TVZ is a major belt of faults and folding which makes up
the steep ranges that form a spine along the North Island. This is known as the ‘North Island
Shear Belt’, and extends from the East Cape down to Wellington.
Earthquakes generated in the Shear Belt are likely to be significantly more powerful, although
also less frequent, than those from the Taupō Fault Belt. The movement of the Shear Belt
faults tends to be more a sliding action than a pulling apart, which gives rise to the term 'Shear
Belt'. To the west lies the Hauraki Graben, a less active example of rifting like in the Taupō
Volcanic Zone. Small to moderately damaging earthquakes may occur in this area and affect
10
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
the western extremes of the region. Figure 3.2 shows the active and inactive faults of the
region.
Figure 3.2 BayHazards map of active (solid red line) inactive (dotted red line), and offshore (dotted black line)
faults (http://boprc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=351747f1ca8347c483371b822198bba8, 9
August 2017).
The most recent large earthquake to affect the Bay of Plenty was in 1987, when a magnitude
6.3 earthquake occurred, centred north of the township of Edgecumbe. While there was no
loss of life, several dozen people were seriously injured, and industrial sites were badly
affected. Associated earthquake hazards include tsunami, subsidence, liquefaction,
landslides, fault rupture, and ground shaking.
3.4 COASTAL HAZARDS
3.4.1 Tsunami
There are three types of tsunami that could inundate the Bay of Plenty coast:
1. Distant Tsunami: These are generated from a source that is a long way away, such as
across the Pacific in Chile. For a tsunami generated from a distal source, there is likely
to be at least three hours warning prior to its arrival. For example, a magnitude (Mw) 9.5
earthquake in Chile generated a tsunami that prompted the evacuation of Whakatāne,
Ōhope, and Ōpōtiki in 1960.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
11
2. Regional Tsunami: A tsunami that would take between one to three hours to reach the Bay
of Plenty is described as a regional tsunami. They are usually generated from earthquakes
along the Kermadec/Tongan trench, which lies to the northeast of New Zealand.
3. Local Tsunami: A local tsunami is one that will take less than one hour to reach the
shoreline. They are the most dangerous form of tsunami as they can occur within minutes
of the generation, leaving little time for a formal warning or evacuation. Earthquakes from
fault lines close to the shore or from areas within the southern part of the Kermadec
trench are the most likely sources for local Tsunami generation.
Tsunami evacuation maps are available on BayHazards; an example is provided in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.3 BayHazards map showing an example of the tsunami evacuation mapping available (Source:
http://boprc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=351747f1 ca8347c483371b822198bba8, 2
November 2017).
3.4.2 Erosion
Coastal erosion is a natural process by which sediment is removed from beaches and cliffs
and transported by currents. Erosion occurs through geological and hydrodynamic processes
such as king tides, storm surges, wind waves, and swell waves. Most coastlines will undergo
a series of periodical shifts between erosion and accretion. Erosion can be caused by wave
action generated from strong storms, winds, or from human activity such as hard engineering
structures along the coast.
Climate change is causing the sea level to rise, frequency and magnitude of storm surge,
wave/swell conditions, rainfall patterns, and tidal range. It is expected that climate change will
increase the rates of coastal erosion. Figure 3.4 shows the erosion zones for the Bay of Plenty
(noting that where there are ‘gaps’ between lines, further information is to come).
12
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
Figure 3.4 BayHazard coastal erosion hazard zones. Green = current erosion hazard zone; blue = 50 years
erosion hazard zone; yellow = 100 years erosion hazard zone (Source:
http://boprc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=351747f1ca8347c483371b822198bba8, 9
August 2017).
3.4.3 Inundation
Inundation is the flooding of low lying coastal areas by raised sea water elevation. Coastal
inundation is particularly likely when high tides, storm surge and wave set-up occur at the same
time. Areas that are inundated only occasionally now are likely to be inundated much more
frequently in the future as climate changes.
Sea level rise and intensification of storms is likely to put many low-lying areas not previously
affected by coastal inundation at risk. More extensive and frequent coastal inundation events
will impact coastal margins with predicted sea level rise, modification of estuaries and harbour
tides, and impacts on storms, waves, river floods, and sediment supply. Figure 3.5 provides
an example of how inundation is mapped for the Tauranga Harbour.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
13
Figure 3.5 Tauranga Harbour 100 year inundation levels (Source: http://boprc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/
MapSeries/index.html?appid=351747f1ca8347c483371b822198bba8, 9 August 2017).
Information is also provided for the Whakatāne inundation risk zone in the BayHazards
online application.
3.5 FLOODING
Floods are New Zealand’s number one hazard in terms of frequency, losses, and declared civil
defence emergencies. Floods can be caused by storms and heavy rain that cause rivers to
overflow their banks or street drains can become blocked causing urban flooding (BayHazards,
9 August 2017).
The Bay of Plenty region has eight major rivers emptying into the Bay; the Wairoa, Kaituna,
Tarawera, Rangitāiki, Whakatāne, Waioeka, Mōtū and Raukokore rivers. Schemes have been
put in place by the Bay of Plenty Regional Council for rivers and streams to protect our
communities from flooding. An ongoing 24/7 flood warning service is also maintained by the
Regional Council to provide early warning advice to landowners, general public, and
emergency management authorities (BayHazards, 9 August 2017).
The CDEM group plan identifies that there are two main types of flooding that can affect the
Bay of Plenty: river bed flooding, where continuous heavy rainfall can cause the river levels to
14
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
rise and for river water to top their banks; and flash floods, where a large amount of rain over
a short space can cause flooding in the streets, storm water drains, or rivers. Figure 3.6
provides an example of how flooding is mapped in BayHazards. Street views of Tauranga City
are also available.
Figure 3.6 An example of how flood hazard is mapped in BayHazards (Source
http://boprc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=351747f1ca8347c483371b822198bba8, 9
August 2017).
3.6 LANDSLIDE AND DEBRIS FLOWS
Landslides can range in size from a single boulder in a rock fall to a very large avalanche of
debris with large quantities of rock and soil. There are many triggering factors for landslides
which include changes in ground water levels to human activity (i.e. the removal of vegetation,
steep roadside cuttings, or leaking pipes). However, the most common triggers are heavy rainfall
events or an earthquake. There are many examples of large landslides in the Bay of Plenty; a
summary for three districts (Ōpōtiki District, Tauranga City, and Whakatāne Districts) are below.
3.6.1 Ōpōtiki District
Ōpōtiki District is mainly made up of hilly and mountainous land covered in dense bush, which
when combined with high annual rainfall means rainfall triggered landslides area a serious risk.
In 2004, severe landsliding occurred following a heavy rainfall event. The landslides damaged
properties and infrastructure, and resulted in the loss of one life. Serious landslides on State
Highway 2 in the Waioeka Gorge and on State Highway 5 east of Ōpōtiki have recently resulted
in the closure of these road sections for prolonged periods of time (BOPEM, 2017).
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
15
There is a high risk of landsliding within the Ōpōtiki District. Due to only a small number of
residents living in landslide prone areas, the main risk from landsliding within this district is
likely to be to transport networks and those travelling along roads in landslide prone areas.
3.6.2 Tauranga City
Tauranga City is located on a landform built by erosional processes and their interactions with
groundwater levels, slope geometry, and soil profiles/properties. Landslides are common
throughout this area but are dependent on the landform shape, soil profile, the extent and
manner of development, and rainfall. Landslides are also caused when the harbour erodes the
toes of the slope, creating accommodation space for the landslide to move into. Tauranga has
experienced severe landslides in 1979, 1984, 1995, 2001, and 2012. The most notable
occurred in 2005 when 300 landslides were recorded and 42 homes were destroyed. Another
notable landslide period was 2011 where more than 40 slips occurred however no homes were
destroyed (BOPEM, 2017).
3.6.3 Whakatāne District
Whakatāne District landslides include those at Whakatāne City, Ōhope, and Matatā. The
backdrop to all of these towns is steep escarpment slopes that could potentially fail during
heavy rainfall or an earthquake posing a risk to people and infrastructure (BOPEM, 2017).
There are many examples of landslides within the Whakatāne District. These include (BOPEM,
2017):
• In Matatā several large landslides and debris flows were triggered following heavy rainfall
over the area in May 2005. One of the main debris flows which caused widespread
damage through the town of Matatā occurred within the Awatarariki and Waitepuru
Streams.
• A large landslide on West End Road in Ōhope in 2011 destroyed houses and tragically
claimed the life of a young teenager. The death was a result of vegetation debris from
the failing slope impacting an occupied house.
• A number of landslides in 2004 destroyed homes and buildings in Whakatāne.
16
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
4.0 IWI OF THE BAY OF PLENTY
The Te Kāhui Māngai (directory of iwi and Māori organisations) has identified the following iwi
groups in the Bay of Plenty region. This information is based on iwi identified in the Māori
Fisheries Act 2004, and those iwi/hapū that have begun the process of negotiating settlement of
their historical Treaty of Waitangi claims (http://www.tkm.govt.nz/, accessed 28 August 2017).
All iwi rohe are susceptible to natural hazards.
4.1 TAURANGA MOANA
This rohe represents three overlapping iwi: Ngāti Pūkenga; Ngāi Te Rangi; and Ngāti Ranginui
(Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1 Indicative rohe for Ngāti Pūkenga, Ngāi Te Rangi, and Ngāti Ranginui. (source:
http://www.tkm.govt.nz/region/tauranga-moana/ )
Each iwi include coastal whenua within their rohe.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
17
4.2 TE ARAWA AND NGĀTI TŪWHARETOA
The rohe presented in Figure 4.2 represents Ngāti Tūwharetoa and Ngāti Tūrangitukua.
Figure 4.2 Rohe of Ngāti Tūwharetoa and Ngāti Tūrangitukua (source: http://www.tkm.govt.nz/region/te-arawa-
waka/ )
Within the Te Arawa iwi rohe the following groups are represented: Ngāti Mākino; Ngāti Pikiao;
Ngāti Rangiteaorere; Tapuika; Ngāti Tarāwhai; Tūhourangi; Te Ure o Uenukukōpako / Ngāti
Whakaue; Waitaha; Ngāti Tahu / Ngāti Whaoa; Ngāti Kea / Ngāti Tuarā; Ngāti Rongomai; Ngāti
Rangiwewehi; and Ngāti Rangitihi.
Of these 13 rohes, seven do not have any coastline: Ngāti Tarāwhai; Tūhourangi; Ngāti Tahu
/ Ngāti Whaoa; Ngāti Kea / Ngāti Tuarā; and Ngāti Rongomai.
4.3 MĀTAATUA
Figure 4.3 shows the rohe of Mātaatua, which has a substantial coastline included in their
boundary.
18
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
Figure 4.3 Rohe of Mātaatua (source: http://www.tkm.govt.nz/region/mataatua/)
4.4 RAUKAWA
Raukawa is a ‘land-locked’ iwi, and straddles the Waikato and Bay of Plenty regional
government boundaries.
Figure 4.4 Rohe of Tainui, Ngāti Maniapoto and Raukawa (source: http://www.tkm.govt.nz/region/tainui/ )
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
19
5.0 BAY OF PLENTY LOCAL AUTHORITY BOUNDARIES
The iwi boundaries outlined in the previous section are located within the jurisdiction of the Bay
of Plenty Regional Council, whose boundary is shown as a blue line in Figure 5.1. There are
seven district councils that fall under the Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s authority, as shown
in Figure 5.1:
• Western Bay of Plenty;
• Tauranga City;
• Rotorua District (part);
• Kawerau District;
• Whakatāne District;
• Ōpōtiki District; and
• Taupō District (part).
Figure 5.1 Regional and local government boundaries of the Bay of Plenty (Source:
https://catalogue.data.govt.nz/dataset/bay-of-plenty-local-council-boundaries-map-book, 2 November 2017).
It can be seen from Figure 5.1 and the rohe boundaries in Section 4 that the local government
and rohe boundaries do not ‘match’. Hence the importance of IMPs in being able to provide a
consistent message to local government across the region.
20
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
6.0 BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL MAORI GOVERNANCE
The Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Māori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001 established
the three Māori Constituencies. The Regional Council became the first territorial authority to
provide for Māori representation in local government. Councillors are elected to each
constituency by residents on the Māori electoral roll. Māori Councillors are members of Council
and fully participate in the decision-making processes (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017b).
The Māori Committee of Council was established in 2006. Its primary function is to implement
and monitor Council's legislative obligations to Māori. Māori Committee meetings are held on
marae across the region to enhance participation. Committee members include three Māori
Constituency Councillors, two general Councillors and the Council Chairman (ex-office). Anyone
is welcome at meetings of the Māori Committee (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017b).
Bay of Plenty region's Treaty landscape is a dynamic space. The Waitangi Tribunal has held
16 historical inquiries across the region identifying Treaty breaches. The region's iwi have
used the reports to support negotiations of several comprehensive Treaty settlements with
the Office of Treaty Settlements. We expect the region's iwi to settle all of their historical Treaty
claims comprehensively soon (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017b).
Hapū/Iwi Resource Management Plan (HIMP) documents approved by iwi are taken into
account by Council in the management of the region's natural resources. HIMPs identify
cultural and natural features important to Māori and outline consultation processes. Funding is
available for iwi/hapū that are in the process of creating a new plan, or revising an existing
HIMP document (Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 2017b).
6.1 HIMP LODGEMENT PROCESS
A copy of the final hapū/iwi resource planning document is to be deposited with Council prior
to the final payment being released. To ensure that Council has regard to this document, the
plan must be recognised by the relevant iwi authority and lodged with Bay of Plenty Regional
Council. The several lodgement options available to hapū/iwi include (Bay of Plenty Regional
Council, 2011):
1) Lodge the plan with a covering letter from the relevant iwi authority.
2) Lodge the plan with a copy of minutes of a hapū/iwi/marae meeting where the plan was
mandated by representatives.
3) Lodge the plan at an official meeting in which Council staff and hapū/iwi representatives
are present.
4) Lodge the plan by completing Council’s ‘plan acknowledgement’ form.
5) Another method as agreed by the applicant and Council.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
21
7.0 INCLUSION OF NATURAL HAZARDS IN IWI MANAGEMENT PLANS
The iwi management plans analysed in this research were identified through the Bay of Plenty
Regional Council website. Those IMPs included in this study are shown in Table 7.1, as well
as if they are inland or include coastline in their rohe.
Table 7.1 Inland and coastal IMPs considered in analysis.
IMP’s included in analysis
Inland/Coastal
Ngāti Pūkenga Resource Management Plan Coastal
Tapuika Environmental Management Plan Coastal
Whaia te mahere taiao o Hauraki - Hauraki Iwi
Environmental Plan
Coastal
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu IMP Phase 2 Coastal
Motiti Island Native Resource Management Plan Coastal
Ngāti Kahu Hapū Environmental Management Plan Coastal
Ngāi Te Ahi Hapū Management Plan Coastal
Ngāti Pūkenga Iwi ki Tauranga Trust IMP Coastal
Te Mana Taiao O Ngāi Tamarāwaho HMP Coastal
Ngai Tukairangi Ngati Tapu HMP Coastal
Ngāi Tamawhariua HMP Coastal
Waitaha IMP Coastal
Tauranga Moana IMP A joint environmental plan for Ngāti
Ranginui, Ngāi Te Rangi and Ngāti Pūkenga
Coastal
Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands HMP Coastal
Pirirakau HMP Coastal
Ngāti Rangiwewehi Iwi Environmental MP Coastal
Ngāti Rangitihi Iwi Environmental MP Coastal
Ngāti Tamateatutahi-Ngāti Kawiti HMP Inland
Raukawa Environmental Management Plan Inland
Ngāti Kea Ngāti Tuara Iwi Enviornmental MP Inland
Ngati Whare IMP Inland
As shown in Table 7.1, 17 of the 21 plans have coastlines (i.e. 81% of IMPs).
An initial screening of the plans was undertaken to determine if the plans contained natural
hazard information, and if so, what type of information was included. The screening identified
that the majority of iwi management plans did not consider natural hazards, or if they had, it
was a secondary concern to another issue (see Appendix 2). For example, the erosion of land
around waterways that was resulting in the sedimentation of a water body that was impacting
on the water quality and subsequently affecting the ability of an iwi or hapū to gather seafood
within their rohe.
The initial screening identified six iwi management plans that included natural hazards
objectives, policies and methods, to varying degrees, shown in Table 7.2.
22
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
Table 7.2 IMPs that included natural hazard objectives, policies, or methods 1 = yes, 0 = no
Iwi Management Plan
Natural hazards
are identified
within objectives
Natural hazards
are identified
within policies
Natural hazards
are included in
methods
Total
score
Ngāti Rangitihi Iiwi
Environmental MP 1 1 1 3
Matakana and Rangiwaea
Islands HMP 0 1 1 2
Raukawa Environmental
Management Plan 1 0 1 2
Ngāti Rangiwewehi Iwi
Environmental MP 0 0 1 1
Motiti Island Native
Resource Management Plan 1 0 0 1
Whaia te mahere taiao o
Hauraki - Hauraki Iwi
Environmental Plan
1 0 0 1
Four of these iwi management plans were further analysed to identify what natural hazard
information they contained, and if the natural hazard information reflects the information
provided in the regional, district, and CDEM group plans.
7.1 ANALYSIS OF PLANS
Appendix 1 presents the protocol used for screening the plans; Appendix 2 presents the
screening results based on the protocol. The following subsections outline the findings from
the plan analysis process.
7.1.1 Policy Framework
The results of the analysis show that 95% of the 21 Iwi Management Plans in this study have
a clear purpose; and 95% of the 21 Iwi Management Plans include a map (rohe). Figure 7.1
presents the percentage of plans that include the planning mechanisms of issues, objectives,
policies, and anticipated outcomes. While 100% of plans include a statement on issues, less
than 50% have objectives.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
23
Figure 7.1 Percentage of IMPs that include issues, objectives, policies, methods and outcomes.
Within the policy framework outlined in the previous section, natural hazards were not often
explicitly identified, as shown in Figure 7.2. The figure shows that only a quarter of IMPs include
natural hazards as an issue, with 10% including them within policies. 19% of IMPs had natural
hazards included within objectives and methods.
Figure 7.2 Identification of natural hazards within the policy framework of IMPs
Figure 7.3 shows which statutory planning documents are referred to in the IMPs. While 81%
of plans analysed referred to district plans, only one plan referred to the Civil Defence
24
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
Emergency Management Group Plan. Other planning documents were referenced; these were
often related to other policy areas such as fisheries and fresh water.
Figure 7.3 Statutory planning documents referred to in IMPs.
Figure 7.4 shows what hazards are specifically included in the IMPs that were assessed.
Reference to climate change and erosion where the most referred to at 35% each, followed by
flooding (30%), then general coastal hazards (15%). Sea level rise and climate change are
categorised separately in Figure 7.4; this is due to how they are represented in plans, i.e. some
plans refer to ‘climate change’ and/or ‘sea level rise’.
Figure 7.4 Specific natural hazards included in assessed IMPs.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
25
In addition, 5% (1) of the 19 IMPs included emergency management functions and
responsibilities in their Plan.
7.1.2 Opportunities for future enhancement
It is noted that while 81% of IMP jurisdictions have coastlines, only 10% specifically address
sea level rise and tsunami. It appears that sea level rise does not appear to be a priority at the
moment; issues around water quality and land use associated with degraded water quality
seem to be the environmental priority areas for iwi.
Considering the number of natural hazards that could impact communities across the Bay of
Plenty, there is plenty of scope to have these hazards included in future generations of IMPs
across the region.
The is also an opportunity to strengthen the linkages between IMPs and CDEM Group Plans,
which is discussed further in Sections 9.4 and 10.
26
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
8.0 FURTHER ANALYSIS OF IMPS THAT INCLUDE NATURAL HAZARDS
Case studies allow for a more in-depth analysis of the natural hazard provisions within the
IMPs, and their context within the plans. Four were selected by cross-tabulating the results
from the analysis of IMPs, based on whether the IMP contained hazard specific objectives,
policies, and methods.
There is no standard format for producing IMPs, which can be seen from the different
approaches outlined in the following sections.
8.1 TE MAHERE Ā ROHE MŌ RANGITIHI (NGĀTI RANGITIHI IWI ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT PLAN)
The Ngāti Rangitihi Rohe includes a number of natural hazards that could impact on their
people, property and environment: volcanic activity; floods; landslides; active faults; tsunami;
coastal erosion; tectonic subsidence; and sea level rise. Within the IMP, there is a specific
description of the 1886 Tarawera eruption, and the effect this event had on the people of Ngāti
Rangitihi, many of whom moved to Matatā and still remain there. The eruption resulted in
significant loss of life and the devastation of villages, pā, gardens, and landscape, and a
painting of the eruption is included in the IMP (see Figure 8.1).
Figure 8.1 Painting of Mount Tarawera eruption by A.D. Willis (Alexander Turnbull Library, C-003-002), included
in the Ngāti Rangitihi IMP (p11).
The Ngāti Rangitihi iwi environmental management plan was prepared by Te Mana o Ngāti
Rangitihi Trust in 2011. The plan identifies the key issues for Ngāti Rangitihi, their guiding
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
27
principles, and objectives for managing the environment. The identified rohe for Ngāti Rangitihi
is shown in Figure 8.2, and covers a large area of land and water.
Figure 8.2 Ngāti Rangitihi rohe boundary map
The plan establishes seven resource areas of focus:
1. Ko te Iwi – the people;
2. Ngā Rawa Whakahirahira – places of significance, customary resource areas,
archaeological sites and water bodies;
3. He Wai – water;
4. Ko Te Papa – land;
5. Ko Tāne Mahuta – flora and fauna;
6. Ko Tangaroa me Tūtewehiwehi – fisheries; and
7. Ko Tāwhirimātea – air.
Each of these seven resource areas includes issues, objectives, policies, and methods for
addressing the important resources to Ngāti Rangitihi. The list is not intended to be a
comprehensive response to resources, rather it is a focus on what is important to Ngāti
Rangitihi and how the issues may be addressed.
28
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
8.1.1 Inclusion of natural hazards
The Ngāti Rangitihi IMP has a specific policy framework for natural hazards, which is under
the key resource area of Ko Te Papa. The framework for natural hazards is shown in Table
8.1 below (emphasis added).
Table 8.1 Specific natural hazard provisions in the Ngāti Rangitihi IMP (p34-36)
KO TE PAPA – KO TĀWHIRIMĀTEA – KO TANGAROA
Resource Issues
Natural hazards – tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption
– Ngā rū whenua, parawhenua
Natural hazards pose a risk to people, property and the
environment.
Objectives
Policies
Methods
To avoid, remedy, or mitigate
the adverse effects of natural
hazards on human life,
property and the environment,
while minimising the adverse
effects of measures
implemented to reduce the
risks of natural hazards
Natural hazard management is an
important role of Councils, Civil defence
and other agencies.
Before provision is made enabling
significant development or redevelopment
of land which will result in intensification of
land use, any flood hazards and measures
to avoid or mitigate their adverse effects
shall be identified.
Development shall not be permitted if it is
likely to accelerate, worsen or result in
inundation of other property, unless it can
be demonstrated that the adverse effects
can be avoided or mitigated.
Construction of mitigation works shall be
encouraged only where people, property
and the environment are subject to
unacceptable risk from flood hazards.
In the coastal environment, new
subdivision, use or development should be
located and designed, so that the need for
hazard protection measures is avoided.
Where existing subdivision, use or
development is adversely affected by a
coastal hazard, coastal protection works
should be permitted only where they are
the best practicable option for the future.
The abandonment or relocation of existing
structures and the use of non-structural
solutions should be considered among the
options.
A precautionary approach shall be used in
avoiding, remedying, or mitigating the
adverse effects on development, of
earthquake, volcanic activity, sea level rise
and global climatic change.
BOPRC will co-ordinate the
management of natural hazards
throughout the Region by setting
standards and ensuring consistency
among TAs.
The BOPRC and TAs will jointly
advocate methods to avoid, remedy,
or mitigate the adverse effects of
natural hazards on the environment.
Ngāti Rangitihi will promote a
comprehensive catchment-wide
approach to flood management.
TAs will ensure that any required
hazard mitigation works are
undertaken, and that they are
adequately maintained.
BOPRC will implement objectives,
policies and rules with respect to
coastal hazards in the coastal
environment, through the provisions in
the Regional Plan — Coastal, which
will encourage subdivision, use and
development in the coastal
environment to locate in appropriate
areas.
TAs will ensure that current
information about known hazards is
available to all persons.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
29
Natural hazards - in particular tsunami, earthquake, and volcanic eruption - are seen as a
resource within the Ngāti Rangitihi IMP. The policy framework takes a risk-based approach,
with a strong risk reduction theme. The key issue for natural hazards is the risks they pose to
people, property and the environment, which is consistent with the legislative well-beings
(Saunders & Beban, 2012). The objective also includes reducing the risks of natural hazards,
which is consistent with the National Emergency Management Strategy (MCDEM, 2008).
The focus on risk (rather than the hazards themselves) in the issue statement and objective is
considered good practice, particularly with the April 2017 Resource Management Act reforms
requiring the significant risks from natural hazards to be managed. Framing the issue as a risk
will allow for the plan to take a risk-based approach in any future actions, and allows for a
consistent approach between the IMP and the outcome of the recent RMA reforms.
The policies are considered comprehensive in the range of hazards and issues they address.
The policies acknowledge the role of councils, civil defence and other agencies in managing
natural hazards. Flooding or inundation is included in three policies (including unacceptable
risk from flooding); coastal hazards in two policies; and a policy for the use of the precautionary
principle addresses earthquake, volcanic activity, sea level rise, and global climatic change.
The policies also address intensification of land use; construction of mitigation/protection
works; and the use of non-structural solutions.
The methods listed are predominantly in the domain of either the BOPRC or the territorial
authorities (TA), with only one method specific to Ngāti Rangitihi (to promote a comprehensive
catchment-wide approach to flood management).
No anticipated outcomes are included.
8.1.2 Relationship with other plans and policies
The plan refers to other plans and policies, specifically around the format of the plan (emphasis
added):
The third section of the plan provides the Iwi policies for resources of significance
to Ngāti Rangitihi. The format of resource, issue, objective policies and methods is
a framework that is commonly used in resource management planning, particularly
regional policy statements, regional plans and district plans. Whilst Ngāti Rangitihi
would prefer to use and would be more comfortable using a more strategic format
or business model of Vision, principles, strategic objectives, work programmes, the
key audience of an iwi management plan is regional councils and territorial
authorities. It was considered prudent to use a familiar format to those used in
plans to avoid possible misinterpretations and lost in translation situations. It also
considered that plan would set out a consistent approach to resource management
matters, both from a proactive and reactive point of view. (p3)
And in regard to the maps that are supplied (emphasis added):
Due to the significant amount of information relating to statutory and planning
mechanisms, schedules have not been prepared for these maps. This information
can be accessed in district plans, regional plans, regional policy statement and
other statutory and planning documents. (p4)
30
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
In addition, Table 8.1 provides an example of how the Plan can link into regional and local
government actions, for example:
BOPRC will implement objectives, policies and rules with respect to coastal
hazards in the coastal environment, through the provisions in the Regional Plan —
Coastal, which will encourage subdivision, use and development in the coastal
environment to locate in appropriate areas.
The plan does not acknowledgement the CDEM Group Plan.
8.1.3 Consultation
The Plan includes a section on Te Hononga – consultation and engagement principles. The
principles are focused on the those that Te Mana o Ngāti Rangitihi Trust will uphold when
engaging with external parties. It outlines the information requirements required before and
during formal consultation; and includes a section on monitoring and review of the plan.
8.2 MATAKANA AND RANGIWAEA ISLANDS HAPŪ MANAGEMENT PLAN
The 2017 Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands plan is an updated edition of the 2012 plan. It
provides guidance and describes the environmental aspirations, responsibilities and cultural
values that encapsulate the views of tangata whenua from the islands of Matakana and
Rangiwaea. The Plan encourages participation by whanau, whanui in overcoming the barriers
for our collective growth and development that ultimately allows for responsible decision-
making amid the diverse itinerary of network strategies.
Located north-west of Mt Maunganui, the rohe for Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands is
provided in Figure 8.3.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
31
Figure 8.3 Rohe of Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands.
8.2.1 Inclusion of natural hazards
Issue Statement 7 outlines that the forested area Te Ure Kotikoti on Matakana Island is a
significant natural feature of the Island, and a critical component of the Island’s natural
environment. The Issue Statement acknowledges that the area is an important natural hazard
defence mechanism acting as an important feature to stabilise the mobile sandy coastal
fringes. It states (emphasis added, p33):
Inconsiderate and/or poor planning and decision making for Te Ure Kotikoti could
lead to severe environmental and social impacts including the destabilisation of the
whole Island which removes the purpose of its ‘whakaruruhau’ abilities against
coastal hazards such as sea-level rise, erosion and tsunami and therefore will
sever the relationship of nga Hapū o Matakana me Rangiwaea with the one place
they can call home.
Coastal hazards including sea level rise, erosion, and tsunami are included within the issue
statement. There is also a clear link between the physical, environment, social and cultural
impacts of poor planning and decision making. Objectives associated with the issue do not
explicitly include natural hazards, however they are aimed at maintaining the existing
32
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
environment, restricting future use and activities, and avoiding all subdivision and residential
proposals.
Issue Statement 12: Protecting our Coastal Environment (emphasis added, p35):
The removal of significant tracts of forestry from Te Ure Kotikoti exposes the
Islands to damage from adverse weather conditions and also serves as a
protective barrier for the islands. Natural hazards are an obvious concern given we
are an Island nation. Given our low-lying land and profile, we are conscious of the
risks of Tsunami and other natural disasters. We are concerned about coastal
erosion and sand dune degradation. The proliferation of man-made hard structures
in the coastal environment on the mainland cause significant adverse effects in
areas where natural defences are vulnerable. Our preference is the soft options
approach where possible and supporting the Island natural defence mechanisms.
In places, we might need to look at hard options ourselves for instance, where our
marae are toppling into the moana and we have limited ability to do anything.
This issue statement clearly acknowledges the impact of harvesting trees on the islands. The hapū
are very aware of the risks of tsunami and other natural disasters that could impact them, including
coastal erosion. The issue statement also highlights the vulnerability of their assets, with the
example of marae falling into the sea; and the helplessness they feel to mitigate this threat.
The issues and policies are summarised in tables within the plan. Those relevant to natural
hazards are reproduced in Table 8.2 (emphasis added). Table 8.2 shows that the iwi are very
aware of their risk from tsunami, and how climate change will affect other natural hazards the
Islands are susceptible to. In particular, they specifically include the need for an effective
tsunami warning system for the Islands.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
33
Table 8.2 Summary of issues, concerns, policies, outcomes and responsibilities for the Matakana and Rangiwaea Island HMP (p46-47)
Issues & Concerns Our Policies, requirements and desired outcomes Responsible
Agencies
References
The removal of significant tracts of
forestry from the Te Ure Kotikoti
exposes the Islands to damage
from adverse weather conditions
and erosion.
Our position is that we want the forest areas on Te Ure Kotikoti to be carefully managed so it serves
as a protective barrier for the Islands.
* The natural buffer along the coastal edge of the entire Te Ure Kotikoti to be set aside for ecological
purposes at 350m from the mean high-water mark along the open coast and 250m along the inner
harbour margins to protect from coastal erosion and the effects of climate change.
* Robust discussions on any developments planned for the forestry area
Forestry
companies
Hapū
Natural hazards - Given our low-
lying land and profile, we are
conscious of the risks of Tsunami
and other natural disasters as a
result of climate change.
Our position is that we want full consultation and engagement to develop plans for coping with climate
change and natural disasters.
*Utilise Frameworks developed by Tangata Whenua ie; Matakana Island 1st Responders and
Tauranga Moana Iwi Response Framework
* We oppose any new residential housing developments built within the high-risk tsunami zone
* We urgently need an effective warning system for the Islands
BOPRC
WBOPDC
Civil Defence
Maritime NZ
RMA
Building Act
Regional and
District Council
Policies
We are concerned about coastal
erosion and sand dune degradation
We want to work closely with the relevant authorities to mitigate the challenges of coastal erosion in
areas of high risk.
* Our Islands provide a shelter (whakaruruhau) for the wider community of Tauranga Moana - the
importance of this needs to be recognised in all coastal planning documents
* We want all coastal areas of medium and high risk to be planted in coastal native plants
* With risk mitigation procedures, such as enforcing speed limits for recreational boats — to limit wash
on foreshore
* We oppose ski lanes that encourage erosion along the inner harbour of Te Ure Kotikoti.
BOPRC
WBOPDC Coast
care MIMC
NZCPS
Regional &
District Council
Policies on
Erosion Buffer
zones
Conservation
laws
Ecological
Enhancement
Fund
34
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
8.2.2 Relationship with other plans and policies
It is clear from the plan that Matakana and Rangiwaea hapū want to be influential within all aspects
of the RMA process, as shown in an issue statement within the plan (emphasis added, p33):
Issue Statement (8)
Nga Hapū o Matakana me Rangiwaea want a Plan that meets the needs of the
Hapū while being influential within RMA and Council plans and processes,
particularly those that affect the Island and the way decisions are made that affect
the Island and Hapū.
Objective 8 Processes, proposals and decision making reflect and are consistent
with, the issues, objectives and policies contained in the Plan.
Policy 8 Authorities use, reflect and incorporate the Plan into all decision making
affecting the Island(s) and Hapū.
Policy 8(a) Developers or Resource Consent Applicants use, reflect and
incorporate all relevant provisions of the Plan in any proposal, Plan, and Policy
reviews and Plan changes including private plan changes.
Footnotes associated with Objective 8 state:
Includes policy reviews, national, regional and district plan reviews, changes or
submissions, development or review of assessment criteria, landscape
designation, notices of requirement, certificates of compliance, resource consent
applications and associated activities, land-use changes or re-zoning, biodiversity
overlays, fishing techniques and protections, establishment of new zones, long
term and annual plans, plan or policy statement implementation programs; all
applies to land and coastal marine areas and the interface between each; applies
to all users and authorities identified in RMA, Local Govt, Marine Mammals, Marine
Reserves, Pouhere Taonga Act, Maritime regulations, Nav Safety By-laws,
Conservation Act and Fisheries legislation
In addition, a further issue statement specific to the coastal environment outlines the ‘want’ to
work collaboratively with councils to mitigate natural hazards and risks, and reinforces the need
for a tsunami warning system:
Issue Statement 12: Protecting our Coastal Environment (emphasis added)
We want to work collaboratively with all relevant authorities to mitigate dangers
arising from coastal inundation, climate change, tsunami, flooding, earthquakes
and all natural and man-made disasters. We urgently need an effective tsunami
warning system for the Islands. We also need to collaborate on risk mitigation
procedures that would require speed limits for recreational boating activities
around the Island(s) because the wake they create accelerates the erosion
problems we face.
These issues and outcomes provide a clear message for Councils around the needs and
priorities of the respective hapū, and where collaboration will be supported.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
35
8.2.3 Consultation
The plan outlines three levels of consultation and engagement: initial; secondary; and full. A
summary of this consultation is provided in Appendix 3. It provides guidance on the principles
of engagement, particularly for representatives of government departments, local authorities,
business and private interests.
8.3 TE RUATAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA (RAUKAWA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN)
Te Ruataki Taiao a Raukawa (Raukawa Environmental Management Plan) was published by the
Raukawa Charitable Trust and the Raukawa Settlement Trust in 2015. The plan identifies four
distinct rohe of Raukawa, each with their own unique but interrelated histories. These four rohe
areas can be seen in Figure 8.4, and extend across both the Waikato and Bay of Plenty regions.
Figure 8.4 Raukawa rohe boundary map.
The iwi management plan includes a physical description of the geography of each of the four
rohe for Raukawa. These descriptions allude to the natural hazards within the rohe through
the description of the volcanic activity across the central plateau, and the high winds that can
blow across their rohe. Raukawa see that their kaitiaki and manaaki roles and responsibilities
are key in the event of natural disasters and events occurring within their takiwā.
8.3.1 Inclusion of natural hazards
The plan identifies 15 policy areas that Raukawa is concerned or has interests in – including
two areas of climate change and natural hazards. Each of these policy areas state the issues
36
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
that Raukawa are concerned about, then provides the policy framework and mechanisms to
overcome the issues. Each of the policy areas includes a vision statement, which incorporates
the desired outcomes and aspirations for Raukawa. The issues are then supported by
objectives, ‘Kete for Kaitiaki’ (aimed at personal actions), and methods. Appendix 1 provides
the full two sections in the plan that address climate change and natural hazards. The key
points from each section are discussed below.
Climate Change
The section specified eight issues for the takiwā; those of particular note include (emphasis
added):
• Raukawa are not well informed about the challenges climate change will present, and
how their behaviours and choices can increase or decrease their contribution to climate
change;
• Raukawa do not fully understand the effects of climate change on their biodiversity
taonga, their current primary productive practices, or their economies;
• Raukawa are unclear as to the role they play amongst the Waikato regional local
government nexus.
These three issues imply that the information transfer from climate change science to the iwi
needs to be improved so that Raukawa are well informed - and understand - the effects of
climate change, and the future challenges they can expect. The last point highlights that
engagement is required between councils and Raukawa so that both parties have a clear
understanding of their roles, and their contributions to adapting to climate change.
To assist in addressing the issues for climate change, the Raukawa Plan includes 20 proactive
methods / action points. These include:
• Wanting to collaborate with government, local authorities and other agencies to
investigate the development of a resilience profile, including the likelihood of extreme
events, predicted climatic changes, and responses;
• Collaborating with the above agencies to provide up to date information on climate
change, including science and research;
• Developing an information and resource hub to assist with climate change preparedness;
• Working with marae to ascertain climate change risk and mitigation strategies;
• Developing a climate change policy document to guide decision making; and
• That government agencies and local authorities ensure mātauranga Māori is used in
collaboration with western science in the development of climate change policy and science.
Te Ruataki Taiao a Raukawa clearly acknowledges and supports adapting to climate change;
to encourage and support this, further engagement between Raukawa, science providers and
councils is necessary to capture this support for climate change adaptation. The plan highlights
that science providers and government agencies need to be aware of the issues and methods
contained in the plan; in doing so, there is a huge potential for partnerships to develop to assist
in managing the impacts of climate change at an iwi level.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
37
Natural Hazards
As provided in Appendix 4, the issues included in the natural hazard section of the Raukawa
Environmental Management Plan are similar to those for climate change. Eight issues are
listed, including (emphasis added):
• Raukawa are not well informed about the challenges posed in the event of a natural
disaster;
• Raukawa do not have comprehensive response plans in place to be able to respond to
nature disasters;
• Raukawa are unsure of natural hazards planning by local authorities and government
agencies; and
• Raukawa are unclear as to the role they play amongst the Waikato regional local
government nexus in times of natural disasters.
As for the climate change section, these four issues imply that the information transfer for
natural hazard information and science to the iwi needs to be improved so that Raukawa are
well informed - and understand - the natural hazards in their rohe. There is clearly an
opportunity for CDEM to work with Raukawa to develop comprehensive response plans. The
last two points highlight that engagement is required between councils and Raukawa so that
both parties have a clear understanding of the planning, roles, and contributions all can make
in relation in natural hazards.
To assist in addressing the issues for natural hazards, the Raukawa Plan includes 11 proactive
methods / actions. These include:
• Developing an information and resource hub to assist with natural hazard preparedness;
• Wanting to collaborate with government, local authorities and other agencies to
investigate the development of resilience profile, including the likelihood of extreme
events, responses to climate change and extreme events, and to identify areas of natural
hazard occurrence; and
• Supporting flood mitigation works where people, property and the environment face
significant risk.
Of particular interest is the last point, which refers to ‘significant risk’. Although the Raukawa
Environmental Management Plan was published in 2015, amendments to the Resource
Management Act in 2017 include the management of significant risks of natural hazards as a
matter of national importance. This wording is therefore already in alignment with what local
authorities will be required to plan for. In addition, there are five methods / actions for local
authorities to consider:
• Require flood hazards to be identified, avoided or mitigated in any intensification of land
use;
• A precautionary approach be applied in avoiding, remedying, or mitigating the adverse
affects on development from earthquakes, volcanic activity, and climate change;
• A coordinated approach to the development of natural hazard management strategies;
and
• Ensure that all relevant information regarding natural hazards is available to Raukawa at
all times.
38
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
The Raukawa Environmental Management Plan clearly supports avoiding, remedying and/or
mitigating natural hazards, particularly those for flooding, earthquake-related hazards, volcanic
activity and climate change. Similar to the climate change section, Raukawa are keen to
collaborate with government, local authorities, and other agencies to understand the natural
hazards of their rohe and implement mitigation measures. This section of the Plan highlights
that science providers and government agencies need to be aware of the issues and methods
contained in the plan; in doing so, there is a huge potential for partnerships to develop to assist
in managing the impacts of climate change at an iwi level.
8.3.2 Relationship with other plans and policies
While Raukawa are unclear about the role they play within the council planning framework,
they do have an understanding of how their Environmental Management Plan relates to the
hierarchy of plans. The plan includes a clear acknowledgement of its influence in other
statutory documents, as shown in Figure 8.5.
Figure 8.5 Relationship of the Raukawa Environmental Plan to external statutory documents (p161).
8.3.3 Consultation
A process for how to engage with Raukawa is outlined in Appendix G of Te Ruataki Taiao a
Raukawa. The appendix provides guidance on principles for engagement; engagement on
policy development and advice; engagement on resource consents and activities; outlines their
process for assessing proposals; information requirements; guidelines for assessing
proposals; and contact details.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
39
8.4 NGĀTI RANGIWEWEHI IWI ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Ngāti Rangiwewehi Iwi Management Plan was prepared by the Te Maru O Ngāti
Rangiwewehi Iwi Authority in 2012. This version of the iwi management plan is an update of
the 2008 environmental plan and is an expression of the vision, mission and values to be
pursued by Ngāti Rangiwewehi. The geographical area for Ngāti Rangiwewehi is shown in
Figure 8.6, covering a large area around Lake Rotorua and Mokoia Island. The description of
the rohe discusses the physical environment, the activities that were undertaken on the land
by their ancestors, and the boundaries of their rohe.
Figure 8.6 Core rohe of Ngāti Rangiwewehi with lands where there is an ancestral connection (p9).
40
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
8.4.1 Inclusion of natural hazards
There is no stated purpose within the iwi management plan. There is a lot of detail on how the
plan came about, and the process that has gone into creating the plan.
The iwi management plan identifies key resource areas that Ngāti Rangiwewehi is primarily
concerned about, which includes water and air quality (but not natural hazards). Each of these
resource areas includes a set of objectives, policies and methods that Ngāti Rangiwewehi
consider to be the most appropriate course of action for overcoming the issues within their
rohe. Additionally, the plan establishes a framework for action in order to achieve the objectives
stated in the two resource areas.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
41
Climate Change
Under the section on ‘Whenua: Lands and Areas of Significance’, there is a sub-section on
climate change, reproduced in Text Box 8.1 (emphasis added).
Text Box 8.1 Climate change extract from Ngāti Rangiwewehi IMP (p30-31).
How the environmental, economic, social and cultural elements of our society is likely to be
impacted by climate change this century is becoming a priority consideration when planning
for our collective future. What are the risks, coping capacity, and adaptation options
available to our people across key sectors, systems and groups?
Rural settlements such as Awahou Village are vulnerable to extreme weather events.
Important contextual factors that influence the exposure and sensitivity of rural Maori
settlements and infrastructure to climatic hazards include low investment in rural
infrastructure (e.g., clean water resources, housing, and roading), the marginal nature of
some Maori land-
blocks and the building of settlements and infrastructure close to
water
ways, floodplains and coastal areas. Additionally, landowners often have lower
economic power and restricted access to finance and these factors contribute to an overall
reduced capacity to cope.
In 2011-2012 a comprehensive investigation into the predicted impacts of climate change on
Awahou village was carried out. The aim of this project was to prepare a sustainable Marae
management plan to help guide social, cultural and economic development for Ngāti
Rangiwewehi, having regard to the known and /or foreseeable physical and environmental
constraints, including the predicted impacts of climate change of the next 25 years. Ngāti
Rangiwewehi has been utilising an in-house Geographical Information System (GIS) to
support a number of its strategic goals and objectives including Waitangi Tribunal claims,
local government engagement processes and of course the management and protection of
its natural and physical resources. It was considered appropriate and prudent to therefore
engage this technology to assist in the development of a sustainable Marae management
plan. This report will form a platform upon which a stage 2 implementation plan will be based.
Adaptation options include setting construction and development away from floodplains and
flood zones, improving water supply, drainage and wastewater systems, and future-
proofing new infrastructural developments such as the introduction of minimum floor levels
for building. Adaptations such as these will contribute to making our community
infrastructure more resilient to current and future climatic hazards. Further, designing and
building new housing or infrastructure to cope with a changing climate is likely to be more
cost effective than retrofitting later.
Incorporating climate change issues into iwi
management plans and meaningful participation in the development of local and regional
planning, such as hazard management, are needed to prepare and reduce the exposure of
our community to climate variability and change.
A key outcome of this investigation included
a strategic mapping analysis centred
specifically on Tarimano Marae but including the wider communal lands and areas. The
resulting map series now provides Ngāti Rangiwewehi with important spatial information on
various environmental, social and economic factors that can now be used to provide
detailed information when considering the future development of our community.
Specific areas of focus included land tenure identification; historical survey maps and aerial
photography, subsurface geology, ground and surface water analysis, vegetation and land
cover information, and climate and atmospheric data mapping.
42
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
The text reflects an impressive understanding of risks, coping capacity, adaptation, exposure
and impacts of natural hazards and climate change. It provides a summary of the issues the
iwi face (e.g. vulnerability to extreme weather), and actions (e.g. the investigation into impacts
from climate change; designing and building new housing or infrastructure to cope with a
changing climate). In addition, they are aware of the cost savings of implementing adaptation
measures now (e.g. “…designing and building new housing or infrastructure to cope with a
changing climate is likely to be more cost effective than retrofitting later”).
Coastal issues
One of the seven coastal issues Ngāti Rangiwewehi has documented is low-lying land flooding,
and/or permanent inundation of this land. Flooding and/or drainage of low-lying lands is
acknowledged as a development barrier and risk, adding to the cumulative impacts of
unsustainable development in the Lower Kaituna/Maketu area and associated mitigation
requirements which sky-rocket development costs.
The lands known as Papahikahawai 1 and 2 has been significantly impacted by the
modification of the lower Kaituna River and the Maketu Estuary. Modifications carried out by
the local and regional authorities has led to the inundation of over 80% of the legally surveyed
land area (87 hectares). Today, only 10 hectares remains above sea level, with the balance
now part of the Maketu Estuary. The Ahu Whenua Trust is currently working with the Bay of
Plenty Regional Council to find solutions for the betterment of the whenua and the estuary (see
Figure 8.7).
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
43
Figure 8.7 Aerial photographs showing the inundation of the Papahikahawai area over time (p46).
Within the Ngāti Rangiwewehi plan there is a section on flooding and drought protection, with
the aim of “Restoring the catchment by encouraging actions that effectively buffer against
flooding and drought” (p57). Associated actions are to “act in partnership with others to
evaluate wetland restoration activities and changes to waterways and water tables in existing
and restored wetlands as a way to monitor the recovery or capacity of catchments to buffer
44
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
flood and drought effects” (p57). Potential external partners listed to meet this aim are regional
and district councils, Ministry for the Environment, NIWA and Landcare.
8.4.2 Relationship with other plans and policies
The Ngāti Rangiwewehi plan outlines the legal context for Te Maru O Ngāti Rangiwhewehi,
and its involvement in resource management within its rohe. It discusses the Treaty of
Waitangi, the RMA and four other relevant statutes, in addition to 16 other statutes which are
relevant. Details are provided on the RMA and IMPs, as reproduced below (p53):
Through sections 66 (2a) and 74 (2a) Iwi management Plans have been given
legislative recognition. Part II of the RMA also sets the purpose and principals of
the Act and makes provisions for a Māori perspective to be considered by local
authorities in their decision making processes. In regards to processing resource
consents Iwi Management Plans such as this document shall be of assistance to
local authorities in fulfilling section 104 of the RMA.
8.4.3 Consultation
The Ngāti Rangiwewehi plan establishes the principles for consultation and engagement with
local authorities and external parties. Guidance is provided for how to consult under resource
management and historic place matters, and the information that is required by Ngāti
Rangiwewehi when seeking consultation with external parties in order to achieve mutually
beneficial outcomes.
The plan establishes the principles for consultation and engagement for Ngāti Rangiwewehi
when working with external parties in order to reach meaningful and mutually beneficial
outcomes. The principles include the ability and mandate to make decisions, face to face
engagement, time to consider proposals, reciprocity, and hospitality to guests and visitors.
There are also information requirements for any consultation with Ngāti Rangiwewehi that
outline the expected amount and type of information to be provided when consulting with them.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
45
9.0 RECOGNITION OF IMP’S IN COUNCIL PLANS
The desktop analysis of IMPs included if they acknowledged council plans; an example of this
recognition is from the Tauranga Moana IMP, which includes a diagram to represent the
relationship between their plan and other plans and policies (see Figure 9.1). However, there
is no reference to the regional Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan; this may reflect
that the Tauranga Moana IMP does not have a focus on natural hazards, but on water quality.
Figure 9.1 Example of how IMP links to council plans (Tauranga Moana IMP 2016 p5)
This section outlines how council plans of the Bay of Plenty region acknowledge IMPs.
9.1 BOP REGIONAL POLICY STATEMENT
Within the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS) there is an explicit section devoted
to Iwi Resource Management Policies, in particular Policy IW 8D that specifically focuses on
encouraging the development of iwi and hapū resource management plans. The policy states
(p154–155):
Encourage iwi and hapū to develop resource management planning documents
that contain:
46
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
a. Specific requirements to address cultural issues pertaining to the management of water,
land, air and geothermal resources, including mauri, and in relation to section 6(e), 7(a)
and 8 of the Act;
b. Protocols to give effect to their role of kaitiaki of water, land and geothermal resources;
c. Instructions or protocols describing how the document is to be used, monitored and
reviewed, including by Bay of Plenty Regional council, city and district councils and the
community; and
d. Sites of cultural significance identified using criteria consistent with those in Appendix F
sets 4 (Māori culture and traditions) and 5 (Historic heritage).
Explanation Iwi and hapū resource management plans are useful policy
documents for identifying issues of significance to iwi and hapū and policies and
methods proposed by iwi and hapū to address specific resource management
issues within their rohe. These plans can assist local authorities with undertaking
their obligations under Part II of the Act. They can assist local authorities where
they contain information on how the authors intend them to be interpreted and
implemented. Sensitive cultural information needs to be treated with care to avoid
offence to tikanga Māori. A precautionary approach shall be taken to activities with
unknown but potentially significant adverse effects on ancestral taonga. Where iwi
management plans use the Statement Appendix F criteria to identify sites of
cultural significance, their assessments must be recognised in resources consents
and plan change processes.
This provides a very strong policy direction for the development of IMPs, their value and use.
9.2 PROPOSED BOP REGIONAL COAST AL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN
The Proposed Regional Coastal Plan (dated 28 April 2017, partly operative) refers to iwi
management plans (and/or any other relevant planning documents to iwi) in the sections on
natural heritage, water quality, iwi resource management, and historic heritage, as well as in
two schedules:
Natural Heritage:
Policy NH 9A Recognise and provide for Māori cultural values and traditions when
assessing the effects of a proposal on natural heritage, including by:
(d) Applying the relevant Iwi Resource Management policies from this Plan and the
RPS.
Water Quality:
Policy WQ 2 To take into account the recommended actions, objectives and policies of
the following documents when making decisions on the management of land and water
resources, including coastal waters, in the Bay of Plenty region:
(d) Any relevant planning document that is developed as a result of Treaty of
Waitangi Settlement agreements or recognitions made under the Marine and
Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011; and
(e) Any relevant iwi or hapū resource management plan (e)recognised by an iwi
authority and lodged with the Regional Council.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
47
Iwi Resource Management:
Policy IW 1 Proposals which may affect the relationship of Māori and their culture
and traditions must recognise and provide for:
(c) Areas of significant cultural value identified in Schedule 6 and other areas or
sites of significant cultural value identified by Statutory Acknowledgements, iwi and
hapū resource management plans or by evidence produced by tāngata whenua and
substantiated by pūkenga, kuia and/or kaumatua.
Policy IW 4 The following shall be taken into account during decision-making:
(a) The consistency of the proposal with any iwi or hapū resource management
plan recognised by an Iwi Authority and lodged with the Regional Council that applies
to the area affected; and
(b) Recognition provided under any other legislation – including but not limited to:
Treaty of Waitangi settlements; gazetting of Rohe Moana and Mātaitai under the
Kaimoana Customary Fishing Regulations 1998 and the customary rights recognitions
available under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011.
Historic Heritage:
Policy HH 1 Protect historic heritage resources within the Bay of Plenty coastal marine
area that are: (d) Identified in any iwi and hapū resource management plan;
Policy HH 2 When making decisions on any subdivision, use or development that may
have an adverse effect on historic heritage resources in the coastal environment,
regional, district and city councils shall:
(c) Ensure matters of significance to Māori are managed in accordance with RPS
Policies IW 2B, IW 4B, and IW 5B and the policies specific to Māori cultural heritage in
Section 3 - Iwi Resource Management of this Plan.
Coastal Hazards:
Policy CH 8A Having particular regard to Policies IW 1 and CH 7 when
considering the most appropriate methods for protecting coastal urupā from the
effects of coastal erosion [Policy IW 1 being a direct link to IMPs].
Reference is also made in Schedule 3 on Outstanding Natural Features and Landscapes
(ONFL) in the Coastal Environment, in that the method of assessing criteria for Māori values
is to:
Review of information collated from iwi and hapū management plans, Treaty
Settlement documents, customary fishing recognitions provided under the Fisheries
Act.
There is also specific mention of iwi and hapū management plans for specific areas of ONFL
within Schedule 3; and Schedule 6 – Areas of Significant Cultural Value, also includes
reference to iwi management plans.
48
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
9.3 DISTRICT PLANS
9.3.1 Tauranga City Plan
The Tauranga City Plan became operative on 9 September 2013. The plan defines IMPs as
planning documents recognised by an Iwi Authority, and that these plans must be taken into
account when preparing the Plan (Section 2A p2). The Plan provides a graphic showing the
context of plans under the RMA (see Figure 9.2), which includes where IMPs sit within the
hierarchy of plans.
Figure 9.2 Context of plans under the RMA, as presented in the Tauranga City Plan (Section 2A, p1).
9.3.2 Western Bay of Plenty District Plan
The Western Bay of Plenty District Plan became operative on 16 June 2012 (excluding
Matakana Island, which became operative from 19 December 2015). The only reference to
IMPs is in the explanatory statement for Section 5 - Natural Environment, which states that:
“Significant Ecological Features may be located on multiple owned Māori land. In these
instances, Council recognises the contribution of iwi management plans” (Section 5 page 2).
9.3.3 Whakatāne District Council
The Whakatāne District Plan became operative on 21 June 2017, and has relatively extensive
acknowledgement of IMPs. Section 1.3 on legislation and planning documents includes a
graphic showing the context of RMA plans, which includes IMPs (see Figure 9.3).
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
49
Figure 9.3 RMA context for the Western Bay of Plenty District Plan (p1-5).
Figure 9.3 is supported by the following statement in Section 1.3.7 (chapter 1 p1–6, emphasis
added):
Iwi and Hapū Management Plans: The RMA states that the Council must take into
account any relevant planning document by an iwi authority and lodged with the
Council. A number of iwi management plans have been received by Council’s Iwi
Liaison Committee and the minutes acknowledged by Council. Hapū management
plans may be prepared by hapū within the District and can form part of an iwi
management plan, or be standalone documents. Iwi and hapū management plans
provide useful information and guidance to Council when assessing the impact of
activities on the environment and also assist our consultation process. These plans
provide an understanding of iwi and hapū aspirations. As iwi and hapū build
capacity through Treaty settlements, the number of plans is likely to increase as
iwi and hapū become more engaged in resource management issues.
In addition, Chapter 2 (Strategic) includes in ‘other methods’ that (emphasis added):
2.5.1 Council will work with tangata whenua to identify and formalise appropriate
consultation processes, for example through Iwi Management Plans,
memorandums of understanding and other agreements, the use of iwi and hapū
contact databases, and spatial information systems.
Chapter 15 on indigenous biodiversity under Objective 1B1 Policy 2 includes reference to
IMPs, and Chapter 16 on heritage includes under ‘other methods’ (emphasis added):
50
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
16.6.1.1 The Council will … c) work with iwi and hapū to include information from
iwi management plans, including sites of significant, in Council’s GIS system; and
d) consider including additional sites of significance in Schedule 16.7, in
consultation with iwi and hapū and affected landowners, through a variation or
change to the Plan.
9.3.4 Kawerau District Council
The Kawerau District Plan become operative on the 1 May 2012. In section A1.3 ‘Other
statements and plans to be considered’, it states:
Iwi Planning Documents - Local Iwi planning documents establish protocols for
dealings with matters that may affect statutory areas or sites of significance and
consultation. Council can advise further in this regard.
This limited acknowledgement of IMPs could be expanded in the future to other specific issues
beyond sites of significance.
9.3.5 Ōpōtiki District Council
While Ōpōtiki has an operative plan (dated 22 September 2005); their Proposal District Plan is
being developed, with submissions heard during July and August of 2017. As such, this
assessment has been made on the operative plan, as the planning provisions can change
during the submission process.
Under Section 2 ‘Relationship with other planning agencies’ of the District Plan, it states that:
Council must have regard to Planning documents recognised by an Iwi authority
or Hapū, such as the Tawharau o Nga Hapū o Whakatohea - Whakatohea
Resource Management Plan (p18).
In regard to the Treaty of Waitangi, the District Plan includes the provision to “ensure
recognition of, or provision for relevant planning documents prepared by iwi and/or hapū”
(p19).
This limited acknowledgement of IMPs could be expanded in the future to address other
specific issues.
9.3.6 Rotorua District Council
The Rotorua District Plan became operative on 10 July 2016. IMPs are addressed in three
areas:
3.2.3 Sustainable development of Māori Land (Part 3 Iwi cultural and historic heritage and
economic resources, p3.3):
Resource consents or Iwi and Hapū management plans can be prepared by Iwi for
the future intended development of Māori land. Such development may include
Marae, papakāinga, kaumātua housing, habitat/wetland restoration, and
commercial activities such as tourism ventures, business hubs, fishing,
aquaculture, forestry and geothermal energy production. Iwi and Hapū
management plans need to be lodged with the council and taken into account in
planning documents and decision making.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
51
Objective 3.3.2 - Resource management decisions that give appropriate weighting to the
relationship of tangata whenua with water, the lakes, rivers, and streams of the district, is
followed on with Policy 3.3.2.3 p3.4:
Consider Iwi and Hapū management plans, or memoranda of understanding
between Iwi and the council (available on the Council’s website) when making
decisions on resource consents and plan changes.
And section 3.9.1 General assessment criteria for discretionary activities:
The extent to which policies of any Iwi and Hapū management plan, conservation
plan and heritage inventory relating to the heritage resource are achieved.
9.3.7 Taupō District Council
The Taupō District Plan was made operative on 11 October 2007, and was reviewed on 19
October 2017. IMPs are briefly acknowledged under Section 1.4 Other national plans and
documents:
There are a number of planning and policy documents in this country which
contribute to the sustainable management of New Zealand's resources. The
District Plan must work in conjunction with these other documents, which may
include: iwi management plans.
They are also mentioned in the section on Land Development (Section 3e.7) Structure Plan
process:
The overall outcomes desired of the structure plan should have regard to Urban
Growth Areas, and as applicable: national policy directions, regional policy
statements and plans, regional land transport strategies, community outcome
statements in Long Term Council Community Plans, District Plan, Council
development guidelines, and iwi management plans.
Similar to other district plans, there is an opportunity in the future to make more explicit and
specific text with regards to the alignment of policies and outcomes between the district plan
and IMPs.
9.4 RECOGNITION OF IMP’S IN CDEM PLANS
There is a lack of recognition of IMPs in CDEM plans throughout the region, highlighted in
Table 9.1 below.
52
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
Table 9.1 Recognition of IMPs in CDEM plans of the Bay of Plenty region.
Title & Description Reference
to IMPs
Rotorua Lakes Council CDEM Plan 2015
The purpose of this Plan is to provide a framework for civil defence and emergency
management decisions to be made in respect of Rotorua Lakes Council
No
BOPCDEM Group Recovery Plan 2015
The purpose of this plan is to ensure a sound recovery capability across the Bay of Plenty Civil
Defence Emergency Management Group (the Group) by confirming the recovery arrangements,
including roles and responsibilities, structures and processes, required to support local disaster
recovery management.
No
Ōpōtiki District Council CDEM Plan 2012
The purpose of this Plan is to provide a framework for civil defence and emergency
management decisions to be made in respect of Ōpōtiki District Council.
No
Whakatāne District Council CDEM Plan 2012
The purpose of this Plan is to provide a framework for civil defence and emergency
management decisions to be made in respect of Whakatāne District Council.
No
BOPCDEM Distant-Source Volcanic Plan 2012
This is a Bay of Plenty CDEM Group plan. This guiding document provides information on the
potential impact of volcanic ash fall in the Bay for the CDEM Group. It also provides direction to
agencies and sectors for their planning preparation and response to volcanic ash fall.
No
Bay of Plenty CDEM Group Plan 2012-2017
The purpose of this Plan is to provide a framework for civil defence and emergency
management decisions to be made across the Bay of Plenty.
No
BOPCDEM Group Public Education Strategy 2012-2017
Through this Strategy we aim to do that by increasing awareness and understanding; increasing
the participation of our community; and implementing a monitoring and evaluation process.
No
Kawerau District Council CDEM Plan 2011
The purpose of this Plan is to provide a framework for civil defence and emergency
management decisions to be made in respect of Kawerau District Council.
No
BOPCDEM Group Alerting and Communication Strategy
The purpose of the Alerting and Communications Systems Strategy is to clearly define the
principles around the adoption and implementation of emergency alerting and communication
systems.
No
Source: http://bopcivildefence.govt.nz/documents/cdem-pl ans/, 11 August 2017.
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
53
10.0 DISCUSSION
The findings of this research can be summarised into three key issues: the inclusion of natural
hazards in IMPs; calls for action in IMPs; and the variability and lack of acknowledgement of
IMPs in other plans. Each of these are discussed below, with questions raised for the next
stage of the research project.
10.1 INCLUSION OF NATURAL HAZARDS IN IMPS
Of the 29 IMPs lodged with the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, 21 plans were analysed for
their natural hazard provisions, linkages to other plans and policies, and consultation process.
Of these 21 IMPs, only six included reference to natural hazards, to different degrees; some
had specific and explicit information on natural hazard risks and climate change; others were
more general. Based on the content of these six plans, four were analysed in more detail to
ascertain to what degree natural hazards were included.
Given the number of natural hazards in the Bay of Plenty (outlined in Section 3), history of
hazardous events, and the availability of natural hazard information (i.e. through the online
BayHazards application, although it is noted that this has only been available for a short time),
it is surprising that natural hazards and climate change are not more recognised as an issue
for iwi of the region. In particular, climate change will exacerbate many hazards, and needs to
be taken into account now in order to make sustainable decisions for the future. The lack of
recognition of natural hazards in many IMPs may be due to competing priorities (e.g. water
quality); the reasons for this lack of acknowledgement will be investigated further in the next
stage of the research.
All four IMPs discussed in Section 8 (Ngāti Rangitihi, Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands,
Raukawa and Ngāti Rangiwewehi) included natural hazards and climate change into their
plans in a very comprehensive way. They were written for Council, so theoretically they should
be ‘easy’ to incorporate into decision making. They provide clear guidance as to their needs,
actions, and aspirations for their iwi.
10.2 CALLS FOR ACTION
The IMPs further analysed in Section 8 had some very explicit calls for action. For example,
the Matakana and Rangiwaea Islands clearly expressed a need for a tsunami warning system.
This call for action needs to be bought to the attention of the emergency management office
(EMO), as it provides a clear direction of need that the EMO can address.
Similarly, Raukawa state in their IMP that they are not well informed about climate change; do
not understand the effects of climate change; and are unclear as to their role in regional and
local government. This call can be easily remedied with Council staff engaging with Raukawa to
share information on climate change, and discuss together the role each can play in governance.
IMPs are valuable documents that can provide many actions for Councils to follow up on, some
of which will be aligned with their own policies/programs/outcomes. The opportunity for sharing
information (two ways between councils and iwi), and having a consistent approach to natural
hazard management and climate change adaptation, is wide open.
54
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
10.3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF IMPS IN OTHER PLANS AND POLICIES
The acknowledgement of IMPs in and regional district plans is variable; the Regional Council
RPS and proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan have comprehensive
acknowledgements; while some district plans make ‘token’ reference to them (e.g. Kawerau).
Others (i.e. Whakatāne District Plan), also have comprehensive acknowledgements and
actions of IMPs. For the Regional Council, this level of inclusion is expected, as they contribute
funding for the development of IMPs in the region. However, the variability between district
plans is large. This leads to a research question for the next stage of this project – whether the
regional council evaluates the implementation of IMPs within the districts.
No CDEM Plans refer to IMPs, and yet some of the IMPs analysed (e.g. Raukawa, Matakana
and Rangiwaea Islands) have clear calls for actions around CDEM. CDEM officers need to be
aware of IMPs, and work with iwi to fill gaps in need, share information, and improve
understanding between both iwi and CDEM officers. This will increase the resilience and
sustainability of Maori communities across the Bay of Plenty.
10.4 RESEARCHER OPPORTUNITIES
When developing research proposals/projects, a first step in developing iwi relationships is for
researchers to see if there is an IMP in the location of their research. This can be a desktop
exercise, and if an IMP does exist, then the proposed project should be assessed against the
needs and priorities presented in the respective IMP. Gaps in knowledge within IMPs is also
important - for example, the Bay of Plenty case studies have shown that sea level rise is a gap
in many IMPs, which could be addressed in the future through the co-development of a
research project.
10.5 QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
This stage of the research has raised a number of questions that will be further investigated in
the next stage of the research. Questions that direct the next stage of the research will include
(but are not limited to):
• How do iwi prioritise the issues in their IMPs?
• How do iwi gather information on natural hazards?
• What are the barriers for iwi to include natural hazard management and climate change
adaptation into their IMPs?
• What opportunities exist to strengthen the linkage between producers of natural hazard
and climate change information, iwi and councils?
• How do councils use IMPs? Are council staff aware of IMPs?
• Does the BOPRC (who fund IMPs), evaluate their implementation at a district level?
• How can natural hazard research be shared with iwi?
• Is an alternative planning framework required, based on the Principles of the Treaty of
Waitangi?
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
55
11.0 CONCLUSION
This research, based on IMPs in the Bay of Plenty region, has shown they are extremely
valuable resources which document iwi issues, actions, and aspirations. The four IMPs that
were further analysed were well structured, written for ease of use by councils’ staff, and
comprehensive in the way they addressed natural hazards and climate change. They have
huge potential to influence policy and decision making, if used to their full potential.
This stage of the research has raised further questions around the use of IMPs, both from
a land use planning and emergency management perspective; and from a sharing of
knowledge perspective.
This research is based on the Bay of Plenty IMPs only; it will not reflect IMPs elsewhere in the
country, many of which may include natural hazard policies.
12.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research would not have been possible without the support from the Mātauranga Māori
and Governance programmes of the ‘Resilience to Nature’s Challenges’ National Science
Challenge; Maureen Coomer for tabulating the analysis data in SPSS; and reviewers Lucy
Carter from the Joint Centre of Disaster Research, Bevan Hunter and Diane Bradshaw from
GNS Science, and Garth Harmsworth from Landcare Research.
13.0 REFERENCES
BayHazards. c2018. Whakatane (NZ): Bay of Plenty Regional Council; [accessed 2018 Mar 01].
https://www.boprc.govt.nz/residents-and-communities/natural-hazards-living-with-
risk/bayhazards/
BOPEM. 2017. Slope Instability (Landslide, Debris Flow, Slumping). [Whakatane] (NZ): Bay of Plenty
Civil Defence Emergency Management Group.
Bay of Plenty Regional Council. 2011. Ngā Tikanga Tuku Awhina ā Te Kaunihera mo ngā Mahere
Whakahaere Rawa a ngā hupū/iwi a-rohe: Policies and procedures for funding to develop
hapū/iwi resource management planning documents of our region. Whakatane (NZ): Bay of
Plenty Regional Council, Māori Policy Section.
Bay of Plenty Regional Council. 2016. Bay of Penty Regional Policy Statement. Whakatane (NZ): Bay
of Plenty Regional Council.
MCDEM. 2008. National Civil Defence Emergency Management Strategy 2007 Wellington (NZ):
Department of Internal Affairs.
Saunders WSA. 2017. Setting the scene: the role of iwi management plans in natural hazard
management. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 34 p. (GNS Science report; 2017/30).
Saunders WSA, Beban JG. 2012. Putting R(isk) in the RMA: Technical Advisory Group
recommendations on the Resource Management Act 1991 and implications for natural hazards
planning. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 52 p. (GNS Science miscellaneous series; 48).
APPENDICES
This page is intentionally left blank.
58
GNS Science Report 2017/50
A1.0 APPENDIX 1: IMP ANALYSIS PROTOCOL
* natural hazards include climate change*
* related to natural hazards e.g. not secondary i.e. sedimentation
* must be explicit e.g. protection of riparian margins not enough, must be specifically for reducing flood risk
Summary Description Coding
Comments
IMP Name of IMP
Year Year of publication
Purpose Does the plan have a clear purpose? 1 = yes 2 = no
Rohe map Is a map included of the area? 1 = yes 2 = no
Issues Does the plan identify issues for the iwi? 1 = yes 2 = no
Hazard issues Are natural hazards identified as an issue? 1 = yes 2 = no Can be for a specific hazard
Objectives Does the plan include objectives for the iwi? 1 = yes 2 = no May also be aims, goals
Hazard objectives Are natural hazards identified within objectives? 1 = yes 2 = no Can be for a specific hazard
Policies Does the plan include policies? 1 = yes 2 = no
Hazard policies Are natural hazards identified within policies? 1 = yes 2 = no Can be for a specific hazard
Methods Are methods of implementing policies outlined? 1 = yes 2 = no Can be an action
Hazard methods Are natural hazards included in methods? 1 = yes 2 = no Can be for a specific hazard
Outcomes Are anticipated outcomes of the policies outlined? 1 = yes 2 = no
Hazard outcomes Are outcomes related to natural hazards? 1 = yes 2 = no Can be for a specific hazard
Consultation process Is the consultation/engagement process with the iwi outlined? 1 = yes 2 = no
What hazards are included? If natural hazards are included in the plan, which ones? 1 = yes 2 = no Hazards must be primary, not secondary
e.g. Water pollution from flooding would not count as the primary concern is pollution, not the flooding
Flood Flood 1 = yes 2 = no
EQ Earthquake 1 = yes 2 = no
CC Climate change 1 = yes 2 = no
Erosion Erosion (primarily, as a hazard rather than an effect) 1 = yes 2 = no
Tsunami Tsunami 1 = yes 2 = no
SLR Sea Level Rise 1 = yes 2 = no
Coastal Coastal 1 = yes 2 = no
Drought Drought 1 = yes 2 = no
Other Any other hazards e.g. fire 1 = yes 2 = no
Reference to planning documents Does the plan refer to other planning documents? 1 = yes 2 = no
RPS Regional Policy Statement 1 = yes 2 = no
DP District Plan 1 = yes 2 = no
CDEMGP CDEM Group Plan 1 = yes 2 = no
RP Regional Plan of any type 1 = yes 2 = no
Other Any other plan (e.g. Smartgrowth) 1 = yes 2 = no
EM? Are emergency management functions and responsibilities included? 1 = yes 2 = no
Plan reference Whereabouts in the plan the hazards info is located
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
59
A2.0 APPENDIX 2: RESULTS OF IMP ANALYSIS
IMP Year Purpose
Rohe
map
Issues
Hazard
issues
Objectives
Hazard
Objectives
Policies
Hazard
Policies
Methods
Hazard
methods
Outcomes
Hazard
outcomes
Consultation
process
Plan reference
Flood
EQ CC Erosion Tsunami SLR Coastal Drought Other DP 's RPS RP CDEMG P Other EM?
Ngati P ukenga Reso urce Management P lan
2013 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2
Tapuika Environmental Management Plan
2014-
2024
1 1 1
2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2
Whaia te m ahere taiao o Hauraki - Hauraki Iwi
Environmental Plan
2004 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2.3 PROTECTING & RESTORING COASTAL DUNE LANDS
2.4 PREVENTING FLOOD & DROUGHTS, p33; flood reduction p38
Ngati Whak aue ki Maketu IMP Phase 2 2011 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2
Motiti I sland Nati ve Resource Management Pl an 2012 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2
pg 146; App 1 - science & research. 33.7.2 Objective: To protect resources and areas of value to
Ngāti Te Hapu that ma y be vul nerable to erosi on or othe r hazards wh ere practi cable ( p165, 170)
Ngati Kahu Hapu Environmental Management Plan 2011 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 Tsunami specifi cally addressed in section 3.10.1 p32; Climate change section 4.2.2 p39;
Ngāi Te Ahi Hapu Manage ment Pl an 2013 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2
Ngāti Pūken ga Iwi ki Tauranga Trust I MP 2013 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Te Mana Taiao O Ngāi Tamarāwaho HMP 2014 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Stor ms menti oned p11 wrt e rosion of waterw ays
Ngai Tuk airangi Ngai Tapu HMP 2014 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2
Ngāi Tamawhari ua HMP 2015 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Waitaha IMP 2014 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 Climate change p81
Tauranga Moana IMP A joint envi ornmental plan for
Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāi Te Rangi and Ngāti Pūkenga
2016-
2026
1 1 1
2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2
Pol icy 36.1(c) How to align – in a pra ctical se nse – mātaura nga and tik anga Maori wi th scien ce and plan ning (p 72. POLICY 37
Policy 37 Increase knowledge and understanding of resource management issues, approaches and processes (p73)
Matakana and Rangi waea Islan ds HMP 2017 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 p35 tsun ami warni ng syste m requir ed, p46 Nat Haz i ssues, polici es, p53 Fi re risks
Piri rakau HMP
2017 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 p39 EM response
Ngāti Rangiwewehi Iwi Environmental MP 2012 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 p30 CC section, p45 coastal flooding, p57 flooding & drought
Ngāti Tamate atutahi-Ngāti Kawiti HMP 2015 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 p36 flooding mentioned
Raukawa Envi ronmental Management Pl an 2015 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 Chapter on CC and natural hazards, CD mentioned
Ngāti Kea Ngāti Tuara Iwi Envi ornmen tal MP 2016 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2
Ngati Whare IMP 2011 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Ngāti Rangitihi Iwi Environmental MP 2011 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2
p11 description of 1886 Tarawera eruption. p34-36 Section on natural hazards.
Policy - A precautionary approach shall be used in avoiding, remedying, or mitigating the adverse effects on development,
of earthquake, volcanic activity, sea level rise and global climatic change.
What hazards are included?
Reference to planning documents
60
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
A3.0 APPENDIX 3: MATAKANA AND RANGIWAEA HMP PROCESS FOR
CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT
62
GNS Science Report 2 017/50
A4.0 APPENDIX 4: CLIMATE CHANGE AND NATURAL HAZARD
SECTIONS OF TE RAUTAKI TAIAO O RAUKAWA (RAUKAWA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN) 2015
128 TE RAUTAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA
2.9.1 Issues Statement – Climate Change
Raukawa understand that we are living in a prolonged period of technological
development, and societal and cultural change, with unprecedented and unrelenting
population growth. We recognise that these changes have brought us increased
affluence, improved health and life expectancy, and access to unimagined
technologies, all of which have fundamentally changed the way that Raukawa live,
work, and play. We fully recognise that these changes have not come without
significant cost. We also recognise the significant cost of these changes and that
these costs have been largely borne by the natural capital that lies within our
environment and felt most by those who are socially and economically marginalised
within our communities. Finally, we recognise that our connection to all things within
the environment implies an intergenerational duty of responsibility for our actions and
behaviours that rests with Raukawa uri as individuals, as collectives, and as members
of the broader global community.
Section 2.9
Climate Change –
Te Hurihanga o te Āhua
o ngā Rangi
Some of the current issues in the takiwā include:
• We are not well informed about the challenges climate change will present, and
how their behaviour and choices can increase or decrease our contribution to
climate change.
• We do not fully understand the effects of climate change on our biodiversity taonga,
our current primary productive practices, and our economies.
• We are unclear as to the role
that Raukawa will play amongst
the Waikato regional local
government nexus.
• Our marae and dwellings have not
been planned for, nor designed in
anticipation of, the effects of climate
change such as changing weather
patterns and intensities.
• We have not undertaken a takiwā
wide risk assessment of our
marae, papakāinga, and industry/
production assets.
• We do not have comprehensive
response plans in place for our
people and places in the event
of emergency.
• There is a strong continuing
reliance upon carbon based energy,
particularly for transportation, with
growing emission levels.
• RCT/RST/RIDL does not currently
have a policy on climate change
to influence and guide Raukawa
decision-making.
2.9.2 Vision Statement –
Climate Change
Raukawa acknowledge and understand
the concept of Te Ao Hurihuri, that is, all
existence is in a constant state of motion.
Equally Raukawa realise that we are living
in a period of unprecedented change,
which can be attributed to an imbalance
in environmental mauri as a direct result
of the effects of current human activity
and behaviour. Our planning horizons are
therefore intergenerational in outlook.
Raukawa understand and proactively
plan for the anticipated effects of climate
change. Our people embrace low
carbon living, and support renewable
sources of energy as a means for
providing for our lifestyle within a low
environmental footprint.
Our marae, papakāinga, homes,
workplaces, and developments have been
designed to meet the foreseeable effects
of revised weather patterns and intensities.
Our communities are strong and prepared,
with comprehensive civil defence plans in
place across the takiwā, with our marae
as central community civil defence
posts. We have strong and well tested
support emergency planning and
provisioning agreements in place with our
surrounding iwi.
Our primary production systems and
management regime planning ensures
that Raukawa farms, gardens, and
plantations anticipate climate change
effects on stock and crops and the need
to respond to changing conditions. Our
farming infrastructure is able to cope
with increased volumes and intensity of
rainfall, ensuring our farms remain highly
profitable and establish best practice
within the takiwā at all times. Soil erosion is
managed andmitigated through whole of
operations planning.
Raukawa work with government agencies
and external stakeholders to promote the
uptake of smaller grids and infrastructure
systems, providing for systems resilience
within our communities, particularly during
natural emergencies.
2.9 CLIMATE CHANGE – TE HURIHANGA O TE ĀHUA O NGĀ RANGI 129
130 TE RAUTAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA
Pohatura and Lake Atiamuri with MRP hydro station. Pohaturoa is a key landmark or Pou for Raukawa and is
seen from Lake Atiamuri
Section 2.9.3
2.9 CLIMATE CHANGE – TE HURIHANGA O TE ĀHUA O NGĀ RANGI 131
2.9.5 Methods
Raukawa
M1 RCT to co-partner with agencies to
secure up to date information on
Climate Change including:
a. Science and research.
b. Alternative energy and
energy efficiency.
c. Transport efficiency.
d. Climatic predictions for
the takiwā.
e. Information to support uri ‘kete
for kaitiaki’.
M2 RCT will collaborate with agencies
2.9.4 Kete for Kaitiaki
Energy use
K1 Insulate your house as well as
your budget allows. Heat escapes
from the ceiling, walls, floor,
and windows.
K2 Block off any draughts in
your house.
K3 Switch off any appliances at the
wall – appliances left on standby
are using up power.
K4 Keep heat from escaping your
windows with sealing, double
glazing, or thermal-lined curtains.
Objectives
• Our world view is revitalised, normalised, and underpins our lives and identity.
• Our world view is shared, acknowledged, and applied.
• Raukawa and all partners will fulfil their obligations and responsibilities for
mutual benefit.
• RCT and its partners will promote internships and educational scholarships that
support a focus on improved environmental outcomes.
• RCT and its partners will support partnerships, research, and
educational opportunities.
132 TE RAUTAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA
to investigate the development of a
resilience profile for the Raukawa
takiwā including:
a. Likelihood of extreme events.
b. Building resilient homes, marae,
and business.
c. Predicted effects on biodiversity.
d. Predicted climatic changes for
the takiwā.
e. Reponses for Raukawa uri
to climate change and
extreme events.
M3 Within the Raukawa Sustainable
Farming strategy Raukawa
will consider the options and
alternatives for farming readiness
for climate change.
M4 RCT will develop a hub of
information and resources to
assist uri with preparedness for
climate change.
M5 RCT will collaborate with partners
to investigate the development
of a Raukawa Environment
Centre – a place to get up to date
information and resources about
the environment.
M6 Where appropriate, RCT will
work with marae to ascertain
climate change risk and
mitigation strategies.
K5 Use efficient heating, such as a
heat pump.
K6 Consider efficient water heating
systems such as solar water heating
or heat pump water heating.
K7 When buying new appliances, look
at the energy rating labels to make
sure it is energy efficient.
K8 Alternative energy sources such
as windmills and solar panels are
becoming more popular, and could
suit your lifestyle.
Transport
K9 Reduce vehicle use by using
public transport, car pooling,
walking, or cycling.
K10 Purchase a fuel-efficient, low
greenhouse gas producing vehicle.
K11 Consider how you drive:
maintaining steady speeds, driving
smoothly, reducing idling time, and
keeping your load down can all
contribute to reduced emissions.
K12 Maintain your vehicle with
regular services and ensuring
tyre pressure is maintained at the
appropriate level.
2.9 CLIMATE CHANGE – TE HURIHANGA O TE ĀHUA O NGĀ RANGI 133
M7 RCT will work with our partners
to develop a Climate Change
policy document to guide
decision-making.
M8 RCT, RST, and RIDL will advocate
for and promote the uptake and
use of environmentally friendly
and sustainable homes, marae,
and business practices, including
the use of clean technologies,
energy, waste, and water reduction
and efficiency methods, efficient
appliances etc.
M9 RCT, RST, and RIDL will minimise
effects on Papa-tū-ā-nuku and
Ranginui through sustainable
corporate practices such as
procurement and design guidelines
(e.g. motor vehicle purchasing
and use, transport planning, and
building energy efficiencies etc).
M10 Raukawa will support and
collaborate with partners to
promote and implement tree
planting projects to offset and
mitigate climate change.
M11 RCT will advocate for afforestation
as a mitigation tool for
climate change.
M12 RCT will partner with stakeholders
to develop opportunities
for afforestation within the
Raukawa takiwā.
K13 Consider bio-fuels where
appropriate.
Aorestation
K14 Look at opportunities to plant trees
at home or around your marae, this
will help to reduce carbon dioxide
emissions to the atmosphere.
K25 Make sure you replace any trees
you cut down to absorb the carbon
dioxide released during harvest.
RCT Environment Group Staff and Waikato
Regional Council at Pikitu Marae
134 TE RAUTAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA
c. Transport efficiency.
d. Climatic predictions for
the takiwā.
e. Information to support uri ‘kete
for kaitiaki’.
M16 Government agencies and
local authorities will continue to
provide opportunities for RCT to
participate in working groups and
policy development workshops
addressing climate change issues.
M17 Government agencies and
local authorities should ensure
mātauranga Māori is used in
collaboration with western science
in the development of climate
change policy and science.
M18 Government agencies and local
authorities should ensure policy
responses to climate change
do not exacerbate health and
housing issues in low
socio-economic communities.
M19 Government agencies should co-
ordinate with RCT at all levels to
remove uncertainties with climate
change policy.
M20 NZTA and local authorities to
collaborate with Raukawa on
opportunities to improve public
and shared efficient transport.
M13 Raukawa will promote and advocate
for responsible consumption
practices that include, where
appropriate, buying locally,
buying products that have a low
footprint, and buying products with
less packaging.
Raukawa Partners
M14 Government agencies and local
authorities should collaborate
with RCT in developing a
resilience profile for the Raukawa
takiwā including:
a. Likelihood of extreme events.
b. Building resilient homes, marae,
and business.
c. Predicted effects on biodiversity.
d. Predicted climatic changes for
the takiwā.
e. Reponses for Raukawa
uri to climate change and
extreme events.
M15 Government agencies and
local authorities should co-
partner with RCT to provide up
to date information on Climate
Change including:
a. Science and research.
b. Alternative energy and
energy efficiency.
In their normal benign form and displaying gentle demeanour, our atua work together to
provide place and means for our lives and livelihoods. At times, however, Tāwhirimātea
and Rūaumoko conspire to wreak havoc on our lands, waters, forests, farms, and our
lives reminding us of their presence, power, and authority. Raukawa live with our own
environmental knowledge and mātauranga handed down to us, and we need to be able
to utilise this knowledge to assist us to be ready for the challenges presented by natural
disasters and emergencies.
The current issues in the takiwā include:
• In general our Raukawa uri are not well informed about the challenges posed in the
event of natural disaster.
• We do not have comprehensive response plans in place for our people, or places to
meet in emergencies to respond to natural disasters.
• We have not undertaken a takiwā wide risk assessment of our marae, papakāinga
and farming assets.
• Our marae, papakāinga, offices, and dwellings have, for the most part, not been
constructed to current building code and may present personal risk in the event of a
Section 2.10
Natural Hazards –
Ngā Aituā Taiao
2.10.1 Issues Statement – Natural Hazards
Our takiwā is situated in the shadow of the tūpuna maunga of the central plateau
and the Kaimai-Mamaku, and we live with the tangible evidence of volcanic activity
reflected in our landscapes on a daily basis. As possibly the defining landscape
characteristic of our takiwā, water in its many forms is ever present. High winds
regularly blow across our takiwā, with an increasing regularity of cyclones
likely to occur based on climate change predictions for our takiwā.
2.10 NATURAL HAZARDS – NGĀ AITUĀ TAIAO 135
136 TE RAUTAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA
large earthquake.
• We need to build resilience into
our primary production industry
systems to provide for personal
safety, farming infrastructure
(e.g. effluent storage), and
animal welfare in the event of
severe flooding.
• We are unsure of natural hazards
planning by local authorities and
government agencies within
our takiwā and how this is rolled
out beyond individual local
authority jurisdictions.
• We are unclear as to the role Raukawa
are to play within the Waikato regional/
local government nexus in times of
natural disaster.
• With the space and facilities offered
by Raukawa marae, these places
make natural community civil defence
points in times of emergency and
community need. We need to formalise
this community function with our
marae and local authorities to define
their civil defence responsibilities
and planning.
2.10.2 Vision Statement –
Natural Hazards
Raukawa see that our kaitiaki and manaaki
roles and responsibilities are key in the
event of natural disasters and events
occurring within our takiwā. Our marae
form a core component of the broader
Civil Defence network as local civil
defence points, and marae communities
are trained in civil defence processes
and procedures.
Raukawa actively engage with local
government and government agencies
to ensure comprehensive and current
natural hazards risk assessment and
planning extends across the entire takiwā,
as opposed to being focused on local
government boundaries.
Raukawa risk assessment and planning
ensures marae and other Raukawa
developments are located appropriately to
manage and minimise risk to both built form
and our communities Disaster planning is
managed by marae, at marae rohe level,
as part of a comprehensive Raukawa
plan for the takiwā. Raukawa uri housing
is of a high standard to ensure personal
safety. Raukawa uri are well informed of
natural hazards within the takiwā, and
are prepared and understand what to do
and where to go in the event of natural
disaster occurring.
Raukawa relationships with local authorities,
government agencies, and infrastructure
providers ensure robust connections to
communications and energy networks
maximise the ability of marae to operate
as safe and welcoming environments for
displaced uri and members of the wider
community. Infrastructure networks across
the takiwā are well managed, resilient, and
responsive, minimising adverse effects.
Section 2.10.3
2.10 NATURAL HAZARDS – NGĀ AITUĀ TAIAO 137
2.10.5 Methods
Raukawa
M1 RCT will develop a hub of
information and resources to
assist uri with preparedness for
natural disasters.
M2 RCT will support Raukawa whānau
to develop home emergency
response kits.
M3 RCT will collaborate with Raukawa
marae to investigate the opportunity
for marae to become civil defence
posts for the takiwā.
M4 RCT will collaborate with agencies
to investigate the development of
a resilience profile for the Raukawa
takiwā including:
a. Likelihood of extreme events.
2.10.4 Kete for Kaitiaki
Being ready
K1 Get your emergency response kit
ready and make sure your whānau
has theirs set up as well.
K2 Talk with your whānau about your
emergency response plan.
K3 Familiarise yourself with your
local civil defence emergency
procedures.
K4 Look at having a first aid kit at
home and if you can, in your car at
all times.
K5 Donate your time or some resources
to helping community groups that
assist with natural hazard response
or community responses.
Objectives
• Raukawa uri understand the potential effects and likelihood of natural disasters
within their rohe, and are prepared.
• Raukawa and our partners are committed to and actively build community
resilience to deal with natural disasters and other emergencies.
138 TE RAUTAKI TAIAO A RAUKAWA
b. Building resilient homes, marae,
and business.
c. Predicted effects on biodiversity.
d. Predicted climatic changes for
the takiwā.
e. Reponses for Raukawa uri
to climate change and
extreme events.
f. Identify areas of natural
hazards occurrence.
M5 RCT will work with local authorities
to develop guidelines on responses
to civil defence emergencies in all
locations of the Raukawa takiwā.
M6 RCT will support flood mitigation
works where people, property
and the environment face
significant risk.
Raukawa Partners
M7 Local authorities should require
flood hazards to be identified,
avoided, or mitigated in any
intensification of land use.
M8 Local authorities should apply
a precautionary approach in
avoiding, remedying, or mitigating
the adverse effects on development
of earthquakes, volcanic activity,
and climate change.
K6 Keep gutters and drains debris-
free during winter to avoid localised
flooding during times of heavy rain.
K7 Work with your marae committee
to ensure your marae is ready to
support whānau and the wider
community in the event of natural
disaster or other emergency.
Heritage Shot - Waikato River. This photo gives some
indication of how the Waikato River has changed with the
advent of the hydro electricity system
2.10 NATURAL HAZARDS – NGĀ AITUĀ TAIAO 139
M9 Local authorities and government
agencies should adopt
coordinated approaches to the
development of natural hazard
management strategies within the
Raukawa takiwā.
M10 Local authorities and government
agencies should ensure all relevant
information regarding hazards is
available to Raukawa at all times.
M11 Local authorities and government
agencies should collaborate with
RCT to investigate the development
of a resilience profile for the
Raukawa takiwā including:
a. Likelihood of extreme events.
b. Building resilient homes, marae,
and business.
c. Predicted effects on biodiversity.
d. Predicted climatic changes for
the takiwā.
e. Reponses for Raukawa
uri to climate change and
extreme events.
f. Identify areas of natural
hazards occurrence.
Example of Land Slumpage and Tomo on Farm North of Tokoroa
1 Fairway Drive
Avalon
PO Box 30368
Lower Hutt
New Zealand
T +64-4-570 1444
F +64-4-570 4600
Dunedin Research Centre
764 Cumberland Street
Private Bag 1930
Dunedin
New Zealand
T +64-3-477 4050
F +64-3-477 5232
Wairakei Research Centre
114 Karetoto Road
Wairakei
Private Bag 2000, Taupo
New Zealand
T +64-7-374 8211
F +64-7-374 8199
National Isotope Centre
30 Gracefield Road
PO Box 31312
Lower Hutt
New Zealand
T +64-4-570 1444
F +64-4-570 4657
Principal Location
www.gns.cri.nz
Other Locations
