Today I’m going to introduce two important principles of IEM and these are co-ordination and collaboration. Coordination in IEM is so important and a trend that is emerging and growing rapidly in New Zealand is Community Based Environmental Management C(B)EM. New Zealanders have a reputation in history for ‘doing it themselves’, and prior to the Conservation Act 1987 this was the case. People formed their own organisations to protect local interests. With the introduction of the Conservation Act, departments such as the Department of Conservation were formed and powers were taken from the community groups in a more top down centralised government approach.
Coordination can happen horizontally and vertically on many levels, from small rural communities, to larger issues that span several communities, to local and regional government, national government departments as well as international groups (Boston, 1991). It is a complex task to balance all opinions and views and to end up with a successful outcome. There is an argument that environmental problems can be addressed better by those who live locally as they have local knowledge and can action changes on the ground, as well as adjust their own behaviour and educate others locally. So while problems occur on an international scale (e.g. over fishing) actions taken by local people can have a positive effect at the local level. While C(B)ME has many positives, it is apparent that it can be difficult to be successful in C(B)ME without formal guidelines.
Some of the issues associated with C(B)EM include;
- Equity in groups
- Monitoring and feedback
- Leadership and commitment of group members
- Knowledge
- Influence – whose view prevails?
- Support from local, regional or national government
Customary Fisheries Management
In New Zealand a bottom up approach to managing local fisheries is becoming more common in the Māori community with iwi taking opportunities to protect their mahinga kai rights by establishing customary fishing reserves. These reserves known as Taiāpure, Mātaitai, and Rāhui offer iwi the opportunity to put in place varying levels of protection for their local fishery (Meredith, 2009). This allows Māori to have input into their own fisheries management, although they do consult with all local stakeholders affected and approval for all fishing restrictions must come from the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). These reserves are recognised by the government who provide support via the MPI by assisting in the election of committees and individuals to manage each reserve (MPI, 2009). The MPI provide information online, as well as educational signage in reserve areas, fisheries officers patrol these areas and fine poachers where appropriate.
One of the biggest issues with these customary fisheries management reserves is the lack of monitoring and reviewing of the effectiveness of the fishing restrictions put in place by the fisheries management. Without current data on the health of the fishery it is difficult to determine if the health of the fishery is improving, or if the current fishing restrictions are adequate to prevent the local fishery from exploitation. It is important to monitor the health of the fishery to ensure the customary fisheries management is having a positive effect, this is one point that must be addressed. A second point is that currently the only information that can find on customary management of fisheries in New Zealand is through the Ministry of Primary Industries, although they do have a lot of information on customary management, it is difficult to sort through and find. Communication on the success of customary fisheries management could be improved through a purpose built website and educational programme. One that allows each iwi to communicate their successes and help the flow of knowledge between like minded communities.
One of the positive spin offs from a customary managed resource is that the community becomes aware of how their actions affect their environment. Since Tāngata Whenua were given the opportunity to manage their own mahinga kai areas the number of taiāpure and mātaitai reserve areas has increased as well as the amount of education available on how to develop your own reserve areas (TMK, n.d.). In an interesting article by Maxwell & Penetito (2007) on the Kaikoura-Wakatu Quay Rāhui it was reported that the wider community gained a sense of responsibility towards the rāhui and the community became the primary surveillance of the rāhui. When suspicious activities were spotted the community reported it to the Fisheries Officers who issued fines to the offenders breaching the rāhui, and in six years this has amounted to three. The involvement of the community lowered costs to the government of having to employ more fisheries officers, it provided a better quality rāhui with fewer breaches, and it allowed an interesting lesson for the younger generation of Māori as well as people from outside of the region on the fishery and on Māori values, while creating a greater sense of community.
 |
| Kaikoura Rahui |
Community based environmental management is an exciting path forward for New Zealand and I think in the case of customary fisheries management it is especially important for Māori in passing on traditional knowledge to younger tribe members, building a greater sense of community and maintaining the health and life of our local fisheries. Is it an IEM approach to management? In this case I say it’s pretty darn close! With improvements in monitoring and review of current reserve areas I believe that customary fisheries management in New Zealand is an integrative approach to environmental management.
Coordination vertically and horizontally helps improve integration between different tiers of government and is important for balancing the needs of the community with government policy. Next week I will investigate what the New Zealand government has been up to of late and discuss how integrative some of their recent policy has been.
Reference
Boston, J. 1991. The problems of Policy Coordination: The New Zealand Experience. Governance: An international Journal of Policy and Administration. 5 pp. 88-103.
Maxwell, K.H. & Penetito, W. (2007). How the use of rāhui for protecting Taonga has evolved over time. Mai Review, 2, pp. 1-15.
