Download Conservation and Environment Science Roadmap

ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION ORGANISATIONS OF NZ
INC.
Level 2, 126 Vivian St, Wellington, New Zealand; PO Box 11-057, Wellington
Email:
[email protected]
Website:
www.eco.org.nz
Phone/Fax 64-4-385-7545
As for 5 September 2016
ECO NZ’s Submissions PART TWO - re Conservation
and Environmental Science Roadmap to inform
development of the roadmap
Dear Team,
You gave us an extension for this submission because of our commitments for and
at the IUCN Congress in Hawai’i for which we thank you.
This is Part TWO of the ECO submission and is to be read in conjunction with our
Part ONE, which took us to p15, sorry, not p47 as earlier stated.
Name: Environment and Conservation Organsiations of NZ Inc
Address: P O Box 11-057, Wellington
Submitter type: Environmental NGO – umbrella group.
We are fine about you releasing ECO’s details but not those of particular individuals.
Things to note about our submission.

It is in two parts – this is part 2 but We reproduce part ONE of our submisisons at
the end of this Part TWO submission.

We have ommited the yes/no answers that you asked for since it is rare that we can
answer in such a binary fashion. We felt it best to go to the substance not an all-ornothing judgement

It would make it much easier on submitters and on submission analysts if you
used numbers instead of bullet points in your discussion documents please.

We have been pressed for time on this and apologise both for the delay and
for the typos and inelegant language that are inevietably in this submission.
1

We wish to follow the progress of the work here. We thank you for much in
the paper that is wise and well framed. For the sake of brevity we have
largely left out commenting where we agree with you – so please do not
think that we are wholly negative about this work – we are not. We have
simply highlighted those areas where we have suggestions and
disagreements, for brevity’s sake.
--------------------------------------------
Re p16 – Roadmap Phase 1 – the Discussion Paper.
P17 The Themes and Questions
 In this and many other sections of the paper, we support
reference to “ecosystems” but consider that this should also
include “biodiversity” so that all of the levels of biodiversity are
included.
 Inclusion of research relating to New Zealand’s international
obligations.
 We would like to see reference here to reserch to fulfill’s New
Zealand’s international obligations.
The “social and economic dimensions” research needs to be
“unpacked”. This should include theories and evidence of:
 changes of behviour;
 the changing of social norms and their significance in influencing
pro-social and pro-environmental behaviour;
 the social and individual paychology of behaviour;
 the role of norms, incentives and disincentives in shaping
behaviour;
 internalisation of externalities; inducing instrinsic motivation and
impacts of extrinsic motivators;
 the recognition of the value of non-rival and non-excluable (ie
public) services and goods, and the funding there-off;
 the ethical and other framing of choices;
 framing choices as citizens rather than as those of consumers and
producers in the market.
2
 The evidence about the strengths and the limitations of selfgovernance, collaborative processes, of markets and of
government and hybrids of these.
The Question of Priorities:
P18
We consider the priority advice useful but inadequate.
In our view:
In 1, the irreversibility of environmental harm is more compelling than a
lost opportunity, since the latter tend to be more substituable than
environmental harms are.
In 2, rearrange so that it says: the impact on nature’s welfare and
subject to that, human welbeing.
To 3 ADD, after “probability”, “the severity, duration, scope and range
of” damage.
To 4 insert after “risk and impact can be”, the words “avoided, remedied
or”, since this idea is embedded in both the RMA and the EEZ&CSActs.
Avoidance of damage is higher up the mitigation heirarchy than simply
“minimisation” which could imply the toleration of the damage with no
attempt to avoid it.
P 16, re your Questions about feedback on the questions:
We would like to ADD:
 Research on what the evidence and literature says about the
sources and measures of human well being – and the variables
that contribute to or detract from this. [This will involve a critique
of GDP and other macroeconomic indicators as well as drawing on
the literature of evidence and self assessment of wellbeing – as
for instance covered in the Spirit Level.
 Research on the drivers of human behaviour (social, psychological,
economic, etc) and the barriers to pro-environmental and prosocial behaviour change.
 Re other comments, we suggest the addition of what IUCN calls
“Nature-based solutions” – to climate change, to mental and
physical health problems, to social delinquency, and other such.
3
 Decision making and rules in information-short environmentals.
 Research to comply with international obligations.
Related Roadmaps:
ECO requests that we be added to the list of those consulted about the
Primary Sector Science Direction roadmap.
4
Theme 1 – Climate Change
These visions and goals are too weak.
1) While understanding the mitigation potential is an essential component, we need to
move beyond getting New Zealand to “understand” the pathways that can lead to a
low-carbon economy. We need this goal to emphasise that we must introduce a
programme of actions, that will ensure we are on a learning curve that allows the
results to be increased rapidly as the damaging impacts of climate change become
more and more evident.
2) Yes we need a planned adaptation and risk reduction strategy. But an essential
element of this strategy has to be to strengthen the public understanding through
actions which can be increased as the situation gets worse.
3) ECO’s understanding of the science is that we need to move faster and
further in reducing our GHG emissions and in particular, we need to srip
carbon out of the atmosphere. New Zealand needs to achieve net zero
carbon emissions by 2050, a more ambitious target than the feeble 30%
reduction by 2050 and that the baseline must be 1990, not 2005.
Emerging ideas:

In our view we need to increase our understanding of the implications and
methods of increasing the capacity of soil as a carbon sink, and not expect to
do so until the impacts of that are unerstood.

Needs to be far greater focus on the impacts of greater precipitation events, and
stronger droughts.
Carbon Capture and Storage seems to be the refuge of those who want BAU and to
avoid substantial emissions reductions.
CC&S in the marine enviornment is opposed by ECO since the impacts of this are not
likely to be well understood and this strategy is likely to be used as an excuse for not
de-carbonising the economy.
Re your 7th bullet point under this heading, the emphaisis need not necessarily be
the use of “novel” land use practices but rathe to develop those land use practices
that are adapted to climate changes AND are low carbon emissions.
We suggest that you ADD here, research on spreading the acceptability and
adoption of low enviornmental damage, low-input and low carbon emission land
uses especially.
Methods for encouraging native bioidiversity provision and ecosystem services on
privately held land.
8th bullet point – changes of plants and land uses, not just plant breeding and not
biotech where this means genetic engineering where adverse ecosystem or health
impacts may result.
Innovative techniques? Well mahbe, but much is already known about this – as
Alison Dewes’s work shows – and the real question is to research how to spread the
uptake of the known methods.
Methods to induce switching from ruminant animal production to other animal and
to plant-based farming is needed. This could include economic and other
instrucments, social norms, peer-group influence and so on. One particularly
important bit of work is to examine, using the natural experiement of changing dairy
prices, the price elasticity of supply of dairy products v alternative land uses.








5

Last bullet point – this needs to be done for all invasive alien species, not solely
those that will flourish with climate change. We need a further research point,
which is how to improve our border and our internal biosecurity controls.
Research Questions:
1.1
Add: and avoiding “non-economic growth”, ie that economic growth
which does more damage than benefit, or does irreversible damage to the
environment.
1.3
We suggest the insertion of “species” after “organisms”


The research questions do not capture the need for research and analysis of existing
data which demonstrates that stocks of fish and wild life are becoming critically
endangered and are likely to be worsened by climate change.
Long term weather change impacts – ever increasing large rainfall events (and
droughts) need further elaboration.
New or Expanding capability Needs
Bullet point 3: After “Maintaining” insert “and publishing for public access in a
timely manner”;








ADD: Health impacts of climate change
Health impacts of increased access to native biodiversity and “nature”.
Drivers of human behavior and of behavior change.
Understandign our current carbon budget and how to achieve progressive and
ambitious milestones
Sources of government and of market failures.
Impacts of sea level rise.
We need open data so that mass resources of scientists can analyse and suggest
further remedies.
Learning from adaptation and mitigation measures instituted in other countries is
essential – but we must take very fast follower actions – and lead in areas where we
have unique conditions, qualifications and experience.
Continued over page.
6
Theme 2
Integrated ecosystems and processes.
We support the reference to ecosystems and processes, but also consider the
other aspects of biogeophysical process and to biodiversity needs to be
incorporated into the and similar sections. We suggest that this be incorporated
through out.
Context





Add reference to the RMA’s integrated approach.
Note that the EEZ&CSA is a “gap filler” and that we still await integrated oceans
policy and law.
Need to reduce silo fisheries management.
Key interface environments should also refer to atmosphere-ocean-land-freshwater
interfaces.
Add the gradations and interfaces from coast to deepsea, seamounts, thermally
active areas, deep seeps etc.
Vision /goals


Refer to “nature-based solutions – cf. IUCN’s work on this at iucn.org
Add biogeophysical systems
Emerging ideas
Re second bullet point – this should not be framed as “balanced”, but rather that
the environmental should constrain the economic , and social and cultural
conditions may, constrain the economic activity (eg the taboo on trading babies)
and may need to change to protect the environment. The “needs” of society are
not necessarily equally ranked, and thus should not be regarded as equally
tradable. Environmental constraints are just that – and not all “needs” have
equal standards, so “balance” is a misleading and inappropriate term to use.
Some may have to change or be abandoned as no longer sustainable in an
environmentally constrained world.
Re bullet point 3
It is not only “land use” but activities and impacts that need to be considered,
including activities at sea.
Bullet 4 – agreed.


The non-linear effects of fresh water systems need to start well before the coastalmarine and estuary areas.
The impacts of glacier melt and the permanent impacts on the local environment
are also missing from the questions.
Research questions
2.3
It is not only environmental policy but also transport, industrial and
primary production and marine policy.

It is essential that the data collected is made available openly for analysis.
7

There is a huge amount of data collected that already has very little (often zero)
resources for analysis and interpretation.
(continued below)
8
Theme 3 – Freshwater ecosystems and processes
Enduring Question:
We suggest that this be rephrased to say “What tools, novel and existing,… to ensure
freshwater ecosystems are healthy and resilient, adverse human health impacts are
avoided, and cultural needs are recognised, while, to the extent consistent with
these, identifying tools, sysstems and uses that can allow human uses of water.

“Minimisation of human health impacts” lacks ambition, Avoidance is the
first goal.

Identify economic, social, political and governmental barrieers to improved
water quality and better functioning fresh water ecosystems

Improved institutional and legal requirements for monitoring, reporting,
publishign and inducing compliance with better rules for freshwater and
freshwater ecosystems.

YES we need many new and novel tools, however we also need higher base level
standards and regulatory actions to ensure the base level standards are achieved –
so we need research into why this hasn’t happened so far.
There is too strong an emphasis on research into new or novel tools, systems and
processes to improve water quality. Conversely there is not enough research into
the reasons such as agency capture by industry, the Ministry’s own caving in to
political pressure to change the standards and distort reporting, council
unwillingness to prosecute, and so on.


Context:

NOTE the potential for growing human well being while lowering private
impacts on freshwater and freshwater systems.

ADD references to the benefits to be gained from aesthetics, recreation,
tourism and ecosystem services and the need to capture these benefits in
decision making and to recognise the non-rival and non-excudable benefits.

The reference to the “quality of water in New Zealand;s lakes” etc as
“variable” is quite inadequate. This should be clear in its acknowledgement
of the downwards trajectory of water quality and be very clear that this is
more than “some negative trends”.
Vision/Goals

There is no need to requite “novel tools” – the application of any tools is
needed and there must be work to analyse the socio-political and economic
pressures that inhibit better outcomes.

The vision / goals needs to be rewritten to place the appropriate standards limits
and targets as the first element of the vision – with the development of tools etc as
the second element to improve the standards over time.
9
Emerging Ideas

We do not agree that collaborative approaches have been shown to be
appropriate for setting limits and implementation. We consider that is a
matter for research, not assumption. There is evidence of failures of these
approaches, and there is evidence of community based management failures,
government and market failures. What is needed is further literature reviews
and research on the relative strengths and weaknesses of the various
approaches, and how methods can be best implemented in different
circumstances.

We need more analysis of the science of behaviour changes, individual and
social, the barriers to change and how to overcome these, and unflinching
politico-economic research into government failures, market failures and
community decision makein failures.
Research questions

ADD the above also to the Research questions – and modify 3.1 to EXAMINE
the extent toi which communities and iwi can set and implement limits etc.

ADD text to reference whether government failures can be avoided and
remedied, not simply to see a wholesale retreat from government as implied
by 3.1.
3.2 – Refer to “full cost accounting” not “economic costs” and ethics.
ADD
3.6
Changing norms, attitudes, values and behaviours to be more proenvironmental.
3.7
The strenths and limitations of the institutional arrangements for research,
for management and reporting

Policy measures and their efficacy and weak points.

NOTE: the Immediate establishment of higher water standards is the essential precursor to allow research to have a higher baseline for research to start from.
10
Theme 4 - Land Ecosystems and Processes
Context:





Include references to increased intensity of land use, esepcailly farming and include
irrigation
We support and recommend inclusion elsewhere throughout the document to
plant, animal, fungal and microbial life, and this should apply throughout the
document, instead of simply plants and animals. Microbial life is vital and prolific in
the marine environment also.
Some conservaiton land is private, as well as the much larger areas of public
conservation land.In para three, add in references to mineral and fossil fuel mining
and production forestry as having impacts.
Make clear that natural capital is biogeophysical systems, not “stocks” and flows of
“resources” and that the conditions for maintenance and repair pf such natural
capital systems must be attained and preserved.
Replace references in para 3 and 5 to “resource base” and “resource” with the term
“environment base” and “environment”.
Vision/Goals
We reject this formulation since it reeks of “reverse sensitivity” – ie allowing
harmful land uses and controlling other land uses that are affected by such
harms.
Instead, we suggest a vision and goal of land uses that do not stress ecosystems
and their processes or the biogeohysical systems; that we do not reach
overcapacity and environmental limits, that human quality of benefit from land
ecosystems and processes are maintained and enhanced from non-damaging and
non-extractive uses.
Emerging Ideas
It is a matter for research whether OVERSEER is adequate, and whether
community based management systems are adequate. Ostrom and Fikret Birkes’
work shows clearly that these only work in certain – and often limitedcircumstances. We suggest you examine Fiorino’s surveys of this literature.
We agree with your para re soils, but we consider this section should also
include the values of conservation-based and ecosystem based management and
the many health benefits from access to nature.
Include in the research questions references to:







Methods to induce the uptake of low-impact, low input farming;
Reductions in irrigation
How the uptake of already known low impact practices can be accelerated
The price elasticity of supply of dairy farming compared othe rland uses
Methods for changing social norms
Methods for internalising enviornmental externalities.
Methods for improving the uptake of internal biosecurity controls.
11
Theme 5 0 - Coastal and Marine Ecosystems and Processes
We agree with the Definition/scope, but changes to the geographic scope stated
earlier in the document need to be made to cover the extended continental shelf,
the full area of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Organisation, SPRFMO; and other
areas relevant to NZ’s international obligations.
Enduring Question
DELETE the text “while at the same time unlocking the economical potential of these
areas in a context of land-use intensification”. Any such reference to economic
outcomes must be qualified to limitation on impacts, reductions of extraction,
observance of limits etc.
Context
This account of the impacts of harvesting is “spin” and should be rewritten.

Hunting and harvesting notably has depleted fish stocks, including orange roughy,
hoki and many other species. Benthic damage is continuing and can hardly be called
“unintentional” since it is well known to be the result of trawling and other bottom
fishing methods. Such damage is not unintentional, rather, it is disregarded.

Fish harvesting still does enormous environmental damage, and it is a thoroughly
moot point whether it is truly economically sustainable, even in market terms. It is
almost certainly not in any full cost accounting of the harms done.

No mention is made of seabird mortality and the pressing need to reduce such.

Add to your list of impacts of climate change the ice melt and ice dynamics, sea level
rise, and current destabilisation and location changes due to changes in salinity and
hence density of seawater.

We do not accept that progress towards agreed international targets will be
constrained by increasing recreational and commercial use of the marine
environment and its resources. Rather, we should aim that such use is increasingly
non-extractive and non-industrial. We do agree that there will be increasing
pressure from the commercial and to a lesser extent, extractive recreational
activities.

There are not only international “targets” but unqualified international obligations
to “preserve and protect the marine environment (Art 192 of UNCLOS).
Vision/Goals

Add after “means to” the word “avoid”.
12

ADD the SDG goals in here as they related to the protection and the coastal and to
the marine environment, the ecosystem based management and achieving
precautionary principle-based management with the goal of protection of the
environment.

ADD That New Zealanders understand the need to ecosystem based management,
that there is political will to achiever the goals.

Add the long term to the “short and medium term”.
Emerging Ideas
We agree with most of these, but once again, we disagree with the assumption in
your last bullet point that collaborative processes will deliver good outcomes. It is
better to have research on the range of conditions under which governmental,
community and market mechanisms will be successful at protecting the environment
and conserving it.
Research Questions
ADD Which institutional arrangements will facilitate the goals in the vision and avoid
failures?
New or Expanding capability Needs:



The systematic evaluation of approaches should be to manage human impacts and
activities on coastal and marine environments.
Understanding of and elimination of actual and quasi subsidies for environmentally
damaging activities
Research into the conditions for and impacts of any release of methane hydrates
/clathrates and how such releases can be avoided.
13
Theme 6 – Urban Ecosystems and Processes
Enduring Ecosystems and processes
The question should be extended to:



“and maximise the positive health and well-being impacts for humans
and minimise damage from extreme climate events.
And pursue a low carbon development plan.
Context

Replace “natural resources” with “the supporting environment and its systems”
Vision/Goals

This needs to include specific reference to “improved resilience to extreme weather
events and sea level rise resulting from climate change.”

ADD: Access for all to non-extractive benefits from nature.
Emerging ideas





ADD to the first bullet point: carbon emissions, plastic pollution, biosecurity risks
and biodiversity losses.
The human phsical and mental health benefits from access to nature.
Needs more emerging ideas related to the need for urban resilience related to
extreme weather events on biodiversity, energy systems, and the three waters
(water supply, storm water and waste water).
The quality of the built internal environment has a significant impact on the external
environment. This is not captured.
The urban built environment needs to be integrated with transport systems which
are currently unsustainable and very locally polluting.
Research Questions:
ADD:

What does the literature including empirical research tell us about the contribution
of environmental systems and access to nature, to human health and well being?

What does the behavioral literature and evidence tell us about making cities more
livable and safer while lowering their environmental impacts?

How can urban dwellers be provided with more non-extractive access to nature at a
more local and proximate and accessible way so lessening impacts on nature?
How can peoplein urban situations


How can the social sciences be brought to bear on improving social connectedness,
pro-social and pro-environmental behavior?

How can infrastructural redesign be achieved to lower our environmental impacts.
14

There needs to be further questions related to the pollution from the dominant use
of fossil fuel energy systems for transport within urban areas.

Note the following from the 2016 IUCN World Congress
Resolution 028 about conservation in urban areas:
“……..

o
o
o
o
o
o
o
“AWARE that nature is essential to people’s physical and mental health,
development, and well-being, that natural areas in and around cities help
give residents a sense of place, offer opportunities to learn about nature
and sustainability, provide a wide range of ecosystem services, contribute
to carbon sequestration, and bolster resilience to climate change and
natural disasters, and that many natural and semi-natural areas in and
around cities are rich in biodiversity and geoheritage and can include
protected areas in any of IUCN’s six categories;
NOTING the dependency of urban populations on goods and services,
such as drinking water, energy, food and flood protection, provided by
rural ecosystems;
FURTHER NOTING that urban natural areas can enhance tourist
attractions of cities and boost income from tourism;
RECOGNISING that access to nature in urban areas can be important in
addressing environmental justice and sustainability issues;
FURTHER RECOGNISING that cities can have major negative impacts
on surrounding ecosystems, for example, air and water pollution,
deforestation for fuelwood, and harvesting of wildlife for human
consumption, that urban ports, airports, and gardens are entry points for
invasive alien species, and that urban sprawl is often a major threat to
nature
ALSO RECOGNISING the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
and its SDG 11 to make human settlements, inclusive, safe, resilient and
sustainable; and
NOTING that Habitat III, the United Nations Conference on Housing and
Sustainable Urban Development will be held in Quito, Ecuador, in
October 2016, and will act on the development of a new Urban Agenda;”
[the operative paragraphs are directed to IUCN itself and are not
relevant here].
15
Theme 7 – Population and Species
Definition/Scope

The geographic definition includes Antarctica, which is great, but it needs to extend
into the South Pacific and other areas where New Zealand has international
obligations. The definition provided is too restrictive.

Recognition of the species types listed is welcome, but marine species, including the
invertebrates and micro organisms should also be included here, and the chemicosynthetic organisms such as those in the deep sea vents and black smokers should
also be included.

Specifically in relation to kiwi recovery, a cold hard look needs to be taken to assess
whether the 24/7 egg-napping and incubation and and chick-napping and raising is
really necessary and whether predator control alone without handling the birds is a
more cost-effective mechanism.

The focus of this section is excessively terra-centric.

The genomic selection proposals verge into genetic engineering. The solution to
one environmental problem with GE may well be the genisis of other, more
intractable ecological problems.

Too often the specialsim of one bio-control agent has been misjudged with the
result that we have accumulated invasive species. We urge caution in such an
approach. The use of chemical poisons has significant downsides. A very positive
side though is that we can choose to discontinue their use. In contrast, biocontrol
agents and GE may both be impossible to reverse (thought that depends on the GE
in quesiton). They can both be irrevocable in impacts, whereas the use of
chemicals can be at least stopped, though bioaccumulative or persistent pollutants
may be dangerous for long periods.
Vision/Goals
We consider the objective of protecting “the highest priority” populations
and species lacks ambition and is not sufficient as a goal. We want to see not
simply particular species but whole ecosystems functioning well. The
“highest priority” stipulation suggests that we give up on the rest. That is
unacceptable to ECO.
Emerging Ideas
We are not convinced that the argument for abandoning some species is
sound.
Research Questions
There is a risk that the emphasis on genomics will lead to a species silo
approach and will fail to notice the ecosystem impacts.
16
Theme 8 – Biosecurity
We agree with much of your discussion in this section but we also consider that
education and particulary, changed social norms and internalized
motivations are needed too. Gardeners’ attitudes and behaviours, social
norms about moving potentially infected materials such as soils and plant
material need also to be addressed.
Changing the social acceptability of dumping plant material must be addressed
urgently and that needs to harness the social sciences and psychology and
sociology as well as the evidence from regulatory research as to what
works and what doesn’t.
The relatively risky process of introducing bio-control agents should also be
reviewed.
We consider the emphasis on biotechnology controls inhibiting conservation
needs to be assessed critically. Biotechnology may sometimes help, but it
carries with it significant unknowns as to ecosystem and species impacts.
A “gung-ho” approach is not sensible. Haven’t we learnt from previous
introductions gone wrong?
We do agree that the sustainability of taxonomic collections and of the people
with the skills to analyse these is vital and needs urgent attention,
particularly in the marine environment.
We draw to your attention the following IUCN World Conservation Congress
2016 Resolution regarding the development of a classification system for
assessing the impact of invasive alien species, and we suggest that New
Zealand should be part of the developments discussed. Note that the
references to the director General is to that of IUCN, and the reference to
the SSC is the IUCN Species Survival Commisssion.
014 - Toward an IUCN standard classification of the impact of invasive alien species
CONSIDERING that invasive alien species are recognised as a major direct and indirect
driver of biodiversity loss across the globe, and that their economic impact is estimated at
hundreds of billions of dollars each year (Bellard et al. 2016; Simberloff et al. 2013;
Pimentel et al. 2005);
RECALLING that Aichi Target 9 of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 of the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Target 15.8 of the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) call for the prioritisation of invasive alien species for
prevention, eradication or control;
HIGHLIGHTING that there is no global, standardised, systematic evaluation, prioritisation
and monitoring process in place for invasive alien species;
17
RECOGNISING the need for metrics to be context specific, particularly at the population
and ecosystem level given available data;
RECOGNISING the efforts carried out by the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC)
Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) for developing authoritative global knowledge
products on invasive alien species, namely the IUCN Global Invasive Species Database
and the Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species;
FURTHER RECOGNISING that, in addition to species prioritisation, pathways
assessment and management are also key strategic actions in invasive alien species
prevention and that IUCN work on pathways (see 'Progress toward pathways
prioritisation in compliance to Aichi Target 9' UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/20/INF/5) is still a
priority;
ALSO RECOGNISING that many protocols and risk assessment tools are available and
in use by various countries and authorities across the world;
APPRECIATING that a global and standardised framework and guidelines for
implementing an IUCN Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) have
recently been developed and published in the scientific literature, with the notable
contribution of the SSC ISSG, following an approach similar to the Categories and
Criteria of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species;
NOTING that the framework to ensure the consistent application of EICAT is now
available, along with technical protocols for the assessment, review and quality
assurance of the resulting classifications, following a wide testing and consultation phase
with the main stakeholders to ensure that their diverse needs have been properly met;
and
RECOGNISING, that the classification of species under EICAT can feed into risk
assessments and statutory regulations, and that changes in classifications over time can
be used as an indicator of trends in invasive alien species impacts and management at
regional, national or global level;
The World Conservation Congress, at its session in Hawai‘i, United States of
America, 1-10 September 2016:
1. REQUESTS the SSC and the Director General to conduct a consultation process
involving all relevant stakeholders within the Union to develop EICAT, integrating the
outcomes into the IUCN Global Invasive Species Database and the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species, thus providing an essential background for the achievement of Aichi
Target 9 (and subsequent related targets) and SDG Target 15.8;
18
2. REQUESTS Council to adopt the framework for the IUCN Environmental Impact
Classification for Alien Taxa, once the consultation process referred to above has been
completed, as the Union’s standard for classifying alien species in terms of their
environmental impact;
3. CALLS ON all Members, and national, regional and global institutions, and the
scientific community to work in collaboration with SSC on:
a. EICAT and the integration of its outcomes into the IUCN Global Invasive Species
Database and The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, as this information is essential
to prevent and mitigate the impacts caused by invasive alien species; and
b. fostering the formal adoption of EICAT and promotion of its use as a decision support
tool; and
4. CALLS ON the scientific community to apply EICAT, in coordination with SSC,
providing comprehensive supporting information to be published in the IUCN Global
Invasive Species Database.
19
Theme 9 – Matauranga Maori
In most respects we agree with this discussion and welcome the inclusion of
Matuarnga Maori in an authentic manner to our knowledge.
We are compelled though to notice that too often the holistic approach is
drowned out by the vigorous assertion of Maori property rights at the expense of
the rights and health of the environment itself.
New or Expanding capability Needs
We suggest using the term “environmental impacts management” instead of the
term “natural resources sector”. The term “natural resources” in itself separates
the product from the systems that produce them and commodify nature.
20
Theme 10 – Social and Economic Dimensions

The Definition/Scope is fine in its first sentence but the second is disjointed from the
rest and strangely singles out just one economic aspect for consideration.

We suggest the addition of an ethical and inter-temporal dimension here. This could
be social justice, responsibilities to the future (and the present) and responsibilities
to maintain the bequest from the past with an “as good or better” bequest to the
future – human and non-human.

On the microeconomic front, we suggest some research into the price elasticity of
supply of dairy proudcts compared to less greenhouse gas and polluting activities of
non-dairy production and land use. That would help policy makers understand
some at tleast of the implications of full environmental cost pricing, internalisation
of costs and so on.

We should also include here a better understanding of the variables in human well
being and how to get better alignment with those in our micro and macroeconomic
policies. Specifically, this will involve considering what really motivates and drives
behavour, the lack of satisfaction derived from much consumption, the
contributions and detractions from well being of relative and positional goods,
inequality, mal-distributional outcomes, and the significance of relationships with
friends and family, respect and esteem, and so on.

At a macroeconomic level, the range of public variables and alternatives and
indicators other than GDP and its derivatives is also needed.

Where this has already been done, then the task becomes, how can such evidence
and analysis be brought into currency in policy and public notice, and the old
misleading aggregates and indicators be replaced by much more accurate,
encompassing and relevant measures and indicators?


We agree with most of the discussion here.
We observe that it applies across almost all the elements in previous themes and
that it needs to be considered in each one of those.
Institutional design and impacts on framing choices and governance are also
crucial and must be considered here too.
Market failures, community governance failures and government failures all
need to be analysed and researched, with such published.
Research processes and institutional arrangements also need serious attention,
for their tendency to special interest and industry capture, for their stifling or
liberating of the thinking of those within them, for their scope of research and for
the ability of the public to critique their problem definitions, question
formulation, research design and access to research reports.
21
Vision/Goals

ADD: New Zealanders reduce their GHG emissions to achieve net zero carbon
emissions by 2050.

“Effective management” is too vague. This must be specified to include protected
areas and species, and “effective management” needs clear environmental
milestones and emissions and impact reduction targets.

We suggest the use of the term “inter-temporal” rather than intergenerational. The
latter is anthropocentric and fails to scale impacts to their duration.

As before, we are not convinced that, flavour of the year that it is, collaborative
decision making is necessarily or even demonstrably better than other methods –
particularly when it is too often used as a “sand pit” to distract and occupy some
players whilst others use the usual power games for end runs and cherry picking of
any outcomes.

Research into environmental history, including non-traditional sources such as the
information about the environment in diaries and literature is also needed. Prof
Daniel Paully has shown how potent and reliable a source of information this is.
Similarly, some of the stories from Maori and other sources can also provide insights
into changes of abundance, range and the behaviour of the environment.

Harnessing emotions and aesthetics to convey meaning, emotion and association
with the environment is also needed.
22
Theme 11 – Informatics, modeling and monitoring
We agree with much in this section.
We would add that the information needs to be there but also to accessible, to be
asking the questions that matter or at least be able to be used to address them,
and that the public must be able to have input into the research questions AND
to access the results.
Institutional arrangements for NGO and public access to public good science,
research of other kinds, and to independent expert assessment of client driven
research that is presented to hearings needs also to be examined and assessed –
and publicly reported on.
23
Theme 12 – New and Emerging Technologies
There are many new technologies and some indeed could be very useful for
conservation. It is not necessarily the case that we should focus mainly on new
technologies: often it is the lack of political will to use what we already have or to
fund these that is the problem.
Biotech can be helpful – but it can also be hazardous. Too much of this paper
comes across as a plug for GE.
The new high tech sensing and seeing techniques are impressive. One needs to
be careful though, that we are not simply engaged in a “tech arms race” where as
fast as techniques are developed for, say, “seeing” or sensing or mapping the sea
floor, those who would exploit it are in for the kill. This is all too likely,
especially in the marine environment.
We thank you for the opportunity to submit on this matter and look forward to
your next report.
**************************************
Our Part ONE comments were as below:
ECO’s comments on your Sections in Developing A Conservation and
Environment Science Roadmap
Time Frame (in the Message from Ministers):
We welcome the 20 year timeframe for the Roadmap, but would like to see a clearer
set of milestones within that time period, and also a section that looks out beyond
20 years.
Comments on the section: Developing A Conservation and Environment
Science Roadmap
Focus
The use of the term “science” is too limiting. We suggest instead that the term
“research” be used. This would much more clearly include social sciences – since for
some people, “science” means natural sciences. “Research” would allow for the
24
inclusion of some rather crucial research such as research into successes and failures
of governance, legal and policy research, and research into cultural and other
aspects such as attitudes and behaviour and Traditional Ecological Knowledge.
Setting the Scence
We find much to agree with in this section, but:
In relation to paragraph two, we strongly recommend that the focus on New Zealand
in 20 year’s time be reframed from New Zealand being “rich in natural resources” to
references to having more knowledge of what contributes to human well-being, and
that we frame the discussion of the enviornment in terms of natural systems and
environments. “Resources” is an unfortunate term that instantly commodifies the
environment, and frames it not as a system but as stocks (or sometimes flows).
It might be useful in this section that rehearses some of the challenges and
problems, to refer to IUCN’s work on “Nature based Solutions” and to the
Millennium Development Goal targets, the Aichi Targets under the Convention on
Biodiversity and to impart a sense of urgency. The IUCN Wawai’I commitments
could be .
ECO considers that this section is a good place to insert a paragraph about New
Zealand’s international conservation and environmental obligations, our obligations
to “preserve and protect the marine environment” under the UN Conventionon the
Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and various other relevant commitments that involve New
Zealand in having to do research.
These include, but are not limited to, the South Pacific Regional Environment
Programme (SPREP), the South Pacific Fisheries Management Organisation
(SPRFMO), the Antarctic Treaty and the the Convention on the Conservation of
Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). All of these mean we have to do various
research related to our obligations.
We suggest that New Zealand also fold into this research agenda this fresh
Resolution from the IUCN World Conservation Congress 2016, August-Sept 2016.
We urge that this be included in this roadmap document. It represents world
opinion of both governments and non-governmental organisations:
“094 - Increase resources for biodiversity conservation research
CONSIDERING the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Strategic
Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and its associated Aichi
Biodiversity Targets, we request the establishment of public policies – or
25
strengthening of existing policies – that enable scientific research on
biodiversity and natural resources conservation;
FURTHER CONSIDERING, in the context of the SDGs, the role of scientific
knowledge about biodiversity and resulting conservation actions, that the
above-mentioned research could contribute to science-based policymaking
and ultimately help to foster environmental sustainability (SDG 15), and
integration of sustainability principles in public policies and programmes that
reverse natural resources losses and that contribute in the long term to
reducing the proportion of people with no sustainable access to clean water
and basic sanitation (SDG 6);
ALSO CONSIDERING that in order to achieve the Aichi Biodiversity Targets it is
important that accurate scientific information is gathered and published
providing guidance for the effective planning and implementation of
protected areas, including balanced management that is ecologically
representative and connected to the diverse protected areas system (Target
11), prevention of threatened species extinction – especially those with
recognised decline status until 2020 (Target 12) [and we suggest beyond] as
well as the development and enforcement of technologies based on
biodiversity conservation (Target 19);
The World Conservation Congress, at its session in Hawai‘i, United States of
America, 1-10 September 2016:
1. ENCOURAGES national governments, in accordance with national and
international law, to establish – or strengthen existing – public policies and
incentives that enable and stimulate scientific research on biodiversity and
natural resource conservation, highlighting their benefits to society; and
2. ENCOURAGES governments to consider conclusions and recommendations
generated from scientific research as inputs for management and
conservation strategies related to the protection of natural areas, including
the establishment of new protected areas, management plans, and
development of action plans for threatened species, as well as periodic
updating of the official list of threatened species.”
We are heartened by the evident commitment to draw from and learn from and
integrate Matuaranga Maori.
Goal for the Roadmap

We recommend that the roadmap be framed in terms of “research”, not
“science”, to allow for a wider scope of knowledge to be explored.

We would like to see explicit mention in this section of research on values,
attitudes, social norms, and behaviour change and barriers to change in this
26
section. Reference here to psychology and social pyschology is important.
So too is research on pro-social and pro environmental and proenviornmental values, attidtudes and behaviour.

Research on governance and decision making and

on how to monitor, report, to induce compliance and sanction noncompliance and enforcement.

Research on policy measures and their efficacy is needed here too.

We sugggest that strategies for decision making in information-short
environments be included in this goal. This would include research for
instance, on the application of information sufficiency tests, the
precautionary principle, and whether adaptive management is anything more
than “suck it and see”.
Scope of the roadmap
We recommend the following amendments to the scope of the road map:
1 In your intitial list, add:
a. the atmosphere,
b. human behaviour and motivation,
c. biogeophysical systems,
d. the cryosphere (icey areas),
e. energy alternatives and impacts,
f. sociolgy and psychology as these relate to conservation and the
environment,
g. ecological economics,
h. ecosystem services, and
i.
legal and policy research as these relate to conservation and the
environment.
j.
Research on the impacts of primary production and other human
activities on the environment and conservation should also be
included here, and not left to the primary production roadmap since
that is not likely to do justice to the topic and its urgency.
k. Research on the institutional arrangements for research, the methods
of organising, funding and reporting research, and the availability of
research results. The balance between public funding for public good
science v privte good research needs exploring, as does the impact of
the current system of CRIs and the impacts of the various institutional
and administrative arragements on researcher motivation and
productivity.
27
2 The geographic scope of the research is too limited and is ambiguous. It is
anyway unclear as to whether this geographic scope refers to the object of
research, the place of research or the nationality of the researchers.

The geographic limitations are incompatible with the nature of the
biogeophysical systems that comprise the enviornment and the systems
that affect New Zealand.

Our research may need to go outside New Zealand in order to understand
the environmental systems, our biodiversity, and impacts on and by New
Zealand.

New Zealand has responsibility directly for our impacts on the continental
shelf as well as the EEZ, albeit we do not have management control over
the water column in the case of the Continetnal shelf.

New Zealand has a variety of obligations to undertake research as part of
our role as world citizens and as a state with international obligations.
These include but are not limited to New Zealand’s international
conservation and environmental obligations such as:
o
our obligations to “preserve and protect the marine
environment” under the UN Conventionon the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS),
o
our obligations under the UNFCCC;
o the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) and its Aichi targets;
o UNCLOS and its implementing agreements such as the Fish stocks
Agreement, the International Seabed Authority requirements;
o the Montreal Protocol relating to ozone depletion;
o the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP);
o the South Pacific Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO);
o the Antarctic Treaty and the the Convention on the Conservation
of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR);
o The implementing agreement being negotiated on Biodiversity
Beyond National Jurisdiction.
o The International Labour Organisation and the UN Convention on
Human Rights may also require research, for instance into lbaour
and human rights conditions in our environmental activities.

All of these – and more - mean we have to do various research related to
our international obligations.
What the Research [Science] roadmap will be used for:
We can see the appeal of an integrated research agenda, but we should also be
aware also that monolithic world views can have their disadvantages too. Diversity
28
in research, as in nature, provides for more truly questionning, more robust
research and allows for a greater breadth and depth of research, but particularly
more capacity to engage with unexpected questions and unforseen enviornmental
stressors.
Although the paper (p9) refers to the research helping to achieve our international
obligations, the geographic scope specification will preclude us complying with these
to a considerable extent. That limitation should be reviewed.
MBIE and Conservation and Environmental Science
We are entirely unconvinced that MBIE is the right institution to be the core agency
that sets the National Statement of Science Investment. MBIE is focussed on
economc growth, has little known expertise in judging research needs, and has a bias
towards its own “patch” of business, innovation and enterprise. Research into how
conservation and environmental research fares in this arragement should be
undertaken.
We are very shocked that, according to your figures on p44, MBIE had $12.8m for
Integrated ecosystems and processes, whilst DoC had a derisery $115,000, and MfE a
mere $13,500. This is truly shocking underfunding of DoC and MfE.
Looking at the totals, and even remembering that the table is incomplete, DoC is
conspicuously underfunded in research, as is MfE. MBIE by contrast takes the lion’s
share in most categories and overall, despite its mission not being central to the
environment or to conservation. Overall, it takes 67% of the total budget outlined in
the tables at the back of the paper. DoC has 17.5%, MfE 12% and MPI 5% (with an
error due to rounding). MPI will have a further budget via the Primary Production
roadmap.
We consider that the research budget need to be reviewed with more research
funding to DoC and MfE.
Looking Ahead
We suggest that the first paragraph under this heading also include invasive species
and pathogens.
In this section and throughout the document, we would like to see less attention to
new technologies, important as these will be, and more attention to the monitoring
and reporting of existing technologies. We need more monitoring of the effects, for
instance, of the use of 1080, so that the gains from it are clearly apparent.
29
Climate Change – mitigation and adaptation opportunities
This section needs more mention of impacts of climate change on the marine
enviornment and the cryopshere. Ocean acidification, ice melt, freshening of oceans
around Antarctica and the north pole need to be included since these will affect
global systems and New Zealand. It is not enough to just look at mitigation and
adaptation – we need to keep working on the actual and projected changes and
synamic systems as well.
Enhancing Ecosystem Services
We welcome this section. We suggest the addition of fungi, and the addition of a
discussionnot only of ecosystems but of all of the dimensions of biodiversity and
biogeophyscal systems. Some reference here to the dis-services of pathogens and
invasive species is also needed in this section.
Freshwater – a continuing challenge
We’d like to see reference to aquatic biodiversity, not just “water” . The statement
“there are still some negative trends in fresh water health” is an absurd
understatement. Please be frank, cut the spin.
Alignment of research Is ok, but we need diversity too. Mike Joy’s work is a powerful
illumination of why a single approach is a very bad idea.
Our land, coastlines and seas – supporting our economy.
Yes they do support out economy but no need to set the frame as economic. They
have many other biological, ecosystem, geomorphological, aesthetic, scenic,
recreational, cultural, identity, existence, bequest and othr values. Stressing
economc values and this slant, though pleasing to the Cabinet, reinforces the
utilitarian mind set and excludes recognition of other values and services.
We suggest the insertion of “micro-organisims in the beginning of the last paragraph
under this head because these are ubiquitous and multitudinous.
Add a section on the implementation of our international obligations and also the
governance issues, the international dimension and obligations with respect to the
sea, EEZ and Continental Shelf and the high seas.
We note these fresh Resolutions from the IUCN World Conservation Congress 2016,
August-Sept 2016. We urge that the research based elements of these be included
in this roadmap document. They represents world opinion of both governments
and non-governmental organisations:
30
094 - Increase resources for biodiversity conservation research
CONSIDERING the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Strategic
Plan of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and its associated Aichi
Biodiversity Targets, we request the establishment of public policies – or
strengthening of existing policies – that enable scientific research on
biodiversity and natural resources conservation;
FURTHER CONSIDERING, in the context of the SDGs, the role of scientific
knowledge about biodiversity and resulting conservation actions, that the
above-mentioned research could contribute to science-based policymaking
and ultimately help to foster environmental sustainability (SDG 15), and
integration of sustainability principles in public policies and programmes that
reverse natural resources losses and that contribute in the long term to
reducing the proportion of people with no sustainable access to clean water
and basic sanitation (SDG 6);
ALSO CONSIDERING that in order to achieve the Aichi Biodiversity Targets it is
important that accurate scientific information is gathered and published
providing guidance for the effective planning and implementation of
protected areas, including balanced management that is ecologically
representative and connected to the diverse protected areas system (Target
11), prevention of threatened species extinction – especially those with
recognised decline status until 2020 (Target 12) as well as the development
and enforcement of technologies based on biodiversity conservation (Target
19);
The World Conservation Congress, at its session in Hawai‘i, United States of
America, 1-10 September 2016:
1. ENCOURAGES national governments, in accordance with national and
international law, to establish – or strengthen existing – public policies and
incentives that enable and stimulate scientific research on biodiversity and
natural resource conservation, highlighting their benefits to society; and
2. ENCOURAGES governments to consider conclusions and recommendations
generated from scientific research as inputs for management and
conservation strategies related to the protection of natural areas, including
the establishment of new protected areas, management plans, and
development of action plans for threatened species, as well as periodic
updating of the official list of threatened species.
31
053 - Increasing marine protected area coverage for effective
marine biodiversity conservation
NOTING the ocean covers 71% of the earth’s surface;
CONCERNED that pollution, over-exploitation, warming, acidification, and
biodiversity loss in the ocean are occurring at rapid or unsustainable rates and
human impacts have reached the distant polar regions and the high seas;
*AWARE that effectively managed, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), as provided
for in IUCN’s Protected Areas Management Categories and Governance types,
including highly protected reserves, are important tools that help conserve the
critical habitats, ecosystem services and biodiversity that support human life;
MINDFUL that scientific evidence supports full protection[1] of at least 30% of the
ocean as reviewed[2] to reverse existing adverse impacts, increase resilience to
climate change, and sustain long-term ocean health;
RECALLING the recommendation in the marine crosscutting theme at the IUCN
World Parks Congress (Sydney, 2014) to "urgently increase the ocean area that
is effectively and equitably managed in ecologically representative and wellconnected systems of MPAs or other effective conservation measures. This
network should target protection of both biodiversity and ecosystem services and
should include at least 30% of each marine habitat. The ultimate aim is to create
a fully sustainable ocean, at least 30% of which has no-extractive activities;
FURTHER RECALLING the 2014 World Parks Congress commitments by State
Members, such as Bangladesh, Brazil, Cambodia, Comoros, Fiji, France (French
Polynesia), Gabon, Madagascar, Russia and South Africa to expand their MPAs
coverage using the six different categories of management of IUCN;
RECOGNISING the progress being made by states to establish large, highly
protected marine reserves within their jurisdictions, efforts at the United Nations
to create an instrument allowing for the establishment of MPAs in areas beyond
national jurisdiction, and the commitment of the Commission for the Conservation
of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) to create a representative
system of MPAs in its geographic area of competence;
ALSO RECOGNISING that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
acknowledges the importance of conserving and sustainably using the oceans,
seas and marine resources for sustainable development;
32
CONSIDERING that the 10th Conference of Parties to the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD COP10, Aichi, 2010) set Aichi Biodiversity Target
11[3] by 2020; and
WELCOMING United Nations General Assembly Resolution 69/292 on the
Development of an international legally binding instrument under the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable
use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, , in
particular, together and as a whole, marine genetic resources, including
questions on the sharing of benefits, measures such as area-based management
tools, including marine protected areas, environmental impact assessments and
capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology;
[1] Sciberras et al.: Evaluating the biological effectiveness of fully and partially
protected marine areas. Environmental Evidence 2013 2:4
[2] O'Leary, B. C., Winther-Janson, M., Bainbridge, J. M., Aitken, J., Hawkins, J.
P. and Roberts, C. M. (2016), Effective Coverage Targets for Ocean Protection.
CONSERVATION LETTERS. doi:10.1111/conl.12247
[3] Target 11: By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10
per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance
for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and
equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of
protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and
integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.
The World Conservation Congress, at its session in Hawai‘i, United States
of America, 1-10 September 2016:
1. CALLS ON the Director General and all components of IUCN to promote and
support the actions described in paragraphs 2-4 below;
2. ENCOURAGES IUCN State and Government Agency Members to designate
and implement at least 30% of each marine habitat in a network of highly
protected MPAs and other effective area-based conservation measures, with the
ultimate aim of creating a fully sustainable ocean at least 30% of which has no
extractive activities, subject to the rights of indigenous peoples and local
communities[1], by:
a. committing to work towards designating and effectively implementing at least
30% of their national waters as MPAs and other effective area-based
conservation measures, as provided for in IUCN’s Protected Areas Management
Categories and Governance types, by 2030; and
33
b. engaging constructively in establishing MPAs in areas beyond national
jurisdiction, areas of joint international management and their own jurisdictions,
including through:
i. the development of a new instrument under the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological
diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and that such a new instrument
contains a robust mechanism for establishing effectively and equitably managed,
ecologically representative and well connected systems of marine protected
areas, including reserves; and
ii. the adoption of existing Southern Ocean and other MPA proposals in 2016 and
the timely preparation and adoption of new MPA proposals by CCAMLR;
3. URGES IUCN State Members to accelerate progress towards achieving Aichi
Target 11 by 2020 ;
4. ENCOURAGES the Parties to the CBD to consider a new process for
developing post-2020 targets to increase the percentage of marine areas highly
protected to 30% by 2030; and
5. REQUESTS all Members to support the achievement of the actions described
in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 above.
[1] The potential impacts of the motion on the rights and interests of indigenous
peoples, and their conservation, economic, social and cultural traditions and
aspirations, should be reviewed in a manner that allows participation consistent
with both indigenous peoples' traditional decision-making process, and UNDRIP.
The Urban Ecosystem
We reproduce here some of the preambular paragraphs of the IUCN Congress
motion 28 regarding incorporating urban dimensions of conservation. We have left
out the operative paragraphs because these are not addressed to states.
RECOGNISING that the majority of the world's population is urban and that
urban people are critical for nature conservation, nationally and globally, that
cities are where most wealth is concentrated, and most media are based, and
that conservation depends on support from urban voters, consumers, donors,
and communicators – yet people living in cities have diminishing contact with
nature;
34
NOTING that urban conservation actors include national, sub-national, and local
authorities, and a range of non-governmental organisations, academic and
scientific bodies, and community groups;
AWARE that nature is essential to people’s physical and mental health,
development, and well-being, that natural areas in and around cities help give
residents a sense of place, offer opportunities to learn about nature and
sustainability, provide a wide range of ecosystem services, contribute to carbon
sequestration, and bolster resilience to climate change and natural disasters, and
that many natural and semi-natural areas in and around cities are rich in
biodiversity and geoheritage and can include protected areas in any of IUCN’s six
categories;
NOTING the dependency of urban populations on goods and services, such as
drinking water, energy, food and flood protection, provided by rural ecosystems;
FURTHER NOTING that urban natural areas can enhance tourist attractions of
cities and boost income from tourism;
RECOGNISING that access to nature in urban areas can be important in
addressing environmental justice and sustainability issues;
FURTHER RECOGNISING that cities can have major negative impacts on
surrounding ecosystems, for example, air and water pollution, deforestation for
fuelwood, and harvesting of wildlife for human consumption, that urban ports,
airports, and gardens are entry points for invasive alien species, and that urban
sprawl is often a major threat to nature;
ALSO RECOGNISING the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its
SDG 11 to make human settlements, inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable;
We provide this text to help focus on the significant gains to health and wellbeing
from urban conservation.
Environmental Contaminants

Air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions should be included in this
section.

Plastics in the marine environment should be highlighted.

Wastes from exploration, mining and minerals processing and dumping on
land and in the marine environment needs explicilty to be added here.
35
Protecting New Zealand’s unique flora and fauna
ADD fungi and native micro organisms to what should be protected
and pathogens ;
ADD In para 1 to the threats:

fungi and pathogens and ocean acidification to the list of threats.

Overfishing and the use of destructive fishing methods and minerals
activities.

wetland weeds and

invasive species in the marine enviornment.
In the 2nd paragraph,
ADD reference to invasives in the Southern Ocean and in Antarctica.
ADD reference to the need to research more rigourous preventiona nd response to
invasive species and to review the criteria for this to avoid the “victim pays”
principle.
Like the introduction of biocontrol species, genetic techniques have the potential to
cause irreversible changes that were not expected. Genetic engineering may have
benefits but once let loose may have ecological consequences that are not
anticipated and are severe. We agree more discussion is needed, but we do not
think that text which does not alert the reader to the risks of irreversible ecological
harm is helpful to this.
Globalisation and Biosecurity
Fine to focus on border controls, but we also need more focus on internal
biosecurity. The criteria for research and response should not be so skewed to
commercial impacts. The spread of Guava moth is a primary case in point.
Maturanga Maori and ToW relatied opportunities
Agreed.
People Matter

Agreed, but more needs to be said about research into messaging, into
nudging behaviour change, social norm changes, and

about science researchers understanding the significance and legitimacy of
ethically motivated and value based decision making.
36

ADD that we also need to explore responsibilities of all people to the
environment and the future, and

the rights of the environment and the future itself.
Underpining Science
ADD:

Research into the nature and application of decision making and decision
rules in information short situations. This should include research on
information sufficiency tests for decisions, the application of the
precautionary pinciple, the use of protected areas as insurance mechanisms,
etc.

Research on the New Zealand research institutional arrangments and rules,
the allocation of the research budget, public access to defining research
questions, public access to results, public access to public good research in
resource management and conservation or utilisation decision processes.
Providing solutions through technology
This section seesm to focus on the issue of biotechnology and genertic engineering
of various kinds. There are many other technologies that need attention. These
include:

Remote sensing

The use of drones and unmanned underwater or aerial sensing and
monitoring vehicles and vessels, aerial and nautical, bio-indicators.

This section reads like a Gluckman inspired ode to genetic engineering. It is
not helpful because it pushes the case and does not acknowledge ecological
risks, the irrversibility of the release of non-lethal genetic engineering, etc.

In general we agree that informed debate is useful, but Gluckman’s
declaration that those who oppose GE are “mad” fails to understand the
ecosystem implications concerns and issues of irreveribility as opposed to
human health concerns.
We recommend that this section be modified, as above.
We also recommend that IUCN’s work on “Nature based solutions” to climate
change, biodiversity losses, mental and physical health problems and more be added
in here. See Appendix 1.
--------------------------------------------------
37
Appendix 1
062 - Integration of nature-based solutions into strategies to combat
climate change
RECALLING the commitments made by Parties at the 21st Session of the Conference of
Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC
COP21 – Paris, 2015) to fight against climate change;
STRESSING the recognition given in the Paris Agreement to the role played by
ecosystems in climate regulation and in the adaptation to climate change regulations;
RECALLING that the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the UNFCCC
recognise the importance of integrating ecosystem approaches into the responses to
climate change, and ask for them to be considered as an integral part of local and
national strategies to combat climate change;
ALSO RECALLING Aichi Biodiversity Target 15, calling for "ecosystem resilience and the
contribution of biodiversity to carbon stocks" to be enhanced "by 2020" "through
conservation and restoration, including the restoration of at least 15% of degraded
ecosystems, thereby contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and to
combating desertification";
WELCOMING the inclusion of the importance of the role played by ecosystems in the
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, adopted by the Third UN Conference on
Disaster Risk Reduction (Sendai, Japan, 2015);
WELCOMING and ENCOURAGING existing initiatives, in many countries, involving
nature-based solutions implemented by governmental organisations, local authorities, the
managers of natural areas or citizens;
NOTING with great concern that the aggregate greenhouse gas emission levels in 2025
and 2030, resulting from the intended nationally determined contributions, do not fall
within the least-cost 2ºC rise in temperature scenarios; and
RECALLING Resolution 5.083 Advancing the role of nature-based solutions to climate
change mitigation and adaptation and their potential to contribute to the global climate
change regulatory regime (Jeju, 2012);
The World Conservation Congress, at its session in Hawai‘i, United States of
America, 1-10 September 2016:
1. INVITES the States to:
38
a. integrate nature-based solutions into their national climate change mitigation and
adaptation policies and strategies;
b. include these solutions in their intended nationally determined contributions and other
documents where appropriate;
c. implement these solutions through actions aimed at protecting intact ecosystems and
those in a good ecological state, including marine and terrestrial protected areas; actions
aimed at improving the sustainable management of ecosystems used for human
activities; and actions to restore degraded ecosystems and recreate natural
environments contributing to these objectives;
d. integrate these solutions into natural disaster risk reduction projects and policies; and
e. find the necessary financial means for implementing these solutions, by mobilising all
the financial mechanisms to address climate change from UNFCCC and other sources
including the Green Climate Fund;
2. ENCOURAGES regional and local authorities to integrate these solutions into their
territorial climate change adaptation and mitigation, energy and land-use planning
policies and strategies, as well as their budgets where appropriate;
3. INVITES AND ENCOURAGES non-governmental organisations to promote and join in
the implementation of these solutions and citizens' initiatives in countries and territories;
and
4. ASKS companies to deploy these solutions in their projects and innovations.”
--- END of Part ONE of ECO’s Submissions
--------------------------------------------------------
39