OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: New Zealand 2017 (Volume 2017)

254 Pages·2017·7.377 MB·English

by  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

OECD Environmental Performance Reviews
NEw ZEalaND
2017
O
E
C
D
E
n
v
ir
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
R
e
v
ie
w
s
N
E
w
Z
E
a
l
a
N
D
2
0
1
7

OECD Environmental
Performance Reviews:
New Zealand
2017
This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The
opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official
views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.
This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or
sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries
and to the name of any territory, city or area.
Please cite this publication as:
OECD (2017), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: New Zealand 2017, OECD Publishing, Paris.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268203-en
ISBN 978-92-64-26802-9 (print)
ISBN 978-92-64-26820-3 (PDF)
ISBN 978-92-64-26829-6 (epub)
Series: OECD Environmental Performance Reviews
ISSN 1990-0104 (print)
ISSN 1990-0090 (PDF)

The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use
of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli
settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law.
Photo credits: © Kyrien/Shutterstock.com.
Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/about/publishing/corrigenda.htm.
© OECD 2017
You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and
multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable
acknowledgment of the source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be
submitted to [email protected]. Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be
addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) at [email protected] or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie
(CFC) at [email protected].
PREFACE
Preface
P
eople of New Zealand enjoy a very good environmental quality of life, with low air
pollution and easy access to nature. The natural environment is a key economic asset. The
country’s land, freshwater and seas provide the basis for internationally competitive
agriculture, forestry and fishery sectors. Despite its remoteness, millions of tourists visit
the country every year, attracted by its pristine wilderness and spectacular landscapes.
This third OECD Environmental Performance Review of New Zealand acknowledges that
New Zealand has strengthened policy co-ordination and environmental management and
leads the international research effort to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and
water pollution from agriculture. It has made greater use of market-based instruments to
put a price on environmental “bads” such as GHG emissions and landfilled waste, although
the use of energy and road vehicles is taxed at relatively low levels.
New Zealand’s growth model, however, has started to show its environmental limits,
with increased GHG emissions, freshwater contamination and threats to biodiversity.
Addressing GHG emissions from agriculture, and especially from dairy farming, should
remain a priority if the country is to achieve its 2030 climate mitigation target under the Paris
Agreement. The Review identifies the need to further explore the economic opportunities
that more sustainable resources use could yield. Developing a long-term vision for a
transition towards a low-carbon, greener economy would help New Zealand defend the
“green” reputation it has acquired at international level.
The Review pays special attention to water resources management and sustainable
urban development. New Zealand has reformed its national freshwater policy and the
Review welcomes this fundamental step towards safeguarding water quality and
availability. However, the management of diffuse nutrient pollution from pastoral
agriculture remains a significant environmental challenge, as it is with most countries.
Speeding up the implementation of the freshwater policy would help reduce investment
uncertainty and the risk of further pressure on freshwater resources and ecosystems.
New Zealand has pioneered the use of a water quality cap-and-trade market in one catchment.
This can provide useful lessons to other countries. But it remains an exception and the
Review suggests broadening the use of economic instruments to encourage water-use
efficiency and pollution reduction.
While New Zealand cities are green and environmental quality is good, population
growth and urban expansion are posing increasing pressures on housing, transport, waste
and water infrastructure. Private cars are by far the dominant mode of transport and
congestion levels are high. The challenge for Auckland – which is home to a third of the
country’s population – and other fast-growing cities is to accommodate a larger population
while avoiding unsustainable urban expansion. According to the Review, this will require
addressing the current institutional fragmentation, a complex urban planning system and
misalignment of land-use, transport and infrastructure decisions. Using pricing instruments
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: NEW ZEALAND 2017 © OECD 2017 3
PREFACE
such as road tolls, congestion charges and water tariffs will help local governments finance
investment in much-needed infrastructure and services, while encouraging more efficient
use of resources and land, and containing urban sprawl.
This Review is the result of a constructive policy dialogue between New Zealand and
the other members of the OECD Working Party on Environmental Performance. It provides
50 recommendations to help New Zealand green its economy and improve its environmental
governance and management. I am confident that this collaborative effort will also provide
other OECD Members and Partner countries with insights on how to deliver solid economic
growth in a way that protects their environmental asset base.
Angel Gurría
Secretary-General of the OECD
4 OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: NEW ZEALAND 2017 © OECD 2017
FOREWORD
Foreword
T
he principal aim of the OECD Environmental Performance Review programme is to help member
and selected partner countries improve their individual and collective performance in environmental
management by:
helping individual governments assess progress in achieving their environmental goals
promoting continuous policy dialogue and peer learning
stimulating greater accountability from governments towards each other and public opinion.
This report reviews New Zealand’s environmental performance since the second review in 2007.
Progress in achieving domestic objectives and international commitments provides the basis for
assessing the country’s environmental performance. Such objectives and commitments may be broad
aims, qualitative goals or quantitative targets. A distinction is made between intentions, actions and
results. Assessment of environmental performance is also placed within the context of New
Zealand’s historical environmental record, present state of the environment, physical endowment in
natural resources, economic conditions and demographic trends.
The OECD is indebted to the government of New Zealand, the Auckland Council and
Environment Canterbury for their co-operation in providing information, for the organisation of the
review mission to Auckland, Christchurch and Wellington on 9-13 May 2016, and for facilitating
contacts both inside and outside government institutions.
Thanks are also due to the representatives of the two examining countries, Miranda Lello
(Australia) and Pete Fox (United Kingdom).
The authors of this report were Carla Bertuzzi, Ivana Capozza, Britta Labuhn, Hannah Leckie
and Eugene Mazur from the OECD Environment Directorate. Nathalie Girouard and Ivana Capozza
provided oversight and guidance. Carla Bertuzzi provided statistical support; Annette Hardcastle
provided editorial and administrative support; and Mark Foss copy-edited the report. Preparation of
this report also benefited from the co-operation of Sylvia Beyer of the International Energy Agency, as
well as from inputs and comments from several members of the OECD Secretariat, including
Christophe Andre, Johanna Arlinghaus, Andrew Barker, David Carey, Delphine Clavreul, Guillaume
Cohen, Anthony Cox, Kwame Frimpong, Michelle Harding, Elisa Lanzi, Xavier Leflaive, Alexander
Mackie, Walid Oueslati, Aleksandra Paciorek, Jehan Sauvage, Clara Tomasini, William Tompson,
Elena Tosetto, Ioannis Tikoudis, Simon Upton and Kurt Van Dender.
The OECD Working Party on Environmental Performance discussed the draft Environmental
Performance Review of New Zealand at its meeting on 9 November 2016 in Paris, and approved the
Assessment and Recommendations.
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: NEW ZEALAND 2017 © OECD 2017 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of contents
Reader’s guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Basic statistics of New Zealand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Executive summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Assessment and recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1. Environmental performance: Trends and recent developments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2. Environmental governance and management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3. Towards green growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4. Water resources management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5. Sustainable urban development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Annex. Actions taken to implement selected recommendations from the 2007 OECD
Environmental Performance Review of New Zealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Part I
Progress towards sustainable development
Chapter 1. Environmental performance: Trends and recent developments. . . . . . . . . . 59
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2. Key economic and social developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3. Transition towards a low-carbon and energy-efficient economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4. Transition towards a resource-efficient economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
5. Natural asset base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
6. Environmental quality of life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Recommendations on climate change, air, waste and biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Chapter 2. Environmental governance and management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
2. Institutional framework for environmental governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3. Setting of regulatory requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
4. Compliance assurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5. Promoting environmental democracy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Recommendations on environmental governance and management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: NEW ZEALAND 2017 © OECD 2017 7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 3. Towards green growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
1. New Zealand’s economy and the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
2. Building a green growth strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3. Greening the system of taxes, charges and prices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
4. Greening financial support to the energy and agriculture sectors . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
5. Investment in the environment to promote green growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
6. Promoting eco-innovation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
7. Contributing to the global sustainable development agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Recommendations on green growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Part II
Progress towards selected environmental objectives
Chapter 4. Water resources management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
2. States and trends of New Zealand’s water resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
3. Institutional framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
4. Efficiency and implementation: Costs, benefits and improvements
for freshwater management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Recommendations on water resources management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Annex 4.A. Comparison of EU Water Framework Directive ecological status
and New Zealand ecosystem health classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Chapter 5. Sustainable urban development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
2. An overview of New Zealand cities: Socio-economic trends and environmental
performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
3. The institutional framework for urban planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
4. The legislative framework for urban planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
5. Spatial planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
6. Policy instruments for sustainable urban development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
7. Investing in environment-related infrastructure and services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
Recommendations on sustainable urban development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
Notes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
Tables
4.1. Percentage of monitoring sites at which five year (2009-13) median values
for water clarity do not comply with the ANZECC 2000 “trigger values”. . . . . . 162
4.2. Percentage of groundwater quality monitoring sites at which median
concentrations exceed drinking water or environmental standards. . . . . . . . . 162
4.3. Bottom-line attributes to meet national values of the NPS-FM (2014). . . . . . . . 169
8 OECD ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS: NEW ZEALAND 2017 © OECD 2017