NGĀTI MĀKINO HERITAGE TRUST
REGION-WIDE WATER QUALITY – PROPOSED PC9 TO BOP REGIONAL WATER AND LAND PLAN
Dr Kēpa Morgan FEngNZ Kaiwhakahaere Matua / General Manager RARANGA TAKE 1. Ngāti Mākino Heritage Trust Priorities 1. Ngāti Mākino Rohe Map 2. Ngā Kuha O Mākino 3. Waitahanui 4. Otamarakau Marae 2. Relevance of Earlier Mahi 1. NMHT v. BoPRC (2014) NZEnvC25 3. Challenges 1. Inconsistent Basis for Decision Making 4. Outcome Sought 1. Adopt a culturally competent and Iwi inclusive approach to this challenge. Matawhaura te maunga, Rotoehu te moana, Whakahau te tangata Mākino te iwi, he taniwha ngā tangata, he paruparu ngā kai.
Kia aho matuahia te taketake – Kia tuwaerea te tau, a Mākino.
Ngāti Mākino Rohe Rotoehu me Matawhaura Ngā Kuha O Mākino
Waitahanui
Otari Pa Moutoroi Pa
Moutoroi nohonga
Nga Kuha o Makino
Rotoehu West Redress Land (A) (NTST
Rotoehu Ecological Reserve 3 1-0
Te Porotai o Waitaha a Hei 1-05 Kohanga Rotoehu West Rakau o 1-02 Block Redress Land (B) Kauwae Hapa (NTST 1-0 1 1-04 Nohonga site Waitahanui
In Ngāti Mākino Heritage Trust v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [2014] NZEnvC 25 the Court notes “there is no dispute that Waitahanui represents the key tāonga of the Ngāti Mākino iwi and their hapu”. Otamarakau Marae
'the relationship between M āori and their tāonga "exists beyond mere ownership, use, or exclusive possession; it concerns personal and tribal identity, Māori authority and control, and the right to continuous access, subject to Māori cultural preferences" Ngāti Mākino Heritage Trust v. Bay of Plenty Regional Council
2014 NZEnvC 25 Inconsistent Basis for Analysis & Decision Making Inconsistent Basis for Analysis & Decision Making
2015 Allocation Status Surface Water Inconsistent Basis for Analysis & Decision Making
Kia aho matuahia te taketake – Kia tuwaerea te tau, a Mākino.
2015 Allocation Status Shallow Groundwater Makino Model Decision Making Framework
• Ontology of • Informs Four Mauri Indicator Dimensions Selection
Makino Quantification Model of Worldview
Trends for Mauri Dimensions Meter
• Indicator • Threshold Scores and Definition for Dimensions Indicators The Makino Model requires Equal Representation Pairwise Comparison Mauri Dimensions extremely strongly moderately equal moderately strongly extremely -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 less important equal more important
Mauri Whenua Hapū Hapori Whanau Total Wellbeing Wai cultural social economic
Whenua 0 ∑x Wai A B C i
Hapū cultural 0
Hapori social 0 Economic 0
Percentage weight for dimension;
PD = (∑xi + 9 ) / 36 x 100% Ways of knowing: Waitangi Tribunal pre 1990 Motunui Kaituna Manukau Rangataua Year 1983 Wai6 1984 Wai4 1985 Wai8 1990 Wai3 Claimant Te Ati Awa Ngati Pikiao Ngati Te Ata Tauranga Cmte Rohe Tai Hauauru Waiariki Manukau Tauranga Claim Pollution of reefs Pollution of river; Pollution of Potential pollution pollution of lake harbour: access of Welcome Bay Issue Petrochemical Diversion of Construction of Housing corp industry; Motunui sewage from sewage ponds, development; outfall impact on Rotorua to Kaituna airport, motorway; water right for kaimoana impact on lake use impact kaimoana sewage discharge Objection ImpactIMPACTS on food Impact on ONfood Impact MAURI on food Impact on food sources; cultural sources; cultural sources; cultural sources; cultural offence offence offence offence Outcome Motunui outfall $12M Scheme Harbour mgmt Sewage discharge abandoned abandoned; plan; Kaitiaki plan and water Land based Removal of ponds; right abandoned effluent disposal Beach remediation MAURI: a way of understanding the life supporting capacity of water, the people, or an ecosystem. THE ATTRACTIVE FORCE BETWEEN THE PHYSICAL AND META-PHYSICAL THAT FACILITATES ALL LIFE How did our Tupuna actually measure mauri? No Impact MAURI unchanged
Exhausted Fully Intact MAURI MAURI Tipping Points No Change Sustainability
0
Diminishing Enhancing -1 +1 Mauri heke Mauri piki
Exhausted Fully Restored -2 +2 Mauri noho / moe Mauri tuturu / ora Learn how to better describe the problem?
Check worldview sensitivity
Make Decision Overcome Unknowns
Quantify worldview Cawthron Institute REPORT 2224 (2013) • The Boston Indicator Project • The Dashboard of Sustainability • Earth Check (Kaikoura Green Globe) • Ecological Footprint • Environmental Performance Index • The Mauri Model • Human Development Index • NZ’s progress using a Sustainable Development Approach • Sustainable Society Index • Well-being Index; and • Whistler2020 The set that appears to be the most useful regardless of the community, is the Mauri Model.
Challenger, 2013 Case Study I: Agats, Papua International Example: Asmat Regency Water Supply Project in Papua (PhD research)
• Agats is the capital of the Asmat Regency • Population 15,000 people • Area 2963 km² • 0 to 5m elevation • Slope less than 2 %
Images: Dr Elisabeth Wambrauw Analysis of Stakeholder Values and Influence of Worldview Dimension Priority
The trend of sensitivity analysis The trend of sensitivity analysis 0.500 the Local Government 0.5 for the Asmat People 14% Environmental Ecosystem 33% 17%+ Cultural
0.0 0.000 Community 12% 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 200644%2011 Social2016 2021 2026 2031 Identity 33% -
The base line The base line Local Government 22% 25% Economic Asmat People -0.5 -0.500
Local Government Asmat People
Clearly Demonstrates Transfer of Mauri / Wealth Case Study II
Ko TukiTuki te Awa, Ko TukiTuki te Mauri!
Principles of Kaitiakitanga not met by the Proposal
Kaitiakitanga is about enhancing mauri
Analysis Present State Construction (5 years) Dam Commissioned Proposal Consent (30 yrs) Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme mauriOmeter Assessment ID Ecosystem Mauri (Environmental) Indicator Descriptions - Kaitiakitanga Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
-1 -1 1 EM1 Water Quality - Minimum Stream and River Flows, Abstraction Volume -1 EM2 Water Quality - P in Water Column (Intensification) 0 0 -1 -1
-1 -2 -1 EM3 Water Quality - N in Water Column 0 -1 -1 -1 EM4 Tukituki Estuary - National Significance for Fisheries 2 0.5 -1.25 -1.375 -0.5 -2 -2 -1 EM5 Indigenous and Braided River Habitat 1 -2 -2 -1 EM6 Habitat for Threatened Species and Wetlands 1 -1 -1 1 EM7 Habitat Integrity - Noxious Weed Control, Riparian Margins, Reservoir Buffer -1 -2 -1 -1 EM8 Net Biodiversity - Nationally significant catchment, trap and transfer 2 ID Manawhenua Mauri (Cultural) Indicator Descriptions - Tino Rangatiratanga Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
MM1 Manawhenua Recognition - Te Tiriti O Waitangi = Co-management -1 -2 -2 -2
-2 -2 -2 MM2 Effective Inclusion of Matauranga Maori in Decision Making = Co-management -1 -1 -1 -1 MM3 Mauri of Waterways - Effective Expression of Kaitiakitanga 0 -1 -1 -1 MM4 Mahinga Kai - Customary Harvesting Tukituki Estuary 1 -0.25 -1.25 -0.875 -0.5 -1 -1 0 MM5 Mahinga Kai - Customary Harvesting Tukituki Catchment 1 -1 2 2 MM6 Ruataniwha Biodiversity Advisory Board - Co-management -1 -1 -1 -1 MM7 Wāhi tapu sites including Ahu Pa, the ‘looking glass’ and Te Ihu o Te Kura 0 -1 -1 1 MM8 Waipawa and Papanui Waterways -1 ID Hapori Mauri (Social) Indicator Descriptions - Manakitanga Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
-2 -1 1 HM1 Population Demand on Services and Housing 0 -2 -1 1 HM2 Construction Workforce Issues 0 -1 -1 0 HM3 Health and Safety Risks new Waterways 0 -2 -1 0 HM4 Health and Safety Risks Traffic on Rural Roads 0 0.375 -1.625 -1 0.5 -1 -1 -1 HM5 Community Tension and Conflict 0 -2 -2 1 HM6 Historic Yeoman Mill Site - Recreation Space 1 -1 1 1 HM7 Reservoir Recreation Activities - Boat Ramp / Trout Fisheryand Anglers Facilities 1 -2 -2 1 HM8 Established Walking Tracks and Existing Camping Sites 1 ID Whanau Mauri (Economic) Indicator Descriptions - Orangatanga Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
-2 -1 2 WM1 Direct Economic Impacts - Scheme Capital Investment / Return 0 0 -1 2 WM2 Indirect Economic Impacts - On-farm Capital Investment / Return 0 -1 1 2 WM3 Flow-on Economic Impacts - On-farm Increased Productivity 0 -1 1 2 WM4 Flow-on Economic Impacts - Increased Processing Industry Activity -1 -0.25 -0.25 0.25 1.375 1 1 1 WM5 Flow-on Economic Impacts - Increased Support Services Activity -1 1 1 1 WM6 Revenue Impacts Port of Napier 0 2 1 1 WM7 Impacts on Average Household Incomes 0 -2 -1 0 WM8 Impact on Regional Lliving Costs 0 Overall Unweighted mauriOmeter Result 0.09375 -1.09375 -0.75 0.21875 Analysis Present State Construction (5 years) Dam Commissioned Proposal Consent (30 yrs) Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme mauriOmeter Assessment ID Ecosystem Mauri (Environmental) Indicator Descriptions - Kaitiakitanga 2.00 Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
-1 -1 1 EM1 Water Quality - Minimum Stream and River Flows, Abstraction Volume -1 EM2 Water Quality - P in Water Column (Intensification) 1.00 0 0 -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 EM3 Water Quality - N in Water Column 0 -1 -1 -1 EM4 Tukituki Estuary - National Significance for Fisheries 2 - 0.5 -1.25 -1.375 -0.5 -2 -2 -1 EM5 Indigenous and Braided River Habitat 1 -2 -2 -1 EM6 Habitat for Threatened Species and Wetlands (1.00) 1 -1 -1 1 EM7 Habitat Integrity - Noxious Weed Control, Riparian Margins, Reservoir Buffer -1
Jan-14 Jan-16 Jan-18 Jan-20 Jan-22 Jan-24 -2 Jan-26 Jan-28 Jan-30 Jan-32 -1Jan-34 Jan-36 Jan-38 Jan-40 -1Jan-42 Jan-44 Jan-46 Jan-48 Jan-50 EM8 Net Biodiversity - Nationally significant catchment, trap and transfer 2 - 2.00 ID Manawhenua Mauri (Cultural) Indicator Descriptions - Tino Rangatiratanga (2.00) Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
MM1 Manawhenua Recognition - Te Tiriti O Waitangi = Co-management -1 -2 -2 -2
1.00 -2 -2 -2 MM2 Effective Inclusion of Matauranga Maori in Decision Making = Co-management -1 -1 -1 -1 MM3 Mauri of Waterways - Effective Expression of Kaitiakitanga 0 -1 -1 -1 MM4 Mahinga Kai - Customary Harvesting Tukituki Estuary - 1 -0.25 -1.25 -0.875 -0.5 -1 -1 0 MM5 Mahinga Kai - Customary Harvesting Tukituki Catchment 1 -1 2 2 MM6 Ruataniwha Biodiversity Advisory Board - Co-management (1.00) -1 -1 -1 -1 MM7 Wāhi tapu sites including Ahu Pa, the ‘looking glass’ and Te Ihu o Te Kura 0 - -1 -1 1 MM8 Waipawa and Papanui Waterways (2.00) -1 ID Hapori Mauri (Social) Indicator Descriptions - Manakitanga 2.00 Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
1.50 -2 -1 1 HM1 Population Demand on Services and Housing 0 -2 -1 1 HM2 Construction Workforce Issues 1.00 0 -1 -1 0 HM3 Health and Safety Risks new Waterways 0.50 0 -2 -1 0 HM4 Health and Safety Risks Traffic on Rural Roads 0 - 0.375 -1.625 -1 0.5 -1 -1 -1 HM5 Community Tension and Conflict (0.50) 0 -2 -2 1 + HM6 Historic Yeoman Mill Site - Recreation Space (1.00) 1 -1 1 1 HM7 Reservoir Recreation Activities - Boat Ramp / Trout Fisheryand Anglers Facilities(1.50) 1 -Jan-14 Jan-16 Jan-18 Jan-20 Jan-22 Jan-24 -2 Jan-26 Jan-28 Jan-30 Jan-32 -2 Jan-34 Jan-36 Jan-38 Jan-40 1Jan-42 Jan-44 Jan-46 Jan-48 Jan-50 HM8 Established Walking Tracks and Existing Camping Sites (2.00) 1 ID Whanau Mauri (Economic) Indicator Descriptions - Orangatanga 2.00 Score Average Score Average Score Average Score Average
-2 -1 2 WM1 Direct Economic Impacts - Scheme Capital Investment / Return 1.50 0 0 -1 2 WM2 Indirect Economic Impacts - On-farm Capital Investment / Return 1.00 0 -1 1 2 WM3 Flow-on Economic Impacts - On-farm Increased Productivity 0.50 0 -1 1 2 WM4 Flow-on Economic Impacts - Increased Processing Industry Activity -1 -0.25 -0.25 0.25 1.375 - 1 1 1 WM5 Flow-on Economic Impacts - Increased Support Services Activity -1 + 1 1 1 WM6 Revenue Impacts Port of Napier (0.50) 0 2 1 1 WM7 Impacts on Average Household Incomes (1.00) -0 -2 -1 0 WM8 Impact on Regional Lliving Costs (1.50) 0 Overall Unweighted mauriOmeter Result (2.00) 0.09375 -1.09375 -0.75 0.21875 RWSS Overall Mauri Impact
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
- -21 Mauri Years Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 Jan-19 Jan-20 Jan-21 Jan-22 Jan-23 Jan-24 Jan-25 Jan-26 Jan-27 Jan-28 Jan-29 Jan-30 Jan-31 Jan-32 Jan-33 Jan-34 Jan-35 Jan-36 Jan-37 Jan-38 Jan-39 Jan-40 Jan-41 Jan-42 Jan-43 Jan-44 Jan-45 Jan-46 Jan-47 Jan-48 Jan-49 Jan-50 (0.50)
(1.00)
(1.50)
(2.00) Worldviews Influence Understanding
4% Environmental 26% Social Ecosystem 33% 4% Cultural
Community 19%
Identity 33% 66% Economic 15%
Council / Farmers Ngati Kahununu
What difference does worldview make? RWSS Overall Mauri Impact
Do Nothing Overall Impact RWSS Interests 2.00
1.50 Council / Farmers 1.00
0.50 -3 Mauri - +9 Mauri Years Years (0.50) +
(1.00)
(1.50)
(2.00)
Clearly Demonstrates Benefit of $ Prioritisation RWSS Overall Mauri Impact
Do Nothing Overall Impact Manawhenua 2.00
1.50 Ngati Kahununu 1.00
0.50
- -27 Mauri Years (0.50) - (1.00)
(1.50)
(2.00)
Clearly Demonstrates Transfer of Mauri / Wealth MAURI
Tipping Points Sustainability
PC9 Where should BoP RC be heading? Is your way of knowing an intrinsic part of who you are? We have shown ours’ is. Show us. Tena koa.
Dr Kēpa Morgan FEngNZ Kaiwhakahaere Matua / General Manager Ngāti Mākino Iwi Authority