C.12 EMBARGOED until 2pm Thursday 18 February 2021 Not 100% – but four steps closer to sustainable tourism February 2021 EMBARGOED until 2pm Thursday 18 February 2021 This report has been produced pursuant to subsections 16(1)(a) to (c) of the Environment Act 1986. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment is an independent Officer of Parliament, with functions and powers set out in the Environment Act 1986. His role allows an opportunity to provide Members of Parliament with independent advice in their consideration of matters that may have impacts on the environment. This document may be copied provided that the source is acknowledged. This report and other publications by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment are available at pce.parliament.nz. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Te Kaitiaki Taiao a Te Whare Pāremata PO Box 10-241 Wellington 6143 Aotearoa New Zealand T 64 4 471 1669 F 64 4 495 8350 E [email protected] W pce.parliament.nz February 2021 ISBN 978-0-947517-24-3 (print) 978-0-947517-25-0 (electronic) Photography Cover images: Hot Water Beach, Eli Duke, Flickr; Akaroa, Bruno d’Auria, Flickr; contrails, Andreina Schoeberlein, Flickr. Chapter header images: Leptopteris superba, John Barkla, iNaturalist; Cyathea dealbata, Hymenophyllum demissum, Paul Bell-Butler, iNaturalist; Anogramma leptophylla, Schizaea australis, Pteris macilenta, Sarah Richardson, iNaturalist; Notogrammitis billardierei, Chris Ecroyd, iNaturalist. EMBARGOED until 2pm Thursday 18 February 2021 Not 100% – but four steps closer to sustainable tourism February 2021 EMBARGOED until 2pm Thursday 18 February 2021 Acknowledgements The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment is indebted to a number of people who assisted him in conducting this investigation. Special thanks are due to Andrew McCarthy who led the project, supported by Leana Barriball, Dr Robert Dykes, Tessa Evans, Vivienne Holm, Shaun Killerby, Peter Lee and Megan Martin. The Commissioner would like to acknowledge the following organisations for their time and assistance during the preparation of this report: • Ahipara Luxury Travel • Ministry for the Environment • Air New Zealand • Ministry of Business, Innovation and • Akaroa Civic Trust Employment • Akaroa District Promotions Society • Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade • Akaroa Ratepayers and Residents Association • Ministry of Transport • Auckland Airport • National Energy Research Institute • Auckland University of Technology • New Zealand Motor Caravan Association • Black Cat Cruises • New Zealand Productivity Commission • Christchurch Airport • Ōnuku Rūnanga • Christchurch City Council • Queenstown Lakes District Council • ChristchurchNZ • Schiff Consulting • Department of Conservation • Stats NZ • Department of Internal Affairs • Swedish Transport Agency • Environment Canterbury Regional Council • Tasman District Council • Federated Mountain Clubs • thinkstep ANZ • Gisborne District Council • Tourism Holdings Limited • HM Revenue and Customs • Tourism Industry Aotearoa • HM Treasury • Tourism New Zealand • Kapiti Island Nature Tours • Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency • Mackenzie District Council • Wanaka Stakeholders Group • Marketview • Westland District Council. • Marlborough District Council The Commissioner wishes to thank the following individuals for reviewing earlier drafts of the report. While he has benefited hugely from their insights, any errors, omissions or opinions are entirely his own. • Professor Susanne Becken • Aaron Cosbey • Raewyn Peart • Dr Hugh Logan • Keith Turner • Geoff Lewis. • Te Rau Kupenga EMBARGOED until 2pm Thursday 18 February 2021 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1 2 Addressing tourism-related aviation emissions 13 3 Government tourism funding through a sustainability lens: Introducing environmental and social conditionality 39 4 Protecting wildness and natural quiet in public conservation lands and waters 63 5 Stronger requirements for self-contained freedom camping and improved oversight of the certification process 95 6 Appendix: Existing tourism policy mix and funding 115 References 119 EMBARGOED until 2pm Thursday 18 February 2021 2 1 Leptopteris superba Introduction My proposals and how they were reached Late in 2019 I published Pristine, popular… imperilled?, an investigation into the environmental pressures resulting from tourism activity in Aotearoa.1 Two key insights emerged from that work. First, the persistent growth of New Zealand’s tourism industry in recent decades had created a set of increasingly serious environment issues. From the greenhouse gas emissions associated with long-distance travel to the pressure on wastewater networks from seasonal peaks, tourism was found to be less environmentally benign than it had often been made out to be. Second, the increase in visitor numbers that was – at the time – forecast would only serve to exacerbate those pressures. I concluded that business-as-usual growth had the potential to undermine the very thing that New Zealand’s tourism industry is based on – the quality of our natural environment. Rather than move immediately to propose remedies, I asked for feedback on two issues. Firstly, was the problem statement contained in the report accurate? Secondly, if it was accurate, what policy approaches might be relied upon to reduce the environmental footprint of tourism? I received 27 pieces of feedback in response. Four main interest groups were represented: the tourism industry, central government agencies, concerned citizens and academia. Notably, none of these groups questioned the accuracy of the problem statement in Pristine, popular… imperilled? On the basis that no one denied the mounting environmental pressures described in the report, I set out to identify a very short list of policies that could make a real difference. This report is the result of that exercise. The shortlist was developed from the feedback provided by respondents, as well as informal comments picked up along the way. In general, the focus was on identifying interventions that could materially reduce tourism-related environmental pressures while also being practical. Where possible, consideration was also given to interventions with fewer economic side-effects and those that might further the ability of Māori to exercise tino rangatiratanga, kaitiakitanga and manaakitanga. 1 See https://www.pce.parliament.nz/publications/pristine-popular-imperilled-the-environmental-consequences-of-projected- tourism-growth. 1 – Introduction I have chosen to promote four concrete policy proposals that – if implemented – would help to address some of the major environmental pressures that I have described. They are: • Introducing a departure tax that reflects the environmental cost of flying internationally from 4 New Zealand and use the resulting revenues to support the development of low-carbon aviation technologies and provide a source of climate finance for Pacific Island nations (chapter two). • Making any future central government funding for tourism infrastructure conditional on environmental criteria and consistent with the community’s vision for tourism development – as expressed in a local destination management plan (chapter three). • Clarifying and, where necessary, strengthening the tools that the Department of Conservation (DOC) has to address the loss of wildness and natural quiet that had – prior to Covid-19 – occurred in the most popular parts of the conservation estate (chapter four). • Introducing stronger requirements for self-contained freedom camping and improving oversight of the process for certifying compliance (chapter five). These four proposals do not pretend to be a comprehensive response to the totality of the issues raised in my first report. But each would provide real leverage in respect of some of the environmental pressures I have identified. Each proposal is given its own chapter and should be judged on its own merits. While each proposal stands alone, all four are informed by a common framing of the problem. The balance of this introduction explains why these proposals should be considered now, and what reform principles should guide the conversation. Is this the right time to consider such proposals? Barely three months after Pristine, popular… imperilled? was released Covid-19 brought tourism to a halt in New Zealand and around the world. International visitor arrivals to New Zealand have declined to levels last seen in the 1950s, prior to the emergence of long-haul air travel.2 Weekly international arrivals numbered in the hundreds during April, May and June 2020. During the equivalent period in 2019 arrivals numbered between 40,000 and 80,000 per week.3 The cessation of international tourism has threatened the commercial viability of many of New Zealand’s tourism-related businesses. International tourists have traditionally accounted for around 40 per cent of all tourism spending in New Zealand. Spending associated with an increase in domestic tourism has made up some of the shortfall,4 but it seems likely that total tourism spending will still fall significantly overall. Understandably, the Government responded to the sharp economic contraction with a broad package of support measures. While the majority of these were economy-wide in nature, tourism businesses have been significant beneficiaries. Estimates from ANZ Bank New Zealand indicate that tourism businesses received $1.35 billion (12.4 per cent) of the $10.9 billion in wage subsidy payments made before 22 May 2020.5 Tourism also received