Climate change response timeframe at odds with visions
An independent reference group established by the Ministry for the Environment advised the government this week to take decisions with urgency so climate adaptation approaches could be "fully in place" by 2045.
That timeline appears at odds with the multibillion-dollar visions for 2100 unveiled by the joint Dunedin City Council-Otago Regional Council South Dunedin Future programme earlier this year.
The reference group's report — "A proposed approach for New Zealand's adaptation framework" — was silent on "proactive buyouts", but said any expectation of the government stepping in to buy out properties should end in 20 years' time.
South Dunedin Future programme manager Jonathan Rowe said it was not clear how the reference group's proposed 20-year transition period would work.
"It's not clear how the proposed transition period and 'no buyouts beyond 2045' would work in practice," Mr Rowe said.
"This approach would appear to constrain options for adapting to climate change over the long term.
"That said, the report acknowledges that there is no 'right' answer to how long a transition should take.
"A transition period of more than 20 years would likely be required to enable the types of changes envisaged for South Dunedin."
Along with proactive buyouts the report did not address "urban regeneration", an approach that aimed to provide a vision of a "safer and better" future for areas in the firing line of the consequences of climate change, Mr Rowe said.
Urban regeneration included creating new housing and urban developments that offered commercial returns and attracted private investment, he said.
Still, Mr Rowe welcomed the reference group's report and said the work represented a step towards long-awaited legislation and regulations on climate adaptation.
Many of the actions noted in the report, particularly around gathering and communicating information about climate change-related risks, and council planning, were already under way for South Dunedin, and across Dunedin, Mr Rowe said.
Further, he welcomed the "broad interpretation" of the reference group's proposed "beneficiary pays" approach to climate adaptation work, saying effective adaptation would typically benefit the government, councils, property owners and others.
"At the same time, it's important to recognise that many stakeholders will be impacted by climate change through little or no fault of their own, and some will also lack the ability to pay," he said.
"The government's adaptation framework will need to balance these trade-offs, providing clear and consistent national guidance while retaining flexibility for local decision-making and implementation."
The reference group said due to the "place-based" nature of climate change risks, planning for climate adaptation should be done by local councils.
But it noted local government faced funding challenges and said there was evidence of "underinvestment" in New Zealand.
"People and markets should adjust to a changing climate over time," the report said.
"This means that people should be responsible for knowing their risks and making their own decisions on whether to stay in a high-risk area or move away."
The group said there was at present an expectation central and local government would step in to cover costs for individual homeowners, despite there being no legal or policy framework to require or guide these decisions.
"In the past, local and central government have offered buyouts of up to the full value of properties affected by natural hazards.
"These decisions reduce incentives for people to understand and manage their own risk, can distort property prices and have given rise to an expectation that buyouts will continue, creating a moral hazard."
hamish.maclean@odt.co.nz
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
4 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Who will pay to protect communities from flooding?
Canterbury councils want to know who pays for preparing for climate change as major storms and flooding threaten local communities. Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has warned a lack of clarity over who pays for measures to protect communities from sea level rise, flooding and weather events could leave ratepayers with a hefty bill. The concern follows the release of a report from the Ministry for the Environment's Independent Reference Group on Climate Adaptation, which raises the question of who should pay. Waimakariri District Council chief executive Jeff Millward said his council is beginning work on a climate adaptation strategy as it looks to prepare for the threat of sea level rise and the growing number of severe weather events. For earthquakes and flooding events, the council has insurance through the local authority protection plan, which covers 40 percent and the balance coming from Government or loan funding. But preparing for sea level rise and flood mitigation measures costs money, Mr Millward said. As the risks become more severe, there may be changes to what insurance is available, or even ''no insurance at all''. ''Does it fall back on the ratepayer or the taxpayer? It is a bit more complicated and a lot more discussion has to happen.'' Councils already have clauses in District Plans identifying natural hazards and impose regulations such as minimum distances from the waterline and raising floor levels to 1.5 metres off the ground. ''People like living near the beaches or rivers, but it puts those properties at risk, so there is going to be a lot of modelling work done to identify the risks and develop and array of tools,'' Millward said. Kaikōura District Council chief executive Will Doughty said the region's councils are working on adaptation plans, following the launch of the Canterbury Climate Partnership Plan by the Canterbury Mayoral Forum in December. ''One thing is for sure - there is going to be a bill. I think we do need clarity and it is a conversation we need to have. ''I think the steps Canterbury has taken as a region to put that action plan in place has put us in a good position. ''It's a much bigger issue than any one particular district and the more joint action we can be doing the better.'' The recent report warned it may not be sustainable for government buy-outs to continue for properties in at risk areas, with weather events such as those facing the Nelson region expected to become yearly events in some areas. It recommends phasing out those buy-outs over a 20 year period. Adaptation measures, such as flood schemes, sea walls and infrastructure, should be funded by those who benefit, the report advised. On Monday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told RNZ the government will not be able to keep bailing out homeowners after major floods. The Hurunui District Council has completed climate adaptation plans in partnership with its beach communities. It has led to the council buying a $3.8m block of land south of Amberley to prepare for future events. Residents from at-risk communities will be able to secure sections by paying a targeted rate over the next 30 years. The plot of land would be attached to their existing property, so the two properties cannot be sold separately. When the time comes, residents could transport their house to the new section, or build onsite. Council chief executive Hamish Dobbie the issue is complex and councils need some guidance from government. ''Some guidance suggests we should be involved at all. We should only be involved in roads and pipes. ''There needs to be a good sensible conversation about this.'' LGNZ vice president Campbell Barry said the ministry's report has failed to address some concerns previously raised by local government. ''It's good to see the report's sense of urgency. Our submission on climate adaptation in June last year stressed that action is needed now. ''We need to have better policies and frameworks in place to cater for increasingly severe and frequent weather events. ''Local government can't afford to have another Cyclone Gabrielle. The aftermath of a significant weather event like that comes with massive financial, infrastructure and human costs for communities.'' Barry said the lack of clarity meant the burden of paying for adaptation was likely to fall on ratepayers. Luxon said Climate Change Minister Simon Watts had been working to get a bipartisan view on how to deal long term with major weather events. - LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
Scoop
20 hours ago
- Scoop
As The Sea Level Rises, Who Will Pay? Councils Seek Answers
North Canterbury's councils want to know who pays for preparing for climate change as major storms and flooding threatens local communities. Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has warned a lack of clarity over who pays for measures to protect communities from sea level rise, flooding and weather events could leave ratepayers with a hefty bill. The concern follows the release of a report from the Ministry for the Environment's Independent Reference Group on Climate Adaptation, which raises the question of who should pay. Waimakariri District Council chief executive Jeff Millward said his council is beginning work on a climate adaptation strategy as it looks to prepare for the threat of sea level rise and the growing number of severe weather events. For earthquakes and flooding events, the council has insurance through the local authority protection plan, which covers 40 percent and the balance coming from Government or loan funding. But preparing for sea level rise and flood mitigation measures costs money, Mr Millward said. As the risks become more severe, there may be changes to what insurance is available, or even ''no insurance at all''. ''Does it fall back on the ratepayer or the taxpayer? It is a bit more complicated and a lot more discussion has to happen.'' Councils already have clauses in District Plans identifying natural hazards and impose regulations such as minimum distances from the waterline and raising floor levels to 1.5 metres off the ground. ''People like living near the beaches or rivers, but it puts those properties at risk, so there is going to be a lot of modelling work done to identify the risks and develop and array of tools,'' Millward said. Kaikōura District Council chief executive Will Doughty said the region's councils are working on adaptation plans, following the launch of the Canterbury Climate Partnership Plan by the Canterbury Mayoral Forum in December. ''One thing is for sure - there is going to be a bill. I think we do need clarity and it is a conversation we need to have. ''I think the steps Canterbury has taken as a region to put that action plan in place has put us in a good position. ''It's a much bigger issue than any one particular district and the more joint action we can be doing the better.'' The recent report warned it may not be sustainable for government buy-outs to continue for properties in at risk areas, with weather events such as those facing the Nelson region expected to become yearly events in some areas. It recommends phasing out those buy-outs over a 20 year period. Adaptation measures, such as flood schemes, sea walls and infrastructure, should be funded by those who benefit, the report advised. On Monday, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told RNZ the government will not be able to keep bailing out homeowners after major floods. The Hurunui District Council has completed climate adaptation plans in partnership with its beach communities. It has led to the council buying a $3.8m block of land south of Amberley to prepare for future events. Residents from at-risk communities will be able to secure sections by paying a targeted rate over the next 30 years. The plot of land would be attached to their existing property, so the two properties cannot be sold separately. When the time comes, residents could transport their house to the new section, or build onsite. Council chief executive Hamish Dobbie the issue is complex and councils need some guidance from government. ''Some guidance suggests we should be involved at all. We should only be involved in roads and pipes. ''There needs to be a good sensible conversation about this.'' LGNZ vice president Campbell Barry said the ministry's report has failed to address some concerns previously raised by local government. ''It's good to see the report's sense of urgency. Our submission on climate adaptation in June last year stressed that action is needed now. ''We need to have better policies and frameworks in place to cater for increasingly severe and frequent weather events. ''Local government can't afford to have another Cyclone Gabrielle. The aftermath of a significant weather event like that comes with massive financial, infrastructure and human costs for communities.'' Barry said the lack of clarity meant the burden of paying for adaptation was likely to fall on ratepayers. Luxon said Climate Change Minister Simon Watts had been working to get a bipartisan view on how to deal long term with major weather events.
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
New Finance Rules Risk Cutting Off Rural Lending
Federated Farmers is calling for new proposed 'green' finance rules to be scrapped, warning they're ideologically driven, unworkable, and risk doing real harm to rural communities. In a letter sent to Ministers and key officials on July 11, the organisation outlined a series of serious concerns with the Sustainable Finance Taxonomy. "This framework is fundamentally flawed," Federated Farmers banking spokesperson Mark Hooper says. "It has been created without meaningful input from working farmers, it imposes unrealistic standards, and it risks cutting off financial services to legitimate, productive rural businesses." The Sustainable Finance Taxonomy is being developed by the Centre for Sustainable Finance and the Ministry for the Environment to provide a consistent framework for defining what is 'green' or 'sustainable' in financial markets. Federated Farmers says it would create major risks for New Zealand's agricultural sector and is urging the Government to halt the process entirely. "One of our core concerns is the lack of practical farming expertise involved in developing the taxonomy," Hooper says. "There are no hands-on farmers involved with the Technical Advisory Group. Instead, it's full of shiny-shoed bankers, sustainability advisors, and forestry lobbyists. "If you're designing a finance framework for agriculture, farmers must be at the table. This is a total governance failure." Without real-world knowledge of farming systems, the framework fails to reflect the operational realities and sustainability efforts already embedded in New Zealand's primary sector. For example, the proposed taxonomy defines 'green' farming as producing less than one tonne of CO equivalent per hectare per year. "This threshold is so low that no working New Zealand farm could realistically qualify, even though we're home to the most emissions-efficient food producers in the world," Hooper says. "It sends a message that no farm is green, regardless of how well it's managed or how efficient it is." Another concern is that productive farmland would be disqualified from being considered 'green' if it was ever a natural ecosystem since 2008. "This ignores decades of sustainable stewardship and penalises farms that have long been operating responsibly," Hooper says. The proposal also includes requirements that Federated Farmers says are simply unworkable. One rule would require 80% of fertiliser use to come from low-emission products within three years - a target Hooper says isn't feasible. "Those alternatives are not yet economically viable or widely available in New Zealand. Farmers can't use what doesn't exist." He says another major burden is the requirement for Farm Environment Plans to include extensive biophysical documentation. "While many farmers already have FEPs, the new standard would dramatically increase complexity and cost, particularly for small and medium-sized farms. "This is a compliance nightmare with no clear benefit." Despite the potential impact on rural capital flows and lending, there has been no economic analysis of how the taxonomy might affect farm businesses, landowners or rural lenders. "For a framework that could fundamentally alter access to finance, this is an unacceptable oversight," Hooper says. Federated Farmers also warns the taxonomy duplicates many requirements already covered by national regulation or industry programmes. "This adds unnecessary red tape without delivering meaningful environmental or financial benefits," Hooper says At the same time, by defining sustainability through a fixed list of approved practices and technologies - such as specific fertilisers or methane inhibitors - the taxonomy risks excluding innovative new solutions still in development. "This will lock us into today's technology and penalise tomorrow's breakthroughs," Hooper warns. While the taxonomy is currently non-binding, the design intent is to become mandatory. That shift would make it harder for legitimate farm businesses to access lending, insurance, or investment - not because they're unviable, but because they don't meet an arbitrary 'green' standard, Hooper says. "This would create a two-tier financial system, where productive and lawful farms are denied services because they don't fit a narrow ideological framework." Federated Farmers supports the intent of two Members' Bills currently before Parliament, introduced by Andy Foster MP and Mark Cameron MP, which aim to prevent financial institutions from making lending decisions based on ideology or reputational risk. "The taxonomy, in its current form, directly undermines that intent," Hooper says. Federated Farmers is urging the Government to disband the taxonomy process entirely, warning it will do more harm than good. "This is not a path to sustainable finance. "It is ideologically driven, practically unworkable, and risks serious harm to rural New Zealand," Hooper says.
