[CEA (Cumulative Effects Assessment) as a component of EIA]

By

Acknowledgement

I would take this opportunity to thank my research supervisor; family and friends for their support and guidance without which this research would not have been possible.

DECLARATION

I, [type your full first names and surname here], declare that the contents of this thesis represent my own unaided work, and that the thesis has not previously been submitted for academic examination towards any qualification. Furthermore, it represents my own opinions and not necessarily those of the University.

Signed __________________ Date _________________

Abstract

Cumulative effects are incrementally additive effects which become significant at a certain point. Cumulative effects assessment (CEA) is the process of assessing the cumulative effects of a project or policy. Such cumulative effects currently form a major environmental issue in New Zealand, as does the process of CEA. The literature surrounding CEA shows in explicit detail that it is a very challenging process, fraught with difficulties. Cumulative effects are inherent within the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and are required to be addressed by local authorities when; developing plans, assessing resource consent applications, and undertaking other tasks in order to prevent the cumulative degradation of our country's resources. This research undertaken in this dissertation investigates the different approaches that six local authorities have taken towards addressing cumulative effects and explores the constraints that each of those local authorities face. A case study approach was adopted that involved semi-structured interviews with both a policy planner and a consent planner from each of the following case study local authorities. Literature surrounding the CEA process was reviewed throughout the research aspect of this dissertation, and the common themes and constraints of CEA practice were compared to form an evaluative framework that presented the findings. The findings showed that the primary approach adopted is the strategic setting of qualitative and quantitative standards through plans (both regional and district). There is a clear difference between the local authorities in the level of consideration that each gives to cumulative effects within their own various plans. From primary consideration at the plan development stage, down to the inclusion of specific rules and assessment matters and project level CEA. The lower the level of consideration within a plan the more likely it is that project level CEA is carried out hence more specific, detailed CEA is promoted. Throughout the local authorities studied, a range of methods for regulating adverse cumulative effects were adopted. A major weakness of practice is the lack of thresholds (or means) for determining when an increment will become significant and be 'the straw that broke the camel's back'. This determination of cumulative significance forms the crux of the difficulties surrounding CEA. The 'case by case' approach adopted by judicial determinations stemming from the RMA makes assessing individual applications for their contribution to cumulative effects a major challenge. Proving any cause-effect linkages of a significant cumulative effect is also difficult when dealing with small scale increments. The interpretation of the precedent effect and permitted baseline issues provide other factors that add ...