The Government is signalling a shift in sentiment around environmental management with plans for new legislation that will centre on economic gain and productivity. Despite this shift, safeguarding the environment remains an objective of the proposed resource management reform [1] and the concepts of nature-positive infrastructure (NPI) and nature-based solutions offer the opportunity to view environmental enhancement as a positive partner to development, rather than as a hindrance to growth and good economic outcomes.

We considered in our last article whether the resource management regime in New Zealand facilitates implementation of NPI in our built environment and touched on some opportunities for reform. We also assessed that while the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) does not expressly provide for NPI, the trend in regulatory instruments developed under the RMA has been increasingly to require land use activities to better protect our natural resources. This article will consider opportunities to proactively provide for NPI in a more directive manner in New Zealand’s resource management regime and beyond, including examples from overseas jurisdictions where the concept is increasingly gaining traction. 

Regulatory reform and policy direction

Shift from effects-based to outcomes-focused legislation

Reform of the resource management regime remains a hot topic and presents an opportunity for legislators to reconsider the purpose and objectives of the resource management system. The Natural and Built Environment Act 2023 (NBEA) (prior to being repealed [2]) would have changed the landscape by replacing the effects-based regime under the RMA to one that is outcomes-focused. This shift would have required a more aspirational and forward-thinking approach to land use and development to achieve specified environmental outcomes.

Phase three of the Government’s plan to reform the resource management system is intended to involve replacing the RMA with new legislation based on the enjoyment of property rights, while ensuring good environmental outcomes [3]. Although guiding principles have been outlined [4], the exact form and focus of any reform is still unknown. A shift from effects-based to outcomes-focused legislation remains possible, though the content is likely to be quite different to the NBEA.

Overseas example: The Environment Act 2021

An example of directive legislation requiring positive environmental outcomes is the United Kingdom’s Environment Act 2021 [5]. This Act sets a global precedent for legislation that requires development projects to include sustainability and environmental enhancement initiatives in order to obtain approval. The Act mandates that all developments must achieve a biodiversity net gain (BNG) of at least 10% to be maintained over 30 years, where BNG is defined as an approach to development that aims to leave the natural environment in a “measurably better state” than it was beforehand. The percentage of BNG of a development will be measured through ecological appraisals against a national metric.

We will consider the Environment Act in more detail in our next article, including key factors that would need to be considered if New Zealand were to adopt something similar in future RMA reform. 

Other policy direction

The development of new National Policy Statements (NPS) could also be an opportunity to introduce NPI principles in New Zealand. Given the Government’s focus on development of infrastructure [6], including roading, it could set national direction on how new infrastructure should integrate with the natural environment and achieve positive environmental outcomes through principles such as NPI. Frameworks such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN’s) Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions [7] can provide an opportunity to incorporate guidance and criteria for NPI. 

An NPS could be developed to require nature-positive outcomes for specific infrastructure projects or sectors, such as:

• An NPS for roading and transport infrastructure development that takes a regenerative approach to land management, providing direction to restore habitats and enhance biodiversity. This could lead to the incorporation of features like green bridges and ecological corridors into roading projects, and revegetation requirements.
• An NPS for three waters services infrastructure (water, wastewater, stormwater) with outcomes such as achieving minimum water quality limits, utilisation of catchment management and riparian buffers, and waterbody restoration. (Standards for acceptable discharge and mitigating environmental risks to rivers and beaches are part of the Government’s Local Water Done Well policy [8], currently being implemented.)

Other opportunities to encourage nature-positive infrastructure 

Funding

NPI could also be encouraged via funding rather than legislation. Canada has invested in public funding for nature-based climate solutions rather than creating purpose-built regulation. An example is the Nature Smart Climate Solutions Fund, a $1.4 billion, ten-year fund to reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions by 5-7 megatonnes by 2030. The fund’s purpose is to support projects that conserve, restore, and enhance wetlands, peatlands, and grasslands to store and capture carbon [9].

Biodiversity credit system

The Ministry for the Environment and the Department of Conservation consulted late last year on a biodiversity credit system intended to incentivise protection and restoration of native wildlife in New Zealand [10]. This system would complement the NPS for indigenous biodiversity (NPS-IB) by recognising and incentivising landholders to take actions that protect and restore nature, which will contribute to the NPS-IB objective of ensuring at least no overall loss in indigenous biodiversity. 

This would take a market-based approach to accelerate investment in biodiversity and nature-based solutions by introducing a new environmental market (which could be similar to the Emissions Trading Scheme) for biodiversity credits, to allow people and organisations to finance and claim recognition for actions on land that protect and enhance nature. This could help to facilitate greater uptake of NPI in development by directing investment into projects that achieve positive environmental outcomes and protection.

Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosures

In late 2023, the Task Force on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) [11] released its final framework for nature-related disclosures. This framework provides guidance to companies and financial institutions for assessing, disclosing and managing nature-related risks and impacts. The framework seeks to recognise the importance of nature and biodiversity in business and financial decisions and enable organisations and investors to factor in nature-related risks to their decision making. 

New Zealand has already introduced legislation for implementation of climate-related disclosures [12]. Similar legislation to require nature-related disclosures, while likely to apply to significant players in financial markets only, could also encourage businesses to incorporate nature-based solutions into planning and decision making to contribute to “on the ground” positive nature outcomes. 

Opportunity for change

New Zealand’s reforms can create opportunities for NPI alongside economic growth. There are a range of ways to provide for NPI in areas that are of particular focus for the Government, including infrastructure development and incentivising land use decisions that facilitate positive environmental outcomes. Whether or how such opportunities will be pursued remains to be seen.

Our next article will focus on the UK’s Environment Act and consider its potential application in New Zealand. 

Footnotes

[1] Speech to the New Zealand Planning Institute | Beehive.govt.nz
[2] Repealed by the Resource Management (Natural and Built Environment and Spatial Planning Repeal and Interim Fast-track Consenting) Act 2023.
[3] Speech to the New Zealand Planning Institute | Beehive.govt.nz
[4] See Government unveils its plan for RMA reform (minterellison.co.nz)
[5] Environment Act 2021, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/30/contents/enacted. 
[6] For example, the commitment to a National Infrastructure Agency in the National and NZ First Coalition Agreement to prioritise regional and national projects of significance, prioritise strategic infrastructure to improve the resilience of heavy industry and establish a Regional Infrastructure Fund; and the commitment in the National and ACT Coalition Agreement to institute long-term city and regional infrastructure  deals and reform the RMA to make consenting of new infrastructure easier.  
[7] IUCN (2020). Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions. A user-friendly framework for the verification, design and scaling up of NbS. First edition. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2020-020-En.pdf 
[8] Local_Water_Done_Well_policy_document.pdf (nationbuilder.com)
[9] Government of Canada “Nature Smart Climate Solutions Fund” (8 March 2023) https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-funding/programs/nature-smart-climate-solutions-fund.html
[10] Ministry for the Environment, Exploring a biodiversity credit system for Aotearoa New Zealand https://consult.environment.govt.nz/biodiversity/nz-biodiversity-credit-system/ 
[11] An international initiative whose objective is to develop a framework for organisations to address environmental risks and opportunities to facilitate channelling capital into positive environmental action.
[12] The Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021 makes climate-related disclosures mandatory for organisations such as listed companies, insurers, and banks, to ensure effects of climate change are considered in business, investment, lending, and insurance decisions, and help climate reporting entities better demonstrate their consideration of climate issues.


This article was co-authored by Olivia Pahulu, a Senior Solicitor in our Environment team.