Decision all about values

Public consultation on the South-East Marine Protection Forum’s proposed marine protection areas for Otago’s coastline ends later month. Pictured, Shag Point. Photo: Gerard O'Brien.

Sustainability is a social contract.  It often depends on individuals setting aside self-interest for the sake of long-term benefits that everyone can share.  The current process of selecting marine protected areas  (MPAs) along Otago’s coast has been splendid, inclusive and thorough. It now gives us all the very best chance of finding a just, and therefore enduring, solution to management of our coastal ecosystems and fisheries.  But we can only achieve this if lots of citizens of all persuasions now speak up for their values and vision.

Public mobilisation is essential because there is a silent majority of people out there who favour marine protection but who will miss out if they don’t speak up loud, and speak up fast.  We have until  December 20, just two weeks away and in the midst of the Christmas rush, to lodge a submission in the last formal stage of the South-East Marine Protection Forum’s public consultation process.

Sophal Chhun, an  environmental economist from Cambodia, completed his PhD at the University of Otago’s Centre for Sustainability in 2013.  He had 1055 randomly selected New Zealanders perform a choice experiment, a type of virtual online auction where they had to choose between conflicting outcomes for our coastal ecosystems.  Dr Chhun’s results were startling!  On average New Zealanders considered biodiversity restoration (marine reserves) to be by far the most important priority: 2.18 times more important than recreational fishing,  2.30 times more important than Maori marine management (taiapure and mataitai), and 2.35 times more important than commercial fishing interests.  Obviously, New Zealanders prioritise biodiversity, they are also fair minded. They want fishers and Maori to also have a reasonable and about equal share of the fish pie once biodiversity is protected. 

The public’s priority ranking is diametrically opposed to our Government’s investment priorities and the extent of our coastal waters that are so far dedicated to marine protection.  In rough terms, the Ministry of Primary Industries invests the vast majority of its marine research and management to support commercial interests, a small amount for recreational fishing.  A mere sliver is invested to support Maori kaitiaki who do a fantastic job of integrating protection and fishing in local areas.  Less than 1% of our nearshore waters are within marine reserves for biodiversity restoration or managed as mataitai or taiapure to support Maori management approaches.  Frankly, the areas in protection close to our coasts are far too small to fully function ecologically as biodiversity reserves.

Dr Chhun’s choice experiment also predicted the New Zealand public would be willing to increase their annual taxes by a whopping $276 million a year to achieve a best-case scenario that maximises our collective social wellbeing.  That scenario targeted best biodiversity protection, medium expression for Maori practices, medium restriction of commercial fishing and severe restriction of recreational fishing.  That voluntary increase in taxes is about the same as the Department of Conservation gets each year to protect and manage a third of New Zealand’s land area. Clearly, the Government is out of touch with the environmental values and wants of mainstream New Zealand.

The recreational and commercial fishers spokespeople are vociferous and effective in getting their way.  I expect them to mount a well-organised submission process that might trump  our collective needs unless the silent majority speaks up.  All sides in this debate, including conservationists and fishers, are often economical with the truth about the process, exaggerate risks and impacts on  MPAs and exploit the unknowns as though the political decision to insert marine protected areas will be won through scientific debate and facts.  I think it is more about values.  Submissions to the South-East Marine Protection Forum need not be technical, scientific, long or professionally crafted: they just have to say what you want to happen in your place and reflect what you believe in. Locals see and care most.  So let’s all have our say for us and our kids coming after us.

- Henrik Moller is a professor emeritus at University of Otago’s Centre for Sustainability.