Report - Environmental Protection Authority

‘Ko te pae tawhiti, whaia kia tata. Ko te pae tata, whakamāua kia tina’
Tangoio Marae
Māori National Network Wānanga
Cultural Risk Assessment & Future Planning
Tangoio Marae, Napier – 6 & 7 May 2010
Draft Report
The wānanga was graciously hosted by Marangatūhetāua or Ngāti Tū at Tangoio Marae near Napier.
After the initial pōwhiri, kaumātua Bevan Taylor provided members with an introduction to the marae,
the region and its history, as well as sharing some of the kōrero about the wharenui.
Toi Te Huatahi alias Toi Kairākau, the famous navigator and seafarer established his southern most Pa
at Tangoio. From his son Awanuiārangi descended Te Koaupari paramount and founding chief of
Ōtātara Pa. From Te Koaupari descended Tukapua first founding ancestor of Ngāti Tū.
The wharenui itself is illustrated by the following expression; E tū ana a Pūnanga te Wāo hei ahuru
mōwai mo te hunga, Stand O Te Pūnanga te Wāo as a sanctuary for your people.
Ngā mihi aroha ki a koutou te Whānau o Marangatūhetāua. Tēnā koutou mo ō mihi mai ki a
mātou mo te mahi manaaki tangata. Nō reira tēnei ano te mihi, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā
mai tātou katoa
Executive Summary
Purpose
At the Annual Māori National Network hui held in September 2009 at Te Puea Memorial Marae in
Auckland, members agreed to focus their next two day wānanga on cultural risk assessment models
and future planning for the Network.
Day 1 involved presentations, workshops and discussion sessions providing guidance on identifying
and assessing cultural effects specific to Māori arising from HSNO applications. Presentations were
provided by ERMA New Zealand staff and Network members involved in developing models for
cultural risk assessment.
Day 2 was facilitated as a strategic planning session providing Network members with the chance to
brainstorm about where they would like to see the Network in 10 years time. This was the first
opportunity for the Network to undertake ‘blue skies’ thinking about its future and involved an initial
re-cap of the journey the Network has been on since its inaugural hui back in 2003.
1

Approximately 40 Network members attended the wānanga along with members of Ngā Kaihautū and
ERMA staff.
Summarised outcomes
The following points summarise the issues addressed during the hui and therefore reflect the overall
outcomes for participants.
An improved awareness of the importance of clearly identifying effects specific to Māori in
HSNO Act application proposals.
An understanding of the concept of risk as it applies to HSNO Act decision making and the
way ERMA New Zealand assesses the risks, costs and benefits of application proposals.
Information sharing about new tools to facilitate effective consultation and alternative models
for assessing cultural risk and opportunity.
Information sharing about proposals to establish a new Environmental Protection Authority
and the potential implications for iwi/Māori.
A long term view of the potential of the Māori National Network in the environmental
management sector.
Facilitation
Tipene Wilson from Maximize Consultancy Ltd (and Māori National Network member) facilitated the
two day wānanga using his experience with the Network and in business and strategic planning.
Feedback received from participants was extremely positive with regard to the facilitation.
Participants noted that the style, nature and knowledge that Tipene brought to the role were
instrumental to the success of the hui. ERMA New Zealand is extremely grateful to Tipene for
undertaking the facilitation for this hui and for his ongoing contributions to the Māori National
Network.
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
2

Day 1: Cultural Risk Assessment
Identifying effects
ERMA staff facilitated a session aimed at improving the identification of effects specific to Māori
during consultation and public submission stages of HSNO applications. The importance of
identifying effects specific to Māori was highlighted, noting that the HSNO Act includes provisions
that require these issues be considered in decision making. Whilst identifying general environmental
or health effects in submissions is useful and valuable, it is the effects specific to Māori that provide a
point of difference and emphasis in terms of Part 2 of Act.
Members were advised of the type of information ERMA New Zealand needs when undertaking its
risk assessment:
a) What the effect is (eg, poses a negative effect to the mauri of waterways);
b) How the effect might occur or what are the possible pathways to exposure (eg, through the aerial
distribution of a vertebrate toxic agent; through the decaying of a poisoned animal carcass in the
water);
c) What evidence is noticed or might be noticed as a result of the activity (eg, fewer tuna present in
the waterway; discolouration and peculiar taste); and
d) What weight would be given to the effect (eg, how significant are tuna to the affected whānau,
hapū, or iwi, and therefore is a depletion of tuna harmful in terms of tikanga and mātauranga
Māori; is the waterway a significant body of water for healing and therefore its healing properties
might be compromised – how significant is this?).
A copy of the presentation is provided in Appendix 1.
Workshop:
Members were separated into five workshop groups to practice clearly identifying effects specific to
Māori working through a) to d) above. The scenarios provided were:
- An application to sequence native and/or valued species (2 groups)
- The field testing of GM cows in outdoor containment
- The use of methyl bromide in the fumigation of import and export goods
- The release of a biological control agent
Participants presented their workshop findings back to the group and a general discussion followed.
Most groups were able to clearly describe how the various effects could occur, but only some were
able to identify the types of evidence they would expect to see. Most groups found it challenging to
consider weighting each effect and time constraints did not allow sufficient opportunity to discuss this
issue more fully. Overall the effects identified can be summarised into three key themes which
applied across each scenario universally (a full list of the effects identified is provided in Appendix 2).
Kaitiakitanga – members recognised that all of the scenario applications posed both potential risks and
potential benefits to kaitiakitanga in terms of their ability to manage and enhance the whenua, flora
and fauna, waterways, air and other taonga.
Manawhenua – most groups noted concern about the ‘power’ relationship between applicants and
tangata whenua groups and the subsequent impacts this might have on their ability to effectively
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
3

manage the resources in their own rohe. They also noted, however, that in some cases the scenarios
had a potential positive impact on their mana in terms of providing tools and options for improved
managment. However the reality of these beneficial effects relied significantly on the nature of the
relationship with the applicants.
Whakapapa – Members identified that all the scenarios had a range of implications with regard to
whakapapa. The GM scenario posed direct impacts through the manipulation of genetic material,
whilst the others posed more indirect effects by changing or disregarding the relationship between
species. Although some beneficial health, conservation management and biosecurity effects were
identified, members noted that because of the importance of whakapapa to Māori, the potential
negative effects were likely to be of more weight and significance.
Post workshop discussion:
As a result of the workshop exercise ERMA staff reinforced the importance of iwi/Māori providing
good information during consultation and/or public submission processes to enable a more beneficial
decision making outcome. It is important for iwi to be articulate about describing their effects – they
need to tell their story. There was also some discussion about the value of iwi/ Māori groups making
their iwi management plans available to ERMA New Zealand. They are a further source of useful
information about issues and sites of significance to iwi/ Māori groups. They can also contribute to
risk assessments, or to the consultative advice ERMA staff provide to applicants.
A number of questions were raised about the mechanisms for engagement between applicants and iwi/
Māori. ERMA staff noted that the HSNO Act does not require engagement but the Authority
recognised that the only way to get the information they needed was for the applicant to engage with
iwi/Māori. However, ERMA’s experiences indicate that applicants often do not achieve an optimal
outcome from consultation. Some Network members are part of an ERMA facilitated review advisory
group currently reviewing ERMA New Zealand’s policies for consultation with Māori, to make
improvements both to the consultation process and hopefully, to the outcomes.
Participants noted frustration at the level of significance afforded Māori issues in the HSNO Act (ie,
‘take into account’). Some discussion followed about the likelihood of a review of the HSNO Act in
the next few years which may provide an opportunity for people to submit their views. Some clarity
about the relationship of the HSNO Act with other pieces of legislation (eg, the RMA and Biosecurity
Act) was also provided by ERMA staff noting their complimentarity across the environmental
management regime.
In concluding the session, ERMA staff reminded members that they are always available to meet or
discuss any applications or related issues. There is also a small fund available to support the active
engagement of Māori with the HSNO decision making process.
Assessment of effects
Asela Atapattu (New Organisms Applications Manager) provided a presentation explaining the
difference between risk and hazard. He noted that hazard is a factual description of something that
could cause harm and risk is based on a range of assumptions about the likelihood and magnitude of a
hazard occurring (see Appendix 3).
Asela also provided some information on the risk assessment framework used when processing HSNO
applications. When a HSNO application is submitted to ERMA New Zealand a process of ‘effect
identification’ is undertaken and then the risk of that effect occurring is assessed based on a range of
information. Once complete the Authority is tasked with considering the risks and weighing them
against each other. Where beneficial effects outweigh adverse effects an approval is able to be given.
4
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010

Participants were then divided back into their workshop groups and asked to use the ERMA
framework for assessment (ie, likelihood and magnitude) to consider the effects identified in the first
session. It was hoped that this session would trigger discussions about whether the existing
framework is adequate, and provided ideas for possible improvements or alternatives.
Post Workshop Discussion:
Participants found it extremely challenging to attribute likelihood and magnitude ratings against
effects. They recognised that for many risks of a specifically cultural nature there was often
significant uncertainty where sufficient information was lacking. Several participants also expressed
discomfort at having to base their ratings on a range of assumptions. At the end of the discussion
participants all noted the need for a precuationary approach to be taken.
With the difficulties above noted, participants were keen to explore other options for risk assessment
that would be more responsive to Māori. They felt a more inclusive approach to assessment would be
useful. They also noted that further information and training would be useful to support iwi/ Māori in
improving the nature and quality of the information provided to the assessment process. They also
recognised the importance of presenting submissions in person so that they can clarify any issues
needing more explanation for the decision making committee.
Presentations
Tangata Whenua Effects Assessment Template
ERMA New Zealand commissioned REPO Consultancy – represented by Tui Shortland and Juliane
Chetham - to develop a Tangata Whenua Effects Assessment template and guideline tailored to HSNO
Act requirements. Network members have for the last several years asked for a template tool and
guide for considering issues raised by HSNO applications to inform the development of impact
assessments and submissions. Tui and Juliane presented their draft template for discussion and
feedback (draft template and guide attached as Appendix 4).
The template and guide use the requirements of the HSNO Act as the foundation for identifying and
considering effects. Participants raised the following issues during discussion:
It is unclear how the template and guide would be used for an application that has national
implications because it is iwi/hapū and/or region specific. However, participants noted that it
could be used effectively by Māori Reference Groups convened to consider HSNO applications.
Suggestions were made to put together a couple of case studies to assist people in using the tool
and the possibilty of using a numerical value (from 1-10) to rank effects.
Some questions and suggestions were raised with regard to the meaning of specific terms (eg,
‘Relationships’ and ‘Māori’) and the possibility of replacing terms like ‘negligible’ with a more
appropriate word. However ,Tui and Juliane noted that people using the tool should define for
themselves the meaning of these words to make it specific to their situation. The template is
provided merely as a guide and a trigger to get people thinking.
Tui and Juliane were congratulated for a good framework. Participants also recognised that there
are a number of tools available though this is the first specifically tailored to HSNO.
ERMA was also acknoweldged for undertaking this project.
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
5

The template and guide will be completed and officially published in 2010 / 2011 and made available
by contacting Kaupapa Kura Taiao staff or through the ERMA New Zealand website.
Using Values to Framework Iwi Assessments of Genetic Engineering (GE)
Mahina-a-Rangi Baker (Ngāti Raukawa ki te tonga, Te Āti Awa ki Whakarongotai and Ngāti
Toarangatira) provided a presentation about a conceptual framework she has developed as part of her
Masters research (Appendix 5). The framework is based on iwi, hapū and whānau specific values to
assess genetic engineering (GE).
The presentation outlined the suite of values her iwi associates with ngārara (insects, reptiles and
taniwha) to demonstrate how those values can be articulated and applied within the framework
developed for iwi assessments of GE. These values are articulated in a korowai framework that
includes kaupapa, tapu, tohu, whakapapa, and mauri looking at how GE might be considered against
them. Mahina-a-Rangi also noted that the framework could be used for considering other situations to
assess potential and risk.
As the wānanga was running behind schedule the final session on research was cancelled.
Day 1 closed at 8.30pm.
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
6

Day 2: Future Horizons – ‘Blue Skies’ Planning
Background
The purpose of conducting this planning process was to begin identifying what both ERMA New
Zealand and Network members want to get out of the Network in the future. One important factor that
provided some guidance for this discussion is that the Network is always founded on the importance of
protecting the sanctity of tikanga Māori.
ERMA staff started the session by providing a brief presentation outlining the origins and activities of
the Māori National Network from its inception in 2003 to today. This included a brief update on the
proposals to be considered by government with regard to the establishment of a new Environmental
Protection Authority that is likely to include ERMA New Zealand.
‘Blue Skies’ Planning Process
Tipene Wilson provided a presentation introducing Network members to a strategic planning process
adapted from the Indigenous Leaders Interactive System (ILIS) Process. The process was designed to
draw on the collective wisdom of the network members in attendance with all able to share ideas and
value the ideas developed in an environment of mutual respect. The process involved identifying
ideas, sharing them with the wider group and then prioritising the ideas to provide a clear ideal
strategic direction for the network. This was a fairly intense session that members seemed to find
entertaining, fun and often challenging.
Workshop ideas and issues
As a result of the workshop planning exercise, participants identified a broad range of ideas about the
possibilities for the Network in the future. Given that an announcement had not yet been made on the
new Environmental Protection Authority, the session was run without imposing boundaries on the
discussion and allowing it to be wide ranging.
Participants were separated into groups and asked - what will the Network look like in 10 years? A
full list of ideas identified during the workshop session can be obtained from Kaupapa Kura Taiao
staff. The following is a summary of the principles and themes prioritised by participants.
Principles
Participants identified a number of principles that they felt applied to the Network regardless of what
form and function it took. They determined that the Māori National Network will always:
be founded on Māori cultural values, knowledge and language as well as actively using the
principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (te Tiriti o Waitangi);
be based on flax roots experience and knowledge;
incorporate tuakana – teina values reflecting the value of kaumātua wisdom and knowledge,
and the vigour and passion of rangatahi;
be kaupapa rather than putea focussed; and
incorporate an educational and promotional role in terms of Māori environmental health and
wellbeing.
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
7

Themes
1. National Body
Participants considered that the Network should, in ten years time, be a nationally recognised,
autonomous body with advisory, educational and promotional roles in the environmental
management sector. It would work across all the relevant environmental agencies and private
sector industry organisations that utilise or impact on natural resources.
In wanting to be efficient and effective in its activities and engagement with organisations,
participants felt it worthwhile to explore the idea of holding an annual week long ‘Māori
Environment Hui’ that involved iwi/Māori organisations, government agencies and private
sector industry. It would serve as a ‘one stop shop’ where information sharing, consultation
initiatives and collaboration could be dealt with in one go on an annual basis.
2. Resourcing
Participants decided the Network should have its own base and structure, and discussed
various mechanisms for funding from Treaty based entitlement to consultancy fees. Some
members felt it needed a centralised base in Wellington, whilst others considered it more
appropriate and effective to have satellite centres that minimise bureaucracy. Regardless of
the model, participants agreed the Network should maximise the use of technology for
communication and knowledge storage, as well as for fully incorporating flax roots, marae
based opportunities.
3. Decision making
There was considerable discussion about who should represent Māori in decision making and
who should be responsible for appointing them. Several models were noted, all of which
reflected the importance of a full understanding and incorporation of Māori values and
tikanga. Participants noted the tension that exists in today’s political and economic
environment between iwi leaders and flax roots practitioners. Regardless of the model chosen
Network members were keen to ensure the Network as a whole had ‘mana’.
4. Complement iwi/Māori structures
In line with the discussions about decision making participants also considered that the
Network should compliment iwi/Māori structures and organisations rather than compete with
them. Many saw the role of the Network as empowering iwi/Māori organisations rather than
seeking to ‘represent’ them.
5. Research
Network members were keen to be more proactively engaged and involved in environmental
research. They also expressed the need to be ‘drivers’ of research, with specific Māori
environmental initiatives and outcomes in mind. In addition, participants felt that, to date, the
Network had useful engagement with young Māori scientists and wanted to continue to
involve them in Network activities, maximising the opportunity to provide mentoring and
guidance.
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
8

6. Global Networking
Participants were keen for the Network to promote international collaboration and knowledge
exchange with other indigenous communities. They felt that it was important to recognise and
incorporate whakawhanaungatanga with other indigenous peoples to build on the
opportunities to make a difference environmentally on a global scale.
7. Education
Finally, participants noted a desire to share its base of Māori specific knowledge and
experience in environmental management with rangatahi through contributing to education
programmes in schools.
Where to from here?
As time was running out and because the discussions were expansive in nature, participants considered
the need to revisit the ideas at future hui with a view to refining them further and developing a
strategic plan for the Network.
Kaupapa Kura Taiao staff will incorporate this into the programmes for upcoming hui and continue to
support the Network in planning its long term future.
The hui concluded with a poroporoaki and lunch.
Any feedback or comment on this report or about the wānanga should be forwarded to:
Linda Faulkner
Manahautū (General Manager Māori)
ERMA New Zealand
PO Box 131
Wellington
linda.faulkner@ermanz.govt.nz
ph: 04 918 4836
fax: 04 914 0433
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
9

Participant List
Abraham Witana Te Rūnanga o Te Rarawa, Kaitaia
Bill Blake Mahia
Bonnie Savage Ngāti Awa, Whakatane
Bronwyn Hunt Te Runanga o Te Rarawa, Kaitaia
Bryce Smith Te Taumata Kaumātua o Ngāpuhi, Kaeo
Dave McKay Dunedin
Des Heke Kaiawha Tauranga
Emma Gibbs-Smith Te Pataka Mātauranga Charitable Trust, Russell
Erica Gregory Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Wellington
Fred Allen Te Atiawa Pipitea Marae, Lower Hutt
Gerry Coates HSNO Committee, Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu, Wellington
Hohepa McLean Te Wheke Atawhai, Opotiki
Janine Copeland Te Wheke Atawhai, Opotiki
Joe Harawira Ngāti Awa Social and Health Services, Whakatane
Joseph Stafford Blenheim
Juliane Chetham REPO Consultancy, Whangarei
Keir Volkerling Hikurangi
Mahina-a-Rangi Baker Wellington
Maree Pene Te Kotuku Whenua Consultants, Hamilton
Maui Hudson ESR, Hamilton
Mere Roberts University of Auckland
Mick Park Te Atiawa Manawhenua ki te Tau Ihu Trust, Motueka
Morry Black Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Inc, Hastings
Pakitai Raharuhi Te Runanga o Ngati Pikiao, Rotorua
Patsy Wilson Te Rūnanga o Turanganui a Kiwa, Napier
Rawinia Puna Dunedin
Tahu Erlbeck Te Karaka
Tipene Wilson Maximize Consultancy Ltd, Hamilton (Facilitator)
Te Tui Hoterene REPO Consultancy, Whangarei
Victor Holloway Te Rūnanga-a-iwi o Ngati Kahu, Kaitaia
Violet Walker Te Taumata Kaumātua o Ngāpuhi, Kaeo
Waitangi Wood Auckland
Wiremu Ruru Te Rūnanga o Turanganui a Kiwa, Gisborne
Ngā Kaihautū Tikanga Taiao
Bella Tuau Hamilton
Glenice Paine (Tumuaki) Picton
Jamie Ataria Christchurch
ERMA New Zealand
Asela Atapattu Manager, New Organisms Group
Linda Faulkner General Manager, Kaupapa Kura Taiao
Maraea Faulkner Kaupapa Kura Taiao
Patrick Gemmell Kaupapa Kura Taiao
Apologies
Clive Stone Darcia Solomon Edward Ellison Fiona Reihana Ruka
Gina Mohi Gina Solomon Grace Ormond Hemi Te Rakau
Malibu Hamilton Nick Roskruge Oliver Sutherland Shaun Ogilvie
Stewart Bull Te Kei Merito Temple Isaacs Wayne Hudson
Wiki Walker
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
10

Appendicies:
1. Cultural Risk Assessment (presentation – Linda Faulkner)
2. Workshop 1 – Effects Brainstorm (workshop notes)
3. Assessment of Effects (presentation – Asela Atapattu)
4. Tangata Whenua Effects Assessment Template & Guideline
5. Using Values to Framework Iwi Assessments of Genetic Engineering (GE)
(presentation – Mahina-a-Rangi Baker)
ERMA New Zealand
Māori National Network Wānanga
Tangoio Marae, Napier
6 and 7 May 2010
11