The Killing Fields of Aotearoa/New Zealand

Just as Britain lead the world out of the evils of slavery in the 19th century, Aotearoa has the opportunity to lead the world out of the dark age of extraction and into an era of inter-species harmony. The choice, ultimately, is whether we will continue to be a hunter-killer state, or finally become the peaceful, harmonious society we claim to be.

The Hunter-Killer State and the Illusion of Species Supremacy: Re-imagining Aotearoa’s Relationship with the Living World

Globally, Aotearoa New Zealand is marketed as a pristine, peaceful utopia. It is the “clean, green” paradise of  the ‘Lord of the Rings’, a nuclear-free haven, and a progressive society nestled in a breathtaking natural environment.

But this carefully curated branding masks a dark, systemic reality. Beneath the rolling green hills and the pristine marketing campaigns lies a society deeply structured around violence, domination, and killing.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the government’s recent $2.7 billion defense package to purchase five MH-60R Seahawk “Romeo” helicopters. This purchase is not merely a military upgrade; it is the ultimate, multi-billion-dollar manifestation of a national psyche addicted to violence. From the slaughterhouses that drive our export economy to the poisoned forests of our biodiversity projects, and our eager enlistment in foreign wars, New Zealand is not a peaceful nation. It is a profoundly violent one.

But to truly change this, we must look beyond the policies and confront the philosophical root of our violence: our arrogant  and foolish belief in human supremacy.

The $2.7 Billion “Hunter-Killer”: Servicing Empire Over the Pacific

The MH-60R Seahawk is a premier “hunter-killer” helicopter, heavily optimized for Anti-Submarine and Anti-Surface Warfare. It is a weapon of war, designed to track and destroy enemies in the deep ocean.

Yet, the New Zealand government justifies this recent exorbitant purchase by claiming it will help with Pacific Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR). This is a profound deception. The MH-60R’s cabin is packed with mission computers and weapons systems, not optimized for carrying bulk disaster relief. With only five air-frames, NZ may only ever have one or two fully operational at any given time—leaving almost zero surge capacity for a major Pacific cyclone.

If the government genuinely cared about Pacific civil defence, they would have purchased heavy-lift, utility-focused aircraft like the Boeing CH-47F Chinook or the utility variant MH-60S “Sierra”. But we didn’t buy those. We bought hunter-killer choppers. Why? Because New Zealand has a long, sycophantic history of enthusiastically joining UK and US wars of aggression. The MH-60R ensures the Royal  New Zealand Navy  can act as a subordinate, interoperable asset for the US and Australian navies to  thwart  a mythical  Chinese invasion thereat. It is a tool of empire, bought with money that could have been used to genuinely protect the Pacific.

The Slaughterhouse Economy: Millions of Lives, Objectified as “Products”

We know that  those exposed to  military violence abroad, bringtheir violence and trauma home with  them This militarism abroad mirrors our violence at home. The foundation of New Zealand’s rural economy is built on the industrialized killing of sentient beings. Each year, the agricultural sector slaughters tens of millions of animals. While the industry uses sterile, bureaucratic language to  desensitize the  public to  the terror and cruelty they inflict —referring to living, feeling individuals as “stock,” “meat,” “carcasses,” and “products”—the reality is visceral and brutal.

Recent scientific consensus has thoroughly dismantled the Cartesian illusion that animals are unfeeling automatons. The 2012 Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness formally acknowledged that non-human animals possess the neurological substrates of consciousness. Research has proven that cows experience grief, pigs possess complex problem-solving skills and emotional depth, sheep  and even bees recognize human faces. They have full cognition, social structures, and a desire to live.

Yet our legal and economic systems maintain a staggering cognitive dissonance. While the NZ Animal Welfare Act was amended in 2015 to formally recognize animals as “sentient,” this very same state sanctions their mass slaughter. Below is a table illustrating the sheer scale of this killing over a recent five-year period (excluding the additional 100+ million poultry killed annually):

The methods of this killing are inherently violent: captive bolt guns, electrical water-bath stunning, and ex-sanguination. We normalize this daily, systemic bloodshed because it lines the pockets of big business and the export economy.

The “Pest” Paradigm: Militarizing Conservation

This culture of killing extends deep into our native bush. New Zealand’s biodiversity sector is dominated by a lethal paradigm: the obsession with killing introduced mammals to save indigenous birds.

Under the banner of “Predator Free 2050,” the state sanctions the killing of roughly 8 to 10 million  possums annually, alongside millions of rats, stoats, and ferrets. We use military tactics—bombing the forests with 1080 poison, which causes a slow, agonizing death by internal organ failure, and deploying steel-jawed leg-hold traps.

This approach relies heavily on the sanctification of the hunter and the trapper as the heroes  of our natural  environment. But it requires a massive, willful blind spot. The NZ biodiversity movement rarely acknowledges the root cause of indigenous species decline: humans and our actions. The destruction of native habitats through rampant deforestation for grazing and dairy conversion, and urban sprawl is the primary driver of extinction.

Yet, rather than addressing the unsustainable expansion of the human footprint, or transitioning to true re-wilding, the conservation establishment defaults to endless culling. We are attempting to bomb, poison, and trap our way to ecological health, just as we buy hunter-killer helicopters to strafe our way to geopolitical relevance.

Beyond Human Supremacy: The Inherent Equality of All Life

To break this cycle of violence, we must dismantle the philosophical foundation that makes it possible: anthropocentrism: the belief that human beings are the supreme rulers of the Earth, and that all other life exists merely as a resource for our consumption. That  belief is a destructive fiction and the key driving force for humans destruction of our natural  environment globally.

The reality of our shared existence demands the recognition of the inherent equality of all living beings. This does not mean that a human, a cow, or  a kauri tree are exactly the same; it means that their right to exist, to flourish, and to live free from unnecessary suffering is of equal moral weight. A pig is the center of its own universe, just as a human is. A possum, a rat, and a kiwi all possess an inherent value that is entirely independent of their utility—or perceived detriment—to human beings or our prioritising of one species over another because of our conservation ideology.

When we view the world through the lens of inherent equality, the language of “pests,” “stock,” and “resources” dissolves. We recognize that we are not the masters of the web of life, but merely one strand within it. The violence we inflict on the slaughterhouse and forest floor  is directly derived from the arrogant  and foolish delusion that we are somehow separate from, and superior to, the natural world.

Five Pillars for an Inter-species Aotearoa

To transition from a Hunter-Killer State to a society of inter-species harmony, we must move beyond identifying its failings and illogicality  to creating a new reality. New Zealand has the geographic isolation, the wealth, the innovation  and the progressive heritage to pioneer this shift. Such  a new paradigm  could look  something like the following…

1. The Parliament of All Beings: Expanding Legal Person-hood

New Zealand is already a global pioneer in the “Rights of Nature” movement, having granted legal person-hood to the Whanganui River (Te Awa Tupua) and Te Urewera. But we have stopped halfway. We must expand this legal framework to grant person-hood and inherent rights to all sentient species and ecosystems.

Imagine establishing an “Ecological Parliament” of equals. Just as the Whanganui River has human guardians to speak for it in court, every major species—the kiwi, the kauri, the honeybee, the cow—would have legally appointed, ecologically trained guardians. Their sole mandate would be to veto legislation, economic projects, or agricultural practices that harm their species’ right to flourish. This shifts our legal system from protecting human ‘property’ to protecting ecological kinship and inter-connectivity.

2. From the Slaughterhouse to a  Laboratory of Caring

The argument against ending animal agriculture is always economic: “We need the export revenue.” But this assumes we cannot innovate our way out of the slaughterhouse. New Zealand has world-class agricultural science and a highly skilled rural workforce.

We must redirect the billions in agricultural subsidies away from the meat and dairy export model, and invest heavily in new strategies like plant protein based agriculture, fruit and nut  tree proteins and precision fermentation using food-forest,  permaculture  and organic principles.

Our farmers wouldn’t be forced out of business; they would be retrained and subsidized to become “ecosystem stewards” and bio-technologists. NZ could transition from being the world’s slaughterhouse to the world’s “Laboratory of Caring,” exporting high-tech, cruelty-free, climate-positive food systems and proving that a vibrant rural economy doesn’t require a bloody foundation.

3. Healing the Hunter-Killer Psyche (Eco-Psychology)

We cannot change our external policies without addressing the internal, psychological conditioning that makes us comfortable with killing. New Zealand’s cultural identity is heavily tied to the “Hunter” (the bloke with the rifle and his pig-dogs  in the bush), the “Warrior” (the ANZAC mythos), and the “Conqueror” (the pioneer clearing the bush).

We must integrate ‘Eco-Psychology’ into our education system and public health initiatives. We need to actively deconstruct the “toughness” associated with killing animals and fighting in foreign wars, replacing the “Hunter-Killer” archetype with the “Cultivator-Healer” who  understands humanity’s  interconnection with the rest of the natural  world and our own dependence on it for our own  survival.  True inter-species harmony requires humans to heal their own disconnection from nature and their own internalized violence.

4. Aotearoa as the World’s First Inter-species Sanctuary

In 1984, New Zealand took a massive geopolitical risk and declared itself a Nuclear-Free Zone. It was mocked by superpowers at the time, but it ultimately became our greatest point of national pride and remains so to  this day. It is time to expand this legacy into an “Inter-species and Ecological Peace” Declaration’.

New Zealand should formally declare its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and landmass a “Sanctuary from Speciesism and Ecological Violence.” This would mean legally banning the importation of products derived from ecologically destructive practices, banning lethal conservation methods (like 1080 and leg-hold traps) on all public lands, and refusing to participate in international military alliances that project violence into the Pacific. It would be a beacon to the world, proving that a modern nation can choose coexistence over conquest.

5. Technological Symbiosis and Non-Invasive Conservation

Our current conservation model relies on brute force: poison, traps, and bullets. The future model must rely on deep listening and technological symbiosis. Instead of spending millions on helicopters to drop poison, we must invest in AI-driven bio-acoustic monitoring networks, drone-assisted native seed dispersal, and genetic research into disease  and predator resistance for native birds like the kiwi and kākāpō.

We must use technology to understand and facilitate nature’s own resilience, rather than using technology to bombard  nature into submission. In this new paradigm, we  can move from being the arrogant “managers” of the forest to its humble “students.”

Re-wilding the Budget and the Mind

New Zealand likes to look in the mirror and see a peaceful, progressive, nature-loving nation. But a society that slaughters 22 million sentient animals a year, poisons  and destroys its own forests, and eagerly spends billions on weapons of war is suffering from a profound moral sickness.

True environmentalism and true peace require us to lay down our weapons, our traps, and our poisons. We must abandon the arrogant illusion of human supremacy and embrace the inherent equality of all living beings.

Just as Britain lead the world out of the evils of slavery in the 19th century, Aotearoa has the opportunity to lead the world out of the dark age of extraction and into an era of inter-species harmony. The choice, ultimately, is whether we will continue to be a hunter-killer state, or finally become the peaceful, harmonious society we claim to be.

A Climate Resilience Fund for New Zealand

Proposed Model: CIR-ACC (Climate Impact and Resilience – Accident Compensation Corporation framework)

Funding Structure: 40% Crown / 60% Levy-Funded | Actuarial Risk Model

May 2026

Paul  Martin –paulm100m@gmail.com

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Fund Architecture and Design Principles 4

Funding Model 5

Phase 1: Foundation and Legislative Development (2026-2027)

Phase 2: Parliamentary Process and Establishment (2027-2028)

Phase 3: Operational Launch and Pilot Programmes (2028-2029)

Phase 4: Full Operation and Integration (2029-2031)

Phase 5: Long-Term Maturity and Expansion (2031-2035+)

Governance Structure and Accountability

Local Government Access Framework

Risk Factors and Mitigation

Conclusion

Executive Summary

This document presents a comprehensive implementation timeline for establishing a National Climate Impact and Resilience Fund (CIR-ACC), modelled on New Zealand’s Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) framework. The proposal originates from a District Council Annual Plan 2026/2027 submission, which identified the urgent need for a permanent, pre-funded mechanism to address climate-related infrastructure damage, managed retreat, and community resilience.

The current ad-hoc, post-disaster funding model leaves councils and ratepayers as insurers of last resort for climate volatility. The 2025 Tasman floods exposed the structural weaknesses in this approach, with fiscal shortfalls persisting despite central government co-funding. One-off funds are structurally incapable of keeping pace with the inevitable intensification and increased frequency of extreme weather events.

The ACC-type fund proposed here would operate as a mandatory, ring-fenced national mechanism, funded through a combination of levies on property insurance premiums, levies on commercial land value, and a fixed-ratio Crown contribution (40% Crown, 60% levy-funded). The fund would use an actuarial model where climate risk is annualised rather than capped per disaster, providing local government with predictable access to resources for both pre-emptive mitigation and post-event relief.

Key Features of the Proposed CIR-ACC
✓  Permanent, pre-funded mechanism replacing ad-hoc disaster bailouts✓  Actuarial risk model — climate risk annualised, not capped per event✓  Three funding streams: property insurance levy, commercial land value levy, Crown contribution✓  Dual purpose: pre-emptive mitigation AND post-event relief✓  Predictable access criteria for all local authorities✓  Independent governance with Crown, local government, and iwi/Maori representation 

Fund Architecture and Design Principles

Core Design Features

The CIR-ACC is designed around five core principles derived from the ACC model, adapted for climate risk management:

  1. Comprehensive Coverage: The fund covers all climate-related physical risks to public infrastructure, community assets, and household property, including gradual changes (sea-level rise, coastal erosion) and acute events (flooding, storms, wildfire).
  2. Community Responsibility: All property owners and commercial ratepayers contribute through established levy mechanisms, creating a broad risk pool that reduces individual burden and ensures equitable distribution of costs.
  3. Complete Rehabilitation: The fund covers not only emergency repair but also long-term resilience building, managed retreat, and ecological restoration — recognising that adaptation is a permanent condition, not a series of isolated responses.
  4. Administrative Efficiency: Predetermined eligibility criteria, standardised assessment protocols, and delegated decision-making authority enable rapid disbursement without sacrificing accountability.
  5. Actuarial Soundness: Premiums are set using climate risk modelling that annualises expected losses over long time horizons, ensuring the fund remains solvent as event frequency increases.

Funding Model

The proposed funding structure establishes three concurrent revenue streams:

Revenue StreamMechanismEstimated Annual Revenue
Property Insurance Levy2.5% levy on all domestic and commercial property insurance premiums; collected by insurers via RBNZ regulatory framework$350-450M
Commercial Land Value Levy0.3% levy on commercial and industrial rateable land values; collected via council rating systems$250-350M
Crown Contribution40% of actuarially assessed annual requirement; appropriated in Budget$200-400M
Total Annual Fund $800M-$1.2B

This model generates an estimated base fund of $800 million to $1.2 billion annually, escalating with property value growth and insurance premium increases. The actuarial approach means funds are available immediately when events occur, eliminating the current delays associated with emergency appropriations and post-event negotiations between central and local government.

Phase 1: Foundation and Legislative Development (2026-2027)

Q3 2026 – Q4 2027  |  Local government advocacy, policy development, and legislative drafting

Council Resolutions and Lobbying (Q3-Q4 2026)

The implementation begins at the local government level. Local, District and Regional Councils formally adopt resolutions calling for central government action. These resolutions specify the ACC-type model as the preferred mechanism and commit council resources to supporting the policy development process.

Council X Annual Plan 2026/2027 formally resolves to lobby for CIR-ACC legislation through Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and directly to the Minister for Emergency Management and the Minister for Climate Change

•  Regional councils, unitary authorities, and metropolitan councils in high-risk areas (Northland, Hawke’s Bay, West Coast, Canterbury) adopt parallel resolutions

•  LGNZ Climate Change and Emergency Management committees develop a consolidated national position paper endorsing the ACC-type mechanism

•  Formal engagement with the Climate Change Commission to incorporate the fund proposal into the National Adaptation Framework

Policy Development and Stakeholder Engagement (Q1-Q3 2027)

Central government agencies, led by the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) and the Ministry for the Environment, establish an interdepartmental working group to develop detailed policy settings. This process involves extensive consultation with local government, iwi/Maori, the insurance sector, and climate adaptation experts.

•  NEMA convenes the CIR-ACC Policy Working Group with representatives from Treasury, MfE, MBIE, DIA, and Te Puni Kokiri

•  Reference group established including LGNZ, Insurance Council of New Zealand, Infrastructure Commission, and Climate Change Commission

•  Iwi/Maori advisory panel convened to ensure Treaty-compliant governance structures and equitable access mechanisms

•  Public consultation on high-level design principles, including levy rates, eligibility criteria, and governance arrangements

Legislative Drafting (Q2-Q4 2027)

The Parliamentary Counsel’s Office drafts the Climate Impact and Resilience Act, drawing on the ACC Act 2001, the Earthquake Commission Act 1993, and international precedents including the UK’s Flood Re and Australia’s proposed Cyclone Reinsurance Pool.

•  Draft legislation prepared establishing the CIR-ACC as an independent Crown entity with statutory objectives and operational independence

•  Levy collection mechanisms integrated with existing rating systems (via councils) and insurance regulatory frameworks (via RBNZ/FMA)

•  Eligibility criteria and access protocols codified, drawing on the National Policy Statement for Natural Hazards 2025

•  Governance framework established with independent board, Crown appointees, local government nominees, and iwi/Maori representation

PeriodKey Milestone
Jul 2026TDC Annual Plan adoption; formal resolution to lobby for CIR-ACC
Aug 2026LGNZ position paper development begins; regional council resolutions
Oct 2026Formal approaches to Ministers for Climate Change and Emergency Management
Feb 2027NEMA-led Policy Working Group convened; terms of reference agreed
Mar 2027Iwi/Maori advisory panel and sector reference groups established
May 2027Public consultation on design principles (8-week period)
Jul 2027Policy recommendations to Cabinet; legislative drafting instructions issued
Sep 2027Draft Climate Impact and Resilience Act completed
Nov 2027Cabinet approval to introduce legislation; Regulatory Impact Statement published

Phase 2: Parliamentary Process and Establishment (2027-2028)

Q4 2027 – Q4 2028  |  Legislative passage, entity establishment, and systems development

Parliamentary Process (Q4 2027 – Q3 2028)

The Climate Impact and Resilience Bill progresses through the full parliamentary process, including select committee scrutiny and public submissions. Given the cross-party consensus on climate adaptation evidenced in the National Adaptation Framework, the bill is treated as priority legislation.

•  Bill introduced to Parliament with first reading debate (December 2027)

•  Select committee inquiry with nationwide hearings (February-April 2028)

•  Submissions received from all 78 local authorities, iwi entities, insurance sector, infrastructure providers, and community organisations

•  Supplementary order papers addressing select committee recommendations (June 2028)

•  Second and third readings; Royal Assent by September 2028

Entity Establishment (Q2-Q4 2028)

Concurrently with the legislative process, the new entity is incorporated and key appointments made to enable rapid operationalisation following Royal Assent.

•  CIR-ACC incorporated as independent Crown entity (March 2028)

•  Independent board appointed: 7 members including chair, with expertise in climate science, actuarial assessment, local government, infrastructure, Maori governance, and risk management

•  Chief Executive recruited and appointed (May 2028)

•  Initial office establishment in Wellington with regional liaison teams

•  Memoranda of understanding executed with LGNZ, Insurance Council, EQC, and key government agencies

Systems and Capability Development (Q3-Q4 2028)

•  Actuarial model development: partnership with ACC’s actuarial team and international reinsurance specialists

•  Climate risk database integration: linking to NIWA, MfE hazard mapping, and council asset management systems

•  IT systems procurement and development for levy collection, claims processing, and disbursement

•  Staff recruitment: initial establishment of 45-60 FTE across actuarial, claims, governance, and regional liaison functions

•  Eligibility criteria and assessment frameworks finalised for the three funding streams

PeriodKey Milestone
Dec 2027Climate Impact and Resilience Bill introduced; first reading
Mar 2028CIR-ACC entity incorporated; board appointment process begins
Apr 2028Select committee report back; board appointments confirmed
May 2028Chief Executive appointed; regional liaison structure established
Jun 2028Actuarial partnership and climate risk database integration begins
Jul 2028IT systems procurement; staff recruitment commences
Sep 2028Royal Assent; Climate Impact and Resilience Act 2028 commences
Oct 2028Regulations gazetted; levy rates set for 2029 financial year
Nov 2028Full operational readiness review; systems testing complete

Phase 3: Operational Launch and Pilot Programmes (2028-2029)

Q4 2028 – Q4 2029  |  Levy collection commences, pilot programmes activated, first disbursements

Levy Collection and Revenue Establishment (Q4 2028 – Q1 2029)

The first levy collection cycle begins on 1 January 2029, with initial revenue flows establishing the fund’s capital base. The levy mechanism is integrated with existing systems to minimise administrative burden.

•  Property insurance premium levy (2.5%) collected via insurance companies on all domestic and commercial policies from 1 January 2029

•  Commercial land value levy (0.3%) collected via council rating systems from 1 July 2029 (aligned with rating year)

•  Crown contribution of 40% of forecast annual requirement appropriated in Budget 2029

•  Initial capital base estimated at $400-500 million by 30 June 2029

Pilot Mitigation Programme (Q1-Q4 2029)

A $150 million pilot programme for pre-emptive mitigation is launched, targeting high-priority projects that demonstrate the fund’s value in reducing long-term liability.

•  Round 1: Elevated bridges and critical infrastructure in flood-prone catchments ($60M)

•  Round 2: Managed retreat buy-outs for properties in unsustainable coastal and flood-risk locations ($50M)

•  Round 3: Wetland restoration and nature-based solutions for stormwater management ($40M)

Pilot Resilience Hub Programme (Q2-Q4 2029)

The community resilience hub stream supports development of solar+battery backup systems for emergency shelters and community facilities, building on the EPOD concept (Emergency Power Operating Devices).

•  Grants programme for community resilience hub establishment ($30M pilot)

•  Priority allocation to communities demonstrating high climate exposure and social vulnerability

•  Integration with Civil Defence Emergency Management Group planning

•  Technical standards and monitoring frameworks developed

PeriodKey Milestone
Jan 2029Insurance levy collection commences; first revenue flows
Feb 2029Pilot mitigation programme Round 1 opens (elevated infrastructure)
Mar 2029First claims protocol activated for qualifying events
Apr 2029Resilience hub pilot programme opens; regional liaison teams operational
May 2029Pilot mitigation Round 2 (managed retreat buy-outs)
Jul 2029Commercial land value levy collection commences via councils
Aug 2029Pilot mitigation Round 3 (wetland restoration); first resilience hub grants approved
Oct 2029Six-month operational review; levy compliance assessment
Dec 2029Annual report to Parliament; year-one actuarial valuation complete

Phase 4: Full Operation and Integration (2029-2031)

Q1 2030 – Q4 2031  |  Mature operations, full council access, actuarial refinement

Full Programme Rollout (2029/30 Financial Year)

With pilot learnings incorporated, the fund moves to full operational status. All three funding streams are available to all qualifying local authorities on a continuous basis.

•  Mitigation programme: $300M annually for elevated infrastructure, managed retreat, nature-based solutions, and flood protection

•  Relief programme: Event-triggered access for infrastructure repair, silt removal, temporary housing, and economic recovery (budget: $200-400M annually depending on event frequency)

•  Resilience hub programme: $60M annually for community facility upgrades with solar+battery backup, water resilience, and emergency communications

•  All 78 local authorities signed up with access protocols and pre-agreed assessment criteria

Actuarial Refinement and Levy Adjustment (2030-2031)

The first two full years of operational data enable actuarial refinement of levy rates, risk profiles, and funding allocations. The board conducts its first triennial levy review.

•  Triennial actuarial review completed (June 2031); levy rates adjusted based on emerging claims experience

•  Climate risk models updated with 2029-2031 event data and attribution science

•  Regional risk weightings refined to ensure equitable access across diverse hazard profiles

•  Investment strategy for fund reserves developed in partnership with NZ Super Fund / ACC Investment Management

Systems Integration (2030-2031)

•  Full integration with council asset management systems for automated exposure assessment

•  Real-time event monitoring linked to NIWA, GeoNet, and MetService data feeds

•  Pre-approved project pipelines enable rapid disbursement (72-hour approval for pre-qualified projects)

•  Annual resilience reporting integrated with council long-term plan and annual plan cycles

PeriodKey Milestone
Jan 2030Full mitigation programme opens ($300M); all councils eligible
Mar 2030First annual actuarial assessment; reserve adequacy review
Jul 2030First full year of dual levy collection; Crown contribution review
Sep 2030Integrated council asset management systems pilot (10 councils)
Dec 2030Two-year operational review; Parliamentary select committee briefing
Mar 2031Real-time event monitoring system operational
Jun 2031Triennial levy review completed; rates adjusted for FY2031/32
Sep 2031Full council systems integration; pre-approved project pipeline active
Dec 2031Three-year actuarial valuation; investment strategy for reserves adopted

Phase 5: Long-Term Maturity and Expansion (2031-2035+)

2032 onwards  |  Continuous improvement, expanded scope, international learning

Fund Maturity (2032-2035)

By 2032, the CIR-ACC is a mature, well-capitalised institution with established governance, proven operational systems, and strong actuarial foundations. The focus shifts to continuous improvement, scope refinement, and preparation for escalating climate impacts projected through mid-century.

•  Projected fund balance of $2.5-3.5 billion by 2035, with annual levy revenue exceeding $1.2 billion

•  Full actuarial cost-benefit data available demonstrating return on mitigation investment (target: 5:1 benefit-cost ratio for pre-emptive works)

•  Managed retreat programme scaled to support 2,000-3,000 property acquisitions annually in high-risk zones

•  Community resilience hub network reaches 300+ facilities nationwide

Scope Expansion and Adaptation (2033-2035+)

As climate science evolves and operational experience accumulates, the fund’s scope may expand to address emerging risks and opportunities identified through the six-yearly National Climate Change Risk Assessment cycle.

•  Potential expansion to cover climate-related business interruption for SMEs in qualifying events

•  Integration with biodiversity and ecological restoration objectives (blue carbon, catchment restoration)

•  International reinsurance partnership to manage tail-risk events exceeding fund capacity

•  Development of parametric insurance products for rapid disbursement in predictable event types

Legislative Review (2034)

The Climate Impact and Resilience Act 2028 includes a mandatory five-year legislative review. This review assesses the fund’s performance against statutory objectives, governance effectiveness, levy adequacy, and scope appropriateness.

•  Independent review panel appointed by the Minister (Q1 2034)

•  Public submissions on fund performance and future priorities (Q2 2034)

•  Recommendations to Parliament for legislative amendments if required (Q4 2034)

•  Second six-yearly National Climate Change Risk Assessment (2032) informs review scope

PeriodKey Milestone
2032Fund matures; $2.5B+ balance; 5:1 mitigation benefit-cost demonstrated
2033Scope expansion options assessed; business interruption pilot considered
2034Mandatory five-year legislative review; independent panel appointed
2035Amended legislation (if required); international reinsurance partnerships
2036+Continuous adaptation to escalating risks; parametric products; blue carbon integration

Governance Structure and Accountability

The CIR-ACC operates as an independent Crown entity with a governance structure designed to balance operational independence with public accountability:

ElementDescription
Legal FormIndependent Crown entity under the Crown Entities Act 2004, with specific provisions in the Climate Impact and Resilience Act 2028
Board7 independent members with expertise in climate science, actuarial assessment, local government, infrastructure, Maori governance, and risk management
Crown OversightResponsible Ministers (Climate Change and Finance); monitoring under Crown Entities Act framework
Iwi/Maori ParticipationStatutory board position; dedicated advisory committee; Treaty compliance audit function
Local Government VoiceBoard position nominated by LGNZ; formal consultation on eligibility criteria and levy settings
AuditFinancial audit by Auditor-General; actuarial review by independent actuary; performance against statutory objectives

The board comprises seven members appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of Ministers. Appointment criteria ensure expertise in climate science, actuarial assessment, local government, infrastructure delivery, Maori governance, community resilience, and financial management. Board members serve staggered four-year terms with one reappointment permitted.

An independent actuary reviews the fund’s solvency annually, with a full actuarial valuation every three years. The Auditor-General audits the fund’s financial statements and performance against statutory objectives. The fund reports annually to Parliament through the appropriate select committee.

Local Government Access Framework

All 78 local authorities (regional councils, unitary authorities, territorial authorities, and district health boards where relevant) have access to the CIR-ACC through three distinct pathways:

Stream 1: Pre-emptive Mitigation

Councils submit project proposals against predetermined eligibility criteria. Projects must demonstrate a positive benefit-cost ratio, alignment with district/regional climate adaptation plans, and deliver measurable risk reduction. Assessment criteria prioritise projects protecting critical infrastructure, reducing community vulnerability, and delivering co-benefits for biodiversity and water quality.

Stream 2: Post-Event Relief

Following a qualifying climate event (defined by intensity thresholds linked to NIWA and MetService data), affected councils activate the relief protocol. Pre-negotiated assessment contracts enable rapid damage evaluation, with 72-hour approval for pre-qualified response categories. The fund covers infrastructure repair, silt and debris removal, temporary accommodation, and economic recovery support for affected communities.

Stream 3: Community Resilience Hubs

The resilience hub stream provides capital grants for community facilities that can function as emergency shelters during infrastructure disruption. Eligible projects include solar+battery installations, water independence systems, emergency communications upgrades, and accessibility improvements. Priority allocation uses a vulnerability index combining climate exposure, social deprivation, and infrastructure dependency metrics.

StreamAnnual AllocationEligible Activities
Pre-emptive Mitigation$300M (base)Elevated infrastructure, managed retreat, wetland restoration, flood protection, nature-based solutions
Post-Event Relief$200-400M (variable)Infrastructure repair, silt removal, temporary housing, economic recovery support
Community Resilience Hubs$60M (base)Solar+battery systems, water independence, emergency comms, accessibility upgrades

Risk Factors and Mitigation

The successful establishment and operation of the CIR-ACC depends on managing several key risks:

Risk FactorMitigation Strategy
Political discontinuityBipartisan support locked in through select committee process; statutory independence protects against ministerial interference
Levy resistancePhased introduction starting at 50% of target rates; public education campaign; clear demonstration of benefit-cost advantage
Event frequency exceeding actuarial projectionsPrudential capital buffer (target 120% of expected liabilities); reinsurance for tail risks; triennial levy review mechanism
Council capacity constraintsRegional liaison team support; simplified application processes for pre-qualified projects; technical assistance grants
Moral hazardCo-funding requirements (minimum 20% council contribution for mitigation); benefit-cost thresholds; post-event accountability measures
Treaty compliance failuresStatutory Maori board position; independent Treaty compliance audit; iwi/Maori advisory committee with formal consultation rights

Conclusion

The Climate Impact and Resilience Fund represents a structural transformation in how Aotearoa New Zealand finances climate adaptation. By replacing the current ad-hoc, post-disaster model with a permanent, pre-funded, actuarially sound mechanism, the CIR-ACC provides local government with the certainty and resources needed to plan for a future of intensifying climate risk.

The implementation timeline presented here — spanning from council resolutions in 2026 to full operational maturity by 2032 — is ambitious but achievable. It requires sustained political commitment, effective collaboration between central and local government, meaningful partnership with iwi/Maori, and public acceptance of the levy mechanisms that underpin the fund’s financial sustainability.

The cost of delay is substantial. Each year without a permanent fund locks in additional vulnerability, defers critical mitigation investments, and ensures that when the next major event strikes, communities and ratepayers will once again bear the full burden of recovery. The experience of New Zealand’s Tasman District in 2026 confirms that climate change is not a series of isolated emergencies — it is a permanent, intensifying condition. The CIR-ACC is the institutional response that permanence demands.

Climate Resilience Starts with Certainty, Not Crisis

New Zealand’s Rapidly Deteriorating Marine Environment

A Submission to the New Zealand Parliament’s Select Committee on a proposed Amendment to the NZ Fisheries Bill.

Concerns Regarding the Fisheries Amendment Bill,  and Recommendations for Sustainable Fisheries Management.

Introduction

The New Zealand Government, through Fisheries Minister Shane Jones, frames the Fisheries Amendment Bill  as an ‘efficiency and productivity’ exercise—cutting red tape, giving industry “certainty,” and boosting seafood export value.

In reality, the Bill represents a systematic dismantling of safeguards at precisely the moment they are most needed.

Key concerns include:

  1. The completely inadequate timescale for consultation on  an issue that  is vital to New Zealanders and our marine world.
  2. Concentration of power:  The Minister gains greater authority to set catch limits independent of scientific advice, with the ability to rely on industry self-reported data rather than robust independent assessment.
  3. Erosion of oversight:   On-board camera footage—recently proven effective at exposing massive under-reporting of discards—would be exempt from the Official Information Act, with fines up to \$50,000 for sharing footage. The Minister can also allow operators to switch cameras off.
  4. Reduced accountability:   Legal challenges to fisheries decisions would be restricted to a 20-working day window, severely limiting judicial review that has historically held Ministers accountable to the Act’s sustainability purpose.
  5. Weakened environmental protections:   The Bill introduces more flexible, longer-term (up to 5-year) catch limits with minimal review, reduces penalties for exceeding catch limits and taking undersized fish, and effectively incentivizes destructive bottom trawling over cleaner methods.
  6. Privatization of a public resource:   Quota owners would gain ability to stockpile entitlements and delay catch reductions even when stocks are depleted, shifting the burden of ecological degradation onto the public while profits are exported—seafood exports average under \$6/kg, little of which benefits domestic consumers.

This proposed amendment occurs against a backdrop of well documented dramatic ecological marine decline. The Ministry for the Environment’s  ‘Our Marine Environment 2025’  report and other official data, note the following negative impacts:

Overfishing:   12% of assessed fish stocks (19 of 152) are over-fished or depleted, with 5 stocks collapsed. Bycatch continues to kill protected species—15 Hector’s dolphins in 2023/24 alone, thousands of seabirds annually, and tonnes of protected coral.

Ocean warming:   Sea-surface temperatures around New Zealand have risen 0.16–0.34°C per decade since 1982, warming faster than the global average. Marine heatwaves are becoming more frequent, intense and longer-lasting, with 2022 setting records causing both  marine species loss and shifting of migratory patterns

Acidification:   Ocean acidity has increased ~30% since 1750, with measurable increases off Otago. This threatens shell-forming species and disrupts food webs negatively impacting fish  nutrition.

Sea level rise:   Accelerating coastal inundation and erosion, compounded by vertical land movement in some areas, resulting in the elimination or reduction of many fish  breeding grounds.

Invasive species and habitat destruction:   428 non-native marine species have been identified in NZ waters, with outbreaks like  Caulerpa  algae spreading across 1,500+ hectares. Bottom trawling continues to bulldoze seafloor habitats.

Extinction risk:  More than half of indigenous marine invertebrate species are threatened or at risk.

Bottom Trawling: The long-term impacts of bottom trawling in New Zealand and the Southern Pacific represent a systematic  and catastrophic degradation of irreplaceable deep-sea ecosystems.  The combination of extreme physical destruction, centuries long destruction of marine habitats and in many cases irretrievable loss, and climate feedback effects is resulting in  permanent biodiversity loss.  Scientific  evidence confirms that protecting climate refugia and  high-vulnerability habitats—particularly seamounts—is essential to  prevent ecosystem collapse and maintain long-term fisheries  productivity, yet current management trends are moving in the opposite  direction.

This  Bill treats fisheries primarily as an export industry to be deregulated, while official reports confirm the marine environment is under compounding pressures from climate change, overfishing, habitat destruction and pollution. The timing is particularly damaging given that camera data revealed a 1,000%+ increase in reported snapper discards and 950% increase in kingfish discards once monitoring began—proof that the industry cannot be relied upon to self-regulate.

The Bill weakens transparency, scientific oversight, and public participation at the exact moment when marine ecosystems require stronger precautionary management and climate-resilient planning. Thus these ‘reforms’ do not represent “modernization”—they represent a privatization agenda that  locks in irreversible ecological damage for short-term commercial gain.

Key Concerns and Proposed Alternatives

1. Tiered Information Framework for Setting Catch Limits (Low-Information Stocks)

The Bill proposes a tiered framework for setting Total Allowable Catch (TAC), where for low-information stocks, the TAC only needs to be ‘not inconsistent’ with the objective of managing the stock at or above Maximum Sustainable Yield. This approach risks over-fishing and depletion of vulnerable or data-poor fish stocks, as management decisions are unable to be based on robust scientific evidence.

This could lead to the plundering of unknown stocks, with potentially irreversible ecological consequences.

Recommendation: The Precautionary Principle  be applied to all data-poor stocks. Instead of allowing higher catch limits, management should default to significantly lower, more conservative catch limits until robust scientific data is available to demonstrate sustainability. Any increases in catch limits should only occur when supported by comprehensive and peer-reviewed scientific assessments.

2. Multi-Year Catch Decisions

The Bill allows the Minister to set TACs for up to five consecutive fishing years . While the stated purposes is  to provide certainty for the industry, this provision introduces reduced flexibility to respond to rapid environmental changes, climate impacts, or unforeseen declines in fish populations. Such extended decision cycles could delay necessary adjustments to protect struggling stocks, potentially leading to collapses that are difficult to reverse.

Recommendation: We recommend implementing Adaptive Management with Frequent Reviews. Catch limits, especially for stocks vulnerable to environmental shifts or those showing signs of stress, should be reviewed annually or more frequently. Decision-making processes must incorporate real-time data and ecosystem indicators to ensure timely and effective responses to changing marine conditions.

3. Relaxed Rules on Discards and Returns

The Bill creates new circumstances under which commercial fishers are permitted to return or abandon fish or other aquatic animals . This relaxation of rules risks increasing the mortality of non-target species (by-catch) and juvenile fish, which are often discarded. This practice not only wastes marine resources but also masks the true impact of fishing on marine ecosystems and hinders accurate stock assessments, making effective management impossible [3].

Recommendation: We call for Mandatory By-catch Reduction and Full Accountability. The government should mandate the widespread use of best- practice by-catch mitigation technologies (e.g., seabird scaring devices, turtle excluder devices, selective fishing gear). In addition, all caught fish, regardless of size or species, must be landed and fully accounted for to ensure accurate data collection, minimize waste, and provide a true picture of fishing impacts [.

4. Confidentiality of Camera Footage

The Bill proposes new provisions that explicitly exclude on-board camera recordings from the Official Information Act 1982 and impose significant penalties for unauthorized release. There appears to be no valid reason for this change, other than  to decrease  public scrutiny of illegal  activities.

This measure represents a substantial reduction in transparency and public accountability of commercial fishing operations. It prevents independent verification of fishing practices, by-catch events, and compliance with regulations, increasing distrust among the public and environmental stakeholders at a time when  all  parties need to be working more collaboratively.

Recommendation: We urge the Committee to ensure Full Transparency and Public Access to on-board camera footage. While noting some issues around commercial sensitivity, this footage should be accessible under the Official Information Act, with redactions only occurring where absolutely necessary. Public oversight is crucial for building trust in the monitoring system and ensuring that fishing practices align with sustainability goals.

5. Revised Judicial Review Window

The Bill introduces a significantly shortened timeframe for challenging fisheries management decisions, requiring any legal challenge to be made within 20 working days of the decision being notified. This extremely short window severely weakens legal safeguards for environmental protection and public participation, making it nearly impossible for environmental organizations and the public to mount effective legal challenges against potentially unsustainable decisions.

Recommendation: We advocate for reasonable  and appropriate Judicial Review timeframes. It is essential to maintain adequate timeframes for judicial review, allowing sufficient time for legal preparation and ensuring that decisions can be properly scrutinized fortheir environmental impact and adherence to legal and scientific requirements.

6. Risks and Opportunities Related to Bottom Trawling

Bottom trawling is widely scientifically recognized for its devastating environmental impacts, including habitat destruction, by-catch, and disruption of marine ecosystems.

The Fisheries Amendment Bill, in not explicitly addressing bottom trawling with the proposed  new regulations, creates an environment where bottom  trawling and its devastating impacts on  the marine environment and fish  stocks, will  continue and could even incentivize this incredibly destructive practice through  the relaxation of camera footage processes and by-catch  rules.

New Zealand is:

  • The only country in the South Pacific that still allows bottom trawling on seamounts
  • The only country whose vessels have bottom trawled in the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) regulatory area since 2019.
  • One of only seven countries still conducting bottom trawling in international waters

Recommendation: We urge the Committee to incorporate specific measures to address bottom trawling. These should include:

  • Ban all bottom trawling by New Zealand fishing companies in the medium and long  term.
  • In the short term ban Bottom Trawling on Seamounts and Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs): Explicitly prohibit bottom-contact gear on seamounts and other identified VMEs to protect unique and fragile deep-sea habitats
  • Provide regulatory or financial incentives for fishers to transition to long-lining, potting, or other low-impact methods that minimize seabed disturbance and by-catch.
  • Mandatory Habitat Impact Assessments: Require comprehensive environmental impact assessments (EIAs) specifically for bottom trawling activities before any multi-year catch limits are set or renewed.
  • Public Transparency of Trawl Impacts: Ensure public access to camera footage of trawling operations to maintain transparency and accountability.
  • Spatial Closures for Recovery: Utilize management procedures to establish and enforce no-trawl zones in areas identified as critical habitats or those requiring ecological recovery.

7. Impact of Climate Change on Fisheries Management

Concern: New Zealand’s marine environment is rapidly  experiencing significant impacts from climate change, including rising sea temperatures, marine heatwaves, and shifting fish distributions.

The current Bill, with its emphasis on multi- year catch decisions and a tiered information framework that can be permissive for data-poor stocks, is ill-equipped to respond to the rapid and unpredictable changes driven by climate change. This lack of adaptive capacity risks exacerbating the vulnerability of fish stocks and marine ecosystems].

Recommendation: The Fisheries Amendment Bill must explicitly integrate climate change considerations into its core framework. This includes:

• Climate-Adaptive Catch Limits: Mandate that all catch limit decisions (TAC/TACC) explicitly account for climate change projections, marine heatwave data, and observed shifts in fish populations.

• Shorten Review Cycles for Vulnerable Stocks: Require annual or more frequent reviews for stocks identified as climate-vulnerable or those showing significant range shifts, moving away from rigid multi-year decisions.

• Protect Climate Refugia: Prohibit destructive fishing methods, such as bottom trawling, in areas that serve as thermal refuges or critical habitats for species displaced by warming waters.

• Dynamic Management Areas: Develop mechanisms to adjust management boundaries quickly as fish stocks shift their geographic ranges, ensuring that newly arrived or displaced stocks are not over-exploited due to outdated management zones.

Conclusion

The New Zealand Fisheries Amendment Bill, in its current form, contains provisions that threaten the short,  medium  and long-term  health and sustainability of New Zealand’s marine environment.

We believe that a truly sustainable and prosperous seafood sector depends on robust environmental protection, scientific integrity, and public trust.

We respectfully request the Committee to give due consideration to these concerns and recommendations.

When the Last Tree Falls

The vital importance of humans connecting to nature: for themselves and for the planet

“In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks.”
—John Muir

Muir’s century-old observation now reads like a medical prescription. A growing body of research shows that regular contact with living, biodiverse ecosystems is a non-negotiable pillar of human health—and the fastest way to make people care about the twin crises of biodiversity loss and climate change.

This post unpacks (1) what happens to our bodies and minds when we lose everyday nature, (2) how collapsing ecosystems ricochet back on us, and (3) the personal and collective actions that turn concern into meaningful response.

As the world’s rapidly expanding human population increasingly no longer lives in proximity to our living world- but instead is surrounded by concrete, tar and walled environments, and enclosed within self-defined technological walls of social media, AI and self-selected ‘entertainment’, we are losing both our vital connection with the rest of the natural world we are intrinsically part of, along with our unconscious understanding of its importance to us.

In doing so, we become less and less aware how the natural world is shrinking inexorably year by year, decade by decade, day by day, and what that means for both ourselves and our world, in terms of our wellbeing and our very survival.

Each new generation of humans normalise a poorer natural baseline, lowering conservation ambition and stabilising acceptance of biodiversity loss as the ‘norm’. Along with those changes of what is ‘naturally normal’, cultural definitions of ‘nature’ shift over time ( e.g. Wordsworth’s early 19th century poems vs. today’s TikTok hiking videos).

Reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more vulnerable to pests and disease, and where fresh water is in problematic supply.

As climate extremes intensify with climate change, the impacts of both floods and droughts are magnified from loss of tree cover.


The 30-Minute Cure: How Daily Green & Blue (aquatic)Time Rewires Us

DomainEvidence-Based Benefits of Frequent Nature Contact
PhysicalLower cortisol, heart-rate variability, blood pressure; stronger immunity (natural killer-cell activity up 50 % after a 3-day forest trip) .
MentalReduced risk of depression, anxiety and ADHD; restored “directed attention” capacity (Attention Restoration Theory) .
SocialHigher empathy, pro-social behavior, lower crime rates in neighborhoods with tree cover .
Spiritual / CulturalSense of identity and belonging, especially for Indigenous and rural communities tied to specific species and landscapes .

Dose–response sweet spot: Two hours per week in green or blue spaces (parks, coastlines, riverbanks) delivers optimal well-being gains .

The Flip Side: Nature-Deficit Disorder

When that contact disappears, we see the inverse—rising obesity, Type-2 diabetes, myopia in children, loneliness, and eco-anxiety. Urban populations already spend 90 % of their time indoors; in lower-income areas, unequal access to safe nature is a new axis of health inequity. Little data is available on the impact of nature deprivation in the Global South.

In countries where daily life is entangled with nature (smallholder farming, forest reliance), disconnection manifests differently—often as loss of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) rather than park visits.


What Biodiversity Loss Actually Costs Us

Biodiversity is the planet’s operating system. Every lost species is a deleted line of code.

Every living thing: every individual fish, every insect, every bird every mammal, has its own intrinsic worth. Its ‘value’ is simply in its existence.

A. Health & Medicine

  • 70 % of anti-cancer drugs are natural or bio-inspired; 60 % of all new infectious diseases are zoonotic and surge when habitat edges fragment .
  • Traditional medicine—used by 80 % of people in developing countries—depends on intact ecosystems .

B. Food & Water Security

  • Pollinator decline already threatens crops worth US $235 billion annually .
  • Wetlands loss (35 % since 1970) has left >2 billion people with declining water quality and rising water-borne disease .

C. Climate Stability

  • Forests, peatlands and mangroves store more carbon than all human emissions from 2009–2018 combined. When biodiversity unravels, these sinks flip to sources, accelerating extreme weather that in turn wipes out more species .

D. Positive Impacts of Human Skin Contact with Soil

Regular, safe skin contact with biodiverse, uncontaminated soil—gardening, barefoot walking, forest play etc, rewilds the human microbiome, trains the immune system and supports mental well-being.

1. Immune-System Maturation
Finnish daycare study: children playing on forest-floor (soil-rich) yards had more diverse skin & gut microbiota and stronger immune regulation two years later. Nature 2024
2. Anti-inflammatory Response
Urban adults handling microbially-rich indoor potting soil for one month showed ↑ plasma IL-10 (anti-inflammatory cytokine) and ↑ skin bacterial diversity (Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes, etc.). Environment International 2024
3. Immediate Skin Microbiome Boost
Just two minutes of rubbing hands with soil & plant materials produced an instant increase in skin microbial richness (Actinobacteria, Acidobacteria, etc.) that lasted several hours. Frontiers 2025
4. Gut Microbiome Support
Mice exposed to non-sterile soil developed higher gut microbial diversity than those on sterile soil, indicating that dermal/oral transfer of soil microbes reaches the intestine. NIH PMC 2019
5. Vaccine Response Enhancement
Adults with daily soil-moss skin contact mounted stronger cell-mediated responses to pneumococcal vaccine (higher IFN-γ, IL-17), suggesting soil exposure can improve vaccine efficacy.
Nature 2024
6. Mental-Health & Stress Reduction
Soil bacterium Mycobacterium vaccae triggers anti-neuroinflammatory pathways, lowers stress hormones and may improve mood via the gut-brain axis. New York Times 2024

E. Mental & Cultural Resilience

  • Coastal or forest communities displaced by fires, floods or coral bleaching lose livelihoods and ancestral stories, triggering inter-generational trauma .

Turning Contact into Commitment: The Feedback Loop That Matters

Every exposure to a thriving wild patch biophilically primes the brain. Here’s how to restore that effect:

Personal Practice

  1. Micro-dose daily: 10 minutes of exposure to tree canopy or moving water (even street trees count).
  2. Citizen science: Log birds, insects or plants on iNaturalist—data that feeds real conservation maps.
  3. Nature journaling: Sketching or photographing a leaf or shell deepens attention and memory encoding.

Community Action

  • Green prescriptions: Doctors in the U.K., New Zealand and Japan now write “green prescriptions” alongside statins . National pilots of green prescriptions in Scotland (2021) and Canada (2022).
  • Schoolyard biodiversity: Converting asphalt to mini-forests improves test scores and doubles local insect diversity within three years .
  • Urban rewilding: Pocket meadows, living walls and daylighted streams cool cities, cut AC demand and give residents daily wildlife encounters. Barcelona’s “Green Axes” programme is a great initiative.
  • Biodiverse botanic parks where people of all ages and ability can explore and learn about our natural green world.
  • Plant native trees in your own backyard- replace that lawn you mow!

Policy & Economy

Why the biodiversity decline matters for climate action

PathwayMechanismEvidence
Environmental behaviourHigher NCI (Nature Connection Index) predicts pro-environmental choices (diet, transport, donations).Martin et al., 2020, J. Environ. Psychol.
Biophilic policy supportIndividuals with strong nature connection are 2× more likely to back ambitious conservation funding.Mackay & Schmitt, 2019, Conserv. Lett.
Psychological resilienceNature connection buffers eco-anxiety; enables sustained activism.Whitburn et al., 2020, Climatic Change
Feedback loopShifting baseline syndrome: each generation normalises a poorer natural baseline, lowering conservation ambition.Papworth et al., 2009, Trends Ecol. Evol.

A Thought Experiment

Imagine the last dawn chorus on Earth: no birds, no insects, just human-made noise.
Now rewind the tape. Plant one native tree outside your window this month. Spend 30 undistracted minutes beside it each week. Listen.

Your nervous system will notice the difference within days.
Your neurons will start lobbying your choices.
And the planet will register one more caretaker.

When we experience how nature heals us, we finally understand that healing nature is self-defense.


References

Richardson, M., Dobson, J., Abson, D. J., Lumber, R., Hunt, A., & Young, R. (2020) Nature connectedness in decline: Evidence from 5000 English adults 2013-2019. People and Nature, 2(3), 821–835. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10146

Richardson, M., Hunt, A., Hinds, J., Bragg, R., Fido, D., Petronzi, D., … & White, M. P. (2019) A measure of nature connectedness for children and adults: Validation, reliability and associations with well-being. PLoS ONE, 14(7), e0218641. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218641

7 Consequences of Biodiversity Loss for Humans: gaiacompany.io.

WWF: How does Biodiversity loss affect me and everyone else? Reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more vulnerable to pests and disease, and where fresh water is in irregular

Royal Society: What is the human impact on biodiversity? How do humans affect biodiversity? · Deforestation. · Habitat loss through pervasive, incremental encroachment such as that caused by urban sprawl.

thrivabilitymatters.org 2023/04/14: How do humans affect biodiversity? The Importance Of Contact With Nature For Well-Being. Spending time in nature, or mingling with a natural element has tremendous effects on physical, mental, social and spiritual wellness.

United Nations Foundation 2023/05/18: How Biodiversity Loss Harms Human Health. A higher risk of infectious outbreaks is just one of the many repercussions of biodiversity loss on human health.

Biodiversity loss can have significant direct health impacts if ecosystem services no longer meet societal needs.

World Health Organization (WHO) 2023/10/12: Climate change is directly contributing to humanitarian emergencies from heatwaves, wildfires, floods, tropical storms and hurricanes.

Mental Health Foundation(U.K.): How connecting with nature benefits our mental health. Research shows that people who are more connected with nature are usually happier in life and more likely to report feeling their lives are worthwhile.

US EPA impacts to human health: Climate Change; City of Chicago: Overview – Temperature Impacts – Air Quality Impacts – Extreme Events – Vector-borne Diseases – Water-Related Illnesses – Food Safety and Nutrition – Mental Health – Populations of Concern – Other Health Impacts.

American Psychological Association 2020/04/01: Nurtured by nature. Exposure to nature has been linked to a host of benefits, including improved attention, lower stress, better mood, & reduced risk of psychiatric disorders.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Climate Change and Human Health | US EPA: This includes increasing the risk of extreme heat events and heavy storms, increasing the risk of asthma attacks and changing the spread of certain diseases .

LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY: THE BURGEONING THREAT TO HUMAN HEALTH: O Adebayo · 2019 · Mencionado — the loss of biological biodiversity appears to affect significantly human health.

Impact of Contact With Nature on the Wellbeing and Nature Connectedness Indicators After a Desertic Outdoor Experience on Isla Del Tiburon by G Garza-Terán · 2022 · Cited by 23 — Results show that both wellbeing and Nature Connectedness are positively influenced by performing activities out in the natural environment.nih.gov2024/05/24

Climate change impacts on health across the life course: The climate crisis results in new disorders such as eco-anxiety and solastalgia. Older people also experience adverse brain effects

Effects of Climate Change on Health – CDC: The health effects of these disruptions include increased respiratory and cardiovascular disease, injuries and premature deaths related to extreme weather .

UC Davis Health2023/05/03: 3 ways getting outside into nature helps improve your health. Research continues to show that being outside and experiencing nature can improve our mental health and increase our ability to focus.

Arizona Health Sciences2023/04/03: A look at the cost of climate change on human health. The evidence is clear – climate change is having a negative effect on our physical and mental health.

ScienceDirect: Natural environments improve parent-child communication by T Cameron-Faulkner · 2018 · Cited by 84 — In this study, natural environments influenced social interactions between parents and children by increasing connected, responsive communication.

The global human impact on biodiversity F Keck · 2025 · Mencionado por 37 — We show that human pressures distinctly shift community composition and decrease local diversity across terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems.

Benefits for emotional regulation of contact with nature by ML Ríos-Rodríguez · 2024 · Cited by 15 — Exposure to natural environments, such as parks, forests, and green areas, is often linked to a decrease in stress, anxiety and depression.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Climate change impacts –

Climate change impacts our society in many different ways. Drought can harm food production and human health. Flooding can lead to spread of disease, death, …

Universidad Veracruzana: Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. The impacts of diversity loss on ecological processes might be sufficiently large to rival the impacts of many other global drivers of environmental change.

Friends of the Earth2020/09/23Importance of nature. For children and adults alike, daily contact with nature is linked to better health, less stress, better mood, reduced obesity – an amazing list ..

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Climate Change Impacts on Health | US EPA Climate change can disrupt access to health care services, threaten infrastructure, and pose physical and mental health risks.

United Nations: Five ways the climate crisis impacts human security

United Nations University2024/05/16: Understanding Humanity’s Role in Biodiversity Loss Losing species threatens our well-being. As we lose species, our ecosystems also lose genetic diversity.

Science Mission Directorate2024/10/23: The Causes of Climate Change – NASA Science. The greenhouse effect is essential to life on Earth, but human-made emissions in the atmosphere are trapping and slowing heat loss to space.

ScienceDirect: Modelling human influences on biodiversity at a global scale–A human ecology perspective M Cepic · 2022 · Mencionado — Globalised human interventions cause most biodiversity losses.


gaiacompany.io

7 Consequences of Biodiversity Loss for Humans – Gaia

1. Food Insecurity · 2. Health Impacts · 3. Loss of Medicinal Resources · 4. Reduced Ecosystem Services · 5. Economic Losses · 6. Climate Instability.WWFHow does Biodiversity loss affect me and everyone else?Reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more vulnerable to pests and disease, and where fresh water is in irregular …Royal SocietyWhat is the human impact on biodiversity?How do humans affect biodiversity? · Deforestation. · Habitat loss through pervasive, incremental encroachment such as that caused by urban sprawl · Pollution such …thrivabilitymatters.org2023/04/14The Importance Of Contact With Nature For Well-BeingSpending time in nature, or mingling with a natural element has tremendous effects on physical, mental, social and spiritual wellness.United Nations Foundation2023/05/18How Biodiversity Loss Harms Human HealthA higher risk of infectious outbreaks is just one of the many repercussions of biodiversity loss on human health. By disrupting the delicate …WHO2025/02/18BiodiversityBiodiversity loss can have significant direct health impacts if ecosystem services no longer meet societal needs. Changes in ecosystems can …WHO2023/10/12Climate change – World Health Organization (WHO)Climate change is directly contributing to humanitarian emergencies from heatwaves, wildfires, floods, tropical storms and hurricanes and …Mental Health FoundationNature: How connecting with nature benefits our mental healthResearch shows that people who are more connected with nature are usually happier in life and more likely to report feeling their lives are worthwhile.US EPAimpacts to human health – Climate Change – City of ChicagoOn This Page: – Overview – Temperature Impacts – Air Quality Impacts – Extreme Events – Vectorborne Diseases – Water-Related Illnesses – Food Safety and Nutrition – Mental Health – Populations of Concern – Other Health Impacts — Overview The impacts of climate change include warming temperatures, changes in precipitation, increases in the frequency or intensity of some extreme weather events, and rising sea levels. These impacts threaten our health by affecting the food we eat, the water we drink, the air we breathe, and the weather we experience. The severity of these health risks will depend on the ability of public health and safety systems to address or prepare for these changing threats, as well as factors such as an individual’s behavior, age, gender, and economic status. Impacts will vary based on a where a person lives, how sensitive they are to health threats, how much they are exposed to climate change impacts, and how well they andAmerican Psychological Association2020/04/01Nurtured by natureExposure to nature has been linked to a host of benefits, including improved attention, lower stress, better mood, reduced risk of psychiatric disorders and …U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyClimate Change and Human Health | US EPAThis includes increasing the risk of extreme heat events and heavy storms, increasing the risk of asthma attacks and changing the spread of certain diseases …nih.govLOSS OF BIODIVERSITY: THE BURGEONING THREAT TO HUMAN HEALTHpor O Adebayo · 2019 · Mencionado por 28 — While the loss of biological biodiversity appears to affect significantly human health, it has also been opined to be a significant threat to the attainment of …nih.govImpact of Contact With Nature on the Wellbeing and Nature Connectedness Indicators After a Desertic Outdoor Experience on Isla Del Tiburonby G Garza-Terán · 2022 · Cited by 23 — Results show that both wellbeing and Nature Connectedness are positively influenced by performing activities out in the natural environment.nih.gov2024/05/24Climate change impacts on health across the life course – PMCThe climate crisis results in new disorders such as eco-anxiety and solastalgia. Older people also experience adverse brain effects from the …CDC2024/02/29Effects of Climate Change on Health – CDCThe health effects of these disruptions include increased respiratory and cardiovascular disease, injuries and premature deaths related to extreme weather …UC Davis Health2023/05/033 ways getting outside into nature helps improve your healthResearch continues to show that being outside and experiencing nature can improve our mental health and increase our ability to focus.UArizona Health Sciences2023/04/03A look at the cost of climate change on human healthThe evidence is clear – climate change is having a negative effect on our physical and mental health. The scale of the impact is vast, with …ScienceDirectNatural environments improve parent-child communicationby T Cameron-Faulkner · 2018 · Cited by 84 — In this study, natural environments influenced social interactions between parents and children by increasing connected, responsive communication. These …NatureThe global human impact on biodiversitypor F Keck · 2025 · Mencionado por 37 — We show that human pressures distinctly shift community composition and decrease local diversity across terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems.nih.govBenefits for emotional regulation of contact with natureby ML Ríos-Rodríguez · 2024 · Cited by 15 — Exposure to natural environments, such as parks, forests, and green areas, is often linked to a decrease in stress, anxiety and depression.National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationClimate change impacts – NOAAClimate change impacts our society in many different ways. Drought can harm food production and human health. Flooding can lead to spread of disease, death, …Universidad VeracruzanaBiodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature PDFThe impacts of diversity loss on ecological processes might be sufficiently large to rival the impacts of many other global drivers of environmental change.Friends of the Earth2020/09/23Importance of natureFor children and adults alike, daily contact with nature is linked to better health, less stress, better mood, reduced obesity – an amazing list …U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyClimate Change Impacts on Health | US EPAClimate change can disrupt access to health care services, threaten infrastructure, and pose physical and mental health risks.Naciones UnidasFive ways the climate crisis impacts human security | United Nations1. Climate change intensifies competition over land and water · 2. Climate change affects food production and drives up hunger · 3. Climate change forces people …United Nations University2024/05/16Understanding Humanity’s Role in Biodiversity LossLosing species threatens our well-being. As we lose species, our ecosystems also lose genetic diversity. This often negatively impacts the …Science Mission Directorate2024/10/23The Causes of Climate Change – NASA ScienceThe greenhouse effect is essential to life on Earth, but human-made emissions in the atmosphere are trapping and slowing heat loss to space.ScienceDirectModelling human influences on biodiversity at a global scale–A human ecology perspectivepor M Cepic · 2022 · Mencionado por 62 — Globalised human interventions cause most biodiversity losses.

‘Cant Find My Way Home’

The heading for this post comes from one of the great compositions by Stevie Winwood and the UK band ‘Blind Faith’ in 1969.

It perhaps symbolises in 2024, the journey this human world is travelling and its likely future…

A world where pointless and savage wars in West Asia, Ukraine and Africa are spurred on by the quest for power and profit and where infantile ideologies predominate.

And a world where climate change continues its seemingly inexorable march towards a planet destroyed through the pure blind stupidity and ignorance of our ‘world leaders’.

Never before have we all been able to witness the savage brutality of a war of genocide in technicolour- never before have we seen Western media and politicians proselytising so blatantly for that inhumanity. An oh so stark reminder of the difference between Western weasel words about ‘freedom and democracy’ and their support of mass-murder when it profits them.

A reminder too that this has been the Western theme for 500 years of colonial exploitation of more vulnerable populations- that these centuries of exploitation are, in the immortal words in 2022 of EU’s blatantly racist and furiously stupid foreign policy chief Josep Borrell,  the reason why Europe and the West is a garden and the rest of the world (in his view), a jungle.

To support this meme, our Western mainstream media continues to idolise the fiction of Western supremacy in all things. As the evidence that this is no longer the case continues to pile up, Western media have resorted to ever greater contortions and lies to support that meme. The recent violence in Amsterdam between Israeli and Dutch football fans – characterised as ‘antisemitism’ is just one of many examples.

Time and time again we have seen European (and U.S. ) political leaders make decisions based on an outdated and irrelevant ideology which ignores all rationality and the reality of the situation.

The most telling, and likely deadly, example of this, is their farcical contortions to prove to their electorates that they doing something about climate change when they are in fact doing worse than nothing. There are no reductions in CO2 emissions, and the hype about the electrification of energy and transport is just that- electrification is not substituting for coal or oil, it comes as an addition to the continuing use of high rates of coal and oil burning.

Our ‘civilisation;’ is locked into endless ‘growth’ (an awful word given that economic ‘growth’ is the total opposite of true organic living growth) – a paradigm that is destroying the planet, but from which we apparently have no wish to escape from.

While climate and environmental scientists have long been steadily ratcheting up their estimations of the devastating impacts of global warming and biodiversity to the living fabric of our world, it is only now that economists from the ‘Network for Greening the Financial System’ are beginning to estimate the true fiscal costs to climate warming- something that could and should have been done 50 years ago, as it would have provided some leverage for real change in this money obsessed world. In the latest estimates economists estimate that global GDP will contract by 33% by 2100 from a 3C rise in global average surface temperatures. That 33% reduction in global GDP is almost certainly a huge underestimation of the real fiscal costs of global warming.

That ‘canary in the coalmine’ early warning system for economies, the cost of insurance, is already rising rapidly as a result of the rapidly increasing unpredictability of our climate systems.

We still do not know for certain what is going to happen to global sea currents and sea level rise as a result of ice melt , but early indications are that there will be a complete collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) within a few decades. When that collapse occurs, not only will much of the Northern Hemisphere become much colder, but the Southern Hemisphere will warm much much faster.

If that’s not enough, the 1972 bestseller Limits to Growth (LtG) authors (70 years ago) concluded that, if global society kept pursuing economic growth, it would experience a decline in food production, industrial output, and ultimately population, within this century. Recent remodelling of that study indicate ‘a halt in welfare, food, and industrial production over the next decade or so, which puts into question the suitability of continuous economic growth as humanity’s goal in the twenty-first century.’

And then we can go to the annual farce of the COP global conferences: the pretence that global leaders are in fact doing something about climate change, when in fact they are doing less than nothing- actively promoting more oil and gas exploration and consumption because endless ‘growth’ on a finite planet is a logical and sensible thing to do -isn’t it?

To hold everything together, so that we don’t lose our trajectory and deviate from accelerating over the climate change cliff, our mainstream and social media incessantly promotes consumption and the vital importance of the constant expansion of each country’s mythical GDP.

Have we completely forgotten our way home?

_______________________________________

References

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/08/climate-breakdown-will-hit-global-growth-by-a-third-say-central-banks

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-39810-w

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jiec.13084

https://www.independent.ie/opinion/editorial/editorial-cop29-climate-summit-is-indeed-like-a-dark-joke-given-the-lack-of-buy-in-from-world-leaders/a131893267.html

SOME THOUGHTS ON  FISCAL  IMPLICATIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND BIODIVERSITY LOSS FOR NEW ZEALAND (and others)

Climate change fiscal  costs are largely currently assessed as solely the impacts of major weather events and consequent  restoration costs. While restoration costs after extreme weather events are likely to  rise exponentially over the next  century  and  beyond, there are significant other fiscal  impacts that also need to  be factored into planning. Note also  that  damage to infrastructure from climate change will  steadily increase in  both intensity and frequency over the next  100  years and beyond.

Ignoring future planning for these certainties will  result in  even more damage to  New Zealand’s economy and its citizen’s livelihood   safety and wellbeing  than is necessary. The impacts of climate change will be disproportinately felt by  those with limited incomes.

The longer we delay  anticipating and responding to the impending fiscal risks from  climate change, the greater the impacts will be on New Zealanders.

Food security for all, but particularly those with limited or no  income, is a key issue in  maintaining the wellbeing of New Zealands’  human population.

As climate change increasingly impacts New Zealand,  food supply chains are likely to  become more and more disrupted, resulting in  increasing costs  and decreasing volumes for food and other supplies.

Supply chain  disruption will occur for  a number of  reasons:

  • More and more frequent intense  climate events will  result in more  frequent road/rail  washouts  and flooding of increasing magnitude both within  New Zealand and beyond.
  • Sea and airline cargo  will  be increasingly disrupted by  extreme  weather events  (including a significant rise in  flight turbulence)  and  intense oceanic storms,  resulting in increase  damage to  transport vehicles and food stocks, higher  insurance costs and resultant food price increases, as well  as disincentives for farmers to produce more produce as export costs rise.
  • Drought,  flood and increases in  temperature in New Zealand and overseas  will  result in  reductions in animal numbers  and plant based food.
  • Rising sea temperatures, along with  ongoing unsustainable  fisheries exploitation are likely to  mean  the large NZ fishing industry  will  collapse within  a few decades
  • The recent  expansion of the dairy ’industry’  into  areas of New Zealand which  are  totally reliant on  intensive irrigation, like the majority of the East  Coast of the South Island, means such  areas will  become completely unsustainable for water intensive crops and  animals. Already  high irrigation levels  in Canterbury,  as a result of drought, are resulting in  unsustainable levels of water being drained from  local  rivers and aquifiers as well  as nitrate and other pollution of potable water supplies
  • Rising sea levels will  increasingly impact  on  both sea and airport  infrastructure. Most of New Zealand’s major airports are built in  flood prone areas or  close to the sea,  and  rising tides will  impact  on port sea  walls,  wharves, cranes and  container storage areas. The cost of rebuilds and/or relocation of air and sea port infrastructure are very  significant.
  • Consequent reduced  food production for export  by  New Zealand food producers will result in  increasing balance of payment’s deficits which  will  likely  result in  fewer overseas food and other  imports, as well  as less government taxation, resulting in  less income to  finance climate change mitigation.
  • As climate instability increases, specific areas of New Zealand like Northland and the East  Coast  of the North Island are increasingly vulnerable to major ongoing  flood and slip  damage and  consequent food production losses. South Island East  Coast  and Nelson droughts are  also becoming more frequent, with similar consequences.

Climate Change is also not only impacting of food supply but is  also beginning to  significantly impact  on  overall  insurer costs for housing,  businesses and new ‘developments’. As insurance premiums rise, all  fiscal  transactions will  slow, as  fiscal risks to  suppliers and purchasers  increase. A slowing economy ( estimated  conservatively as  a reduction of at  least  20% in 30 years) will result in  job losses and further risks to  human wellbeing, unless forward planning and implementation occurs now

Disruptions to and increased risk in  air flights will also  inevitably  result in  progressive reductions  in  tourism  income into  New Zealand (currently 11.4% of GDP)

The recent  analysis of Civil  Defence responses to the Hawkes Bay weather event has demonstrated that  Civil  Defence is not sufficiently resourced to   respond adequately to  even the current level  of extreme events.   Two  cyclones within  a few weeks,  as a Vanuatu  has recently  experienced, would stretch CD to breaking point. Significant increases in central   and local CD resourcing are going to be essential. Similarly, Police and NZ Army will  need upgrades to  cope with  the increasing frequency and magnitude  of climate extreme events.

Energy Consumption

New Zealand’s increasing consumption of energy, particularly in  increased use of EVs and other machinery that is being transitioned to  electrification and also IT /AI/Cloud based impacts. While NZ currently has just  sufficient sources of renewable energy, if current electricity  demands continue to increase, considerable investment in  renewable energy production in  solar  and wind will  be required.  

Carbon Credit Offset  Costs

If we continue under this current government policies to  take less action on  local  carbon reduction, we will  need to  purchase increased offshore  carbon  credits in  the billions of dollars to  meet  our international  obligations. Additionally, failure to meet  our international  obligations will  impact  on  our capacity  to export our produce to many countries.

Biodiversity Loss

The loss of New Zealand’s indigenous biodiversity is  well  documented and acknowledged as a major ongoing concern. However biodiversity loss of both  indigenous and non-indigenous flora and fauna  is occurring at an  alarming rate in New Zealand.

 We do  not  fully understand the intricate interconnections that occur between all  species in Earth’s  soil  and air  and the risks to  inadvertently tripping ‘tipping-points’ resulting in extreme  and sudden biodiversity loss are  consequently high. There are also  significant  difficulties in  attempting to  measure the fiscal  implications of biodiversity loss. However the current trajectory  of biodiversity loss in New Zealand and across the world, has the potential to  not only severely contract  GDP globally,  but potentially to  extinguish  all  life on  earth.

Piwakawaka (NZ's fantail)

The fertility of our soil, increasingly contaminated with  artificial  fertilizers, pesticides and weedicides is rapidly  deteriorating, particularly as mycorrhizal fungi; essential  to soil fertility, cannot survive in toxic environments. New Zealand’s continued capacity to  produce high volumes of agricultural  exports will  therefore be compromised in  the medium  to long term. The loss of pollinators  through toxicity, loss of habitat  and  introduced viruses is also a  major risk

Population Impacts

In recent years  NZ  governments have  increasingly used  migrant labour as a  cost-effective  mechanism  to increase GDP, however without the consequent   necessary increased development of critical  infrastructure in housing,  health or education. Rapidly increased populations have also  put increasing pressure on  biodiversity as ‘developed’ urban areas have expanded exponentially, and factors like recreational  fishing and foraging by  ever  larger numbers of people , impact  on  species numbers.

Potential  Solutions

Forward planning is urgently required  to both proactively  reduce the inevitable adverse impacts of climate change and to  ensure sufficient funding and other resources are available to  local  and regional  government and local  communities. The human  and fiscal  costs  of not proactively planning  for the inevitable will  be exponentially larger unless work is begun  now.

 Every Local community  must  be encouraged  and resourced to become as self-sufficient as possible as supply chains are increasingly disrupted.

Local  versus National

It is clear that  local  governments will  not be able to  finance the continuous work  to  both  reduce  local  climate change impacts and to  respond to local   adverse events through rates increases. A  formalised collaborative practical  partnership  between local and national  funding bodies needs to be established specifically to  address climate change risks.

National Resourcing

National  systems are  becoming  increasingly financially pressured to  respond to  adverse event mitigation. It is therefore be essential  to  urgently establish  a national  funding body , likely based on  the ACC contribution model that  can   resource the immense amount of work  required.

Iwi

Local  Maori iwi have traditionally played an immensely valuable role in  supporting local  populations put at  risk  by  weather and other adverse  events . Because of their  strong local  knowledge of the environments and resources  and connections and their hugely  practical  responses to  events , iwi  need to be  fully resourced to  support ongoing emergencies. Further, local  iwi’s traditional  and Te Tiriti role of guardianship  (Kaitiaki) of their lands needs greater recognition and support.

_______________________________________________

References

https://www.oxfordeconomics.com/resource/the-global-economic-costs-of-climate-inaction

ashttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1002016023001388 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-22/the-link-between-climate-change-and-turbulence/103877522

Piwakawaka (NZ's fantail)

A submission to my local Council on bio-diversity & climate change

I note that the Mayor states in the forward to  the  Council’s proposed Annual  Plan that: ‘A strong area of focus for our Annual Plan 2019/20 is climate change. Council recognises that climate change mitigation and adaptation present key challenges for our region, country and the globe. We need to build our resilience and harness innovation to ensure we can plan and act in a responsive and responsible way”

It is rather difficult to reconcile this statement, which confirms the enormity of climate change as a fundamental threat to human sustainability, with the actions proposed in this Plan.

It is interesting to note that there is no mention in the Plan about species loss and ecosystem collapse- issues which have equal weight in terms of human capacity to survive on this planet in the medium to long term, and which are completely interrelated to climate change. Other than the Department of Conservation, which has a very limited range of actions permitted to it , there is no human agency out there looking out for nonhuman survivability either in this region or nationally. Councils must act!

Given the recent government report; ‘Environment Aotearoa 2019’, which as “Stuff” notes paint a grim picture in many respects, the report’s assessment of native ecosystems and the plants and animals they contain is particularly bleak. Almost two-thirds of rare ecosystems were threatened by collapse, the report said, and thousands of individual species were either threatened or at-risk of extinction. Those species include 90 per cent of all seabirds, 84 per cent of reptiles, 76 per cent of freshwater fish and 74 per cent of terrestrial birds.”

Actions which focus on th city’s  “development’ are fundamentally in opposition to working to reduce climate change and at the very least, slow down our catastrophic species loss. Whether we like it or not, humans are entirely dependent on the other species on this planet for our survival. We cannot live on shopping precincts and electronic baubles.

Human ‘progress’ equals the substitution for living and wild areas for dead spaces or toxic farming areas. Like it or not, your city planners will be forced sooner rather than later to plan for a zero growth economy – why not start now?

E.O Wilson’s book “Half Planet” and the Half-Earth Project https://www.half-earthproject.org/ make it very clear that humans will not survive on this planet without urgent and dramatic restoration of the eco-sphere that protects us all . The Extinction Rebellion movement of our youth also makes it very clear where our future does not lie and what our options are.  Act now with bravery! https://rebellion.earth/

Since coming to this city I have been amazed at the amount of concrete “easy-care’ properties; in a climate where plants grow well and where lawns could quickly become low maintenance shrub and vegetation areas that support a wide range of habitats and species.

Surely our recent wildfires are a lesson to be learnt? Re-plant hill areas with native shrubs and trees that provide shade and damp ground areas beneath them and provide moisture back into the air, increasing the likelihood of rain. Stop the planting of pines and eucalypts – plants which are adapted for drought conditions and which minimise moisture loss from their leaves and produce resins that encourage wild fires in dry times.

Some Proposed Actions:

  • Develop and environmental code for all city planning decisions , which place predominant weight in planning decisions that ensure minimal disruption to all wildlife, along with specific actions to increase wildlife . Equal species rights is the only survivable option https://www.humansandnature.org/humans-nature-the-right-relationship

  • Apply permaculture strategies for urban planning https://permaculturenews.org/2012/03/07/re-imagining-urban-design-and-city-life/ (and please note that quote there in terms of busineses co-opting open spaces: The enclosure of public spaces, by the same reasoning, is anti-democratic. When shopping malls and office towers eliminate our public squares, our parks and our promenades, we lose our capacity to see each other, to socialize and speak publicly, to identify and empathize with each other, to be commoners. Without these spaces, we are forced into playing roles dictated by the Market or the State.

  • Develop city planning processes that are aligned with human and other species centric behaviour https://centerforthelivingcity.org/janejacobs. Develop a city whose structures and systems fosters and celebrates other species in our presence, that encourages interactions between all members of its human society (the poor, the unemployed, the wealthy , the young and the old) , that promotes safety, connection and wellbeing for all.

  • Replant most large lawn areas owned by the council with native and edible plantings. And stop putting toxic acid bark as mulch. Pine bark kills most of the native insects and other organisms for some soil depth – mulch with living plants.

  • Completely eliminate immediately the spraying of weedicides to keep berns and other grassed areas “tidy”.

  • Develop a city by-law to limit the concreting over of properties – all new driveways remain gravelled and unsealed .This will allow the soil to breathe underneath and permit the multiple soil species in that area to survive. It will also allow rain water to soak into the ground and help create more life, rather than being siphoned off into concrete storm-water drains and into the sea.

  • Extensively replant all stream, river and estuarine boundaries to the water’s edge with plants natural to those habitat areas. This will reduce erosion, silting up and improve water quality, and greatly improve the diversity of all species surviving in the area and beyond the water.

  • Severely restrict fishing in all areas close to the shore. Such fishing is helping (along with the commercial companies) to destroy our oceans, by eliminating essential breeding grounds for fish and other marine animals.

  • Stop the development of more commercial areas unless they are densely planted with native and other species.

  • Provide extensive education training and practical opportunities for communities to ensure their neighbourhoods are safe places for all species. (learn how to provide natural habitats, how to plant your backyard, compost etc etc ) Develop a free city-wide ‘creative commons’ of internet shared space for creating community, connection and environmental sustainability.

  • Develop public transport systems that are innovative and flexible and light- eg shared transport options that are modelled on electric scooter technology, and also encourage community interaction.

  • Encourage local small scale human activities that work alongside nature. Develop community garden initiatives, seed sharing clubs, local community planting initiatives…

  • Significantly extend and improve the filtering and natural oxidation processes for sewer discharge. More swamp ponds and natural screening filters to ensure all sewage and other industrial water discharges are naturally filtered and no untreated discharges occur in extreme weather events (events which are becoming more and more frequent!)

  • RE-PLANT!