Does business as usual still make politics as usual? Prospects for sustainably managing

1. Does business as usual still make politics as usual? Prospects for sustainably managing freshwater resources as a CPR in Canterbury, New Zealand ≈ P.A. Memon, Lincoln University, New Zealand John W. Selsky, University of South Florida Lakeland, USA Presented at GIN2007 Waterloo, Ontario, June 2007

2. General context: managing fresh water • Challenge in both developed & developing countries • Increases in demand – population rises, development pressures, changing market economics • Compromised quantity and quality of supply • Governments attempt to deal with these challenges through their regulatory apparatuses. • New Zealand at forefront of innovation in natural resource management since passage of innovative Resource Management Act (RMA) in 1991.

3. Exploratory case study – Canterbury region, New Zealand • First phase - ‘prospected’ a case of a rapid increase in dairy farming in Canterbury and its impact on the management of fresh water resources during 1991-2001. • Diagnostic analysis published (Memon & Selsky 2004) • Stakeholders: • Fonterra • Environment Canterbury • Farmers • Fish & Game Council; Forest & Bird Society • Maori • Other – national Ministry of Ag & Fish; research institutions; etc.

4. First phase findings • Rapid increase in dairying associated with increasing pressure on water resources, quality degradation, social conflict • implementation gap in application of RMA to freshwater resources • condition of ‘business as usual makes politics as usual’ in political economy of Canterbury • RMA has transformative potential alternative solution paths possible: • “transformative change in the relationships among the private sector, the public sector and civil society” • “transformative change in each stakeholder’s and each sector’s relationship to natural resources”

5. trajectory for the case • Unless concrete steps are taken soon to resolve water allocation conflicts, the social, economic and environmental consequences will de-generate into one of the classic scenarios in the literature on exploited commons, namely, a tragedy of de facto open access (see Selsky & Creahan 1996). • A working hypothesis going into second phase of case study.

6. Second phase (2001-05) – research questions • Has the implementation gap persisted during 2001-05? How has it changed? • Has the condition ‘business as usual makes politics as usual’ persisted? How has it changed? • Has there been any evidence of either alternative solution path? Can these paths be made more operational?

7. Ecology of issues • Dairying in Canterbury • Project Aqua • Lake Tekapo water allocation issue - Meridian Energy vs Aoraki Water Trust • Central Plains Water scheme • Fonterra Clean Streams Accord • Environment Canterbury regional water plans • Rangitata River water conservation order • Ngai Tahu and water issues

8. Second phase findings • implementation gap? • In general, persisted. RMA still being used to protect/sustain private property rights, not common property rights. • ‘business as usual makes politics as usual’? • Same as it ever was. No new force to deflect neo-Gramscian alignment between Fonterra and ECan. • Use of ‘neoliberal toolkit’ • Continued, if not accelerated, degradation of groundwater and surface water

9. Findings – cont’d. • evidence of either alternative solution path? • Appears to be intensification of the earlier dynamics • Humble evidence: • Civil society has won a few skirmishes (Project Aqua, Lake Tekapo), but continues to lose the war to Fonterra • Fonterra now recognizes its environmental responsibilities due to European market pressures. • But NZ dairy farmers continue to see no problem, see themselves as guardians of the countryside/environment

10. Analysis & ‘points of hope’ • Situation not adequate because it is now less likely to deliver sustainable ecosystems.What can be done? • implementation gap? ☼ strengthen the consultation provisions and platforms for consensus building in the RMA ☼ retire those ECan staff with old and inappropriate mindsets and replace them with staff with a strategic, ecosystemic perspective? • ‘business as usual makes politics as usual’? ☼ put more faith in the market in terms of changing the mentality of consumers regarding product value. This may in turn inspire/force corporations to alter their practices and their deliverables to their markets.

11. evidence of either alternative solution path? ☼ Focus on institutions. Put more resources into government as an effective counterweight to big business (and big agriculture?). Either negotiate more aggressively on the terms of industry self-regulation, or monitor it more aggressively, or reduce the ambit of self-regulation. Revive/re-position government as the guarantor of the public good. ☼ Note:the politics in the application of such new regulation should be unusual!

12. Concluding thoughts • This is a bellwether issue for illustrating current state of public resource management vis-à-vis corporate and community interests in NZ. • At macro scale this issue mirrors the growing recognition of the challenge of climate change • Use of phrase ‘business as usual’ to signal impending climatic catastrophe

13. Source: Christchurch Press, 2003

14. dreck • Possible growing sense of ‘governmentality’ (Silver et al. 2007) or ‘environmentality’ (Argawal 2005). • [drop?] Examples of potential positive effects: • they might help stakeholders to transcend adversarial encounters based on private property rights • they might help stimulate new action-oriented platforms for sustainable ecosystem management.