Choosing Regional Futures

Choosing Regional Futures: Challenges and choices in buildingintegrated models to support long-term regional planning inNew Zealand*

D.T. Rutledge1, M. Cameron2, S. Elliott3, T. Fenton4, B. Huser5, G. McBride3,G. McDonald6, M. O’Connor7, D. Phyn5, J. Poot2, R. Price1, F. Scrimgeour2, B. Small8,A. Tait9, H. van Delden10, M.E. Wedderburn8, and R.A. Woods11

1 Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, Private Bag 3127, Hamilton, New Zealand.(e-mail: [email protected])

2 University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.3 National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Hamilton, New Zealand.4 Alchemists Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand.5 Environment Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.6 New Zealand Centre for Ecological Economics, Palmerston North, and Market Economics Ltd, Takapuna, New

Zealand.7 Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Guyancourt, Paris, France.8 AgResearch, Hamilton, New Zealand.9 National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Wellington, New Zealand.10 Research Institute for Knowledge Systems, Maastricht, The Netherlands.11 National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Abstract. Better integrated knowledge of coupled ecological-socio-economic systems canassist regional policy development and planning in moving towards sustainable development byassessing the viability of those systems to meet the needs of current and future generations.Developing models that will yield such integrated knowledge poses significant challenges andrequires hard choices. We explore these challenges and choices in the context of the ChoosingRegional Futures project. In our project a regional council in New Zealand and several researchorganizations are co-developing a spatial decision support system (SDSS) to assist the councilin undertaking long-term integrated planning as required by recent legislative changes. TheSDSS integrates aspects of the economy, environment, and society. It consists of a spatially-explicit systems model operating at three scales: regional, district (i.e. sub-region), and local(200 m grid cells). The SDSS addresses aspects of biodiversity, economics, demography, landuse change, and water resources. Climate change and external drivers at global and nationalscales are also included to explore their influence on future regional development. Whileresearchers lead SDSS development, council staff participated in the project to build their

* The New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology funds the Choosing Regional Futures projectunder Contract ENVW0601 to Environment Waikato. Environment Waikato also provides co-funding for D. Phyn,B. Huser, and T. Fenton, and Landcare Research co-funded early SDSS development as part of the Sustainable FuturesWaikato Capability Fund project. Corresponding author: Daniel Rutledge, Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research,Private Bag 3127, Hamilton, New Zealand. Email: [email protected]

doi:10.1111/j.1757-7802.2008.00006.x

© 2008 the author(s). Journal compilation © 2008 RSAI. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road,Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden MA 02148, USA.

Regional Science Policy & Practice, Volume 1 Number 1 November 2008.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

knowledge and capacity, thereby maximizing both the relevance and likelihood of uptake uponproject completion.

JEL classification: C00, H79, Q00, R00, R14

Key words: integrated systems modelling, New Zealand, regional planning, spatial decisionsupport system, sustainable development

1 Introduction

New Zealand, like the rest of the world, now aspires to the principles of sustainable develop-ment, including formally adopting the Brundtland definition of “development which meets theneeds of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their ownneeds” (DPMC 2003). Furthermore, those principles have been formally codified in the LocalGovernment Act of 2002 (LGA). The LGA defines the local government system consisting ofregional councils, district/city councils, and unitary authorities, which combine regional anddistrict functions, and gives them authority to govern activities within their jurisdictions. TheLGA states that:

this Act . . . provides for local authorities to play a broad role in promoting the social, economic,environmental, and cultural well-being of their communities, taking a sustainable developmentapproach. (Section 3).

As part of their responsibilities, councils must prepare a long-term council community plan(LTCCP). The plan must: (1) identify, prioritize and integrate economic, social, cultural andenvironmental outcomes that the community wants to achieve in the long term; (2) describecouncil actions to achieve those outcomes; (3) must be for at least 10 consecutive years; and (4)provide “integrated decision-making and co-ordination” of council resources (Local Govern-ment Act 2002, Section 93). Every three years councils must review the LTCCP to assessprogress towards meeting community outcomes, and every six years councils must update/revisethe LTCCP including determining if, and to what extent, desired community outcomes havechanged.

Sustainable development in general and the LGA amendments in particular present councilswith significant challenges. Sustainability presents an unstructured or ‘wicked’ problem char-acterized by: (1) multiple actors with differing, legitimate values and opinions; (2) high uncer-tainty; (3) aspects of irreversibility; (4) no clear solutions; (5) being fraught with contradictions;and (6) being persistent and unsolvable (Rittel and Weber 1973; O’Connor 1999; Ludwig 2001;Rayner 2006). The inherent complexity, dynamism, and uncertainty of natural and humansystems, as well as the interactions among them, makes understanding and defining sustainabil-ity and measuring progress towards it highly problematic.

Attempts in New Zealand and elsewhere to define and monitor sustainable developmenttypically focus on sets of unrelated or loosely related indicators often reported at intervals ofseveral years (Glauser 2001; Statistics New Zealand 2002; DEFRA 2007; de Montmollin andScheller 2007) or a decade in the case of state of environment reporting in New Zealand(Ministry for the Environment 1997, Ministry for the Environment 2007). While better thannothing, the indicators only provide a snapshot of the (recent) past state of natural or humansystems and provide no insights into long-term system viability. This issue becomes exacerbatedat anything below global scales, including national or regional scales. Attempts to characterizesustainability at sub-global scales must somehow account for exchanges with areas outside thesystem under study and the sustainability of those external areas.

86 D.T. Rutledge et al.


Fortunately, new theories, methods and models are actively being researched and developedto help meet the substantial challenges posed by sustainable development. Theories of post-normal science recognize the uncertainties and values inherent in scientific practice and call formore pluralistic and participatory approaches to knowledge creation (Funtowicz and Ravetz1991; Frame and Brown 2008) and the consideration and acceptance of multiple views to betteraddress complexity (O’Connor 1999; Verweij et al. 2006). Scenarios are being used increasinglyas a method for organizing and exploring the future (van Notten et al. 2003; Frame et al. 2005;PCE 2005; Börjesona et al. 2006), and a range of new methods for sustainability and perfor-mance assessment are being developed in a variety of contexts (e.g., Ghosh et al. 2006;Bebbington et al. 2007).

The use of integrated models to characterize the state of coupled ecological-socio-economicsystems is also becoming more common. As usability increases, it can help councils undertakelong-term planning by evaluating different drivers of change or different policies or strategies.Such models help reintegrate previously fragmented systems (i.e., the ‘pillars’ of sustainabledevelopment) and understand the possible consequences of a range of events from single largephenomena like floods, earthquakes, or volcanic eruptions to the accumulation of many smallindividual decisions causing, for example, urban sprawl (PCE 2002). Examples of such models,either static or dynamic, can be found across a range of scales and domains: global (Nakicenovicand Swart 2000; Tallis and Kareiva 2006), multi-country (Schröter et al. 2005; Audsley et al.2006), national (Foran and Poldy 2002), subnational (Santelmann et al. 2004), watersheds orcatchments (Hulse et al. 2002; Conway and Lathrop 2005; van Delden et al. 2007), and local(Caruso et al. 2005; Ballas et al. 2007).

While integrated modelling techniques help address complex issues of sustainable develop-ment, designing and developing such models requires many choices regarding their scope andscale and presents many challenges relative to integrating different types of models. Whichissues are to be addressed and therefore which aspects of the system are to be included and/orcombined? At what spatial and temporal scales? At what level of detail? More importantly,which issues will be left out? How feasible is integration given our knowledge base, namely, canwe build relationships using good data or are we simply guessing? What is the purpose of theexercise in the first place: basic research, support for policy development, or rigorous analysisto support resource management?

We explore these challenges and choices in the context of the Choosing Regional Futuresproject. Waikato regional council, which operates under the name Environment Waikato (EW),and several research organizations are collaborating to develop better processes and tools tosupport long-term integrated planning for the Waikato region. A key aim of the project is todevelop a spatial decision support system (SDSS) (Densham 1991) that will help the council andcommunity explore possible future scenarios of development for their region and evaluate theconsequences of different actions. The SDSS represents the first attempt to develop an integratedsystems model for the entire Waikato region and the first time that EW will have the capabilityto explore in a quantitative, spatial and integrated fashion how the region might develop into thefuture.

2 Choosing Regional Futures

The Choosing Regional Futures project developed in response to the LGA discussed above. Theshift to the LTCCP planning process requires councils like EW to develop new knowledge,processes and tools to carry out long-term integrated planning and new capacities to use themeffectively in community consultation. Choosing Regional Futures aims to help councils meetnew LGA requirements by developing new processes and tools that support the LTCCP process.

87Challenges and choices in building integrated models to support long-term regional planning in New Zealand


The project has two objectives: (1) development of deliberation processes to support theLTCCP process; and (2) development of an SDSS to support both the deliberation processesof Objective 1 and EW’s LTCCP processes (Rutledge et al. 2007). The SDSS is beingdesigned to help councils and their communities integrate consideration of cultural, economic,environmental and social outcomes and consider trade-offs among them, identify links andfeedbacks, set limits explicitly (e.g., only so much land and water), and demonstrate theimportance of ‘where’ in addition to ‘what’ and ‘how much’. An SDSS is an integratedframework designed to help examine weakly-structured or unstructured problems. Whereasstructured problems are tractable and understandable and often have a single, optimal solu-tion, weakly- or unstructured problems are characterized by high levels of uncertainty, poten-tial conflicts, or both (van Delden 2000).

The Waikato region is located in the north central North Island of New Zealand just south ofAuckland. The region covers 25,000 km2 and includes all or portions of 12 district/city councils,which are the smallest units of government within New Zealand (Figure 1). The region encom-passes a diverse range of environments and ecosystems from the central volcanic peaks andmountains of Ruapehu, Tongariro and Ngaruahoe, through rolling high country, to lowlandcoastal plains and coast (Leathwick et al. 2003a; Environment Waikato 2006a). The majorfeatures in the region include Lake Taupo in the southeast and the Waikato River, which flowsfrom Lake Taupo through the centre of the region and empties into the Tasman Sea in thenorthwest. As of 2006 the Waikato Region had an estimated population of 400,000 (about 9.5%of the New Zealand population) and 150,000 households, making it the fourth most populousregion in the country. The region includes Hamilton, New Zealand’s 4th largest city by popu-lation. The estimated gross regional product for the year ending March 2008 was about$15 billion NZD or about 8.5% of New Zealand GDP.

Compared to the rest of New Zealand, Waikato has a larger area devoted to primaryproduction owing to the higher proportion of land suitable for such purposes (Leathwick et al.2003a). As of 2001/2002 55% of the region (compared to 41% nationally) supported primaryproduction including dairy, sheep and beef farming (Thompson et al. 2003). Exotic forestryoccupied 15% (8% nationally), but recent high global commodity prices for dairy products havedriven substantial conversion of forestry to dairying. About 28% of the region remains in naturalland cover compared to 47% nationally, while urban and other miscellaneous land coversaccount for less than 2% of total land area (2% nationally).

To help guide and organize thinking about the region’s future, the project is developingqualitative scenarios in consultation with stakeholders to help identify and explore keydrivers and challenges that the region will face in trying to become more sustainable (Delaneyand Huser 2008). Key drivers operating at a range of scales (Table 1) could affect the regiongoing forward (Rutledge et al. 2007). Climate change, energy security and globalizationtrends could influence agricultural production within the Waikato region and access to globalmarkets. Population trends across a range of scales influence the region’s demographic com-position. An influx of migrants seeking respite from adverse climate change and/or the returnof some of New Zealand’s large diaspora community could significantly boost the populationwhile national and regional trends will lead to an ageing population and a shift in ethniccomposition. Urban expansion from Auckland in the north could exert further pressure onagricultural land, as could demand for additional land to foster new subdivision and improvehousing affordability. Remaining agricultural land could come under further intensificationpressures, causing environmental impacts such as water quality degradation or erosion.Increasing competition for land could spur more stringent land use planning regulations ascommunities across the region strive to balance shorter-term economic gains with longer-term concerns over preservation of soil, biodiversity, and other critical ecosystemservices.



Fig. 1. Waikato region and associated districts



3 Choices in developing integrated systems models

As discussed earlier the design and development of integrated systems models requires choicesrelated to purpose, prioritization and scope, scale and level of detail. Below we discuss each ofthose considerations in the context of the Choosing Regional Futures project.

3.1 Purpose

The Choosing Regional Futures SDSS has two purposes. First, the SDSS will help provide abetter understanding of coupled environment-socio-economic land systems in the Waikatoregion and allow the exploration of future scenarios of change including examining the conse-quences of individual or collective actions over time on those systems. Second, the SDSS willhelp councils in formulating, reviewing, and revising their LTCCP by examining the similaritiesand differences among different future scenarios, evaluating trade-offs, and identifying possiblethresholds or limits that they previously had no means to evaluate.

Given these two purposes, we chose to take a spatially-explicit systems modelling approachfor the SDSS. This will allow EW to model the stocks and flows in space and time of key aspectsof the regional economy, environment, and society and the links and feedbacks among them.From the beginning we decided to develop a tool that an organization like a regional councilcould use directly. This necessitated making several choices based on organizational andtechnical considerations. Thinking long-term we decided against using commercial GIS appli-cations because councils in New Zealand use at least four different GIS applications andchoosing one would limit potential future uptake by other councils. Moreover, commercialvendors can modify or update their products such that custom-built applications might stopworking in the future. Given these constraints we decided to partner with a particular researchorganization (Research Institute for Knowledge Systems (RIKS) in The Netherlands) thatspecialises in developing spatially-explicit dynamic systems models for targeted policy appli-cations. The resulting SDSS will operate in RIKS’s GEONAMICA® framework (Hurkens et al.2008) and will require no additional software to run, although organizations would have to payfor a GEONAMICA® licence.

Table 1. Key trends and drivers affecting the Waikato region over the next 50–100 years

Scale Key trends and drivers

Global • Climate change: increased instability, extremes, and spatial variation• Population: migration trends, potential climate refugees• Market changes: number, size, access, consumer preferences & expectations, locations• Globalization: R&D investment

New Zealand • Population: older, increasing proportion of people from Maori, Pacific Island, and Asiancultures; decreasing proportion of people from European cultures

• Lifestyles: changing expectations, influence of technology• Economy: agricultural intensification, new metrics, bio-economy• Energy: availability, affordability, mix of renewable/non-renewable• Housing: affordability, increasingly urban culture

Waikato region • Land use: intensification; change trends; management and influence on intensity of flooding,erosion, slips;

• Auckland: urbanization pressures• Economy: agricultural intensification• Governance: continued devolution versus greater central authority



3.2 Scope and prioritization

A key challenge to developing the SDSS or any integrated model is deciding on the scope of thesystem to study and prioritizing the issues or questions to address. EW and the district councilswithin the region developed a shared set of desired community outcomes as part of the firstLTCCP process (Choosing Futures Waikato 2005). Each district council also have separatedesired community outcomes specific to their organizations, as well as other policy andplanning documents addressing a range of related policy, resource management, or infrastruc-ture issues.

We began SDSS design by examining two key sources of information to identify recurringissues and themes (Rutledge et al. 2007). Those sources were, first, the shared set of communityoutcomes grouped into five broad themes (Table 2) including 38 more specific outcomes(Appendix 1) and, second, key drivers and issues identified in four qualitative scenarios (Delaneyand Huser 2008). The broad community outcomes and many of the associated outcomes proveddifficult to interpret from a quantitative systems modelling perspective. Fortunately the Waikatocouncils had also developed a set of 75 core indicators (Appendix 2) in an associated project(Environment Waikato 2006b). We therefore focused on how well the SDSS would directly orindirectly inform those core indicators, many of which were quantitative. The findings from thequalitative scenarios confirmed that we had included an appropriate set of models (e.g., economic,demographic) to address many of the potential key drivers of future change, although we clearlycould not include models to address all potential aspects of change. For comparative purposes, wealso reviewed community outcomes from four other regional council regions in New Zealand(Auckland, Bay of Plenty, Horizons and Canterbury) (Appendix 3). The latter three regions aresimilar to Waikato in that they have extensive production areas with one main urban centre(respectively Tauranga, Palmerston North and Christchurch). They also aim for broadly similaroutcomes to Waikato such as sustaining the environment or developing sustainable and diverseeconomies while also highlighting a number of key issues unique to their regions. Aucklanddiffered the most given its much larger population (>1 million) and dominant urban focus,nonetheless it too included aspects of environment, economy, demographics, etc. This informedus that the SDSS was sufficiently general in scope to be useful outside the Waikato.

3.3 Scale

An SDSS typically consists of a range of subsystems operating at different spatial and temporalscales. The key is to try to model each subsystem at the appropriate corresponding scale, whileinsuring that all models interact as seamlessly as possible. Being the focus of the project, the

Table 2. Choosing Futures Waikato high-level community outcomes

Theme Outcome statement

Sustainable Environment The Waikato region values and protects its diverse, interconnected natural environments.Quality of Life The Waikato region is a great place to live, providing the services and opportunities we

need to live well.Sustainable Economy The Waikato region balances a thriving economy with looking after its people, places,

and environment.Culture and Identity The Waikato region identifies with – and values – its land, air, rivers and waterways,

mountains, flora, fauna and people.Participation and Equity The Waikato region builds strong informed communities and has a culture that

encourages people and communities to play their part.



Waikato region (Figure 1) defines the spatial extent of the SDSS and also has a wealth ofeconomic data. We also incorporate information at the district level, which is smaller than aregion and the smallest unit of local government in New Zealand. At the finest scale, werepresent Waikato as a series of 200 m2 grid cells to characterize land use, land cover and aspectsof terrestrial biodiversity. Ideally, given the importance of agriculture in the region, it would beuseful to characterize individual farms, but the available information and resources are notadequate to consider that scale explicitly. We also model aspects of hydrological systems whosespatial units consist of drainage networks with both linear (e.g., streams and rivers) and areal(e.g., catchments and subcatchments) features.

Simulations within the SDSS run for a period of 50 years. Using a 50-year time frame strikesa balance between shorter (e.g., 20 years) or longer (e.g., 100 years) time horizons. Shortersimulations would likely have lower overall (unmeasured) uncertainty and generally be moreplausible. However that horizon may be too short to adequately evaluate the consequences ofcumulative impacts on many aspects of land systems, e.g., long-term impacts on soil quality. A100-year time frame would be more suitable in a sustainable development context but would beless informative for decision-making given compounded uncertainty over time.

3.4 Level of Detail

In addition to scale, subsystems can be modelled at different levels of detail. For example,economic models can include more or fewer sectors, land use models can have fewer or moreland use classes, biophysical models can range from simple look-up tables or statistical rela-tionships to more complex process-based models. Choosing the appropriate level of detail forvarious SDSS components depends on the overall objective of the SDSS and what questions itwill be asked to address, taking into account the availability of knowledge and information.

For the Choosing Regional Futures project, the main focus is on integration of existingknowledge or models rather than generating new information or models. Therefore the SDSSincorporates a number of existing models that bring with them a pre-defined level of detail or atleast a pre-defined range of detail to consider. The main task then becomes identifying links andfeedbacks among contributed models rather than building individual components from scratch.

4 Spatial decision support system

The draft design for the Choosing Regional Futures SDSS is a multi-scale, spatially explicitdynamic systems model linking components at four spatial scales (Figure 2): global to NewZealand, regional, district and local (i.e., grid cells). As noted earlier, the SDSS is beingdeveloped in the RIKS GEONAMICA® framework that was designed for the development andapplication of SDSSs to support policy and planning (Hurkens et al. 2008).

4.1 Global to New Zealand scale

The global to New Zealand scale contains climate scenarios and external drivers that take intoaccount exogenous drivers of change at global and national levels that will affect the Waikatoregion. The SDSS will include three climate change scenarios projecting annual rainfall, tem-perature and potential evapotranspiration (PET) to 2050. The three scenarios correspond to threeglobal greenhouse gases emissions scenarios (low, mid-range and high) produced as part of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (Nakicenovic



and Swart 2000). The projections are based on averages of output from 12 global climate models(GCMs) statistically downscaled to a 0.05° lat/long (approximately 5 km) spatial resolution forall of New Zealand and extending from the base year to 50 years hence. External drivers consistof key factors that may strongly influence New Zealand and/or the Waikato region, such asforeign exchange rates, world commodity prices, interest rates, credit availability, migrationtrends, technological developments, etc.

4.2 Regional scale

The regional scale contains a dynamic economy-environment interaction model, a hydrologymodel, and a water quality model. The Waikato region dynamic economy-environment model(WRDEEM) is a system dynamics model of region-wide environment-economy interactions(McDonald 2007). WRDEEM consists of five sub-modules: labour force, growth, economics,economic physical flow and environment-economic physical flow. It models the flow of eco-nomic commodities as traded on markets in both monetary terms (constant 1998 NZ dollars) andphysical terms (tonnes), along with the flow of associated natural resource inputs (e.g., land,energy, water) and residual outputs (e.g., wastes, pollutants and emissions). WRDEEM simu-lates the combined environmental and economic implications of economic change in theWaikato Region calibrated from data between 1993 and 2005. The model is driven by scenarios

NZ & World

Region

District

Local

Waikato Region Dynamic Economy-Environment Model

NZCEE/ME

External Drivers External Sources

Water Quality NIWA

DemographyUoW

ZoningDistrict Councils

BiodiversityMW Spatial Indicators

Land Use RIKS/MW/EW

Climate Change Scenarios NIWA

DairyingUoW

SUITABILITY

ACCESSIBILITY

LOCAL INFLUENCE

HydrologyNIWA

Fig. 2. Draft SDSS system designNote: EW = Environment Waikato; ME = Market Economics; MW = Manaaki Whenua; NIWA = National Institute ofWater and Atmospheric Research; NZCEE = New Zealand Centre for Ecological Economics; RIKS = Research Institutefor Knowledge Systems; UoW = University of Waikato.



of economic growth. The model was originally developed for the Auckland region directly northof Hamilton (Figure 1). Despite Auckland being predominantly urban (over 1 million residentsin the region), adaptation of the model to the Waikato region has thus far proven relativelystraightforward with only recalibration and minor changes needed.

The hydrology model is a simple hydrological simulation model for annual water runoff atselected points along surface water networks (Woods 2003, 2008). It evaluates the effects ofspatially variable inputs of climate, soil and vegetation on annual runoff and the expected wateryield in the driest month. Water quality represents an adaptation of the U.S. Geological SurveySPARROW model to New Zealand (Elliott et al. 2005). SPARROW estimates pollution loads,(e.g., total nitrogen) at selected points in a river network as a function of upstream catchmentcharacteristics including land use.

4.3 District scale

The district scale contains zoning, demography and dairying. Councils prepare zoning maps andother rules as part of district plans as required by the Resource Management Act (RMA) of 1991.The RMA outlines a range of six ‘types of activities’ ranging from prohibited to allowed thatindicate whether councils need to issue a consent for a particular (possibly allowable) activity.Zoning therefore strongly influences where different types of land use can or cannot occur.

Demography consists of a multi-district population model that projects population overtime, expressed as single-year male and female age cohorts. The district population submodelestimates and projects birth rates, death rates, and net migration rates from each district to otherdistricts within the Waikato region, and from each district to outside the region (Cameron et al.2007).

The dairying model will consist of a district-specific production function model of thedairying sector in the Waikato region. The model, which is currently under development, willuse historical input and output data to project future dairy industry outputs such as kilogrammesof milk solids per hectare based on assumptions of future inputs provided by other models.

4.4 Local scale

The local scale consists of: land use, terrestrial biodiversity and spatial indicators. TheWaikato region at the local scale of the SDSS is represented by a grid of square cells orpixels. Grid cell resolution can vary, and we have chosen a resolution of 200 m ¥ 200 m cellsto balance detail of land use and model performance, namely, the model executes morequickly at coarser resolutions but at the expense of land use detail and realism and vice versa.Land use change will be modelled dynamically over time starting from a base year of 2001.The WRDEEM and demographic models generate demands for economic and residential landuses respectively, that are input to the land use change model. The land use change modelthen uses cellular automata to apportion land to different uses based on a combination of fourfactors: zoning as described above, suitability, accessibility and local influence (Engelen et al.1997). Suitability estimates the biophysical suitability of land for different uses. Accessibilitytypically relates to travel distances, which can affect the desirability of some land uses suchas housing. Local influence measures the influence of neighbouring land uses on a land useat a particular grid cell.

The terrestrial biodiversity model will combine information on land cover (Thompson 2003)with information on protected areas (Rutledge et al. 2004) and land environments (Leathwick



et al. 2003a, 2003b) to provide indicators on biodiversity status across a range of scales (e.g.,Walker et al. 2008).

Different spatial indicators depicted as maps will be developed to track the status of differentmodel inputs and outputs over time. Land use change is an example of a basic indicator that canbe generated. The series of maps can be saved as an animated image and used for reporting,communication and education purposes. Various outputs from the SDSS such as maps, graphsor tabular information can inform development of the LTCCP through the formulation andevaluation of scenarios developed in consultation with communities and stakeholders. Morespecifically some, but not all, of the 75 associated core indicators (Appendix 2) can be assessedand compared in an integrated fashion using the SDSS, which can in turn inform to some degreehow well different community outcomes would or would not be realized.

5 Conclusions

Achieving more sustainable development requires a better understanding of our integratedenvironmental-socio-economic systems and how these change over time. This presents a sig-nificant challenge because a myriad of choices exist in terms of what issues or system aspectsto include, at what scales, how to integrate them, and to what level of detail. The ChoosingRegional Futures project represents one example where researchers and end-users are workingtogether to identify and prioritize key issues and have begun developing an integrated model(e.g., SDSS) in the Waikato region of New Zealand.

The development of the SDSS is informed primarily by a set of desired community out-comes developed through a community consultation process shared among all councils withinthe region. The community outcomes consist of five high-level outcomes, 38 more detailedoutcomes, and an associated set of 75 core indicators developed to inform the outcomes. Thehigh-level outcomes and to a degree the more detailed outcomes proved difficult to interpretfrom a quantitative systems modelling standpoint, therefore informing the 75 indicatorsbecame the focus of early SDSS development. Key drivers identified in a parallel process todevelop qualitative regional scenarios as well as outcomes from other regions also guidedSDSS development.

Other key choices have significantly influenced SDSS design. These include the desireto build a tool usable by end-users rather than a model that remains under the control ofresearchers, the reliance on a systems dynamic modelling paradigm, the requirement to bespatially explicit, the choice of the software framework in which to implement the SDSS, anda focus on integrating sets of existing models rather than building new ones.

The SDSS design that emerged and that continues to develop will address aspects of climatechange, terrestrial biodiversity, hydrology, water quality, economy, demography, land usechange and dairying, with the latter being an important economic activity within the Waikatoregion. With the SDSS the regional council will have the ability to explore different scenarios offuture development and evaluate the consequences of different policies or strategies on relatedaspects of regional land systems. For example, they can more effectively evaluate the potentialconsequences of substantial conversions from exotic forestry to dairying, such as recentlyoccurred within the region, or evaluate different strategies of urban growth and the consequencesof these strategies for biodiversity and agricultural production.

Ultimately the goal is an SDSS that informs the LTCCP process by highlighting the potentialchanges and consequences, either positive or negative, to the region and that informs the counciland community about what actions to take to avoid adverse effects or achieve beneficialoutcomes. Most importantly the SDSS will help councils better evaluate the state and trend ofthe region under a range of possible scenarios or impacts. This will in turn help councils better



meet the intent of the Local Government Act and make progress towards sustainable develop-ment by ascertaining if current generations can meet their needs without compromising theability of future generations to meet their needs.

Appendix 1. Choosing Futures Waikato Community Outcomes

1.1 Sustainable Environment

The Waikato region values and protects its diverse, interconnected natural environments

• The iconic landscapes and natural features of our environment define and sustain us. Werespect and celebrate them as Taonga.

• Our natural environment is protected and respected. Its ecological balance is restored, its air,soil, and water quality is improved, and its native biodiversity is enhanced.

• We are aware of what we need to do to look after our environment. Our region is renownedfor linking environmental awareness with community action.

• The traditional role of Iwi and Hapu as Kaitiaki is acknowledged, respected and enabled.• Our coastal and waterway environments are restored and preserved, and access to them is

maintained.• Our region’s waterways have consistently high water quality.• We use land management practices that protect and sustain our soil and land.• We reduce our reliance on non-renewable energy.• Waste reduction, recycling, energy conservation and energy efficiency are promoted and are

part of how we all live.

1.2 Quality of Life

The Waikato region is a great place to live, providing the services and opportunities we need tolive well.

• We are healthy with active lifestyles and we enjoy a total sense of well-being. Everyone hasaccess to affordable quality health services throughout the Waikato region.

• Education provides opportunities so we can reach our full potential as individuals andcontribute to the well-being of the whole region.

• Maori enjoy the same quality of health, education, housing, employment, and economicoutcomes as non-Maori.

• We have a choice of healthy and affordable housing that we are happy to live in and that isclose to places for work, study and recreation.

• Maori have the ability to live on ancestral land in quality, affordable housing.• Our communities and government work together so that we are safe, feel safe and crime is

reduced.• We can work and participate in the communities where we live, and there are quality work

opportunities for people of all ages and all skill levels.• We can participate in recreation and leisure activities that meet our diverse needs and we have

opportunities to enjoy the Waikato region’s natural places and open spaces in responsible ways.• Families are strong and our communities are supportive of them.• Older people are valued and children are valued and protected. Young people have work,

education and leisure opportunities and are included in making decisions that will affect theirfuture.



1.3 Sustainable Economy

The Waikato region balances a thriving economy with looking after its people, places, andenvironment

• Our region has economic growth and development that is well-planned and balanced withenvironmental, cultural, and social needs and values.

• Our regional and local economies are robust and diverse, providing opportunities throughoutthe Waikato region.

• We have reliable, efficient and well-planned infrastructure and services, including transportthat is safe, interconnected and easy to get to and use.

• We take a practical and co-ordinated approach to planning and providing services, whichworks effectively across boundaries and sectors and responds to our communities’ needs.

• The growth, wealth, and uniqueness of the Maori economy is acknowledged and supported.• Our economy is built on land-based industries, and we encourage planning and practices that

protect and sustain our productive resources.• We have a tourism industry that recognizes the region’s cultural and environmental heritage

and values, and supports economic growth.• Our region has a reputation for entrepreneurship, innovation, research and education; attract-

ing investement, and people to work, study and visit.

1.4 Culture and Identity

The Waikato region identifies with – and values – its land, air, rivers and waterways, mountains,flora, fauna and people.

• We are proud of our region’s distinctive identify, its strong Maoritanga, and its rich anddiverse natural and cultural heritage.

• Heritage sites and landscapes of significance to Whanau, Hapu and Iwi are preserved andvalued.

• Our historic buildings and places are retained and cared for. New developments are designedto be sensitive to people, places and the environment.

• All our communities have cultural and recreational events and facilities. We identify with andtake part in our communities, building good community spirit.

• Art, culture and creativity can be part of everyone’s life. We all have opportunities for creativeexpression and our creative industries are supported and promoted.

1.5 Participation and Equity

The Waikato region builds strong informed communities and has a culture that encouragespeople and communities to play their part.

• All our people and communities can participate in decision-making. We are educated,informed and have the resources we need to take responsibility for our own futures.

• Iwi, Hapu and Maori work together with central government, local government and commu-nity organizations in mutually beneficial partnerships.

• Our communities understand partnerships under the Treaty of Waitangi and representationand processes for these partnerships have integrity.



• The unique status of Tangata Whenua is respected and reflected in community practices.• Maori have the opportunity to participate in community development and decision-making at

Marae, Hapu and Iwi levels.• We are knowledgeable about and show respect for the many and diverse cultures of the people

who live here.

Appendix 2. List of 75 core MARCO indicators

Sustainable Environment

River water quality for ecological healthRiver water quality for recreationLakes water quality for ecological healthLakes water quality for contact recreationLand useAir quality (particulate matter, PM10)Groundwater availability and useSurface water availability and useProtection of natural heritage and landscapesExtent of native vegetation (forest, wetland, coastal)Protected native vegetation areasPeople’s environmental attitudesPeople’s personal environmental actionsCoastal water quality for recreationPublic access (or coastline ownership)Rural subdivisionStock densityTotal energy consumptionGreenhouse gas emissionsEnergy efficiency (or energy use relative to economic

growth)Waste to landfillsProportion of recycling

Quality of Life

Life expectancy at birthSocial deprivation index (*)Avoidable mortality and hospitalization rates (*)Overall quality of lifeBarriers to accessing general health practitionersSchool leavers with no formal qualificationEducational attainment of the adult populationParticipation in early childhood educationAdult and community educationWork opportunities matching skillsRent to income ratioHousing affordabilityHome ownership rateHousehold crowdingProximity to work, study, recreationCriminal victimization rates (or reported criminal

offences and resolution rates)Perceptions of safetyRoad traffic injury ratesUnpaid workParticipation in sport and active leisure

Participation in social networks and groupsContact between young people and their parentsYouth and older people’s engagement in decision-making

Sustainable Economy

Genuine progress indicator (or ecological footprint)Regional GDPUnemployment rateMedian weekly incomeNumber of businesses and employees by industryBuilding consentsDrinking water qualityRoad traffic crashes and casualtiesResident’s confidence in councils’ decision-makingResident’s confidence in councils’ approach to planning

and providing servicesRegional GDP contributed by primary industriesNights in commercial accommodationIncome from tourism (international and domestic)Employment in the tourism industryTotal research fundingEnrolments at tertiary education institutes (by type of

study)

Culture and Identity

Resident’s rating of their sense of pride in the way theircity/town looks and feels

Proportion of Maori speakers (in Maori and in totalpopulation)

Proportion of population that speak the ‘first language’ oftheir ethnic group

Number of buildings and places listed on Historic PlacesTrust register

Number and proportion of heritage buildings demolishedor removed from heritage records

Design of new developments (survey)Resident’s satisfaction with cultural facilities providedParticipation in cultural and arts activities

Participation and Equity

Percentage of voter turnout at local and general electionsDegree of representation by Tangata Whenua and minor-

ity groups governance and decision-making bodiesResidents satisfaction with council’s provision of oppor-

tunities for



Appendix 3: Community outcomes from Auckland, Bay of Plenty, Canterbury andHorizons Regional Councils

Auckland Regional Council

Growth and Change

Quality built environment

• Infrastructure planning leads integrated, co-ordinated and quality urban development.• High quality building and design• More parks and public spaces in high-density housing developments• Choices about where we work and play• CBD Waterfront development that retains public access

Efficient energy use based on clean and reliable sources

• Promote and educate people about energy conservation• Energy-efficient building design• Cleaner fuels• Renewable energy sources• Encourage the use of regionally generated alternative sources of energy

A thriving regional economy that supports a good standard of living

• A choice of lifestyles and a good standard of living• Strong economic base for the future of Tamariki/children• Affordable housing• Opportunities for well-paid work• Reduce the wage gap• Create decentralized growth nodes connected by an integrated transport network• Develop the waterfront as an investment attraction zone• Improve the Auckland region’s economic performance

The ARC, the community, local and central government and business work together toachieve results

• Inspire and encourage community participation• Open, inclusive and appropriate consultation with Maori• Maori participation in the RMA process• Give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi in relation to Article 2• Greater consistency between local body decisions and planning for the future• Educate people about the processes of local government• Clear planning, funding and regulatory roles and responsibilities

Access, Choice and Opportunity

Aucklanders have access to a range of affordable and safe ways to move people and goods

• Public transport and road projects are completed on time• Integrate land use with transport, for example, park and ride and shopping• Integration across public transport providers and the full range of transport modes



• Transport links that connect new business and housing developments• Choice of quality, efficient and reliable public transport• Services are easily accessible and safe• Reduced congestion• Walking and cycling are safe and a genuine travel alternative• Encourage people to use public transport• Address the impact of transport on the quality of the environment and reduce vehicle

emissions

Recreational and leisure opportunities that offer a range of experiences for all

• A 24-hour city of festivals, sport, music, art, museums, shopping and events• Cater for diverse communities• Regional facilities of international standard• Recreational fisheries are well stocked• Open space for passive, informal physical activity

Aucklanders are educated and skilled and have access to appropriate learning andtraining opportunities

• Relevant, appropriate and lifelong learning opportunities• More affordable tertiary and trades-based education• Significantly improve child literacy and educational attainment• Training and education to address skill shortages now and in the longer term

Community health and wellbeing is supported by a healthy environment where people haveaccess to appropriate healthcare

• Access to appropriate local healthcare services• Removal of financial barriers to healthcare, especially for children• Major health issues are addressed• Greater awareness of the benefits of healthy active lifestyles

Access to a range of affordable housing

• More appropriate housing for families• Suitable retirement options in the suburbs

Neighbourhoods with a sense of community

• A community where it is safe to walk and cycle• Appropriate community facilities and meeting places• Neighbours who know each other in supportive communities

Caring for Place

Aucklanders caring for and enjoying the natural environment

• Guardianship and restoration of the environment• Resources are conserved• Responsible use of the environment by business and industry• People taking responsibility for and participating in their environment



• Educate people about the value of their environment• Our ‘clean and green’ environment contributes to Auckland’s economy and social well-being• Access to clean beaches• The Mauri of water is preserved and stormwater and wastewater are managed better• Give effect to the principles of sustainable management

Open spaces and green places now and for the future

• Need for more green space and places for all the community to enjoy• A balance between urban and rural parks• Plan for a variety of parks and open spaces in future urban and rural developments• Link parks and open spaces via landscaped corridors

Auckland’s special places are respected and conserved

• Our diverse natural and cultural heritage is protected and restored• Encourage planting of native trees• Auckland’s iconic landscapes are recognized and preserved• Agencies work together to identify and protect historic buildings and sites• CBD Waterfront development retains public access

The diversity of native species and habitats is protected and restored

• Parks, public spaces and ecological corridors that provide habitats for diverse native plantsand animals

• Control of weeds and pests on public and private land

Caring for People

The significant place of Tangata Whenua is acknowledged and its role as kaitiakiis recognized

• Maori participation in the RMA process• Give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi in relation to article two• The Mauri of water is preserved and stormwater and wastewater are managed better• Greater recognition of Tangata Whenua and improved awareness of Maori culture

Maori are succeeding socially and economically, and contribute to decision-making

• Strong economic base for future of Tamariki• Open, inclusive and appropriate consultation• Give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi in relation to Article 3

The needs of women are recognized and addressed

Safer neighbourhoods and public spaces

• Better cared for urban environment with less graffiti and vandalism• Reduce crime, especially domestic violence and crimes against children• Improve lighting in public places• Caring neighbourhoods and communities• Urban design that discourages crime, and promotes greater safety



• Improve road safety

Auckland’s population growth and migration are well managed

• Manage growth• Assist immigrants to overcome language barriers and gain employment• Recognize overseas qualifications

Valuing our identity and the changing face of Auckland

• Greater recognition of Tangata Whenua and improved awareness of Maori culture• Champion tolerance and understanding of difference• Celebrate Auckland’s diverse culture, festivals and food

Environment Bay of Plenty Regional Council

A Clean and Protected Environment

Our natural environment is valued and preserved – enjoyed by us now and protected forfuture generations.

• Rare and endangered habitats and species are protected and enhanced• Areas of important natural beauty are recognized and protected• Our harbours, foreshore and waterways are clean and healthy• There are strongly connected open spaces within and between residential and business/

industrial areas• The community is educated and involved in environmental care• Waste is minimized and managed to ensure efficient use of resources• Environmental legislation is enforced to ensure population increase and growth pressures are

managed in a sustainable way• Kaitiakitanga is practiced by all – we look after our land, air and water resources• The region is a place where people can truly experience, enjoy and appreciate nature.

Healthy and safe communities

Individuals and organisations work in partnership to promote healthy living and ensuresafe and caring communities.

• Healthy, active people involved in their communities• Greater attention to health promotion with information on preventative health issues readily

available• Quality primary and secondary health care accessible to all• Support for youth development, with youth gaining from – and contributing to – their

communities• Support and respect for the elderly and for the disadvantaged and disabled• Adequate policing and low levels of crime providing a feeling of safety and security in our

homes and communities• An environment that supports healthy living, including such things as safe drinking water,

comfortable public spaces and adequate recreational opportunities• A real sense of community spirit throughout the region.



Value on learning and excellence

Residents are inspired to achieve and are supported in their efforts to learn and be wellinformed.

• A range of affordable, quality education and training opportunities are available throughoutthe region

• Educational options are flexible and accessible, and appealing to all age groups• Participation in education is encouraged and supported, especially for youth• Skill shortages are addressed through appropriate training• There are good role models in the community to inspire residents (particularly youth) to strive

for excellence• Efforts are made to recognize, celebrate, and reward achievement.

Quality, affordable infrastructure

Our infrastructure – particularly the transport network – serves business and the com-munity well, contributes to quality of life in the region, and is sensitive to the naturalenvironment.

• Infrastructure improvements support sustainable economic growth and development• The road network is a key component of a comprehensive transportation system (also includ-

ing rail, sea and air)• It is easy to get from place to place and travel times are reasonable and predictable• Public transport is affordable, efficient and promoted so it is well used• ‘Active’ transportation options (e.g. walking and cycling) are safe and accessible• Transportation choices are environmentally sustainable• Housing developments have minimal impact on the environment and offer variety and choice

to suit all segments of the community• Efficient, reliable communication technology is available throughout the region.

A vibrant and fulfilling lifestyle

The Bay of Plenty is a region that people love and are proud to live in and call their own.

• People work together to make a positive difference• Regular activities and events that support and celebrate art, music, drama, dance and sport• High quality facilities for events, conferences and tourism• Great attractions such as museums and art galleries• Parks, reserves and recreational facilities are maintained and enhanced• The spirit and character of communities throughout the region remain distinctive and vibrant• The Bay is a bustling and attractive area where opportunities abound• The region has a unique identity that is celebrated and promoted.

A prosperous and sustainable economy

Our productive, diverse regional economy provides long-term sustainable growth andprosperity.

• The region’s unique characteristics are developed and used to our competitive advantage



• A wide range of employment opportunities are available in urban and rural areas• We are skilled and adaptable and we provide competitively-priced products and services• Entrepreneurship and innovation focus on adding value and contribute to (export) growth• Investment, new businesses and skilled individuals are attracted to the area• Maori economic development is supported• Tourism plays an important role, building on the region’s attributes and unique character• Sustainable energy use is encouraged• Buying local is promoted• Economic growth is balanced with social and environmental responsibility.

Open and inclusive leadership

Our responsible and motivated leaders and officials support community participation indecision-making.

• Leaders are visible and strong, have a clear vision, and earn the confidence and respect of thecommunity

• Leaders are accountable, understand and represent the views of the region, and work for thegood of all

• Decision-making processes are transparent and easily understood• Residents have easy access to information and the opportunity to participate in decision-

making• Business, government, education and not-for-profit sectors work effectively together• Council and Maori work in partnership• Councils in the region coordinate their efforts and costs are appropriate for the services and

facilities provided.

Respected culture and heritage

The history of the region and the value of Maori culture within it are recognized andfostered.

• The special place of Maori as Tangata Whenua is recognized• Maori resources are preserved and developed in a sustainable way• All cultural heritage and traditions are respected and celebrated• Preservation of important heritage buildings, structures, and sites• Efforts to incorporate Maori culture into more tourism ventures• Linking Maori culture with schools and education• A strengthening of harmonious relationships amongst all cultures.



Environment Canterbury Regional Council

Social Well-Being ‘Living the good life in Canterbury’ Rank

Good healthcare for all 1Everyone has access to good education 2People feel safe at all times 3Community services that meet people’s needs 11Everyone has access to acceptable standards of housing 13Transport and travel needs are met 21Easy to travel around cities and towns and easy access to shops and other

community services25/26

Economic Well-Being ‘Prospering in Canterbury’

Incomes provide good standard of living 8People at work 10A strong economy 14Alternatives for moving people & freight 27/31

Environmental Well-Being ‘Caring for Canterbury’

Water is in a healthy condition, clean and plentiful enough to support life 4,5/6Air, beaches and ocean and land are all in a healthy condition 7,9/16Business and farming activities do not harm the environment 12/18Environment, in general, is to be looked after 15Rural land is mainly for farming and horticulture 23Native plants and animals can thrive 24

Cultural Well-Being ‘Vibrant exciting Canterbury’

A good place to live for all cultures 17Opportunity to participate in sport and recreation 19Public parks and reserves are plentiful 20Access to open spaces and wilderness areas 22Recreational needs are met 28Opportunity to participate in arts and cultural activities 29Canterbury has attractive places to live in 30Heritage buildings and sites are protected 32



Hor

izon

sR

egio

nal

Cou

ncil

Wat

erQ

ualit

yC

lean

and

heal

thy

rive

rsan

dla

kes

Riv

erhe

alth

and

aqua

ticec

osys

tem

sar

esu

stai

ned

Cle

anan

dhe

alth

yw

ater

for

the

regi

on’s

citie

s,fa

rms

and

agri

cultu

ral

busi

ness

es

Mai

nten

ance

of–

and

acce

ssto

–cl

ean

heal

thy

wat

erfo

rre

crea

tion,

and

tobu

ilda

sens

eof

prid

ein

the

regi

on’s

rive

rs

Wat

erQ

uant

itySu

stai

nabl

em

anag

emen

tan

dfa

iral

loca

tion

ofw

ater

reso

urce

sR

iver

ecos

yste

ms

are

sust

aine

dM

aint

ain

enou

ghw

ater

tom

eet

the

need

sof

agri

cultu

re,b

usin

ess

and

indu

stry

Acc

ess

tosu

ffici

ent

wat

erfo

rdr

inki

ngan

dfo

rre

crea

tiona

lan

dcu

ltura

lac

tiviti

es

Floo

dPr

otec

tion

Ear

lyw

arni

ngan

dre

ason

able

prot

ectio

nfr

omflo

odev

ents

The

regi

on’s

nativ

eha

bita

tis

not

com

prom

ised

byflo

odpr

otec

tion

wor

ks

Bus

ines

s,in

dust

ryan

dag

ricu

ltura

lpr

oduc

tion

cont

inue

duri

ngflo

odev

ents

;an

dflo

odpr

otec

tion

isaf

ford

able

Peop

lefe

elsa

fefr

omth

eth

reat

offlo

ods

Hab

itat

Prot

ectio

nH

abita

tsar

epr

otec

ted

and

enha

nced

Nat

ive

plan

ts,a

nim

als

and

ecos

yste

ms

and

proc

esse

sar

em

aint

aine

dan

dpr

otec

ted

Agr

icul

ture

and

fore

stry

can

co-e

xist

with

nativ

eha

bita

tsin

the

regi

onA

sens

eof

livin

gna

tura

lhe

rita

geis

mai

ntai

ned

for

the

regi

on

Coa

stal

Env

iron

men

tA

cces

sto

and

mai

nten

ance

ofhe

alth

ygr

ound

wat

erC

oast

alla

ndsc

ape,

habi

tats

and

wat

ers

are

prot

ecte

dan

den

hanc

edC

oast

alre

crea

tion

and

deve

lopm

ent

oppo

rtun

ities

are

mai

ntai

ned

Peop

lean

dco

mm

uniti

esca

nac

cess

and

enjo

yco

asta

lre

crea

tion

activ

ities

with

ina

natu

ral

coas

tal

envi

ronm

ent

Gro

undw

ater

Hor

owhe

nua

Acc

ess

toan

dm

aint

enan

ceof

heal

thy

grou

ndw

ater

Mai

ntai

ncl

ean

and

suffi

cien

tgr

ound

wat

erfo

rth

ere

gion

Rel

iabl

egr

ound

wat

erfo

rag

ricu

lture

,ho

rtic

ultu

rean

din

dust

ryA

cces

sto

clea

nan

dhe

alth

ydr

inki

ngw

ater

Lan

d Man

agem

ent

Sust

aina

ble

man

agem

ent

ofth

ere

gion

’sla

ndSu

stai

nabl

em

anag

emen

tof

the

regi

on’s

land

and

soil

reso

urce

sE

cono

mic

sust

aina

bilit

yfo

rth

ere

gion

’sag

ricu

ltura

lan

dho

rtic

ultu

ral

indu

stri

es

Ena

ble

the

regi

on’s

rura

lco

mm

uniti

esto

surv

ive

and

flour

ish

Nat

ural

Haz

ards

Tam

aran

uiE

arly

war

ning

;or

gani

zed

resp

onse

and

reco

very

from

natu

ral

haza

rdev

ents

Are

silie

nten

viro

nmen

tR

ural

and

urba

nec

onom

ies

can

cont

inue

tofu

nctio

nan

dab

sorb

the

effe

cts

ofna

tura

lha

zard

s

Peop

lear

ein

form

edan

dfe

elsa

fe

Air

Qua

lity

Tam

aran

ui&

Taih

ape

Cle

anai

rA

irqu

ality

leve

lsar

eke

ptto

natio

nal

stan

dard

sL

ocal

indu

stry

cont

inue

sto

prov

ide

empl

oym

ent

oppo

rtun

ities

for

the

loca

lco

mm

unity

Pote

ntia

lhe

alth

issu

es(e

.g.r

espi

rato

ryill

ness

es)

are

redu

ced

Was

teM

anag

emen

tPa

lmer

ston

Nor

thM

anag

eth

eef

fect

sof

was

tedi

spos

alW

aste

isdi

spos

edof

with

out

adve

rse

effe

cts

onth

een

viro

nmen

tR

educ

edco

stto

the

com

mun

ityby

redu

cing

was

teC

lean

sust

aina

ble

com

mun

ities

Publ

icT

rans

port

Tara

rua,

Hor

owhe

nua,

and

Palm

erst

onN

orth

Eas

eof

trav

elR

educ

eden

viro

nmen

tal

impa

cts

from

wel

lpl

anne

dtr

ansp

ort

netw

orks

and

acce

ssto

publ

ictr

ansp

ort

serv

ices

Rel

iabl

epu

blic

tran

spor

tan

dtr

ansp

ort

infr

astr

uctu

reen

ablin

gpe

ople

togo

free

lyab

out

thei

rbu

sine

ss

All

peop

leca

nac

cess

serv

ices

safe

lyan

dea

sily



References

Audsley E, Pearn KR, Simota C, Cojocaru G, Koutsidou E, et al. (2006) What can scenario modelling tell us aboutfuture European scale agricultural land use, and what not? Environmental Science and Policy 9: 148–162

Ballas D, Kingston R, Stillwell J, Jin J (2007) Spatial microsimulation-based planning for local policy making.Environment and Planning A 39: 2482–2499

Bebbington J, Brown J, Frame B (2007) Accounting technologies and sustainability assessment models. EcologicalEconomics 61: 224–236

Börjesona L, Höjera M, Dreborgb K-H, Ekvallc T, Finnveden G (2006) Scenario types and techniques: Towards a user’sguide. Futures 38: 723–739

Cameron M, Cochrane W, Poot J (2007) End-user informed demographic projections for Hamilton City up to 2041(Population Studies Centre Discussion Paper No. 66). University of Waikato, Hamilton

Caruso G, Rounsevell M, Cojocaru G (2005) Exploring a spatio-dynamic neighbourhood-based model of residentialbehaviour in the Brussels periurban area. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 19: 103–123

Choosing Futures Waikato (2005) Regional community outcomes: goals and aspirations for communities to worktowards. URL: http://www.choosingfutures.co.nz/files/Choosing_Futures_Waikato_-_Regional_Community_Outcomes_November_2005_FINAL_.pdf, accessed 29 July 2008

Conway TM, Lathrop RG (2005) Alternative land use regulations and environmental impacts: Assessing future land usein an urbanizing watershed. Landscape and Urban Planning 71: 1–15

DEFRA (2007) Sustainable development indicators in your pocket. UK Department for Environment, Food and RuralAffairs, London

Delaney K, Huser B (2008) Future Scenarios for the Waikato – Revised version June 2008. Report producedfor Environment Waikato. URL: http://www.creatingfutures.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Scenarios-Files/EWDOCS-1344391-v2-WaikatoScenarios-FullReport-with-Photos.pdf.

Densham PJ (1991) Spatial decision support systems. In: Maguire DJ, Goodchild MF, Rhind DW (eds) Geographicalinformation systems: Principles and applications. Longman Scientific and Technical, New York

DPMC (2003) Sustainable development for New Zealand: Programme of action. New Zealand Department of PrimeMinister and Cabinet, Wellington

Engelen G, White R, Uljee I (1997) Integrating constrained cellular automata models, GIS and decision support toolsfor urban planning and policy making. In: Timmermans H (ed) Decision support systems in urban planning.Chapman and Hall, New York

Elliott SH, Alexander RB, Schwarz GE, Shankar U, Sukias JPS, McBride GB (2005) Estimation of nutrient sources andtransport for New Zealand using the hybrid mechanistic-statistical model SPARROW. Journal of Hydrology 44:1–12

Environment Waikato (2006a) Delivering a sustainable future: Long-term council community plan 2006–2016.Environment Waikato, Hamilton. URL: http://www.ew.govt.nz/PageFiles/3792/ltccp2006-16.pdf, accessed 29 July2008

Environment Waikato (2006b) MARCO benchmark indicator Report. (Document #1092609) Environment Waikato,Hamilton. URL: http://www.choosingfutures.co.nz/files/MarcoBenchmarkIndicatorReport-December2006.pdf,accessed 29 July 2008

Environment Waikato (2007) Future scenarios for the Waikato – draft summary. (Document #1282367). URL: http://www.creatingfutures.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Scenarios-Files/EWDOCS-1282367-v1-FutureScenariosfortheWaikato-draftsummary.doc, accessed 29 July 2008

Foran B, Poldy F (2002) Future dilemmas: Options to 2050 for Australia’s population, technology, resources andenvironment (Working Paper Series 02/01). Australian Commonwealth Industrial and Scientific Research Organi-sation, Canberra

Frame B, Molisa P, Taylor R, Toia H, Wong L-S (2005) 100% pure conjecture? Accounts of our future state(s). In:Liu J, McCreanor T, Teaiwa T, McIntosh T (eds) New Zealand identities: Departures and destinations. VUW Press,Wellington

Frame B, Brown J (2008) Developing post-normal technologies for sustainability. Ecological Economics 65: 225–241Ghosh S, Vale RJD, Vale BA (2006) Domestic energy sustainability of different urban residential patterns: A New

Zealand approach. International Journal of Sustainable Development 9: 16–37Glauser P (2001) MONET evaluates sustainable development in Switzerland (Working Paper No. 31). Swiss Federal

Statistical Office, NeuchâtelFuntowicz S, Ravetz J (1991) A new scientific methodology for global environmental issues. In: Costanza R (ed)

Ecological economics: The science and management of sustainability. Columbia University Press, New YorkHulse D, Gregory S, Baker J (eds) (2002) Willamette River Basin planning atlas: Trajectories of environmental and

ecological change. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis



http://www.choosingfutures.co.nz/files/Choosing_Futures_Waikato_-_Regional_Community_

http://www.creatingfutures.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Scenarios-Files/EWDOCS-1344391-v2-WaikatoScenarios-FullReport-with-Photos.pdf

http://www.creatingfutures.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Scenarios-Files/EWDOCS-1344391-v2-WaikatoScenarios-FullReport-with-Photos.pdf

http://www.ew.govt.nz/PageFiles/3792/ltccp2006-16.pdf

http://www.choosingfutures.co.nz/files/MarcoBenchmarkIndicatorReport-December2006.pdf

http://www.creatingfutures.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Scenarios-Files/EWDOCS-1282367-v1-FutureScenariosforthe

http://www.creatingfutures.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Scenarios-Files/EWDOCS-1282367-v1-FutureScenariosforthe

Hurkens J, Hahn B, van Delden H (2008) Using the GEONAMICA® software environment for integrated dynamicspatial modelling. In: Sànchez-Marrè M, Béjar J, Comas J, Rizzoli AE, Guariso G (eds) Proceedings of the iEMSsfourth biennial meeting: International congress on environmental modelling and software. International Environ-mental Modelling and Software Society, Barcelona

Leathwick J, Wilson G, Rutledge D, Wardle P, Morgan F, et al. (2003a) Land environments of New Zealand – Nga taiaoo Aotearoa. David Bateman Ltd, Auckland

Leathwick J, Morgan F, Wilson G, Rutledge D McLeod M, Johnston K (2003b) Land environments of New Zealand:A technical guide. David Bateman Ltd, Auckland

Local Government Act 2002. URL: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM170873.html,accessed 29 July 2008

Ludwig D (2001) The era of management is over. Ecosystems 4: 758–764McDonald G (2007) Auckland region dynamic economic-environment model. Market Economics, AucklandMinistry for the Environment (1997) The state of New Zealand’s environment. Ministry for the Environment, WellingtonMinistry for the Environment (2007) Environment New Zealand. Ministry for the Environment, Wellingtonde Montmollin A, Scheller A (2007) MONET indicator system: The Swiss road to measuring sustainable development.

International Journal of Sustainable Development 10: 61–72Nakicenovic N, Swart R (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios: A special report of working group III of the

intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeO’Connor M (1999) Dialogue and debate in a post-normal practice of science: A reflexion. Futures 31: 671–687PCE (2002) Creating our future: Sustainable development for New Zealand. New Zealand Office of the Parliamentary

Commissioner for the Environment, WellingtonPCE (2005) Future currents: Electricity scenarios for New Zealand 2005–2050. New Zealand Office of the Parliamen-

tary Commissioner for the Environment, WellingtonRayner S (2006) Wicked problems, clumsy solutions: Diagnoses and prescriptions for environmental ills. URL:

http://www.martininstitute.ox.ac.uk/NR/rdonlyres/C3EDD045-9E3B-4053-9229-9CF76660AAC6/645/JackBealeLectureWickedproblems.pdf, accessed 29 July 2008

Rittel H, Weber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4: 155–169Rutledge D, Price R, Ausseil A, Heke H (2004) National analysis of biodiversity protection and status: Methods and

summary results. (Contract Report 0405/042). Landcare Research, HamiltonRutledge D, MacDonald G, Cameron M, McBride G, Poot J, et al. (2007) Choosing regional futures spatial decision

support system draft specifications (Contract Report 0708/063). Landcare Research, HamiltonSantelmann MV, White D, Freemark K, Nassauer JI, Eilers JM, et al. (2004) Assessing alternative futures for agriculture

in Iowa, U.S.A. Landscape Ecology 19: 357–374Schröter D, Cramer W, Leemans R, Prentice IC, Araujo MB, et al. (2005) Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability

to global change in Europe. Science 310: 1333–1337Statistics New Zealand (2002) Monitoring progress towards sustainable development. Statistics New Zealand,

WellingtonTallis HM, Kareiva P (2006) Shaping global environmental decisions using socio-ecological models. Trends in Ecology

and Evolution 21: 562–568Thompson S, Grüner I, Gapare N (2003) New Zealand land cover database version 2 illustrated guide to target classes.

Ministry for the Environment, Wellingtonvan Delden H (2000) A generic approach for the design of decision support systems for river basin management.

University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlandsvan Delden H, Luja P, Engelen G (2007) Integration of multi-scale dynamic spatial models of socio-economic and

physical processes for river basin management. Environmental Modelling and Software 22: 223–238van Notten PWF, Rotmans J, Van Asselt MBA, Rothman DS (2003) An updated scenario typology. Futures 35: 423–443Verweij M, Douglas M, Ellis R, Engel C, Hendriks F, et al. (2006) Clumsy solutions for a complex world: The case of

climate change. Public Administration 84: 817–843Walker S, Price R, Rutledge D (2008) New Zealand’s remaining indigenous cover: Recent changes and biodiversity

protection needs (Science for Conservation 284). New Zealand Department of Conservation, WellingtonWoods RA (2003) The relative roles of climate, soil, vegetation and topography in determining seasonal and long-term

catchment dynamics. Advances in Water Resources 26: 295–309Woods RA (2008) Evaluation of a simple similarity index method for estimating global runoff. Presentation at European

Geosciences Union General Assembly, April 2008, Vienna



http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0084/latest/DLM170873.html

http://www.martininstitute.ox.ac.uk/NR/rdonlyres/C3EDD045-9E3B-4053-9229-9CF76660AAC6/645

Date post:	17-Nov-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	universite-paris-saclay
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Choosing Regional Futures

Documents