Daniel Rutledge, Landcare Research

Garry McDonald, NZCEE & Market Economics

Michael Cameron, University of Waikato

Graham McBride, NIWA

Jacques Poot, University of Waikato

Frank Scrimgeour, University of Waikato

Robbie Price, Landcare Research

Derek Phyn, Environment Waikato

Hedwig van Delden, RIKS

Beat Huser, Environment Waikato

Bruce Small, AgResearch

Liz Wedderburn, AgResearch

Tony Fenton, Alchemists Ltd

Development of Spatial DecisionSupport Systems to SupportLong-term Integrated Planning

International Congress on Modelling & SimulationUniversity of Canterbury

11 December 2007

What do we want for the future?

Depends on•Whom you ask…•How far ahead we look…

(amongst other things)

Despite different individual opinions, values, desires, & utilities, increasinglywe express a desire to become sustainable.

New Zealand Policy Context

• Resource Management Act 1991

“The purpose of this Act is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.”(Section 3)

• Local Government Act 2002

“… 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 development approach.” (Section 3)

Prepare Long-Term Council Community Plans

Cultural Environmental

Social Economic

WELL-BEINGS

While laudable in principle,how do we become sustainable?

How do we plan for it?

How do we measure or monitor it?

What will it take?

What will it take?

“The common theme throughout this strategy for sustainable development is the need to integrate economic and ecological considerations in decision making.”

World Commission on Environment and DevelopmentOur Common Future, 1987

“The fundamental task in front of us over the coming decades is to redesign our socio-political-economic system in ways that reintegrate the dependencies between people and our underpinning ecological systems.”

Dr. J. Morgan Williams,Former NZ Parliamentary Commissioner for the

Environment

Environment Waikato Long-Term Council Community Planning

“ Local authorities within the Waikato area have made a commitment to work together to promote the well-being of their communities, consistent with the principles of sustainable development. This commitment is in the form of a signed triennial agreement.” (Page 9)

“ Our environmental resources therefore need to be managed sustainably, so that our region’s prosperity and growth can continue for the long-term.” (Page 24)

Choosing Regional Futures

Develop and apply planning and

communication tools to make

informed choices for the future

Funded from 2006-2010 by NZ Foundation for Research, Science & TechnologyNZ Foundation for Research, Science & Technology

Waikato 2006

• Population: 387,700 (Statistics NZ June 06 est.)

• Households: 145,100(Statistics NZ June 06 est.)

• Land Cover– Agriculture 55.2%– Natural 28.2%– Forestry 14.4%– Urban 1.1%– Other 1.0%

• GDP: ~ $12 Billion(2003 GDP + 3% annual growth)

• Ecological Footprint: ~9 ha

• # Businesses: ~34,000

Waikato 2026?

• Population: 426,800 (+39,100, Statistics NZ 2026 med. est.)

• Households: 169,400(+24,300; Statistics NZ 2036 med. est.)

• Land Cover– Agriculture ?– Natural ?– Forestry ?– Urban ?– Other ~ ?

• GDP: ~ $33 Billion(2003 GDP + 3% annual growth)

• Ecological Footprint: ?

• # Businesses: ~50,000+ ?

?

CRF Objectives

1) Process and communication focus linked to EW Community Outcomes & LTCCP process

explore plausible futures (scenarios)

develop and trial a Deliberation Matrix

2) Building a spatial decision support system support the planning & communication in Objective 1

integrate economy, environment, society ( & culture?)

track indicators across space and/or time

explore trade-offs, win-wins, limits

Natural Capital (resources)

‘mine’ ‘maintain’

How

we

mea

sure

‘w

ealth

’ in

Wai

kato

‘GDP’

(profit)

‘GPI’

(people)

CrowdedHouse

•New Zealand has more people than expected

•Less money from government

SleepingIn

•Climate change impacts are bigger than expected

•The economy is weaker and slower growing than anticipated

NatureCounts

•New Zealanders discuss and understand the value of nature in a new way

•Economic growth comes from biological and life sciences

ScienceSociety

•Science and scientists become more important for economic growth

•More things are known about what you as an individual are doing; more things are known about what companies are doing

Strategies /

Sce

narios

Values / Indicators

Sta

keho

lder

s

Objective 1 Deliberation Matrix

Why an SDSS?

• Long-term integrated planning and resource management are examples of “wicked” or unstructured problems

• Characterised by– Multiple actors– Multiple values & views– Multiple outcomes possible– High uncertainty

Uncertainty

relative to the

knowledge for

solving the

problem

Conflicting views on values, goals and measures relative to the solution of the

problem

weakly structuredproblem

structured problem

weakly structuredproblem

unstructured problem

An SDSS helps address unstructured problems• Integrates society, economy, and environment• Identifies links & feedbacks• Sets limits explicitly (e.g., only so much land, water, soil)• Demonstrate importance of “where” in addition to “what” and “how much”• Potential for aggregation/disaggregation

Example: ill-structured problem

To be recognised as a District with:• A growing and vibrant community where cultural

diversity is celebrated.• A diverse, sustainable economy that provides full

employment.• A safe and healthy society, where people can achieve

their goals.• A pristine, sustainable environment.

South Waikato District Council LTCCP, Page 15

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

The Process

Present(informed by Past)

(i.e. Community Outcomes)

Future Goals

The CRF SDSS should…

• Focus on science and integration, not technology

• Address a range of issues in an integrated manner

• Be robust and relatively quick

• Consider space explicitly

• Be adaptable to other regions in NZ.

CRF SDSS Considerations

Scientific

Organisational

Technological

CRF ProjectConstraints

Time

Budget Resources

Scope

Scientific Considerations

• Interdisciplinary

• Systems approach

• Spatially-explicit

• Multi-scale

• 30-50 year temporal horizon

SDSS: Systems Approach

Society Economy

Environment Resources

Wastes

Goods

Labour

Services

Stewardship

Systems models track stocks & flows over time

Stocks Flows

Society Economy

Environment Resources

Wastes

Goods

Labour

Services

Stewardship

Spatially-Explicit

Technological Considerations

• Multiple data types & sources

• Integration of different models with different origins

• Portability/adaptability

• Speed/ease of use under different settings (i.e. use in community engagement or only “behind the scenes”)

RIKS GEONAMICA Framework

• Stand-alone application

• Systems models

• Multiple spatial & temporal scales

• Model components from partners incorporated directly (no passing of data)

• History of development and use

Organisational Considerations

• Regional & District/City Councils– Primary customer– Want to use SDSS otherwise why bother– Deliver sooner rather than later– Portability

• Research– Ability to address a range of issues– Flexibility for simple to complex

Universite de VersaillesSaint-Quentin-en-Yvelines

Project Structure

Advisory GroupEnd User Networks

SDSS Design by Triangulation

WaikatoCommunity Outcomes& MARCO Indicators

Key Drivers fromQualitative Scenarios

Community outcomesfrom 4 other regions

Society Economy

Environment

Choosing Futures WaikatoCommunity Themes & Outcomes

• 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 & Identify - The Waikato region identifies with - and values - its land, air rivers and waterways, mountains, flora, fauna and its people.

• Participation & Equity - The Waikato region builds strong informed communities and has a culture that encourages people and communities to play their part.

Too difficult to interpret – focused on set of 75 core MARCO indicators

Qualitative Scenarios – Key Drivers• World

– Climate Change: increased instability, extremes, and spatial variation– Population: migration trends, potential climate refugees– Market changes: number, size, access, consumer preferences, locations– Globalisation: R&D investment

• New Zealand– Population: older, increasing proportion of Maori, Pasifika, and Asians;

decreasing proportion of Pakehas/Europeans– 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: urbanisation pressures– Economy: agricultural intensification– Governance: continued devolution versus greater central authority

4 Comparison Regions• Auckland

– ~1/3 of NZ population– Highly urban and urban expansion affects Waikato to the south– Large source of internal tourism for the Waikato

• Bay of Plenty– Proximity to Waikato– One major urban centre (Tauranga)– Focused more on horticultural than pastoral

• Horizons (Wanganui-Manawatu)– Similar major land uses (agricultural, forestry)– One major urban centre (Palmerston North)

• Canterbury– Similar major land uses (agricultural, forestry), increasing dairying– One major urban centre (Christchurch)– Water supply/allocation an issue

NZ & World

Waikato Region Dynamic Economy-Environment Model

NZCEE

External DriversExternal Sources

Water QualityNIWA

DemographyUoW-PSC

ZoningDistrict Councils

BiodiversityLCR Spatial Indicators

Climate Change ScenariosNIWA

DairyingUoW-SM

Land UseRIKS/LCR/EW

SUITABILITY

ACCESSIBILITY

LOCAL INFLUENCE

HydrologyNIWA

Draft SDSSSystem Design

Region

District

Local

GEONAMICA - RIKSINTEGRATION - LCR LEAD

3 Examples Based on the SDSS Prototype

Land Use

Abandoned

Bare Ground

Broad-Acre

Forestry

Infrastructure

Mine

Indigenous Vegetation

Pastoral - Dairy

Pastoral - Other

Other Primary

Residential

Water

Wetland

Utilities

Services

Manufacturing

Construction

Dairy Expansion

Dairy Decline

Village Life

SDSS “Goodness of Fit”

Waikato Region Community Theme

Indicators (#)

Total

Informed

Direct Indirect Gap

Sustainable Environment 22 16 5 1

Quality of Life 23 3 6 14

Sustainable Economy 17 9 4 4

Culture and Identity 10 - 3 7

Participation and Equity 4 - - 4

What We Want to Achieve

1. Planning tools that inform communities

2. Tools expose links and trade-offs

3. Councils use these tools

Conclusions (so far…)

• Successful development requires active and on-going organisational commitment

• Tension exists between design flexibility and prioritisation

• Spatially-explicit systems model approach should help unite different models & approaches

• Technical integration offers adaptive potential & simplifies end-use but generates additional overheads and requires willingness of researchers to relinquish some control.

Thank you!

Universite de VersaillesSaint-Quentin-en-Yvelines