Up close and personal: an essential ingredient in transboundary water basin agreements

ABSTRACT

While the media is filled with accounts of water scarcity and threats to water quality, abundant examples of effective transboundary water resource agreements exist throughout the world. This article discusses how consensus was reached between diverse stakeholder groups in the Canterbury Plains District on the South Island of New Zealand. The interdisciplinary, trans-sector water users included the Indigenous Ngāi Tahu. Interviews indicated successful water agreements were positively facilitated by face-to-face interactions during meetings, meals, field trips, and casual interaction, intentionally implemented by the Ngāi Tahu. When encouraged during the stakeholder process, this interpersonal aspect has repeatedly broken through intractable stalemates.

KEYWORDS:

• Transboundary water negotiations
• face-to-face interactions
• collaborative water diplomacy
• trust building
• Aotearoa–New Zealand

Introduction

Meeting the ever-growing demand for fresh water while maintaining healthy environmental standards presents a daunting global challenge. Regional, national, and international stakeholders need examples of how to judiciously manage finite and shared water resources in small and large transboundary basins. This manuscript discusses the history, successes, and future challenges of building and maintaining consensus for protecting and sharing freshwater resources in the Canterbury Region on the South Island of Aotearoa–New Zealand. Specifically, it addresses the cooperative efforts of multiple sectors to lower nutrients following an unsustainable surge in dairy farming that threatened regional water bodies, including sacred waters of the Indigenous Ngāi Tahu. The paper highlights how trust and bonding were developed at multiple levels before, during, and after the implementation of the Canterbury Water Management Strategy. In particular, face-to-face interactions that were encouraged and acted out by the presence of the Ngāi Tahu helped promote trust and cooperation to lower nutrient loading and improve land and water management in this region. Finally, the article discusses how other watershed groups have effectively maintained this crucial interpersonal aspect of transboundary watershed agreements despite shifting political and administrative climates.

This case study is part of a larger analysis on the qualities of effective transboundary water agreements from local to international scales (Rugel, unpublished data). Both the current manuscript and larger study attempt to address the following questions:

1. What motivates stakeholders with competing agendas to share and protect water?

2. What conditions or principles promote convergence and agreement between disparate parties?

3. What lessons can be drawn from these examples (including failures) to ensure longer-lasting success of water negotiations?

Background and setting – the Canterbury region, A-NZ

The Canterbury Region of Aotearoa–New Zealand (A-NZ) was once referred to as the ‘Breadbasket of England’, providing wheat, oats, and mutton to Britain and its Commonwealth in the late 18th century. Cultivation of these and other agricultural products has been ongoing in the Canterbury Plain for 150 years. Between 1989 and 2009, sheep and beef farmers in this region replaced many of their herds with dairy cows, requiring greater use of groundwater resources to support an increase from 312,000 to 2.1 million cows [https://www.stats.govt.nz (accessed 6 November 2020)].

During this time, various groups, including the Indigenous Māori on the South Island (known collectively as the Ngāi Tahu) as well as the Mayoral Forum of Canterbury, became apprehensive about increasingly poor water quality and a lack of effective land and water management throughout the region. High levels of nutrients, particularly nitrates, were threatening surface waters and groundwater, including sacred waters of the Ngāi Tahu. The cause of this environmental degradation was alleged to be an over-allocation of dairy permits by Environment Canterbury (ECan), the regional environmental council.

Approximately 74,000 Indigenous Ngāi Tahu still inhabit A-NZ’s South Island. They consider the waters discovered by their ancestors to be part of their ancestry. At its core, whakapapa (the genealogy of the Māori) starts with these first ancestors, including sky, wind, water, forest, oceans, and plants. Ngāi Tahu maintain a strong sense of connection to and guardianship over (kaitiakitanga) these ancestors [http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/whakapapa-genealogy/page-4 (accessed 2 July 2023)].

After the British Crown claimed the islands of A-NZ as their own in the 18th century, the Ngāi Tahu were systematically stripped of their ownership of and access to their ancestral lands and waters. They became increasingly marginalized in the country, and, along with loss of life and resources, they were unable to control and protect ancestral elements over which they considered themselves stewards (O’Malley & Armstrong, 2008).

In the 1970s, global and local environmental and civil rights movements were joined by a new generation of Ngāi Tahu who sought to reclaim their power to co-govern and protect their sacred lands and waters. When a more sympathetic administration was elected, the country became willing to face its history of cultural exclusion. In 1975, a tribunal was established to reinterpret and honour Indigenous rights given under the Treaty of Waitangi as a Commonwealth of Britain. The Crown offered formal apologies and minor reparations (ongoing) to hundreds of iwi (tribes), and Ngāi Tahu were given the official right to co-govern over A-NZ.

The Ngāi Tahu were just regaining the willingness to set aside past grievances when environmental degradation in the Canterbury region reached a crisis point. As concerns were raised by regional Ngāi Tahu and the Mayoral Forum of Canterbury, a study was published evaluating the performance of ECan (Creech et al., 2010). The study, known as the Creech Report, revealed ECan councillors had, in fact, over-permitted in favour of the dairy industry, threatening regional surface water and groundwater. Because 70% of all fresh water in A-NZ is found within the Canterbury Region, and tourism (including eco-tourism) generates over $16 billion dollars annually, there was a strong incentive both locally and nationally to protect these waters [(https://www.tourismnewzealand.com/insights/industry-insights/ (accessed 12 July 2023)].

When the Creech Report revealed the degree of mismanagement of surface water and groundwater resources by ECan, Parliament responded, almost overnight, by dismissing this entire arm of its environmental council (10 councillors). Seven commissioners were appointed in their place (Eppel, 2015).

Case study – the Canterbury Water Management Strategy

Under the Resource Management Act, the seven new commissioners were given the power to cap permitting and set nutrient limits. Sensing heavy pressure to act and produce quick results, they immediately set a strict 35% reduction of nutrients.

The nascent Canterbury Water Management Strategy (CWMS) became the backbone on which new water management plans were constructed. In order to tackle not only current but legacy land and water degradation and to address the subregional differences in land use and water sectors, the Canterbury Region was divided into 10 subregions or zones (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Map of Canterbury Region within the South Island of Aotearoa–New Zealand with 10 zones. https://ecan.maps.arcgis.com/apps/ZoneLookup/index.html?appid = df4699cc044d4c7fbe319beff18d881f&find = Paringa%252C%2520Haast%252C%2520West%2520Coast

Committees were formed that consisted of water users unique to each zone, including members of the Indigenous Ngāi Tahu. These collaborative committees were charged with creating Zone Implementation Plans (ZIPs) consisting of their own best solutions for reaching nutrient limitations within their zones (Robson-Williams et al., 2022). Farmers could submit plans to control nutrients on their individual properties, but were encouraged to consider and collaborate with upstream and downstream riparian users. ECan promised to adopt any ZIP as long as it did not break a law.

Since the re-interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi, the Ngāi Tahu work alongside all local, regional, and national administrations, with the understanding that in all matters, including the environment, Māori knowledge (matauranga) will be respected. This included the presence and participation of Ngāi Tahu on ZIP committees.

Only actual water users/stakeholders were allowed to sit on zone committees, although supporting agencies and interested parties could observe and offer assistance during meetings when their help was requested. (In addition to Ngāi Tahu, stakeholders and special interests throughout the Canterbury region included farming, ranching, recreation, tourism, irrigation, anglers, business, non-government agencies, and industry [https://www.ecan.govt.nz/your-region/your-environment/water/whats-happening-in-my-water-zone/about-the-water-zone-committees/ (accessed 14 July 2023)]. ECan provided facilitators, scientists, science interpreters, and some funding to each zone committee (ECan, 2015).

Despite the codification of co-governance, cultural hurdles had to be surmounted before trust and respect between Māori and Pākehā (non-Māori) was achieved and negotiations could begin. Wariness went both ways. Fortunately, in addition to their sense of guardianship in relation to the environment, Māori hold many distinctive cultural beliefs and observances. Some of these include a preference for face-to-face interactions (kanohi ki te kanohi), deciding issues by consensus, and a spiritual reverence during the acquisition and preparation of food. This includes preparing and repairing their tools, choosing species to harvest sustainably, and hosting and feeding others – collectively known as mahinga kai or ‘working the food’ [https://www.ecan.govt.nz/your-region/your-environment/our-natural-environment/mahinga-kai/ (accessed 11 July 2023)].

Interviews and observations

By the time this research was conducted in Canterbury (2019), ZIP committees were at various stages of designing and implementing plans to meet their nutrient quotas.

According to interviews, before committees began discussing basin issues, representatives of Ngāi Tahu in each zone shared the above-mentioned cultural concepts with zone meeting members. In accordance with the newly formed promise to respect and maintain matauranga at all levels, Ngāi Tahu traditions began to be recognized, included, and valued, not just at the water table, but in all tiers of government, management, research, and development.

Māori demonstrated and shared their traditional practices and values before, during, and outside of meetings. This included interacting face to face and preparing and sharing food in their unique manner (mahinga kai) while hosting non-Māori at meals and gatherings. Their willingness to act as host was intentional. They saw it as an essential part of the process of building trust and relationships that would promote consensus. At multiple levels, including Zone Committees, other stakeholders began to recognize the power of these Indigenous practices, how they overlapped with non-Māori values, and how they could help restore and maintain their degraded environment. Although witnesses say it took approximately a year, distrust between Māori and non-Māori eventually began to lessen.

In every interview it became apparent that the inclusion of the Ngāi Tahu and a growing understanding and implementation of Indigenous values and practices had a profound effect on those participating in the CWMS, as well as supporting agencies. Every interviewee, whether farmer, councillor, politician, legislator, facilitator, or scientist, described what became known as ‘a magic moment in time’. What began as a water management plan broadened into a deeper cultural paradigm shift. Ngāi Tahu concepts were not only being respected and adopted to address environmental degradation, but their presence became evident (and honoured) throughout the country, within industry, in written and spoken communications, advertising, and government.

At this writing committees and stakeholders have achieved varying degrees of progress and implementation of measures to meet nutrient quotas within its 10 zones. To date, over 4000 farms have created individual plans for saving and protecting water at the farm level while keeping the larger watershed in mind (Mountains to the Sea approach). Nutrient levels, chiefly nitrates, are coming down, although legacy nutrients still present long-term problems, particularly in groundwater. Other conservation practices within ZIPs include sustainable land development, using retention ponds and planting trees to hold and process nutrients, putting fish screens on intakes, protecting well heads, updating irrigation equipment, changing herd composition, and cultivating more drought-resistant crops [https://www.ecan.govt.nz/your-region/your-environment/monitoring-and-compliance/cme-5-year-plan/ (accessed 12 July 2023)].

In 2019, soon after these interviews were conducted, a new administration was elected in A-NZ. The appointed ECan commissioners who had replaced previous councillors were themselves replaced by a new group of elected councillors. The new administration is seen by some as more top-down and less supportive of collaborative (and local) water management than the previous one that helped facilitate the above period of progress under the CWMS. The ZIP committees are still implementing zone plans and Ngāi Tahu are still working to maintain matauranga at all levels of government.

Discussion

According to interviews in this study, attaining consensus over water allocation and water quality improvements in the Canterbury Region was greatly facilitated by the development of relationships and trust formed through face-to-face interactions. Many of these bonds were established prior to formal dialogues or decisions, during meals, field trips, and casual exchanges. As the principles and practices of close interpersonal interaction are already deeply imbedded in the Māori culture, the inclusion of Indigenous members from the early stages of water negotiations under the CWMS created an atmosphere that promoted a greater willingness to work towards mutually beneficial outcomes.

The larger case study in which this current study is embedded examines how agreement and/or consensus has been reached between disparate water users in regional, national, and international transboundary basins. Results from the larger study, currently 110 interviews of experts, stakeholders, policy, and management representatives, suggests that when water users share time, meet face to face, and share meals and casual conversation, the walls that previously divided them may begin to lower (Decker, 2023). These casual, interpersonal exchanges build what Ostrom recognized and referred to as ‘social capital’ (Ostrom, 1990).

In the Apalachicola–Chattahoochee–Flint River Basin in the south-eastern United States, for example, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia were unable to resolve the allocation and protection of water in their tri-state basin after three decades of litigation between the states and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Efforts towards breaking this impasse began with three water users in an informal setting, sharing concerns, coffee, and ideas. The group grew to a 56-member board of volunteer stakeholders who took it upon themselves to attempt a non-government approach to resolving their water issues. In five years, the Apalachicola–Chattahoochee–Flint Stakeholders published a data-driven plan for sharing the water between 14 water sectors in the basin where 30 years of state litigations had failed. Observations and interviews suggested that much of their success was attributed to casual time spent sharing time, food, and values, while visiting one another’s farms, factories, dams, oyster beds, and businesses throughout the tri-state basin (Rugel, 2020).

Although this parameter of personal interaction may appear subjective, it has repeatedly been shown to be a powerful factor for breaking down barriers and increasing willingness to cooperate over shared resources, including water.

In an examination of the water, peace, and resource diplomacy literature, Keskinen et al. (2023) identified trust, or the lack of, as pivotal to building or hindering cooperation and consensus between stakeholders and state/non-state actors. The focus of the study was on actions within the negotiation process that offer opportunities for trust-building. These are not limited to sharing data and other information transparently, joint fact finding, tackling low-hanging fruit which benefits all parties, informal interactions such as field trips, and soliciting the input from marginalized players (Indigenous groups, women, and youth). These activities also help to solidify a group identity that can promote greater cooperation and more effective and nuanced problem solving.

In his study of bilateral negotiations, Wheeler (2018) suggests that before formal negotiations begin, face-to-face interactions greatly enhance the potential for successful cooperation where ‘the other’ is perceived as a potential enemy. He points out specifically that sharing a meal before, after, and/or during negotiations has been shown to build trust and empathy vital to positive outcomes between mediators.

On a large scale, The International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River has managed to create and maintain an effective forum for the riparian countries that share water along the Danube River. While observing the Joint Meeting of the Water Ministers of these countries held at the United Nations in Vienna, the author witnessed first-hand the cooperation and congeniality of what the Secretariat of the Commission referred to as the ‘Joint Family’. These ministers have interacted for over a decade to discuss concerns and solutions for protecting and sharing the waters of the Danube River between 19 countries. Collaboration between divergent sectors such as navigation, engineering, scientists, environmentalists, hydrologists, and the EU are ongoing and surprisingly cooperative. Interestingly, they end each Joint Meeting with a shared meal.

Another successful and unique application of transboundary cooperation is The Nile Project (https://abeautiful.world/stories/the-nile-project/), which, rather than sharing food, shares and co-creates music. The mission of the project is to break down cross-cultural and national barriers and stimulate creative solutions for the multilateral cooperation required for sharing and protecting the Nile’s water resources among its 11 riparian countries.

Conclusion

Governance of transboundary watersheds may take a wide range of forms from top-down to bottom-up models. Irrespective of its framework, the challenge of building trust, respect, and relationships must be addressed between all parties before goals, best practices, and benchmarks are established. Ice breakers may be useful in dispelling initial tensions between stakeholders and parties involved, but the stronger bonds that promote trust, understanding, empathy towards, and cooperation between opposing water users can best be developed within an environment of long-term face-to-face interaction and shared experience.

Far from a ‘soft science’, relationships are an essential element in the water agreement process. These hard-won bonds can bring previously disparate water sectors to the table and help them make prudent decisions that respect all parties. In the end it may be the relationships between two or more stakeholders, facilitators, or convenors that hold transboundary agreements together as they are created, implemented, and revised, and as new administrative, legislative, and political climates shift and evolve.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).