Lesson 4: Na wai te mana? Understanding your stakeholders

Flashcards covering key concepts from Lesson 4: understanding stakeholders, mana whenua, stakeholder categories, perspectives, government roles, and climate change case study concepts.

What is a stakeholder?

A stakeholder is any individual, group, or organization who can affect, be affected by, or perceive themselves to be affected by the activities, decisions, or policies of another group or organization. This broad definition encompasses both internal and external entities with varying levels of interest and influence.

Who are mana whenua in the NZ context?

In the New Zealand context, mana whenua are Māori who have customary authority over a specific area, derived from ancestral ties to the land and deep cultural connections. They hold a unique constitutional position as tangata whenua (people of the land) and Treaty partners under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This status grants them inherent governance authority, distinct from other stakeholders, and necessitates their engagement in policy and resource management as partners, not merely as an interest group.

What are the three levels to consider when analyzing climate change stakeholders?

When analyzing climate change stakeholders for comprehensive policy development and implementation, it is crucial to consider stakeholders at three interconnected levels: the global level (e.g., international organizations, multilateral corporations), the national level (e.g., governmental ministries, national industries, Indigenous groups), and the local level (e.g., community groups, local businesses, regional councils). This multi-scalar approach ensures all relevant actors and their varied impacts and interests are accounted for.

Define primary, secondary, and tertiary stakeholders.

Stakeholders are typically categorized based on their proximity and impact: Primary stakeholders are those directly affected, either positively or negatively, by the decisions or actions (e.g., communities impacted by climate change, industries facing new regulations). Secondary stakeholders are indirectly affected but hold significant influence or interest (e.g., NGOs, advocacy groups, research institutions). Tertiary stakeholders are not directly affected but can facilitate or influence processes, often providing broader context or support (e.g., academics, international observers, media). This categorization helps in prioritizing engagement strategies.

What is the difference between 'interests' and 'positions' of stakeholders?

Interests refer to the fundamental needs, concerns, desires, and underlying reasons a stakeholder has regarding an issue. These are often not immediately apparent and require deeper understanding. Positions, conversely, are the explicit, often publicly stated, stances or demands a stakeholder takes on an issue. Understanding the distinction is crucial in negotiation and policy-making, as addressing underlying interests rather than just stated positions can lead to more sustainable and mutually beneficial outcomes.

What is perspective-taking vs perspective-getting?

Perspective-taking involves empathetically imagining or inferring what another person or group might be thinking, feeling, or desiring, based on available information or their known context. Perspective-getting, conversely, is the active process of directly soliciting and gathering information about others' actual thoughts, experiences, and opinions through direct engagement, consultation, or research. Both are vital for effective stakeholder engagement: perspective-taking helps anticipate needs, while perspective-getting confirms or corrects these presumptions, leading to more informed and legitimate policy decisions.

What is the 'balancing act of government' in policy making?

The 'balancing act of government' in policy-making typically refers to the utilitarian process by which the Executive branch (specifically Cabinet) weighs and reconciles the often competing interests, rights claims, and economic costs/benefits of various societal groups. This involves making trade-offs to determine a course of action that aims to maximize overall societal welfare or achieve a 'greatest good for the greatest number' outcome, often within significant political and resource constraints. It embodies the complex nexus of political, economic, and social considerations in public policy decisions.

What are the three branches of government in New Zealand?

New Zealand operates under a Westminster-style parliamentary system with three distinct branches of government:

1. Legislature (Parliament): Comprises the House of Representatives and the Governor-General, responsible for debating and enacting legislation.
2. Executive: Consists of the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers, drawn from the Legislature. It is responsible for governing the country, administering laws, and proposing policy initiatives.
3. Judiciary: An independent system of courts that interprets and applies laws, ensuring justice and upholding the rule of law. Its independence is crucial for checks and balances.

What is the 'public sector'?

The 'public sector' encompasses all government departments, agencies, state-owned enterprises, and public entities that are primarily funded by taxes and statutory levies. Its primary function is to deliver a wide range of public services (e.g., education, healthcare, infrastructure), formulate and implement public policy, and enforce regulations. This sector plays a crucial role in the social and economic welfare of the nation, operating under principles of public accountability and service.

Who are global climate change actors at the international level?

Global climate change actors operating at the international level include:

• The United Nations (UN): Particularly the UNFCCC (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) and its related bodies (e.g., IPCC), which establish global frameworks and facilitate negotiations.
• National Governments: Participating in international agreements and setting national policies.
• Multinational Organizations: Intergovernmental bodies (e.g., World Bank, OECD) that influence policy and finance climate initiatives.
• Civil Society Groups: Global non-governmental organizations (NGOs) focused on advocacy, research, and grassroots action (e.g., Greenpeace, WWF, environmental think tanks, and scientific bodies like the ICSU).

How is climate policy debated at the national level in NZ?

At the national level in New Zealand, climate policy is debated through a multi-stakeholder and parliamentary process. Key actors include:

• The Government: Cabinet and relevant ministries (e.g., MfE, MBIE) formulate policy and legislation.
• Political Parties: Articulate different ideological stances and proposed solutions.
• Industry Bodies: Represent sectors significantly impacted by or contributing to climate change (e.g., Federated Farmers, EMA).
• Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): Environmental groups and advocacy organizations (e.g., Forest & Bird, Environmental Defence Society) lobby for stronger action.
• Iwi/Maori Organizations: Advocate for Māori rights and interests, including kaitiakitanga (guardianship) of the environment.
• Local Governments: Implement national policy and contribute local perspectives.
• Scientists and Academic Institutions: Provide research, evidence, and expert advice.
• Media: Shape public discourse and hold actors accountable.
• Public Consultation: Plays a significant role in gathering diverse perspectives on proposed policies.

What does 'Think global, act local' imply for stakeholder analysis?

'Think global, act local' emphasizes that while climate change is a global phenomenon requiring international frameworks, effective action also necessitates localized initiatives and community-level engagement. For stakeholder analysis, this implies that:

• Global-level analyses identify overarching issues and international responsibilities.
• National-level analyses translate these into country-specific policies.
• Local-level analyses focus on specific impacts, vulnerabilities, and the capacity for local communities and organizations to implement solutions and drive change through grassroots campaigns, sustainable practices, and advocacy tailored to their unique contexts. It highlights the interconnectedness of scales and the agency of local actors.

What is mana whenua status in policy and partnerships?

Mana whenua possess a distinct status in environmental policy and partnerships in NZ, recognized through various mechanisms:

• Governance Roles: They hold inherent governance responsibilities rooted in whakapapa (genealogy) and kaitiakitanga, not merely a consultative role.
• Treaty Settlements: These often include redress mechanisms and co-governance arrangements over natural resources, providing legal mechanisms for partnership.
• Legislation: Acts like the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991 and the Conservation Act 1987 mandate meaningful engagement and consideration of Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview) in decision-making.
• Partnerships: Formal agreements (like social accords) facilitate collaboration between state agencies and iwi. However, the nature and extent of these relationships vary significantly across the country due to historical context, settlement progress, and local iwi structures.

What is a 'social accord' in this context?

In this context, a 'social accord' refers to a formal, collaborative arrangement or partnership between state agencies (e.g., government departments, local councils) and mana whenua. These accords are established to achieve shared environmental and social outcomes, often involving co-governance, co-management, or joint decision-making processes. They move beyond mere consultation to establish a framework for true partnership, recognizing and giving effect to mana whenua authority and knowledge in managing natural resources and public services.

Give an example of a multi-stakeholder partnership involving mana whenua.

The Integrated Kaipara Harbour Management Group (IKHMG) serves as a prominent example. This multi-stakeholder partnership involves iwi (e.g., Ngāti Whātua), central government agencies (e.g., DoC, MPI), local government (e.g., Northland Regional Council, Auckland Council), farming communities, and environmental groups. Notably, it is characterized by strong mana whenua leadership, demonstrating how Indigenous governance and knowledge can be central to effective, holistic, and culturally appropriate environmental management approaches within a complex multi-stakeholder framework.

What is the purpose of stakeholder analysis in civic engagement?

The purpose of stakeholder analysis in civic engagement is multifaceted:

1. Identification: To systematically identify all individuals, groups, or organizations that have a legitimate stake in an issue, categorizing them (e.g., Primary, Secondary, Tertiary).
2. Understanding Positions and Interests: To delve into their explicit positions and, more crucially, their underlying interests, motivations, and potential conflicts.
3. Mapping Influence and Power: To assess their capacity to influence decisions and policy outcomes.
4. Informing Consultation: To determine who needs to be consulted, at what level, and through what methods, ensuring inclusive and representative participation.
5. Identifying Collaboration Potential: To identify potential allies, opponents, and areas where collaboration or consensus-building is feasible, enhancing the robustness and legitimacy of policy processes.

What is an example of a rights vs utilitarian debate in policy (animal welfare case study)?

The animal welfare case study involving SAFE (advocating for animal rights, particularly the right not to be exploited) versus NZ Pork (representing the economic interests and livelihoods of pig farmers) and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) highlights the fundamental tension between rights-based and utilitarian approaches in policy. SAFE argues for inherent rights of animals, regardless of economic cost. NZ Pork argues for sustainable farming practices that balance animal welfare with economic viability, often appealing to utilitarian principles of maximizing welfare within economic constraints. MPI, as the government agency, is tasked with balancing these competing moral and economic arguments within its regulatory frameworks, ultimately making a decision that reflects a societal 'balancing act' on welfare standards vs. productive outcomes.

What are the roles of central vs local government in NZ?

In New Zealand, the central government (Wellington-based agencies and ministries) holds responsibility for national policy frameworks, major resource allocation (e.g., education, health, social security, economic policy), and international relations. Local governments (city and district councils, regional councils) are responsible for delivering local public services (e.g., water supply, waste management, roading, infrastructure development), administering district plans, and applying national regulations to local contexts. There is a continuous interplay, with central government providing legislative frameworks and funding streams, while local government adapts and implements these within their specific communities, often facing unique challenges and opportunities.

Which key acts shape mana whenua involvement in environmental management?

Two foundational pieces of legislation significantly shape mana whenua involvement in environmental management:

• The Conservation Act 1987 (and subsequent amendments): This Act requires the Department of Conservation to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, enabling Māori participation in conservation management and recognizing traditional Māori uses of natural resources.
• The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA): Although now partially replaced, the RMA explicitly required local authorities to 'recognise and provide for' the relationship of Māori with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu (sacred places), and other taonga (treasures), and to 'have particular regard to' the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. This mandated extensive consultation and involvement of mana whenua in resource consent processes, plan development, and environmental decision-making, providing a legal basis for their role as Treaty partners in environmental governance.