IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES BETWEEN INDIGENOUS VALUES AND CURRENT SUSTAINABLE DESIGN CONCEPTS IN AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND

Transcription

1 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES BETWEEN INDIGENOUS VALUES AND CURRENT SUSTAINABLE DESIGN CONCEPTS IN AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND Emily Voyde * Te Kipa Kepa Brian Morgan Abstract Urbanization creates impervious surfaces which reduce natural hydrologic functions and result in channel erosion, loss of property and habitat degradation. Sustainable design and management adopts a more holistic approach to conventional methods. Various techniques for sustainable management are Low Impact Development (LID), Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) and Low Impact Urban Design and Development (LIUDD). Regardless of terminology, the introduction of such concepts to Aotearoa New Zealand reflects a paradigm shift from conventional stormwater management techniques to a more sustainable design philosophy. This paper proposes that the imported concepts of sustainable design run parallel to indigenous values when applied in the Aotearoa New Zealand context. Mätauranga Mäori is the indigenous knowledge of the Mäori people of Aotearoa. Examples are presented to discuss the parallels between current sustainable design techniques and the contribution of mätauranga Mäori through indigenous values. * Research Assistant, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Auckland, New Zealand Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Auckland, New Zealand k.morgan@auckland.ac.nz

2 216 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN Keywords New Zealand, tangata whenua, stormwater management, sustainable design, mätauranga Mäori Introduction The water balance is altered significantly by urban development. When land is converted from its predevelopment state (such as forest) to residential or commercial use, its hydrological characteristics change drastically (Davis, 2005). Vegetation is replaced by impervious surfaces rooftops, driveways, roads, car parking, and footpaths. The remaining vegetated areas tend to be smoothed into lawns and parks. Diverse, and often native, plant species are replaced with monoculture grasses that are regularly mown and may experience regular application of fertilizers and pesticides (Davis, 2005). The combination of increased impervious surfaces and smoothed vegetated surfaces promote runoff at the expense of hydrologic functions such as interception by plants, depression storage, infiltration and flow retardation due to surface roughness (Shaver, Horner, Skupien, May, & Ridley, 2007). A greater volume of (potentially polluted) excess water runs off more quickly for a given rainfall event. The likelihood of stream channel erosion is elevated resulting in property loss and habitat degradation. As catchments are developed (become more impervious), groundwater recharge is reduced causing streams which previously had water flowing year round to become ephemeral (Shaver et al., 2007). In addition to volume and peak flow problems associated with urban development, in many cases water quality is also negatively impacted. Many of the components in an urban development contribute higher pollution loads (heavy metals from roofs and roads, suspended solids, etc.). Furthermore, the natural filtering action of vegetation and the infiltration capacity of the underlying soils is replaced by hydrologically smooth impervious surfaces (concrete, asphalt, roofs, etc.) which offer little means to improve water quality (Davis, 2005). Table 1 demonstrates the effects of development on the Auckland hydrological cycle; runoff increases dramatically while infiltration and evapo-transpiration decrease. Sustainable design principles in Aotearoa New Zealand A single paradigm has typically dominated conventional stormwater management practices in New Zealand. Stormwater runoff is considered undesirable and must be removed from the site as quickly as possible to achieve good drainage. Every feature of a conventionally developed site is carefully designed for hydraulic efficiency. Runoff is rapidly conveyed to a centrally located management and/or treatment device, usually at the end of a piped reticulation system. TABLE 1: Components of the hydrological cycle in Auckland (recreated from Auckland Regional Council, 2003) Component Pre-development Post-development Post-dev./Pre-dev. Annual rainfall 1200 mm 1200 mm 100% Total runoff 320 mm 700 mm 219% Deep infiltration 60 mm 10 mm 17% Shallow infiltration 300 mm 100 mm 33% Evapotranspiration 520 mm 390 mm 75%

3 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 217 New Zealand is currently experiencing a gradual paradigm shift towards sustainable urban design and development. Low Impact Development (LID) is a stormwater management methodology gaining popularity in New Zealand. As a specific concept, LID was pioneered by the Prince George s County (Maryland) Department of Environmental Resources in the late 1990s. The primary goal of LID is to mimic predevelopment site hydrology by using design techniques that store, infiltrate, evaporate, transpire and detain runoff (Prince George s County, 1999), in essence to ensure maximum protection of the ecological integrity of the receiving waters by maintaining or restoring the catchment s predevelopment hydrologic regime (Davis, 2005; Prince George s County, 1999). Logically, if runoff patterns are generated in the same manner as the pre-development condition, receiving water impacts are not exacerbated by development. Stormwater is managed in small landscape features located on individual sites rather than being conveyed and managed in large pond facilities located at the bottom of a catchment. With the focus at a single site scale and by integrating stormwater treatment into the landscape, improvements are considered as a cumulative impact integrated over the entire development area (Davis, 2005). This source control concept is quite different from conventional treatment (typically pipe to pond or direct to receiving water) (Prince George s County, 1999). The desired result is not only a reduction in runoff volume and peak flow rates from the site but also improved water quality (Davis, 2005) as suspended solids are reduced and contaminants can be removed in near surface topsoil layers. Furthermore, by creating landscape amenities, LID enhances urban design and visual, social, cultural and ecological values. Prince George s County (1999) identify five fundamental concepts which must be integrated into the site planning process: Using hydrology as the integrating framework Thinking micromanagement Controlling stormwater at the source Using simplistic, non-structural methods Creating a multifunctional landscape The design should retain as much pervious area as possible (Davis, 2005; Shaver, 2000). Infiltration practices reduce the total volume of stormwater runoff, provide groundwater recharge, and augment base flow in streams. To mitigate the effects of impervious areas that cannot be avoided, the site can be engineered for greater infiltration and evaporation by increasing overland flow, creating storage, TABLE 2: LID alternatives to traditional design for stormwater management (adapted from Morgan, 2006) Traditional Method Site design Curb and gutter systems Connected rooftop gutter systems LID Alternatives Narrow driveways Narrow streets Minimal footpaths Permeable pavement Vegetated filter strips Swales Bioretention cells (rain gardens) Disconnected downspouts Into vegetated areas/soakaways Into rain barrels for later use Living roofs

4 218 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN and modifying soils to promote infiltration (Davis, 2005). Impervious rooftops are one of the most difficult runoff problems to address; however, living roof technology is a means of incorporating additional stormwater retention into the site design. Examples of alternative LID techniques are presented in Table 2. True expression of sustainability in urban design and development requires the consideration of multiple criteria. It is necessary to include economic, environmental, social, cultural, technical and health-related aspects (Hellström, Jeppsson, & Kärrman, 2000). LID as a design concept focuses particularly on stormwater management; however, it has been incorporated into other sustainable design initiatives. In New Zealand, low impact urban design and development (LIUDD) is the catchment-based management of stormwater as a valued resource. LIUDD is a synthesis of other international sustainable urban design concepts (Van Roon & Van Roon, 2009). Included are elements of water sensitive urban design (WSUD, an Australian term), sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS, originating in the UK) and low impact design (LID, from the USA and used in New Zealand) (Puddephatt & Heslop, 2007). WSUD is often viewed as the Australian equivalent to LID; however, Donofrio, Kuhn, McWalter, and Winsor (2009) state it is an integrated water management system that encompasses LID, water conservation and recycling, water quality management, and urban ecology. LIUDD is a term resulting from a 6-year programme (started 2003) within the Sustainable Cities Portfolio, funded by the New Zealand Foundation for Research Science and Technology (Van Roon & Van Roon, 2009). The primary principle of LIUDD is to work with nature s cycles on a catchment basis to maintain the integrity and mauri [life force] of ecosystems (Van Roon & Van Roon, 2009). The aim in New Zealand is to reach beyond alternative stormwater management alone to an integrated urban design and development process (Van Roon, 2005). The LIUDD approach adopts a more holistic paradigm than LID (which emphasizes stormwater runoff source control and multifunctional design) with broader reaching sustainability benefits in the form of an integrated urban design and development process. Although LIUDD is recognized as more a holistic and broader sustainable development approach, LID is currently becoming more mainstream in New Zealand as a design initiative and will provide the base comparison with indigenous values in this paper. The Auckland Regional Council (ARC) has two documents that address the concept of LID. Technical Publication 124, The Low Impact Design Manual for the Auckland Region (Shaver, 2000), presents an alternative approach to site design and development from a stormwater management context. Technical Publication 10, Stormwater Management Devices: Design Guidelines Manual (Auckland Regional Council, 2003), provides guidelines on the selection and design of structural stormwater management devices. Mäori relationship with the ecosystem The indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand have a traditional relationship with the ecosystem which has developed over centuries of close interaction with New Zealand s indigenous biodiversity; it remains an important part of the lives of many Mäori (Ministry for the Environment, 2000). Simon (2003) defines the indigenous identity as being characterized by a conservatory ethic, a unified approach to living and a holistic worldview in which things are united/related. The living generations act as the guardians of the land, like their tïpuna (ancestors) before them (Mead, 2003). The land is a source of identity for many indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand. The name used for themselves, as the indigenous

5 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 219 people of Aotearoa New Zealand, is tangata whenua or people of the land. Being descendants of Papatüänuku (the earth mother), tangata whenua see themselves as not only of the land, but as the land. The link between tangata whenua and the land is well illustrated by the word whenua. This word means both land and placenta. Whenua nourishes humanity in the womb. Thus, when a child is born, the placenta is returned to the Earth: the whenua to the whenua (Gillespie, 1998). Simon (2003) defines the Mäori identity as being characterized by a conservatory ethic, a unified approach to living and a holistic worldview in which things are united/related. Mäori have a spiritual association with the land (Rolleston, 2005). The widely held belief is that through the many phases of creation, as the world evolved, a physical and spiritual element was created when Ranginui (the sky father) and Papatüänuku were separated by their children. Once the parents were separated their children occupied and flourished in the various realms created, Täne Mähuta covering the land, Tangäroa the oceans, Tütewehiwehi the fresh water rivers and lakes, and Tawhirimätea the air space between their separated parents (Morgan, 2006a). A consequence of the separation of Ranginui and Papatüänuku was that each would grieve for the other, and so rainfall is considered to be Ngä Roimata o Ranginui (the tears of Rangi) while the wellsprings are considered to be Ngä Puna Tapu o Ngä Atua (the weeping of Papa) (Morgan, 2006a). The physical and spiritual elements evolving from the creation of the world are bound by mauri. Mauri is the essence or life force that provides life to all living things and the potential to support life to water and land; it was passed from Ranginui and Papatüänuku to their children. Mauri is central to the holistic view of the ecosystem held by Mäori; it establishes the inter-relatedness of all living things. An appropriate level of tapu (sacred/restricted) is associated with water sources due to their spiritual origins. Particular practices must be observed to maintain the spiritual balance or mauri of the water. Water from rainfall and springs is considered sacred and is only suitable for human use after it has travelled over Papatüänuku and become noa (free from tapu/ restriction) (Morgan, 2006a). The basic premise is that water, having been used for whatever purpose, should be returned to Papatüänuku if the mauri of that water is not suitable for the subsequent use (Morgan, 2006a). Environmental management regimes established in the traditional Mäori kawa (protocols) of tapu and noa ensure that the requirements of a particular water status can be observed effectively. The essence of these kawa is the importance of not altering mauri to the extent that it is no longer recognizable; the essential character of a site must not be changed as a result of human intervention (Williams, 2006). Current sustainable design principles and mätauranga Mäori Mätauranga Mäori is the indigenous knowledge of the Mäori people of Aotearoa. The Ministry for the Environment (2000) recognizes that mätauranga Mäori about New Zealand s biodiversity is an important source of knowledge, but states that it is currently under-used and vulnerable to ongoing loss. In particular, they state that there are currently no formal mechanisms to sustain mätauranga Mäori and there is little recognition of its potential contribution in biodiversity management. Furthermore, Mäori are often willing to share their traditional knowledge but only on the basis that they retain control over that information and the way in which it is used. This creates a potential conflict between promoting the public understanding of mätauranga Mäori and the desire of Mäori to protect the information from improper use (Ministry for the Environment, 2000). Wehi (2009) also acknowledges that it is often difficult for scientists based within a Western paradigm to access mätauranga Mäori and discusses the

6 220 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN contribution and value of ancestral sayings as an important source of ecological data that can illuminate past ecology and management. Mätauranga Mäori is central to indigenous worldviews and is one of the most important contributions that Mäori can bring to sustainable design and environmental management in New Zealand (Wehi, 2009). The importance of mätauranga Mäori and indigenous perspectives in relation to the management of ecosystems is reflected in the recognition of indigenous values in legislation and government policy. The Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991 defines sustainable management as: 5. (2) In this Act, sustainable management means managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources in a way, or at a rate, which enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety while (a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations; and (b) Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and (c) Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment Significant references to indigenous values are included in the RMA (1991) in that decision makers must: recognise and provide for the relationship of Mäori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wahi tapu [sacred places], and other taonga [treasure] (Section 6e); have particular regard to kaitiakitanga [guardianship] (Section 7a); pay particular regard to the intrinsic value of ecosystems (Section 7d); and take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Section 8). Within both the overarching definition of sustainability and the specific references to Mäori perspectives and values, the RMA acknowledges the traditional holistic approach Mäori take towards environmental management. Mäori environmental values are consistent with concepts of sustainability and can provide a positive contribution to environmental management and urban design practice. In essence, traditional objectives and values are seen to be complementary to conservation ideals (Gillespie, 1998; Rolleston, 2005). The RMA provides a range of mechanisms for the protection of Mäori interests. Beverley (1998) comments that courts in the resource management field have made genuine and successful attempts to honour directives found within the Act. However, it is acknowledged that the reality of these types of resource consent proceedings require that the court balances the interest of Mäori with those of the applicant and at times the community at large. Beverley (1998) states that at times these conflicting interests are difficult to reconcile and the courts have continued to refine their approach in this form of environmental protection. The intrinsic value of ecosystems (Section 7d) is a concept advocating that ecosystems should be preserved for their own sake rather than for their instrumental or exploitable value to humankind. The concept of intrinsic value is consistent with traditional Mäori perspectives. Intrinsic value replaced the mauri of ecosystems when the Resource Management Bill first went to Parliament as it was argued the New Zealand legal system could not cope with the concept of mauri (Durie, 1998). Kaitiakitanga, referenced directly in the RMA (Section 7a), is the ethic of guardianship over the land practised by the tangata whenua. The use of natural resources is governed and regulated through cultural lore and traditions of tapu, rähui (ritual prohibition) and noa (Rolleston, 2006). Traditionally Mäori were reliant and dependent on a balance between protection, conservation and use. Sustainable

7 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 221 management is not only about protection and conservation, but is also concerned with allowing and providing for its use and development. Kaitiakitanga is central to the traditional Mäori interpretation of the term sustainability (Harmsworth, 2004; Morgan, 2006a; Rolleston, 2006). Kaitiakitanga requires maintaining and enhancing the mauri of everything within the ecosystem (Morgan, 2008). Desecration of resources is destruction in a physical sense, but also an insult to the spiritual powers which created them (Morgan, 2008). Sustainability, as a concept, recognizes the cultural significance of intergenerational equity (Rolleston, 2006). The sustainable management paradigm ties directly to the traditional Mäori value that the living generations act as the guardians of the land, like their tïpuna before them. Simon (2003) argues that the current Western sustainable development paradigm is not entirely focused on conservation, preservation and sustainability, but instead places emphasis on ongoing economic growth. Ecological sustainability is at the very heart of Mäori development and is a concept also valued in many sectors of mainstream (non-indigenous) society. It is argued that by focusing on the shared values between Western scientific ways of knowing and mätauranga Mäori it is possible to overcome the economic growth focus to achieve a truly sustainable development paradigm suitable for New Zealand (Simon, 2003). Mätauranga Mäori and Western scientific knowledge can combine to create best practice management techniques (Wehi, 2009). Example Living roofs Corroborating the traditional view that water from rainfall and springs is considered sacred, and its mauri must be maintained, Morgan (2006a) identified that higher sustainability ratings were achieved for stormwater techniques where a recycled use is associated with returning the water to Papatüänuku. The application of stormwater reticulation and the disposal of treated stormwater to water bodies rated poorly for sustainability using the Mauri Model (Morgan, 2008). From a tangata whenua perspective, an integrated holistic approach to stormwater management is required; the need is to reduce, recycle/reuse or eliminate stormwater flow (Morgan, 2006a). Living roof technology highlights parallels between current sustainable design principles (LID, LIUDD, WSUD and SUDS) and traditional Mäori values. Current research at The University of Auckland (Figure 1) has demonstrated that, in the Auckland Region, a mm depth living roof can retain 72 percent of rainfall on the rooftop annually (Voyde, Fassman, & Simcock, 2009). The benefits of living roofs are consistent year round and not significantly affected by season. Living roofs retain a median of 84 percent of rainfall per event and demonstrate a median of 93 percent peak flow rate reduction. Peak flow and volume reduction help achieve LID goals to maintain a site s predevelopment hydrology, but also adhere to the ethic of kaitiakitanga. Rainwater is managed onsite rather than being piped, at accelerated flow rates and increased (potentially polluted) volumes, and discharged directly to a receiving water body. The key characteristic of rainwater that influences roof runoff quality is the low ph, typically about ph 5 in New Zealand (Kingett Mitchell Ltd., 2003). Estimates of roof runoff contaminant loads indicate that roofs are important contributors to stormwater contaminants for zinc and lead (Kingett Mitchell Ltd., 2003). Increased metal concentrations correlate to rainfall passing directly over the metal on the roof. In a conventional stormwater management system, contaminated stormwater runoff discharges directly into the receiving water body, negatively affecting the mauri of the water. In contrast, living roof technology not only reduces the volume of water, but treats it onsite using a lightweight soil-like media, in line with the ethic that Papatüänuku is responsible

8 222 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN FIGURE 1: Comparison between The University of Auckland original conventional asphalt roof surface (left) and the living roof (right). FIGURE 2: North elevation of Te Noho Kotahitanga demonstrating the inclusion of a substantial living roof (extracted from design drawings of Te Noho Kotahitanga by Design Tribe). FIGURE 3: Comparison between the Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga alternative development (left) and a traditional development from the same period (right).

9 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 223 for the ultimate treatment of a pollutant. Mäori values of guardianship aim to retain the integrity of the receiving water and surrounding environment, thus maintaining the mauri of the water and ecosystem as a whole. In addition to stormwater management benefits, the living roof provides aesthetic, amenity and biodiversity value, improves urban air quality and reduces the heat island effect (Earth Pledge, 2005) further enhancing the mauri of what may otherwise be a stark conventional urban development. The use of living roofs in papakäinga (villages) is a novel concept; the authors are currently unaware of any completed developments. However, the Mt Albert campus of Unitec New Zealand has a marae (meeting place) currently under construction. The marae aims to add substance, integrity and meaning to a partnership document, Te Noho Kotahitanga, created in 2001 to express Unitec s commitment to the Treaty of Waitangi. Te Noho Kotahitanga promotes respect, sensitivity and understanding among people of all cultures (Unitec, 2010). The original plans for the marae included a living roof (Figure 2). The living roof is not included in the current construction as it became cost prohibitive; however, the structure has been designed to support a living roof and thus it can be retrofit at a later date. Example Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga development The Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga development on the shores of Lake Rotoiti in the Bay of Plenty, New Zealand, was considered a radical departure from established engineering practice in the late 1980s when the 438 (Ahuwhenua) Trust administrators secured planning consent to proceed. The land block is multiple owned Mäori land, with an area of 13 hectares (33 acres). Two development opportunities were considered: Option 1, a conventional development based on typical engineering practices of the day, or Option 2, an alternative development created from first principles based on the collective aspirations of the Mäori owners for Haumingi 10a2b. Option 1 provided seven half-acre allotments (10% of total area) with a maximum of two dwellings per site. Option 2 provided 10 dwellings. Option 2 (alternative design) was considered because the approaches considered best practice by both the council TABLE 3: Conventional design compared to alternative Mäori value based development Feature Option 1: Conventional Option 2: Alternative Carriageway Impervious surface, dual carriageway Porous pavement, narrow carriageway Footpath Impervious surface Grassed walkways Car parks Impervious surface 20% impervious Site coverage Minimum impervious Stormwater management Native bush cover Maximum 2 per lot, 140 m m 2 30% minimum impervious surfaces Kerb & channel to stormwater sewerage discharge Level ground cover and fence lots 10% impervious area of Option 1 Roof runoff to soakaway Areas returned to bush

10 224 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN and professional advisors to the trust were not accepted by the meeting of owners. Many of the features of Option 1 (conventional development) were inconsistent with the indigenous concepts of kaitiakitanga (guardianship of the land) and tino rangatiratanga (self-determination). In terms of kaitiakitanga the approaches were not sensitive to the desired environmental aspirations, and in terms of tino rangatiratanga the further alienation of more than 2800 m 2 of land to the council (Road Reserve) was considered unnecessary and inappropriate. The guiding principles (Morgan, 2008) of the papakäinga development were: whatungaro te tangata tu tonu te whenua people perish but the land remains subdivision of the land was not necessary as individual land ownership and capital gain were not the goal provide a quality housing opportunity for the descendants of Hikapuhi II of Te Arawa development will preserve and enhance the uniqueness of Rotoiti (land and lake) house construction from low maintenance materials that complement the environment layout that protects wildlife habitat, reduces earthworks, and minimizes runoff and erosion while returning a minimum of 10 percent to native bush native plant species sourced from local gene pool as best suited to the environmental conditions mai Ranginui ki Papatüänuku rainfall is sacred until it has passed over mother earth and thence culturally and spiritually suitable for human use Table 3 gives the different methods used in the two developments and Figure 3 demonstrates the differences between the two sites. Traditional Mäori villages and structures maintained a high level of permeability in the overall design; walking tracks and communal areas were predominantly compacted soil (Best, 1927). Traditional villages had little negative influence on the hydrology of sites; the raupö (bulrush) roofs absorbed rainfall, and modification of site topography diverted wind and rainfall away from areas susceptible to stormwater accumulation. Modern requirements for subdivision include a high degree of impervious paved surfaces which cause many adverse effects. Impervious surfaces result in an increase in channelization; rooftops and roads drain efficiently to gutters connected to the reticulated stormwater network, discharging into the receiving water (stream or harbour). In addition to high-velocity, high-volume stormwater runoff causing erosion, contaminants deposited on roofs/roads (sediment, heavy metals, etc.) wash directly to the receiving water, further compromising the mauri of the water body. The main technique used to improve the site hydrology of the Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga development was introducing permeability back into the design by reducing the total impervious area and using permeable materials in place of conventional impermeable materials. In addition, there was extensive revegetation and preservation of native ground cover. The road in the alternative development is narrower than a conventional carriageway and permeable, in direct contrast to the two lane asphalt conventional design. By utilizing permeable pavement, curb and guttering becomes unnecessary. Disconnected runoff pathways allow infiltration and groundwater recharge which sustains baseflow in streams. Infiltration also reduces the concentration and transport of contaminants to the receiving water by filtering out faecal bacteria and particulate pollutants. Soluble heavy metals, phosphorous and some organic compounds are retained by soil minerals, and pollutant uptake or transformations may be accomplished by biological processes within the near surface soil structure. The Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga development did not require a conventional reticulated stormwater management system. Road runoff was infiltrated and roof runoff was either directed to soakaways or to rain barrels for use

11 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 225 in the garden. Soakaways are infiltration devices that utilize and enhance the natural capacity of the ground to drain and store water. Rather than just allowing for infiltration directly from the surface, a soakaway allows for the concentration of water via a piped network, such as roof gutters. The internal voids within the soakaway then allow for water storage while infiltration is occurring. A soakaway must be sized accurately to make sure that it does not overflow and to ensure that all the water is dissipated effectively into the surrounding area. Managing water at the source not only reduces the quantity to be treated but also reduces or eliminates the need to convey water off-site. Roof water was not reused for drinking due partially to the availability of traditional spring waters. Although impermeable surfaces were not traditionally used by Mäori, it was not due to a lack of knowledge. Water was sometimes stored in cisterns excavated in soft rock or forms of earth that would retain water. Rainwater falling on the ground was directed to such pits for storage, and in some cases they were filled by hand (Best, 1927). Sometimes rainwater was caught in troughs placed under the eaves of cooking huts. Such a supply would not be used unless the place was invaded by an enemy. No rainwater was caught from the roof of a dwelling hut, for to drink such water would be disastrous to man (Best, 1927). Water collected from some rooftops was seen as tapu and was not collected due to the spiritual connection to the dwelling. Conservation and landscaping is a significant LID tool for maintaining the predevelopment hydrology of a site. Using first principles and drawing upon the ethic of kaitiakitanga, Haumingi 10a2b returned areas to native bush and minimized site disturbance. An example of such is the use of grassed walkways between dwellings. The steeper area of the Haumingi 10a2b block had a 20 percent grade and was designated a reserve in the development proposal. Runoff and erosion reduction was achieved through reducing the grade using terracing and extensive revegetation and preservation of native ground cover. Native bush regeneration has had immeasurable benefits in terms of landform resilience and also revitalizing the native fauna bird populations in the area, thus also improving the mauri of the site as a whole. Resistance to adoption of sustainable design principles During the 1980s, the main challenge was persuading engineers from the council that the Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga development could work. Resistance to the new design ideas persists today, there are few performance records for LID over long periods of time and little is known about whole life costs (Kirby, 2005). The alternative development approach of the Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga has generated no problems or maintenance requirements in its 20+ years of service. Improvements have occurred with: the addition of four permanent dwellings, the most recent recognized for innovation in the SHaC 09 Sustainable Habitat Challenge; whareuku (earth house) for earth walls strengthened physically and culturally with flax fibres, providing a literal connection to the land; having families living permanently on the lands; ongoing ecosystem enhancement through control of pest species; and the maintenance of land tax liabilities by those now occupying the land. Thus the alternative development approach has enabled the overall state of the land block to be improved significantly, enhancing the economic, social, cultural and environmental well-being of all stakeholders (Morgan, 2006b). LID methodology is very different to conventional drainage systems and there are grey areas about whole life costs and whose responsibility it is to maintain such devices, particularly in the long term. Councils and water companies in New Zealand have little experience managing LID devices and as such perceive a significant element of risk involved in utilizing the technology, thus impeding adoption of the methodology. With

12 226 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN conventional pipe systems, there are clear codes and guidelines; water companies know how to maintain these systems, so the risks are minimal (Kirby, 2005). Sustainable design initiatives (whether coming from indigenous perspectives or more formalized LID techniques) are intuitively right, they require less control over the environment using hard engineering techniques (such as gutters and pipe networks) and instead place more trust in natural processes (such as infiltration through permeable paving). Kirby (2005) comments that many practitioners do not feel comfortable in accepting SUDS (or LID) as a routine solution and a greater understanding is required to achieve this comfort. For alternative design methods to become mainstream a shift in typical engineering design/thought is required from complete control to reliance on natural processes. Are current sustainable design principles truly innovative? Although the commonalities between indigenous concepts and current sustainable design principles have been highlighted, the authors do not suggest that current New Zealand sustainability principles have come from traditional Mäori values. Rather than being directly related, this paper recognizes the similarities and suggests it is possible that techniques such as LID may have been achieved sooner if indigenous ideas had been considered. The Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga alternative development was ahead of its time. Created from first principles based on the collective aspirations of the Mäori owners, the development demonstrates clear parallels to current sustainable design principles, but was constructed in the 1980s, well before current sustainable design principles such as LID, LIUDD, SUDS and WSUD were introduced in New Zealand. All water is returned to the waterways via Papatüänuku, or in terms of LID, the predevelopment water balance of the site is maintained post-development. Although there are barriers to mainstream implementation, LID techniques are not new and have been successfully implemented in the past. The principles are based around natural drainage patterns of the land. Kirby (2005) presents proof that these principles were used over 4000 years ago in the Negev Desert to harvest rainwater. Runoff farmers in the Negev Desert had to devise ways of collecting and storing the surface runoff due to extremely low average annual rainfall ( mm). The natural drainage pattern of the land was the inspiration for the extensive use of constructed channels and cisterns for water storage. The reasons for storing water could not be more different between LID and water harvesting, but the basic principles are the same. Both require full control of the flow using natural drainage patterns, hence Kirby (2005) argues that if sustainable urban drainage systems are based on natural and ancient principles then they cannot be described as innovative drainage solutions. Instead, it is the development of the land over many thousands of years that has blinkered us from using natural drainage techniques in finding solutions (Kirby, 2005). Likewise, Aztec West is an office and light construction development park near Bristol (UK) that was built in the 1980s and utilized a site-wide drainage scheme well before sustainable urban design (or LID) became a common term (Kirby, 2005). The site used ponds (volume control) and ornamental fountains (to facilitate the breakdown of hydrocarbons for water quality improvements) and provides amenity value through extensive landscaping and vegetation. Both Haumingi 10a2b Papakäinga alternative development and Aztec West are proof that LID methods are effective drainage solutions if designed and built correctly. Both schemes were built over 20 years ago and are still performing effectively and as intended. Indigenous peoples concepts, principles, models and efforts to explore alternative development paths have largely been overlooked in

13 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 227 the growth of the modern sustainable development paradigm. Indigenous peoples, such as Mäori, have been typified as traditional peoples clinging to the past, who must undergo inevitable change which will allow them to enjoy the supposed benefits of modern (Western) society (Loomis, 2000). Rather than learning about and including mätauranga Mäori in developing a sustainable urban design initiative suitable to New Zealand, modern society followed the conventional design approach only reaching for new ideas and methods (such as LID) now that the current methods are becoming recognized as unsustainable for future generations. Conclusions This paper has identified that sustainable design principles share many concepts with the traditional indigenous views on the environment. Many of the currently utilized sustainable design principles, such as onsite stormwater treatment, reduction in impervious surface area and promotion of infiltration devices, are commonly attributed to new design paradigms such as LID, LIUDD and WSUD; however, they have been utilized already in New Zealand when design focused on Mäori landowner values. Sustainable design principles are currently not the norm, although they are gaining popularity in mainstream design. By incorporating mätauranga Mäori into urban design and development, another channel is opened to promote sustainable design initiatives whereby the intrinsic value and integrity of the ecosystem is considered in the design process without impeding urban development. Glossary kaitiakitanga ethic of guardianship practised by tangata whenua enhancing mauri kawa protocols marae meeting place mätauranga indigenous knowledge of the Mäori Mäori people of Aotearoa mauri the life force and unique potential of all things animate and inanimate; capacity to support life Ngä Puna o Ngä Weeping of Papa Atua (wellsprings) Ngä Roimata o Tears of Rangi (rainfall) Ranginui noa free from tapu or any other restriction, balance/ neutrality (Mead, 2003); state of relaxed access (Harmsworth, 2004); sanction (Rolleston, 2006); profane (Morgan, 2006a) papakäinga original home; home base; village Papatüänuku Papa the earth mother rähui ritual prohibition either placed on a place, or part of a river, part of a foreshore or on certain resources Ranginui Rangi the sky father raupö bulrush tangata whenua people of the land with authority over that place (New Zealand Mäori) taonga treasure or anything that is highly valued and prized by Mäori (RMA, 1991) tapu state of being set apart (Mead, 2003); sacred restriction or regulation (Harmsworth, 2004); sacred (Morgan, 2006a) tino self-determination rangatiratanga tïpuna ancestors wahi tapu sacred place whareuku clay

14 228 E. VOYDE & T. B. MORGAN References Auckland Regional Council. (2003). Stormwater management devices: Design guidelines manual (Technical Publication 10). Auckland, New Zealand: Auckland Regional Council. Best, E. (1927). The pa Maori: An account of the fortified vilages of the Maori in pre-european and modern times: Illustrating methods of defence by means of ramparts, fosses, scarps and stockades. Wellington, New Zealand: Board of Maori Ethnological Research for the Dominion Museum, Beverley, P. (1998). The mechanisms for the protection of Maori interests under Part II of the Resource Management Act New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law, (2), Davis, A. P. (2005). Green engineering principles promote low-impact development. Environmental Science & Technology, 39(16), 338A 344A. doi: /es053327e Donofrio, J., Kuhn, Y., McWalter, K., & Winsor, M. (2009). Water-sensitive urban design: An emerging model in sustainable design and comprehensive water-cycle management. Environmental Practice, 11(3), 179. Durie, M. (1998). Te mana, te käwanatanga: The politics of Mäori self-determination. Auckland, New Zealand: Oxford University Press. Earth Pledge. (2005). Green roofs: Ecological design and construction. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub. Gillespie, A. (1998). Environmental politics in New Zealand/Aotearoa: Clashes and commonality between Mäoridom and environmentalists. New Zealand Geographer, 54(1), Harmsworth, G. (2004). The role of Mäori values in low-impact urban design and development (LIUDD). Discussion paper. Palmerston North, New Zealand: Landcare Research. Hellström, D., Jeppsson, U., & Kärrman, E. (2000). A framework for systems analysis of sustainable urban water management. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20(3), Kingett Mitchell Ltd. (2003). A study of roof runoff quality in Auckland New Zealand and implications for stormwater management. Auckland, New Zealand: Kingett Mitchell Ltd. Kirby, A. (2005). SuDS Innovation or a tried and tested practice? Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers: Municipal Engineer, 158(2), Loomis, T. M. (2000). Indigenous populations and sustainable development: Building on indigenous approaches to holistic, self-determined development. World Development, 28(5), doi: / s x(99)00162-x Mead, S. M. (2003). Tikanga Mäori: Living by Mäori values. Wellington, New Zealand: Huia, Ministry for the Environment. (2000). The New Zealand biodiversity strategy. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry for the Environment. Morgan, T. K. K. B. (2006a). An indigenous perspective on water recycling. Desalination, 187(1 3), Morgan, T. K. K. B. (2006b). Lifting the lid on LID in Aotearoa NZ. Paper presented at the meeting of the NZWWA Stormwater 2006 conference, Rotorua, New Zealand. Morgan, T. K. K. B. (2008). The value of a hapu perspective to municipal water management practice: Mauri and its potential contribution to sustainability decision making in Aotearoa New Zealand. Unpublished doctoral thesis, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Prince George s County. (1999). Low-impact development design strategies: An integrated design approach. Largo, MD: Department of Environmental Resources, Programs and Planning Division. Puddephatt, J., & Heslop, V. (2007). Policy instruments to promote the uptake of low impact urban design and development: An internationanl review of best practice transferability to New Zealand. Auckland, New Zealand: University of Auckland, Auckland Regional Council, Christchurch City Council. Resource Management Act (RMA). (1991). Retrieved from public/1991/0069/latest/dlm html? search=ts_act_resource+management+act+1991_ resel&p=1&sr=1. Rolleston, S. (2005, August 2005). Maori perspectives of urban design. Preliminary findings. Paper presented at the meeting of the Urbanism Downunder 2005, Wellington, New Zealand. Rolleston, S. (2006, 2 5 April 2006). An indigenous cultural perspective to urban design. Paper presented at the meeting of the New Zealand Planning Institute and Planning Institute of Australia Congress Shaver, E. (2000). Low impact design manual for the Auckland region (Technical Publication 124). Auckland, New Zealand: Auckland Regional Council. Shaver, E., Horner, R., Skupien, J., May, C., & Ridley, G. (2007). Fundamentals of urban runoff management: Technical and institutional issues (2nd ed.). Madison, WI: North American Lake Management Society.

15 IDENTIFYING COMMONALITIES 229 Simon, K. H. (2003). Searching for synergy: Maori/ indigenous and scientific conservatory values The affinity proposition. He Puna Korero: Journal of Maori and Pacific Development, 4(1), Unitec. (2010). Te Noho Kotahitanga The partnership. Retrieved from ac.nz/?17d82f95-be8f-484f-b517-1c18f C Van Roon, M. (2005). Emerging approaches to urban ecosystem management: The potential of low impact urban design and development principles. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 7(1), Van Roon, M., & Van Roon, H. (2009). Low impact urban design and development: The big picture: An introduction to LIUDD principles and methods framework. Lincoln, New Zealand: Manaaki Whenua Press. Voyde, E., Fassman, E. A., & Simcock, R. (2009, 30 November 3 December 2009). Hydrologic performance of Auckland green roofs. Paper presented at the meeting of the 32nd Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium 2009, Newcastle, Australia. Wehi, P. M. (2009). Indigenous ancestral sayings contribute to modern conservation partnerships: examples using Phormium tenax. Ecological Applications, 19(1), doi: / Williams, J. (2006). Resource management and Mäori attitudes to water in southern New Zealand. New Zealand Geographer, 62(1),