MinterEllisonRuddWatts’ Post

With the Government indicating more change for environmental management, we consider if the planned reforms can advance nature-positive infrastructure here in New Zealand. Partnering with Arup, we discuss the potential for a more proactive approach to nature-positive infrastructure and share examples from overseas where the concept is gradually gaining acceptance. #naturepositive #infrastructure #sustainableimpact #helpingshapenewzealandsfuture      

There’s an increasing worldwide emphasis on the environmental impacts of projects and ways parties can use contractual terms to achieve their biodiversity and carbon targets. The latest instalment of MinterEllisonRuddWatts and Arup's series on Nature Positive Infrastructure explores ways parties are incorporating environmental considerations into contractual frameworks and some of the challenges with doing so. Please reach out if you want to know more about Nature Positive Infrastructure– or check out the other articles in the series! 

Very interesting in terms of BNG and biodiversity in general. 🤔

With all the momentum around nature-based solutions (NBS), one of the questions we repeatedly hear is: How can we scale up their implementation? One major barrier to scaling up is permitting. Obtaining permits for nature-based projects is challenging for many reasons: conflicting requirements at federal, state, and local levels; bias inherent in the permitting process that favors gray (over green) infrastructure; a lack of transparency in permitting processes; and limited ability to use general permits for NBS, making the application process lengthy and complicated. Chloe Wetzler , Lydia Olander and I recently looked at these permitting problems for a single NBS type: living shorelines. 🌊 Our project focused on 3 U.S. states—Virginia, Florida, and North Carolina— that have designed policies and programs to try to overcome some of these permitting challenges and have actually managed to expand the use of living shorelines across their coasts. By talking to project implementers across all three states, we analyzed what’s working well, what still needs to be fixed, and how other states might think about adopting some of these policies. Read the full report on the Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment & Sustainability website: https://lnkd.in/eHmFR3Me #NatureBasedSolutions #LivingShorelines #GreenInfrastructure #Permitting

Read Sara Mason's thoughts on a new Nicholas Institute white paper about permitting living shoreline projects below and then check out three key takeaways here: https://lnkd.in/eDEkQFpd   The paper was written by Nicholas Institute experts Mason and Lydia Olander, along with Chloe Wetzler, who is pursuing a master of environmental management degree at the Duke University Nicholas School of the Environment and a juris doctorate at the Duke University School of Law. #NatureBasedSolutions #LivingShorelines #Permitting

The Nicholas Institute is doing great work on how to scale up implementation of coastal green infrastructure. Check out the report below! What nature-based solutions would you like to scale up? How are you doing that?

How can organisations incorporate nature into construction contracts? MinterEllisonRuddWatts, recently featured us in an article discussing how contracts can be utilised to help future-proof the environment. They cited Edgar’s Clause, which is designed for insertion into building contracts. It incorporates nature-positive infrastructure principles such as nature-based solutions and biodiversity net gain. Read more about our clauses here: https://lnkd.in/dmnxZYxx #ESG #climatecontracts #construction #climatechange

There are three main reasons why the Fast-Track Approvals Bill is bad law: “1. It bypasses environmental and climate considerations. 2. It prevents public comment. 3. It lacks stretegic direction” If approved, some projects will have significant environmental impacts that will negatively affect future generations. We must not look away from such a critical matter. This is not just a political issue; you, your neighbourhood, and your community can be affected by some of these initiatives.

The Government’s list of 149 projects for inclusion in the Fast-Track Approvals Bill contains a swathe of infrastructure and housing developments as well as renewable energy projects. So, does it really spell disaster for the environment? In this Newsroom NZ piece today, EDS’s CE Gary Taylor and COO Shay Schlaepfer explain why the Bill remains bad law: 1.     It bypasses environmental and climate considerations; 2.     It prevents public comment; and 3.     It lacks strategic direction. “If the Fast-Track Approvals Bill is to have any credibility it needs to be amended so that environmental and climate matters are appropriately considered and weighted, and to provide for public participation. And pending resource management reform needs to adopt strategic spatial planning to chart a clear way forward.” Gary spoke to Kathryn Ryan on RNZ's Nine to Noon this morning about concerning elements of the Bill and specific projects noting “time is running out to get the legislation right.” Read the full op-ed here: https://lnkd.in/geNXWUnA Listen to Gary’s interview here: https://lnkd.in/gtWAfd47

The government has issued a Planning Reform Working Paper inviting views on proposed provisions in the forthcoming Planning and Infrastructure Bill relating to environmental protection and improvement. https://lnkd.in/eT8G29zu The proposals are summarised in paragraph 13 and are threefold: - moving from project-specific assessments to a single state-level strategic assessment and delivery plan; - moving more responsibility for this area from developers to the state; and - in exchange for developers doing less, they will have to pay for the state to do it Environmental Outcomes Reports will follow ‘in due course’, so although still committed to, they seem some way off. There is a form for responding with views, although I can't see a closing date - I've asked.