School of Government · Te Kura Kāwanatanga: Institute for Governance and Policy Studies: Working and Policy Papers

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://ir.wgtn.ac.nz/handle/123456789/21219

The Institute for Governance and Policy Studies (IPS) fosters discussion, research and publication of current issues of domestic and foreign policy. We particularly link academic research and public policy by providing opportunities for independent and detached study, and for neutral and informed discussion of important and relevant issues. Our goal is to engage the broadest possible range of informed opinion, particularly in drawing people together from the universities, the public service, the business community and the wider public community. Our three catchwords might be summed up as study, engage, inform.

Browse

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Open Access
The Case for New Climate Change Adaption. Funding Instruments.
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2017) Boston, Jonathan; Lawrence, Judy
Adapting to climate change during the 21st century and beyond poses unprecedented technical, administrative and political challenges that will test the ability to cope at national and local levels. The impacts of climate change will be progressive (sea level rise) and intense (rainfall), and punctuated by abrupt and extreme events (storms, droughts, floods and landslips). Such changes will be outside the variability ranges that we have responded to in the past or are responding to currently. They will be ongoing for centuries, and occur concurrently in time around New Zealand. The risks will compound within, between and across sectors and domains of interest. The foreseeable impacts will create high damage costs (Bell, Paulik and Wadwha, 2015; Insurance Council of New Zealand, 2014) and raise difficult inter-temporal and intra-generational trade-offs.2 For instance, in New Zealand insured losses due to extreme weather events were as much as $175 million in 2013 and $135 million in 2014 (Insurance Council of New Zealand, 2017). The Treasury estimates that drought cost New Zealand around $1.5 billion in 2013. Over the last ten years the annual cost of repairing land transport networks damaged by weather-related events has increased from $20 million to $90 million. Moreover, these costs can be expected to escalate significantly over coming decades as a result of climate change. Importantly, in this regard, Local Government New Zealand estimates – based on research by Deloittes Access Economics (Australia)(2013) – that $1 spent on hazard risk reduction will reduce losses and disruption from natural disasters worth between $3 and $11. Other international estimates of the likely savings are consistent with these findings (Healy and Malhotra, 2009).
Restricted
Joint or Shared Accountability: Issues and Options
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2011) Boston, Jonathan; Gill, Derek
Responsible and responsive government depends on effective accountability – at all levels within the state. To this end, democratic governments have typically established strong vertical or hierarchical accountability relationships. New Zealand has been no exception. Indeed, the state sector reforms introduced in the late 1980s emphasised formal, vertical, straight-line accountability. Yet some of the work of government involves collaboration or joint working across multiple agencies. This implies the need for shared and horizontal accountability. It also casts doubt on the wisdom of relying too heavily on vertical accountability, not least because this may undermine joint working. How, then, should accountabilities be managed in the context of shared or joint working across agencies and what principles and considerations should guide policy makers when designing such accountability arrangements? With these issues in mind, this paper begins with an exploration of certain key concepts – vertical and horizontal accountability, responsibility, answerability and blame – and considers the limitations of vertical models of accountability within a Westminster-type parliamentary democracy. It then explores the nature and problems associated with joint working in the state sector where accountability for particular activities or outcomes is shared between two or more organisations. The paper argues that there are certain ‘hard’ factor and ‘soft factors’ that must be addressed to enable joint working. It is also argued that four key issues need to be considered when designing the institutional and associated accountability arrangements for joint working: depth, co-ordination and alignment, complexity, and separability. The paper concludes by exploring the ‘levers’ available to accommodate new ways of working across public agencies.
Open Access
Post-2012 Burden Sharing: Towards an Ethical Approach
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2008) Kengmana, Lucas; Boston, Jonathan
This paper explores how the costs of mitigating and adapting to climate change should be shared by the international community. While it briefly surveys other desiderata for a new global agreement on climate change for the post-2012 period, its primary focus is on the ethical issues posed by the imperative to address human-induced climate change, and in particular the principles and considerations that should inform an ethical approach to global burden sharing.The first part of the paper outlines the context surrounding the current international negotiations for a new global agreement on climate change, which is designed to take effect when the first commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol expires at the end of 2012. This includes consideration of the criteria that any new agreement must address and the relevance and importance of ethics at the international level. The second part examines burden sharing from an ethical perspective. It assesses the relevance and validity of a number of principles of distributive justice that are widely discussed in the relevant climate change literature – most notably, equality, capacity, historical responsibility, need, monetary costs and welfare costs. It then uses these principles to evaluate six proposed burden sharing frameworks. The third part considers the implications of these burden sharing frameworks for New Zealand. This includes a brief examination of the possible impacts of various proposed changes to some of the key rules underpinning the Kyoto Protocol.

Browse

Browsing School of Government · Te Kura Kāwanatanga: Institute for Governance and Policy Studies: Working and Policy Papers by Author "Boston, Jonathan"