The Back Bones of Integrated Environmental Management: Community Based Environmental Management: Its relevance to IEM

What is Community Based Environmental Management (C(B)EM)?

The most simplistic theory regarding C(B)EM is to think globally and act locally.

Environmental problems often begin at local scales, people live locally, but governments act under districts, regions and at a national scale. Therefore, problems may be better dealt with people that are closest to the issue and believe to know more about the problem than those decision makers from outside. It can also be argued that environmental issues are more likely to be addressed by those who will benefit most from their resolution (ERST 633), i.e., those that live locally to an environmental issue are more likely to work on managing or fixing the problem because they will be the immediate beneficiaries if the problem is solved.

There exists a long history of community management in some resources, especially where there is a long intergenerational history, for example many local fisheries and forest management programmes worldwide have adopted community based management as the best solution for the restoration of these resources.

Community Based Environmental Management and New Zealand?

Prior to the Conservation Act 1987 and more particularly the quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation reforms, New Zealand had a reputation for ‘doing it themselves’ in conservation (ERST 633), e.g.,

Trampers built & maintained their own huts
Acclimatisation Society (now Fish and Game NZ) members took part in many on the ground works
Rabbit boards, pest boards and water boards were established

The first attempt at coordinated environmental management using community management was through the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act 1941 which established local catchment boards to coordinate soil and water conservation across whole water catchments which spanned several towns, boroughs or counties (MfE, 2012). Government subsidies were supplied via Ministry of Works and Development to the Catchment boards to assist local landowners to carry out flood protection works, river control work, drainage and soil conservation works.

Throughout the late 1960s and early 1970s, public awareness of environmental issues was fuelling high profile campaigns against hydro development (i.e. the raising of Lake Manapouri), the clear felling of indigenous forests, Christchurch's air pollution, and numerous cases of water pollution (MfE, 2012). The growing pressure for better environmental protection therefore brought in many reforms to the New Zealand government which was reflected in a number of new laws.

Some of these laws were:

Water and Soil Conservation Act 1967
Clean Air Act 1972
Town and Country Planning Act 1977
Pesticides Act 1979

Potential issues in Community Based Environmental Management

Whose views prevail when it comes to the social construction of nature and of sustainability, how is agreement reached when views are divided?
Issues of equity, in particular the gender of group members and the diversity of membership. For example are certain members of society locked out of interest groups?, are there conflicts of interests?
Issues of leadership retention, often one key motivator or champion leads the group and withholds its vision and possibly its passion, what happens if that person leaves and no ‘succession’ planning has occurred?
What level is the management being facilitated at? Stream care, land care, catchment management. Issues to do with scale may include when does the problem get to great that it can no longer be dealt with using community management, and who decides where this point is? Is there any monitoring and feedback occurring that may give rise to such a situation or to enable the community to recognise any progress they may have made?
For C(B)EM to be affective for solving larger "complex" environmental issues on a global scale it requires all communities to be in sink with one another and abide by the same directive...
Community based groups may struggle to enforce ideas or programmes without legislation in a tougher economical world...

So why bother with local management?

One of the most important steps that can be taken to stop or reverse the present erosion of natural resources and environmental quality at local levels is to empower people with environmental understanding or allow people within communities to manage their specific environments (Dahl, 1999). More often than not people within communities whom withhold what is termed “localised knowledge” can better manage local environmental problems than that of a top down approach using central government management.

Localised knowledge could be best described as where people of a particular setting or community have a wealth of experience in that area and know how it adapts, changes or is managed under different environmental circumstances or constraints.

Community based management could also be seen as a form of integrated management. C(B)EM implies, almost by default, integration, coordination, co- management, and uses multiple tiers of governance. To this end, it essentially is an approach to IEM. C(B)EM can be seen as an alternative view based on theories of collaborative approaches to environmental management and to achieve more in the long run; both of which are consistent with IEM theories.

Case Study/Example:

The Lincoln Envirotown Trust is an example of a C(B)EM group and one that is rather familiar to any student that has undertaken any environmental course at Lincoln University. The Lincoln Envirotown Trust is a trust that is dedicated to fostering a community-owned process for sustainability in the Lincoln area. The group works with the community, for the community, in partnership with Selwyn District Council, Lincoln University, Landcare Research, Waihora Ellesmere Trust, Environment Canterbury, Plant & Food Research, local schools and businesses. (how is that for integrating the stakeholders and interested parties of the area?)

The Trust has the following objectives:

To promote the long-term environmental sustainability of Lincoln Township with the understanding that this is also the basis for social, cultural and economic sustainability in the future. (Relevance to long term goals from Cairns & Crawford 1991)
To educate about and raise awareness of environmental sustainability issues and to provide information about how to achieve environmental sustainability.
To provide appropriate opportunities for personal and community decision making to ensure that the environmental, social, cultural and economic sustainability of the Lincoln Township is promoted.
To act as a role model for other communities wanting to progress towards environmental sustainability.

What the Trust achieves and seeks to achieve

Projects that have been undertaken include (but are not limited to) a State-of-the-Town report, planting native vegetation, educational workshops and courses for adults and children, public and private consultation sessions, a sustainability centre, a local "Zero Waste Street Challenge", and more.

The Trust also helps other communities to set up their own enviro groups aiming to foster environmental sustainability. By 2011 the Lincoln Trust had helped five other communities set up groups.

The Mahoe Reserve is one of the many key projects that the Lincoln Envirotown Trust Manages. The Mahoe Reserve has three broad objectives, which are, education, ecology and pest management. The vision for the Enviro Trust for this particular project is to ensure that the Mahoe Reserve will be restored to a healthy indigenous ecosystem, highly valued by the community.

Other key projects that the Lincoln Envirotown Trust undertakes within its community include a Sustainability Centre, a Community Garden, an Enviro Kids programme and assisting other Envirotown Groups.

To leave you with a thought and a quote:

“the law alone cannot enforce the common interest, it principally needs community knowledge and support.... it will also require promoting citizens initiatives, empowering peoples organisations & strengthening local democracy” (WCED, 1987: 63).