IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare10/59260.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coastal planning in North Shore City, New Zealand: Developing responsible coastal erosion policy

Author

Listed:
  • Wilson, Amanda

Abstract

North Shore City’s coastline has been subject to intensive development pressure over the last 15 years. In this time, new developments have established along previously undeveloped areas of coastline and existing sites have redeveloped with much larger houses. This paper provides a description of the planning controls that currently affect coastal development and an assessment of the effectiveness of these controls. This is followed by an analysis of the role of local government in controlling future development. Contention arises when attempts are made to control the property rights of landowners to protect their properties from coastal erosion. The impacts of private coastal protection works on the coastline have wider impacts than their immediate location and can influence public perception of the coastal environment. Coastal erosion is a prominent issue for North Shore City and this increase in development has increased the risk to both property owners and potentially the Council. Authorities are concerned that current coastal planning controls do not address coastal erosion to a great enough degree. A methodology for assessing change along the coastline is described and used to identify where planning controls are not being effective by using indicators such as the presence of coastal protection structures and signs of erosion. Alternative policy approaches are identified and evaluated using a cost-benefit analysis framework. It is envisaged that this preliminary cost-benefit analysis will identify policy aspects requiring future in-depth investigation. The practical implications for different policy approaches regarding coastal erosion and private property rights are also explored.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilson, Amanda, 2010. "Coastal planning in North Shore City, New Zealand: Developing responsible coastal erosion policy," 2010 Conference (54th), February 10-12, 2010, Adelaide, Australia 59260, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare10:59260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/59260
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Libecap, Gary D., 2009. "The tragedy of the commons: property rights and markets as solutions to resource and environmental problems," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(1), March.
    2. Stephen K. Swallow & Michael P. McGonagle, 2006. "Public Funding of Environmental Amenities: Contingent Choices Using New Taxes or Existing Revenues for Coastal Land Conservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 56-67.
    3. Whitmarsh, David & Northen, James & Jaffry, Shabbar, 1999. "Recreational benefits of coastal protection: a case study," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4-5), pages 453-463, July.
    4. Damian Collins & Robin Kearns, 2008. "Uninterrupted views: real-estate advertising and changing perspectives on coastal property in New Zealand," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 40(12), pages 2914-2932, December.
    5. Cerin, Pontus, 2006. "Bringing economic opportunity into line with environmental influence: A discussion on the Coase theorem and the Porter and van der Linde hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 209-225, February.
    6. Gary D. Libecap, 2009. "The tragedy of the commons: property rights and markets as solutions to resource and environmental problems," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(1), pages 129-144, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    coast; erosion; planning; cost; benefit; development; protection; structures.; Environmental Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aare10:59260. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.