• About this site|
• Site index|
• Contact us|
• Jobs

Getting Our Priorities Right

Credits and Acknowledgements

Executive Summary

Introduction

Part 1: Information for Priority Setting

Part 2: Approaches to Priority Setting for Ocean Management

Conclusion

Appendix 1: About the Maps in this Report

Appendix 2: Detailed Explanation of Draft Marine Environments Classification Maps at 4-class, 9-class and 20-class levels

References

Part 1: Information for Priority Setting

Because New Zealand's ocean is vast, complex and dynamic we will probably never have all the information we need to fully understand marine functions and processes or the effects of our activities on the ocean. However, with smart planning and investment we can build a robust information base and sound tools to help us make the best possible decisions about how our ocean is used and managed into the future. The question is: what steps are needed to achieve this?

In Part 1 we explore the issues relating to the collection and distribution of information for priority setting, asking:

• What information might we need to inform our priority setting in the marine environment?
• How much of the necessary information do we already have available, and where are some of the key gaps?
• What are the different types of information-based tools we will need to assist with setting national ocean priorities?

1.1 Information needs for ocean management

Current information needs are determined by a diverse range of existing management priorities and objectives, based on guidance set out in legislation, policies, strategies and plans. Many of these objectives have been determined without reference to an integrated set of priorities or objectives for national ocean management as a whole. Often they have been set without reference to:

• other agencies' priorities or objectives, and potential overlaps or duplication across these
• the best available information (from all sectors)
• an assessment of the cumulative impacts of various management responses in different areas or environments.

Any national priorities set under the Oceans Policy will need to address key threats and opportunities for the management of our ocean - across social, cultural, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. We can therefore expect the information needed to set these priorities to include both values-based information and empirical information.

Values-based information is needed about people's preferences for the management of our ocean - what aspects of the ocean are important to people. A large part of the Oceans Policy exercise to date has been the collation of information about how people would prefer the ocean to be managed and what things they value about it. The potential scope is reflected in the vision and high-level objectives and principles contained in the draft Oceans Policy, which were drawn from the document Healthy Sea, Healthy Society: Towards an Oceans Policy for New Zealand (Ministerial Advisory Committee on Oceans Policy, 2001).

Over time these values may need to be reviewed as people change their preferred uses and values. There may also be a need for more detailed values-based information in relation to specific ocean management issues.

Empirical information will be needed about the nature of the environment itself, including:

• the full range of ocean environments and habitats
• human activities in, and uses of, the ocean
• types of change that can occur in different environments and habitats, and as a result of different human activities and uses within them.

The Ocean Survey 20/20 project is embarking on the ambitious task of developing a comprehensive set of empirical data about our marine environment. The remainder of this section scopes the range of information that could be collected as part of the Ocean Survey 20/20 project and other complementary projects, to assist with Oceans Policy priority setting. It does not delve into the criteria for deciding what information should be collected first and where, because this is part of the Ocean Survey 20/20 work programme development. However, we anticipate that in order to maintain an adaptive approach to management, the information needs driven by Oceans Policy and the information gathered through the Ocean Survey 20/20 project will inform each other over time.

A model for detailing specific information needs is provided by the approach adopted by the National Oceans Office of Australia (2002) as part of its impact assessment work. As part of the project leading up to this report, we convened two workshops to test ways of modifying the Australian approach to better reflect the New Zealand context. A panel of technical experts was convened to identify and agree on appropriate categorisations for:

• New Zealand ocean environments and habitats (coastal to the outer edge of the Exclusive Economic Zone)
• human activities in and uses of the New Zealand marine environment
• types of change that may occur in relation to these environments, habitats, activities and uses.

The categorisations were completed using expert professional judgement (and agency peer review) and did not involve assessing impacts per se, or evaluating actual changes in relation to specific environments, habitats, activities or uses.

The results of this process are set out in Tables 1-3 on pages 7-9. They provide a basic overview of the types of information that will be needed to make best use of our ocean in future. They could also provide the basis for future impact assessments, as part of a risk-based approach to setting national priorities. [A risk-based approach to setting national priorities is discussed further in Part 2.] However further work will be needed to refine these lists.

Workshop participants recommended, in particular, that:

• benthic and pelagic zones of different environments/habitat types should be further subdivided to analyse different changes occurring in areas of hard versus soft substrate, and inter-tidal versus sub-tidal areas [Inter-tidal areas are areas that are variously covered and uncovered by water during different stages of the cycle between low and high tides; sub-tidal areas remain permanently covered by water during all stages of the tidal cycle.] (where relevant)
• key plant and animal species should be detailed, perhaps using a checklist such as the one being developed by the Maritime Safety Authority in the context of its oil spill risk assessment, which includes algae, birds, amphibians, fish, invertebrates, mammals, plants and reptiles.

Refining these lists will provide us with an agreed checklist of 'primary information needs' for the marine environment - basic information about where activities occur, the nature of biodiversity in different marine environments, and the nature of different changes that occur in those environments. However, to identify priorities for management, managers will also need information about the relationships between these data sets. For example, what types of change can be expected to occur in any specific ocean habitat over time? How might different ocean habitats be affected by specific activities or events (both natural and human-induced) into the future?

A second expert workshop was convened in June 2004 to test the extent of our current knowledge and information about these key relationships. The idea was to attempt to summarise, for the whole of New Zealand's Exclusive Economic Zone, the extent of current knowledge or information about where:

• different types of change can occur as a result of natural processes or events, across the range of marine environments and habitats
• different types of human-induced change can occur across the range of marine environments and habitats
• different types of change can occur as a result of different human activities and uses of the ocean.

Again, the workshop adopted a simplified version of the approach taken by the Australian National Oceans Office during development of the South-East Regional Marine Plan (see Australian National Oceans Office, 2002). Participants used the matrices shown in Figures 2 and 3 (on pages 10 and 11) in an attempt to summarise, for the entire Exclusive Economic Zone, the extent of knowledge about the relationships between each specific environment or activity, and each type of change. Participants were asked to colour-code the matrices to indicate:

• where a relationship is known to exist between a specific environment or activity, and a particular type of change
• where a relationship can be expected to exist despite a lack of any direct data to prove it)
• where a relationship is known not to exist
• where there is inadequate (or no) information to determine whether a relationship exists.

This exercise proved very difficult and was, on the whole, unhelpful because it confused two separate questions:

• Is there a known relationship between each specific environment or activity, and each particular type of change? (this question addresses the scope of our information needs)
• If so, do we have adequate knowledge and information about the nature of and trends in that relationship to make effective management decisions into the future? (this question assists with identifying key gaps in our existing information base).

A revised approach is therefore needed to distinguish between these questions. Participants also indicated that a revised approach should be designed:

• at appropriate management scales (not the Exclusive Economic Zone in its entirety)
• to distinguish between natural and human-induced change
• with clear temporal reference points (so that changes to environments or in relation to different activities and uses could be analysed according to appropriate temporal baselines).

Table 1: Environment and habitat types

Table 2: Human activities and uses

View human activities and uses (large table).

Table 3: Types of change

View types of change (large table).

1.2 Gaps and issues associated with existing information

Once the range of data needs is identified, the next step is to document, using standard descriptions, the data sets that are currently available and identify where some of the gaps might lie. This section summarises easily available information and explores some of the gaps and issues relating to the collation of currently available information.

Existing information

There have already been a number of reports and projects undertaken over the past few years to summarise the range of marine data and information held by various agencies throughout New Zealand. Chief among these are.

• A review undertaken for the Ministry of Fisheries of data sets that may be incorporated into the National Aquatic Biodiversity Information System (NABIS) - a centralised decision-making tool containing layers of aquatic biodiversity information.
• Marine Research in New Zealand: A survey and analysis (Chapman and Lough, 2003) - this survey was carried out by the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology in 2003. It provides an overview of current and recent New Zealand marine research, both publicly and privately funded. It concludes that the major focus of recent marine research in New Zealand has been on understanding physical systems, but that if research on biological and ecological systems is grouped together it can be shown that research on understanding living systems is the largest area of focus. The report notes emerging signs of a greater focus on aquaculture and bioactives and a decreased focus on physical systems. It reports that the average figure spent annually on marine research in 2001/02 and 2002/03 was $63 million. The majority of this (77 percent) was publicly funded.
• Setting Course for a Sustainable Future: The management of New Zealand's marine environment (Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, 1999) - this report notes that it is difficult to determine the extent of information on the marine environment because "information generated and held by different stakeholders is often not generally accessible to other stakeholders. This may be for cultural reasons, for reasons of commercial sensitivity and advantage, or as a consequence of the complexity of official management and reporting systems". The report also identifies a number of examples of the diverse range of information collected about the marine environment, and gaps across these.
• Review of National Databases Relating to the New Zealand Marine Environment (Froude, 2000) - this review was commissioned by the Ministry for the Environment in August 2000 to assist with developing marine environmental performance indicators. It reviews the following types of national marine databases:
  • general biological databases (including various species and ecological databases, as well as an adventive biota database)
  • fisheries databases (this is an extensive set of databases, including catch-effort data, scientific observer data, and trawl, longline, aerial sighting and tag data)
  • wildlife databases (including the Ornithological Society of New Zealand's Atlas of Bird Distribution, and the national bird-banding scheme)
  • physical databases (including Land Information New Zealand bathymetric and nautical charts; scientific data from surveys, climate, marine oil spills, ocean currents, salinity and temperature; satellite data, wave data and sediment data)
  • integrated physical and biological databases (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research estuaries database)
  • protected areas.
• Review of Existing Coastal and Estuarine Monitoring (Excluding Regional Council Monitoring) (Froude, 1998) - again, this report was commissioned by the Ministry for the Environment to inform development of marine environmental performance indicators. It summarises the monitoring of coasts and estuaries carried out by agencies other than regional councils, including broad-scale monitoring of dunelands, localised monitoring of beach and estuary dynamics, monitoring of inter-tidal and sub-tidal habitats, localised monitoring of general water and sediment quality, localised reporting on dredging and dumping, and monitoring of the effects of activities excluding discharges, and dredging and dumping.
• Coastal Resources Database and GIS: A report to the NZ Maritime Safety Authority (Tortell, 2001) - this report was prepared in 2001 to summarise data sets that might comprise a GIS-based tool to provide comprehensive coastal and marine resource information for the purpose of oil spill response, oil spill contingency planning and oil spill risk assessment.
• Shining a Spotlight on the Biodiversity of New Zealand's Marine Ecoregion: Experts workshop on marine biodiversity, 27-28 May 2003, Wellington, New Zealand (WWF-New Zealand, 2004) - this report contains the outcomes of an experts workshop convened by WWF-New Zealand in 2003 to carry out an independent assessment of marine biodiversity in the New Zealand region. The report summarises and references biogeographical information about New Zealand's marine biodiversity that is otherwise widely dispersed in the published and unpublished literature. It also cites gaps in the marine biodiversity knowledge base and makes recommendations on future actions for conserving New Zealand's marine biodiversity.

Illustrative maps of our ocean biodiversity and ocean-based activities

To add to this body of knowledge, we undertook a data collation exercise for this report culminating in a series of illustrative maps of biodiversity and activities in New Zealand's marine environment (see the maps at the end of this section). The maps were developed for this report to illustrate:

• some of the key information available about the biodiversity of, and human activities in, our marine environment
• some potential gaps in, and barriers to accessing, information that might be useful in setting future national ocean priorities.

The maps were compiled over a short period (about two months) using data sourced free of charge from a range of groups, organisations and individuals. They may not represent the best available information or the full range of information that might be useful for setting future national ocean priorities, but they are a start. In the future, better information might be aggregated from distributed sources (such as regional councils) or transformed from non-GIS formats (such as hard-copy charts). Section 1.3 of this report discusses the options for improving access and aggregating information already available.

Electronic copies of maps 1-20 are provided on the CD-ROM that accompanies this report. Further information about the data used in the maps, and where it was sourced, is contained in Appendix 1 (and in an electronic copy on the CD-ROM).

As noted above, other policy initiatives (such as development of the National Aquatic Biodiversity Information Strategy, Oceans Policy, and the proposed Coastal Resources Atlas) have revealed a number of key gaps in the availability of information for management purposes. The process of compiling the maps in this section also revealed a number of gaps in, and barriers to accessing, spatial information that might be needed to set future national ocean priorities. Table 4 below provides a full assessment of the issues we faced in collecting the data for each map, which can be summarised as follows.

• Some information cannot be readily accessed because of intellectual property issues, making the costs prohibitive, even though in many cases the data was collected with Crown funding in the first instance (eg, bathymetry data).
• Some data is available but there is no means yet to access it easily in electronic geospatial format (eg, data on submarine cables and mining exploration permits).
• There is no standard definition to inform particular data sets (eg, there are 15 different data sets on the position of the coastline).
• Data is distributed among diverse research agencies, from Crown to private, and a means to collate and depict data already collected needs to be developed (eg, marine research activities, marine pollution data and sediment loads from rivers).
• Responsibility for the collection of the data is unclear (eg, data on recreational uses).
• The right technology is not available, or required, to collect the information (eg, vessel-tracking technology for shipping is not required in New Zealand, though it is in other countries).
• An agency is collecting the information, but is not resourced adequately to maintain a comprehensive data set (eg, the New Zealand Water and Waste Association is keen to develop and keep up a national database on sewage outfalls).
• There are sensitivities relating to how some information could be used (eg, defence activities).

Table 4: Information gaps and barriers identified through map compilation

Maps

Map 1: Administrative and jurisdictional boundaries

Map 2: Seabed, rivers and estuaries

Map 3: Inshore marine protected areas

Map 4: Seamounts closed to trawling

Map 5: Marine mammals and seabirds

Map 6: Benthic invertebrate, algal, and plant biodiversity

Map 7: Fish biodiversity

Map 8: Recreation - boating and diving

Map 9: Ocean discharges and dumping

Map 10: Petroleum industry seismic surveys

Map 11: Mining, petroleum and undersea cables

Map 12: Mining and petroleum in Taranaki

Map 13: Shipping

Map 14: Commercial fishing - snapper catch

Map 15: Commercial fishing - orange roughy catch

Map 16: Commercial fishing - snapper distribution

Map 17: Commercial fishing - orange roughy distribution

Map 18: Commercial fishing - red rock lobster distribution

Map 19: Commercial fishing industry employment

Map 20: Title extending below mean high water

1.3 Building the right tools for managing information

The limitations of our information base, such as those discussed in section 1.2, mean that tools and models for interpreting and extrapolating from information that we do have are vital.

Three different types of information-based tools are needed in setting national priorities for ocean management:

• access tools, which allow decision-makers to directly access key information and data layers
• sourcing tools, which provide an overview of the range of available data and information sources throughout the country, and information such as where they are held, by whom and in what format
• interpretive tools, which can be used to evaluate and extrapolate from existing information.

A number of information-based tools have been, or are being, developed that can help decision-makers source, access and interpret existing marine data and information. These include the following.

• The National Aquatic Biodiversity Information System (NABIS) - development of this centralised decision-making tool is being led by the Ministry of Fisheries under the umbrella of the New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy. NABIS contains a number of different layers of aquatic biodiversity information. It is designed to enable decision-makers and planners to make informed decisions on the issues that affect aquatic biodiversity, by:
  • bringing together existing information to support decision-making processes that affect marine biodiversity
  • summarising key information for consideration in management decisions
  • making national-scale information about the marine environment freely available via the internet in GIS format
  • contributing to improved management of marine biodiversity information through the implementation and maintenance of common database and metadata standards.
• Marine Environments Classification - the Ministry for the Environment, in partnership with the Ministry of Fisheries and Department of Conservation, commissioned the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) to develop the Marine Environments Classification [The classification system is available from the Ministry for the Environment on DVD (Ministry for the Environment, 2005). The DVD contains GIS data that allows the marine environments classification to be displayed at any level of classification detail from 2 to about 300 environments, documents (maps) showing the classification at 5, 10, 20 and 40 classes for those who do not have a GIS, and all the data layers used during the classification development process (fifteen data layers). The fifteen data layers can be used independently of the classification as a whole.] . This classification is a Geographic Information System (GIS) based tool for mapping ecologically distinctive units ('marine environments'). The classification is derived from eight physical characteristics that influence the 'distinctiveness' of ecological systems. It is based on the principle that ecosystem properties are broadly determined by the interplay between biophysical processes and physical factors in the marine environment. The classification generates maps that subdivide the marine environment into areas where ecosystem properties are different and where the effects of resource uses can be expected to differ. The maps also identify areas that are considered to be ecologically similar, and where the biotic communities and effects of resource use could be expected to be similar.
• Near-shore classification - the Department of Conservation is leading development of the interim near-shore marine classification (INMARC), a tool for use in identifying potential sites for protection in the near-shore area around New Zealand.
• The classification uses a biogeographical approach and comprises inventories of information covering the entire near-shore marine area of New Zealand. It comprises information at two scales: the meso-scale (100s to 1000s km), which describes marine biogeographic regions; and the micro-scale (10s to 100s km), which describes coastal, shelf and offshore island units. A report on the INMARC is due for publication soon, and will contain an inventory of information for use by those with an interest in the marine environment.
• Marlin - the purpose of the Marlin meta-database, being developed by the Ministry of Fisheries, is to make it easy for people to determine the existence, relevance, appropriateness and location of data which describes New Zealand's fisheries and marine biodiversity. Examples of such data include electronic databases, paper forms, specimens of marine organisms, and specimens collected for ageing purposes. Marlin is primarily a repository for metadata about Ministry of Fisheries funded research. However, it is anticipated that it may eventually become a 'one-stop shop' for people wanting to find any data about New Zealand fisheries or marine biodiversity. The first version of Marlin went live in July 2004, with further improvements planned over the next few years.
• Draft marine environmental performance indicators - these were identified under the Ministry for the Environment's Environmental Reporting Programme (1996-2002) as a useful tool for better co-ordination of marine data collection. [The Ministry for the Environment compiled technical reports on the development of the proposed indicators for the marine environment. Proposals included indicators for: fish stocks, fishing impacts, marine biodiversity, physical/chemical values and human health and values. The fish stocks indicators were further developed by the Ministry of Fisheries. Compiled reports are available under "Technical reports" online athttp://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/ser/.] Indicators allow measurement of key parameters of change using consistent monitoring and reporting methods, so that we can build a national picture of significant trends. A set of indicators for the marine environment was agreed, but these would require further development (eg, establishment of monitoring regimes by agencies) before they could be implemented and reported.

Together, these initiatives offer a valuable platform for future work.

Access tools

Data and information can be made available to those who need it in a number of formats: eg, reports and articles, spreadsheets, relational databases, lists, pictures, maps, and co-ordinates. And it can be conveyed in a variety of ways: in hard copy files, or in electronic files down-loaded from discs, e-mails or the internet.

A significant problem that often faces people wishing to access existing data is that they must approach a large number of different sources to obtain it - which poses considerable costs in terms of both time and expense. They then have to figure out how to aggregate data presented in a range of different formats and to a variety of standards - a technical exercise at best.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) offer a powerful way around these problems. GIS essentially involves mapping different data layers (eg, species distribution, infrastructure, commercial activities) to provide a combined picture of information relevant to a specific management question. The maps at the end of section 1.2 provide examples using real data about New Zealand's marine environment.

GIS technology has not been widely or consistently used by government departments to date. This is due mainly to cost, data access constraints, [For example, the Maritime Safety Authority has had a challenging and, at times, frustrating experience in trying to build a Coastal Resources Atlas to support planning and management of oil spills.] and the fragmentation of ocean management functions.

However, several valuable GIS tools are being developed to provide access to existing data in formats that assist interpretation (ie, map formats). The National Aquatic Biodiversity Information System (NABIS) has recently been launched, and a number of other tools are under development, but not yet in place - including the proposed Coastal Resources Atlas and the Marine Environments Classification system. Also, the Department of Conservation is using GIS-based tools to map marine protected areas (see for example Froude and Smith, 2004), and a number of councils are in the process of mapping marine ecosystems [In a recent survey (Ministry for the Environment, 2004) the Ministry for the Environment asked councils whether they had mapped marine ecosystems on paper or using GIS. The results show that:

• fewer than a third (5/17) of regional councils/unitary authorities have mapped relevant marine ecosystems
• only three out of 69 territorial authorities have mapped relevant marine ecosystems
• overall, fewer than one in 10 (8/86) councils have mapped relevant marine ecosystems.]

using GIS.

These systems are being designed to meet a range of different purposes. For example, NABIS is designed mainly to assist fisheries management, the Coastal Resources Atlas to assist with planning for oil spill responses, and the Marine Environments Classification system has been designed as an environment-based tool for planning, environmental monitoring and reporting and management. Together, however, they comprise valuable layers of information for informing a range of management purposes. In combination they could provide a powerful system to draw information together and make it available to a range of decision-makers.

A web-based portal

GIS technology is already sufficiently advanced that, in future, customised maps such as those at the end of section 1.2 could be generated through a web-based portal that draws on data distributed throughout New Zealand. Such a portal would be accessible to everyone, and provide a powerful means to integrate across a wide range of existing data held by various institutions nationwide. Further benefits would include the ability for:

• existing data custodians to retain their rights to hold and manage data, and to have a say in how it can be accessed through the GIS portal
• data to be analysed at different scales (eg, from the whole of the Exclusive Economic Zone down to a particular estuary), depending on the resolution of available data
• data to be customised to different management needs (users could call on just the data they need)
• data to be accessed and analysed without any special software requirements (because the relevant software is all available as part of the web-based package)
• new or emerging data layers to be integrated into the system as they are generated
• New Zealand to contribute easily and effectively to - and perhaps even demonstrate best practice through its participation in - international programmes that are building a global picture of ocean systems, such as the Census of Marine Life [See http://www.coml.org/coml.htm/.] and the related Ocean Bio-geographic Information System (OBIS), [See http://www.iobis.org/.] and the United Nations Global Marine Assessment. [See http://www.mfat.govt.nz/foreign/env/oceans/gma.html for an explanation of New Zealand's involvement in this proposal.]

Preliminary work by the Australian National Oceans Office to build a national Oceans Portal provides a useful model for potential adaptation to the New Zealand context. [See http://www.oceans.gov.au/oceans_portal.jsp for more information about the Australian Oceans Portal proposal.] Several issues would need to be addressed in order for the development of a national ocean portal to be feasible, however. These include the need for:

• agreed data quality, data management and metadata standards
• a common regulatory framework or policy on spatial information
• data-sharing protocols across government agencies, and between the government and key data custodians (such as Crown research institutes, councils, universities and museums)
• a marine cadastre (a registry of rights and obligations affecting the marine environment, such as petroleum exploration permits, or permitted marine farming sites)
• an agreed marine classification system, to provide an ecologically relevant base layer for the ocean portal, and to provide the ability for extrapolation across information gaps in similar environments.

Sourcing tools

Decision-makers often face difficulties in determining what data is available to assist them in making the best decisions about the use and management of the ocean. This can result in decisions being made in the absence of the best available information, or duplication of effort and cost to collate data that already exists elsewhere.

Meta-databases provide a solution to these problems. They index information about where existing data is held, by whom, in what format, and to what quality standards. They help decision-makers identify which existing data is best suited to their purposes, and who they can contact to negotiate terms for its use.

An ocean meta-database

There is currently no comprehensive meta-database of information about New Zealand's marine environment and its uses. However, several initiatives do offer a platform on which a future marine meta-database could be built. These include:

• Marlin - a web-based tool being developed by the Ministry of Fisheries, which stores information about a range of existing data sources, with a focus on supporting fisheries management
• a database of marine research prepared for the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology (Chapman and Lough, 2003), whichcontains entries on current and recent New Zealand marine research - both publicly and privately funded
• inventories attached to the upcoming report by the Department of Conservation on its Interim Near-shore Marine Classification, and WWF-New Zealand's report on the results of an experts workshop that it convened in 2003 (WWF-New Zealand, 2004).

To provide a platform for a more comprehensive, web-based meta-database of marine data and information in future, these databases and inventories would need to be enhanced with other key data sources to support decisions across the full spectrum of ocean issues. A whole-of-government approach - and preferably co-operation from agencies outside government - would be needed to achieve this.

Interpretive tools

Interpretive tools provide the means for decision-makers to aggregate and analyse across a number of data and information sets, and to extrapolate from information-rich to information-poor areas or issues. They are therefore vital tools for managing in the context of uncertainty and limited information about the marine environment, how it functions and the impacts of human activities on it.

Key examples of interpretive tools being developed in the context of New Zealand's marine environment have been discussed earlier in this section, and include:

• the Marine Environments Classification system
• the Interim Near-shore Marine Classification
• draft marine environmental performance indicators.

The Marine Environments Classification system

The Marine Environments Classification system is a valuable tool for marine ecosystem depiction. Figure 4 (page 24) illustrates the eight data layers used to derive the EEZ-scale classification, and illustrates the draft classification at the 20 group (EEZ) and regional (Hauraki) scales. Maps of the draft EEZ-scale classification are provided at the end of section 1.3; and a detailed explanation of those maps is contained in Appendix 2.

Since these draft maps were produced, the classification system has been completed, and is now available from the Ministry for the Environment in DVD format (Ministry for the Environment, 2005). It will be made available to marine managers and decision-makers for application across a range of management questions. A whole-of-government approach will be needed for any new work to further develop or improve the classification. A report on the potential for improving the Marine Environments Classification has been completed as part of the classification project to inform decisions about further work.

The Marine Environment Classification system could provide a valuable platform for the web-based national ocean portal proposed earlier in this section, due to the key data layers that comprise it and its power as a model for ecosystem depiction.

Maps

Draft Marine Environments Classification - 4 Class Level

Draft Marine Environments Classification - 9 Class Level

Draft Marine Environments Classification - 20 Class Level