The latest Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (July 2015) seeks a land transport system that supports economic growth and productivity, road safety and value for money. The transport system must be in the public interest by supporting economic, social, cultural and environmental well-being. Consequently, there is an obligation on road controlling authorities (RCAs) to mitigate the impacts of projects on heritage sites, but without placing an unreasonable funding burden on the economy. These obligations exist throughout the life cycle of projects, including development, delivery and, where applicable, the ongoing ownership of a heritage place. Each RCA has its own approach to the assessment and management of historic and cultural heritage values. The NZ Transport Agency (the Transport Agency) has implemented a number of tools for historic and cultural heritage to complement its business case logic for state highway projects that are consistent with its environmental plan and standard. The Transport Agency’s assessment of changes in heritage and heritage management is also informed by guidelines produced by Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga and the International Council on Monuments and Sites New Zealand Charter. While the risks and opportunities for historic and cultural heritage as a result of transport activities are commonly expressed through the impacts on heritage value and significance, the economic implications of such expressions are less well understood, acknowledged and quantified. This creates a number of potential economic risks for RCAs. First, a project could be stopped by a ‘fatal flaw’ when tangata whenua or local stakeholders perceive a significant loss of heritage that was not identified during the planning preparation. These groups are increasingly likely to make submissions in such cases, which can delay projects and lead to significant write-off of project development costs and land acquisition. Second, designation requirements can be formulated in such a way that a minimal heritage conservation effort suffices. This may create heritage sites and structures that cannot be used, with low economic, social or cultural value and likely to deteriorate slowly over time. In such situations, RCAs are ultimately left with an asset that is unlikely to ever create value for New Zealand. Third, there is a risk of unexpected discovery of archaeological remains, which can be costly in terms of finding solutions, documenting the find, and through delays to the project. Understanding the importance of the find to affected parties can help clarify and justify the costs associated with it. In the long run, future projects may benefit from smoother relations with tangata whenua and stakeholders if RCAs can show they acknowledge the importance of handling an unexpected discovery with due care. To provide RCAs with an approach to address these concerns, the Transport Agency contracted Landcare Research to develop a method to better assess the benefits of heritage conservation investments. Adding an economic perspective to heritage conservation decisions has the potential to improve the value for money delivered by heritage investments and to achieve better outcomes for New Zealand’s heritage stock. We reviewed the literature about how the values of historic and cultural heritage are assessed and expressed in heritage and economic literature. We found a significant overlap in concepts and terminologies from heritage conservation experts and cultural and environmental economists. When articulating heritage values, heritage experts in New Zealand prefer narratives developed by experts. Economic rationales, in contrast, often lean on numeric and monetary quantification. An over-reliance on monetary valuation can be misplaced, particularly for concepts like culture and historical awareness, and a survey of monetary valuation studies of heritage sites indicates that monetary valuation techniques have been applied to a very limited range of values generated by heritage sites. We also present an overview of heritage as it stems from matauranga Maori. The aim of this overview is not to provide a summary, synthesis, or any kind of standardisation of matauranga Maori. It is intended to prepare planners for developing partnerships with tangata whenua by giving a more in-depth overview of the world view of tangata whenua and the concepts that make up the heritage of iwi or hapu. While we provide examples of how some iwi have chosen to express their values in the past, RCAs need to engage and develop a way forward that is appropriate for the context of each organisation and project. Based on these insights, we propose a Heritage Economic Benefits Framework (HEBF) and tool for identifying and expressing the economic benefits of engaging in heritage conservation and minimising some of the project risks related to the loss of heritage. The framework and tool provide suggestions for expressing heritage values, so that these values can potentially be included in multi-criteria assessments of transport project options, and be used to identify and prioritise heritage impacts consistently across projects. Both the framework and the tool facilitate the comparison of conservation costs, which are often known, and the benefits of conservation. They strengthen economic rationality when deciding on the appropriate level of heritage investment. Where heritage can generate economic benefits, such as from future rental income, refurbishment of vacant buildings, or regeneration of urban areas, the tool can help identify such benefits. A key recommendation is to engage strategically with tangata whenua and stakeholders, and to consider their views on heritage impacts from the earliest stages. Moving forward, the HEBF tool provides a classification of heritage values and benefits that can be used consistently to identify and prioritise heritage impacts. It will likely take some time to develop experience with the HEBF and tool. A retrospective assessment of heritage conservation actions in transport projects from various RCAs could be considered to provide a starting point for that learning. With use, the HEBF and tool will contribute to fostering a better understanding of the benefits and need for heritage conservation, and of the opportunities created by maintaining or creating high-quality heritage. (Author/publisher)
Abstract