C.C. Hoogsteden & W.A. Robertson
New Zealand
Abstract
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), New Zealand is required to delineate its continental shelf in just eight short years (from 1998) if it wishes to take advantage of the international agreement. Given that New Zealand will then have the world's fourth largest Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the task of mapping and managing this area will tax a small nation - economically, technically and logistically.
In viewing this enormous task, one thought has been to develop a national maritime spatial infrastructure which could enable New Zealand to enjoy the efficiencies and other benefits of a single datum and a seamless core maritime cadastral data base, comprising both land and topographical features. The present government appears to have accepted that certain spatial databases are public-good assets, an essential tool for governance and an activity which should enjoy Crown financing.
Having now restructured the Department of Survey and Land Information (DoSLI) into separate regulatory and operational entities, i.e. the funder-provider split, a primary task is to maximise the effectiveness of the funding available. The administration of the hydrographic funding by the regulatory agency provides an opportunity for a unified approach to the development of a spatial infrastructure for the whole of New Zealand's territorial land and ocean. However, at a time of continued pressure to reduce government spending, a convincing argument and articulation of the shorter and long term benefits will be needed if New Zealand is to seize the strategic opportunity now presented.
This paper sets out to explore the components of a New Zealand onshore-offshore cadastre and topographic information system set against the marine environment by attempting to isolate and analyse some of the similarities and differences, for example, defining, demarcating and identifying "boundaries". It examines current and likely institutional arrangements to see what the various impacts may be on achieving the required topographic (e.g. seafloor mapping) and cadastral tasks. We review the various activities which are likely to take place in the offshore area and how they will fit into this new spatial regime. In turn, this brings out issues of managing and monitoring such activities, e.g. extraction of claimed resources. Finally, we outline and consider alternative scenarios which might unfold as the deadline for delineation of the continental shelf looms and attention then shifts to the cadastral system beyond.
BACKGROUND
New Zealand, placed in the south-west Pacific Ocean, consists of two main, and several smaller islands with a combined land area of 270,500 square kilometres which is similar to Japan and the British Isles. As well as nearby islands, New Zealand includes some smaller inhabited outlying islands including the Chatham Islands (850 kilometres east of Christchurch), Raoul Island in the Kermadec Group (930 kilometres north-east of the Bay of Islands) and Campbell Island (over 600 kilometres south of the main South Island.)
Of particular interest here, is that this land-based sovereignty effectively means that New Zealand’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) at 200 nautical miles is presently 1.2 million nautical square miles. This covers an area about 15 times the land mass making it the fourth largest EEZ in the world. (New Zealand Yearbook, 1997) Moreover, the continental shelf extends well beyond the EEZ in some parts, a fact which potentially increases the area of control even further. The 200-mile EEZ is patrolled by air and sea, and fisheries officers are frequently aboard aircraft or ships when such patrols are conducted. On occasions, ships fishing illegally have been boarded and, after the due process of the law, confiscated.
While fishing is the main activity in this offshore area, samples dredged up from the ocean floor northeast of New Zealand recently are tantalising scientists with the prospect of a modern day undersea gold rush. (Otago Daily Times 30th December 1997) The samples contain a higher concentration of gold than in some onshore mines and came from relatively shallow depths that could be mined economically by contrast to most other similar deposits elsewhere in the world. New Zealand is going to have to take management of this resource seriously! However, it will have to define its extend and secure its territorial integrity first.
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
International
The third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) is the most recent in a series of international conventions on maritime matters and came into force in 1994. A wide-ranging document, it deals with matters as varied as fishing, mineral extraction and freedom of navigation. Through UNCLOS III and its predecessors, coastal states such as New Zealand obtained significant, although not absolute, rights within the 200 mile EEZ. Article 77 of the convention allows coastal states to claim a continental shelf where that stretches beyond the EEZ and to exploit the non-living resources within that area. In turn, Article 76 sets out detailed criteria for determining where the actual shelf lies and, especially, where it ends. There is a rub however. A time limit arising from the UNCLOS III ratification in 1994 means that the United Nations commences consideration of continental shelf claims in 2004 with New Zealand having until August 2006 to lodge its full and proper claim.
National
Several pieces of New Zealand legislation are pertinent here. First, there is the Territorial Sea and Exclusive Economic Zone Act 1977 which essentially ratified the international agreements flowing from UNCLOS II on matters such as the width of the territorial sea. The second piece of important relevant legislation is the Fisheries Act 1996, a comprehensive rewrite of the Fisheries Act 1983. It includes procedures for setting quotas for species, delineation of management areas and general monitoring and management of fish stocks. Following on from legislation which included the Maori Fisheries Act 1989 and the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992, it also sets out processes for determining and managing traditional Maori fishing areas known as taipure.
The Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991 is arguably one of the most significant pieces of legislation enacted in recent time in New Zealand. It has, as its linchpin, the concept of sustainable management of the natural environment with particular emphasis on the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources. Practically, these resources are managed through a system of regional and territorial local governments who make use of written documents and, usually, graphical plans. By contrast to earlier legislation the assumption is made that unless an activity is expressly prohibited, then it is allowable. Because individual properties are the building blocks of the management process, the underlying cadastre showing land parcels is a most important information layer for management and decision-making. Other rights and interests are also relevant and can be linked to this ownership base.
The twelve regional authorities have a particular responsibility for land uses where these affect matters such as soil conservation, water quality and quantity and hazardous substances. These control functions extend into coastal marine areas, which include the foreshore, seabed and coastal water with the outer boundary being the limit of the territorial sea (12 nautical miles). The landward boundary is mean high water springs and the extraction of sand and shingle are amongst the activities in their brief.
Whilst it could be argued that some "boundary" is needed between regional and territorial authorities there are clearly activities which straddle both and there even be some "land" uses which occur across the land surface, the coastal marine area and out beyond the 12 nautical mile limit, e.g. mining. In such instances, the seamless cadastre, which is compatible and consistent, takes on considerable importance particularly with such an activity bringing into play additional mining controls such as those under the Mining Act 1991 and others.
Mapping and Charting Organisations
One of the earliest maps in New Zealand is attributed to the Maori chief Huruhuru. (Carrad 1976) In voyages of exploration, Abel Tasman charted part of the North Island in 1642 and James Cook produced various large-scale charts of selected parts of the New Zealand coast over a century later. On land, planned settlement after 1840 required topographic and cadastral surveys and a long heritage of formal mapping began. The early New Zealand surveyors were explorers of high calibre, their tasks taking them into remote areas, often in a harsh climate and with dangers aplenty including rivers that were "..so swift that drowning at that time was recorded as death by natural causes." (Lawn 1982)
Between 1876 and 1986, the Department of Lands and Survey was responsible for overseeing the nation’s land-based surveying and mapping programmes. In topographic mapping, the national one inch to the mile series was eventually completed in 1976 and 1:50,000 series replaced this just over a decade later. A Torrens system of land registration having replaced registration of deeds in 1870, New Zealanders have obtained the benefits of a sound cadastral survey system since then. The Torrens system is one of three main tenure types in New Zealand the others being Crown Land and Maori Land. Torrens covers freehold land which has individual and full ‘ownership’ rights. Maori land is multiple owned customary land belonging to the indigenous people of New Zealand. Crown Land is reserved for public purposes, conservation, or leased or licensed. For minerals there are also licenses or leases. For all of these detailed cadastral survey plans, based on a national survey control system, supported dealings in individual land parcels while providing the underlying core data-base for various cadastral map series.
A major policy decision by government in 1986 saw the creation of a stand-alone Department of Surveying and Land Information (DoSLI) which was not only charged with the national surveying and mapping function but also with paying its own way through ever increasing levels of cost-recovery and user-pays charges. Offshore, the New Zealand Navy continued to produce all nautical charts for New Zealand and also for a fairly large area of the South Pacific.
In 1995, an independent study into DoSLI commissioned by government recommended inter alia that:
This study also referred to the importance of a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) to New Zealand.
After due consideration, government adopted many of the recommendations creating Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) in July 1996. LINZ takes over responsibility for the policy, regulatory and core government service functions of DoSLI, the Land Titles Office, and the purchase of hydrographic services from the New Zealand Defence Force. (LINZ, 1996) In turn, Terralink NZ Limited is established as a state owned enterprise at the same time to provide and then contest work previously undertaken by DoSLI
SOME OTHER RELEVANT POLICY DIRECTIONS
Progress in Automation
A business case for automating the New Zealand cadastral survey and title systems was approved by government in November 1997. The strategy is for progressive phases with full completion intended by 2001. Funding will comes from an existing LINZ trading surplus together with an increased levy on all land transactions and cadastral survey plans from 1998-2002. The levy and fees will then drop significantly. The stated goal is to have automated survey and title registers available from remote locations offering a turn around time of 24 hours for 90% of survey and title services.
Continental Shelf Delimitation
In terms of New Zealand’s topographic and hydrographic systems, LINZ also has the collation of seabed hydrographic information into a standardised hydrographic database as an important goal. This would be seamless and extend out to the Continental Shelf. (LINZ, 1996) The strategy is to create a data capture and management strategy for seabed information which includes developing contestable markets for acquiring such data.
Expressions of interest have now been called for in order to move ahead on the continental shelf delimitation process. Here, there is special emphasis on interpreting Article 76 of UNCLOS III and rigorously testing existing data against that which is considered necessary to sustain the claim. In another allied area, the development of a marine survey information system is seen a key milestone in meeting and maintaining the Crown’s interest in the land information infrastructure. Whilst the inclusion of hydrographic/bathymetric databases is obviously necessary, a marine cadastre would also appear to be a sensible component to include.
Creating New Zealand’s Dynamic Geodetic Datum 2000
Straddling the Pacific/Australian plate boundary means that some parts of New Zealand have relative ground movements of about 5cm per annum. In fact, the sum of such relative movements since the New Zealand Geodetic Datum 1949 was observed and established is now approximately 2.5 metres. (Blick, 1997) The implications for surveyors, and the survey system, are obvious but there are also other users of the survey control system who are also affected by such significant movements. Various solutions have been suggested to deal with the geodetic and survey control problems including the use of velocity models to calculate past and future positions of control points Of interest, some of the GIS user-groups are a little diffident:;
"For a small number of GIS users a dynamic datum will reduce uncertainty, and the proposal will be welcomed. On the other hand, large numbers of GIS users will be inconvenienced by a constantly changing reference frame." (Critchlow, 1997)
Thus, whilst the principle of establishing a national geodetic system for New Zealand is laudable, and arguably essential to underpin a National Spatial Data Infrastructure, there are some challenging issues with which to deal. Some of these are now being considered by LINZ.
A National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI)
The original Clinton model for building a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) was premised on it providing a mechanism which would facilitate improved data-sharing through common standards and where:
"An information infrastructure is built up layer upon layer from the physical connections with cable and satellite connections at the bottom level, up via logical networks based on standardised protocols to reach the application and service layer." (Ostensen, 1996)
Given that a substantial amount of the spatial data will, or can be, be linked directly with the cadastral database, there is a clear need for land ownership information (i.e. a cadastral system) to be integrated and comprehensive. This includes off-shore ownership and management interests.
BUILDING A SEAMLESS ONSHORE-OFFSHORE CADASTRE
For the purpose of this paper, we adopt the FIG definition of a cadastre and without suggesting that maritime cadastres were excluded from such a definition, most of the information gathered has tended to be about land-based property units. The traditional purpose of hydrographic surveys has been to provide accurate seabed data, to certain depths, especially for the production of nautical charts and their use for safe navigation of vessels. Increasingly, with the development and refinement of technology such as multibeam swath scanning systems, many other hydrographic mapping applications are occurring such as marine resource management; electronic chart development (e.g. ECDIS); monitoring channels and port construction; mineral extraction and so on but still not yet focused on legal parcels.
If it is accepted that a legal cadastre is a very efficient method of identifying, recording and protecting all interests in "land" in a state, then the extension and evolution of the land-based cadastre to the maritime environment is not only sensible but necessary for commercial progress. In addition, if one is to have a spatial and textual continuity which traverses the land-water interface, there also needs to be some coherence in terms of: the register of interests, the unique parcel identifiers, the cadastral survey system, and the cadastral map, based on a common national (sometimes international) coordinate system. To enable some equity in an overall fiscal cadastre, the processes for valuing property and interests and levying taxes also should not distinguish unreasonably between the land and water entities. Indeed the growth in commerce in sea areas will attract a taxation to at least offset the costs and resposibilities which nations incur in administering territorial seas and facilitating commercial activity. In addition it is desirable that the development of this cadastral infrastructure serve a wide range of multi-purpose uses to enable the cost effectiveness of its long term use to be maximised. The development of a seamless cadastre across land and water would therefore seem to be a sensible path to follow provided that it can be achieved economically, effectively and efficiently. Thus the commonality of land and sea tenure infrastructure requirements need to be addressed from the outset. Fortunately in New Zealand, the provisions of the Survey Act 1986 already provides a broader definition of land for the purposes of cadastral surveying and documentation. It’s definition of land encompassed the air and water directly above the surface and the material directly beneath its boundaries readily enabling the extension of its provisions to the new offshore territory.
A reasonably standard checklist covering a number of issues for testing a cadastral system against will now be used to tease out some of the issues which will need to be considered in creating a new seamless cadastre for New Zealand.
THE OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES AHEAD
The addition of significant areas of open sea to territorial jurisdiction offers major opportunities for national growth and development of the maritime nations affected. In New Zealand’s case, as already mentioned, the territorial extension is extremely large. There are, over the long term, significant possibilities of identifying and developing resources which will return major benefits to recipient nations. Already an increasing number of activities and uses are taking place in both inshore and offshore maritime areas. A sample which illustrates the wide range of issues or activity likely to require administration and management in the offshore areas includes; the erection of structures, reclamation, dredging, seabed mining, marine farming, birds and mammal conservation and observation, fisheries management and harvesting, boating, transportation, navigation, the laying of cables, water pollution, oil pollution, ocean dumping, rubbish and litter, waves, sea ice, water quality, environmental monitoring and the delimiting of reserves and restricted areas etc.
However, in comparison with the initiation of the development and use of land resources the use and management of the territorial sea and its resources is fraught with a much higher level of risk in all phases of activity. Present utilisation is very much in the pioneering stage and the future range of activities and economic uses are relatively unknown at this point. The ocean environment is changeable, challenging and capricious so that operating costs are high and infrastructure and associated systems need to be robust and cost effective in their applications and maintenance over the long term.
In many ways the development of the offshore section of the seamless cadastre, parallels the pioneer role of land surveying during the settlement phase of NZ development. We have a similar lack of comprehensive and detailed knowledge about our prospective tracts of new territory and the resources they contain. Much reconnaissance activity can still be expected and initially, resource use and development is likely to be spasmodic and undertaken in a ‘pepper-potting’ fashion throughout the territorial sea. Thus, the cadastral infrastructure will need to be able to be implemented on a demand basis and the support provided in one area at a particular time will need to endure so as to be of continuous utility for whatever other uses subsequently occur in a particular area or zone. However, the inability to execute effective superficial marking and the consequential significance of the geodial character of the ocean surface, due to the need to calculate dimensions over long distances, provides a difference that will demand a variable approach to delimitation for the sea cadastre.
Tenure, Title and Registration
Just as for land related property a wide range of tenure title and registration instruments will be required if the development and management of new territorial sea is to meet the variety of maritime demands efficiently and competitively. Such rights will in their own way need reliable documentation, unique identification and a system for giving sound assurance, such as registration. There will be differences from the land situation due both to the fact that there are now improvements that could be made if the land systems were being initiated with modern thinking and technology. As well the offshore environment requires a variable and innovative approach to tenure, ownership, or specified rights in comparison with the consolidation of current land title systems. For example, a planimetric area offshore can relate to replica areas on the ocean surface, at different depths, on the seabed or beneath it. As well individual resources can be allocated on a discrete basis with rights limited to any specified resource envelope through the use of unique defining criteria. Fishing and biological resources have changing locations and already alternative approaches such as quotas have needed to be regularised and documented specifically with appropriate procedures to enable effective administration. Thus, the traditional cadastral land parcel which bundles together a wide range of ownership and use rights does not have the same relevance in the offshore cadastre. What is required for and offshore cadastre is a wide range of overlapping but discrete parcels with volumetric as distinct from simply planimetric dimensions, for which individual rights are clearly stipulated, described and identified.
A system that can accommodate the unbinding of discrete resource ownership, use and management rights while still offering the same assurance and integrity as positive land registration systems, is required for the offshore cadastre. Thus, the concept of a common parcel may have to yield to the application of single purpose parcels for individual rights related to themes or spatial envelopes. This need not, in the long term, be seen as a distinction between land and sea cadastres. The same need for differentiation is becoming increasingly evident on land as the complexities of modern resource management demand more individual definition. Thus, the corollary of a common parcel and a bundle of rights for simple ownership concepts is the unbundling of rights and the proliferation of special purpose parcels for times of complex ownership concepts. It is of relevance to note the increasing flexibility and diversity in the definition of land based rights, that have been provided for in the "right area" concept in the current LINZ "Survey and Title Automation" design will also have relevance to marine areas.
Boundaries
The marine environment is not conducive to the general use of monumentation. An exception is that buoys demarcating lines on the sea surface and marking on the sea-bed are possible in selected circumstances. The ubiquitous use of ground marking in the land area of NZ will not be able to be applied in the maritime area. This is a challenge to established techniques dependent on the use of prior ground marking in the locality to provide both control assurance and cost effectiveness. Although the traditional cadastre has generally relied on vector boundaries, distinct from topographic features, there is an increasing relevance of topographic features to cadastral boundaries today. This is even more evident in the offshore environment where topographic features have the potential to play an important reinforcing role for the offshore cadastre. Thus, the positioning of sea-floor, coastline and other physical features will steadily become integrated into the seamless national spatial infrastructure as key reference and defining points and boundaries.
Survey and Control
New Zealand’s problems with substantial differential movement across the country and within the survey control system were outlined above. In many ways the component of earth deformation which is now being factored into the dynamic datum concept has important implications for the development of a seamless NZ cadastral data base. Not necessarily through detailed replication of the new approach, but in copying the innovative attitude of the reassessing of the users needs, and the characteristics of the operational environment, and the development of an approach which is conceptually sound for the long term but, still equally practicable in a new environment. In the past without the capability to refer to stable reference marks there has had to be a substantial trade-off in the precision accepted for marine positioning. Precise positioning techniques have been largely land referenced or of a highly scientific and expensive nature. However the rapid development of new positioning, profiling and imaging technology now offers new techniques with which to develop alternative systems. In terms of survey techniques, the Global Positioning System is the obvious and predominant system for horizontal positioning for both the land and marine environments. As such it offers a common measuring system for the development of the on and off-shore geo-spatial infrastructure and the seamless cadastre. The application of active GPS has much to offer in surveying and positioning in the territorial sea and it’s reception up to 200 Kilometres from shore will provide new levels of accuracy and confidence for the sea cadastre. Sea applications will justify a good density of land based GPS active stations which together with other strong land based justifications will offer significant advantages and improved performance in both these applications through an integrated approach. This identifies but one of the opportunities for sharing spatial infrastructure to maximise the benefits of the seamless joint land and sea cadastre. Marine based activity related to property is inevitably linked to the land and hence a seamless spatial system is critical for efficiency and continuity.
Resource Management Consents
The environmental impact and physical planning system in New Zealand have been integrated into an overarching statute to manage environmental effects called the Resource Management Act 1991. There are likely to be the need for resource management consents in the new territorial areas and the extension of the processes of this legislation will need to be contemplated. However the structures for this responsibility will need review as at present Regional Authorities have responsibilities out to the existing territorial limits. However, the situation is so complex that although the legislation provides a good basis for procedures a simple extension of existing resource management responsibilities is unlikely to be practical. The administration of these responsibilities in the far reaches of the new territorial waters will require a re-consideration of the best structures for effective resource management in these vast new areas of marine territory.
Administration
In New Zealand’s situation the additional jurisdictional responsibilities for the new territorial sea areas, will be of an order that will require a major administrative and regulatory direction if the challenges are to be successfully managed and the development opportunities made good. A focus of organisational responsibility will be essential if the fragmentation of well meaning but divisive sectoral initiatives are to be avoided and substituted with strategic and integrated policy and operational administration. There is the need to establish a relevant and efficient property and usage system of rights and their description, definition and identification. Monitoring systems for performance standards and environmental effects will also be required.
Management and administration of the new ocean territory will need to be build up incrementally over the decades ahead but within the terms of a compelling vision, strategies and planning. Already systems for the management and harvesting of fish quotas are in place in NZ. As well a system for defining and allocating coastal territory to the various Maori tribes for fishing purposes has been implemented. These are simply a example of the recognition of both a tradable commercial potential and the provision for traditional tribal rights and access in offshore territory. It foreshadows the range of activity and concomitant regulation that will require the evolution of instruments for administration, monitoring and adjudication.
The basis for the determination and adjudication of the delimitation of the continental shelf boundary has already been established. However, although this is a major task, this is only a precursor to the documentation, identification and adjudication that will be required for the national management of the large areas of new territory that are in prospect. Systems for granting of rights and adjudication will be very transparent to global users and inconsistencies and inefficiencies will incur a cost in relation to competitiveness for either investment, production, or distribution.
The role of the World Trade Organisation will in areas of commercial activity have a major impact similar to what it is having in all other trading sectors. No longer are trading protocols bilateral or multilateral deals capable of national political resolution. There is now a global legislative regime to set trading standards and settle disputes. Trading in the new territorial ocean areas will need to observe a global transparency and consistency from the start and this will demand a high quality of administration and efficiency. The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) is but one of the instruments exposing countries to global standards of efficiency and performance. The design of a national administrative regime for new territorial sea extensions need to anticipate the international legislative environment that has been introduced through the last GATT round of negotiations and agreements.
The jurisdictional responsibilities for the new ocean areas is likely to raise significant constitutional issues that will need early consideration if the national administration is to proceed smoothly from the start. The vast majority of responsibilities will become internal issues although the impact of any international treaties or agreements will need to carefully assessed to ensure international legalities and commitments are observed in the change over to national administration. The role and responsibilities of indigenous people in relation to resources is likely to grow in significance.
POSSIBLE SCENARIOS
In developing the most suitable strategy for developing a efficient form of property and use rights to territorial sea and ocean areas it is useful to consider the possible scenarios that a country such as New Zealand may follow.
The Incremental Model
This model involves adapting incrementally to changes demands and opportunities as they occur. Sometimes incrementalism is unkindly referred to as muddling through, although it is often a successful technique for managing some stages of change. However, it does not accommodate innovation and quantum change and encourages the avoidance of strategic investment until it is too late or at least overdue. For NZ this scenario would involve proceeding the along the same ad hoc path that has been our approach to date. It involves reacting to new requirements as they occur with the consequent high potential for delay, duplication, redundancy and divisive planning and management of sectoral operations. The cadastral support in this scenario would be isolated and project specific with the potential for inefficiencies and for conflicts through overlaps in specific activities or projects. There would not be the capability for multi purpose use and sharing of costs.
The apparent lack of need for major initial effort and investment makes this scenario superficially attractive. However the huge scale of the new territory and the jurisdictional implications herald major responsibilities and opportunities that will not be well served through a series of ad hoc responses to future demands and emerging opportunities.
The Sectoral Model
This would involve the provision of a spatial infrastructure specifically for sectors as they were evidently needed, and for which funding could then be sourced. This model would allow some planning ahead for a particular industry but would not be conducive to multi-purpose use or the wide spread or long term sharing of costs. Scale economies would be lost as there would be no incentive to fund incremental improvements not directly benefiting the prime project. In this scenario a few major industries would be well served but there would not be the policy and planning to convert these industry specific infrastructure investments into core sustainable maritime spatial infrastructure.
The Seamless Cadastral Model
This model draws from the concept of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) but fully encompasses the offshore territorial area and accepts a variability of the application of the NSDI framework and its format for the maritime environment. This model requires an acceptance of the value of the provision of a skeletal core infrastructure which will enable the potential for consistency and multiple use anywhere across New Zealand’s territorial areas of land and sea to be realised. This will require a clear vision of the long term goal of a full facility for efficient allocation transfer and operation of property rights in the territorial sea. As well a clear articulation of the form of the geo-spatial infrastructure to be realised will be needed from the beginning. The concept of the dynamic New Zealand datum will need to extend throughout the new territorial sea, and have the capacity to accommodate the finite boundary that will result from the definition of the limits of the continental shelf in terms of UNCLOS III. The techniques for recording and surveying the sea areas will need to be developed to suit these particular circumstances. As already mentioned the geoidal character of these areas need to be factored in to the approach. Also the availability of GPS and the increasing accuracy in relative and absolute GPS positioning provide a excellent tool for maritime cadastral surveying. Because of the difficulties of monumentation the role of coordinates as the prime evidence of position is appropriate. This will in turn require adequate provision for, the legal tracibility of measurements and the competent prescription of standards of accuracy and error ellipses, and possibly, mechanisms for the co-relation of co-ordinates and datums with earth deformation.
This model because of its corporate NZ approach to the total national territory depends on an appropriate degree of integration of sectoral activities and will require a organisational focus for overall administrative and regulatory responsibility. A small Maritime Affairs Ministry would provide a suitable organisational and administrative focus and co-ordination that the addition of these major new territorial areas of sea will require, at least in the initial stages. A overarching ministry could provide the strategies and policies that would link the fishing, mineral, petroleum, navigation and other sectors so as to unify government outcomes for the new territorial sea areas. It’s acceptance and endorsement of the strategy of an onshore offshore seamless cadastre would be important for the successful development of this key infrastructure component. There is also the need to bring the new territorial ocean areas under a single regional jurisdiction, which will undertake resource management and related responsibilities but with no service delivery functions. A strong separation of policy and regulatory from service functions will allow the testing of a highly competitive approach in the provision of offshore services from the beginning. Although it is not necessary to create a new spatial authority it is most important that the responsibilities of the existing NZ spatial authority are specifically extended to provide for the spatial infrastructure and standards in the new territorial ocean areas.
CONCLUSIONS
This initial overview of the longer term consequences of the major expansion of New Zealand offshore territory indicates the opportunities for a long term strategic and planning approach. There are clearly efficiencies and benefits through the staged provision of a national maritime spatial infrastructure to encompass the new territorial areas and integrate with the land geodetic datum and surveying system in a single seamless cadastre. The current cadastral reform of the NZ land cadastral system and institutions provides a good basis and opportunity to develop a new spatial infrastructural system which is inclusive of the offshore areas. Although the fundamentals of the cadastre on land and sea are common, the particular nature of the sea environment is such that new systems, techniques, and technology, will enable applications that are specific to maritime needs. Thus three dimensional geoidal positioning, the use of an active GPS network, and co-ordinate referencing can provide an effective alternative to the monument and ground control techniques of land based geodetic surveying. The integration of relevant topographical features with vector parcels will become very much a feature of the maritime section of the cadastre because of the utility of having physical reference points.
The long term scale of the territorial maritime responsibilities are of a quantum that indicate a policy of making do will be severely inadequate. A strategic approach is clearly called for. In terms of such an approach there is a case for establishing a small government ministry to take overall responsibility for the policy and regulation of the total maritime territory at least in the initial stages of governance. As well the allocation of regional government type responsibilities would also appear to have considerable merit. Without an organisational focus of this form it will be difficult to move from the current reactionary response to new developments to a proactive one. It will be necessary to plan and regulate and develop strategies and initiatives such as the provision of a national seamless maritime spatial infrastructure and other multi-sectoral programmes. The preliminary scenarios indicate that as an alternative to incremental or sectoral models a holistic approach will require vision mission and strategy and long term planning. This corporate New Zealand approach will readily enable a wide range of necessary strategies to be developed and indicate the benefits of the early provision of the key components and a pathway towards the implementation of a seamless multi-purpose cadastre to provide coverage of the total potential New Zealand land and sea territorial extent. It will not simply be satisfied by the provision of a statement of New Zealand’s "Ocean Strategy". The development of an effective strategy needs to underpin the ‘fine words’ with the provision of an underlying framework to co-ordinate all maritime activity as the reality will prove to be that activities will be widely dispersed, disparate and spasmodic in their time-scale. In this respect the introduction and planning of a national spatial infrastructure for the new maritime areas is a key early step. This is particularly so when early activities will be sparse and widely spread. The various administrative, resource management and logistical issues will all benefit from the early establishment of an appropriate national spatial infrastructure. The challenge is for national surveying agencies and the survey profession to build on their land experience and extend a seamless cadastre and its geodetic framework so as to provide the preliminary infrastructure necessary to initiate an effective administrative regime for the extensive areas of ocean territory ensuring strong national accountability.
The clock is now ticking for the time period in which national governments have to delimit the definition of the continental shelf and the extend of their new territorial areas of sovereignty. Equally the clock is ticking for the development of a strategy for an integrated land and maritime spatial infrastructure that serves the purpose of supporting the regulation and administration of the potential new national territory that will accrue once the requirements for the definition of the continental shelf has been executed and ratified.
REFERENCES
Blick, G., (1997) Do We All Need to Develop Dynamic Datums? Seminar/Workshop on Geodesy Beyond 2000 & Geodetic Cadastre Land Information New Zealand Wellington 14-15 October 1997 pp. 15-16
Critchlow, S., (1997) Geodetic Needs of the GIS User Community Seminar/Workshop on Geodesy Beyond 2000 & Geodetic Cadastre Land Information New Zealand Wellington 14-15 October 1997 13-14
LINZ., (1996) Post Election Briefing Land Information New Zealand Wellington 40 pp.
Ostensen, 1996, "Mapping the Future of Geomatics." Geomatica 50:3 pp. 301-304
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
C. HOOGSTEDEN PhD
Chris Hoogsteden is an Associate Professor at the University of Otago, New Zealand having joined that institution in 1978. Prior to that he practiced as a land surveyor and town planner for some ten years. With undergraduate and advanced degrees in surveying, planning, economics and management he teaches in a wide variety of subject areas including professional practice, comparative cadastres and introductory surveying. He has acted as a consultant to a number of central and state government surveying and mapping agencies and projects in New Zealand, Australia and Europe. His research interests include: economic evaluation of spatial information systems; cadastral reform and professional management issues.
W. A. (Bill) ROBERTSON
Bill Robertson is currently an independent consultant specialising in public sector strategic management, and environmental planning and information management. From 1987 to 1996 he was the Director General/Surveyor General of the New Zealand Department of Survey and Land Information. This position carried responsibility for the strategic leadership, management, and professional and statutory functions of a public sector organisation employing up to 1450 staff and administering surveying, mapping, land information, land administration and land title functions. He is a fellow of the NZ Institute of Surveyors, a Past President of the NZ Planning Institute, and is current President of the Commonwealth Association of Planners. His professional awards include the NZ Planning Institute Gold Medal, the NZ Institute of Surveyors Fulton Gold Medallion, the Eminent Individual Award of the Australasian Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (AURISA), the NZ 1990 Commemoration Medal, and a ANZAC Study Fellowship. Significant project consultancies include serving on the Iraq Kuwait Boundary Demarcation Commission for the UN, GIS consultancy for the World Bank in Shanghai, a land policy framework for FAO in Zimbabwe, and Cohesive Policy Implementation in Government for the NZ State Services Commission.
His postal address is 3 Eskdale Rd,
PO Box 50 735 Porirua NZ.
Tel 64-4-233 1768
Fax 64-4-233 1762
e-mail billrobertson@xtra.co.nz