However, as we navigate the momentous task of restructuring the way we manage our water resources, there are an immense number of challenges that we need to work collectively to overcome if we’re to uphold that 100% Pure claim.
In my 25 years in the water industry across both Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, I’ve seen time and again that it all comes down to two key factors: quality and quantity.
Quality
As we grapple with how to cost-effectively treat our stormwater and wastewater to protect the environment when there is (quite rightly) so much pressure on getting value for money for the community, we need to look to our communities for direction.
GHD’s recent global study, Crossroads, surveyed over 10,000 people across 10 countries, including Aotearoa New Zealand.
Kiwis ranked green, nature-based solutions for securing clean drinking water and protecting natural waterways among the country’s top four priorities. If we are to look at ways to harness nature to effectively manage and mitigate the effects of stormwater, then nature-based solutions, such as incorporating wetlands, will be crucial to deliver cost effective outcomes.
The Elsdon Park wetlands design, part of Porirua’s CBD stormwater upgrade, recognised at Infrastructure NZ’s Building Nations awards, showcased the effectiveness of community collaboration and nature-based solutions. With strong iwi support, the wetlands are restoring ecosystems and improving water quality, reviving the mauri (life force) of Te Awarua o Porirua and ultimately delivering far broader community benefits beyond just managing stormwater run-off. Through community collaboration and education, we can work to inform the next generation on the importance of incorporating these solutions.
Water quality is back in the spotlight, this time with concerns about lead contamination, which combined with some of the recent challenges in Queenstown and Hawke’s Bay, places even more pressure on the industry to perform.
In my experience, the water industry often responds by developing technologically complicated (and expensive) solutions in the spirit of continuous improvement.
However, there’s no substitute for stepping back, considering the entire system from a risk perspective, and engaging early with the community and iwi.
This approach helps us avoid tunnel vision and find more pragmatic, cost-effective ways to manage all three waters.
Quantity
When we think about environmental outcomes, “quality” often comes to mind first, but “quantity” is equally important. Aotearoa New Zealand has experienced its fair share of excessive stormwater, especially during major flooding events in recent years. Here are some pragmatic approaches I’ve seen:
· Buying flood-prone properties:
While it’s sensible for governments to purchase privately-owned residential properties prone to repeat flooding, the thinking has evolved to consider how that land can benefit the community when it’s not flooded. By integrating these areas with nature, we’re now seeing land adjacent to waterways as an asset rather than a liability.
· Rethinking infrastructure:
When an old bridge serving rural properties is washed away in flood, the natural engineering response might be to build a higher, modern one. But through meaningful engagement with the local community - who are often more resilient to temporary isolation during flooding compared to us city folk - we might find that a more cost-effective solution, like a weir-style crossing that maintains a fish passage, can be agreed upon. This approach can be a fraction of the cost of the default engineering solution.
Water quantity, or in more specific terms, thinking about a sustainable water yield versus demand balance, is another part of the equation. Understanding the sustainable extraction from our current and future water sources is essential.
On the demand side of this equation, metering and education are our most effective tools.
According to Motu Economic and Public Policy Research from Victoria University, by 2022, only 14 out of 67 councils in Aotearoa New Zealand had implemented universal water metering and were charging based on usage.
Educating our communities on the benefits of metering can ultimately save money by reducing the need for developing new sources and can avoid the risk of overextraction. Tauranga City Council, for example, has successfully used volumetric charging for over 20 years, adjusting customer behaviours through programmes like Water Watchers, which used education to raise awareness with the community to deliver long-term savings and achieve a 14% reduction in demand over the summer of 2021-22.
How do we clear the murky waters?
Addressing the quality and quantity issues we face now and in the future hinges on making the most of the current water industry reform process. It’s about choosing the right structure and funding model to make real progress possible.
A key part of this is engaging with our communities to find a common ground on what they are willing to invest to secure our water resources for generations to come and keep Aotearoa New Zealand 100% Pure. My colleague David Norman addresses this in more detail in his recent article.
