Some aspects of New Zealand and Hawaiian experience in land use planning : a contrast

There are many parallels to be drawn between New Zealand and Hawaii. Among these are the relative physical isolation, the presence of significant, indigenous populations, the encroachment of European settlers and the agricultural and tourism-based economies. Both places were originally populated by Polynesian maritime cultures, which flourished long before European settlers arrived. Both are a long way from market populations and both have agriculturally adaptive environments as well as harsh terrain. They have both become world famous as resorts as well as being of naval significance for merchant shipping and military purposes. Settlement by Europeans brought European concepts and practices - particularly English common-law institutions - which were imposed and grafted on to existing institutions. Given these similarities, the present thesis engages in a comparative study of the ways in which the two jurisdictions have approached and are addressing issues of sudden emergence of urban growth and the preservation of cultural and historical ways of life. Traditionally, issues of the rural urban fringe for example have been construed as issues of subdivision. This has led to a biased and skewed interpretation of the development. This thesis considers the existing literature, three approaches to planning analysis, and the very recent legislation enacted by the two jurisdictions, particularly in relation to the Resource Management Act (New Zealand) and the Hawaii State Plan. The thesis concludes with recommendations for further analysis and consideration of the effects of the new legislation. Chapter One is devoted to a review of literature; Chapter Two describes the cultural histories of the two island groups, stressing the different cultural influences which each modern policy making organ must adequately reflect if it is to be acceptable; Chapter Three outlines three different theoretical approaches to planning and policy, representing the analycentric approach, the meta-policy approach and the policy process approach. These approaches are all considered in relation to the Hawaiian and the New Zealand planning systems. In Chapter Four, the legislative frameworks of the two jurisdictions are set out in some detail and compared. Finally, Chapter Five discusses alternative methodologies, sets out some conclusions and makes some recommendations for future policy-making