Ask, don’t demand, and we may be pleasantly surprised at the result

At the start of February one farmer, falling back on the argument of his property rights, delayed the fire service and electricity repair crews gaining access to his property, contributing to a major, day-long power disruption across the Auckland region. It caused chaos.

Putting aside the rights and wrongs of the dispute itself, it is a timely reminder that when it comes to civil laws, and local authority regulations and rules, upholding them can be thrown into turmoil when a determined landowner digs their toes in and says ‘no’.

There is no quick fix in such situations, and imagine the consequences if there are hundreds or thousands of landowners saying no at the same time. The impasse would be monumental.

My experiences in relation to this type of issue revolves around local authorities moving to gain increasing amounts of farm specific data to ensure farmers are meeting their environmental requirements under the Resource Management Act and Regional Plans.

Those local authorities that take the attitude the ‘law requires us to do this’ or resort to legal action to force third parties to release information they hold on individual farms, may achieve short-term compliance but their actions create the potential for long-term confrontation.

The real answer to achieving compliance lies in good communication, listening to and respecting opposing points of view, addressing genuine concerns and gaining buy in on the basis of the greater good.

It is far more effective to get people to do things voluntarily than it is to force them to comply.

Achieving consensus and co-operation may take longer, but around the world there is a realisation that collaborative governance achieves better outcomes and greater co-operation than the adversarial approach.