Part 1: What we looked at and why

How well four councils are responding to a changing climate.

1.1
In many ways, councils are at the front line of a wider response to climate change. Councils are largely responsible for civil defence, regional and district land use, planning, and major community infrastructure. They are the owners of significant assets, some of which are at risk because of climate change. They also have a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

1.2
Councils have obligations to keep their communities and assets safe from the impacts of a changing climate. They also have a responsibility to consult and keep their communities informed about the scenarios they are planning for and the steps they are taking to protect people and property.

1.3
In this report, we use the term climate effects to mean the changes from rising global temperatures, such as rising sea levels and more frequent extreme weather events. Climate-related impacts are the consequences of those effects, such as coastal inundation and flooding. Climate-related risks are impacts that are not apparent yet but could arise.

Why we did this work

1.4
Most councils in New Zealand have identified responding to climate change as a strategic priority. Most have strategic plans that refer to initiatives designed to prepare for or implement a response to climate-related risks.

1.5
We wanted to understand how well councils were moving beyond high-level climate change commitments and strategies towards taking action.

1.6
We also wanted to make a positive contribution to climate response momentum among councils. This report aims to do this by:

  • sharing lessons and insights that might help other councils; and
  • publishing our findings to give New Zealanders an independent view of the steps that four councils are taking and to support public accountability of council climate actions.

1.7
It is important to acknowledge that the timing and extent of the future impacts of climate change are uncertain. Councils around the country are at various stages of preparing climate change scenarios and understanding what risks climate change poses to their communities and assets.

1.8
In addition, councils are operating in a changing legislative and policy environment. In the past few years, changes to resource management legislation were passed by Parliament and then repealed. A climate adaptation bill was anticipated under the previous Government but not introduced, and a select committee inquiry into climate adaptation has recently been completed.

1.9
We were interested in the extent to which councils were able to progress their climate responses despite uncertainty both about the impacts of climate change and within the policy environment.

What we looked at

1.10
We wanted to find out how well councils have moved from climate change strategies, commitments, and expectations to actions.

1.11
Our audit had three lines of inquiry:

  • How well have councils identified climate change actions?
  • How well have councils implemented and managed their climate change actions?
  • How well have councils made themselves accountable for their climate change actions?

1.12
We audited climate actions at four councils:

  • Canterbury Regional Council (Environment Canterbury);
  • Christchurch City Council;
  • Nelson City Council; and
  • Whanganui District Council.

1.13
We chose these councils mainly because they are different sizes and types. We wanted our sample to include regional (Environment Canterbury), territorial (Christchurch City Council and Whanganui District Council), and unitary (Nelson City Council) local authorities.

1.14
We were interested in actions that were under way or had been completed in the last three to four years and were a response to the impacts of climate change or climate-related risks.

1.15
We did not examine every climate-related activity that each council has carried out. For a sample of activities in each of the four councils, we looked at how actions were identified; whether they aligned to strategic priorities; how well they were planned, implemented, and governed; and how well councils reported their progress to communities. The Appendix has more information on the activities that we looked at.

1.16
Given the various stages of implementation, we did not evaluate the effectiveness of specific actions. We also did not assess whether the actions were the right or best ones to take – those are policy decisions for councils to make.

1.17
We did not, through this work, audit the four councils' 2024-34 long-term plan (LTP) development, which was under way at the same time as this audit. LTPs are subject to a separate audit process.

1.18
However, we did liaise with auditors of LTPs to test the consistency of our findings. We expected that, where councils had identified climate change as a strategic priority or committed significant investment, this would be apparent in their LTPs.

How we did our audit

1.19
We collected and reviewed publicly available documents as well as additional documents provided by each council. Documents included strategy and policy papers, risk assessments, decision papers, minutes of meetings, internal briefings, evidence of financial plans, management and governance reports, and analysis of community feedback.

1.20
We interviewed key staff and some elected members at each council. We also interviewed stakeholders external to each council, including representatives of iwi, hapū, and rūnanga who had been involved with the councils' climate change work.

1.21
This report groups our audit findings in four themes, which broadly cover the criteria in our three lines of inquiry. The four themes are:

  • understanding the impacts and risks of a changing climate;
  • implementing and monitoring responses to those impacts and risks;
  • governance of a council's responses to climate change; and
  • involving and informing communities about the responses.