SLM Hill Country Erosion Fund Stage 1 Evaluation Framework

The Stage 1 Evaluation Framework will be used by the Inter-Departmental Panel to assess the eligibility of applications to the SLM Hill Country Erosion Fund when evaluated against the Stage 1 Eligibility Criteria.

  Eligibility criteria Guideline for proposal assessment Guide to information requirements
E1 The problem is significant and is considered beyond the scope of the local authority because it:   The problem is the ongoing risk arising from accelerated erosion.
a
  • has significant or potential national effects (positive or negative); or
 Loss of income compared with regional income. Needs to be consistent with adverse events criteria.
b
  • requires solutions at a multi-regional scale; or
 Problem affects more than one region. Does source of the problem affect at least 10 000 hectares and go over at least one regional boundary?

Scale needs to be significant and coordination required.

c
  • the problem affects an area of national significance (i.e. people outside the region place a significant value or receive significant benefit from the resource).
 Affects features of significance outside the region. For example:
  • tourism icons;
  • key infrastructure;
  • high-value water bodies;
  • landscape values;
  • structures or features identified as significant in regional or district plans.
OR Eligibility criteria Indicator Guidelines or
guide questions
E2 The problem may currently (or may in the near future) be beyond the capacity of local government because:   Consider whether the four sub-criteria combined mean it is beyond the capacity of the region.
a
  • the sheer scale of the problem when considered on a total catchment basis is beyond the council’s resources;
Number of rate payers affected, total rate contribution and percent of land prone to erosion within the target area. Identify the extent of the target area, the number involved and the extent of the catchment affected.
b
  • the region lacks the income from its rating base, other assets or cannot prioritise resources to address the problem and carry out its other functions;
 Number of rate payers (compared to other regions). Population density.
Existing rating level (percent capital value) (compared with other councils). Rates vs Capital value.
Percent of existing rate committed to SLM. Indication of existing rates allocation.
Level of income distribution from shareholding in commercial ventures compared with other regions. Applicant must demonstrate that they are applying their own resources to the problem and the distribution of those resources compared with other regions.
c
  • the region lacks the people and skills to implement a solution;
 Specialist skills sets needed but not present in region (council or commercial), for example, engineering, land management, software.

Number and nature of specialist technologies required.

 Identify staff numbers, use of consultants and skill sets possible in comparison with other regions.
d
  • the problem is longstanding and was inherited by the regional council at the time of its establishment and it is therefore at a disadvantage compared with other regions.
 Length of time the problem has been affecting region. Provide listing of problems, activities to date, the degree of success or failure and barriers to progress.
AND Eligibility criteria Indicator Guidelines or
guide questions
E3 The problem must be quantified in environmental and economic terms. The costs and benefits of the proposal need to be clearly described to enable a balanced judgment of whether the proposal is rational to fund from an economic perspective. Economic, social, cultural and environmental benefits of the proposal must be specified as outputs and outcomes. Outputs: Could include level of participation and activity.

Outcomes: Could include land area treated, catchments and streams protected and the economic and social impact on the region.

AND Eligibility criteria Indicator Guidelines or
guide questions
E4 The proposed solution is consistent with achieving Government’s desired SLM outcomes. Maintenance of the potential of New Zealand soils for a range of uses for present and future generations. The proposed solution needs to demonstrate which of Government’s priorities for SLM are being addressed.

In summary they are:

protection for soils;

community income and viability;

causes of erosion;

water quality issues;

whole of catchment in approach to stabilising land, infrastructure and flood protection.

The adoption of land management skills and the application of appropriate technologies to enable individuals and communities to provide for their social, cultural and economic well-being.
The avoidance, mitigation, and remediation of the impacts of land related hazards, including flooding, subsidence erosion and siltation.
The maintenance of catchments to provide high quality water resources for downstream users and for users of coastal spaces(inter-tidal areas, seabed, water), and
Protection of communities and infrastructure.

 

Contact for Enquiries

HCE Project Adviser
Natural Resources Group
MAF Policy
PO Box 2526
WELLINGTON 6140
Telephone: (04) 894 0632
Contact this person

 
Display a printer friendly version of this page Print friendly




Biosecurity New Zealand Web Site

New Zealand Fast Forward