Port development in Nelson : externalities and planning

Research Problem: The Nelson Harbour Board has proposed five development options for the future provision of port facilities for the Nelson region and a Cost Benefit Analysis has been performed for four of the options. It has been assumed that the viewpoint from which the analysis was conducted was that of the Nelson Harbour Board as provider of port facilities. As a consequence of adopting this viewpoint, many costs and benefits associated with the development were external to the analysis. Because the Harbour Board wishes to incorporate regional objectives in its overall appraisal of the options, there is a need to identify the external costs and benefits created by the development options. This research had two goals. They were to: - identify the externalities that are related to the proposed port development options and the groups bearing the costs and receiving benefits; and - discuss how information about the externalities of development can be used in making decisions about the proposed development options. Three methods were used to obtain information. They were: a literature review; 'key-person' interviews; and a public opinion survey. The three methods yielded different types of information and all three proved valuable in providing information to meet the research goals. The information resulting from the literature review provides a list and detailed discussion of potential impacts of port development. Literature concerning the Nelson region indicates issues and potential externalities that are of particular relevance to the Nelson situation. The information gained from 'key-person' interviews allows the preparation of a list of externalities of particular relevance to the Nelson region and external costs and benefits that distinguish between the options are identified. The interviews also prompted considerable discussion of appropriate means of dealing with the problem of externalities. The importance of planning, good information and the identification of community values are noted. The results of the public opinion survey yield a large amount of information including: residents' responses to seven externalities identified by 'key' people; extensive lists of externalities identified as being associated with each development option; an indication of the general public's overall ranking of the development options; and an indication of opinions held by the public generally regarding port development. The project evaluation approach provided by Cost Benefit Analysis is discussed and the particular analysis performed by the Nelson Harbour Board is reviewed. A number of problems in the Harbour Board's analysis are identified and discussed. The possibility of performing a Cost Benefit Analysis from the viewpoint of the region and thus internalising many of the externalities identified by the literature review, 'key-person' interviews and the public opinion survey is discussed. This course of action would involve several difficulties if it were to be done sufficiently well to provide 'good' information for the decision-making process. Many of the externalities identified are incommensurables. These present a problem for analysis and decision-making. Three general approaches for dealing with incommensurables are presented and discussed. Planning and decision-making processes are seen as appropriate means for dealing with the problem of externalities and in particular, those that are incommensurable. Planning and decision-making processes are shown to be based on goals and values. The values relevant to the planning of port Nelson are discussed and the importance of decision-making that is responsive to changes in values is noted. The planning and decision-making processes of the Nelson Harbour Board and Nelson Bays United Council are outlined and opportunities for the information provided by this research to be incorporated are discussed.