Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

publication search

You are here > Home / Research / Nutrient Trading Study Group Reviews

Nutrient Trading Study Group Reviews

To assess the Nutrient Trading Study Group (NTSG) process Motu commissioned two reviews of the process, one internal (by Glen Lauder) and one external (by Guy Salmon). These two reviews are available in full below.

The overarching goal of the study group process was to improve the development of our Lake Rotorua nutrient trading scheme prototype. This was to be achieved by clearly outlining the current state of knowledge and the issues at stake, and to propose technical solutions to the challenges where possible. As a secondary goal it was hoped that a process that brought together a range of key stakeholders to discuss nutrient trading would be a first step towards a consensus on how to deal with excess nutrient discharges in Lake Rotorua. These reviews were commissioned with these initial goals in mind but with the aim of documenting the development and progress of the NTSG and also independently assessing the process and how it could be improved for possible future dialogue groups. Both reviews focus on the process of the NTSG and do not consider the outputs of the group.

The Rotorua Nutrient Trading Study Group (NTSG), 2007-2008
Glen Lauder acted as the facilitator of the NTSG and has been involved in the development and running of the group since its inception. His review outlines the development of the group, the progression of discussions and the important steps in relationship and consensus building that have occurred in the NTSG so far.

At the Interface of Research and Implementation: An Assessment of the Work of the Nutrient Trading Study Group (NTSG)
Guy Salmon’s report was commissioned as an independent review of the NTSG process. It has been carried out with input from participants (but not Motu or Glen Lauder). The review assesses the experience of the NTSG and, by relating this to Guy’s knowledge and experience of Nordic governance processes, offers suggestions for improving the process for future dialogue groups.