Research Commons
      • Browse 
        • Communities & Collections
        • Titles
        • Authors
        • By Issue Date
        • Subjects
        • Types
        • Series
      • Help 
        • About
        • Collection Policy
        • OA Mandate Guidelines
        • Guidelines FAQ
        • Contact Us
      • My Account 
        • Sign In
        • Register
      View Item 
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Arts and Social Sciences
      • Arts and Social Sciences Papers
      • View Item
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Arts and Social Sciences
      • Arts and Social Sciences Papers
      • View Item
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

      Aerial conflicts: Drone regulation and gaps in spatial protection

      Wallace, Philippa Jane
      Thumbnail
      Files
      Aerial conflicts.pdf
      Published version, 298.4Kb
      Find in your library  
      Citation
      Export citation
      Wallace, P. J. (2016). Aerial conflicts: Drone regulation and gaps in spatial protection. Resource Management Journal, 2016 (August), 17–22.
      Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/10666
      Abstract
      Drones have undoubtedly arrived in New Zealand landscapes, but less apparent is that adequate regulatory responses have accompanied them. The purpose of this article is to examine the adequacy of New Zealand law and policy in managing the adverse environmental effects of Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA). Currently regulated by the Civil Aviation Act 1990 (CAA 1990) and associated aviation rules, it is argued that this approach fails to sufficiently capture all potential adverse effects. As a result of exemptions for overflying aircraft the Resource Management Act 1991(RMA), the principal legislation governing resource use in the New Zealand environment, is unable to fill the breach. Instead, the CAA 1990 framework applies, rendering an inconsistent regulatory approach exacerbated by rules which rest operational control largely in the hands of property owners. In this manner opportunity to comprehensively manage spatial conflicts is reduced and spatial protection from potential effects is compromised. A better approach is to include RPA operations within the ambit of the RMA, enabling a permissive regime with appropriate controls to manage potential land use/spatial conflicts.
      Date
      2016
      Type
      Journal Article
      Publisher
      Resource Management Law Association of New Zealand Inc.
      Rights
      This article is published in the Resource Management Journal. Used with permission.
      Collections
      • Arts and Social Sciences Papers [1403]
      Show full item record  

      Usage

      Downloads, last 12 months
      94
       
       

      Usage Statistics

      For this itemFor all of Research Commons

      The University of Waikato - Te Whare Wānanga o WaikatoFeedback and RequestsCopyright and Legal Statement