Show simple item record  

dc.contributor.authorWallace, Philippa Janeen_NZ
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-02T22:59:48Z
dc.date.available2016en_NZ
dc.date.available2016-10-02T22:59:48Z
dc.date.issued2016en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationWallace, P. J. (2016). Aerial conflicts: Drone regulation and gaps in spatial protection. Resource Management Journal, 2016 (August), 17–22.en
dc.identifier.issn1178-5462en_NZ
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/10666
dc.description.abstractDrones 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.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherResource Management Law Association of New Zealand Inc.en_NZ
dc.rightsThis article is published in the Resource Management Journal. Used with permission.
dc.subjectDrones
dc.subjectRemotely piloted aircraft (RPA)
dc.subjectResource Management Act 1991(RMA)
dc.subjectCivil Aviation Act 1990
dc.subjectspatial conflict
dc.subjectwildlife disturbance
dc.titleAerial conflicts: Drone regulation and gaps in spatial protectionen_NZ
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.relation.isPartOfResource Management Journalen_NZ
pubs.begin-page17
pubs.elements-id142634
pubs.end-page22
pubs.issueAugusten_NZ
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato/FASS
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato/FASS/School of Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group/Waikato/FASS/School of Social Sciences/Environmental Planning
pubs.publisher-urlhttp://www.rmla.org.nz/product/rm-journal-aug-2016/en_NZ
pubs.volume2016


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record