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
      • Law
      • Law Papers
      • View Item
      •   Research Commons
      • University of Waikato Research
      • Law
      • Law Papers
      • View Item
      JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

      Keeping pace with technology: drones, disturbance and policy deficiency

      Wallace, Philippa Jane; Martin, Ross; White, Iain
      Thumbnail
      Files
      Wallace Martin &White Keeping Pace with Technology Drones Disturbance and Policy Deficiency Submitted version.docx.pdf
      Submitted version, 547.1Kb
      DOI
       10.1080/09640568.2017.1353957
      Link
       doi.org
      Find in your library  
      Citation
      Export citation
      Wallace, P. J., Martin, R., & White, I. (2017). Keeping pace with technology: drones, disturbance and policy deficiency. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, -online. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2017.1353957
      Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/11292
      Abstract
      This paper analyses regulatory responses to rapid intensification of the use of drones/remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) in the context of wildlife protection. Benefits and disadvantages of the technology to wildlife are examined, before three key limitations in policy and law are identified: failure to address wildlife disturbance in RPA regulation; reliance upon insufficiently comprehensive existing wildlife protection legislation to manage disturbance effects; and limited species-specific research on disturbance. A New Zealand case study further reveals an inconsistent regulatory approach struggling to keep pace with innovation, inadequate regulatory capture of environmental effects due to exemption as “aircraft”, and no recognition that specific geographical locations, such as coastal areas, distinguished by recreational pressures and high numbers of threatened species require special consideration. Recommendations include acknowledging the impact on wildlife in policy, gap analysis of legal arrangements for protection from disturbance (including airspace), and adoption of minimum approach distances to threatened species.
      Date
      2017
      Type
      Journal Article
      Publisher
      Taylor & Francis Group
      Rights
      This is an author’s submitted version of an article published in the journal: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. © 2017 Newcastle University.
      Collections
      • Law Papers [303]
      Show full item record  

      Usage

      Downloads, last 12 months
      153
       
       
       

      Usage Statistics

      For this itemFor all of Research Commons

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