NZ is not adapting fast enough to growing climate risks, leaving communites exposed to damage and costs, says a new report from the Climate Change Commission.
The report recommends six areas for urgent action, including clarity about how adaptation will be paid for, making changes to legislation, and supporting iwi to carry out adaptation efforts.
The Science Media Centre asked experts to comment. Feel free to use these comments in your reporting or follow up with the contact details provided. Previous expert reactions on climate adaptation can be found here.
Dr Nathanael Melia, Founding Director of Climate Prescience Ltd & Adjunct Senior Research Fellow at the New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute, Victoria University of Wellington, comments:
“It is vital and welcome that the Climate Change Commission continues to pursue climate-change adaptation: communicating risks to government and independently monitoring progress, and the lack of it, under the National Adaptation Plan.
“There are valuable population and infrastructure-based exposure mapping statistics within the report, and the report is strongest where the science is clearest. The case for increased coastal flooding is clear. As the planet warms, oceans absorb heat and expand, while land ice melts; both raise sea levels. When this rising baseline coincides with high tides and storm conditions, damage to coastal homes and infrastructure becomes increasingly likely. Because so many New Zealanders live and work near the coast, we face serious and vexing questions about adaptation, insurance availability and retreat. The relative simplicity of thermal expansion leaves governments with an uncomfortable certainty: difficult and unpopular decisions will be required soon.
“The report’s limitations are not a failure of expertise in the Commission or among New Zealand scientists. They reflect the woeful funding lottery of the past decade, combined with climate-science questions that are too often narrow, compromised and asked at the last minute. The extreme-heat maps make that problem vivid. It highlights that the largest extreme heat is around Aoraki/Mt Cook; this is entirely scientifically self-consistent. But it is answering a question that is completely inappropriate for the Climate Change Commission, which I blame on the rush to obtain answers to narrow, predefined questions.
“The inland-flooding results raise a related concern. The infographic shows enormous spatial variation in exposure between regions, apparently much greater than the climate change difference between 1°C and 2°C, or between 2°C and 3°C, of warming. That makes me ask how strongly these results are conditioned by the geography and historical basis of the model, rather than by the incremental climate-change signal it is intended to illuminate. It also raises a basic question of scale: are these risks best understood and managed locally, or through national coordination and allocation? Presenting physical flood processes through tidy regional and territorial-authority boundaries illustrates this conundrum. Extreme-rainfall events do not respect such boundaries; many follow rivers, and boundaries themselves often run along them and flood both sides.
“I question whether this last-minute collision of the natural sciences and bureaucracy is the right way to frame either the research or the response. I feel that national coordination is essential, and putting all the responsibility on local decision-makers is akin to Pontius Pilate washing his hands, symbolically abdicating responsibility.
“The National Science Challenges provided mission coordination and field-specific expertise to guide research priorities and their policy interpretation. Australia has sustained a succession of exactly the sort of innovation, coordination, and focus we need; the ARC Centres of Excellence have funded successive centres for Climate System Science, Climate Extremes and now Weather of the 21st Century.
“New Zealand badly needs comparable, durable mission-led climate and weather research, including all the associated fields needed for robust climate adaptation. The current funding vacuum has degraded our ability to ask and frame these questions of national significance, let alone give our scientists anywhere near adequate resources to answer them.”
Conflict of interest: “Founding Director of the Independent Research Organisation Climate Prescience Ltd, which receives government funding for climate research.”
Dr Shaun Awatere (Ngāti Porou), Kaihautū Research Impact Leader, Bioeconomy Science Institute, comments:
“The impacts of climate change are becoming increasingly visible in Aotearoa and around the world. In recent years, New Zealand has experienced severe weather events, including major flooding and landslides, while communities overseas have faced extreme heat and wildfires. Forecasts also indicate the potential for El Niño conditions, which can influence weather patterns across the Pacific and increase climate-related risks in New Zealand like drought. Together, these trends highlight the growing importance of preparing for a future characterised by more frequent and severe climate hazards.
“Against this backdrop, the Climate Change Commission’s progress report on the first National Adaptation Plan provides an important assessment of how Aotearoa is responding to climate risks. For Māori, many of the report’s findings reflect challenges that hapū and iwi have been raising for some time. Historical inequities and ongoing socioeconomic disparities can increase exposure and vulnerability to climate impacts in some Māori communities. Many marae, urupā, and culturally significant sites are located in areas that face increasing climate-related risks. While there have been efforts to support Māori adaptation initiatives, funding and support mechanisms remain uneven and may not yet match the scale and complexity of the challenges facing communities.
“Supporting Māori adaptation is both an equity issue and an opportunity to strengthen resilience more broadly. The Commission’s report recognises the important role that Māori organisations, iwi, and hapū play in climate adaptation and emergency response. During significant weather events, marae have often served as hubs for shelter, welfare support, and community coordination. Across the country, Māori-led environmental initiatives are contributing to the protection and restoration of coastal areas, freshwater systems, and other important natural resources, but are often small scale and under-resourced. Strengthening the capacity of hapū and iwi to care for their taonga can also contribute to the resilience and wellbeing of wider communities.
“The report also highlights the importance of long-term planning, collaboration, and effective governance in responding to climate risks. Adaptation requires approaches that consider the interests of future generations and recognise the connections between communities and the natural environment. Building resilience will depend on strong relationships among central government, local government, iwi, hapū, and communities. The Commission notes that effective partnership requires meaningful engagement, shared decision-making where appropriate, and processes that reflect Te Tiriti o Waitangi commitments.
“Hapū and iwi bring valuable knowledge, experience, and leadership to adaptation planning. Māori have long managed environmental change and maintained relationships with land, water, and natural resources across generations. As climate risks grow, there is an opportunity to better support Māori-led adaptation through sustained investment, improved access to information and data, and stronger involvement in decision-making processes. Strengthening these foundations can help ensure that Māori communities, and Aotearoa as a whole, are better prepared for the challenges ahead.”
Conflict of interest: Conflict of interest statement yet to be received.