On 9 December 2025, the New Zealand Government released the Natural Environment Bill and the Planning Bill. These Bills are intended to repeal and replace the Resource Management Act 1991 by mid-2026. DLA Piper has produced a well-researched, no frills practical guide to help time-poor business come to grips with what it means for them. Read the full government release here
Together, the Bills are designed to provide distinct, but consistent, approaches to environmental management and land-use planning in New Zealand.
This article covers key aspects of the Bills, including the foundational provisions and the Environment Court, National direction and plans, Consenting, Designations, Compliance and enforcement.
The foundational provisions of the Bills introduce new guiding purposes and principles for the resource management regime. The Bills also provide direction on the consideration of effects, and establish a new framework for setting environmental limits and managing natural resources within those limits.
Foundational provisions
Part 2 of both Bills has been expanded, rather than only containing purpose and principles (as under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA)).
Part 2 of the Bills, titled “Foundations”, contains goals, procedural principles, direction regarding the consideration of effects, restrictions on land use (previously sections 9–15C of the RMA) and environmental limits (in the Natural Environment Bill)
The two Bills identify specific goals (set out in clause 11 of both Bills). The goals aim to narrow the scope of the environment and planning systems, while providing clearer direction for decision-making.
There is some overlap between the goals in the Bills, including managing the risks of natural hazards, providing for Māori interests through iwi participation in the development of planning instruments and the development and protection of identified Māori land.
Procedural principles
Both Bills identify the same procedural principles (clause 13). The principles aim to balance cost and feasibility with the scale and significance of projects, ensure documents are in plain English and understandable to the general public and avoid unnecessary repetition between frameworks
Te Tiriti o Waitangi/ Treaty of Waitangi
The RMA requires decision-makers to “take into account” the principles of the Treaty.
This has enabled the courts to interpret the RMA in a way that attempts to protect Māori interests and to require good-faith engagement and consultation.
The Bills propose to remove the reference to Treaty principles and instead set out specific clauses through which the Crown’s responsibilities in relation to Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi are recognised.
The Planning Bill sets out five areas where those responsibilities would apply:
- giving effect to the Māori interests goal in clause 11
- consultation with iwi authorities before notification of a proposed national instrument
specific consultation duties when preparing regional spatial plans - when preparing land-use plans, requiring authorities to have regard to statutory acknowledgements, prepare and change land-use plans in accordance with specific legislation, and
- undertake consultation (including having regard to advice provided)
- imposing duties on decision-makers in relation to designations on identified Māori land
The Natural Environment Bill sets out three areas where those responsibilities would apply:
- giving effect to the Māori interests goal in clause 11
- consultation with iwi authorities before notification of a proposed national instrument
- when preparing natural environment plans, requiring regional councils to have regard to statutory acknowledgements, preparing and changing plans in accordance with specific legislation and undertaking consultation (including having regard to advice provided)
Environmental limits
The Natural Environment Bill provides for the setting of environmental limits for air, freshwater, coastal water, land and soil, indigenous biodiversity
The limits are intended to protect human health and the life-supporting capacity of the natural environment.
Setting environmental limits
Human health limits must be set by the responsible Minister in national standards. Ecosystem health limits must be set by regional councils in natural environment plans. To set or change ecosystem health limits, the council must follow the plan change process.
Environmental limits must be expressed as either a biophysical state for a management unit; or the amount of harm or stress to the natural environment permitted in a management unit.
The Bill sets out decision-making criteria for setting environmental limits. The decision-maker must consider the extent, scale and impacts of any environmental degradation, the trend, direction, and pace of degradation and the difficulty of reversing degradation if action is delayed.
The Bill contains explicit direction that a lack of scientific certainty is no reason to delay a decision needed to prevent significant or irreversible harm to the natural environment.
When Ministers and regional councils set environmental limits, they must consider the existing capacity of the natural environment to withstand or recover from pressures and disturbances and the impact of the proposed limit.
Assessing that impact requires consideration of factors such as the effects on the life-supporting capacity of the natural environment or human health, community needs or aspirations for the economy, society, and the natural environment, the magnitude and spatial extent of any over-allocation of natural resources and alternative ways of providing for natural resource use that are consistent with protecting or enhancing the natural environment (including alternative locations)
Tools for managing natural resources
The proposed methods for managing natural resources within environmental limits are
caps on resource use and action plans.
Caps on resource use are preferred, unless a regional council determines they would not be effective.
A cap on resource use describes the maximum amount of resource use that can occur without breaching an environmental limit. It informs the allocation of resource use in plan rules and permits.
A cap can be expressed as a land use (for example, the extent of an activity), an input (for example, the amount of fertiliser that may be applied) or an output (for example, the volume or rate of contaminant discharge, such as an annual nitrogen discharge cap).
Action plans may provide guidance for decision-making on applications for natural resource permits, reviewing permit conditions or preparing rules in a natural environment plan and/or caps on resource use.
Breaching environmental limits
A regional council must avoid breaching an environmental limit. If there is sufficient evidence that an environmental limit will be breached in the medium to long term, the council must evaluate the likelihood of breach.
If breach is likely, the regional council must take action to avoid it, including by:
- preparing an action plan
- changing its natural environment plan or cap on resource use
- reviewing conditions (specified in the plan) applying to natural resource permits and making necessary adjustments
- changing the way natural resources are allocated; or
- establishing a safety margin.
If an environmental limit is breached, the regional council must publicly notify the breach and its cause. The regional council must then prepare an action plan setting out how it will manage natural resource use to remedy the breach and review the cap on resource use.
Effects
Both Bills provide guidance on the consideration of effects.
The Planning Bill includes effects that decision-makers must disregard, including (notably):
- the internal and external layout of buildings on a site (for example, provision of private open space)
- the demand for, or financial viability of, a project (with some exceptions)
- the visual amenity of a use, development, or building in relation to its character, appearance, aesthetic qualities, or other physical feature
- the social and economic status of future residents of a new development
- views from private property
- effects on landscape
- the effect of setting a precedent
However, the clause is explicit that it does not restrict the management of:
- areas of high natural character within the coastal environment, wetlands, lakes, rivers, and their margins
- outstanding natural landscapes and features
- sites of significant historic heritage
- sites of significance to Māori
- effects of natural hazards
Both Bills also formalise an effects management hierarchy by directing that the decision-maker must consider how adverse effects are to be: avoided; minimised; or remedied “where practicable”; or offset or compensated “where appropriate”.
The Natural Environment Bill directs decision-makers to consider the positive effects of enabling activities, the effects on natural resources, the effects of natural hazards, and any other effect (except those excluded by the Planning Bill).
What issue is the reform looking to solve with foundational provisions?
The Government intends the reform to:
- speed up the delivery of infrastructure (for example, by narrowing the scope of effects subject to assessment and regulation)
- provide more direction to decision-makers (for example, through procedural principles)
- provide a greater role for central government in shaping and overseeing the new system (for example, through Ministerial functions and powers)
- reduce time and cost (including by requiring decision-makers to take all practicable steps to achieve procedural principles)
- safeguard the natural environment and human health through the environmental limits framework
What outstanding questions or issues are there with the foundational provisions
It is likely to take some time for the foundational provisions to come before the courts. Until then, there may be uncertainty as to how competing goals will be balanced (for example, safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems, while enabling the use and development of natural resources).
We also expect a teething period for regional councils setting environmental limits, especially where there may be limited data available on a specific natural resource.
It is a goal of the reform to provide more central government control and direction. Given this, ultimately the greatest uncertainty is the content of the national direction to come.
What do regulators need to know about the foundational provisions
Key points for councils include:
- Effects on character, heritage and amenity are to be disregarded: The Planning Bill does not restrict the management of “sites of significant historic heritage”. However, effects on the visual amenity of a use, development, or building in relation to its character, appearance, aesthetic qualities, or other physical feature, are to be disregarded by decision-makers.
Setting ecosystem health limits: The process for setting ecosystem health limits may be specified in national standards, otherwise councils can follow its own methodology. - New tools to manage natural resources: Caps on resource use and action plans will be used to manage air, water, land, and soil, and indigenous biodiversity within environmental limits
Māori interests: A shift from “taking into account” Treaty principles to a directive clause specifying how the Crown’s responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi are recognised. - More efficient procedures: Balancing costs and feasibility with scale and significance, while ensuring information is succinct, non-repetitive, and in plain language.
- Achieving goals: Regulators must “seek to achieve” the goals set out in the Bills when exercising functions, duties and powers.
What do applicants need to know about the foundational provisions
Key points for applicants include:
- Reduced scope of effects: The scope of effects which can be considered under the Bills is narrowed, which may mean the resource consent application process is less expensive and time consuming for applicants.
- New goals: Decision-makers must seek to achieve new goals, including supporting and enabling economic growth and providing for infrastructure to meet current and expected demand.
- Positive effects of enabling activities: Decision-makers are directed to consider the positive effects of enabling activities.
What is changing with the Environment Court
Schedule 9 of the Planning Bill sets out provisions applying to the Environment Court and its proceedings under both Bills.
The Environment Court will continue to have the same powers, duties and discretions in respect of consents, declarations and enforcement. It will also hear appeals on designations and merits appeals on bespoke provisions in land-use plans.
The ability for the Environment Court to consider direct referrals and nationally significant proposals is removed. Its role in plan making will become more limited, and a Planning Tribunal will be established as a division of the Environment Court.
The Planning Tribunal will have power to review decisions made under the Planning Bill (for procedural and legal error, whether the decision was reasonable in the circumstances, and notification decisions).
It will also be able to exercise declaratory powers under the Planning Bill and the Natural Environment Bill, and any other powers provided for by any other Act.
This report was written by Kerry Anderson, Diana Hartley, Anne Buchanan, Emma Manohar, Kate Rogers, Waldo Randal, Mike Campbell, Jessie MacEwan, Hannah Retimana, Rochelle Lowe of DLA Piper, a law firm with offices in more than 40 countries across the Americas, Asia Pacific, Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
As the first global business law firm in New Zealand, the firm’s clients range from some of the world’s most renowned global brands to the most influential businesses in New Zealand.
Among an illustrious global alumni, its first female partner in 1988 and, at 25 years old, the youngest ever is Dame Helen Winkelmann, now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New Zealand.
