Consultation on Eligibility Criteria in New Zealand
From EIANZ Wiki
These are the results of a consultation done by Simon Beale of several ecological practitioners in New Zealand. This was to consider the scope of existing eligibility criteria and how they might apply to certification of ecologists.
| SUMMARY | Criteria | Respondent 1 | Respondent 2 | Respondent 3 | Respondent 4 | Respondent 5 |
| We should be careful not to weight this criterion against those with undergraduate degrees. | 1. A relevant ecology related degree | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. Noted the existence of very good taxonomists and field specialists that are nationally recognised but have only have an undergraduate degree, while some with post graduate degrees are not good practitioners. | Concur. | Concur. Worth looking at other tertiary qualifications, for example a Post Graduate Diploma majoring in Ecology from Lincoln, which is a very good course. Others may have studied under-graduate planning, then ecology as a Post-grad or similar. |
| More clarification may be required for people wearing two hats e.g. as an ecologist and environmental planner. This situation is not unusual and is a reflection on the nature of our roles but also the market place. It would be unsustainable for a number of us to be reliant solely on ecological work to meet our budgets. | 2. Five years of full time experience in ecological practice during the last ten years | Need to define ecological practice. Considers this to be a person who is a good ecologist who has put in ecological techniques into practice. Applies to people who understand ecosystems and processes. This seems to imply an accumulation of five year experience over the last ten years. |
Comfortable with this requirement particularly if the applicant wants to be part of a specialist group. Essential you are full time. | Possibly discriminates against parents. What about those who undertake unpaid work for a Trust such as field work or writing restoration plans. | This requires more clarification especially if one is part time or has time off. Does every project have to be critiqued? Currently involved in policy development on the biodiversity component of Horizons Regional Plan as a Council Officer/Expert Witness, such as presenting S42A reports at Hearings. | Keep it broad, like in the CEnVP wording. Every application will be unique. There is no use in constructing a box that won't fit some worthy applicants. |
| General agreement. | 3. Statement of ethical conduct. | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. |
| Seems to require a degree of flexibility. | 4. Nomination by three respected ecological professionals who are willing to support application | How do you determine who is an ecological professional? | Concur. This raises an important point though. Are there enough ecologists out there? Some degree of flexibility is therefore required that allows other professionals to be used who are certified in other areas and respected in their own field. | Concur. Strong parallels with other professional societies, e.g. The Royal Society. | This requires some flexibility. Do these professionals need to be certified? Issue of subjectivity as to determining respected professionals. | There are actually relatively few consultant ecologists around, and although we know each other we are actually working in isolation in competing businesses. A referee for your work should be the person who works WITH you (e.g. planner, engineer), or receives work FROM you (private client, councils, DoC etc). I think only 1 ecologist reference for skills, then 2 other referees to vouch for professional conduct and performance. |
| We may need to bear in my mind the differences between academia, research organisations and consultancy firms in terms of outputs. It could be unfair to give more weighting to research publications over ecological assessment reports. | 5. Evidence in the form of referee statements (at least two), publication in ecology citations, CV, ecological reports etc that the candidate is a respected competent, ethical and active member of the ecology profession | It is important to have referees who can verify they are an ecologist. Ideally there should be two ecologists on the interview panel. | This requirement is a bit loose. Requires more of a structure around the work portfolio, e.g. research, management /restoration plans, evidence, EIA’s etc. | Concur. | How would these criteria be weighted such as a publication versus a report? In a number of cases a report will be prepared under the organisation name rather than the individual e.g DOC and Council reports. | Concerned mainly with any expectations for research publications being expected, when basically all of the work Consultant Ecologists do is contract reports. These are a good measure of proficiency in ecological practice though and should be included as publications. The referees can refer to these publications, and therefore this section could be incorporated into 4 above. |
| Further clarification and discussion may be required to include flexibility. Budgetary constraints can for example, prevent out of town conference attendance. | 6. Ongoing commitment to training and professional development in ecology (minimum of 100 points of CPD over a two year period) | Needs further clarification given the difference roles/functions between, for example, academia and private firms. | Concur. | Concur. What constitutes training? It can be difficult to get to do short courses particularly when working in a senior/ full time position. Such positions do however allow for some lecturing and mentoring of junior staff. | It can be very difficult to get to a conference due to budgetary issues and in some organisations there is no in-house training.
It is important to note that ecologists work in many different roles. |
Concur. Ongoing professional development is essential for practitioners to remain aware of best practice etc, and to network with other professionals. Good business practice anyway. We undertake CPD in complementary programmes also (e.g. GIS training, RMA planning seminars etc) which could be considered, although they are not strictly honing ecological skill, just the application of the skill. |
| General agreement. | 7. A signed (and witnessed) statement of claim covering qualifications, experience, ethics, commitment and accuracy of materials provided to the certification board. | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. | Concur. |
| Availability of panels members for CEnvP applicant interviews is an issue. Careful thought needs to be given to the location and availability of ecological professionals in NZ who are currently certified. | Other Comments | There is a clear need for a disciplinary process to deal with a person who is not acting professionally even if they may be certified. Cited the NZIF and NZ Institute of Landscape Architects. | Interview provides opportunity to provide for some degree of flexibility in assessing an applicant. This will be governed by the members on the panel. | I agree that the certification should come under the existing CEnvP structure. It is important to bear in mind that many consultant ecologists have planning or other expertise. This certification should apply to 'ecological practitioners' or some like term which refers to a person applying ecological expertise, to avoid confusion with an 'ecologist' who technically just studies ecology. This certification is about supporting practitioners of ecology who wish to engender confidence in a marketplace by essentially having colleagues giving them the thumbs up. |
