title: Managing agricultural non-point source pollution in the European Union, New Zealand, and Vietnam

authors: Luong Nguyen, Sy

abstract: The world population explosion has led to the unprecedented demand for food. To ensure food security for more than seven billion people, the development of intensive agriculture appears to be inevitable. However, these days, excessive intensive farming becomes a leading threat to our environment as non-point sources of pollution. That situation poses an urgent need for a legal management mechanism for the pollution from intensive agriculture. In such developed countries as in the European Union, New Zealand, agricultural production shall comply with stringent environmental regulations. However, though one of the most productive agriculture baskets globally, Vietnam lacks a firm legal basis for agricultural management. 
The research's primary objective is to study and propose an optimal legal institution for Vietnam’s management of non-point pollution, assuring the harmonization between economic development and environmental protection. The author would respectively address key research questions, including:
1. What is agricultural non-point source pollution? How are the trends of non-point pollution in the EU, New Zealand and Vietnam?
2. What are the approaches of pollution control under international law, and the European Union, New Zealand, and Vietnam systems?
3. What is the difference between the European Union, New Zealand, and Vietnam's pollution legislation? Recommendations for Vietnam’s laws. 
The research scope would cover two primary fields, including livestock and crop farming, and other water polluters as well. It would then vary from international law to national laws on non-point pollution, with the focus on the European Union and New Zealand systems. Finally, the status of the current law on intensive farming in Vietnam will be concentrated. A comparison would obtain shortcomings of Vietnam’s laws compared to the other systems; thus, a feasible approach for Vietnam would be developed.

text: Managing agricultural non-point source pollution in the European Union, New Zealand, and Vietnam The world population explosion has led to the unprecedented demand for food. To ensure food security for more than seven billion people, the development of intensive agriculture appears to be inevitable. However, these days, excessive intensive farming becomes a leading threat to our environment as non-point sources of pollution. That situation poses an urgent need for a legal management mechanism for the pollution from intensive agriculture. In such developed countries as in the European Union, New Zealand, agricultural production shall comply with stringent environmental regulations. However, though one of the most productive agriculture baskets globally, Vietnam lacks a firm legal basis for agricultural management. 
The research's primary objective is to study and propose an optimal legal institution for Vietnam’s management of non-point pollution, assuring the harmonization between economic development and environmental protection. The author would respectively address key research questions, including:
1. What is agricultural non-point source pollution? How are the trends of non-point pollution in the EU, New Zealand and Vietnam?
2. What are the approaches of pollution control under international law, and the European Union, New Zealand, and Vietnam systems?
3. What is the difference between the European Union, New Zealand, and Vietnam's pollution legislation? Recommendations for Vietnam’s laws. 
The research scope would cover two primary fields, including livestock and crop farming, and other water polluters as well. It would then vary from international law to national laws on non-point pollution, with the focus on the European Union and New Zealand systems. Finally, the status of the current law on intensive farming in Vietnam will be concentrated. A comparison would obtain shortcomings of Vietnam’s laws compared to the other systems; thus, a feasible approach for Vietnam would be developed.

year: 2021

title: Stratigraphy and sedimentology of Pliocene limestones, Wairoa district, northern Hawke's Bay

authors: Jiang, Zichun (Jared)

subjects: Pliocene limestones

abstract: This project documents the sedimentary geology of a shallow-marine, limestone-bearing Pliocene succession (Mangaheia Group; up to 1.5 km thick) within the Wairoa Syncline, northern Hawke’s Bay. The primary focus is three cool-water “Te Aute type” limestone units in the succession – the early Opoitian age Opoiti Limestone (5-10 m thick), the late Opoitian age Whakapunake Limestone (30-100m thick) and the Waipipian age Tahaenui Limestone (10-30 m thick) – that form locally spectacular outcrops in the Wairoa district. Lithostratigraphically, the limestones are given formational status while the encasing siliciclastic sandstones and mudstones are lumped into a newly defined Wairoa Formation which can be informally classified as A, B, C or D depending on position with respect to the three limestone formations. Three field lithofacies groups – limestone (L), sandstone (S) and mudstone (M) – are erected, and variability within these groups is recognised by subdivision into three lithofacies types, L1-3, S1-3 and M1-3. The massive Opoiti Limestone (35-65% CaCO₃; L3 and S2) comprises poorly sorted, variably sandy, barnacle, epifaunal bivalve and locally brachiopod debris well-cemented by low-Mg calcite (LMC) (micro)sparite and micrite. Opoiti Limestone is a bioclastic quartzofeldspathic arenite to biosparrudite, occasionally dolomite-bearing. Occasional calcite infilled biomoulds are testament to former aragonite molluscan skeletons. Opoiti Limestone unconformably overlies Wairoa Formation A (2-200 m thick), and grades up into differentially cemented mudstone of Wairoa Formation B (700-800 m thick) which is unconformably overlain by Whakapunake Limestone. The late Opoitian Whakapunake Limestone (up to 85% CaCO₃; L1, L2 and S1) comprises (cross) bedded and differentially cemented interbeds of fossiliferous and more siliciclastic-rich facies. The limestones are typically poorly sorted bivalve-barnacle biomicrite to biosparrudite cemented by variable amounts of fringe and later equant LMC (micro)spar, sometimes including abundant zoned stoichiometric dolomite rhombohedra. Fabrics are moderately open to tight with some conspicuous limonitised glauconite. Whakapunake Limestone passes conformably up into massive calcareous mudstone of Wairoa Formation C (latest Opoitian; >10 m thick). A shallow angular unconformity separates the Whakapunake Limestone and/or Wairoa Formation C from the overlying well-cemented flaggy Tahaenui Limestone (50-80% CaCO₃; L1), a bivalve-barnacle biosparite to biosparrudite with some neomorphosed former aragonite skeletons and a moderately open fabric. In this limestone early formed dull luminescent isopachous fringing cements (host specific) precede variable pore occlusion by dirty LMC (micro)spar and/or micrite. 
The three limestone formations accumulated on the eastern side of a narrow forearc basin seaway (Ruataniwha Strait) within the Hikurangi subduction complex atop and about antiform upthrust ridges in an active convergent margin setting. Tectonics was the main control on the location and mainly lensoidal geometry of the limestone units, while Pliocene glacioeustatic sea-level fluctuations played a secondary role. Cross-bedded and interbedded limestonesandstone facies attest to deposition under the influence of strong tidal flows and repeated storm events that produced high-energy hydraulic conditions and reworking of variably mixed terrigenous-skeletal sands in the shallow (<30 m) seaway during Pliocene. Redeposition down flank from antiform summits provided accommodation space for sediment build-up.
The calcite dominated cool-water skeletal make-up of these limestones, combined with their relatively shallow burial depths (150-700 m), has resulted in them retaining significant macroporosity (up to 20%). Consequently, as well as having application as a lime or hard rock resource they also have reservoir potential for hydrocarbons in the subsurface.

text: Stratigraphy and sedimentology of Pliocene limestones, Wairoa district, northern Hawke's Bay This project documents the sedimentary geology of a shallow-marine, limestone-bearing Pliocene succession (Mangaheia Group; up to 1.5 km thick) within the Wairoa Syncline, northern Hawke’s Bay. The primary focus is three cool-water “Te Aute type” limestone units in the succession – the early Opoitian age Opoiti Limestone (5-10 m thick), the late Opoitian age Whakapunake Limestone (30-100m thick) and the Waipipian age Tahaenui Limestone (10-30 m thick) – that form locally spectacular outcrops in the Wairoa district. Lithostratigraphically, the limestones are given formational status while the encasing siliciclastic sandstones and mudstones are lumped into a newly defined Wairoa Formation which can be informally classified as A, B, C or D depending on position with respect to the three limestone formations. Three field lithofacies groups – limestone (L), sandstone (S) and mudstone (M) – are erected, and variability within these groups is recognised by subdivision into three lithofacies types, L1-3, S1-3 and M1-3. The massive Opoiti Limestone (35-65% CaCO₃; L3 and S2) comprises poorly sorted, variably sandy, barnacle, epifaunal bivalve and locally brachiopod debris well-cemented by low-Mg calcite (LMC) (micro)sparite and micrite. Opoiti Limestone is a bioclastic quartzofeldspathic arenite to biosparrudite, occasionally dolomite-bearing. Occasional calcite infilled biomoulds are testament to former aragonite molluscan skeletons. Opoiti Limestone unconformably overlies Wairoa Formation A (2-200 m thick), and grades up into differentially cemented mudstone of Wairoa Formation B (700-800 m thick) which is unconformably overlain by Whakapunake Limestone. The late Opoitian Whakapunake Limestone (up to 85% CaCO₃; L1, L2 and S1) comprises (cross) bedded and differentially cemented interbeds of fossiliferous and more siliciclastic-rich facies. The limestones are typically poorly sorted bivalve-barnacle biomicrite to biosparrudite cemented by variable amounts of fringe and later equant LMC (micro)spar, sometimes including abundant zoned stoichiometric dolomite rhombohedra. Fabrics are moderately open to tight with some conspicuous limonitised glauconite. Whakapunake Limestone passes conformably up into massive calcareous mudstone of Wairoa Formation C (latest Opoitian; >10 m thick). A shallow angular unconformity separates the Whakapunake Limestone and/or Wairoa Formation C from the overlying well-cemented flaggy Tahaenui Limestone (50-80% CaCO₃; L1), a bivalve-barnacle biosparite to biosparrudite with some neomorphosed former aragonite skeletons and a moderately open fabric. In this limestone early formed dull luminescent isopachous fringing cements (host specific) precede variable pore occlusion by dirty LMC (micro)spar and/or micrite. 
The three limestone formations accumulated on the eastern side of a narrow forearc basin seaway (Ruataniwha Strait) within the Hikurangi subduction complex atop and about antiform upthrust ridges in an active convergent margin setting. Tectonics was the main control on the location and mainly lensoidal geometry of the limestone units, while Pliocene glacioeustatic sea-level fluctuations played a secondary role. Cross-bedded and interbedded limestonesandstone facies attest to deposition under the influence of strong tidal flows and repeated storm events that produced high-energy hydraulic conditions and reworking of variably mixed terrigenous-skeletal sands in the shallow (<30 m) seaway during Pliocene. Redeposition down flank from antiform summits provided accommodation space for sediment build-up.
The calcite dominated cool-water skeletal make-up of these limestones, combined with their relatively shallow burial depths (150-700 m), has resulted in them retaining significant macroporosity (up to 20%). Consequently, as well as having application as a lime or hard rock resource they also have reservoir potential for hydrocarbons in the subsurface.

year: 2011

title: Looking for the Tikanga in technology education

authors: Knoef, Bernard John

subjects: Maori

abstract: This dissertation is dedicated to understanding how it would feel to be disconnected from their own past and devalued as a race by colonialism; that is, how would it feel to be Māori in my class?
This dissertation aims to support New Zealand teachers of Technology to better understand how they can create a curriculum for Technology that is more connected to aspects of Māori culture and in doing so improve learning outcomes for Māori. At the same time it explores how Pākehā students could gain a better understanding of the tikanga that guides the essence of what it means to be Māori and what it means to be an honourable Treaty partner with Māori. The 1840 Treaty of Waitangi laid the foundation for a formal respectful relationship between Māori and the British and for the introduction of British rule of law. Despite the intentions of the Treaty being one of equal partnerships between the British and Māori, the Treaty did not eventuate to be the equal nor mutually beneficial agreement that was anticipated by Māori.
Today visible disparities, that exist for Māori across society, are evident in Māori learning outcomes in Aotearoa New Zealand secondary schools. This research explores my own praxis in secondary technology education in collaborating with Māori to incorporate tikanga Māori (Māori customary values and practices) into the classroom. A focus on tikanga and Technology provides opportunities to develop improved understandings of more inclusive learning contexts. This dissertation histories the identity evolution of me, the researcher. The process I utilised is a method of self-examination and identity construction for other technology teachers who want to improve their practices in teaching students who are Māori. This study describes a repositioning process of how I took ownership for self-improvement. To enable an emphasis for this, there is a particular focus on the Nature of Technology strand of the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007, 2017). Pacey (2001) discusses the possibilities of a more people-centred technology with a participatory, ethical experience of technology that values people as well as their environment. In Aotearoa New Zealand, a teacher is encouraged to take personal responsibility for their engagement with an official curriculum (MOE, 2007).
My students and I have embarked on a number of projects that are localised both within our community and in wider society. These projects required us to have an understanding of tikanga. Mead (2016) requires that for educators and leaders to be more effective in what they do, they need to know the protocols that are drawn from the basket of knowledge called tikanga. My research explores ways to aid teachers develop understandings of Te Ao Māori (The Māori world) and the cultural world of Māori learners, with a view to promoting teaching that engages respectfully with, the knowledge of tikanga Māori in New Zealand Technology classrooms.
I have completed many years of teaching, much of which has been in the curriculum area of Technology. I have managed this with only a limited amount of supporting knowledge and understanding of how tikanga Māori could be appropriately and meaningfully, woven into my practice and the practice of my fellow Technology teachers as a result of my leadership. I am non-Māori and have practised as a teacher in New Zealand secondary schools for 29 years. Together with my students, we recently completed a number of Technology projects that involved learning about significant aspects of Māori culture including tikanga Māori. One whole school technology project was to build Te Whare Iti o Te Ako (The Small House of Learning) for our local early childhood centre. Because of this project and other related experiences, I have had the chance to reflect at a very personal level. I have had the opportunity to identify the gaps in my understanding of indigenous knowledge, but also through students participating in these projects, I have witnessed a tremendous engagement of curiosity for learning from both Māori and non- Māori about tikanga Māori. Accordingly, this research study seeks to answer the following questions and supports my intention to become more effective in what I do and how I practise as a non-Māori teacher with both Māori and non-Māori learners.
● As a non-Māori teacher, what did I learn about and from, including tikanga Māori into my pedagogical praxis as a teacher of technology?
o Who did I learn this from and how did I learn this?
o In what ways did these experiences contribute to my understandings of Te Ao Māori?
o How might my experiences support other teachers of technology?
I use Autoethnography to undertake this research which allows me to produce meaningful, accessible and evocative research that is grounded in personal experience (Ellis, Adams & Bochner 2011).

text: Looking for the Tikanga in technology education This dissertation is dedicated to understanding how it would feel to be disconnected from their own past and devalued as a race by colonialism; that is, how would it feel to be Māori in my class?
This dissertation aims to support New Zealand teachers of Technology to better understand how they can create a curriculum for Technology that is more connected to aspects of Māori culture and in doing so improve learning outcomes for Māori. At the same time it explores how Pākehā students could gain a better understanding of the tikanga that guides the essence of what it means to be Māori and what it means to be an honourable Treaty partner with Māori. The 1840 Treaty of Waitangi laid the foundation for a formal respectful relationship between Māori and the British and for the introduction of British rule of law. Despite the intentions of the Treaty being one of equal partnerships between the British and Māori, the Treaty did not eventuate to be the equal nor mutually beneficial agreement that was anticipated by Māori.
Today visible disparities, that exist for Māori across society, are evident in Māori learning outcomes in Aotearoa New Zealand secondary schools. This research explores my own praxis in secondary technology education in collaborating with Māori to incorporate tikanga Māori (Māori customary values and practices) into the classroom. A focus on tikanga and Technology provides opportunities to develop improved understandings of more inclusive learning contexts. This dissertation histories the identity evolution of me, the researcher. The process I utilised is a method of self-examination and identity construction for other technology teachers who want to improve their practices in teaching students who are Māori. This study describes a repositioning process of how I took ownership for self-improvement. To enable an emphasis for this, there is a particular focus on the Nature of Technology strand of the New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007, 2017). Pacey (2001) discusses the possibilities of a more people-centred technology with a participatory, ethical experience of technology that values people as well as their environment. In Aotearoa New Zealand, a teacher is encouraged to take personal responsibility for their engagement with an official curriculum (MOE, 2007).
My students and I have embarked on a number of projects that are localised both within our community and in wider society. These projects required us to have an understanding of tikanga. Mead (2016) requires that for educators and leaders to be more effective in what they do, they need to know the protocols that are drawn from the basket of knowledge called tikanga. My research explores ways to aid teachers develop understandings of Te Ao Māori (The Māori world) and the cultural world of Māori learners, with a view to promoting teaching that engages respectfully with, the knowledge of tikanga Māori in New Zealand Technology classrooms.
I have completed many years of teaching, much of which has been in the curriculum area of Technology. I have managed this with only a limited amount of supporting knowledge and understanding of how tikanga Māori could be appropriately and meaningfully, woven into my practice and the practice of my fellow Technology teachers as a result of my leadership. I am non-Māori and have practised as a teacher in New Zealand secondary schools for 29 years. Together with my students, we recently completed a number of Technology projects that involved learning about significant aspects of Māori culture including tikanga Māori. One whole school technology project was to build Te Whare Iti o Te Ako (The Small House of Learning) for our local early childhood centre. Because of this project and other related experiences, I have had the chance to reflect at a very personal level. I have had the opportunity to identify the gaps in my understanding of indigenous knowledge, but also through students participating in these projects, I have witnessed a tremendous engagement of curiosity for learning from both Māori and non- Māori about tikanga Māori. Accordingly, this research study seeks to answer the following questions and supports my intention to become more effective in what I do and how I practise as a non-Māori teacher with both Māori and non-Māori learners.
● As a non-Māori teacher, what did I learn about and from, including tikanga Māori into my pedagogical praxis as a teacher of technology?
o Who did I learn this from and how did I learn this?
o In what ways did these experiences contribute to my understandings of Te Ao Māori?
o How might my experiences support other teachers of technology?
I use Autoethnography to undertake this research which allows me to produce meaningful, accessible and evocative research that is grounded in personal experience (Ellis, Adams & Bochner 2011).

year: 2019