The primary goal of our project was to support and assist the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) in assessing methods of water management and innovative systems that can have the feasibility to improve water quality in the Greater Wellington Region. In order to achieve this goal, three objectives were proposed.

●   First, our group needed to understand the areas of critical need which were affecting water supply, stormwater, and wastewater management in Wellington.

●   Second, our group identified innovative freshwater management best practices that were being applied around the world.

●   Finally, in our third objective, we gathered feedback about the feasibility of implementation for these solutions.

We hoped these objectives would engage the opinions of our primary stakeholders to take steps toward solving the problem while ensuring that the values of all affected parties were respected.

Objective 1 was designed to assess the areas most in need of help. As we progressed through the process of the interviews, a general pattern began to arise. We began to see active determinants to water quality, such as urbanization, which is causing habitat loss and increased runoff with higher pollutant content. We also came to understand the significance of Māori culture in New Zealand, recognizing that Māori frameworks should be considered in future objectives. Specifically, we must consider these frameworks when talking with experts in Massachusetts and trying to adapt methods from other areas of the world to the particular culture of New Zealand. Finally, we began to see factors that would be essential to success if used properly, or a large handicap if ignored – namely, governmental regulation and public outreach. Regulation, if used properly, can assist in enforcing water quality standards and ensuring that proper protocol is followed. Public outreach and education can inform people on the proper disposal of waste and lead to more motivation to spend resources to achieve infrastructure improvement.

Based on the research we conducted in the Results and Findings section, along with guidance from our Sponsors, we compiled a brief list of important topics to touch upon in our Objective 3 interviews with those in Wellington. The main purpose of these interviews was to run some of those solutions to get a reaction and input on if they are feasible to implement in Wellington. All while taking into account the cultural and political factors that may differ between Wellington and Massachusetts. See Appendix D for objective 3 interview questions. These final discussions with members of the Wellington community helped our group culminate the results of our project into developed recommendations.

When first approaching this project, we expected to complete it with a list of concrete, technical recommendations for the GWRC, such as installing more bioretention swales or putting rain barrels in some specific locations. However, once we became more educated on the complexities of water quality management, our initial idea for the structure of recommendations began to fade away, and we had to reframe our thinking. Water quality management can be seen as a “wicked problem". “Wicked problems” contrast with “tame” problems that can be approached with a specific methodology to produce a concrete answer. As STEM students, we were used to studying “tame” problems within science and engineering, which is why our group had a different initial perspective of the types of recommendations we would be able to make. In our studies, we have been taught to follow a particular process to find a solution, and give a concrete answer to each problem. The many social, political, and economic factors that make up water management could not be simplified into a problem-solving process and required our team to re-evaluate our approach to recommendations.