Because the special conditions of the coast have not always been understood and given due regard by programme designers, economic planners, project engineers, and international donors and banks, there have been losses of revenue, jobs, food, and foreign exchange earnings potential in many coastal countries that could have been avoided. ICZM programmes are designed to correct this situation.
ICZM is a powerful mechanism for allocation of natural resources based upon sound environmental and socio-economic planning and evaluation. It requires networking with all relevant government activity, including national economic development planning.
In this report two types of planning are discussed - strategic planning and master planning. Strategic planning is covered in this section and master plan preparation in the next.
As the initial step, strategic planning considers problems and opportunities regarding resources, economic development activities, and societal needs in the coastal area and devises a strategy to accomplish ICZM objectives. A major purpose of strategic planning is to devise a programme that will promote compatibility between economic development and the long term environmental and socio-economic needs of the community. But compatible multiple-use objectives should always be the main focus and the strategic plan should establish a method to eschew short-term development tactics in favour of long-term development and resource conservation strategies.
Planners know that the best of plans often remain on bookshelves and are not put into practice, usually because of a lack of political commitment to the socio-economic changes the plan would require. It is much easier for decision-makers to authorize a planning initiative than to implement its provisions. Therefore, the maximum of commitment to the planning outcome should be secured from decision-makers at the beginning.
For professional planners, understanding the benefits and mechanisms of ICZM type programmes should be easy, as mentioned previously. On one hand, ICZM programmes are distinctive because the coast is a landform with such different resources and unique problems. On the other hand, the ICZM process of programme development is a familiar one. Regional economic development planners and resource planners, particularly, should feel comfortable with ICZM because it deals with designated areas, the variety of resources and economic sectors therein, and other compatible subjects.
In addition to control of development, ICZM has to consider the protection of environmental values. Environmental protection enters into the management equation as including the important, but less tangible, values of nature protection and biodiversity conservation. Their inclusion in an ICZM programme could be controversial because many countries tend to give the priority to tangible yields, products, and consumption. Yet there is a general global awakening to the need for environmental maintenance together with changes in national accounting procedures.
It is important to recognize that ICZM is oriented more toward management of development than to management of resources. The example of fisheries will illustrate the difference. In most countries there is a department of fisheries which has responsibility for the management of coastal and marine fish stocks (as common property resources). This department implements conservation by prescribing closed areas for fishing, closed seasons for certain species, prohibitions on certain methods of fishing, and other controls. ICZM does not usually pre-empt this resource management role. Instead, it supplements and enhances the work of the fisheries managers by controlling coastal development and resource uses (such as pollution discharge or coral mining) which conflict with fisheries and which could have an adverse impact on fish stocks and particularly on the critical habitats which provide life support for fish species. In fact, some State ICZM programmes in the USA explicitly separate development management from resources management.
The strategy plan lays the foundation for the legislation or the executive order that is needed to authorize the ICZM programme (the programme development stage follows). The plan should: 1) assign responsibility for the programme to a particular agency; 2) authorize the funding necessary for programme development; 3) state clearly the objectives of the ICZM programme; 4) recommend a method for collaboration among the various sectoral agencies and private interests involved; 5) state the time limits involved for various stages of programme development; and 6) require a specific programme development, or tactical planning and organizing process.
Every country evaluating the potential of an ICZM-type programme will have its own special approach to conservation of resources and will be facing its own distinct array of coastal issues. Nevertheless, the first priority has to be putting ICZM on the country's political agenda and obtaining favourable action on a mandate for conservation. The programme content will vary from country to country according to needs, traditions, norms, and governmental systems (see Box 6.1).
According to Chua Thia-Eng (pers. comm.), a considerable amount of groundwork has to be done in any country to build up public awareness and political climate in favour of any attempt at environmental management for attaining sustainable development. In developing countries, the avialability of outside funding is often a key factor in building awareness. After awareness and political sensitizing, strategic planning comes in, followed by policy formulation and programme development.
While each country's programme will be unique, there are several basic stages in the generation of an ICZM programme which should be common to most, in one form or another. These stages are as follows:
Policy Formulation: Creation of an initial policy framework to establish goals and to authorize and guide the ICZM programme; accomplished by executive and/or legislative action. This stage includes authorization for strategic planning.
|BOX 6.1 - ASPECTS OF POLICY AND PLANNING FOR COASTAL AREA MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING (CAMP)|
|Different branches of government are responsible for different aspects of marine affairs. One branch of government may be responsible for fisheries, another for tourism, yet another for transportation. Planning and environmental issues are often the concerns of still other departments. While all of these branches of governments are ultimately concerned with economic and social development, they can impede development of other sectors and create conflicts of usage from fragmentation and lack of communication. Often apparent conflicts can be easily resolved and with careful planning the resource base can sustain multiple usages. By taking an integrated approach, development potential of all sectors can be maximized, conflict minimized, and the resource protected. This usually requires a reassessment of policy.|
|Successful policy must be based on soild biological and socio-economic and socio-unwittingly cultural information.|
|The purpose of management planning is to achieve a desired situation, and the direction that management policy takes is dependant upon the desires of government and resource users and consumers. These desires are synthesized into an ideal that becomes the goal of management policy. While not realizable, this ideal provides direction. Objectives are specific outputs necessary for progress towards a goal. Objectives generally are obtainable, and are used to determine what actions need to be taken. Objectives should always be based on solid biological and social data.|
|Arriving at a realistic policy for marine resource management requires that this reevaluation be a shared effort among the resource management community. Naturally this means the various groups involved must compromise, since their individual goals will be quite diverse. But a major purpose of the multi-disciplinary, participatory approach is to foster compromise and cooperation in the community. If the effort is successful, what will emerge is a policy that is rooted in local dyanamics, and the options chosen are ones that can acutally work for the community as a whole. Other more tangible factors also have to be included in policy determination.|
|Goals and objective serve two important purposes in management planning: they are the foundation for determining mangement policy, and they are the standards by which to judge success.|
|Source: Adapted from Geoghegan (1984)|
Strategic Planning: Sometimes called “Preliminary Planning”, this is the stage where the feasibility and potential impacts of the ICZM policy action are explored. Impacts may affect resources and resource users; income, foreign exchange, and jobs; social and cultural well-being. This planning stage is where benefits are evaluated, where a wide array of data is accumulated, where a general strategy is created, and where recommendations are made for implementing policy and organization and administration of the ICZM programme.
Programme Development: In this stage the ICZM programme is developed in detail, a Master Plan for the coast is prepared, institutional mechanisms are created, and programme responsibilities are assigned. Revisions will usually be necessary during the process.
Implementation: Once the Master Plan and programme details are approved and a budget and staff are authorized, programme implementation can commence.
In practice, the above stages are not so discrete and linear as theory suggests. Instead, there will be feedbacks and revisions of earlier stages as new facts and opportunities come to light in later stages. For example, there will certainly be the need for policy revision and strengthening as a result of findings and recommendations from stages two and three. Therefore, the whole programme must be flexible and adaptable (Figure 6.1).
No ICZM-type programme can be stronger than its policy foundations. Clear and specific goals and directives are essential. In Box 6.2 examples of the type of goals and strategies appropriate to ICZM-type programmes are listed; of course, not all of these goals would be found in every country's programme.
ICZM will discourage piecemeal approaches to coastal development in favour of a balance between a variety of compatible uses whereby economic and social benefits are maximized and conservation and development become compatible goals. Moreover, certain resource reserves, critical habitats, and other specially designated areas might be set aside for restricted use. Chua Thia-Eng (pers. comm.) makes the points that: 1) the primary function of ICZM is environmental management, which it does through special forms of management of development and of resources; and 2) ICZM planning may result in shifts in general economic policy of a country.
Regarding national economic development, ICZM should closely reflect general governmental economic policy. In so doing, ICZM programme policy might incorporate the following concepts, among others: optimize the long term economic benefits to society from the marine area under national jurisdiction; decrease economic dependence on advanced countries; decrease the influence of private developers in controlling the pace of economic growth (by default) and determine the parameters for government decision-making; clarify for potential investors the intentions and objectives of the government; and guide development and use of the country's marine area in a rational and efficient manner for highest and most equitable economic benefit to the people.
Figure 6.1 ICZM Process: Strategy Planning (Steps 1–6) and Programme Planning (Steps 7–11) Source: Clark (1991c)
|BOX 6.2 - EXAMPLES OF ICZM GOALS AND STRATEGIES|
|Maintain A High Quality Coastal Environment: The coast is a major national resource, providing commerce, food, recreation, spiritual refreshment, and security. These values will not last forever without conservation. ICZM would provide the means for maintaining the quality of the coastal environment.|
|Protect Valuable Species: Many coastal species need special protection. ICZM would preserve their breeding and feeding areas through protected reserves and the use of regulations.|
|Conserve Critical Coastal Habitats: Habitats of special importance to species and the functioning of coastal ecosystems - mangroves, seagrass meadows, coral reefs, beaches, lagoons, and certain tideflats - would be protected in ICZM programmes.|
|Conserve Critical Ecological Process: Certain ecological processes are critical - supply of nutrients, penetration of light through the water (avoid excessive silt and turbidity) and water circulation - and need protection through regulations.|
|Control Pollution: Pollution from point sources and from land runoff as well as accidential spills of pollutants which foul coastal waters (human health problems and ecological disruption) would be addressed by ICZM programme.|
|Provide Development Guidance: Much of the ecological and scenic disruption of the coast is from inadvertent side effects of coastal development. An ICZM programme would provide advisory services to development entities to help them reduce impacts.|
|Provide Planning Guidance: To avoid development initiatives which would be damaging to the coast, advice would be provided to various planning entities - physical planners, economic planners, development planners - through ICZM. Of particular importance is infrastructure; highways should be properly routed and water and power not provided to sensitive places.|
|Identify Critical Lands: Certain areas of the coast have a special potential for recreation, housing, nature protection, economic development, and so forth, The ICZM programme would identify lands optimum for development an dfor nature.|
|Restore Damaged Ecosystems: Many otherwise productive coastal habitats have been damaged but are restorable. The ICZM programme would offer opportunities to identify and restore such habitats.|
|Public Awareness: ICZM can play an important role in creating public awareness of coastal values and needs for conservation.|
A national policy is a fundamental requirement for the development and use of maritime (high seas) resources and for special management of enclosed seas. Such a policy establishes goals, objectives and priorities and lays down basic principles and criteria which provide guidance for the formulation of plans and programmes and a marine development strategy. The policy should outline a framework that identifies the financial, human, technical and institutional resources needed.
Broad participation of the citizenry should be encouraged. Therefore, beginning with policy formulation and continuing through each subsequent stage of developement of the programme, intrested citizen groups should be frequently consulted (see Principle 10). Renard (1986) identifies the following broad themes as examples of those that should be addressed:
Determination of economic, social, political and cultural situations;
Respect and support for the culture;
Dialogue, sharing of agendas and mobilization (not “confidence building”), ability to listen;
Intervention based on the human system as well as on the natural system-multidisciplinary and multisectoral approaches;
Participatory research, use of folk knowledge and permanent redistribution;
Collective problem identification - formal and informal activities;
Formulation of solutions and promotion of consensus; and
Utilization of indigenous technology, know-how and experience.
The policy statement should declare in the strongest terms possible that it is the intention of the nation to review and exercise control over developmental activities affecting the sustainability of coastal renewable resources (Goeghegan, 1984). The goal should be maintenance of the optimum sustainable use of coastal renewable natural resources, in both the economic and social context. The policy should then list specific national coastal concerns and issues to be addressed and state the priorities of the nation toward coastal resources conservation.
The policy statement should also state the actions that the executive authority or legislative body expects various agencies of government to take. In addition to specific assignments to agencies for the strategic planning stage to follow, there should be assurance that funds are authorized and available to pay for the work that must be done.
In policy formulation, it is not appropriate to identify particular programme details because policy is concerned with general goals and directives. In fact, specifics should be avoided because it is too early in the process to make informed decisions about precise programme components or objectives. There is danger in becoming locked into specifics that may prove to be misdirected.
In many countries a considerable amount of policy affecting coastal renewable resources will already be in existence. Therefore, an evaluation of existing policy is a first step. Creation of new policy to fill gaps and integrate existing policy is a second step. The Philippines is an example of a country where considerable policy and operational legislation has been enacted which altogether gives a sufficient policy base for an integrated ICZM programme (although it has not been implemented to date). Examples of the policy instruments developed by the Philippines are given in Box 6.3.
Coastal development policy should emphasize that it is in the best interests of the country to achieve sustainability of its resources and long-term protection of its natural assets. To this end the set of goals suggested for a proposed Saudi Arabian ICZM programme for the Red Sea (as listed in Box 6.2) is worth reviewing (adapted from Clark, 1985).
This stage involves all the preliminary investigation, data collection, dialogue, negotiation, and draft writing that is necessary to enable the government to define the problems, to understand its options and to proceed to authorize a specific ICZM programme.
The strategic plan lays the foundation for the legislation or the executive order that is needed to authorize the Programme Development stage that follows. The strategic plan should: 1) specifically assign responsibility for the programme to a particular agency; 2) authorize the funding necessary for programme development; 3) state clearly the objectives of the ICZM programme; 4) recommend a method for collaboration among the various sectoral agencies and private interests involved; 5) state the time limits involved for various stages of programme development; and 6) require a specific step-by-step programme development and organizing process.
To create the strategic plan for an ICZM programme requires consultation with a wide array of interests, both governmental and private. It is the accepted wisdom of ICZM experts that only a truly integrated programme (i.e., one that includes all the major economic sectors affected) can succeed fully. If important stakeholders are left out - e.g., tribal chiefs, port authorities, housing departments, tourist industries, fishermen, economic development planners - ICZM will likely fail. Figure 6.2 depicts the complexities that face strategic planning - numerous sectors are involved and strong political and economic pressures come into play.
National development decisions have typically targeted single sectors and reflected too little concern about the impact these narrow decisions may cause on other sectors. The more common sectors of commercial activity are: agriculture, forestry, fisheries, energy, transportation, manufacturing, tourism, housing, environmental protection, military, and public health. Any of these sectoral areas can be further divided into more specialized coastal components; for example, transportation may be divided into shipping, ports, and surface and air transportation.
|BOX 6.3 - EXAMPLE OF PHILIPPINE COASTAL POLICIES|
|A general policy statement formulated by the Inter-agency Legal Committee of the Natural Environmental Protection Council for organizing an ICZM-type programme states: It is hereby declared a policy of the State to pursue a continuing programme of effective management of coastal zones to meet the socio-economic development needs of our country for the benefit of present and future generations. In pursuing this policy, it shall be the responsibility of all government bureaus, agencies or instrumentalities, including political subdivisions involved in coastal management, to instill awareness to the public about the dangers of the degradation of environmental conditions in the country's coastal zones and encourage active participation of the people in all undertakings to conserve and enhance the country's coastal zones.|
|Section 26 of Presidential Decree No. 1152 (Philippine Environmental Code) states that the national government, through the Department of Natural Resources (now the Ministry of Natural Resources), shall establish a system of rational exploitation of fisheries and aquatic resources within the Philippine territory and shall encourage citizen participation therein to maintain and/or enhance the optimum and continuous productivity of the same.|
|Section 27 of Presidential Decree No. 1152 provides for the measures for the rational exploitation of fisheries and other aquatic resources which include, but shall not be limited to: a) undertaking manpower and expertise development; b) acquiring the necessary facilities and equipment; c) regulating the marketing of threatened species of fish and other aquatic resources; d) reviewing all existing rules and regulations on the exploitation of fisheries and aquatic resources, with a view of formulating guidelines for the systematic and effective enforcement thereof; and e) the conserving of the vanishing species of fish and aquatic resources, such as turtles, sea snakes, crocodiles, and corals, as well as maintaining the mangrove areas, marshes and inland waters, coral reef areas and islands serving as sanctuaries for fish and other aquatic life.|
|Source: NEPC (1983); Tolentino (1984)|
Figure 6.2 Forces at work on coastal resources include a variety of economic sectors and political powers, each with a stake in levels of exploitation. Creation of management measures to control exploitation and rehabilitation of coastal resources are the role of ICZM programmes. Source: Chua (1986)
The sectors, each with its own clientele, compete for funding, resources and political advantage. Therefore, at the planning or budget level, the inputs of different sectors may conflict and pull in different directions. For this reason, special arrangements are needed to guarantee a multi-sectoral, integrated, approach. For example, the organization of a coastal programme to manage mangrove forests for the sole benefit of the fisheries sector might succeed, but more likely it would fail if it lacks mechanisms to incorporate the interests of local villagers, forest industries, upland agriculture, public health, tourism, port development, and so forth (Table 6.1).
It is unlikely that the sectors themselves would cooperate with each other to reduce misuse of coastal resources in the absence of government intervention. Therefore, the ICZM programme should be organized so as to encourage and guide intersectoral cooperation and activity coordination in order to achieve the goal of an integrated, multi-sectoral plan.
|Sectors that are often coastal zone or ocean specific||Sectors that are rarely coastal zone specific but have direct impacts|
|1.||Navy and other national defense operations (e.g., testing, coastguard, customs||1.||Agriculture - Mariculture|
|2.||Port and harbour development||3.||Fish and wildlife management|
|(including shipping channels)||4.||Parks and recreation|
|3.||Shipping and navigation||5.||Education|
|4.||Recreational boating and harbours||6.||Public health - mosquito control and food|
|5.||Commercial and Recreational fishing||7.||Housing|
|6.||Mariculture||8.||Water pollution control|
|8.||marine and coastal research||10.||Transportation|
|9.||Shoreline erosion control||11.||Flood control|
|12.||Oil and gas development|
It is a major objective of ICZM to facilitate coordination among levels of government and their various bureaucracies toward defining specific resource conservation goals. This may require realignment of institutional arrangements at various levels of government. The very fact that an ICZM programme is being considered for a country suggests that in the past adequate attention has not been given to conservation of coastal renewable resources.
There is no single answer to the question: “Where should the ICZM authority be lodged within the government institutional structure?” The correct answer will be different for each country depending upon answers to other questions, such as: Would a coordinating office be sufficient? If so, within what ministry should the office be lodged? Or would an agency with power to act independently be needed? What kind of staff skills are necessary? How would such an agency integrate the roles of the several sectorally oriented agencies with strong interests in the coast? These are crucial points that must be addressed. An ICZM agency must be part of, or have influence over, economic development sectors. A central coastal office may be realistic only if its functions are non-competing and its main role is coordinative.
It may be useful to designate a particular Ministry for the strategic planning phase and another for implementation, including programme development and management.
The mutuality of interest suggests that in some countries, agencies responsible for prevention and mitigation of natural hazards should become equally as interested in advancing ICZM programmes as are the agencies responsible for resource conservation and environmental protection. Because officials responsible for coastal hazards concern themselves mostly with emergency response and post-disaster relief, the condition of the coast's protective resources has been too often ignored. That is why it is essential for ICZM to undertake a primary role in prevention. Also, conservation of the physical natural defenses of the coast is a logical counterpart to conservation of natural habitats.
It is certain that ICZM must be integrative, allowing for multiple uses and not be preemptive. Its role is to make judgements about development and resources management that are for the benefit of the nation as a whole and not for the good of a particular economic sector or agency of government. ICZM is committed to advancing sustainable multiple use of coastal resources (Principles 11 and 12) through an integrative, multiple sector approach (Principle 13).
In the ICZM process, legislation and administrative arrangements should be as flexible and cost-effective as possible and should adhere to simple guidelines such as the following proposed for marine protected area programmes (Salm and Clark, 1984):
New agencies should be created only where existing agencies cannot be adapted, motivated, and empowered to carry out adequately the task.
Existing agencies with jurisdiction over marine activities should be involved by interagency agreement as necessary and appropriate to meet the conservation objectives.
Existing regulations and regulatory mechanisms should be continued when they are consistent with conservation objectives.
Regulations and management plans should be as simple as possible.
Central government jurisdiction in developing countries often begins at the low-water mark and extends seaward, whereas regional and local jurisdiction extends landward from the low-water mark. This can have a significant effect on ocean use, since all ocean uses require companion land-based support facilities. Accordingly, the development and regulation of the coastal lands needed for land-based support systems may be under the control of the local or regional government whereas the actual use and development of the marine environment will be controlled by the national government. Problems may result if local governments perceive national policies for development of the marine area under national jurisdiction differently from the central government (UNESC, 1987).
ICZM is a management and planning programme for a specific situation, the coastal area, or coastal zone. Consequently, it is necessary to delineate the area of ICZM jurisdiction by specifically, and legally, defining the coastal zone (Principle 5). The boundaries should be based upon the issues to be addressed in the ICZM programme; i.e., the problems to be solved by ICZM exist within a certain area and this area can be defined as the coastal zone for either a nationwide programme or a regional (subnational) programme.
The boundaries of the coastal area (or “coastal zone”) to be addressed in an ICZM-type programme depend upon the specific functions of the programme. All ICZM programmes include both land and water within their boundaries. There is not one standard set of prescribed ICZM boundaries.
Planning boundaries for the coastal area, or coastal zone, must be specified at the strategic planning stage. Initially a relatively broad planning zone should be delineated. Subsequenty, a narrower management zone should be delineated. It is important to recognize that ICZM programmes evolve through stages from initial planning to final management programme. The first set of boundaries are for the planning phase and do not imply that the entire coastal zone delineated for planning will be included in the management programme that evolves. In fact, the zone of management that emerges will in most cases be narrower than the initial zone of planning for ICZM. One purpose of the planning phase is to refine the boundaries and reduce the width of the designated coastal zone to the minimum needed for the management phase.
The ICZM zone defined for planning should also include the areas most threatened by seastorms, tsunamis, and certain other natural hazards. Thus, to the extent possible, ICZM planning boundaries should be functional boundaries, encompassing natural ecosystems and natural forces. But at the same time they should reflect the boundaries of towns and industrial centres; that is, where possible the boundaries should be modified to include an entire community.
In a broad context, the coastal zone could be as wide as 300 km or more if it were designated to include the entire EEZ (200 miles or 320 km wide), transitional areas, and adjacent uplands. The EEZ is important to small countries because it vastly increases their area of economic influence - for example, from 70 to nearly 500 000 square miles in the case of the Marshall Islands in the South Pacific. Countries that cannot themselves exploit the vast EEZ can “rent” it to other nations for fishing or other uses. The role of ICZM in this process would be minimal in most countries but should be explored in detail for certain countries.
Small island countries may have a particularly difficult time in determining ICZM boundaries. Some ICZM authorities would call entire islands “coastal zones” because most island commerce and societal affairs have a coastal connection. However, giving ICZM authority over the whole of an island seems unrealistic for a coastal programme, even though many island specialists recommend it.
Calling a whole island a coastal regime and abandoning the concept of a “coastal zone” as a definable and separable entity may jeopardize chances to achieve integrated resource management for the coast. To abandon the idea of governing a particular defined coastal zone or segment - an area - and instead to try to govern the use of the resources of the country at large, would result in a programme that lacks focus and distinctiveness, and particularly, cohesiveness. The strong political support needed to initiate an effective programme may dissolve. The narrower the coastal zone or coastal area, the more authority ICZM can expect to gain. The broader it is, particularly a whole country, the less authority it can gain because of the appearance of duplication and competition with existing authorities as well as the vagueness of function. Therefore, for islands, the author prefers to identify a coastal zone in the same manner as for other landforms.
Ideally, a coastal nation or subnational unit should set the boundaries of the ICZM zone only as far inland and seaward as necessary to achieve the objectives of the management programme. Since the problems and opportunities that motivate the creation of an ICZM programme vary considerably from one unit of government to another, the selection of boundaries would also be expected to exhibit considerable variation among coastal nations as well as among subnational units (Sorensen and McCreary, 1990).
For the inland boundary of the planning area, it will be convenient to use a major highway paralleling the coast, the foot of a coastal mountain range, or the inland boundary lines of the coastal counties or municipalities, or other recognized political or physical feature. This will be more practical than an arbitrary distance of 100 m, 1 km, etc., as is done by some US States (e.g., Washington and Connecticut). This “practical” type of planning area boundary is most convenient for regional planning and social demographic and economic analysis as well as for defining interest groups.
An ICZM programme can be designed to fit into any governmental structure. The variety of institutional arrangements is sufficiently flexible to match whatever administrative system a country has.
All ICZM programmes require three components as a minimum: 1) legal, policy and administrative structure, 2) a project review mechanism, and 3) a coordinative system.
Elaborations can be added as appropriate, including technical assistance, planning, inspection, extension services, public education, research, regional (subnational) programmes, protection of critical habitat areas, survey and mapping, habitat restoration, training, and so forth.
To be successful the ICZM programme requires specific kinds of support from government; particularly important needs are:
Clearly articulated policies for the development of coastal resources to fulfil national development objectives;
Clear assignment of responsibilities and designation of a lead agency to formulate and coordinate the programme;
Powers to enforce rules and to achieve intergovernmental coordination;
Funds to implement ICZM.
The particular form of any ICZM programme will depend upon the national and regional issues it is meant to address. Since the tableau of issues and options varies from country to country, so will the form of the programme. No two countries would be expected to have identical programmes. But the essential purpose remains the same - to create an interagency mechanism to promote sustainable uses of renewable resources within the defined coastal area.
Some of the most destructinve “development” practices - massive coral reef mining or mangrove forest cutting - will usually have to be curtailed because they are not sustainable and conflict strongly with other economic uses such as fishing and tourism. On the other hand, development activities with a lesser potential for damage can be adjusted in location, design or scale in order to meet guidelines (Table 6.2).
The realities of political, economic and social life of the particular country may require a less ambitious, more restrictive, beginning. An example of a limited programme is: a targeted management programme on shore erosion or perhaps on designating critical habitats. Such targeted programmes might later evolve into more full-scale regional ICZM-type programmes, as is occurring in Sri Lanka (Olsen, 1987) where ICZM started with an erosion issue and now is expanding into a broader programme.
One way to think of the strategic plan is that its purpose is to answer questions in the minds of decision-makers in government. The answers will lead to decisions to authorize or not to authorize the ICZM programme or more fact-finding. To this end, the strategic planning stage should be organized to anticipate the questions that decision-makers will ask and to provide the data to answer these questions. Examples are given in Box 6.4. Chua Thia-Eng (pers. comm.) suggests that another key factor is attitudes and perceptions of affected communities toward expected changes resulting from management solutions.
|Type of Ecosystem|
|Development Activity||Marshes||Deltas||Estuaries||Mangrove swamps||Seagrass beds||Coral reefs and lagoons||Beaches||Islands|
|Agriculture and farming||•||•||•||o||o||•|
|Feedlots, ranching and rangelands||o||o||•||o||•||•|
|Aquaculture and mariculture||o||o||•||•||•||o|
|Dredging and filling||•||•||•||•||•||•||o||o|
|Roadways and causeways||o||•||•||•||•||•||o||o|
|Electric power generation||o||•||o||•||•||o||o|
|Heavy industry (onshore)||o||•||•||•||•||•||•|
|Offshore oil and gas development||o||o||•||•||•||•|
|Military facilities, training and testing||o||•||•||•|
|Land clearing and site preparation||o||o||o||o||o||•||•||•|
|Sanitary sewage discharges||o||•||o||o||•||•|
|Solid waste disposal||•||o||o||•||o||•|
|Water development and control||•||•||•||•||•|
|Shoreline management and use||o||•||•||•|
|Coastal resource uses||•||•||o||•||•||o||•||•|
o Significant adverse effects likely
• Adverse effects possible
BOX 6.4 - QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED IN STRATEGIC PLANNING
Which coastal resources are seriously degraded; to what level have yields fallen; what are the economic consequences; what actions are needed to correct this situation?
What are the causes of the degradation; what type of developments and activities need to be controlled; what are the economic effects of the controls; in consideration of the variety of possible trade-offs and their effects, what actions are recommended?
Who are the principal users of coastal resources; how many jobs are at stake; how much income and foreign exchange earnings are involved. Fisheries and other resource dependent industries; what further losses are expected if ICZM is not implemented?
What are the priority issues; what critical habitats and species need protection; what is the best approach, regulation or protected areas?
What can an ICZM type programme do to prevent loss of life and property form coastal natural hazards such as sea storms and beach erosion; what are the benefits of combining hazards protection and resource conservation in a single coastal programme?
What are the existing government programmes for coastal resources conservation at national and local levels; how effective are they; what are the shortfalls; what changes in governance are recommended?
How effective are the existing mechanisms for interagency and intersectoral coordination on coastal matters; what can be done to improve the situation; what actions are recommended?
What are the expected net benefits of an integrated national ICZM-type approach, in economic and social terms; how can an ICZM programme be funded?
Who are the major proponents and opponents of the proposed ICZM programme?
What is the status of personnel training for ICZM; is there sufficient expertise; what can be done to improve the situation?
To consider the more specific questions that are involved, it is useful to review, for example, the major objectives given in the ICZM strategic plan generated for the Sultanate of Oman by Salm (Salm, 1986, 1987):
establishment of conservation areas
management of recreational resources
management of fisheries resources
protection of cultural and archaeological resources
maintenance of coastal aesthetic resources
conservation of threatened wildlife resources, such as turtles and seabirds
management of special environments, such as mangroves, coral reefs, sand dunes, beaches, lagoons, river valleys and flood plains
proper design and construction of coastal developments such as harbours, marinas, seawalls, groins, piers, breakwaters, coastal roads and dams.
It is worth repeating that in most countries the goal should be to achieve the widest range of stakeholder participation possible at the Strategic Plan stage. Consultations should be held with all relevant agencies of central and local government, with private developers, with resource users and other interests that would be affected by ICZM (fishermen, farmers, etc.), environmental advocacy groups, and investment sources (including international donor institutions). These interests should be encouraged to go beyond dialogue and to participate to the maximum possible in goal setting, data collection, conflict identification and so forth.
Wide participation will improve the structure of the ICZM programme. It will also provide an opportunity to resolve conflicting points of view among powerful interests so that the Strategy Plan will meet the least political resistance as it goes through the approval process and so that the next phase, Programme Development, can proceed smoothly and not meet unexpected opposition.
The required clarity and specificity of ICZM programme elements can only be expected if the country's policy-makers are convinced of the value of ICZM and are willing to make a strong commitment. To achieve this optimum state may require a considerable political effort on the part of ICZM advocates. This effort must continue through the entire process; i.e., through all stages of development of the ICZM programme.
In convincing supervisors, decision makers, and legislators of the essentiality of an ICZM programme, nothing is more important than persuasive economic evidence. National income, foreign exchange earnings, employment and local self-sufficiency are most important factors (see Principle 10). These factors must be addressed during the policy formulation stage in a preliminary but convincing manner. Then in the strategic planning stage - which is the principal opportunity for selling the ICZM programme - economic benefits must be addressed in a more detailed way. Because of the importance of economic justification of ICZM, it may be desirable to employ a professional resource economist to assist with the economic analysis.
It is most difficult to provide advice on how to effectively promote an ICZM programme because the art of politics is so specific to each country. But the advice of R. Knecht (1979), given in Box 6.5, should be of value to most countries. Chua Thia-Eng (pers. comm.) would add to this listing that a particularly dynamic approach to convince leadership about ICZM would be to emphasize “the socioeconomic benefits that are generated by the resource systems and the need to protect the continued functioning of those systems if sustained benefits are to be continued … the resource system is the goose that lays the golden egg and should be protected”.
The ICZM programme will be expedited and strengthened by broad consultation with the municipal and provincial governments most affected by the programme. Equally broad consultation with a variety of national government ministries will also pay off in greater cooperation and less opposition (see Principle 8).
It is also most important to have the support of, or at least the acquiescence of, the main resource users. Strong political opposition by fishermen or others who gain their living from marine resources could stall an ICZM programme.
Because the support and cooperation of numerous economic sectors is essential to the success of integrated, multi-sectoral programmes such as ICZM, it will be necessary in the policy formulation stage to consult with representatives (public and private) of the sectors that are likely to be most affected (see Principle 13). Many of these sectors will have little to gain from coastal resources conservation and they may see the ICZM programme as a problem rather than as an opportunity; examples are transportation, housing, military, agriculture, and manufacturing. To ensure a minimum of opposition from these sectors, strong persuasion may be needed along with assurance that the policies to be formulated will treat them fairly.
Sectoral fears can also be alleviated by stressing the multiple-use function of the ICZM programme in the policy statement (see Principle 12). Under ICZM most coastal areas would be open for a variety of compatible uses. Only certain resource reserves, critical habitats, and other specially designated areas would be set aside for restricted or single-purpose use.
Many countries may not, in the end, choose to go to a full-scale, integrated, ICZM approach, but rather adopt a less sweeping programme with limited interventions. But, such countries are well advised to strive for the ICZM goals of comprehensive and integrated coastal resource management in their own approach. Chua Thia-Eng (pers. comm.) cites Singapore as a good example of excellent coastal planning “without the benefits of ICZM”.
|BOX 6.5 - CONVINCING YOUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT OF|
THE MERITS OF CAMP OR COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT (CZM)
|The following five points would be useful in discussing the merits of CZM with a national government:||-||Energy and industrial interests can be convinced that CZM will facilitate rational development and increase the predictability of the coastal situation.|
|1.||E m p h a s i z i n g the development aspects of coastal management as a positive approach.|
|-||Local authorities should realize that they can increase their impact on national government coastal policies through a partnership involving local CZM programmes.|
|2.||The “balanced” nature of the coastal management approach should be emphasized. The emphasis in the programme also should be on management, that is, the prudent use and development of resources, and not on preservation per se. Of course, protection of sensitive coastal areas is a key objective of CZM.|
|-||Rival government agencies should be incorporated into the CZM planning process early on and made partners in the programme.|
|3.||Determine early who is potentially opposed to CZM and develop arguments particularly aimed at that sector.|
|4.||Clearly, one needs to argue the logic and reasonable-ness of rational coastal planning and management and obtain a maximum number of allies for this point of view.|
|5.||Governments involved with planning for 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zones should understand the value of a foundation of rational coastal planning and management.|
|Source: Knecht (1979)|
Not all countries need a formally constituted ICZM programme if ICZM can be incorporated in their existing institutional arrangements. With the development of ICZM as a recognized field, it has become a common perception that countries without a formalized ICZM programme cannot or do not manage their coastal resources in an integrated fashion. In some cases, however, it may be possible to achieve the same goals through an existing framework and infrastructure.
Where government departments and agencies responsible for different sectors of the coastal zone have the potential to collaborate and effectively coordinate their management activities, the result could be as well integrated as management carried out through a single ICZM programme, particularly where one agency takes the lead role. When this is possible, it is unnecessary to develop a new independent programme which could stretch limited financial and manpower resources even further, introduce a sense of competition, and be seen as a threat to existing institutions.
In some countries the result of the strategic planning stage will be to modify existing planning and resource management mechanisms to accommodate ICZM-type needs. For example, Trinidad and Tobago experimented with ICZM (starting in 1978) and conducted preliminary investigations of the potential for a regionalized approach. The country finally decided in 1984 that the established Town and Country Planning Division could handle coastal development management with technical assistance from the Coastal Area Planning and Management Division of the Institute of Marine Affairs. According to McShine (1985): “It was decided that a separate Coastal Area Plan as distinct from an integrated National Physical Development Plan involving coastal development should not be formulated”.
While strategic planning is not the detailed planning stage for the ICZM management programme which comes in the programme development stage, it lays the foundation for ICZM and it does provide to decision-makers, resource users, developers, and citizens, important information about the issues, conflicts, economic trade-offs and benefits, and potential working mechanisms of ICZM. This section describes some of the material inputs of value to the process.
It is essential to conduct a formal analysis of the significant issues facing coastal resources and coastal development at a very early stage of the programme. ICZM is an issue-driven process and the nature of the particular issues will dictate the type of programme to be created. Also, it is clear that the effort and expense of an ICZM-type programme would not be justified unless there were multiple issues of importance to address.
It is not enough to simply identify and list the issues. Each should be evaluated for at least the following: the extent of socio-economic disturbance and resource loss that it causes; the degree to which it could be resolved by an ICZM-type approach; and the consequences of not resolving it.
Sorensen and McCreary (1990) make the point that there should be a good fit between the set of issues an ICZM programme is attempting to resolve and the institutional mechanism set up in response. These authors also remark that the same issues that motivated a nation to create an ICZM programme are those that are likely to reappear as the criteria for programme evaluation.
As has been stated many times, an essential element of an ICZM-type programme is a system to do a special review of major development projects that would impact coastal resources. Such a system would most usually be built around typical and well known “environmental assessment” techniques.
Environmental assessment (EA) is a term used to describe both a governmental process and an analytical method. As a process, environmental assessment is usually imposed by government on public agencies (and in some cases, private developers). The purpose is to predict environmental impacts and to coordinate aspects of planning (Gammon and McCreary, 1988; Thompson, 1985). EA programmes usually require that proposals for developments in excess of a certain magnitude be reviewed and approved before a permit can issue.
This ability to review coastal development projects - through environmental impact assessment - and to effectively oppose or alter environmentally bad projects, usually does not exist in fisheries departments. An exception is Sri Lanka, where the national ICZM programme was assigned to the fisheries department. But the integrated, centralized, coastal management operation will usually be a special function placed in a special ICZM agency or office, either a coordinating entity or a separate management agency. These two organizational options are illustrated in Figure 6.3.
According to Sorensen and McCreary (1990), three fundamental benefits arising from EAs are: 1) cause-and-effect relationships can be determined with reasonable accuracy and presented in terms understood by policy makers; 2) prediction of impacts will improve planning and decision-making; and 3) the government can better enforce decisions emanating from the environmental process.
The strategic plan will need to recommend the general approach to project review and some particulars about the environmental assessment procedure to be used. For example, it may be useful to do “programmatic” EAs, that is, generic assessments of guidelines, standards, etc., generated by the programme. In this approach, much of the assessment might be done once for each programme element, thus avoiding the need to repeat it for each project that comes under review.
For most countries, the motivation for implementing an ICZM-type programme will be very practical. Definite economic benefits - some short term - will have to be shown. Explicit and persuasive social benefits will also be helpful. The values that developed nations put on biological diversity, saving endangered species, and protecting environmental quality are not so fully embraced by developing countries unless they attract international tourists. The burden of proof put on advocates of ICZM is to show clear socio-economic benefits.
Figure 6.3 Two Alternative Institutional Arrangements for Administering on ICZM programme. Source: NPS (1986)
The complexities of evaluating coastal renewable resources and measuring the economic impacts of development require that special methods be devised and used in ICZM. This requirement applies to countries with economic/political systems ranging from liberal approaches to centrally planned economies. Regardless of the type of economic system that is in place, a special mix of economic trade-off analyses is required for ICZM because of the nature of coastal problems and its common property resources.
The above mix consists of standard economic and financial tools coupled with special approaches developed for coastal natural resources and amenity evaluations. Among the most commonly used approaches recommended are such forms of analysis as: net present value, internal rate of return, and benefit-cost ratio. Other approaches, such as cost-effectiveness analysis, also may be used. Then, there are special analyses developed for situations where market-based, monetary transactions are important - shadow pricing, willingness to pay, etc. It is very important to separate market and non-market values as well as on-site and off-site locations of goods and services (Table 6.3).
|Location of Goods and Services|
|Valuation of Goods and Services||Marketed||1||2|
|Usually included in an economic analysis (e.g., poles, charcoal, woodchips, mangrove crabs)||May be included (e.g., fish or shellfish caught in adjacent waters)|
|Nonmarketed||Seldom included (e.g., medicinal uses of mangrove, domestic fuelwood, food in times of famine, nursery area for juvenile fish, feeding ground for estuarine fish and shrimp, viewing and studying wildlife)||Usually ignored (e.g., nutrient flows to estuaries, buffer to storm damage)|
An example of effective economic analysis of conflicting uses of coastal resources is the Hodgson and Dixon (1988) study of the effects of logging on tourism and fisheries at north Palawan Island in the Philippines. The biologist-economist team proved convincingly that continued slope-cutting would result in a negative economic future for the region (see Box 6.6 and Figures 6.4 and 6.5).
Unfortunately, there are no simple “cookbook” techniques that can be employed in conservation economics. It will usually be necessary to engage a professional resource economist to assist with economic analyses. If this is not possible, it will be necessary to make the best estimates possible to build a persuasive justification for the ICZM programme.
Coastal communities often depend on natural resources in the sea for their livelihoods, on a day-by-day basis. Any restriction on their fishing or other resource extraction activities, for conservation or resource rehabilitation purposes, could be disastrous for people living so close to the edge. Random DuBois (pers. comm.) notes that many rural communities dependent on coastal resources do not have the cushion to risk management actions that might erode even for short periods their means to a livelihood and that politicians may not be willing to enforce conservation rules that would force people beyond the margin.
BOX 6.6 - ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CONFLICT : PALAWAN, PHILIPPINES
This case study illustrates how a traditional market solution to a coastal conflict can impose major social costs on society unless there is ICZM-type intervention.
Bacuit Bay on Palawan Island, Philippines, supports major fishing and tourist economies. The surrounding hills contain valuable timber resources (see Figure 6.4) harvested under a government concession. Logging activity leads to substantial soil erosion and sedimentation of the Bay killing corals and disrupting the natural food chain. Decreased fishing makes the Bay less attractive to tourists, and,in turn, brings three major industries into conflict - fishing, tourism, and logging.
To assess the situation, a combined ecologic/economic analysis was conducted by Hodgson and Dixon (1988) for two options: (1) cessation of logging, and (2) continued logging. The results below show that over a 10-year period combined revenues industries are conservatively (at 10% discount rate) 50% greater if logging ceases (values in US$ 1 000) (see Figure 6.5).
|Tourism||47 415||8 178|
|Fisheries||28 070||12 844|
|Total||75 485||33 907|
|Present Value (10%)|
|Tourism||25 481||6 280|
|Fisheries||17 248||9 108|
|Total||42 729||25 157|
|Present Value (15%)|
|Tourism||19 511||5 591|
|Fisheries||14 088||7 895|
|Total||33 599||22 125|
Author's comment: In spite of the evidence, the logging industry is not expected to cease operation without government action through an ICZM-type mechanism. An ICZM programme could achieve socio-economic balance and protect the common resources of the sea. However, the cease-or-continue outcome may be too simplistic, so an ICZM approach allowing continuance of logging under strict controls on sediment runoff may be indicated.
Source: Dixon (1989)
Figure 6.4 Bacuit Bay, Palawan, Philippines, showing locations of main industries discussed in the text and Box 6.7. Source: Dixon (1989)
Figure 6.5 Predicted changes over 10 years in coral species number, percent live cover, and fish catch (in 100 t) because of logging-caused sedimentation of Bacuit Bay. Source: Hodgsson and Dixon (1988)
The question of “alternative livelihood” programmes should be considered, if ICZM results in the loss of employment for certain users of the coastal zone. DuBois (pers. comm.) believes that a promising field in those rural areas characterized by highly degraded coastal resources is the development and provision of alternative livelihood systems designed to provide the “grace period” within which to initiate conservation or resource rehabilitation. When improved, the natural resources base (e.g., mangrove lagoon, barrier reef) can be used to support a sustainable system of resource utilization. This would be a counterpart to such integrated terrestrial programmes as: fast-growing leguminous trees, cut-and-carry systems, contouring drainage for water control, and reforestation currently being applied in upland degraded lands.
In many cases ICZM programmes are being developed in which resources will be/are reallocated to the detriment of one or more stakeholder groups (such artisanal fishermen or coral miners who would be displaced by a tourist development, charcoal makers who would be displaced by a ban on cutting of mangroves). Although the short term economic value of the displaced activities is much less than the value of the proposed activities, and represents a negligible part of gross national product, the negative effects on groups which are often already disadvantaged is likely to have adverse consequences for achieving adoption of an ICZM programme.
Therefore, it is essential that planning for ICZM programmes explicitly include consideration of such distributional effects. This is not to imply that the ICZM agency become an employment agency. Rather, the institutional arrangement for ICZM should include explicit linkage with the relevant agencies, such as the Ministry of Social Welfare, the Ministry of Economic Affairs, which have responsibility for retraining and employment.
Effective programmes for protection of species and their habitats will include both regulatory and custodial (protected areas) components, as shown below:
Regulatory - The regulatory component provides a broad administrative framework for controlling uses of coastal resources - regulations, permits, environmental assessment, development planning - and operates through administrative process and “police power”.
Custodial - The protected areas component provides government custodial protection for officially declared parks, nature areas, and resource reserves, and other areas of special resource value, operating through the owner's exercise of proprietary rights and custodial responsibility.
By combining these two, there is created a combined approach that includes both: 1) a regulatory scheme for resource conservation and orderly development, and 2) a specific protected areas scheme for high level protection of special resources (Clark, 1986). The marine parks workshop at the Third World Congress on Parks and Protected Areas concluded: “The aim of coastal zone management … should be to complement and enhance existing conservation efforts through a coordinating mechanism, an ‘umbrella’ programme under which coastal and marine protected areas can prosper” (Salm and Clark, 1984).
Marine and coastal parks or other types of protected areas that are designated to protect critical areas are most secure if they are integrated into an Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) programme. Economic considerations are essential (Table 6.4). Planning for a park in isolation from surrounding land uses and peoples, and without interagency cooperation usually will not work because protected areas that are alienated from a wider programme of coastal resources management exist as islands of protection threatened by surrounding areas of uncontrolled exploitation. ICZM can be organized to prevent pollution from these sources along with overfishing, destruction of “nursery” habitats, and other types of external impact that can be damaging to the protected area. ICZM provides an appropriate framework for integration of protected areas into a larger system of protection and a method of consensus building for their support.
Reducing risk to life and property from natural hazards (e.g., hurricanes, cyclones, typhoons) should be a major element of the ICZM programme. Aspects of hazards risk reduction can be readily combined with resource conservation, thus simplifying the management of coastal development and leading to more balanced decisions. For example, the same setback requirement that protects beachfront structures from erosion and storm waves can also preserve turtle nesting sites on the back beach. Similarly, a restriction on clearing of mangrove swamps will both conserve a valuable resource and maintain a physical defence against storm waves (Clark et al., 1980). In a final example, a seashore or coral reef park could be established to both conserve the reef habitat and protect the inner shore from wave attack during storms (Salm and Clark, 1984).
Human activities that remove or degrade protective landforms - for instance, by removing beach sand, weakening coral reefs, bulldozing dunes, or destroying mangrove swamps - may diminish the degree of natural protection that the coast receives. Natural hazards would usually be addressed in sectoral plans for public health and safety. But natural disasters cut across all sectors. Wind damage from a hurricane, inundation by a tsunami, or rapid coastal erosion can affect tourism, the fishing industry, port operations, public works, and transportation. Housing and industry are also vulnerable.
The solution decided by the State of Western Australia is to provide a setback in order to retain, in public ownership, a buffer strip of land above, and along, the Mean-High-Water line (O'Brien, 1988). The purpose of this buffer strip is to prevent private development from encroaching into the hazardous coastal “edge zone” (see Principle 7). The buffer areas of public land are held in “reserves”, a type of protected area (see previous subsection) with a major purpose of keeping development back from erodible and floodable shore areas and to protect edge zone natural resource values.
Troublesome erosion of beaches occurs in developed areas where buildings and roadways have been placed too close to the water's edge and are being undermined or threatened by storm induced erosion. In such cases, the beach is often “armoured”, that is, seawalls or groins are built to protect the threatened properties or jetties are built to keep inlets open. But these structures are very expensive and may even worsen the situation. Therefore, they should be closely reviewed by the ICZM authority to see if less expensive and more successful “soft-engineering” alternatives exist (see Principle 9). (Refer to Figure 5.2 for an example).
|Economic Evaluation of Coastal and Marine Parks and Protected Areas|
|Since planning should accomplish certain defined goals and objectives, the planner hopes that these will be clearly laid out. However, because such goals are often ambiguously stated, the planner's first job may be to interpret and refine the mandate for the planning process and to request necessary clarifications. In so doing, the planner may find that the programme needs substantial and detailed justification, particularly when it is based on administrative rather than legislative action. The justification may be based on political, social, or economic grounds. Economic justification is now fashionable, and the planner should be prepared to provide the necessary analysis of costs and benefits for the programme.||-||Total hotel catering, product processing and packaging, equipment production (factory) and distribution (outlet), guide, and other jobs in industries linked to the protected area.|
|Quantitative economic indicators of protected area values are usually numbers of visitors or jobs created, tons or value of fishes landed, money or days spent in hunting and recreational fishing, and so on. Examples of measures of monetary benefit are:||-||The probable total cost of property damage (to roads, buildings, livestock, and crops) through storm waves and winds (multiplied by the probability of storm damage (i.e., after the felling of mangrove, disturbance of dune vegetation, or blasting of coral reefs) to obtain an estimate of the annual benefit of natural storm damage control.|
|-||Gate or licence fee totals, to indicate the economic value of tourism to the protected area. These are also indicators of the willingness of the public to pay for recretational privileges at the site.||-||The number of visiting students or student groups, their range of ages, and the number of teaching institutions represented. These give estimates of the value of the protected area for education.|
|-||Total tonnage at dockside or retail value of fish landings to calculate the contribution of a protected area to fishery revenues (i.e., the economic value of the breeding ground of a fishery resource).||-||The number of researchers, research projects, theses, and publications, to indicate the value of the protected area to research.|
|-||Total income from recreational and commercial equipment, lodgings, and food and transportation to estimate the contribution of a protected area supporting industries.||-||Head, bus, boat or group counts of visitors to a protected area. The figures can be expressed as a total or a percentage of the state or national population for an estimate of the social value of the site.|
|Another approach to estimating the value of a protected area is to calculate the cost of rehabilitating the habitats and restoring the species decimated in the absence of area protection.|
|The next few years will almost certainly see an increase in types and means of quantification for evaluating protected areas.|
Certain natural disaster protections are so closely related to resource conservation that they should be included in an ICZM programme. Specifically, water-related disasters - which are virtually inevitable in any coastal nation - result from cyclonic storms, tsunamis, shore erosion, coastal river flooding, landslides and soil liquefaction. The Philippines, Bangladesh, Jamaica and dozens of other countries are affected by severe storms and flooding (Hayes, 1985). In addition to the recognized value of ecological protection, there is the closely allied benefit of protection from natural hazards.
In the strategic plan, recommendations should be made about inclusion of natural hazards prevention in the ICZM programme. This is critically important if no other governmental agency is dealing with the subject of maintaining natural storm defences.
The strategic plan should recommend the level of involvement that the ICZM programme would have with pollution control. Since most countries have an existing agency to handle pollution, the validity of transferring coastal pollution control projects to the ICZM programme should be assessed.
As stated earlier, communities that have exclusive rights to adjacent marine resources often take responsible action for conservation of those resources. Further, without some control on fishing rights, fishermen have little incentive not to overfish since they cannot prevent others catching what they leave behind (Johannes, 1982).
In ICZM programmes, criteria for legitimate traditional or customary rights and rules of procedure to guarantee their continuance may be needed, particularly where establishment of protected areas for traditional fishing are proposed or valuable tidal lands or lowlands are assigned to private parties.
The IUCN draft “world conservation strategy” (1990) states that the capacity of coastal communities and organizations to manage the resources they use varies greatly with social and economic circumstances. Where indigenous or traditional systems can form the basis of management, communities should be empowered to share management responsibility (Ruddle and Johannes, 1985). Even where such systems have broken down, opportunities for developing new management partnerships between governments and users should be explored. Education and training in conservation may then be necessary.
The general public must be involved in the formation of new coastal policies and rules on resource use if they are to support them. According to Renard (1986), public participation is a tool available to the entire management community (resource users, public agencies, non-governmental organizations, etc.) to ensure the quality and the effectiveness of the management solutions that will be implemented. He emphasizes that participation is also a duty because “…the issue remains, above all, one of human development and because …people are not the object of that development but the subject of development and the makers of their own history”.
White (1987) believes that participation comes from wanting to support common values to gain some real or perceived benefit for the individual and the community. Without it, according to White, marine resources can never be conserved nor sustained, because external enforcement of laws in the marine commons is not usually practicable. Chua Thia-Eng (pers. comm.) cautions that “the level and mode of public consultation should be important … inappropriate timing and unfavourable socio-political, cultural conditions may be counter productive”.
At the strategic planning stage it is most important to recommend a strong coordinating mechanism to ensure the widest and most effective participation of government agencies, the business sectors, and the public. Having the coordinating mechanism working correctly is clearly the most difficult part of the creation of an ICZM-type programme because coordination is one of the inherent problems of the ICZM process. Numerous private economic sectors and the corresponding numerous government bureaucracies directly or indirectly affect coastal uses, resources, and environments. Horizontal integration is a term that describes efforts to coordinate the separate economic and governmental sectors and thereby reduce fragmentation and duplication (Sorensen and McCreary, 1990).
Data collection and assimilation is an important part of the strategic planning phase. It is during this phase that the most important decisions will be made about the future of the ICZM programme, or even whether it will have a future. Clearly, these decisions should be made in the most data-rich of circumstances so that the consequences of taking or not taking specific actions are predictable. Because the information needs for a strategic plan depend upon the issues to be addressed and because these vary considerably from country to country, it is not possible to set forth a standard list of information requirements for an ICZM programme from which to prescribe a data compilation programme. However, in Box 6.7 are listed some of the more common information items that strategy planners often need; it should be remembered that the purpose of this stage is to bridge between the policy and the programme development stages. The information is to be used in having an ICZM programme approved or disapproved, if it should be discovered that the country does not need or want ICZM for whatever reasons (see also section 9).
In the strategic planning stage, the information needed is mainly for convincing decision-makers and stakeholders of the need to authorize an ICZM programme, or not to do so, if it is not feasible or appropriate. It should be noted that strategic planning is a reconnaissance level activity and the information required is less detailed than for the programme development stage to follow.
It is expeditious to organize the database so that essential information can be mapped and to display as many categories of data as possible on maps. For example, a Caribbean Conservation Association report (Geoghegan, 1984) states: “It has been found time and time again that perhaps the most useful way for the environmental planner to discover trends, conflicts, and problem areas that can otherwise be easily overlooked, is by mapping information”.
BOX 6.7 - TYPICAL INFORMATION NEEDED INSTRATEGIC PLANNING
Coastal renewable resources: Fisheries and aquaculture activity and yields, by species and seasons; mangrove forest exploitation, activities and products.
Users of coastal areas and resources: Tourism, manufacturing, maritime trade, mining, urban, oil industry, jobs, revenue, investment and tax yields.
Impacts: Impairment of coastal resources and ecosystems; pollution, habitat losses, species depletion, sedimentation, visual degradation.
Upland effects: Impairment of coastal resources from river dams and diversions, accelerated sediment transport, reduction of freshwater inflow, disruption of natural hydro-period, reduction of beach nourishment with erosion and pollution.
Socio-economic status: economic statistics for coastal communities; social organization of coastal communities and dependencies on coastal resources.
Critical habitats: Habitats of critical importance such as mangroves and other wetlands, beaches, dune fields, seagrass meadows, coral reefs, tideflats, estuaries, lagoons, shellfish beds, and special breeding and feeding areas for coastal species; restoration needs.
Critical species: Identification of the coastal species of particular significance or economic value and their habitats; and restoration needs.
Resource problems, conflicts: Information on special problem situations, such as highly polluted estuaries, extensive mangrove clearing for aquaculture ponds, destruction of coral reefs, etc.
Natural hazards: Identification of areas of high risk to natural hazards such as badly eroding beaches, floodable lowlands, landslide prone slopes, etc.
Protection areas: Description of areas that should be designated as reserves or other of protected areas.
The regional level of implementation (Box 6.8) allows immediate action on the most severe coastal problems, enables a nation to obtain experience with ICZM region by region, provides time to develop and recruit expertise, and presents later opportunity to make needed mid-course corrections (Sorensen and McCreary, 1990). Major port and lagoon (or estuary) complexes are the focus of the greatest intensity and number of coastal resource conflicts, and the greatest environmental degradation. As a result, national interest in ICZM may focus on one or several of these complexes. One region of concern may be an urban centre surrounding a major port and its associated bay, lagoon, or estuary. Other examples in this region may include regions of lowland agriculture, coastal rural settlements, tourist regions of beaches or natural phenomena like flamingo or ibis migrations.
A second type of incremental approach is to define specific resources or problem areas to initiate the ICZM management process. It may be expeditious to focus first on problems of limited geographic scope, such as shoreline erosion, loss of coral reefs, or degradation of estuarine fish spawning areas, using the strategies of critical area designation or shoreline exclusion setbacks (Sorensen and McCreary, 1990). “Critical area” designations and “exclusion zones” are relatively inexpensive and simple to administer. Either strategy can be implemented on a 10-site specific basis, commensurate with available information, staffing, or expertise. They can be reinforced with regional planning or broad sectoral planning of larger geographic scope: combining wetside (estuarine or marine area) protection with dryside (shorelands) management strategies offers the possibility of managing whole coastal ecosystems.
A third type of incremental approach is at the administrative level, whereby all the ICZM functions are not implemented at one time, but rather are implemented function by function. For example, the programme may start with project review (environmental assessment) only and without planning or technical services which will follow at later phases of implementation. The incremental approach to ICZM implementation provides the opportunity to test concepts and approaches as a pilot effort before committing energies and political capital to full-scale nationwide effort. The risks and consequences of failure are considerably less when a programme is implemented incrementally.
A national ICZM programme does not have to be initiated all at once. It can be implemented either region by region, resource by resource, or function by function.
ICZM-type programmes can benefit from the regional planning approach in at least two different ways: 1) the national ICZM programme can be organized to implement individual “Regional Unit” programmes if it has the flexibility to recognize regional distinction, and 2) the national ICZM programme can be organized to facilitate input into presently ongoing regional economic development planning activities. If either the first option (specific regional ICZM programme) or the second (facilitated input into regional development planning) are chosen, it is appropriate for coastal interests to understand what regional planning is and how it operates. [Note: one of the best reference documents on regional planning is “Integrated Regional Development Planning” produced by the Organization of American States (OAS) in 1984, in cooperation with the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Park Service of the US Department of the Interior.]
|Box 6.8 - ECUADOR'S REGIONALLY ORGANIZED ICZM|
|The proposed ICZM-type programme for Ecuador is an example of a well-planned regionalized approach. Four specific coastal regions have been designated as regional ICZM units, termed “Special Management Zones” Each of these units - one is proposed for each of the country's four coastal provinces - would have a separate Advisory Committee composed of government and private sector representatives. A special effort would be made in each region toward coordination and enforcement of existing regulations - it is believed that sufficient regulations already exist and that the major task of the ICZM-type programme is ensuring that they are enforced appropriately.|
|Source: Matuszeski et al. (1988)|
In selecting the boundaries for the Regional Unit Initiative many factors have to be considered, including existing political subdivisions and traditional ways of regional thinking. But to the extent possible for ICZM purposes, the region should reflect the natural boundaries of the landscape.
Linkage should be identified between national ICZM programmes and current international initiatives on biodiversity conservation, marine debris and entanglements, drift nets, endangered species, hazardous wastes, wetland protection, global warming and other related climatic changes, and control of biotechnologies.
In fisheries, the relations between the coastal seas, the EEZ, and High Seas management must be clearly understood. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provides a framework for conservation and sustainable use. FAO has the responsibility for management at regional level, through regional fishery bodies. Other non-FAO fishery bodies exist with similar functions, some created under the aegis of FAO. These bodies provide the basis for international cooperation.
For pollution, the Montreal Guidelines for the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-based Sources, drafted by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), could be the basis for agreements. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is developing a technical annex covering marine pollution via the atmosphere, to be attached to the Protocol for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution from Land-based Sources.
For protection of species and their habitats, there are a number of important instruments. For example, “the Ramsar Convention” (an international treaty for protection of wetlands of international importance) which has provided extra protection to many important coastal wetlands. Also, the Regional Seas Programme of UNEP has encouraged international “protocols” for conservation of natural areas and protection of species (e.g., Mediterranean Sea, Eastern Africa, Southeast Pacific, Caribbean Sea).
Few countries have adequate contingency plans and emergency response procedures for oil spills. Current international agreements have greatly reduced oil pollution from shipping. But they need stricter enforcement, along with provisions of guidelines. The International Maritime Agency (IMO) is preparing a convention on emergency preparedness and response. UNEP'S Regional Seas Programme deals with maintaining the quality of regional marine habitats and has a useful role to play in ICZM.
Transnational issues related to ICZM requiring international cooperators include shared stocks, highly migratory species and transboundary stock, maritime stock, maritime boundary resolution, straddling oil and gas deposits, and transboundary pollution. These issues are said to be most significant in enclosed or semi-enclosed seas because the regions usually involve a multiplicity of countries and interests. Thus, in planning coastal seas activities, it will be necessary to consider effects on adjacent countries.
The development financing agencies (World Bank, USAID, EEC, Inter-American Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, etc.) are slowly but surely realizing the environmental limitations to development. They can play a useful role as motivating and coordinating forces. The client countries themselves are showing more interest in sustainable development and related issues but are concerned with food security and looking for an equitable sharing of the costs of world environmental protection.
In this case, however, international implications related to implementation of UNCLOS and considerations related to ocean management should be taken into account. If, finally, the coastal zone has strong links with offshore resources (highly migratory), activities and oceanic processes the Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs) concept might apply.