Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe – Final Report The lack of training and education opportunities, allowing stakeholders and practitioners to familiarise themselves with ICZM principles and instruments is equally observed in several regional seas. For existing courses no agreed quality standards are available on the EU-level. On the national level, education and training is also underrepresented in the national strategies. This is most obvious for particularly important and new areas, e.g. the use of natural processes by re-establishing natural functions as a management option. Stakeholder participation Efficient information and dissemination frameworks on coastal zone issues are not commonly present, and effective communication to the wider general public is therefore lacking. A high level of awareness and knowledge of the general public on the main issues affecting the coastal zones, as a pre-condition of constructive participation is desirable but often not achieved. Wide participation helps to resolve conflicts Stakeholder involvement takes many forms in the EU. Overall, the level of actual stakeholder participation or “co-management” is felt to be insufficient by a large majority of stakeholders in most countries. A major potential impact of stakeholder participation, using ICZM as an instrument for conflict resolution, is therefore not sufficiently realised. 27 Monitoring of implementation through common methodologies While the availability of reliable, up to date and comparable data is a precondition for an effective management of Europe’s coastal zones, relevant data collection and monitoring schemes beyond the national level is still not fulfilling the requirements adequately, especially in the New Members States and the Accession Countries. ICZM needs good information On the level of indicators and monitoring a reasonable first level platform for an overall appreciation of the status and potential for ICZM seems to be in place in several areas, additional information in particular on regional and local scales is important for future, more formalised impact analyses. 27 At the same time, the promotion of stakeholder participation as a constitutive element of ICZM is considered as a positive point in itself; see below. 18 August 2006 188
Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe – Final Report 4.7.2 Benefits of Implementation Overall, ICZM implementation has shown a beneficial impact for the coastal management in Europe. Awareness creation for long-term and large scale impacts The implementation of the eight "Principles of good ICZM" as promoted in the EU-Recommendation has created new awareness and a higher level of preparedness at the regional level regarding long-term challenges and scenarios. Although some countries with a long history of coastal protection are aware of processes such as sea level rise, increased frequency of storm events or climate change, the ICZM- based holistic approach and the precautionary principle will improve further coastal management and bring positive effects on the awareness and the level of preparedness at the regional level regarding long-term challenges. Changing our minds and practices The EU ICZM recommendation has initiated a rethinking and has fostered a fresh view on coastal issues in various policy contexts: Positive impacts Improved preparedness for future challenges Promoting new thinking • The regional sea perspective underlines the rational to have a holistic, broad geographical view on the coastal zone including transboundary issues and the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) since emerging patterns of coupled land and sea use cannot be seen in isolation but are linked in terms of their implications are for the sustainability in the coastal zone. • The EU ICZM Recommendation is positively impacting on traditional spatial planning by emphasising sustainability and participatory approaches: The interconnectedness of social, economic and environmental issues along the coast and ICZM’s potential to reconcile these conflicting demands by developing longterm, objective-led strategies has shown positive effects especially on infrastructure-oriented planning approaches. Secondly, the introduction of pro-active procedures such as stakeholder participation and communication is adding a new dimension to the credibility of decision making and policy acceptance by stakeholders. Improved preparedness for future challenges • The EU ICZM Recommendation has increased the awareness and the understanding of the need to protect the coastal zone and apply the principles of sustainable development in its management approach. Although ICZM is still (too) often seen as an “environmental” (i.e. sectoral) strategy, it has increasingly been accepted as an “ecological” tool, i.e. requiring a holistic system management approach for the entire coastal zone. Stakeholder Participation Participation of stakeholders is a central innovative element within the EU ICZM Recommendation which - although clearly being spelled out as one important principle -, is not being taken up by many countries at the level promoted by the EU ICZM Recommendation. Participation is an efficient policy tool 18 August 2006 189
Page 1 and 2:
International Ocean Institute Evalu
Page 3 and 4:
Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zo
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
# Evaluation of Integrated Coastal
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138: Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zo
Page 187: Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zo
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Annex A: Final Overview of National
Page 259 and 260:
COUNTRY CYPRUS NATIONAL CONTACT Joh
Page 261 and 262:
COUNTRY FINLAND NATIONAL CONTACT Ti
Page 263 and 264:
COUNTRY GERMANY NATIONAL CONTACT St
Page 265 and 266:
COUNTRY IRELAND NATIONAL CONTACT Da
Page 267 and 268:
COUNTRY LATVIA NATIONAL CONTACT Dzi
Page 269 and 270:
COUNTRY MALTA NATIONAL CONTACT Mich
Page 271 and 272:
COUNTRY NATIONAL CONTACT AFFILIATIO
Page 273 and 274:
COUNTRY ROMANIA NATIONAL CONTACT Du
Page 275 and 276:
COUNTRY SPAIN NATIONAL CONTACT Carl
Page 277 and 278:
COUNTRY NATIONAL CONTACT AFFILIATIO
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Analysis of National ICZM Strategie
Page 283 and 284:
3.1.2 Coverage of administrative le
Page 285 and 286:
4.1.2 Analysing the degree of using
Page 287 and 288:
ef principle 8: What kind of instru
Page 289 and 290:
• European Maritime Policy Papers
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Question Block 1: Interview Co-ordi
Page 295 and 296:
2d) How are interests, roles and co
Page 297 and 298:
Question Block 3: Implementation of
Page 299 and 300:
Question Block 4: Summary 4a How is
Page 301 and 302:
Make your voice heard! You have bee
Page 303 and 304:
ICZM Evaluation --- Make Your Voice
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Clark, J., (1998). Coastal Zone Pla
Page 309 and 310:
European Commission. (2000) Communi
Page 311 and 312:
Participation. Technical Report EUR
Page 313 and 314:
Pickaver, A. (2003): Integrated Coa
Page 315 and 316:
Country-Specific The country-case a
Page 317 and 318:
Belberov, Z., H. Nikolov and E. Tri
Page 319 and 320:
Cyprus: State of Play in Implementi
Page 321 and 322:
Suomen Raportointi EU:N Komissiolle
Page 323 and 324:
Ministère de l'Écologie et du Dé
Page 325 and 326:
Verkehr, Bau - und Wohnungswesen),
Page 327 and 328:
Cummins, V., C. O’Mahony and N. C
Page 329 and 330:
HELCOM recommendation 15/1, on Prot
Page 331 and 332:
Povilanskas, R., and Urbis, A. (200
Page 333 and 334:
Planning Authority, 2001. The North
Page 335 and 336:
Spatial Scale in Coastal Zone Manag
Page 337 and 338:
„Jak zaangażować społeczeństw
Page 339 and 340:
Romania National Reporting to EU IC
Page 341 and 342:
Lambrechts A., Tourism Development
Page 343 and 344:
Elburg-Velinova, v. D., Perez Valve
Page 345 and 346:
Larsson U., Hajdu S., Walve J. and
Page 347 and 348:
Stocktake and Supporting Documents
Page 349 and 350:
List of Individuals Consulted for I
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
Page 359 and 360:
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms
show all

Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?