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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe – Final Report New Neighbourhood and Partnership instrument (ENPI): For the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, the ENPI could provide helpful support to prepare the ground for co-operations in terms of ICZM. Basic conditions and priorities for enabling ICZM should therefore be laid down in the national ENP Action Plans. 7th Research Framework Programme as the largest research Programme in Europe will have to play a key role in funding ICZM-related research, demonstration, coordination, and training activities in its sub-programmes and themes. As the priorities for FP7 calls are being annually agreed, ICZM should be continuously put high on the funding agenda. Rapid response and preparedness instrument for major emergencies should fund especially methodologies and capacity building as regards preparedness for risks. Implementation Costs: not applicable. Related actions: 5.2, 5.3, 7.1, 9.4 18 August 2006 246
Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Europe – Final Report Harmonise monitoring and evaluation frameworks Draw up a baseline from a sustainable development perspective, including a risk registry. Harmonise methodologies and indicators, data collection and exchange arrangements. Monitor implementation progress and carry out a long-term evaluation. 8 Sound coastal management can only be achieved if it is based on a thorough monitoring system with clear and standardised guidelines valid for all (regional) coasts. Many valuable efforts have been undertaken within the EU and beyond to provide a framework for monitoring and assessing the state of the coast. 29 However, comprehensive monitoring is a difficult task which requires a rigorous methodology including the careful selection and definition of sustainability indicators which adequately reflect the complex coastal relationships of socio-economic conditions and ecosystem health. Only with such indicators at hand the establishment of a baseline case as a further essential pre-requisite for determining the actual state of the coast is possible. Sustainability indicators go hand in hand, but are not identical to, ICZM progress indicators. The work of the EU Working Group on Indicators and Data (of the ICZM Expert Group) is of particular relevance for the development of these two kinds of indicators. Throughout the exercise of drawing up National ICZM Strategies (or alternative ICZM reports), many countries have tested both the sustainability and the ICZM progress indicators. A major accomplishment on the way to making ICZM a widelyaccepted approach would be if all coastal Member States would report (to a Regional Sea or EU coordination body) on a frequent basis on ICZM progress indicators. It is apparent that the indicator work needs to be continued with the aim of further developing and harmonising indicators and evaluation methodologies. To achieve a balanced and truly holistic ICZM with respect to all principles of good ICZM, a common method has to be developed that allows making consistent value judgements e.g. on issues as divergent as ecosystem health and employment. Rationale Various monitoring approaches available Monitor coastal state and implementation progress Need for common indicators and assessment methods In implementing this recommendation, the following actions and costs to the EU are proposed: 18 August 2006 247
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:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196: Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zo
Page 245: Evaluation of Integrated Coastal Zo
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 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 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?