Charting a Course Through the Stormy World of Coastal ... · Ways to Avoid Implementation...

Highlights

2Mooring BouyProgram

7Beach ErosionSolutions

8EnvironmentalFinancing

10Urbanizationand Tourism inBrazil

12Conversationwith Barbados’Leonard Nurse

ThemeAdvisor:

Donald D.Robadue,Jr.

Charting a Course Through theStormy World of CoastalProgram ImplementationBy Donald Robadue

Implementation has a simple dic-tionary definition. It is a straight-

forward matter of selecting theright tools, then carrying a pro-gram or policy into effect to fulfillan objective and accomplish a goal.Yet coastal management practition-ers can only dream that it could beso easy, that plans and policiesattract all the funds, staff, andpolitical and administrative supportrequired to put those plans andpolicies into motion.

Consider the following scenario:You, as a coastal manager, haveworked for months to build a con-sensus among stakeholders to cre-ate a plan or policy that will suc-cessfully solve a difficult issue. Thestakeholder committee is finallyunanimous, the press coverage isextensive and supportive, and theplanning team is exhausted but sat-isfied. Yet it is with some fear anddoubt that you watch the carefullycrafted plan passed along andadopted by authorities with powerand responsibility. Your dreamslowly becomes a nightmare whenyou realize that decisionmakers livein a different world and operate bydifferent rules and concerns. Youwatch helplessly as they pick andchoose among the parts of theaction program the planning team

has so skillfully woven together asthe first integrated proposal forcoastal management. As if this wasnot demoralizing enough, youlearn in the newspaper that thelargest natural resource user groupcomplains to the minister that ithas grave reservations about com-plying with what it considers amisguided proposal. This influen-tial user group announces it willonly agree to investigate the issue.The bright promise and hopefulspirit of the consensus-driven plan-ning stage is replaced by the night-mare world of scarce budgetaryresources, distracted and perhapsdisinterested leaders, brokenpromises, weak political supportand institutional frailty.

We know that ‘implementers’are often only able to take on atiny portion of a work plan thatthey might support with vigor. Aproposed lead agency mightdecline to conduct joint exercisesor share resources with other min-istries or departments that areessential for the success of a pro-posal. A capable staff who workedlong, hard weeks to prepare acoastal plan, can be quickly dis-persed to other posts and assign-ments, leaving a ‘skeleton crew’ tocarry out an ambitious program. Akey donor who expressed earlyenthusiasm might unexpectedly (continued page 11)

present a long list of preconditions,modifications and restrictions forthe program, which would neverbe acceptable to the stakeholderswho agreed to the plan or the gov-ernment that adopted it. As aresult, one can be faced with thelikelihood of receiving only a frac-tion of the funds needed to launchthe program.

Advice from the Field:Ways to AvoidImplementationNightmares

This issue of InterCoast high-lights projects, policies and strate-gies from around the globe whichillustrate how to bridge the gapbetween the worlds of planningand implementation. No grandschemes and one-size-fits-all solu-tions are presented here. Instead,the articles and cases cover a widerange of issues, settings and scales,yet reveal some common-senseingredients for success. Provide Implementers WhatThey Need to Know in Orderto Act. Governments face infor-mation limitations that can impedetheir coastal management duties.Officials need to tap availablesources of expertise and find col-laborative forums to apply knowl-edge to case decisions. Skilled pro-fessionals, both within and outsidepublic agencies, are needed whowillingly work together and takepersonal responsibility for expand-ing their skills can do much toreduce the knowledge gap. In

Narragansett, Rhode Island USA • #33 • Winter 1999

InterCoast Network • Winter 1999

By Mark Amaral

Kenya has taken several small,but significant steps towards initiat-

ing an integratedcoastal manage-ment (ICM)process bypreparing anaction strategy

for the Nyali-Bamburi-Shanzu beacharea. One of the immediate imple-mentation projects recommendedwas installing mooring buoys in theMombasa Marine Park. This actionwill reduce the direct physical dam-age caused by human activities suchas anchor damage, boat groundingsand trampling of corals by tourists.The Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS)was assigned the responsibility ofimplementing this activity.

Installation of the mooring buoyscould have been done by the KWSalone, however, the KWS and theCoastal Management SteeringCommittee (CMSC) recognized thevirtue of using this activity to buildsupport for marine park manage-ment and ICM among their localstakeholders (boat operators, hote-liers, dive shops among others). Tothis end, the KWS teamed with theCMSC to implement a mooringbuoy training program and stake-holder meeting. The major objec-tives were:

•To provide technical training tothe KWS so they could design andinstall more efficient moorings,building on their own experienceand incorporating lessons learnedfrom other marine protected areas

•To inform the KWS about thepurpose and use of the moorings

•To explore how ‘positive’enforcement (versus the more tra-ditional law enforcement) could bean effective tool in park manage-ment

•To work with the local con-stituency to begin creating a moor-ing management program

The meeting facilitated consen-sus-building among opposing stake-holder groups about where moor-ing should be placed, how theyshould be used and what the gener-al operating rules should be forboaters in the area.

The discussion went well beyondhow to install mooring buoys, onto areas of enforcement, educationand community involvement.During part of the workshop, theKWS was joined by local boatoperators and hoteliers. In thisnon-threatening ‘training’ environ-ment, boat operators and KWSrangers shared openly their opin-ions and ideas. Boat operatorshelped construct the moorings,select the new mooring sites andinstall the moorings. By workingtogether, everyone’s interests wereconsidered and incorporated intothe decisions.

Stakeholders also worked withthe KWS to draft a code of con-duct for the use of the newlyinstalled moorings, and for an edu-cational brochure about the parkand the moorings. Both these prod-ucts were presented at a formalstakeholders’ meeting held on thelast day of the training. At themeeting, participants reviewed thedraft code of conduct and brochureand suggested changes. Several ofthe suggestions supported rulesstricter than the KWS would haveproposed for fear of themselvesbeing seen as heavy-handed. By theend of the meeting the stakehold-ers approved revisions to bothproducts. This cooperative processcreated the necessary stakeholdersupport for the rules and, as aresult, will reduce the level of for-mal enforcement necessary to

implement them. At the conclusion of the work-

shop, the KWS expressed a strongdesire and commitment to imple-ment the mooring managementplans designed at the workshop.Stakeholders publicly supportedthe new mooring managementplans, putting positive pressure onthe KWS to follow through withimplementation. The facilitatorsfrom the KWS’s training centerwill work with staff from each

marine park and reserve to con-duct workshops and training pro-grams on moorings, using much ofthe same material used during thisworkshop. The purpose of eachworkshop is to develop a brochureand a mooring map for each area,and to bring local stakeholders intothe process.

For further information contact:Nyawira Muthiga, Kenya WildlifeService, P.O. Box 82144,Mombasa, Kenya. Tel: (254) 11227774. FAX: + (254) 11 312744.E-mail:[email protected].

2

A Mooring Buoy Training Program Creates NewPartners in Reef Protection in Kenya

At the conclusion of the workshop,

the Kenya Wildlife Service

expressed a strong desire and commit-

ment to implement the mooring man-

agement plans.

Kenya Wildlife Service at work.


By Noëlle F. Lewis

In November 1998, the RhodeIsland, USA, Chapter of the

American Society for PublicAdministration, held a three-dayworkshop, “Towards VirtualGovernment: A Report Card onthe Changing Face of PublicAdministration.” One sessionfocused on “The Governance ofCoastal Ecosystems: NewApproaches and Partnerships.” Thepanel examined the changing theo-ry and practice associated with theadministration of the environment.Private and public partnerships,self-regulation, and other emergingforms of governing and managingthe environment were discussed.

Big Business Can Joinwith Interest Groups toPrevent EnvironmentalDamage

Peg Brady, executive director ofthe Massachusetts Coastal ZoneManagement Agency, spoke onMassachusetts’ efforts to achieve anenvironmental and cost effectivesolution to the dredging problemsassociated with the development ofBoston Harbor.

The Port of Boston has enor-mous shipping traffic. Overall, theport handles over 1.3 million tonsof general cargo, 1.5 million tonsof non-fuels bulk cargo and 12.8million tons of bulk fuel cargoyearly, which is over 90 percent ofMassachusetts’ petroleum con-sumption. Fuel vessels havebecome larger and wider. This,combined with the fact that BostonHarbor has not been dredged forover 50 years, made it necessaryfor the harbor to be dredged. This

led to a somewhat unusual partner-ship between the United StatesArmy Corps of Engineers (Corps),a public entity, and theMassachusetts Port Authority(MassPort), a private enterprise.

The volume of the dredge spoilsfrom this project was estimated tobe 3.7 million cubic yards. Becauseof its magnitude, the projectreceived immense publicity.Numerous interest groups andstakeholders became involved. Thekey issue was disposal of thedredge spoils; and as a result ofpressure from the interest groups,offshore disposal was used for onlya portion of the spoils. Due to soilcontamination, approximately one-third of the spoils, 1.2 millioncubic yards, was not suitable foroffshore disposal. These would bedisposed of in the harbor in perma-nent storage ‘cells.’ These cells are200 ft by 500 ft in size and wouldbe buried 30 ft deep.

There was great concern aboutthe environmental monitoring. Theresulting framework for the moni-toring was the creation of an ‘inde-pendent observer’ to ensure thatthe monitoring was as bulletproofas possible. The observer, financedby MassPort, is a consultant whoworks with a group of interestedorganizations. The observer has theability to stop and start the projectif there are environmental con-cerns. Another key feature to thisframework is the assurance that themonitoring program will scaledown as the project reaches com-pletion. Because of the level oftrust between the players that themonitoring will be undertakenproperly, the interested parties

agreed to have confidence in theopinion of the independent observ-er as to the amount and duration ofthe monitoring, and in its results.

This form of project overseeinghas been very successful primarilybecause the amount of planningand involvement by all groups ledto a high degree of trust betweenthe interested parties, MassPortand the Corps. This was not drivenby management (top down) or bythe interest groups (bottom up); itwas a trust agreement among all.

An EcosystemManagement Approachto ImplementationFosters CollaborationAmong Diverse Groups

Virginia Lee of the CoastalResources Center, University ofRhode Island, spoke of the use ofthe ecosystem managementapproach, that has recently beengaining acceptance in Rhode Island.Three projects were described: thePawcatuck Watershed approach,the Aquidneck Island Partnership(AIP) and a hazard mitigation pro-ject. These projects have a commonthread: each has several public andprivate entities that need to findcommon ground to implementneeded change.

The Pawcatuck Watershed con-tains 14 cities and towns and a sov-ereign American Indian nation, andis located in two states (Connect-icut and Rhode Island). It is thefirst watershed to have a bi-stateagreement to develop managementstrategies for the resource. Facil-itating communication among theseagencies and local stakeholders hasproduced a broad-based agreementon the nature of threats to theregion, a needed first step towardsserious debate.

The AIP has taken the ecosystemmanagement approach in lookingat management issues on Aquid-neck Island. The AIP representsinterests from public and private

3

The Changing Face ofImplementation and Compliance:Public/Private Partnerships BuildGood Will for Action

(continued page 4)


organizations in the three islandcommunities of Middletown,Newport and Portsmouth, and isworking to achieve coordinatedresource management that main-tains a balance between economicdevelopment and environmentalwell-being, while maintaining theisland’s unique character.

The hazard mitigation project isone of the strongest of the pub-lic/private partnerships. It linkstwo national programs, the FederalEmergency Management Agency(FEMA) and the Institute forBusiness and Home Safety (IBHS)an initiative of the insurance indus-try. FEMA, after years of pouringmoney into rebuilding after naturaldisasters have damaged ordestroyed personal property, hasjoined with the IBHS to promotethe use of creative techniques toreduce disaster losses. This is donethrough education programs andmandates that focus on building,rebuilding or relocating to avoidfuture loss.

Business Regulation: BeEnvironmentally Friendlyand Be Rewarded

Curt Spalding, executive direc-tor of Save The Bay, a Rhode Islandcitizens environmental group, worea different hat for this discussion.Though currently working as anenvironmental advocate, he spokeof his experience while working atthe United States’ EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA). His per-spective was that of a private indus-try needing to work with regulato-ry agencies on pollution issues.Citing numerous examples of envi-ronmental programs undertaken bythe EPA, Spalding said that in manycases regulatory agencies havefound that addressing the specialneeds of individual companieswhich are subject to an industry-wide regulation, by treating indi-vidual companies within an indus-try differently if a company is vol-

untarily addressing environmentalconcerns, has been an effectivemethod of achieving compliancewith environmental regulations. Inthese cases, the companies are lessregulated than those showing noregard for the environment. Theregulatory agencies are finding thatthere is a need to differentiatecompanies’ actions and rewardgood behavior. However, Spaldingstressed, “The agencies need tomake changes incrementally, notstart a new program and/or makebig changes to existing ones. Thestakeholder process takes time andcannot be done overnight.”

Voluntary Compliance:A Success Story

Grover Fugate, executive direc-tor of the Rhode Island CoastalResources Management Council(CRMC), used CRMC’s experi-ence with the Rhode Island MarineTrade Association as an example ofa public/private partnership suc-cess story. The key element in thissuccess was similar to thatdescribed by Spalding, providingincentives for marina businesseswhen they comply with the regula-tions voluntarily as opposed to bylegal action. He also echoed theneed to make small, incrementalchanges in regulations based uponlearnings from practical experi-ence.

Fugate described the process theCRMC used to bring RhodeIsland’s marinas into compliancewith the marina perimeter permit.A number of the marinas in thestate, in operation pre-CRMC in1977, were not in conformity withstate regulations or they had out-dated permits, or had been estab-lished and operated without anypermit. In order to bring all mari-nas within the legal requirementsof the coastal program, the CRMCprocess began by developing a rela-tionship of trust with the MarineTrade Association and developing a

process that would be accepted bythe marina owners, as well as be asmaintenance-free as possible. Thiswas accomplished after much nego-tiation, and took the form of a‘grandfather permit’ process. Thisspecial permit would require thatthe marinas define their area ofoperation and specify the maxi-mum number of boats. When amarina did this voluntarily, CRMCwould issue a permit for work onthe marina property without anysanctions, as though it had appliedthrough the standard process. Oncethis was done, the marina wasgiven the freedom to adjust theinternal layout of the floats as themarket demanded, requiring only amaintenance permit from CRMC,which could be quickly approved.This satisfied the business owners’need for equitable and quick deci-sions.

For marinas that chose not tovoluntarily apply for a permit, theCRMC threatened to hold themarina to the 30-year-old permits,thus requiring massive change tomarina configuration, andinevitably resulting in loss of boatslips. Approximately 96 percent ofthe marinas have now completedthe permitting process. Fugatestressed that implementation of the‘grandfather permit’ did not occurwithout problems and did not hap-pen overnight. A willingness andability to make gradual chages inthe process allowed the CRMC andmarinas to move in the same direc-tion at a reasonable pace. Thisallowed the CRMC and the mari-nas to move in the same directionat a reasonable pace. Facing a BrighterFuture.

These four examples demon-strate the importance of developinga strong public/private partner-ship. The driving force for the part-nerships included environmentalprotection driven by interest

4

(continued from page 3)

(continued page 6)


By Michele Lemay

The Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank’s (Bank)

‘Strategy for Coastal and MarineResources Management in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean’ pro-vides new directions for Bankactivities which significantly affectthe coastal zone. Calling for arenewed, more integratedapproach, the strategy is intendedto bring the Bank’s interventions insectors such as fisheries, tourism,maritime transport and pollutioncontrol in line with the EighthCapital Replenishment strategy.The principles, elements of innova-tion and actions which are at thecore of the strategy, are designedto fill a void in the Bank’s currentpolicies in natural resources man-agement. The strategy and itsaccompanying policy researchpaper were approved by the boardof directors of the Bank on June17, 1998, following two years ofdiscussion about the region.

One of the strategy’s objectivesis to assist the region in establishingprograms for the integrated man-agement of coastal and marineareas tailored to the social and eco-nomic priorities of coastal states. Indoing so, the intent is to promoteleadership in coastal management,create opportunities for innovativesolutions, link coastal managementto other aspects of sustainabledevelopment such as waterresources management, and fostera genuine commitment towardsunderstanding and managingcoastal and marine areas.

Design Programs toAchieve SteadyImprovement, Not LeapsForward

When the Bank considers mak-

ing an investment in coastal man-agement, it is important that itaccurately assess the appropriatescale of effort. This requires evalu-ating whether during the periodbeing contemplated, a country’sprogram is best categorized asbeing at the level of demonstration,consolidation or extension, andaccurately assessing the capacity ofthe institutions and stakeholdergroups involved. The best approachis for countries to progress througha sequence that begins with stronglocal support for action, graduallyencompasses larger geographicareas, moves towards furtherdecentralization and involvementof local governments, and address-es more issues. Programs thatignore this sequence usually runinto trouble.

Progress towards integratedcoastal management in LatinAmerica and the Caribbean callsfor innovative institutional arrange-ments designed to overcome con-flicts in coastal resource use, rein-force decentralized decisionmakingand build partnerships with theprivate sector. The largest impedi-ment to this progress in the regionis the inadequate supply of skilledprofessionals and weak institutionalcapacity.

Programs Must ShowHow Institutional andHuman Capacity Will BeStrengthened

There are two main types ofactions that the Bank can take toaddress human capacity needs. Thefirst is to build into projects short-term training and team reviews ofexperience to enhance the skillsand abilities of those involved incoastal management programs.Learning-by-doing, bolstered by

documentation and disseminationof experience, should be a corner-stone of all coastal managementprograms in the region.

The second is to invest in short-term training in emerging universi-ty-based education programs.Formal educational programs areurgently needed to build an indige-nous regional capacity in integratedcoastal management and relateddisciplines such as natural resourceeconomics.

The Bank, along with otherfinancing institutions, must supportcapacity building for coastal man-agement not only within govern-ment at national, provincial andlocal levels, but also within non-governmental organizations, uni-versities and key private sectorgroups. The objective should be tobuild the full range of coastal man-agement services from data collec-tion and analysis, land use plan-ning, community-based manage-ment, monitoring and enforce-ment, and education. In addition tostrengthening individual institu-tions, there should be an emphasison strengthening regional andnational networks of resource man-agers stationed in the field, as wellas universities, research institutionsand laboratories conducting marinesciences.

The Bank will match its coastalmanagement projects to the capaci-ty of institutions, both public andprivate, responsible for their exe-cution. Providing funds andresponsibilities to institutions thatexceed their capacity is counter-productive since it usually resultsin failure, loss of credibility andeven the dismantling of what hadbeen a promising but young andinexperienced institution. This

5

Financial Resources for Coastal Management inLatin America and the Caribbean: A FundingInstitution’s Perspective

(continued page 6)


means that when considering aninvestment of Bank resources, thematurity of the existing coastalmanagement program in terms ofdemonstrated capacity needs to beassessed. Countries will need todemonstrate that certain ‘thresh-old’ requirements are in placebefore investments are made. Onesuch requirement should be a basiccapacity and commitment to gen-erate revenues, establish fees orenter into cost-sharing agreementsto ensure the financial sustainabilityof coastal management.

Sustained FundingRequires Partnershipsand Leveraging forAdditional Resources

The Bank intends to continuecoordinating with bilateral donorsand international organizationssupporting coastal managementwith the specific objectives of: (a)identifying opportunities wherefunds can be leveraged as additionalincentives for integrated coastalmanagement; (b) ensuring consis-tency towards resolving theregion’s priority coastal issues; and(c) making most efficient use ofresources. In this regard, the Bankwill also work with its borrowingmember countries to identify pro-ject opportunities (or project com-ponents) eligible for financingthrough the ‘international waters’focal area of the GlobalEnvironmental Facility (GEF).

Financing Instruments. TheBank has at its disposal a variety ofinstruments to finance operationsfor the management and develop-ment of coastal and marineresources. For example, the Bankcan continue to support coastalmanagement initiatives throughpublic sector investment loans fortourism and port rehabilitation.Investments for the expansion ofcoastal transportation corridors,

sanitation or for integrated ruraldevelopment can also includecoastal management componentsthat can help mitigate the indirectimpacts of infrastructure develop-ment in coastal rural areas. TheBank will also continue to financepublic sector loans for integratedcoastal management upon request,with care given to factors such asinstitutional leadership, capacityand ownership.

There are opportunities for pro-moting strategic partnerships forcoastal management by using vari-ous technical funds administered bythe Bank. Here, the Bank willexplore the possibility of support-ing involvement of marine scienceinstitutes, specialized organizationsand centers of excellence inEurope, Japan, Canada and the USas a means of strengthening profes-sional networks for coastal andmarine management. Other Bankavailable funds offer complemen-tary opportunities for financing ini-tiatives aimed at strengtheningindustry associations and promot-ing micro-enterprises in sectorssuch as ecotourism, fisheries andmariculture, port administrationand maritime navigation.

Analysis of CoastalDevelopment ProjectDesign

Changes are needed in the waypublic sector loans for tourism,maritime transport, fisheries man-agement, marine pollution controland other investments are analyzedto take into account competingresources uses, the need to inter-nalize environmental costs (includ-ing those associated with cumula-tive impacts) and the role of gov-ernment. The Bank will supportimprovements in project analysismethods to address these changingcircumstances. More thorough doc-umentation of economic benefitsand costs of existing coastal man-agement loans will also play a criti-

cal role in improving project analy-sis methodologies.

Several other elements of thestrategy represent a significantdeparture in financing naturalresources management. Theseinclude, for example, a reorienta-tion of assistance in fisheries tosupport the move from open toclosed access regimes and the inte-gration of environmental concernsin fisheries management. Emphasisis also placed on the need to buildcapacity to manage conflicts amongcompeting economic sectors in thecoastal zone.

(The full version of the docu-ment, “Strategy for Coastal andMarine Resources Management inLatin America and the Caribbean”(GN-1906-2) can be found on theweb site:http://www.iadb.org/sds/content.cfm?parent=60&id=425.)

For further information contact:Michele H. Lemay, Senior CoastalSpecialist, Environment Division,Inter-American DevelopmentBank, 1300 New York Avenue,NW, Washington, DC 20577USA. Tel: 202-623-1000. E-mail:[email protected].

6

groups or regulatory agencies,resource conservation and userpermitting. Each of these casesshow that implementation is moresuccessful through a partnership,and compliance follows fromincreased trust between partners.The report card results truly implythat there is a changing face in pub-lic/private administration.

For further information contact:Noëlle F. Lewis, Coastal ResourcesCenter, University of RhodeIsland, Narragansett, RI 02882USA. E-mail: [email protected] site: http://crc.uri.edu.

Partnerships(continued from page 4)

(continued from page 5)Financial Resources


delta. Since 1850, the shoreline hasretreated approximately 1.3 km,reaching local peak values ofapproximately 20 meters per yearin recent years.

Along the southern side of thedelta, the first coastal defenses(groins) were constructed near theend of last century, when a shore-line retreat of approximately 100meters endangered the newlyinhabited village. Different types ofrock rubble/boulder breakwaterswere built during this century.Today at Marina di Pisa, offshorebreakwaters run for 2.5 km fromthe river mouth southward, and acontinuous seawall protects the

coastal highway (Figure 2). In addi-tion, groins divide the protectedcoast into five cells of different size(Figure 3-top). More than 5 km ofhard structures defend 2.5 km ofcoastline.

Although shoreline retreat wasstopped directly in front of thetown, erosion rates neverthelessincreased southward and offshoreof the breakwaters. A 1997 bathy-metric survey indicates that a 7-misobath runs at the foot of thebreakwaters. Wave reflection overthe breakwater induces undertowerosion and scouring, togetherwith the offshore dispersion of sed-iments that no longer reach thesouthern beaches where newgroins are built every year.

In 1996 an innovative project ofcoastal restoration was initiated bythe local authority (Comune di

Pisa). The project aimsto prevent offshore dis-persion of the south-ward longshore sedi-ment transport, to stopthe construction of anynew hard structures,and to gradually returnto a more naturalcoastal landscape in areas wherehard structures were built. This isto be achieved by removing thebreakwaters to mean low water(MLW) and by covering the exist-ing seawall with an artificial gravelbeach in order to dissipate waveenergy and to prevent overwash(Figure 3-bottom). Wave channelexperiments were performed atthe University of Florence labora-tory; these proved that even underextreme wave conditions, a well-designed gravel fill is able to pre-vent overwash on the coastal high-

way and to restore a good-sizedbeach (one able to support atourist industry).

In the meantime the PublicWorks Ministry, responsible for theseaside resort shoreline protection,had to maintain two breakwaters –raising their berm from 2 m to 3.5m above MLW – at a cost ofapproximately US$ 1.8 million.Each breakwater must undergo thistype of maintenance every 10-15years.

Breakwater maintenance is not

7

By Pierluigi Aminti, Luigi E.Cipriani and Enzo Pranzini

More than 50 percent of the3,250 km of Italian coastline

experiences severe erosion (1991estimate). In an effort to counterthis, coastal engineers have favoredthe use of hard structured barriersdue to the low cost of rocks andthe fact that sand dredging is rarelyneeded, due to the absence of riverand estuary navigation. As a conse-quence, hard structures such asbreakwaters, seawalls and groinsprotect over 330 km of shoreline.

These structures are believed tocause longshore beach erosion,resulting in loss of a valuablecoastal environment. As a result, inrecent years beach renourishmenthas been used as a technique forcoastal restoration; someresearchers have found methodsthat have restored beach areaswhere breakwaters and seawallshad been constructed. If benefit-cost analysis had been done beforethe construction of hard structuressuch as breakwaters, many of theproblems may not have occurred.At present, cost-effectivenessanalyses are being used to assesspossible solutions.

Marina di Pisa is a seaside resortlocated on the southern side of theArno River delta (Figure 1). Thesevere erosion characterizing thearea is a consequence of the reduc-tion in the Arno River sedimentload from approximately5,150,000 cubic meters per yearbetween the 16th and the 19thcenturies, to the estimated1,910,000 cubic meters per year inthe last 50 years. Beach erosionbegan during the mid-19th centuryat the delta apex and graduallyspread laterally. Beach erosion hasproceeded uninterrupted along theuninhabited northern side of the

An Innovative, Non-Structural Solution to BeachErosion: Costs Less and Delivers More Benefits

Figure 1. Location map of the study area.

Figure 3. Present

coastal configuration

(top) and proposed

restoration project

(bottom).

Figure 2. Seawall and breakwaters.

(continued page 34)


By Jeremy Haas, ElizabethHickey and Jack Greer

Typically, a community’s envi-ronmental resources – and its

environmental problems – com-prise a patchwork of ecosystems,public and private land ownership,and mixed jurisdictions. Whilecommunity leaders often search fora ‘silver bullet’ to finance environ-mental protection and restorationefforts, what they really need is a‘community quilt’ that piecestogether funds to pay for environ-mental and public health projects.The restoration of stream or ripari-an buffers in the 64,000 squaremile watershed of the ChesapeakeBay (Maryland and Virginia, USA)is an example of this approach.

During the last 30 years, coun-ties within the Chesapeake regionhave experienced heavy develop-ment as agricultural and forested

lands havebeen con-verted intohousing sub-divisions. Asa result, the

habitats along the 100,000 miles ofstreams are divided into a mosaicof public, private and nonprofitorganization land ownership, sup-porting numerous activities. At thesame time, riparian zone issuesaffect the health of the entirewatershed, so management effortsare most effective when addressingand including all activities relativeto the diverse networks of streams.

More Targets = MoreFunding Options

The diverse nature of streamcorridors (and other environmentalregions such as watersheds, coast-lines and forests) allows a broadcollection of terms to be used to

describe management efforts.Using a variety of terms, in turn,can expand sources of funding andlead to broad-based support forrestoration and conservation. Forexample, terms such as wetlandrestoration, community education,urban and agricultural best man-agement practices (BMPs), sourcewater protection and reforestation,all describe aspects of stream corri-dor management, and all have pub-lic and private funding sources.

Traditional funding is nosolution. Traditional sources ofinfrastructure financing (govern-ment grant programs, tax-exemptbonds and private capital) are lim-ited in their ability to addresstoday’s environmental financingdemands for clean water, air andland. New, innovative approachesare needed to fill the gap betweentraditional financing methods andthe costs of environmental restora-tion and conservation. Some innov-ative financing techniques to sup-plement federal and state grantsinclude sale-leaseback arrange-ments, special assessment districtsand revolving loan programs (seebox).

The process of choosing alterna-tive financing techniques is similarto sorting through government-sponsored programs. Factors toconsider when analyzing tech-niques include political attractive-ness, opportunities to leveragefunds for capital and operatingcosts, applicability to the situation,and legal and administrativerequirements. In addition, someoptions, especially ones thatrequire landowner participationsuch as management agreements orconservation easements, may havebetter success when a local citizenorganization is involved as a part-ner with the local government.

Moreover, communities may con-sider integrating managementefforts in areas such as stormwater,wastewater, recreation and habitatthat are united by their ties to thestream corridor.

The Community QuiltConcept of Financing

A whole-system perspective toenvironmental financing helpsplace each activity (whether forrestoration or development) withinthe context of the entire system,such as a watershed or stream cor-ridor. Further, taking a broadwatershed view allows targeting ofinnovative local approaches towhere federal and state subsidyprograms (e.g., grants and below-market loans) leave gaps. Piecingtogether funding programs, techni-cal assistance programs and innova-tive financing techniques createsbroad-based solutions to environ-mental challenges. The resulting‘quilt’ of financing techniques cancover the watershed activities thatare threaded together by thestream.

Federal and state programs.Federal and state governments haverealized that a variety of land usesaffect stream corridors, and manyprograms offer funds and technicalassistance to property owners,public agencies and watershed asso-ciations to protect property andimprove fish and wildlife habitat.Examples include grants for wet-land and riparian habitat restora-tion, agricultural BMPs, coastalzone management and low-interestloans to improve drinking and sur-face water quality. However, thesefunds cannot be relied upon tosolve all problems, and there aremany ways to finance water clean-ups besides traditional federal sup-port programs.

Community-based efforts.Even communities without sub-stantial revenues can encouragewater quality protection. In fact,

8

The Community Quilt Conceptof Environmental Financing

Piecing together funding programs,

technical assistance programs

and innovative financing techniques

creates broad-based solutions to envi-

ronmental challenges.


prevention of pollution can bethought of as a financing methodbecause cleaning up waterwaysafter they have been polluted isextremely costly. Therefore, pollu-tion prevention measures taken bycommunities, which may includeproviding incentives or dis-incen-tives for agricultural and suburbanBMPs, low-impact development,management agreements andlandowner recognition programs,can contribute significantly to thefinancing quilt of techniques forwater quality management.Communities can select from arange of such techniques (see box),including revenue-generating pro-

grams, but the choice of financingoptions to protect sensitive landsadjoining streams, rivers and coast-lines depends on the willingness ofthe community and its elected offi-cials.

For instance, taxes and fees tar-geted at users or polluters, such asa stormwater utility, appeal to thewallet and provide dedicated rev-enue, but may face initial citizenskepticism and may require sub-stantial effort to develop andadminister. Conversely, voluntarymeasures, such as landownerrecognition programs, appeal toone’s sense of pride for the landand may need only minimal effortto establish, but do not ensure par-ticipation in the community’s effortto reduce nonpoint source pollu-tion. Rather than relying on a sin-gle activity, some communities use

a variety of approaches to establisha stream restoration or watershedmanagement program.

Four Stages of FundingThere are four stages of stream

corridor and watershed manage-ment that require funding efforts,and each can be supported by vari-ous federal and state assistance pro-grams and innovative financingtechniques:

Planning. Assessing potentialimpacts using maps and otherinformation is an important firststep in correcting a problem. Also,by developing a plan, a propertyowner (public or private) can beassured of a thorough analysis and

complete identification of theproblem.

Capital. Both structural BMPs,such as stream rip rap, retentionponds or animal fencing; and non-structural BMPs, such as riparianforest buffers and marsh plantings,require capital funds. Capital mayalso be provided in the form oftechnical assistance.

Maintenance. Often mainte-nance of stormwater and erosioncontrol projects is the most impor-tant part in retaining the project’seffectiveness. Poorly maintainedfacilities provide little or no floodprotection, lead to water qualitydegradation and threaten publicsafety, and can ultimately costmore to repair. An effective routinemaintenance program can reduceoverall costs and should be consid-ered part of a financing option.

Education and outreach.Every aspect of managing isenhanced by education and out-reach. Effective public educationcan encourage prevention, which inthe long run is cheaper than cor-rection efforts. There are severalsources of funding for environmen-tal education for local govern-ments: partnerships with localorganizations (e.g., wildlife groups)have proven very effective.

The Quilt Covers theCosts

Because there are many activitiesaffecting natural resources, a vari-ety of approaches to financing areneeded to best address shared envi-

ronmentalproblems.This typeof holisticapproachto financ-ing envi-ronmentalprojectscan alsoincreasethe types

of support available through theleveraging of funds and by involv-ing many segments of the commu-nity. As a result, when various fed-eral and state funding sources aresupported by local initiatives toprevent pollution and encouragewise stewardship, a comfortablefinancing quilt is created to providesupport for desired and mandatedenvironmental goals.

For further information contact:Elizabeth Hickey, EnvironmentalFinance Center, University Systemof Maryland, 112 Skinner Hall,College Park, MD 20742 USA.Tel: 301-405-6384. FAX: 301-314-9581. E-mail:[email protected]. Web site:http://www.mdsg.umd.edu/MDSG/EFC/.

9

Local Government Initiatives to Supplement Funding Programs(in order of increasing community effort)

• Programs for landowners who conserve sensitive areas• Management agreements• Leases• Loan agreements, including low-interest loans• Mini-bonds• Fees, including stormwater districts and other impact fees• Conservation easements, including transfer and purchase of development rights• Land acquisition, including land banks, rights of first refusal and options to purchase


By Marcus Polette

In recent years, increased tourismalong the Brazilian coast has

resulted in degradation of the nat-ural resources and a decline intourism. Evidence of this includes adecline in the local economy, envi-ronmental degradation, and theloss of cultural integrity and identi-ty by the local population, amongothers.

The city of Balneário Camboriúis a good example of the currentproblems. It is one of the largesttourist cities on Brazil’s southernAtlantic coast, receiving largenumbers of tourists fromArgentina, Uruguay and Paraguay.During the summer, the populationof a 6-km stretch of coast increases10 times its permanent population,receiving approximately 60,000tourists and reaching a density of9,000 inhabitants per square km.This has caused almost irreversibledamage and it is clear that short-,medium- and long-term coastalmanagement programs are needed,and that these must include localparticipation.

The Historic ProcessThe region was initially a fishing

and agricultural area. In the 1920s,the first summer houses appeared.In 1938, Camboriú resort had fewtourists. The coastal plain was cov-ered with forests, with few struc-

tures for visi-tors. The localsocial structure,especially arti-sanal fishers,was strong andthe environ-ment was unaf-fected by

tourist activities. The 1940s beganthe start of rapid development with

the construction of hotels and resi-dences along the beach. Furtherfrom the beach, residences werebuilt along narrow streets in stripsparallel to the beach (the rural dis-trict).

In the 1950s and ‘60s, the num-bers and regularity of visitorsincreased significantly duringOctober to February, the summerseason, and there was an increaseby local interests to develop thearea. In 1964, independent politicalstructures were established for thecoastal area and the rural district.The rural district was designatedthe municipal district.

In the 1970s, a highway wasbuilt in Brazil to facilitatenorth/south access, passingthrough the heart of the municipaldistrict. This contributed greatly tothe area’s development. At thistime, residences located on thebeach front were transformed intohotels and commercial buildings. Aresidential expansion also began.

Real estate speculation was adecisive factor in the loss of envi-ronmental quality in the municipaldistrict. With a significant increasein population, and with the entre-preneurs in charge of development– with support both financially andpolitically from the public munici-pal powers – problems increased.The local community, being depen-dent on jobs from resort develop-ment, did not interfere.

In the 1980s and ‘90s, the areabecame firmly established as aresort city, with the tourist popula-tion larger than the permanentpopulation and tourism dominatingthe economy. Hotels were builtquickly, and were now being builtinland because of the lack of avail-able coastal land. Today, areas onceused by artisanal fishers are slowly

being converted to marinas andpiers, and other facilities associatedwith tourism.

During March to Novemberwhen tourism is low, the city set-tles down and is occupied mostlyby the permanent population.However, when the summer seasonbegins, the city goes from a quiet

mode to a full-swing tourist resort.The result is a decline in the quali-ty of life for the local population,as increased demand is put on thewater supply and sewage treatmentsystem, as well as the town’s over-all infrastructure.

Current conditions indicate thatthere is a great need for an inte-grated coastal management pro-gram for Balneário Camboriútoday, but which also addresses thedemands for future growth, as wellas an increasing permanent coastal

population. Several programs arealready in place to mobilize thelocal population to becomeinvolved, not just with problems inthe city, but in the watershed of theCamboriú River. These programsare aimed to educate and empowera small portion of the population,who in turn will educate theremaining population in an effortto improve their environment andquality of life.

Very recently, a locally-organizedcommittee, the Management

10

Urbanization and Tourism on theSouth Coast of Brazil

Aerial

view in

1956.

Aerial

view in

1938.

Aerial

view in

1995.


Committee of Rio CamboriúWatershed Basin, began a processfor the planning, adoption andimplementation of a coastal man-agement program in an integratedand participatory manner. Thiscommittee is working towardswide social visibility and credibili-ty; only when this is achieved willthe committee be able to partici-pate in the decisionmaking process.

An expected implementation

motivating and confidence-buildingeffect far beyond its size and cost.

Attend to basic humanneeds. Owusu-Mensah’s article(page 18) raises the crucial questionof whether an integrated coastalmanagement program offers muchfor poor people living subsistencelifestyles. In some countries, com-munity-based coastal managementprograms are among the few mecha-nisms for protecting the naturalresource base upon which coastalcommunities depend. Coastal pro-grams can also give a voice to theneed for access rights to common-property resources that are fre-quently not considered when large-scale development decisions aremade.

Cultivate partnerships andimplementation networks. Animportant recent trend in coastaland marine conservation is the pri-vate-public partnership and theexpanding role of civic organizationsin taking on implementation respon-sibilities. (See Lewis article, page 3;Heyman article, page 19) The pur-pose of these collaborations is not tocircumvent legal requirements orweaken enforcement, rather to findand respond to the motivating factoror need which resource usersrequire in order to change behavior.This often means flexibility in themethod by which a business meetspollution standards or resource har-vesting limits. It also can mean

empowering local conservationgroups who are already motivated tocarry out conservation measures butmay lack official recognition, organi-zational capacity or legal authority toenforce management policies.

Craft a practioner’s network.Promoting a coastal managementcommunity, both locally and world-wide, is crucial. Associations of orga-nizations with a common purposeare succeeding in engaging both gov-ernment and civic associations tosolve specific problems.

Success stories in implementationare as diverse as the places theycome from and the dedicated peoplewho pursue them, sometimes withgreat courage against formidableodds. Although the specific tactic orstrategy may not be transferable toanother cultural or legal setting, thespirit to continually try to find whatworks most definitely can be trans-planted.

Don Robadue has guided US andinternational coastal managementproject teams for 22 years andpresently coordinates CRC’s LatinAmerica technical assistance pro-gram. He can be contacted at:Coastal Resources Center,University of Rhode Island,Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882USA. Tel: 401-8746128. FAX: 401-789-4670. E-mail:[email protected]. Web site:http://crc.uri.edu.

11

problem will be the ability toachieve a consensus between thegovernmental and nongovernmen-tal stakeholders. The main prob-lems identified so far are lack ofsewage treatment, agrotoxicityfrom the rural areas, lack of astrong monitoring programs forland use activities, lack of an effec-tive master plan, deforestation ofAtlantic rainforest and lack of envi-ronmental education programs in

the urban and rural areas.For further information contact:

Marcus Polette, University of Valedo Itajaí, Faculty of SeaSciences/Oceanography, RuaUruguai 458 - Itajaí - SC, 88302-202 Brazil. E-mail: [email protected].

Latin America, the Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank is focusing onbuilding institutional capacitythrough professional training andfostering integrated projects whichlink economic development and nat-ural resource management.

Implementers are concernedmore with the feasibility of solutionsthan refining the diagnosis of theproblems. Economic studies thatreveal the full range of benefitsaction might be more useful inattracting administrative and politi-cal support.. Save money by using soundcoastal management policies.Coastal policies aimed at sustainingthe coastal resources can foster eco-nomic development, and pay forthemselves. Pollution preventionstrategies (see Letson article, page14) and non-structural alternativesto coastal erosion (see Polette arti-cle, page 10) can be backed bystrong economic arguments showingthat conservation or balanced use ofresources is advantageous.

Prove that a good idea canreally work: Seeing is believing.Pilot projects and easily manageddemonstrations such as mooringbuoys or small marine park projectscan test specific key doubts and con-cerns about implementation. A suc-cessful small exercise can have a

(continued from page 1)Charting a Course


Interviewed by PamelaRubinoff, Coastal ResourcesCenter

Question: Describe the originand the principles of the coastalmanagement program in Barbados.

Answer: Our program beganofficially in 1983, when the gov-ernment of Barbados embarked ona pre-feasibility and diagnosticsstudy for coastal conservation. Itfocused initially on the issue ofcoastal erosion. However, theissues have changed over time. Theprimary reason for the change inthe issues stems from the recogni-tion that one cannot tackle issues inisolation. We recognize, for exam-ple, that coastal erosion is clearlylinked to the increased vulnerabili-ty of coastal beaches through reefdegradation, water quality issues,the removal of coastal vegetation,among other things. This led tofundamental changes in the pro-gram, broadening its scope andlook.

We have a number of competinguser groups – the tourism sector;hoteliers; fisheries; passive recre-ationists such as divers, snorkelersor swimmers; and water-sportoperators such as jet-ski and glass-bottom boats operators. Conflictresolution became a new andemerging issue. We recognized thatit was important to pay consider-able attention to the question ofsystems’ thresholds and recognitionof carrying capacity if we were tomaintain the integrity of coastalresource space. So, while we didinitially focus on problems relatedto coastal erosion, we succeededonly by broadening that outlook toother issues and integrating themmore.

Q: Over the last 15 years, whatwould you say have been yourmajor accomplishments within theprogram?

A: I would like to highlight fiveof them. I think first of all we havemanaged to embed the notion ofcoastal zone management in thethinking and the psyche of ourleaders. People have come to rec-ognize that the coast is a criticalnational asset. It has a dollar value.It is an economic good, and there-fore, it has to be treated as aresource, which needs to be prop-erly managed if it is to become sus-tainable.

Secondly, I think we’ve also suc-ceeded to some degree in arrestingthe coastal erosion at critical sites,particularly at those favorite beachlocations which are important forboth residents and visitors alike.We have brought the prime beachlocations under control by using avariety of litigation measures, softand hard erosion options, and regu-latory techniques.

Thirdly, we now have at our dis-posal better mechanisms for con-flict resolution among the coastalstakeholders. We have initiated asystem where we can bring con-flicting interests together in thecoastal zone and try to workthrough those difficulties and findsome common ground amongstakeholders.

A fourth area of success is theconsiderable building of nationalcapacity within Barbados, specifi-cally in terms of training. We have agood pool of highly trained profes-sionals working in the CoastalZone Management Unit. Coastalmanagement programs can only besustainable if there is a good cadreof local, trained professionals that

can develop along with the pro-gram.

There is one final area that I’dlike to mention, that is the extentto which we’ve been able to getgovernment’s successive changes inpolitical administration to buy intothe coastal management program.Indeed, it would be true to say thatour resources, both in terms ofstaff and budgets, have increasedwith every successive change inpolitical administration. Politicalsupport is important for ensuringsurvivability of the program interms of budgets, resources andsense of ownership.

Q: Who else is involved in thework of coastal management inBarbados?

A: There are specialties and skillswhich we don’t have within theoffice. Thus we have set up func-tional linkages (management link-ages) with other agencies, forexample, with the Ministry ofEconomic Affairs. We don’t havethe skills of economists within ouroffice. We have no attorneysattached to our office either, so wedraw those resources from else-where in the government sector orfrom cooperating agencies.

Q: Failures often give us some ofthe lessons learned and some of thestrength to move forward. Can youoffer some examples?

A:Yes. No one likes to stand upin front of a group and say, “I’vebeen a spectacular failure.” But Ithink we can learn as much fromfailures in coastal zone manage-ment as we can from successes. Wehave generally tended not to docu-ment our failures in the past. Andmaybe this is something whichcoastal management and scientistsaround the world need to begin

12

Implementing Coastal Management – A Conversation with Leonard Nurse, Directorof the Coastal Management Unit, Barbados


doing because there are very goodlessons to be learned. We havemade, on occasion, erroneousassumptions about solutions toproblems, and end up sometimeswith the wrong definition for whatwe perceived to have been theproblem. The lesson is that solu-tions essentially are location specif-ic. I am a firm believer in this.Even though problems may looksimilar to those in another country,the solution required may be vastlydifferent.

Another lesson learned I wouldlike to mention is our tardiness inrecognizing the critical role that allstakeholders have to play. In theearly days we made certainassumptions about which groups ofstakeholders were critical andwhich were not. That is the mostdangerous thing to do in coastalmanagement and planning. We’velearned that even those stakehold-ers who initially you may haveassumed to be marginal to theprocess, are often crucial in ensur-ing that the program survives. Atthe same time, we must recognizethat stakeholders are good reser-voirs of knowledge, and I think thatknowledge can be harnessed andput to good use in the managementprocess.

A third example has been ourtardiness in recognizing the valueof quantifying, in dollar terms, theimportance of our coastalresources. I think people tend totake coastal resources such asbeaches for granted, believing thatthey will always be there. It isessential to quantify in dollar termsthe importance of those resourcesso that people can understand theeconomic value of coastalresources. For example, calculatingwhat the loss by erosion of a kilo-meter of beach means in dollarvalue.

Q:You mean in lost revenuesand opportunity costs?

A: Precisely. Revenue is lost

from the point of view of enjoy-ment and beach use by tourists orlocals. It also is ‘lost’ in the sensethat we now have to find money tostabilize that beach or to designmitigation measures and quantifythose mitigation measures torestore that beach. So I think theresources have to be measured inthose terms. Only then do politi-cians and administrators recognizethat they’re sitting on a very valu-able resource. This is also one areathat we need to look at in thefuture in terms of institutionalstrengthening and as the CoastalZone Management Unit developsand broadens.

Q: How has the institutionalframework within Barbados beenable to promote coastal manage-ment?

A: The Town and CountryPlanning Office was initiallyresponsible for all physical develop-ment on the island, includingcoastal development. It is staffed byurban and physical planners. Theydid not have all the specific skillsrequired to manage coastalresources and to deal with coastalproblems. What they do is to enterinto consultation and seek adviceon specific aspects of coastal prob-lems from other agencies with thatexperience.

In 1983 the Coastal Conserva-tion Unit was set up. The govern-ment recognized that it was criticalto ensure the permanence of theagency. It has grown from a staff offour to close to 30 scientists andother professionals. It is now calledthe Coastal Zone ManagementUnit and is a permanent entity inthe government of Barbados. Onecritical thing is the importance ofensuring that you have trained,qualified staff with appropriateareas of expertise to manage acoastal program.

Q: What do you see as the chal-lenges for the future of coastalmanagement in Barbados?

A: One of the challenges we faceis that as our program expands andas new responsibilities are taken onby our office, we have to spendmore time looking at the issue ofenforcement. It is pointless if afterdoing good science, designing aprogram and putting a manage-ment plan in place, if we are notgoing to pay attention to enforce-ment. It is expensive, and I thinkwhat we will try to focus on isfinding the best mix and attempt todesign an enforcement system thatis not cumbersome, administrative-ly burdensome or overly expensive.There are ways that one can doenforcement by drawing on theresources and the expertise ofother agencies that are perhaps bet-ter placed and better trained to doenforcement.

A second challenge is focusingon the consistent and genuineinvolvement of all stakeholders inthe process. We plan to ensure thatthere are resources and access topersonnel by nongovernmentalorganizations and other stakehold-ers, as well as to ensure that thereis stakeholder training.

A third important area is theneed to prioritize all the issues thatare still outstanding and need to betackled. In other words, we have toorder our focus a bit more. As theprogram matures, there are morechallenges that come up. We as agroup have to do some soul-search-ing in terms of prioritizing ourneeds and the way in which welook at issues.

Finally, and perhaps one of thegreatest challenges we will face inthe future or have begun to face, iscoping with the increasing pres-sures being brought to bear on thecoast. The competition among usergroups is becoming fiercer. Weneed to ensure that the northeastand southeast coasts of the islandare not developed in the same wayand at the same pace that the west

13

(continued page 35)


By David Letson, DanielSuman and Manoj Shivlani

In the past decade, national andinternational pollution policieshave increasingly opted for preven-tion over remediation. Installingpollution control infrastructure andretrofitting industrial and commer-cial operations after the fact, inorder to restore contaminatedrivers, lakes and coastal waters, hasresulted in significant progress overthe past three decades in waterquality restoration and protection.However it has come at enormousexpense, requiring complex imple-mentation and compliance systemsthat countries find increasingly dif-ficult to undertake. The UnitedStates’ Pollution Prevention Act of1990 defines pollution prevention

(P2) assourcereduc-tion, andoffers afour-tierhierarchy

of waste management options, indescending order of preference:

1. Prevention and reduction2. Recycling and reuse3. Treatment4. DisposalP2 warrants careful considera-

tion as an anticipatory, comprehen-sive approach that might savemoney and avoid end-of-pipe regu-lations, which are key problems incoastal pollution control imple-mentation.

Over the past 25 years, U.S. leg-islation has increasingly embracedP2 principles in the management ofcoastal environments. Four casestudies illustrate P2’s prospects forimproved success in actions toaddress a variety of pollution prob-lems within the coastal zone: mari-nas in Broward County, Florida(toxic substances); the cruise line

industry (solid waste); ChesapeakeBay, east coast U.S. (nutrients); andBoston Harbor, Massachusetts(wastewater).

The coastal zone is unique in thenature of P2 activities. Water trans-ports pollutants released on landsand waters far from the source,affecting sensitive habitats and eco-nomically valuable resources. Thecoastal zone is a good site for adop-tion of P2 strategies. Becausecoastal resources are multi-mediaand are exposed to a broad suite ofpollutants, damage is often readilyvisible and there is the possibilityof creating a strong constituency insupport of action.

The P2 case studies reportedhere all faced significant political,legal or economic obstacles to suc-cessful implementation. Politicalfactors include the absence ofgrassroots acceptance, weak politi-cal will and poor cooperation andcommunication between the regu-lators and the regulated communi-ty. On the legal level, problemsarise when regulations do not per-mit the affected sources to selectapproaches that they consider to becost effective or socially accept-able. Enforcement in pollutioncontrol is often complicated bylarge numbers of geographically-dispersed small sources thattogether generate significantamounts of pollution. However, thevoluntary nature of many P2 cam-paigns may reduce the commandand control-based enforcementburden somewhat. Economic limi-tations include weak incentives toadopt clean technologies and thelack of accounting of the positiveeffects of a cleaner environment.

Toxics in Broward CountyMarinas. The Broward County,Florida, marina program regula-tions contain an exemption forsmall marinas (<10 boat slips) and,

therefore, many marinas remainoutside the formal P2 program.Despite the cooperation betweencounty regulators and the marinaindustry, many marina ownersoppose the program and are suspi-cious of the county’s motives. Toaddress this difficulty in programexecution, public education andcooperative ventures with the reg-ulated industry were undertaken toencourage adoption of P2 strate-gies. Recognizing that clean tech-nologies may be costly, state andlocal governments could providestronger economic incentives toencourage marinas to adopt P2strategies.

Disposal by the Cruise LineIndustry. Compliance with inter-national and national restrictionson ocean disposal of garbage hasstimulated adoption of some P2strategies by the cruise line indus-try, as has industry sensitivity topublic image. However, despitethese restrictions, full complianceremains problematic. A successfulimplementation program in thiscase must address several uniquefactors. The vast size of the oceanpresents logistical problems formonitoring vessels. Many cruiseships are not registered in the U.S.,and sail in waters beyond the juris-diction of U.S. authorities. Someforeign ports that receive garbagefrom U.S. vessels may not haverecycling or garbage-handling facil-ities. Availability of cheap disposaloutside the U.S. may inadvertentlysubvert P2 initiatives. The con-sumptive nature of this industryimplies that source reduction mayhave only limited success.Additionally, older vessels wouldrequire extensive retrofitting toinstall new garbage treatment sys-tems.

Nutrients in ChesapeakeBay. Nutrient reduction in the

14

Pollution Prevention in the U. S. Coastal Zone

While not a panacea, the United

States’ pollution prevention pro-

gram adds analytical and managerial

options that may yield better long-run

environmental results and increase

chances for implementation.


Chesapeake Bay watershed pro-vides numerous land-based exam-ples of successful P2 by setting outthe overall results but allowingflexibility in how to achieve them.Obstacles to P2 strategies in theChesapeake watershed includeadministrative coordination on amulti-state level. To enhance thechances for success, the effort iswatershed based, considers ecosys-tem function and is multi-jurisdic-tional. With the overall nutrientreduction goals established byinterstate agreement, each jurisdic-tion possesses the flexibility toselect its own mix of strategiesbased on political and economicfactors. Strategies may embraceland management techniques, agri-cultural best management prac-tices, phosphate detergent bans,and/or nutrient reduction fromsewage treatment plants. Lack ofpolitical will at the highest levels ofsome states may still derail theoriginal agreement. Even wherepolitical will exists, funding limita-tions may restrict the programs’full effectiveness.

Wastewater in BostonHarbor. The revitalization ofurban wastewater treatment facili-ties may introduce technologieswith a higher P2 rank. The P2 prin-ciples may prompt identification offeasible solutions with superiorenvironmental results. For some ofthe nation’s older northeast cities,a national ban on ocean dumping ofsewage sludge appeared to pose aninsurmountable obstacle by man-dating alternative disposal meth-ods. Boston’s selected option, pel-letization (formation of small pel-lets), is ‘external waste recyclingand use’ in P2 language and mayprove a superior outcome in thelong run. Pellet sales only recoupabout 10 percent of productioncosts. However, the accountingwould change if one were to quan-tify the avoided environmentalharm, as well as the comparative

costs of alternative disposal.National and state standards forlimits to metal loadings in land-applied sludge have encouragedindustrial pretreatment and sourcereduction, which are also yieldingenvironmentally superior results.

Integrating P2 andCoastal Management

In addressing the effectiveness ofP2 in the coastal zone, a recurringconcern has been integration ofstakeholder-wide participation(comprehensiveness). For example,five types of integration in coastalmanagement have been identifiedthat also seem desirable for P2:

• Horizontal integration of sepa-rate economic sectors and associat-ed governmental units

• Vertical integration of all levelsof governmental and nongovern-mental units

• Integration of planning andmanagement perspectives thataddress land-use and sea-useprocesses

• Integration across scientific dis-ciplines of analyses and assessments

• Program integration consistingof planning, management, educa-tion and applied research

Comprehensiveness in address-ing pollution control and preven-tion is not always desirable, partic-ularly if it brings in more numer-ous stakeholders with more hetero-geneous economic interests anddivergent agendas that dilute thefocus of implementing P2. Perhapsthe goal should be maximum par-ticipation that does not induceparalysis. The Chesapeake Baywatershed has its ‘free riders’ (thestates of Delaware, New York andVirginia) and still faces coordina-tion problems. Broward County’sjurisdictional concerns range fromprohibitive enforcement costs forall the small facilities, to the needto elicit the cooperation of itspolitical neighbors. Similarly, thecruise line industry is international

and prohibitively expensive tomonitor. Boston’s long road toclean-up is partly attributable todiffusion of responsibility among itsmany communities. (TheMassachusetts Water ResourcesAuthority serves 61 cities andtowns.)

P2 is fundamentally anticipatoryin its focus. However, anticipatingeffluents before they occur impliesan indirect and likely distortedapproach that might lead to unan-ticipated mistakes. Such ‘upstream’strategies, those that limit inputs toor intended outputs from pollutingactivities, may be easier wheneffluents are unobservable orexpensive to remediate (e.g., toxicsubstances or nonpoint source pol-lution). Unfortunately, producersor consumers facing limits on theinputs they use or the outputs theydesire may respond in ways,unforeseen by policymakers, thatactually increase pollution. Forexample, farmers have sometimesresponded to acreage limits byincreasing their use of agriculturalchemicals. Thus the input restric-tion induced the substitution of apolluting input (chemicals) for anabating one (land), possiblyincreasing pollution. The efficiencyof an anticipatory approachdepends on whether the adminis-trative ease of addressing inputs oroutputs is worth the consequentdistortions.

P2 EffectivenessThe effectiveness of P2 relates to

its evolution. Through no historicaccident, P2 has several basicunderlying principles. First, inrecognition of technological limitsto end-of-pipe strategies and of ris-ing remediation costs, P2 antici-pates rather than reacts to pollu-tion. This precautionary principlehas become an accepted approachfor developing coastal resource usepolicies. Second, environmental

15

(continued page 21)


By Thomas C. Malone

As human populations and activ-ities increase in coastal water-

sheds, the combined effects ofglobal climate change and humanalterations of the environment areexpected to be especially pro-nounced in coastal aquatic ecosys-tems where inputs of materials andenergy from land, sea, air and peo-ple converge.

Episodic meteorological eventsand longer-term climate changewill compound the effects of localand regional human alterations ofthe environment through sea levelrise and an increase in storm-surgehazards, and possible changes in thefrequency and intensity of storms.Over the next 100 years, rising sealevel may inundate large areas ofcoastal wetlands and a significantportion of dry land less than 50 cmabove sea level. Assuming currentdevelopment trends continue,flood damages incurred by proper-ties subject to sea level rise areprojected to increase by as much as50 percent for a 30-cm rise, and byover 100 percent for a 90-cm rise.In addition, saltwater is likely tointrude further inland andupstream, threatening drinkingwater supplies. Projected increasesin water tem-perature andchanges infreshwaterflows are likelyto have pro-found local andregional affectson the biodi-versity and pro-ductivity ofcoastal ecosys-tems.

A recentanalysis of‘ecosystem ser-vices’ conclud-

ed that their global value, in termsof the cost of reproducing them inan artificial biosphere, is on theorder of US $30 trillion – or near-ly twice the cumulative globalgross national product. Servicesprovided by coastal aquatic ecosys-tems (Table 1) were valued at US$11.4 trillion, with terrestrial (US$11.1 trillion) and oceanic (US$ 7.5trillion) ecosystems accounting forthe rest. Such analyses of ecosys-tem services and current predic-tions of climate change and itseffects are controversial. However,they underscore the importanceand urgency of achieving a moreholistic, predictive understandingof the responses of coastal ecosys-tems to inputs from terrestrial,atmospheric, oceanic and humansources.

Coastal-Scale GlobalOcean ObservingSystems

Achieving a predictive under-standing of coastal ecosystemsdepends, among other things, onthe development of regional-to-global networks that link observa-tion, analysis and applications in aneffective and timely manner. Toachieve this, the Global Ocean

Observing System (GOOS) wascreated in 1991 in response to thedesire of many nations to improveclimate forecasts, mitigate naturalhazards and improve the manage-ment of living resources. GOOSwould establish integrated, multi-disciplinary observations systemsrequired to achieve these goals on acoastal-to-global scale.Conceptually, GOOS consists oftwo components, a basin-scalecomponent concerned primarilywith the role of the oceans in glob-al climate change, and a coastal-scale component concerned pri-marily with the combined effectsof climate change and human activ-ities at local-to-regional scales.

Although many governmentshave expressed strong support forCoastal GOOS (C-GOOS), agree-ment on goals and the develop-ment of a strategic plan for imple-mentation has been slow, largelybecause implementing C-GOOSrequires two fundamental changesin how things are done:

1. The coastal research commu-nity has been internally fragmented(oceanographers, meteorologists,estuarine ecologists, terrestrial andlandscape ecologists, etc.) and iso-lated from the public and the pub-

16

Coastal GOOS: What is it and Why do it?

Table 1. Ecosystem Services Provided by Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems inOrder of Estimated Value.

Rank Ecosystem Service Ecosystem Functions Examples

1 Nutrient Cycling Nutrient storage & processing Nitrogen fixation, nutrient cycles2 Waste Treatment Removal, breakdown of excess Pollution control, detoxification

nutrients & contaminants3 Disturbance Regulation Buffer impact of climatic Storm protection, flood control &

disturbances drought recovery4 Recreation None Boating, sport fishing, swimming, etc.5 Food Production Portion of primary production Fish harvest

extractable as food6 Refuges Habitat & biodiversity Nurseries, resting stages & migratory

species7 Cultural None Aesthetic, artistic, spiritual & research8 Biological Control Trophic dynamics & biodiversity Keystone predator & pest control9 Raw materials Portion of primary production Lumber & fuel

extractable as raw materials10 Gas Regulation Chemical composition of the Carbon dioxide, ozone & sulfur oxides

atmosphere


lic interest. C-GOOS must pro-mote more effective linkagesbetween these groups.

2. With few exceptions, researchto document patterns in coastalecosystems has emphasized obser-vations and experiments on small(local) scales. Thus, experimentsand observations are generally toolimited in time and space to pro-vide summary information on thescale that characterizes biologicaland physical variability in coastalecosystems and their adjacentwatersheds and oceans. C-GOOSmust promote the collection ofobservations on coastal ecosystemsof sufficient duration, spatial extentand resolution, and of real-timedata telemetry, assimilation andvisualization.

In an attempt to address thesechallenges, two efforts have beeninitiated in 1998 to make C-GOOSa reality:

• The IntergovernmentalOceanographic Commission (IOC)established a C-GOOS panel thathad its first meeting in April of1998, during which the panelestablished a program to designinternational C-GOOS

• Federal agencies, led by theoffice of the NationalOceanographic and AtmosphericAdministration, concerned withthe coastal zone have established aC-GOOS Support Office at HornPoint Laboratory, Maryland.

Two activities will be a work-shop in Spring 1999 to highlightthe importance and challenges of insitu sensing, real-time telemetryand assimilation modeling; andLABNET, an attempt to networkU.S. coastal laboratories for thepurposes of detecting and predict-ing change in the coastal zone.

Recurring EnvironmentalIssues

There are many environmentalproblems and issues that occur on aglobal scale. These can be orga-

nized into operational categoriesthat reflect user needs (Table 2).The role of C-GOOS is to encour-age and support the developmentand application of methods ofdefining current and predictingfuture environmental conditions.These predictive capabilities wouldbe used as a means of preservinghealthy coastal environments, pro-moting sustainable uses of coastalresources, mitigating coastal haz-ards, and ensuring safe and efficientmarine operations. To these ends,with support from the IOC, WorldMeteorological Society, UnitedNations Environment Programmeand International Council ofScientific Unions, a C-GOOS panelhas been formed to develop a strat-egy that will promote:

• The use of remote and in situsensing technologies and real-timedata acquisition and analysis

• More timely exchange of infor-mation and knowledge among ter-restrial and estuarine ecologists,oceanographers and meteorologistsworking in the coastal zone

• The development of models toimprove the understanding ofcoastal ecosystem structure andfunction, and to predict changes in

their capacity to support ecosystemservices

• More effective linkagesbetween science and society; andincreased public awareness of theissues, especially as related to theinteractive effects of climatechange and human activities in thecoastal zone

• The design and implementationof regional-to-global coordinatedstrategies for monitoring, dataacquisition, integration, synthesis,modeling and dissemination ofproducts

For further information contact:Thomas C. Malone, Horn PointLaboratory, University ofMaryland Center forEnvironmental Science, P.O. Box775, Cambridge, Maryland 21613USA. Tel: 410-221-8406. FAX:410-221-8473. E-mail: [email protected]. Web site:http://www.hpl.umces.edu.

17

Table 2. Globally Issues Organized by OperationalCategories.

Operational Category IssuesPreserve Healthy Coastal Habitat loss and modification Environments Nutrient over-enrichment

Toxic contaminationIncreases in marine organismsHarmful algal bloomsNon-indigenous speciesBiodiversity

Promote Sustainable Use Exploitation of living resourcesof Coastal Resources Mariculture

Saltwater intrusionMitigate Coastal Hazards Water (flooding, storm surges)

Wind (tropical storms)ErosionSea-level rise

Safe and Efficient Marine Safe navigationOperations Efficient maritime commerce

Exploitation of non-living resourcesSpills of hazardous materialsBallast water (non-indigenous

species introduction)


By Ben Owusu-Mensah

From the first day of theUniversity of Rhode Island

Coastal Resources Center’s 1998Summer Institute in CoastalManagement program, the more Ilearned about integrated coastalmanagement (ICM) and sustainabledevelopment, the more I becamealarmed that many developingcountries are only paying lip ser-vice to ICM, and that ICM initia-tives in developing countries are injeopardy.

If we define sustainable develop-ment as ‘development that meetsthe needs of the present withoutcompromising the ability of futuregenerations to meet their ownneeds,’ then how can one imple-ment programs that call for the useof coastal resources in a ‘sustain-able’ manner? Must most coastalcommunities in developing coun-tries use coastal resources as theirmain source of livelihood, which inmost cases out of necessity leads tooverexploitation and degradation.There are often no alternativelivelihoods, and considering thesepeople have to live, how can theybe bothered about environmental

degrada-tion andsustainabledevelop-ment?‘Let’s livetoday andlet tomor-row take

care of itself,’ as the saying goes.The question therefore is whetherthere is a correlation betweenpoverty and environmental degra-dation? It seems that there is. Thefollowing questions support this. •Why are governments in devel-

oped countries more concernedabout environmental issues thangovernments in developing coun-tries?•Why are communities in devel-

oped countries more concernedwith their environment to theextent that they are even preparedto make trade-offs (like payingmore taxes) to preserve their envi-ronment? •Why are more affluent communi-ties in a developing country moreconcerned about their environmentthan people living in poorer com-munities in the same country?

The question I pose is whetherthe framework being put forth bydeveloped countries to achieve sus-tainable development in the com-munities of poor developing coun-tries will succeed, or does eachdeveloping country have to evolveits own approach to address ICMproblems?

Within the ICM policy cycle(issue identification, programpreparation, adoption and funding,implementation and evaluation), toguarantee success, would it not bemore prudent if after the programpreparation and funding stages, andbefore the implementation stage,emphasis be placed on ‘earlyactions’ that would directlyimprove the economic and sociallivelihood of the people? Thisshould be accomplished by aware-ness programs. Otherwise ICMprograms will have less chance ofsuccess when economic and socialconditions are bad. Environmentalissues are of low priority whenthere is no food on the table.

The National ScaleOn June 11, 1998, U. S.

President Clinton signed an execu-tive order on coral reef protection

committing US$ 2 million a yearfor coral reef protection, and a fur-ther US$ 224 million for oceanareas. On the national level, theU.S. has an ICM plan, while everycoastal state also has its own ICMplan. In Europe, the EuropeanUnion has its Coastal ManagementCode. On the other hand, in theSub-Saharan Africa region, mostgovernments either have no coastalmanagement plan or are in theprocess of evolving one. In mostcases these program have beenstarted through the initiative of aninternational body and not throughthe governments’ own initiative.Not many countries in Sub-SaharanAfrica have US$ 2 million, or feelthey can afford to sacrifice othersocial needs for environmental pro-tection. Some would rather sacri-fice their environment for money.

Many countries in Sub-SaharanAfrica sit down helplessly andwatch as their coastlines are devas-tated by erosion, their fisheries col-lapse and their waters become pol-luted. These governments have tomake difficult trade-offs with theirscarce resources. Should they bepumping in huge sums of money tocontrol environmental degradation,or invest in vital services such ashealth and education? It might bethat the US$ 224 million provisionfor ocean areas protection in theU.S. is perhaps 0.001 percent ofthe federal budget, while thisamount might be a three-year bud-get for a whole country in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Communities and theCorrelation betweenPoverty andEnvironmentalDegradation

The importance communitiesplace on their environment might

18

Link Between Poverty and EnvironmentalDegradation Must Be Addressed for ICM toSucceed in Developing Countries

When implementing ICM plans in

developing countries, literacy

programs and other programs geared

towards improving the communities eco-

nomic well being must be implemented

either in tandem with the main ICM

plan, or before, through early actions.

(continued page 20)


By William D. Heyman

The Gulf of Honduras encom-passes a tri-national body of

coastal and marine waters includ-ing portions of the exclusive eco-nomic zones of Belize, Guatemalaand Honduras.The gulf contains acritical network of existing andproposed marine reserves, but alsoprovides a home to nearly a halfmillion inhabitants, two industrialshipping ports and all the associat-ed commerce. If the health of thecoastal ecosystem is maintained,fisheries and marine and coastaltourism will contribute greatly tothe sustainable economic develop-ment of the region.

Because the Gulf is a sharedecosystem, whereby marine cur-rents link the waters of three coun-tries, implementation and enforce-ment becomes complex and diffi-cult. For example, effluents fromthe Ulua and Motagua rivers ofHonduras and Guatemala affectwater quality around the SapodillaCayes along the Belize BarrierReef. Belize continues to allow tur-tle harvesting, while it is banned inGuatemala and Honduras.Guatemala allows lobster captureduring the time when Hondurasand Belize have seasonal closures.In order to address conservationand management issues across thisgulf, a group of eight concernednongovernmental organizations(NGOs) have come together as theAlliance of NongovernmentalOrganizations for the Conservationof the Gulf of Honduras – “TheAlliance.”

The Alliance members recognizethe authority and national sover-eignty of their respective govern-ments, but also recognize theirunique role as NGOs in guidingdevelopment and conservation.The

Alliance has had six formal meet-ings since its formation in 1996. Itsmajor objectives are:•Tri-national fisheries management•Tri-national system of coastal andmarine protected areas•Sustainable economic alternativesfor local residents, especially eco-tourism•Protection and management ofcertain species, especially manatees•Port contingency planning

The Gulf of Honduras containsall major Caribbean coastal andmarine habitats in close proximity:estuaries, mangroves, seagrasses,coral reefs and open ocean waters.These waters support healthy anddiverse fishery resources includingspiny lobster, conch, shrimp,and finfish including snappers,groupers, jacks, mackerel andsnook. According to bothregional technical assessmentsand anecdotal reports fromlocal fishers, these resourcesare under heavy extractionpressure and in a drastic stateof decline. Since theseresources are shared, open-access resources, there is littleincentive for management.

The fisheries managementstrategy of The Alliance, there-fore, is to work at both thenational government level, as wellas with local fishers in all aspects ofresearch, issue identification andsolution implementation.TheAlliance has completed the firststage by conducting a survey ofcoastal fishermen which detailstheir opinions about the state ofthe resources, and their suggestionsfor better management.They havealso helped sponsor a regional fish-eries management policy meeting,held in Puerto Barrios, Guatemala,and attended by local fishers fromall three countries, and govern-

ment representatives fromGuatemala, Honduras and Mexico.Government officials from Belize,Guatemala and Honduras alsoattended themost recentmeeting ofThe Alliancewhich washeld inPunta Gordain Belize. Finally, NGOs are sup-porting the enforcement efforts oftheir national government part-ners, in some cases by providingboats and fuel to enforcementagencies whose operational budgetsare severely restricted.

Marine Protected AreasA linked system of coastal and

marine protected areas is criticalfor the support of marine fisheries,

and coastal and marine tourismdevelopment.These protectedareas are severely limited, financial-ly, yet the ecological and economicservices that they provide are high-ly significant. Alliance members ineach country are assisting theirnational government partners withthe planning and management ofcoastal and marine protected areas.For example, the Fundación para laProtección de Lancetilla, Punta Saly Texiguat, is managing the ParqueNacionál Janette Kawas at PuntaSal, on behalf of the Honduran

19

‘The Alliance’ – SharedResponsibility to Assure Results

NGOs are supporting the enforce-

ment efforts of their national

government partners, in some cases by

providing boats and fuel to enforce-

ment agencies whose operational bud-

gets are severely restricted.

(continued page 20)


also lend to understanding the cor-relation between poverty and envi-ronmental degradation. In big citieslike New York, Washington orLondon – communities wherethere is poverty – the urban envi-ronments are very much degradedas compared to affluent communi-ties. In these poor communities,where environmental awareness isvery low, garbage littering is verypronounced, while the same is nottrue in the richer communitieswhere awareness and concern arevery high.

In comparing rural and urbancoastal communities of developingcountries, you see that rural com-munities pay much less attention totheir environment. Environmentalawareness is low, and, in most casesfor those living in the coastal zone,there are few or no alt ernatelivelihoods, thus they necessarilyexploit, and usually over-exploit,their coastal resources to survive.In some communities, in the ab-sence of vital social amenities liketoilets and garbage dumps, thebeaches are used for thesepurposes.

Constituency BuildingExperience in coastal manage-

ment worldwide demonstrates that

the success of sustained manage-ment efforts are significantlyincreased by the meaningful partic-ipation of the communities. Butwhen one asks the opinions ofcoastal managers who work in adeveloping country, they will agreeon how difficult it is to build con-stituency for a coastal managementinitiative. Even to convince com-munities that their own environ-ment is under threat seems to be alosing battle. Villagers have livedthis way since the times of theirforefathers, and as such see nothingwrong with traditional practicesfor using resources, nor the needfor change. Modernization theo-rists claim that developing coun-tries remain poor because they donot want to change from the waystheir forefathers lived.

On the other hand, constituen-cy-building in developed countriesseems to be much easier. In somecases the initiative for area manage-ment plans emanates from thecommunities themselves.

Early Actions Necessaryfor ICM in DevelopingCountries

For ICM to be successful indeveloping countries, finding theproper argument to motivateaction will first need to beaddressed, which will in turn assist

in improving the communityawareness. When implementingICM plans in developing countries,literacy programs and other pro-grams geared towards improvingthe communities’ economic well-being must be implemented eitherin tandem with the main ICM plan,or before, through early actions.Today many ICM plans in develop-ing countries have yet to reachtheir implementation stage, andthus their success or failure is notknown. Even when the implemen-tation stage is reached, it will beyet another huge undertaking toachieve compliance with the regu-lating components of an ICM pro-gram. Only when implementationand compliance are addressedtogether can there be hope for truesuccess.

Ben Owusu-Mensah, (BenomConsult/Coastwatch Ghana), 2ndSoula Street, North Labone, P.O.Box 4932, Accra, Ghana. Tel:233-21 776356; Fax: 233-21775482. E-mail: [email protected].

20


government. The Fundación paraEcodesarollo y Conservación(FUNDAECO) is managing CerroSan Gil, while Fundación MarioDary is developing managementarrangements for the PuntaManabique Reserve in Guatemala.Finally, the Toledo Institute forDevelopment and Environment(TIDE) has developed management

plans for the Port HondurasMarine Reserve and the Payne’sCreek National Park in Belize.

TourismThe Gulf of Honduras contains

all the necessary elements for tri-national, community-based coastaland marine tourism. An Alliancemember organization, the BelizeTourism Industry Association, isdrafting regional ecotourism devel-

opment policies in all aspects oftourism development, whichinclude community members livingnear existing and proposedreserves. Providing locals with theeconomic alternative of ecotourismwill help bring about long-termsustainable development byincreasing the stakeholder base inenvironmental protection. Forexample, TIDE, in southern Belize,has trained local gill-net fishermen


Poverty

The Alliance

transportersincluding Shell,Basic, Texaco,the naval baseand others. Toprove their will-ingness and abili-ty to respond todisasters, thecommittee spon-sored an oil spillsimulation onJuly 4, 1998,which served asa regional aware-ness buildingevent.

For further information contact:William D. Heyman, PROAR-CA/Costas, The NatureConservancy, 62 Front Street,


to be catch-and-release fly fishingguides. As guides, these fishers willmake more money than they wouldwith gill nets, and do little damageto the environment. Belizean com-munity fishers are now becomingimportant stewards for theircoastal resources as a result.

PollutionThe Gulf is vulnerable to cata-

strophic chemical and oil spills,since large volumes of these sub-stances are transported in and outof the major seaports of PuertoBarrios, Guatemala, and PuertoCortés in Honduras. Recognizingthis threat to the gulf, FUNDAE-CO facilitated a port contingencyplanning process for PuertoBarrios. The committee that devel-oped this is made up of major

Punta Gorda, Belize. Tel/FAX501-7-22503. E-mail:[email protected].

21

Tri-national Alliance of NGOs collaborate on a regional survey of fishers.

authorities increasingly have diffi-culty legally defending mandates,and P2 favors voluntarism,although often backed up with thethreat of adverse public opinion orpossible government mandates.Land-based sources of marine pol-lution sometimes lack obviousoffenders or easy targets for man-dates. P2 recognizes the site-specif-ic character of many pollutionproblems and delegates decisionsto those having the knowledge, ifnot the incentives, for effective,least-cost reductions. This contrastswith a nationwide standardsapproach that seeks to achieve uni-form discharge levels from cate-gories of industries and discharges,regardless of local impact.

Third, responding to criticismsof single-medium approaches aspiecemeal, and acknowledgingother exposure routes besides envi-ronmental release, P2 follows

material use across media. Morethan a slogan, P2 is an applicationof the adaptive management princi-ple, permitting a more fluidresponse to changing issues andstakeholder preferences. P2 canplay an important role in thecoastal zone, where these princi-ples also have shaped management.

If environmental policy contin-ues its long-term trend toward ananticipatory, voluntary and cross-media emphasis, P2 will increasing-ly influence coastal management.However, anticipation and compre-hensiveness as strategies are notalways better, and sources do notalways volunteer to reduce. Whilenot a panacea, P2 adds analyticaland managerial options that mayyield better long-run environmen-tal results and increase chances forimplementation. The coastal zoneactivities considered are all increas-ing with coastal populations. Thus,even if coastal economic sectorsadopt P2 strategies, no guaranteeexists that pollutants released to

coastal waters will decrease.Nevertheless, P2 presents worthyoptions for coastal pollution man-agement that, taken across eco-nomic sectors, can minimizereleases of pollutants to coastalwaters and enhance the amenitiesof these unique resources.

(For a more detailed projectreport, see Letson D., D. Sumanand M. Shivlani (1998) “Pollutionprevention in the coastal zone: Anexploratory essay with case stud-ies.” Coastal Management 26(3):157-175.) Web site:www.epa.gov/docs/opptintr/p2home/aboutp2.htm.)

For further information contact:Manoj Shivlani, Division of MarineAffairs and Policy, RosenstielSchool of Marine and AtmosphericScience, University of Miami, 4600Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami,FL USA 33149-1098. Tel: 305-361-4685. FAX: 305-361-4675. E-mail:[email protected].


Pollution Prevention


Capacity-BuildingProgram for Tanzaniaand the Western IndianOcean Region

One of the main recommenda-tions of the “Workshop onIntegrated Coastal AreaManagement for Eastern Africa andthe Island States,” held in Tanga,Tanzania in August, 1996 was thatthere was a need for training pro-gram for experts and practitionersthat focused on the practicalaspects of planning and implemen-tation of integrated coastal man-agement (ICM) programs in theregion. To guide this, a new frame-work for building capacity for ICMis now in place with the signing ofa Memorandum of Understanding(MOU) for the Western IndianOcean Regional Capacity BuildingProgram, signed by the vice-chan-cellor of the University of Dar esSalaam, the president of theWestern Indian Ocean MarineScience Association (WIOMSA)and the University of RhodeIsland’s Coastal Resources Center(CRC).

According to the MOU, therewill be a national training programin ICM for Tanzania that will bedesigned through a process facili-tated by the Tanzania CoastalManagement Partnership in coop-eration with the Institute of MarineSciences of the University of Dar

es Salaam. It will targettechnical experts at boththe national and districtlevel and across multiplesectors. The focus will beto facilitate the sharing ofideas, approaches andinformation, as well ascreating a Tanzania net-work of coastal manage-ment practitioners. Therewill also be a similarregional training programfor the Western Indian

Ocean regional states. Preparations for the first nation-

al training program are alreadyunderway with a needs assessmentexercise in progress. The needsassessment has been designed toassess the existing human and insti-tutional capacity. The findings willidentify existing sources of trainingand education, as well as provideguidance on formalizing a broadertraining and education agenda forICM. This will be used to designtraining courses; the first will be atwo-week short course held March1-12, 1999, in Mombasa, Kenya.The course will be designed forpractitioners from the states ofComoros, Kenya, Madagascar,Mauritius, Mozambique, Reunion,Seychelles, South Africa andTanzania. It will be implementedthrough WIOMSA in cooperationwith CRC.

The MOU also establishes aframework that will allow theregional training and the nationaltraining to come together overtime to establish a regional centerfor ICM course work and training.It is hoped that a certificate coursewill be offered for regional practi-tioners and, eventually, a certifiedundergraduate and graduate cur-riculum will be available.

Through the regional trainingpartnership that was built duringthe Tanga Workshop, capacitybuilding will continue to beimproved and strengthened for the

benefit of the Western IndianOcean region.

For further information contact:Gratian Luhikula, Tanzania CoastalManagement Partnership, P.O.Box 71686, Dar es Salaam,Tanzania. Tel: 255 51667589/666190. FAX: 255 51668611. E-mail:[email protected].

22

R E P O R T S F R O M

T H EF I E L D

Towards an ICM PolicyProcess for Tanzania

On November 29, 1998, a meet-ing was held on integrated coastalmanagement (ICM) in Tanzaniahosted by the vice president’soffice. Directors, commissionersand heads of key government insti-tutions, whose departments andinstitutions are key stakeholders incoastal and marine management,endorsed the process of formulat-ing a national ICM policy forTanzania.

During the one-day meeting,government executives, led by theprincipal secretary in the vice pres-ident’s office, Peter Ngumbullu,reviewed and scrutinized pertinentcritical coastal issues identified bythe Tanzania Coastal ManagementPartnership (TCMP) WorkingGroups. They made valuable com-ments and inputs that provide for aclearer description, emphasis, andclarity on complexities of theissues and their cross-sectoralnature.

Endorsement of the process wasmade after group discussions whichfocused on the following issueareas, among others:

•Maintaining and improvingcoastal village well-being and liveli-hood

•Shorefront planning and man-agement of Tanzania’s emergingcoast-related economic opportuni-ties, including tourism, maricul-ture, industry, and oil and gas

AFRICAT A N Z A N I A

AFRICAT A N Z A N I A


exploration•Shorefront erosion resulting

from extraction of coastalresources

•Supporting local initiatives anddecisionmaking for inter-sectoraldevelopment

•Lack of human and institutionalcapacity

The meeting emphasized theneed for a more detailed issuedescription on gender issues, agri-culture, small-scale and informalsector needs, public awareness andcapacity building. It further sug-gested the inclusion of issue themeson coastal emergency preparednessand hazard reduction, as well as oncross-boundary problems such aspollution and pelagic fisheries.

The government executives out-lined key actions to guide theprocess to move from issue identi-fication to adoption of an ICM pol-icy. They directed that while theoverall ICM policy is being formu-lated and adopted, action should betaken in the short term on criticalissues such as resource depletion.

The TCMP is expected to pre-pare policy elements to bereviewed by the sectoral heads whowill guide the drafting of thecoastal policy. “We have been lead-ing the eastern African region onICM issues and now, with our newfocus at the national level throughthe TCMP, we are consideredleader in the field of coastal man-agement probably for the entirecontinent,” said the Minister ofState in the vice president’s office,Edward Lowassa, “We should notbe complacent but move quicklyand boldly towards effectivepolicy.”

For further information contact:Gratian Luhikula, TCMP, P.O.Box 71686, Dar es Salaam,Tanzania. Tel: 255 51667589/666190. FAX: 255 51668611. E-mail:[email protected].

23

South Africa’s CoastalPolicy

The need to harness and opti-mize the economic opportunitiespresented by South Africa’s coast isa key thread that runs throughSouth Africa’s “Coastal PolicyGreen Paper.” This message is bal-anced with a strong warning thatSouth Africa can realize theseopportunities only if it manages itscoastal ecosystems wisely.

The Green Paper proposes nei-ther a ‘green’ nor a ‘developmentat any cost’ policy. Rather, it sug-gests a policy aimed at promotingeconomic and social development.It effectively addresses the need forthe coast to provide benefits to allSouth Africans on a sustained basis.

According to Jeff McCarthy,chairperson of the CoastalManagement Policy ProgrammePolicy Committee, the GreenPaper estimates the value of coastalgoods and services in South Africato be approximately US$ 3.036 bil-lion annually, approximately 37percent of the country’s annualgross domestic product. It alsoacknowledges benefits which cannot be attributed a monetary value,such as the coast’s cultural, aesthet-ic, educational, scientific and spiri-tual value. It is clear that the coastprovides an important basis forfuture economic development,poverty reduction and sustainablejob creation in South Africa.

The Green Paper is based onspecialist studies and an extensive,unprecedented process of publicparticipation. Over 65 regionalpublic events and numerous one-on-one meetings have resulted inmore than 1,000 individuals fromover 200 organizations beingdirectly involved in the program.The successful development of afinal coastal policy is dependent on

AFRICAS O U T H A F R I C A

maintaining this high level of publicinput.

One of the first significant prod-ucts of the public participationprocess was a draft vision for thecoast. This national vision has guid-ed and informed the formulation ofthe Green Paper.Principles, Goals andObjectives

A set of principles, goals andobjectives for coastal managementhave been developed in order torealize the national vision. Theprinciples relate to the overarchingissues of national heritage, eco-nomic development, social equity,ecological integrity, holism, riskaversion and precaution, duty ofcare, coordination and integration.

The goals and objectives will beachieved through appropriate insti-tutional and legal arrangements.The Green Paper puts forwardthree possible institutional models,as well as a number of legalarrangements, which require fur-ther evaluation and discussion.

Regional and provincial work-shops, culminating in a nationalevent in early 1999, are planned todebate and reach consensus on thevarious policy options and institu-tional and legal arrangements pre-sented in the Green Paper. Thiswill result in a final coastal policy(White Paper) by April 1999.

The Coastal Policy Green Paperis a product of the CoastalManagement Policy Programme,funded by the BritishGovernment’s Department forInternational Development.

To receive a copy of the GreenPaper, or be involved in the pro-gram, please contact Nicola Acutt,Tel: 021 424 5054. FAX: 021 4242495. E-mail: [email protected].

For further information contact:Glynis Ponton, P.O. Box 1828,Cape Town, South Africa 8000.Tel: 021 424 5054. FAX: 021 4242495. E-mail: [email protected].

ASIAI N D O N E S I A

Halting Coral Mining inSri Lanka: A Hard-WonSuccess Story

Halting coral mining – whichhas occurred in parts of Sri Lankafor over 400 years – has been amajor problem for the Sri LankaCoast Conservation Department(CCD) since its inception in 1981;a problem where significantprogress is now being made.

Coral is the principle source oflime for Sri Lanka’s constructionindustry, supplying approximately90 percent of the lime used.Traditionally, only inland relic reefsbehind beaches were mined, how-ever, the growth of the construc-tion industry in the late 1960sstimulated the coral mining indus-try, which then expanded toinclude collection of coral rubblefrom the beach and reef breaking.Such activities not only destroyreef habitat, but also reduce ero-sion protection offered by the reef.

The coral mining problem in SriLanka was significant. In 1984,over 18,000 tons of coral lime wasmined, 58 percent of it illegallyfrom the coastal zone. The socioe-conomics of the industry com-pounded the problem. About 1,200individuals were directly engagedin this seasonal activity. In just fourmonths, ‘miners’ working in thecoastal zone were able to earn overUS $300, approximately the aver-age annual income in Sri Lanka atthe time. In addition, this ongoingproblem was undermining thecredibility of CCD – which onother fronts was making outstand-ing progress on improved coastalmanagement.

Since its formation, CCD hadattempted to halt illegal coral min-ing in the coastal zone. At first, thedepartment relied on policy andregulation. In 1988, CCD obtaineda specific legislative amendment to

their act which made the mining,collecting, processing, storing,burning and transporting of coralin the coastal zone illegal. CCDalso recognized the need to dealnot only with the legal aspects ofthe problem, but with the socioe-conomic aspects. Multiple strate-gies to end illegal coral mining inSri Lanka were clearly needed, andas they were implemented, it wasclear that some worked better thanothers.

CCD identified and found fund-ing for alternative livelihoodschemes for coral miners.Sometimes there were unanticipat-ed consequences – such as attract-ing people to become miners sothey could become eligible for aparticular alternative livelihoodscheme. CCD engaged in researchto identify alternative sources oflime, but to date these sources havenot been developed. CCD also car-ried out education programs, notonly with miners, but withenforcement officers and affectedcommunities. As education effortsbegan to take effect, and createmore awareness of the problemand its consequences, CCD wasable to step up its enforcementactions and demolish illegal kilns inthe coastal zone.

The results of these effortsbegan paying off. By the early1990s, coral mining was no longerspreading to new areas. By 1993,the amount of illegal coral beingmined was reduced significantly,down to about 4,000 tons per year– a 48 percent decrease from1984. In CCD’s two special areamanagement sites along the south-ern coast – Hikkaduwa andRekawa Lagoon – CCD was able toachieve even greater compliancewith the coral mining prohibition.In both locations, coral mining hasbeen reduced by about 95 percent.At Rekawa, over 75 illegal corallime kilns have been voluntarilydemolished. The remaining coral

lime production is now utilizingcoral debris from demolishedbuildings and inland fossil coral.

While Sri Lanka has not yettotally solved the coral miningproblem, solutions are in sight.What has it taken? It has takenmultiple strategies: sufficient legalauthority, political support at bothhigh and local levels, a partnershipbetween resource users andresource managers, identificationof alternative sources of lime, andperhaps most important of all,CCD’s creativity, patience and per-severance.

For further information contact:Chip Young, CommunicationsDirector, Coastal ResourcesCenter, University of RhodeIsland, Narragansett, RI 02882USA. Tel: 401-874-6630. FAX:401-789-4670. E-mail:[email protected]. Web site:http://crc.uri.edu.

InterCoast Network • Winter 1999 24

ASIAS R I L A N K A

Indonesia Targets MarineDegradation andPollution

The Indonesian EnvironmentalImpact Management Agency(BAPEDAL) has initiated programsthat target marine degradation andsources of marine and coastal pol-lution. In line with BAPEDAL’smandate, these programs involveworking closely with, and buildingconsensus among, the central gov-ernment, local communities andgovernments, nongovernmentalorganizations and the private sec-tor. Key programs in marine andcoastal management focus on cleanharbors, clean tourist beaches,coral reefs and mangroves. Theseprograms come under the umbrellaprogram Pantai Lestari – the actionplan for the control of coastal pol-lution and degradation.

Clean Harbors: BAPEDAL iscooperating with port authoritiesand the Ministry of Sea

InterCoast Network • Winter 1999 25

Communications in assessing alter-native strategies, procedures andtechnologies for reducing wasteentering the marine environmentof ports. Implementation of thisprogram, with technical assistancefrom the Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency (CIDA),began in March 1998 with semi-nars and field inspections at theport of Tanjung Priok, Jakarta.

Clean Tourist Beaches:Indonesia has become increasingpopular as a tourist destination,with clean beaches being the majorattraction. The program will con-centrate on efforts to controlwastes and to promote the aesthet-ic management of tourist beachareas. The program will be imple-mented along the popular beacharea extending from Nusa Dua toSanur on the southeast coast of theisland of Bali, Indonesia’s maintourism destination.

Coral Reefs: Indonesia has oneof the most extensive and diversecoral reef systems in the world.BAPEDAL has partnered with theIndonesian office of The NatureConservancy (TNC) in planningand implementing a mooring buoyprogram in popular marine parksand areas. Significant damage incoral reef parks originates frombottom and reef anchoring oftourist and fishing boats. Since July1996, BAPEDAL, TNC and theMinistry of Forestry have installedand promoted the use of ninemooring buoys in KepulauanSeribu National Park (north ofJakarta) and 46 mooring buoys inthe Komodo National Park(Central Indonesia). The programhas scheduled the installation of 25buoys in Bunaken National MarinePark (north of Manado, NorthSulawesi), 20 buoys at PulauMusala (North Sumatra) and 89buoys around Bali.

Mangroves: Local communi-ties, private aquaculture companiesand the Ministry of Forests, in

cooperation with BAPEDAL, areinvestigating, testing and imple-menting rehabilitation methods. AGreen Belt program was intro-duced in 1998 supported by regu-lations promulgated by theMinistry of Forests. Under thisprogram, no housing or otherbuildings may be located within aset distance from the high tide linein mangrove areas. Structurespresently in place will be removedand set back according to a weight-ed formula.

The future of each of these pro-grams is now uncertain givenIndonesia’s current political andeconomic crisis. BAPEDAL’s1998/1999 budget was cut 50 per-cent from the previous year’s leveland the reallocation of scarceresources within the institution isunderway. Cooperation with otheragencies and organizations in activ-ities of joint interest, and promo-tion within government of thecoastal environment as a resourceof national strategic importance,will enable BAPEDAL to continueto play an important role in marineand coastal management.

For further information contact:Brian Yates or Jacques Whitford,Environment Limited, Vancouver,Canada. E-mail: [email protected];or Noel Boston, Marine PollutionControl Advisor to BAPEDAL,EVS Consultants, NorthVancouver, Canada. E-mail:[email protected].


Villagers Take Lead inCreation of the BlongkoMarine Sanctuary

Blongko is a small village with apopulation of 1,250. It is locatedon the northwest shore ofMinahasa, North Sulawesi, approxi-mately one degree, eight minutesnorth of the equator. Its approxi-mately 6.5 km of coastline is

healthy and productive, borderedby relatively thick and vigorousmangrove. Most of the populationlives along the water, and themajority of the population are fish-ers, although many residents bothfish and farm. The fishery, both off-shore and on the coral reef, plays asignificant role in the livelihood ofthe community. Most fish capturedare used for home consumption orsold by the fishers’ wives to thelocal community.

The idea of making six hectaresof mangrove swamp and part of thecoral reef a marine sanctuary cameabout after a field visit by Blongkovillagers to a marine sanctuary atApo Island in the Philippines. Areturn visit by the Apo Island vil-lage chief and members of thewomen’s cooperative took place toobserve Blongko and exchangeideas. The kepala desa, village gov-ernment head official, of Blongkoand the community quickly under-stood the Apo Island group’sdescription of how their communi-ty-driven marine sanctuary effortwas developed and implemented.Realizing the value of the local fish-ery, and seeing a way to protect itas a valuable nursery for fish thatcould help feed future generations,kepala desa worked with ProyekPesisir’s (the Indonesian coastalresources management project)staff and community members tocollect data, identify a proper siteand develop a local ordinance toregulate the proposed protectedarea. Within a year, the communityfully supported the concept, com-pleted technical research andselected a site. The village govern-ment also received support fromthe regional and national govern-ments for the ordinance that thevillagers had crafted. In October1998, the area was officially desig-nated a marine sanctuary. Alreadyan information/meeting center isunder construction, placement ofboundary markers is underway and


information signs are being creat-ed. By promoting the community-based marine sanctuary, Blongko’sresidents now have a more activerole and responsibility for protect-ing and sustaining marine resourceswhich directly affect their day-to-day lives. The resource users inBlongko are now becomingresource managers.

While one small sanctuary maynot seem like much, if it is used asa model which is replicated widely,it can greatly add to the amount ofcoral reef area protected within anation. It also has positive financialimplications over time. With bud-gets being cut due to the nationaleconomic crisis, community-basedmarine sanctuaries become anattractive and less-costly means ofmarine ecosystem and biodiversityprotection as the majority of costs– like the benefits – can be inter-nalized within the communityrather than be rolled into nationalbudgets.

The Blongko Marine Sanctuaryis minuscule in a global context,but it is extremely important as anexample of success in a countrysuch as Indonesia, which contains20 percent of the world’s coralreefs and the highest marine biodi-versity in the world – ”the under-water rain forest.”

For further information contact:J. Johnnes Tulungen, ProyekPesisir North Sulawesi, Jl. WolterMonginsidi No. 5 Kleak Lingk. 1 /19, Manado, North Sulawesi,Indonesia. Tel: 0431 841 671.FAX: 0431 841 673. E-mail:[email protected].

USAID/Indonesia Natural ResourcesManagement program. Its objectiveis to decentralize and strengthencoastal resources planning and man-agement.

Bunaken DeclarationOn September 26, 1998,

President J. Habibie signed theBunaken Declaration to safeguardIndonesia’s seas. He signed the decla-ration in Manado, North Sulawesi onthe International Year of the OceanDay. The declaration will helpProyek Pesisir advance its projects inN. Sulawesi and throughout the arch-ipelago.

For further information contact:J. Johnnes Tulungen, Proyek PesisirNorth Sulawesi, Jl. WolterMonginsidi No. 5 Kleak Lingk. 1 /19, Manado, North Sulawesi,Indonesia. Tel: 0431 841 671. FAX:0431 841 673. E-mail: [email protected].

Kalimantan Field ProgramProyek Pesisir’s East Kalimantan

(Borneo) field office officiallyopened in September 1998. A studywill be done of the pressure industryplaces on the coastal areas surround-ing Balikpapan. The office will seekto establish innovative coastalresources management partnershipsbetween government, the communi-ty and private sector interests. Theimmediate plan is to develop coastalresources management capacity atthe sub-provincial level in both gov-ernment and nongovernmental insti-tutions.

For further information contact:Ramli Malik, Proyek Pesisir Kaltim,Jl. Pierre Tendean no. 37,Balikpapan, Kalimantan Timur,Indonesia. Tel: 0542 31580. FAX:0542 31580. E-mail: [email protected].

Lampung Field ProgramOne of the first activities under-

taken by the Lampung field office ofProyek Pesisir in southern Indonesiawas a study of how socioeconomicgaps undermine integrated coastalmanagement.

As with many other coastalzones of Indonesia, the coasts ofLampung face serious problems.One issue is illegal and destructivefishing in Lampung Bay, includingthe illicit use of trawls. This illegalfishing has reduced the catch ofartisanal and traditional fishers whoare unable to compete with thebetter-equipped fishing fleets. Theequipment gap has led to a socioe-conomic gap; a rift that has wors-ened with the financial turmoil ofthe past year. Lampung also facesland use and tenure conflicts. In itsenthusiasm to attract investors, thelocal government eased land useand tenure regulations in coastalareas. As the economic crisisbegan, the large companies thatowned the seaside plots could notcontinue operations. Many of theselots were abandoned before anyeconomic output was realized.

Similarly, the conversion of man-groves and paddy fields into shrimpaquaculture ponds has exceededthe environmental carrying capaci-ty. This negative impact is exempli-fied by the erosion, salt-waterintrusion and marine pollutionfound along Lampung’s easterncoast.

The environmental damage andnon-sustainable development in thecoastal and marine zones ofLampung deserves serious atten-tion. The poverty that many resi-dents shoulder is the direct resultof this environmental degradation,and, ironically, the same povertyhas led to further environmentaldamage.

Proyek Pesisir set up an office inthe province to address these prob-lems. The project is preparing anintegrated coastal managementstrategy for the province. Thedynamic management plan willaccommodate socioeconomic andcultural aspects. The plan, throughparticipatory democratic means,will incorporate community inter-ests and aspirations in an effort to

26


Indonesian CoastalResources ManagementProgram

Proyek Pesisir (IndonesianCoastal Resources ManagementProject) is part of the


improve coastal conditions and liv-ing standards.

For further information contact:Budy Wiryawan, Proyek PesisirLampung, Jl. Sutan Syahrir no. 4,Pahoman, Bandar Lampung 35231,Indonesia. Tel: 0721 250984,252851. Fax: 0721 253013. E-mail: [email protected].

The first conference broughttogether academics and practition-ers in the environmental field todiscuss invited papers on the sub-ject of DIPs. Papers were present-ed on the contribution of DIPS toenvironmental governance, theimplications of social intelligenceand contemporary politics forDIPs, and the relationship betweenformal and informal systems ofgovernance.

While it was agreed that DIPs,in principle at least, provide a vehi-cle for expression of other forms ofknowledge and values traditionallyexcluded from decisionmaking, theconference papers and contribu-tions from the audience posed aseries of key questions for discus-sion in later seminars.

First, the temporal and spatialscales of DIPs present real prob-lems for practitioners. Over whatspatial scales are DIPs relevant?Should local instances of DIPs takepriority over regional or evennational strategies? When mightDIPs be inappropriate? Theincreased complexity of environ-mental issues which transcendadministrative and regulatoryboundaries pose particular chal-lenges for the role of DIPs in envi-ronmental governance. Similarly,environmental problems extendover time. How might DIPs workunder conditions of uncertainty,yet still capture and represent the‘silent voices’ of either unborngenerations or, indeed, non-humanforms of life?

Second, the legitimacy andaccountability of the DIPs processand outcome were subjected toclose examination. Key issues cen-tred on who should be involved,when and how? Equally importantfor the outcome of DIPs is theagenda which participants are per-mitted to discuss. What is the roleof the state in facilitating a legiti-mate process? Should DIPs becompulsory for environmental reg-

ulators and agencies?The third main theme, how we

might evaluate DIPs, generatedconsiderable discussion. Do delib-erative and inclusionary processesactually lead to better decisions?How could this be measured?Should strategic decisions by envi-ronmental regulators be subject toscrutiny by a more deliberative andinclusionary audit panel?

These themes and questions willbe considered in the next threeseminars which will be held in1999-2000.

For further information contactKevin Collins, Environment &Society Research Unit,Department of Geography,University College London, 26Bedford Way, London, WC1H,0AP, United Kingdom. Tel:+44(0)171 504 5548. FAX:+44(0)171 380 7565. E-mail:[email protected]. Website: http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/esruwww/dip/index.htm.

27

EUROPEU N I T E D K I N G D O M

EnvironmentalGovernance: Respondingto the Challenge ofDeliberative Democracy

At a one-day session onDecember 17, 1998, over 140 peo-ple gathered for the first in a seriesof conferences on the topic of‘Deliberative and InclusionaryProcesses in EnvironmentalDecisionmaking,’ or ‘DIPs.’Sponsored by the United Kingdom(UK) Economic and SocialResearch Council, with additionalfinancial support from the UKEnvironment Agency and EnglishNature, the conference series willexplore and assess innovative formsof decisionmaking. The Environ-ment & Society Research Unit(ESRU), University CollegeLondon, is leading the series inpartnership with researchers fromthe University of Lancaster and theUniversity of East Anglia.

The idea for the conferenceseries emerges from a growingdebate in environmental policy cir-cles which suggests a need to movefrom statistical methods of assess-ment towards more deliberativeways of making decisions anddeveloping policy. The new agenda,in turn, demands the inclusion ofmany different social groups; inparticular those who were previ-ously ignored or ‘spoken for.’However, many questions needanswering: not least, who shouldbe involved, and do deliberativeprocesses lead to better decisions?

LATIN AMERICAJ A M A I C A

Study of MarineProtected Areas BuildsSupport forConservation

In Jamaica, and throughout theCaribbean, there is concern for thehealth of the coral reefs and thecoastal environment. Many reefsare deteriorating and fish popula-tions are declining. Reasons for thisrange from increased constructionon shore and pressure from fishers,to natural events such as cyclones.

In response to this concern, theUnited Kingdom’s Department forInternational Development autho-rized a program to investigate thedevelopment of areas of the seawhere activities are restricted,commonly called marine protectedareas (MPAs). This program looksat the marine biology and the


social-anthropological aspects ofMPAs. The marine biological sideof the project is investigating theeffects on reef populations of vari-ous forms of restrictions on fishingand other marine activities. Thesocial-anthropological side is inves-tigating the factors that are likelyto affect the ways people who fishwill respond to the restrictions ontheir activities.

The marine biological researchbegan in April 1997. The informa-tion gathering was completed inApril 1998, and analysis of thatinformation is in progress. Thesocial-anthropological side began inApril 1998, and will end in mid-1999. The main field site isWhitehouse, Jamaica, a part ofMontego Bay where many peoplelive and fish. A study of fishers inRiver Bay is also being carried out.This is different from Whitehousebecause it is primarily a landingbeach, not a place where fisherslive. In addition to the two sites inMontego Bay, three months will bespent in Negril, and a shorter peri-od in Discovery Bay. These siteswere selected because each hassome form of MPA.

This research will be importantfor those in the Caribbean whohave advocated MPAs as a solutionto some of the problems faced inthe region. Advocates tend to thinkin terms of the sorts of activitiesthat should be restricted, and oftenassume that fishers and others willaccept and even support therestrictions imposed on their activ-ities that come with MPAs.However, the history of MPAswithin the region shows that oftenthis acceptance and support is notforthcoming, that fishers and oth-ers are reluctant to change fishingmethods and locations.

This research will seek to seegenerally what sorts of activitiesfishing involves, how those activi-ties affect the lives of fishers andothers, and how fishers think about

their fishing activities and thewaters they fish. The intendedresult is a set of issues and ques-tions that need to be evaluated bythose in government and voluntaryorganizations that are consideringestablishing MPAs.

(Results of the entire projectwill be presented in a meeting tobe held in Jamaica in July 1999,together with speakers describingother regional MPA projects.)

For further information on thesocial-anthropological study, con-tact: James G. Carrier, Durham,UK,. FAX: +44 191 374-2870. E-mail: [email protected] or Lucy Robertson, Jamaica.E-mail: [email protected].

For further information on themarine biological study, contact:Nicholas Polunin or Ivor Williams,Newcastle, UK. FAX: +44 191222-7891. E-mail:[email protected] [email protected].

strategies to protect the naturalresources that are the industry’sprincipal attraction, and the drivingforce for regional economic devel-opment.

In July 1998, the “NormasPrácticas para el DesarolloTurístico” (Practical Guidelines forLow-Impact TourismInfrastructure) was published bythe Amigos de Sian Ka’an, a localnongovernmental organization, andthe University of Rhode Island’sCoastal Resources Center (USA).The manual is a collection of over100 practical measures for thedesign and placement of coastalinfrastructure. Topics addressed arebeaches and dunes, wetlands andlagoons, vegetation and landscape,potable water and wastewater,solid waste and alternative energyoptions. Many of the techniquesdescribed have been successfullyapplied in the U.S. and othercoastal programs throughout theworld. These techniques are aimedto address the challenges facingQuintana Roo. The goal of theNormas Prácticas is to provideworkable voluntary alternatives toassist the private sector in protect-ing tourism investments and pre-serving the environment, since theenvironment is the core attraction.

Implementation of the NormasPrácticas is critical to the success ofecotourism in southern QuintanaRoo. Working with governmenttourism promoters, the NormasPrácticas’ development team iden-tified a developer who would applythe guidelines in the field and eval-uate the results. As an outcome,design changes were recommenda-tions that reduced environmentalimpacts. These included a 30-msetback from wetlands and ocean-front, constructing wetlands forwastewater treatment, and imple-menting a landscape plan consistingof dunes with a narrow, inter-spersed pathways vegetated withnative species. In the coming year,

28

LATIN AMERICAM E X I C O

Partnerships PromoteLow-Impact Tourism inQuintana Roo

With the attraction of large-scaletourism destinations such asCancun and the Mayan Riviera innorthern Quintana Roo, the gov-ernment, local communities andinvestors are hoping to create acontrasting type of tourism insouthern Quintana Roo – specifi-cally, one which diversifies thetourism market and also maintainshigh ecological diversity. While theexisting regulatory regime includesmany valuable tools, integratedstrategies that support sustainabletourism development are limited.To address this, the United StatesAgency for InternationalDevelopment/Mexico (USAID) isworking to develop a strong pri-vate sector initiative to develop


the goal is to facilitate more pub-lic/private partnerships to enhanceuse of the guidelines and to fine-tune them for application withinthe region. The government hasalso found the manual useful in theimplementation of various regula-tory tools and in formulating zon-ing plans currently being drafted bythe Quintana Roo government.

Complementary efforts to pro-mote and market the concepts ofsustainable tourism developmenthave been initiated through the useof a planning and incentive/certifi-cation program known as theGreen Globe Alliance. Colleaguesfrom the World Travel and TourismCouncil and George WashingtonUniversity (USA) have signed amemorandum of understandingwith Mexico’s Tourism Secretary topromote sustainable tourism prac-tices. Additionally, project mem-bers joined with USAID partnersfrom Jamaica to participate in atwo-day workshop in September1998; 40 hoteliers and investors inthe Cancun area were informedabout the concepts and benefits ofGreen Globe’s environmental man-agement systems and the NormasPrácticas’ low-impact developmenttechniques. The program was wellreceived, and demonstrated waysto save money, protect the environ-ment and receive certification oftheir environmental achievements.

The Spanish language versioncan be purchased from the CoastalResources Center for US$ 10 tocover postage and handling (con-tact Pam Rubinoff at addressbelow). The full manual in Spanishwill be available on the World WideWeb in early 1999, and be translat-ed into English in early 1999.

For further information contact:Pam Rubinoff, Coastal ResourcesCenter, University of RhodeIsland, Narragansett, Rhode Island02882 USA. Tel: 401-874-6135.FAX: 401-789-4679. E-mail:[email protected].

Civic AssociationsDevelop Agenda forSustainable ResourceUse

The first-ever meeting ofMexican civil associations fromSonora, Sinaloa, Baja California andBaja California Sur on the conser-vation of natural resources in theGulf of California area was held inGuaymas, Sonora, November 12-14, 1998. The Spanish title“Conocer Para Conservar,” has adual meaning that captures thespirit of the event, which was toemphasis the need to better under-stand and appreciate this vast,unique biogeographic region, andbring together the area’s leadinggroups to increase communicationand mutual support.

Representatives of nearly 30organizations described their activi-ties and worked to develop a com-mon agenda and build new work-ing relationships. In addition,workshop participants shared con-cerns and strategies for creatingsuccessful alliances and networks oflocal conservation organizations –an increasingly important trend inLatin America.

The Gulf of California is locatedbetween the Baja California penin-sula and the western mainland ofMexico. It is 1,600 km long and100 to 200 km wide; it runs fromthe Colorado River Delta in thenorth to the Pacific Ocean in thesouth. It has a coastline of 3,000km and is bordered by six states. Ithas been identified as one of the 20most important marine regions inthe world.

The region’s environmental lead-ers agreed to prepare a detailedcommon agenda highlighting fourkey areas:

1. Defining a vision for the bio-geographic region. This is a majorchallenge because of the impor-

tance of protecting migratoryspecies of fish, marine mammalsand birds, as well as the coastal andupland ecosystems. It is importantto document the ecological valueof resources, the economic impactof resource use and the culturaldimensions of the region that influ-ence successful management.

2. Compiling and sharing infor-mation about management experi-ences in the region for identifyingcommon themes, avoiding duplica-tion of effort and learning fromsuccesses and failures.

3. Strengthening civil associa-tions’ knowledge of issues includ-ing sources of financing; legalrequirements and administration;training of staff (including leader-ship, networks and alliances); andprogram development.

4. Developing a common frame-work, beginning with a historicalreview of key conservation andmanagement ideas including sus-tainability, quality of life and theparticipatory process. In addition,examining the political and socialefforts to achieve sustainability.

Meeting participants will con-vene as smaller committees duringearly 1999 to develop specifics onhow to address these areas. Alsoplanned for 1999 is a second meet-ing to review progress and involvemore groups, especially from thestate of Nayarit.

The meeting was supported bythe David and Lucille PackardFoundation, the United StatesAgency for InternationalDevelopment and the WorldWildlife Fund.

For further information contact:María de los Angeles Carvajal,Conservation InternationalMéxico, A.C., Miramar 59 A.,Colonia Miramar, C.P. 85450,Guaymas, Sonora, México.Tel/FAX: 52-6-22 1-0194. E-mail:[email protected].

29

LATIN AMERICAM E X I C O


Citizen Stewards StandWatch forEnvironmental Change:Project COAST, Florida,USA

Project COAST, a coastal waterquality monitoring program,recently celebrated its one-yearanniversary. The initial goals ofrecruiting volunteers, establishingsampling stations, working out thelogistics of monitoring more than100 miles of Florida’s coast, andsetting up the water chemistry lab-oratory have been achieved.

One hundred sites have beendesignated adjacent to five coastalcounties (Taylor, Dixie, Levy,Citrus and Hernando). These siteshave been sampled monthly fortotal phosphorus, total nitrogenand chlorophyll. Temperature,salinity and water clarity were alsorecorded.

Over 1,000 samples have beencollected and the data are currentlybeing processed in the water chem-istry laboratory at University ofFlorida’s Department of Fisheriesand Aquatic Sciences. Additionalsamples were also collected in

cooperation with the Departmentof Environmental Protection’s(DEP) Fisheries Monitoring pro-gram in the Cedar Key area.

Why sample? Florida’s BigBend section of coast is home tosome of the most pristine andextensive areas of salt marsh andseagrass habitats in the world, andencompasses coastal drainage andassociated estuaries fromApalachicola to Tampa. Seagrassesand salt-marshes provide essentialhabitat for many recreational fish-eries (e.g., spotted sea trout andred drum) and commercial fish-eries (e.g., blue and stone crabs,grouper, oyster, shrimp and clams).Changes in coastal water qualitycould alter the ecology of thesesystems.

Citizen involvement. ProjectCOAST’s challenge was to define atime frame and identify individualsto collect water samples. Citizenvolunteers were the answer.Modeled, in large part, afterUniversity of Florida’s LAKE-WATCH program (now one of thelargest volunteer monitoring pro-grams in the U.S.), ProjectCOAST involves citizen volunteerswith three main goals in mind:

•To provide the public with edu-

30

NORTH AMERICAU N I T E D S T A T E S

cational information concerningenvironmental issues

• To encourage and support anew approach to water manage-ment, including a sense of sharedresponsibility with the public

• To develop a cost-effective,long-term data set that can be usedto establish baseline water qualityconditions in coastal waters ofFlorida, and warn of significantenvironmental changes that couldaffect valuable marine resources

Sampling is coordinated by theDepartment of Fisheries andAquatic Sciences in cooperationwith the Florida DEP and citizenvolunteers. Financial support forthis first year of monitoring wasprovided by the Suwannee RiverWater Management District andthe Southwest Florida WaterManagement District. ProjectCOAST is now being recommend-ed for expansion to a statewidecomprehensive water monitoringprogram.

For more information contact:Tom Frazer, University of Florida,Department of Fisheries andAquatic Sciences, 7922 NW 71stStreet, Gainesville, FL 32653 USA.Tel: 352-392-9617 ext. 243. E-mail: [email protected].

Rapid Assessment of Management Parameters for Coral ReefsBy Richard B. Pollnac

Coral reefs are a powerful symbol of both the economic and ecological significance of coastal ecosystems, as well as the rapid lossof marine biodiversity, and the resources upon which millions of coastal residents around the world depend.

In 1995, the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) was launched to call attention to the alarming decline of the world’s coralreefs and to catalyze a response to reverse current trends. It was recognized early on that there was little work concerning the role ofhumans in this complex ecosystem. To address this gap, project RAMP (Rapid Assessment of Management Parameters) was con-ceived. RAMP was designed to expand upon the International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management’s (ICLARM), ongo-ing work on ReefBase, a global database of coral reef condition, by defining a set of indicators of human factors potentially impactingcoral reefs. Project RAMP is truly a pioneering effort.

Rapid Assessment of Management Parameters for Coral Reefs. 1998. Richard B. Pollnac. Coastal Resources Center, University ofRhode Island. Narragansett, Rhode Island USA. 199 pages.

Shipping and handling per book in the United States: US $7.50, Canada: US$ 10.00 and Overseas: US $12.50. Master Card, Visa,check and money order accepted payable to Coastal Resources Center. Please mail to Suzanne Wood, Coastal Resources Center, URINarragansett Bay Campus, South Ferry Road, Narragansett, RI 02882 USA. Tel: 401-874-6109. FAX: 401-789-4670. E-mail: [email protected].

INTERCOASTSIDERFORMATION

rules regarding the protection ofwater dependant shorelands arepresented in this site. Address:http://www.lcd.state.or.us/coast/index.htm.

Resource Analysis. Policy advis-er to various groups involved insustainable management and theuse of natural resources. Address:http://www.resource.nl/index.html.

Sustainable DevelopmentInstitute. The SDI is a non-profitorganization designed to link eco-nomic and environmental goalsthrough policy and practice.Address: http://www.susdev.org.

Tidal Wetlands Impacts DataHome Page. This site presentsdetailed summaries of cumulativeimpacts to tidal wetlands inVirginia, USA. Address:http://www.vims.edu/rmap/wet-lands/cgi-bin/index.htm.

PublicationsAquaculture Economics andManagement. This journal focus-es on the use of economic analysisto manage aquaculture. Other top-ics include aquaculture inputs andproduction, farm management,government policy, internationaltrade and cooperation and environ-mental impacts. Contact: BlackwellScience Ltd., JournalSubscriptions, P.O. Box 88, OxfordOX2 0NE, UK. Tel: 44 1865206126. FAX: 44 1865 206219. E-mail: [email protected].

Development of BiologicalCriteria for Coral ReefEcosystem Assessment. Thispublication can be viewed at theEPA Coral Reef Homepage:http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/coral. Paper copies are available


American Fisheries Society.Publications, current events,upcoming meetings and relatedevents dealing with fisheries arelocated at this site. Address:http://www.fisheries.org.

Associated British Ports. Thissite focuses on port managementand the environmental benefitsfrom shipping. Links related toport research and business can befound here. Address:http://www.abports.co.uk.

Coastal Education andResearch Foundation. This non-profit corporation is dedicated tocoastal research, management andmaintenance. Address:http://www.cerf-jcr.com.

CoastNet (The CoastalNetwork). CoastNet is a mem-bership body linking together indi-viduals and organizations involvedin practical coastal management inthe United Kingdom. It representsthe largest pool of practical experi-ence in coast management in theUK. Address:http://csweb.bournemouth.ac.uk/consci/coastnet/. To subscribe, E-mail: [email protected].

Cosmo-Bio Demo Site. This wasdeveloped to show the possibilitiesand benefits of a decision supportsystem for integrated coastal zonemanagement. Address:http://www.minvenw.nl/pro-jects/netcoast/bioweb/index.htm.

31

ElectronicResources

Discovery of Rhode Island Coastal Environments.This site offers virtual field trips

to the coastal ecosystems of RhodeIsland. Address:http://omp.gso.uri.edu/doce.htm

Environment Australia. Thissite was developed to promoteecologically sustainable manage-ment of Australia’s coastal andmarine resources. Address:http://www.environment.gov.au/marine/.

HazNet. This organization is dedi-cated to helping people meet thechallenges presented by naturalhazards. Information on coastalhazards and mitigation policy andplanning is presented in this site.Address: http://www.haznet.org.

International Union forConservation of Nature andNatural Resources. The goal ofthis organization is to conserve andmanage natural resources on aglobal scale. Address:http://www.iucnus.org.

Jug Bay Wetlands Sanctuary.This site provides information onthe education and research thatoccurs at a wetland sanctuary.Address:http://web.aacpl.lib.md.us/rp/parks/Jugbay/.

NetCoast. Information regardingall aspects of integrated coastalzone management can be foundhere. Address: http://www.min-venw.nl/projects/netcoast/index.htm.

Oregon Coastal Index.Information about this state’s pro-gram for managing coastalresources and the administrative


by contacting Kennard Potts, E-mail: [email protected].

Habitat Lost: Taking the Pulseof Estuaries in the CanadianGulf of Maine. Published by theConservation Council of NewBrunswick. 1998. 81 pages. Price:US$ 8.00. Contact: CCNB, 180 St.John Street, Fredericton, N.B.,Canada E3B 4A9. Tel: 506-458-8747. FAX: 506-458-1047. Website: http://www.web.net/~ccnb/orderF%7E1.htm.

Handbook for WetlandsConservation andSustainability. Released by theSave our Streams (SOS).Department of the Izaak WaltonLeague of America. Topics includebasic wetland ecology, wetlandfunction and values, stewardshipand monitoring methods. 2nd edi-tion, 288 pages. Price: US$ 35 plusshipping and handling. To ordercontact: SOS Staff, IWLA, 707Conservation Lane, Gaithersburg,MD 20878. Tel: 800-BUG-IWLA.E-mail: [email protected]. Web:http://www.iwla.org.

Journal of InternationalWildlife Law and Policy. This isa journal of Kluwer LawInternational that focuses on legaland political issues concerning theinterrelationship between thehuman race and the wildlifespecies, including international andregional wildlife treaty regimes andnational legislation and regulations,and the impact that judicial deci-sions have on a national and inter-national level. To subscribe contact:The Managing Editors [email protected].

Navigating the UncertainWaters of the 21st Century:The Role of New Technologiesin Building a Competitive andSecure MaritimeInfrastructure. The Institute ofNavigation, the National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration,and the U.S. Coast Guard AcademyCenter for Advanced Studies spon-sored a workshop on May 22, 1998in Washington, D.C., USA. Modelsof foreign ports, in particular thePort of Rotterdam and foreignoperations, in this case CanadaSteamship Lines and BritishAirways, are showcased in thispaper as examples of how public-private partnerships can lead toimprovements in maritime trans-portation. A summary paper of theconference can be obtained fromLori Costantino, U.S. Coast GuardAcademy, 15 Mohegan Ave., NewLondon, CT 06371 USA, Tel: 860-444-8298. E-mail:[email protected] portions of the conferenceare available as a video broadcast athttp://www.theshippingnetwork.com.

Sustainable Strategies forOceans: A Co-ManagementGuide. 1998. 85 pages. Price:US$15.95. Contact: RenoufPublishing Ltd., 5369 CanotekRoad, Unit #1, Ottowa, OntarioK1J 9J3. Tel: 613-745-2665. FAX:613-745-7660. Web site:http://www.nrtee.ca/english/index.htm.

WaterNews is a weekly on-linepublication that focuses on water-related issues. Policies, activitiesand publications are availablethrough this newsletter. To sub-scribe, E-mail: [email protected]. Leave the sub-ject line blank and in the body ofthe message write: Subscribewaternews firstname lastname.

Conferences1999 American WetlandsMonth Conferences. TerreneInstitute’s 3rd Annual American

Wetlands Month Conferences:Communities Working forWetlands. Four conferences arescheduled beginning in NewOrleans Feb. 18-20, followed bySan Francisco March 18-20,Indianapolis April 8-10, and con-cluding in Andover, MA May 6-8.Contact: Tel: 703-548-5473. FAX:800-813-1925 document 204. Website: http://www.terrene.org.

March 2-4, 1999. InternationalSymposium on GeographicInformation Systems inFishery Science. Seattle, WAUSA. Contact: Tom Nishida,National Research Institute of FarSeas Fisheries, Shizuoka, Japan. E-mail: [email protected].

March 20, 1999. Forth AnnualInternational Wildlife LawConference. Washington, DC.Contact: Wil Burns, ManagingEditor. Journal of InternationalWildlife Law and Policy, 46Shattuck Square, Suite 18,Berkeley, CA 94704. Tel: 510-540-0980. FAX: 510-452-9266. E-mail:[email protected].

March 23-27, 1999. Legacy of anOil Spill: 10 Years After ExxonValdez. Anchorage, Alaska.Contact: Brenda Baxter, Alaska SeaGrant. Tel: 907- 474-6701. E-mail:[email protected].

March 30-April 2, 1999. TheInternational MEDCOASTConference on: Wind and WaveClimate of the Mediterranean andthe Black Sea. Antalya, Turkey.Contact: Dr. Saleh Abdalla, OceanEng. Research Center, CivilEngineering Dept., Middle EastTechnical University, 06531Ankara, Turkey. Tel: +90-312-21054 37. FAX: +90-312-210 14 12.E-mail: [email protected]. Website: http://tu-waves.klare.metu.edu.tr/confer-ence/.

32


April 9-11, 1999. 1999Conference of CoastalCommunities. Steveston,Canada. Contact: CoastalCommunity Network, P.O. Box218, Ucluelet, B.C. Canada VOR3AO. Tel: 250-726-4683. FAX:250-726-2268. E-mail: [email protected]. Web site:http://www.coastalcommunity.bc.ca.

April 14-16, 1999. InternationalConference on ScientificAspects of Coral ReefAssessment, Monitoring andRestoration. Ft. Lauderdale,Florida. Contact: National CoralReef Institute, Nova SoutheasternUniversity Oceanographic Center,800 N. Ocean Drive, Dania, FLUSA 33004. Tel: 954-920-1909.FAX: 954-921-7764. E-mail:[email protected]. Web site:http://www.nova.edu/ocean/ncri/confinfo_1.html.

May 10-14, 1999. Research forthe Development of Fisheriesand Aquaculture in theCoastal Zone of CentralAmerica. Costa Rica. Contact:Anne van Dam, Programa UNA-LUW, Escuela de CienciasBiologicas, Universidad Nacional,Apdo. 86-3000 Heredia, CostaRica. FAX: 506-237-6427. E-mail:[email protected].

May 19-22, 1999. The CanadianCoastal Conference 1999:Coastal Science andEngineering Into the NextMillennium. Royal RoadsUniversity, Victoria, B.C. Canada.Contact: Mr. Christian J. Stewart.CCC`99 Conference Chair. VGIVision Group International Inc.5325 Cordova Bay Road, Suite211, Victoria, British Columbia,Canada, V8Y 2L3. Tel: 250-658-4844. FAX: 250-658-0084. E-mail:[email protected]. Web site:http://www.vgivision.com/ccc99.

July 18-20, 1999. Workshop onMarket-Based Instruments forthe EnvironmentalProtection. Cambridge,Massachusetts. Contact: Robert N.Stavins, John F. Kennedy School ofGovernment, Harvard University,79 John F. Kennedy Street,Cambridge, MA UAS 02138. Tel:617-495-1820. FAX: 617-496-3783. E-mail: [email protected]. Web site:http://www.ecu.edu/econ/aere.

July 24-30, 1999. Coastal Zone`99 Conference. San Diego,California. Contact: UrbanHarbors Institute, University ofMassachusetts Boston, 100Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, MAUSA 02125-3393. Tel: 617-287-5570. FAX: 617-287-5575. E-mail:[email protected]. Website:http://omega.cc.umb.edu/~cz99/main.html.

Educationand TrainingIntegrated CoastalManagement for Practitionersin the Western Indian OceanRegion. March 1-12, 1999.Whitesands Hotel, Mombasa,Kenya. The Western Indian OceanMarine Science Association(WIOMSA), in cooperation withthe Coastal Resource Center,University of Rhode Island(CRC/URI) and a number of otherregional partners, will offer a two-week regional training course forcoastal management practitionersfrom East and South Africa and theIsland States. For furtherdetailscontact MargarethKyewalyanga, WIOMSA, TheSecretariat, P.O. Box 3298,Zanzibar, Tanzania. Tel:(++255)(54)/32128/30741.

FAX: (++255)(54)33050. E-mail:[email protected].

Marine Biology Station, CostaRica.The station is part of theSchool of Biological Sciences of theUniversidad Nacional, where anundergraduate course program inMarine Biology and a ‘Licenciatura’program in Marine and FreshwaterResources are offered. Its missionis to train professionals, generateinformation and to solve problemsfaced by users of the coastal zone.The station has two main focuses:coastal management and marineaquaculture. There are extensionprojects on various issues andresearch projects on marineresources. On request from boththe private and public sector, thestaff of the station also provideconsultant services on coastal prob-lems. Recently, a new curriculumfor a Masters degree in Marine andCoastal Science was developed.This course is scheduled to open in2000. For more information, con-tact Angel Herrera, Estación deBiología Marina, Apdo. 126-5400Puntarenas, Costa Rica, Fax (506)6613635, E-mail: [email protected] site: http://www.una.ac.cr/biol/ebm/.

Nonpoint Education ofMunicipal Officers (NEMO) isa University of ConnecticutCooperative Extension projectusing innovative techniques toteach local officials about thesources and impacts of nonpointsource pollution, how differentland uses affect water quality, andwhat towns can do to protectwater quality. Web site:http://www.lib.uconn.edu/CANR/ces/nemo/.

33


consistent with the new project,and an alternate solution to defendMarina di Pisa was presented to theministry by the local authority. Forthis project, a special wave channelexperiment was performed thattested gradual lowering of a break-water concurrent with filling withgravel. This solution, razing the

34


Beach Erosion

Integrated Coastal and Ocean ManagementBy Biliana Cicin-Sain and Robert W. Knecht

andCoastal Seas: The Conservation Challenge

By John R. Clark

This past year has provided us with two new books designed as guides to the concepts and practices of coastal manage-ment. Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management by Biliana Cicin-Sain and Robert W. Knecht (Island Press) is a hefty 500page-plus volume designed to address “the difficult problems of managing among overlapping jurisdictions, competingcoastal and ocean uses, and sensitive environments.” The second is by John R. Clark, the author of the encyclopedic 1996Coastal Zone Management Handbook. Clark’s second effort, Coastal Seas: The Conservation Challenge (BlackwellScience) is in essence a synopsis of his earlier work containing a sequence of short sections grouped into chapters withheadings such as Impacts, Program Design, Methods and Tools and the Coastal Professional. As with his earlier volume,Clark’s new book contains many pithy statements on complex topics. It serves as a good orientation for the uninitiatedand will remind the practitioner of the fundamentals of their profession.

Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management is the product of an ambitious undertaking supported by United NationsEducational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission. This volume is dividedinto two approximately equal parts. The first half leads the reader through the why and the what of integrated coastalmanagement (ICM), the evolution of ICM and on to a ‘practical guide to ICM.’ Many of the sub-sections have similar oridentical headings to those in Clark’s volumes. The approach, however, is more scholarly. It places a greater emphasis onthe prescriptions of international bodies and contains numerous text boxes and tables that document and illustrate pointsmade in the text. Chapters on the evolution of coastal and ocean management are a well-documented and useful synthesisof international responses to the challenges posed by the transformation of coastlines and the intensifying use of oceanresources. The ‘practical guide’ is somewhat uneven in its style and content but contains many useful sections with consid-erable detail and pointers to additional sources. For example, the chapter on science and information for managementcontains a lengthy table that poses scientific questions and the kinds of information that are likely to be most relevant tounderstanding common coastal management issues. On the other hand, the section on financing a coastal managementprogram provides little in the way of practical guidance on this crucially important topic.

The second half of the Cicin-Sain and Knecht’s volume is devoted to case studies and lessons learned. Much of theinformation presented is in the form of short profiles of national programs. The style and the content complements thecases in Clark’s 1996 volume with its focus on how individual coastal management initiatives illustrate specific issues andapproaches to their resolution. Cicin-Sain and Knecht’s concluding chapter is a thoughtful summing up on a rapidly evolv-ing field.

These two new guides to the theory and practice of coastal management do much to introduce a profession that isattempting the difficult task of integrating across traditional sectors and academic disciplines. Both the student and thepractitioner can now have on their bookshelves volumes that successfully distill out the salient features of a new field and anew profession.

breakwaters to MLW and dumpingthe surplus rock boulders at theoffshore toe of the structure,decreased the external slope andreflectance and increased the stabil-ity. In addition, testing was done todetermine the optimum volume ofgravel to use (100 cubic meters permeter of coastline). The total costfor this solution was estimated tobe approximately US$1.3 million,and was found to be cost effective.

Data on the stability of using gravelfor beach renourishment are notreadily available in the literature;however, the above-mentioned lab-oratory experiments suggest thismethod is quite durable. Detailedmonitoring of the beach renourish-ment project will provide data toperform an accurate cost-effective-ness analysis.

In addition to the lower cost ofthe cost-effective option, a 30-m


and south coasts have developed.Q: Do you have any final

thoughts about implementingcoastal management?

A: I think that coastal programscan be donor-funded, but need tobe internally driven. It is importantthat the programs be designed andimplemented by locals, with helpfrom external expertise if thatcapacity isn’t resident in theircountries. I don’t think we shouldever begin by trying to bite offmore than we can chew. We shouldproceed slowly, do things incre-mentally, set very clear objectives,accomplish them and then moveon.

35

InterCoast Subscription Order Form

Enclosed one-year (US $10) (check or money order, payable to CRC)

Waiver requested

Please bill my Visa MasterCard Card#_______________________________

Cardholder name_____________________________________________________________________

Expiration date_______________ Signature______________________________________________

Salutation Mr. Mrs. Miss Ms.

Last Name First Name

Organization Title/Position

Address

Telephone FAX E-mail

Mail to: InterCoast SubscriptionCoastal Resources CenterURI Narragansett Bay CampusSouth Ferry RoadNarragansett, RI 02882 USA

If we believe that we can accom-plish something called integratedcoastal management overnight, Ithink we’re making a sad mistake.In the case of the Barbados pro-gram, we have been trying to grap-ple with it for over 15 years. Ithink we have learned a lot ofthings. But I would be the first toadmit that we still have yet a longway to go.

Leonard Nurse is a leadingexpert on coastal management inthe Caribbean. He has nearly twodecades of experience guiding itsgrowth in the island nation ofBarbados. He can be contacted at:Oistins Government Complex,Oistins, Christ Church, Barbados.Tel: 246-428-5945. E-mail:[email protected].

Nurse(continued from page 13)

wide gravel beach will be formed.The economic value as a result ofincreased tourist use of the newcoastal environment is expected toincrease as a consequence of theincreased beach area, the improvedwater quality due to an increase inwater circulation and the restora-tion of a more natural landscape.This will allow tourists to enjoywatching the sun set on theLigurian Sea, rather than on a 3.5-m high rock mound.

For further information contact:Enzo Pranzini, Dipartimento diScienze della Terra, Universitàdegli Studi di Firenze, Via IacopoNardi, 2-50132 Firenze, Italy. Tel:+39 55 243486. FAX: +39 55241595. E-mail:[email protected].

For an annual subscription fee of US$ 10, three issues and a periodic special issue of InterCoast are available. For students,and readers from developing countries who cannot afford the subscription fee, InterCoast will be provided free of chargeif a waiver is requested.

The issue on Coral Reefs willdraw strongly, but not exclusively,from the International Coral ReefInitiative and the GreatBarrier ReefMarinePark

Authority's inaugural InternationalTropical Marine EcosystemsManagement Symposium(ITMEMS) held in Townsville,Australia, on November 23-26,1998. ITMEMS served as a majorforum for discussion of coral reef-related topics including: tourism,climate, fisheries, public outreach,education and training, research,data analysis, among many others.

In addition to articles on coralreefs, InterCoast also includes arti-cles on general coastal issues and‘Reports from the Field,’ summariz-ing projects and achievements orinitiatives. InterCoast also includes‘InterCoast Insider Information;’listing upcoming conferences,new publications, web sites,training and other useful items.

Articles should be 750-1,500 words, and‘Reports from the Field’ are250-500 words. Photos,maps and other graphics arestrongly encouraged.We do

edit articles as necessary to fitthe available space.

To contribute to InterCoast#34, contact Managing Editor,Noëlle F. Lewis, Coastal ResourcesCenter, Graduate School ofOceanography, University of RhodeIsland, Narragansett, RI, 02882USA.Tel: 401-874-6870. FAX: 401-789-4670. CRC Web site:http://crc.uri.edu. E-mail:[email protected].

Deadline is March 21, 1999.Articles can be submitted electroni-cally.

Thank you.

Coastal Resources CenterUniversity of Rhode IslandNarragansett Bay CampusNarragansett, RI 02882 USA

Address service requested

Printed on recycled paper

NonprofitOrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDWakefield, RIPermit No. 19

Editor: Stephen B. OlsenManaging Editor: Noëlle F. LewisDesigner: Matt Castigliego

InterCoast is an internationalnewsletter of coastal management,published three times each year by theCoastal Resources ManagementProject of the University of RhodeIsland's Coastal Resources Center(CRC) and the U.S. Agency forInternational Development (USAID).Funding to publish InterCoast is pro-vided by USAID's Global EnvironmentCenter.

The objective of InterCoast is tofacilitate information exchange oncoastal management. Readers areinvited to contactNoëlle F. Lewis, Managing Editor,with questions and comments onInterCoast and its effectiveness as asource of information on coastal man-agement.

InterCoast NetworkNoëlle F. LewisCoastal Resources CenterUniversity of Rhode IslandNarragansett Bay CampusNarragansett, RI 02882 USATel: 401-874-6870FAX: 401-789-4670E-mail: [email protected]

InterCoast invites others to reprintarticles found in InterCoast.We wouldappreciate if you would contact NoëlleF. Lewis, at the above address, for per-mission.

Next InterCoast on Coral Reefs

Date post:	05-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Charting a Course Through the Stormy World of Coastal ... · Ways to Avoid Implementation...

Documents