Coastal zone planning
and management
• General concept of
•
•
•
•
integrated coastal
management
Coastal issues
Lessons Learned
Analytical Approach
Future
What is ICZM?
• In general, it’s a interdisciplinary
and comprehensive strategy or
framework based on the best
available science to be
implemented at the community
level and national level;
• The prime goal is to overcome
sectoral and intergovernmental
fragmentation that exist in today’s
coastal management efforts;
http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/Hotspots
http://www.conservation.org/Marine/map.htm
the most biologically valuable areas
the most threatened marine areas
the most critical areas for marine conservation
Production
•
Productivity is highest in coastal waters
and upwelling zones due to higher
nutrient concentrations
Average Global Primary Production (Chl a) March 6-13 2001
Terra MODIS NASA/GES/DISC/DAAC
• After 40 years of coastal management
planning we are still trying to develop
simple, effective and widely applicable
models and approaches; and we still
need successfully implemented
examples of ICZM!
• Today, the environmental problems in
coastal areas have been exacerbated
by habitat destruction, water
contamination, coastal erosion and
resources depletion; increasing social
and cultural degradation as well as
poverty!
Go to list of issues in coastal
conditions ppt.
What went wrong and
what did we learn?
• The root cause of this crisis is a failure of both
•
•
•
•
•
perspective & governance;
Oceans & coasts are the largest public domain
and has to be managed holistically for the
benefit of local communities, recognizing their
socio-economic and cultural heritage values;
Involvement of local communities in the planning
and decision-making process;
Increased use conflicts can be managed simply
by controlling where certain activities are
undertaken, but sustainability can only be
attained when environmental conditions are
appropriate;
Interdependence of land and sea! Watershed
and ecosystem management approach;
Use suitability and use conflict analysis support
the interdisciplinary and holistic aspects of
coastal planning and sustainable development;
indicating where better information is needed;
Objectives and goals of the
responsible coastal planning
and management
• Optimize benefits from coastal and
marine resources, specifically for local
communities
• Identify desired uses
• Minimize conflicts
• Prevent environmental degradations
• But How?
General concept for integrated
coastal management
• Resource assessment: comprehensive
inventories of coastal natural and human
resources (e.g. physical and biological data,
resource uses, cultural heritage, traditional land
uses and activities, etc.); includes long term in
depth biocomplexity research studies;
• Impact assessment: assessing the coastal zone
vulnerability to various activity impacts;
interactions between uses and resources; a tool
to help making decisions and evaluate options for
the mitigation and environmentally sound
management (e.g. spatial and use conflict
analysis, GIS models); based on the best available
knowledge and acknowledging uncertainties;
• Policy and regulatory framework: a basic tool
for training and education, and for local
community participation in decision making
process; based on analysis of existing institutional
and legal mechanisms develop comprehensive
policy framework to address coastal issues;
• Socio-cultural & Economic assessment:
understanding of socio-economic incentives at
the local level in suggesting alternative
income-generating programs; the simpler the
national rules the better they are understood
and followed on the local levels; the capacity
of the community to regulate its own activities
and uses; to enforce local rules is an important
determinant of perceived management
success;
• Implementation: how to apply science and
develop and implement the BMPs?
Comprehensive BMPs are ‘living documents’
open to revision, expansion; provide consistent
national standards and practices for
implementation;
• Monitoring and evaluation: assess
cumulative effects of changes and update
management program elements to reflect
changing needs and circumstances;
multidisciplinary data as a ‘feedback loop’
evaluation of our activities and their impacts;
Still the question is how?
And what is the driving
force and approach in
coastal management?
My general premise is that “the
environment sets the limits for
responsible and sustainable
development".
Why?
Understanding ecosystem's
"function, health and resilience"
is an imperative for successful
application of adaptive coastal
management.
http://alpha.es.umb.edu/faculty/af/frankic.html
Site suitability
and use conflict analysis:
an optimal allocation for user
functions
• Finding suitable sites for existing and
potential use/activity in the marine
and coastal environment is one of the
most critical challenges facing
coastal planning and management.
Analytical Approach –Summary:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Optimal sites are selected based on
environmental suitability analysis and GIS
models. Environmental parameters required
for potential activity sites were selected and
generic protocol was developed. Often a
modified version of the activity protocol has
to be created and applied based on available
and spatially explicit data.
GIS use-suitability modeling: application of
available environmental suitability indicators
from developed protocols; includes evaluation
of the model with existing activity sites.
GIS use-conflict modeling and analysis:
identification of exiting and potential uses,and
use conflicts.
Characterization of management issues and
options. Providing outcome scenarios and
recommendations, identifying gaps to help
guide future scientific research, monitoring
and decision-making processes.
Phase One:
• The most important step is to identify the
environmental conditions necessary for
each use/activity to succeed.
• Based on extensive literature review and
present knowledge, the environmental
use suitability indicators (parameters or
criteria), for activity to be long-term
sustainable, can be identified and
derived.
• Note: ESRI ArcInfo and ArcView
software were used to write algorithms
to model protocols, and perform GIS use
conflict modeling and analysis.
Protocol example for:
Marina Suitability
Indicators
Suitability Indicators
Water quality
Fecal coliforms
Cfu/100 ml
Salinity (%◦)
Desirable
Undesirable
Closed for direct marketing of
shellfish; no potential for future
productivity
200
Approved, seasonally
approved for shellfish
harvesting
> 200
Unsuitable for shellfish growth
Suitable for shellfish growth
Nitrate mg/l
1
Phosphate mg/l
0.1
Suspended solids/
sediments (mg/l)
Mex. Wave height (m)
10
< 0.5
> 0.5
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)
>5
<2
Current/exposure
< 1 knot
> 1 knot
Bathymetry (m)
>1
<1
Proximity to natural or
improved channels
< 50 feet to navigational
channel
> 50 feet
Absent
Present
Private lease or public
oyster ground in proximity
Dredging
No present or planned private
lease or public ground within
affected area
Does not require dredging
Adjacent wetlands
Suitable buffer could be
maintained around marine site
Cannot maintain suitable
buffer area
SAV
Not presently used for
recreational, tourism uses,
fishing, crabbing, etc.
Absent
Presently used for
recreational activities and
fishing, crabbing
Present
Shoreline erosion
Shoreline protected by natural
or planted riparian vegetation
No shoreline stabilization
Threatened or
endangered species and
habitats
Designated shellfish
grounds
Existing use of site
Finfish habitat
Unimportant area for spawning
or nursery for any commercial
or recreational species
Requires frequent dredging
Important spawning and
nursery area
Protocol example for:
Tourism Suitability
Indicators
Environmentally
Suitable Indicators
Excellent
Beach area capacity
(m²/person)
8 -10
Sea Temp. (C)
for swimming
> 25
Water supply
(l/day/person )
200 – 250
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)
>5
Water quality (E.coli)
Drinking
Swimming (*)
0 100
Suspended solids/ sediments
(mg/l)
>5
Bottom type
Sand, small gravel
Current/exposure
Sheltered bays
Bathymetry (m)
0-5
Shoreline slope (%)
topography
2-5
Beach area access
(buffer zone 2000m)
Energy supply
Within buffer zone
Sufficient, solar and
alternative resources
present
Sewage systems
(Waste water treatment)
Present
Protected areas,
Nature Reserves, MPAs
Present
Cultural Heritage
Preservation
Present
Food Supply, local mariculture,
autochthon products
Sustainable Infrastructure &
landscape Design
Sufficient and
present on site
Present
Good
Poor
6-8
6
100 - 200
< 100
40 - 50
100 - 200
 50 (MPN/100 ml)
 200 (MPN/100ml)
mud
Protocol Example for
Shellfish Aquaculture
Suitability
Indicators
General
On-bottom
oyster
h. clam
s. clam
pH
7.0-8.5
6.75-8.75
6.75-8.75
Temp. (C)
20-28
Opt. 15-25
Opt.21-31
Opt. 10-20
Salinity (%◦)
10-35
10-35
18-20 ideal
10-25
Suspended
sediments (mg/l)
15
10 - 25
Dissolved
oxygen (mg/l)
>5
Bathymetry (m)
0-2
>3.64
0-2
0-2
0-2
Bottom type
Solid, oyster
reefs
Firm, and
sandy
Areas of activity
Mainly
subaqueous
fixed structures
(piers)
Mainly eastern
shore
Soft,
muddysand
Accessibility
(nearest boat
ramp)
Other physical
attributes
Regulatory
Factors
Species type
500-5000 meters
Prefer riparian
areas, and
wetlands;
Exclude condemned
areas;
Exclude SAV
habitats
native
Fecal coliforms
Cfu/100 ml
14
Nitrate mg/l
0.8
Phosphate mg/l
0.08
Dissolved
oxygen (mg/l)
>5
Turbidity NTU
< 25
Buffer zone
≥30 meters*
Shellfish aquaculture suitability criteria
(modified protocol)
Ranking
Optimal
Suitable
Unsuitable
Hard clams
Oysters
=< 2 meter depth
SAV absent
>= 20 ppt
outside condemned areas
0-2 meter depth
SAV absent
> 7ppt
outside condemned
areas
=< 2 meter depth
15-20 ppt
SAV absent
inside condemned areas
0-2 meters depth
SAV absent
> 7 ppt
inside condemned
areas
SAV present
< 15 ppt
SAV present
< 7 ppt
Phase Two:
• GIS use-suitability modeling :
Identification of areas in which
environmental conditions for each
specific use are found
• This includes spatial analysis (aerial
photos and satellite images); integration
of GIS coverages (data layers) for e.g.:
temp, salinity, bathymetry, water
quality, substrate types, benthic
biocenoses, slope, hydrology, geologypedology, critical habitats and protected
species/areas, etc.
• GIS application of available
environmental suitability indicators
from developed protocols and
evaluation of use suitability models;
Site suitability analysis for hard clam aquaculture in
Chesapeake Bay, Virginia (Source: VIMS/CCRM, A.
Frankic)
Aerial photo/ Digital Orthophoto Quadrangles (DOQs) – Hungars
Creek: Clam nets in SAV beds in 2002 (source: D. Wilcox, VIMS)
Site suitability analysis for oyster aquaculture in
Chesapeake Bay, Virginia
Source: VIMS/CCRM, A. Frankic
Existing
Aquaculture
Optimal
%
#
Suitable
%
#
Unsuitable
%
#
Oyster
commercial
32 sites
72%
23
19%
6
9%
3
Hard clams
99 sites
82%
81
3%
3
15%
15
Phase Three:
• Identification and mapping of coastal,
marine and land uses
• Performing the GIS use conflict
analysis and modeling (21 models);
The goal is to identify areas that,
although suitable for aquaculture on
the basis of suitable environmental
assessment (from Phase Two), may
be less desirable due to incompatible
uses that are present or planned
(tourism, recreation, fishing,
protection, agriculture, etc.)
Example of identified land uses for aquaculture site suitability
analysis (Ch. Bay, Virginia) (Source: VIMS/CCRM, A. Frankic)
Suitable
area
(Acres)
Aesthetic
conflict
area
SAV historic
area
potential for
restoration
Hard
clams
199297
65051
5903
388
1406
Oyster
404589
138336
25179
662
1404
Model
Dredging
area for
boat access
Agriculture
(shoreline
length/km)
Phase Four:
• Identification of all possible management
issues that could be caused by or related to
aquaculture development in certain area
(includes local community knowledge and
participation);
• Assessment of existing policies,
regulations and laws related to e.g.
aquaculture, identify and characterize
management issues and conflicts;
• Analysis will incorporate socio-economic
considerations, and each management issue
will be presented with adequate
management options and recommendation
scenarios;
Use conflicts and
management issues:
• Aquaculture and SAV
• Aquaculture and other uses
of the water column
• Incompatible adjacent land
use, and
• Water quality impairments.
Adjacent Coastal
activity/use
Terrestrial:
Residential
Agriculture
commodity
(e.g. crops, tomato
farms; livestock;
organic farms)
Industry
Sewage power plants
Management issues
Management options
Water quality
(NPS urban runoff, storm
water runoff, wastewater
runoff)
Socio-economic issues –
aesthetics;
1) priority use zones
2) areas with multiple uses
If priority area for
aquaculture no permits for
other activities;
Storm water permitting
Retention ponds; Irrigation
ponds; creating
riparian/wetland buffers;
Erosion and sediment control;
Water quality
recommendations (classes for
aquaculture through
regulation – tier I-III)
Buffers
Designating priority use
zones
Water quality
(agricultural runoff,
pesticides, nutrients,
erosion, sedimentation)
Wastewater discharge,
Sediment contamination
Out falls; elevated water
temp.
Water quality
(wastewater discharges)
200 m buffer (match
regulations, ½ mile DOH)
Physical damage
Buffer - 100 feet for oysters
Recreational fishing and
boating;
Water quality
Buffer area in residential
priority zones
Permit required for >100 feet
in active lease
Beaches(public); and
bare areas as
potential
beaches
Water quality
(pathogen contamination)
2 m in-shore buffer;
buffer maybe reduced with
public facilities
Recreation:
(rec. fishing, boating
and hauling)
Wild harvest
Golf courses
In vicinity of residential
areas; water quality issue;
Marina
Navigation (potential
conflict everywhere)
Piers
Protected areas
Sanctuaries
Physical/spatial issue
Habitat
restoration/protection:
Clam (brood stock area)
Oyster reefs; B. crabs;
SAV restoration
Designating priority use
zones
No wake zones
Buffer zones
Buffers: 100 feet for SAV
Outcomes
Suitable if buffers
exists;
Socio-economic
cost benefit
analysis
(advantages and
disadvantages of
management
options)
To be determined
by environmental
and socioeconomic
assessments
Suitable depending
on water quality
Suitable for
aquaculture outside
buffer
Suitable for
aquaculture
Suitable or optimal
with adequate
facilities;
Bathing lease (1/2
acre)
Suitable for
aquaculture
Vicinity is a
plus/optimal
outside buffer
areas, except SAV
restoration areas;
Conclusion:
• This analytical approach support
interdisciplinary aspects for
coastal planning, and indicate
that use suitability models are
useful for discriminating
environmental potential among
sites but they are inadequate as
predictors for long-term
sustainability. Why?
• The major shortcoming is
inability to integrate socioeconomic considerations as
measurable indicators in use
suitability assessment and use
conflict models of ICZM!
Use conflict analysis in
Chesapeake bay
• http://rmapnt52.wetlan.vims.
edu/shallowwater/viewer.htm
• Shallow Water Use Conflict
• Economy (production, services, goods,
income, profit)
• Society (social, political and cultural
systems)
• Environment (natural resources, water,
air, soil, raw materials, health)
• This “triple bottom line’ is used as a
framework for measuring and
reporting corporate performance
against economic, social and
environmental parameters (John
Elkington)
http://www.sustainability.com/
NEXT STEPS:
Identification and implementation
of socio-economic indicators for the
integrated coastal area
management.
Table with 32 suggested indicators:
Source: UNESCO/IOC/COOP, Halifax Meeting, Canada
February 2004:
www.phys.ocean.dal.ca/~lukeman/COOP/hfx_a
pril_04.html
1
Resident Population
(census data)
17
Pesticide Use in Watershed
2
Population Density
18
Coastal Energy Production
(% of National Production by type)
3
Land Use/Land Cover
Patterns/Composition
19
4
Employment in Industry Sectors
20
Level/Value of Commercial Fish
Landings by harvest area, gear type, species,
weight, and value;
Artisanal Fishing Effort by harvest area,
value, species and type;
5
% Population with Potable Water
21
Number/Value of Recreational
Fishing Days
6
% Population with Internet Access
22
Seafood Consumption Patterns
gram/person/day
7
Change in User Conflict
23
Seafood International Trade
Value/Quantity/Terms & Direction
8
Property Values
24
Groundwater Extraction
9
Income/wealth Distribution
25
Number of Tourists (% of National)
per day or # of bed nights
10
% Altered Coast
26
Number/Attendance at Recreational
Bathing Beaches
11
Public Access Points/km of coastline
27
Number of Shipping Vessels
Entering/Transiting Coastal Waters
12
Water dependent use industry/
coastal industry
28
Aquaculture – Total Hectares, by type,
weight, value and species type
13
Value of Products dependent on
Coastal Habitats
29
Value Change in Seafood Due to
Chemical Contamination
14
Non-Use Values of Coastal
Habitat(Bequest/Existence/Option)
30
Value Change in Seafood Due to
Pathogenic/Toxic Contamination
15
% Population Served by Wastewater
31
Social mitigation cost of Invasive Species
(public & private)
16
Fertilizer Use in Watershed
32
Number of Beach Closings
VARIABLE
VARIABLE
1
Sea level
20
Fisheries: landings and effort
2
Water temperature
21
Primary production
3
Currents
22
Total organic C and N
4
Changes in bathymetry
23
Neutral red assay
5
Salinity
24
Incident solar radiation
6
Surface waves
25
Total suspended solids
26
Cholinesteraze (pesticides)
7
Sediment grain size
8
Benthic biomass
27
Cytochrome p450 (e.g. oil)
9
Changes in shoreline position
28
Metallothionein (trace metals)
10
Dissolved oxygen
29
Zooplankton biomass
11
Dissolved inorganic nutrientsN, P, Si
30
Eh in sediment
31
Particulate organic C and N
12
Phytoplankton biomass (chlorophyll)
13
Attenuation of solar radiation
32
Benthic species diversity
14
Faecal indicators
33
Zooplankton species diversity
15
Sediment organic content
34
Biological oxygen demand
16
Phytoplankton species diversity
35
pH
17
Nekton species diversity
36
Seabird diversity
18
Coloured dissolved organic matter DSOM
37
Nekton biomass
19
Seabird abundance
Related References:
• UNESCO, 2003. (Strategic Design Plan for
Coastal Ocean Observing Module.
http://ioc.unesco.org/goos/docs/GOOS_125_C
OOP_Plan.pdf
• UNESCO, 2003. A Reference Guide on the use
of Indicators for Integrated Coastal
Management.
http://ioc.unesco.org/icam/files/Dossier.pdf
• EC, 2000: Driving force-Pressure-StateImpact-Response (DPSIR) Model
• “How is your MPA doing?” A guidebook
of natural & social indicators for
evaluating MPAs management
effectiveness; IUCN/WWF/NOAA, 2004
www.iucn.org/bookstore
• Frankic, A. 2003. ICZM Plan for Croatia with
special focus on aquaculture. Republic of
Croatia, Ministry for environmental protection
and physical planning.
http://ccrm.vims.edu/staff/Adriaticaquaculture.
pdf