Environment and development in coastal regions and in small islands

 Integrated coastal management planning strategies

Part 2        General principles of coastal zone development planning

Chapter 2.1 Coastal zone planning: background

Coastal zone development has historically taken three types of factor into account: ecological, social and economic factors. Modern practice is characterised by an effort to synthesis these factors. Thus to resolve the environmental problems that arise as a result of the use of natural resources, it is necessary to take into account ecological factors. Social factors are key in resolving conflicts between different stakeholders (users of natural resources in the coastal zone) Finally, economic factors need to be taken into account when planning the development of the coastal zone.

The concept of coastal zone planning is different in different countries; so current approaches and methods of coastal zone planning throughout the world present a varied picture. In the USA every state that has an outlet to the ocean has its own plan for coastal zone development that reflects local legislation. Industrially advanced European countries (Great Britain, France, The Netherlands) established the legal base for coastal zone planning on the basis of Roman law and wide experience of land management and engineering. However, these same countries followed a policy of uncontrolled plundering of natural resources of the coastal zone in their colonies. Relics of this attitude are still present in many countries that have long since become independent (Indonesia, India) Finally, countries with a command economy (Cuba) have accumulated a wealth of experience in planning – but only on the basis of a centralized command system. Brunei, Singapore, Ecuador and Columbia are trying to develop their own coastal zone planning policy. In some instances different regions of the same country apply differing approaches and methods of coastal zone planning (China, Trinidad and Tobago)

The struggle of ideas and concepts in modern planning theory and practice is represented in the Table 4.

It is clear that current coastal zone planning is based on ideas and concepts from a variety of schools and positions that are not always mutually compatible. However, there are some widespread trends in coastal zone planning:

1. Abandoning the sectoral (bureaucratic) approach in favour of a comprehensive (intersectoral) one; development of integration and cooperation;
2. Transfer from anthropocentric vision to an egocentric one, recognition of the ecological uniqueness and particular value of the coastal zone;
3. Transfer to adaptive management;
4. Dynamic planning: transfer from the plan as a document to planning as a process; using global information systems (GIS) as a management tool;
5. Broad involvement of local people in decision-making;
6. Raising the level of environmental awareness of all people involved in the decision-making process;
7. Development of a preventive approach to natural and anthropogenic disasters;
8. Recognition of the concept of sustainable development as the basic paradigm of coastal zone planning and management.

Chapter 2.2 Planning for the coastal zone as a complex system

Planning for any complex system (such as the coastal zone) may be defined as management to limit arbitrary functioning of the system, restricting it within the framework of a predefined trajectory (policy) Planning makes it possible to adhere to a chosen policy in vague and uncertain situations. Planning is necessary to achieve the desired out come, it cannot be expected to emerge of itself. So planning is concerned with, on the one hand, prevention of inappropriate actions and, on the other hand, reduction of the number of untapped opportunities.

All previous experience in the use of natural resources in the coastal zone has shown that uncoordinated, scattered, sporadic management efforts are inefficient and can lead to the following undesirable results:

• “excessive spending” (greater efforts and resources used to achieve the same goal than in the case of well-planned work);
• late (retrospective) recognition of a problem (a problem whose seriousness was not recognized in time may remain unsolved);
• transfer of problems from one sphere to another (instead of their resolution)

A complex system should be considered as a whole, avoiding reductionism of any kind. Various modifications of the systematic approach may be used when working with a complex system:

Comprehensive systematic  approach – specification and application of the systematic approach to various subsystems of the coastal zone (see Table 3) Each subsystem is considered as a complex dynamic system and at the same time as a component of a higher level system.

Systematic program approach – application of the systematic approach to resolution of local scientific, technical, economic, ecological and other problems that emerge in the course of planning.

Systematic multiplicative approach – application of the systematic approach to the study of the processes connected with multiplication of effects.

Systematic normative approach – specification and application of the systematic approach to planning requirements (for example, requirements concerning optimal use of resources)

Systematic economic approach – specification and application of the systematic approach to the study, development and substantiation of measures designed to ensure economy in all spheres of activity, replacement of outdated technologies by new ones, use of alternative resources.

Dynamic systematic approach – specification and application of the systematic approach to the study, development and substantiation of measures designed to make planning more dynamic.

The usual outset of any management activity is the emergence of some problem; on analyzing and diagnosing the problem a decision can be made as to how the problem can best be tackled, that is, what management action is needed. This action might involve planning, or it might not.

The no planning approach is usually in response to an emergency where urgent corrective measures are needed. Such emergency measures in some cases can be an important element of coastal zone management, but it should be understood that this approach excludes planning as such.

In more complicated cases there is some planning, but a lack of proper systematization and integration. The plans are uncoordinated and made without enough thought. In practice a broad range of types of planning are applied, and the choice is influenced by the administrative, political, economic, and social context.

Finally there is what might be called “planning of planning” in which all planning activities are organised and coordinated. Today this “integrated planning” is recognized as the most efficient planning system.

Integrated planning ensures the following important outcomes in coastal zone management:

• it can help to avoid the installation of new enterprises in the coastal zone if their activities threaten coastal ecosystems, or ensures that adequate preventive measures are taken;

• it lessens the negative consequences of economic development (for example, environmental protection);

• it supports initiatives that meet the chosen policy of coastal zone resource use, by including them in the development plan. From this perspective the plan may be considered as a method of implementing the chosen development path.

Basic management activities that are used in planning include:

• distribution of resources.  A budget is a way of distributing resources. It is a numerical representation of a plan; a balance between receipts and expenditures in both monetary and natural terms. As an important tool in the planning system the budget must accord with other components of the plan.

• adjustment to the outside environment. A development model must take into account external factors, which may influence the system being managed, and are not within the planners’ control. Such factors include politics (both domestic and international) and national legislation. It is necessary to ensure in each specific case that coastal zone development strategy can adapt to changes in these factors.

• internal coordination and integration. This ensures effective internal operation.

• elaboration of strategy and purposes of development. Planning should include the definition of tasks and identification of the steps necessary to fulfil these tasks. Another component of planning is the study of possible development paths. It should make clear which factors contribute to the ambiguity of choice of a certain policy. 

Today there is no single, common theory of coastal zone planning. This is because many specialists with different backgrounds now participate in planning, each of them applying their own approach and criteria – for example, ecologists, geographers, landscape architects, real estate agents, specialists in administrative and territorial planning. Inconsistencies in their methods both complicate and blur the planning process.

There are two opposing approaches to coastal zone planning – one, centres on an “object” to be planned for, and the other is based on the “method” of planning. The first approach requires, initially a definition of the object of planning. It is then possible to determine what resources are available and to size up the factors and parameters that will influence the decision-making process, taking into consideration the outside environment. The second approach focuses on the choice and application of a certain planning method to make decisions. Both approaches supplement each other and have been formed in the course of a long evolutionary process. Decision-makers use the method that best suits their concept of planning.

“Top-down” v “bottom-up” planning

Two more contrasting approaches to planning are the “top-down” and “bottom-up” methods.

The “top-down” approach is reasonable and convenient in certain situations. It makes use of a deductive method of analysis. An authorized agency imposes a certain model of development. The planning process and implementation then follow this model. This approach generates feelings of order, clearness of purpose and appropriateness of efforts. The drawback of this approach is its command style. It can be applied only in centralized and highly bureaucratic economies (Ancient Egypt, China, the former USSR) A strong, centralized power (totalitarian regime, absolute monarchy) that is able to ensure implementation of its decisions and to control realization of its plans is the only guarantee that the plan will be implemented. This approach inevitably leads to formation of a complicated bureaucratic machine with controlling and enforcement bodies. Any deviation from the rules is considered as a violation and entails a penalty.

“Bottom-up” planning, that, according to P. Kropotkin (author of the bottom-up approach), “is sprouting up like grass”, is an alternative. In this instance decision-making requires agreement and consensus of all interested parties. The role of the leading body is restricted to providing advisory assistance. Implementation of the plan is controlled by those who have drawn it up – generally the initiators of the project who are interested in its development. The broadest possible range of people participates in the decision-making process. Application of this approach is possible only in a well-developed democracy. The ideal type of society for the bottom-up approach is, according to P. Kropotkin, is anarchy – a self-governing society of free working people, who are able to make joint decisions. The necessity for state structures that control public initiative is questioned by advocates of this approach.

Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. “Top-down” planning may fail because it ignores local interests and “bottom-up” planning often fails to identify clear-cut common positions.

The most suitable option for coastal zone management is usually a combination of both strategies, a “mixed” type of planning, or a “two-way strategy”.

Next

	Introduction	Activities	Publications	Search
	Wise Practices	Regions	Themes