X hits on this document





13 / 44

A small number of respondents felt that these objectives did not clarify what ICZM meant, or how it could change existing arrangements for the better. They felt the vision should express the values and distinctiveness of the coast and that a vision for the coast was needed in addition to the vision for coastal management, so that coastal managers could be clear what outcomes they were trying to achieve.

Thirteen respondents called for a definition of the coastal zone or at least some recognition of landward and seaward boundaries, which would provide some form of context and understanding within the coastal management vision. There was one view which suggested that the coast should be defined in its broadest sense to include areas which are ‘coastal dependent’ such as coastal communities, habitats and infrastructures.

Eleven respondents agreed that ICZM should be part of a national overarching framework that looked at strategic coastal management, policy, structure and governance. One respondent suggested that a more prescriptive and statutory based framework was required while another felt that a UK framework for coastal regulation would provide consistency and promote understanding.

A number of respondents addressed the individual elements of the suggested vision as follows:


Seven respondents addressed this point. Comments suggested that this objective was misleading as sustainable management is not solely about balancing human activities, but rather a case of living within environmental limits, and pursuing ‘win-win’ situations or looking at integrating human activities rather than trading one activity off against another. Another comment was that a “management approach which also considers economic and social uses and needs should also be promoted”.


Respondents were supportive of this objective and felt that without a clear policy and workable framework, ICZM would be unworkable.


Two respondents supported this objective but there were views that this should not be another planning requirement.


Of the three responses that addressed this point one stated that a consistent approach was vital, the other two respondents referred to marine planning suggesting that it “must place near-shore processes close to the centre of its strategic framework” and that any new management approach “should include mechanisms to ensure co-ordination across the land-sea interface”.


Six respondents recognised the importance of building on existing structures, but felt that this would only be effective if there was support from national and regional bodies and an overarching





  • how coastal groups and agencies can become more coordinated to form an efficient integrated management structure; and

  • how ICZM could be delivered through projects, initiatives and management structures such as coastal partnerships.


Document info
Document views144
Page views144
Page last viewedSat Jan 21 07:18:46 UTC 2017