X hits on this document

113 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

33 / 44

Monitoring Progress

We aim to ensure that the state of the English coast, issues affecting it, and progress in achieving an integrated approach to coastal management are effectively monitored. We proposed that we would:

  • (w)

    Undertake a ‘State of the Coast’ review.

  • (x)

    Explore use of the ICZM progress indicator, and indicators of

sustainable development at the coast, as drawn up by the EU Expert Group’s working group on indicators. Further consideration will be needed as to their applicability to the English coast, how they can be used to evaluate the state of the coast, and how we might work with the Devolved Administrations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to consider these indicators.

(y) Measure our progress against the principles of the EU Recommendation and findings of the ICZM stocktake published in 2004.

(z) Consider further action to monitor progress in achieving ICZM, once responses to this consultation have been evaluated, and followed up with the publication of a strategy for England.

Question 14: Do you have any views about points (w) to (z) above, and ways in which we can best monitor progress in achieving an integrated approach to coastal management in England?

14 Question 14 summary of responses

    • 14.1

      57 of the responses received addressed this question.

    • 14.2

      The majority of respondents welcomed the proposals and were overwhelmingly in favour of the proposal for a “State of the Coast” review, which would aid prioritisation of those parts of the coast needing most urgent attention. Respondents stated that careful consideration should be given to its scope and purpose – a national review is likely to be an overview and might not easily translate into action, whereas a regional review would identify areas where ICZM issues are a priority, including detailed quantitative information and specific recommendations for action. Many felt that the review must be of use to, and recognise, all stakeholders involved at a coastal management level, making use of and incorporating existing studies and methodologies such as the Devon 2001 State of the Coast study, the use of aerial photographs and GIS by Lancaster City Council Engineers, and the State of the Exe Estuary 2006 study. One respondent asked that the review include an adequate account of the coastal historic environment, another encouraged the inclusion of an evaluation of the economic benefits of coastal partnerships and the value of ICZM.

14.3 Some respondents suggested that the state of the coast be reviewed at regular intervals, such as every five years, so that once the initial data analysis is completed, regular meetings of stakeholders could take place to assess the state relative to the indicators but also to develop the indicators themselves. Many felt that, to be successful, the review would need an effective monitoring system in place but a few thought that resources would be better spent in applying existing indicator work at the

32

Document info
Document views113
Page views113
Page last viewedThu Dec 08 22:30:09 UTC 2016
Pages44
Paragraphs814
Words13832

Comments