Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul
Participation in ICZM initiatives: Critical aspects and lessons learnt from the Mediterranean and Black Sea experiences Stefano Soriani ⇑, Fabrizia Buono, Marco Tonino, Monica Camuffo Ca’ Foscari University, Department of Economics, Cannaregio 873, 30121 Venice, Italy
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Available online 3 February 2015 Keywords: ICZM Participation Stakeholders Effectiveness
a b s t r a c t Public participation is recognized as a necessary tool to ensure a successful implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) strategies and plans. This paper, based on the experiences carried out in the Mediterranean and in the Black Sea within the EU FP7 project PEGASO, presents some critical aspects and lessons learnt regarding participation in ICZM projects. The research shows that data availability, the complexity of data interpretation, an inadequate legal and cultural framework and the difficulties in promoting integration of all the components of coastal management within short term projects are all elements that if not properly considered since the beginning of the participatory process may hinder public participation effectiveness. Moreover the definition of the spatial scale of coastal phenomenon as well as the discrepancy between the local scale of coastal governance and the complex multi-scale nature of coastal systems remain highly critical aspects to be addressed. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction In the last few decades public participation has been regarded as an essential component of a new model of environmental governance. By promoting the development of new partnership among the various actors involved in environmental policy and management, the search for consensus and mutual trust and the sharing of information and experiences, public participation has been recognized as a fundamental dimension of the concept of sustainable development (Bulkeley and Mol, 2003; Bäckstrand, 2006; Koppenjan and Enserink, 2009). Public participation is considered a constitutive dimension of most of the Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) plans, programs and initiatives, due to the complexity and variety of the perspectives and interests that characterize the use and management of coastal and marine resources; its importance has been also recently highlighted in the Integrated Coastal Zone Management Protocol (UNEP-MAP, 2008). However, despite the great emphasis placed on the issue, public participation remains a very complex process to be designed and managed. The difficulties to translate concepts into practice and to assess the effectiveness still remain a critical point. In particular, ⇑ Corresponding author at: Cannaregio 873, 30121 Venice, Italy. Tel.: +30 041 234 9160; fax: +39 041 234 9176. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Soriani), [email protected] (F. Buono), [email protected] (M. Tonino), [email protected] (M. Camuffo). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.12.045 0025-326X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
the evaluation of participation effectiveness in the academic literature is mainly focused on procedural aspects (aspects that contribute to the effectiveness of the process) rather than on the substantive ones (did the participatory process achieve the outcome which was intended to?). This point highlights the need for evaluations that assess what can and cannot be expected from participation (Brown, 2014; Middendorf and Busch, 1997; Petts and Leach, 2000; Rowe and Frewer, 2000). By considering some selected experiences in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, this paper aims to shed light upon the contribution that public participation can provide to ICZM and the most relevant problems, resulting from the design and implementation of a process of public participation. In particular, the work critically evaluates the results of an EU-FP7 project, PEGASO (People for Ecosystem-based Governance in Assessing Sustainable development of Ocean and coast). The project aimed at building on existing capacities and at developing common novel approaches to support integrated policies for the coastal, marine and maritime realms of the Mediterranean and Black Sea basins consistent with and relevant to the implementation of the ICZM Protocol (UNEP-MAP, 2008). Within the PEGASO project, ten ‘‘Collaborative Application SitEs’’ (CASEs) were identified in order to represent different scales, coastal issues, expertise and experiences. Each CASE had the opportunity to apply and adapt different participation methods in order to better answer to their specific characteristics and needs as well as to bridge the gap between science and decision makers. Against this background, this paper considers how participation was built within the project and presents the main lessons learnt
144
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
regarding participation in ICZM. It is organized as follows: firstly, it provides an overview on the main reasons that make public participation essential for ICZM; secondly it describes how the participatory process was built in PEGASO. It then describes the participatory processes implemented in the CASEs and finally the lessons learnt and conclusions are presented. 2. Participation in environmental management Public participation is widely recognized as a necessary tool to ensure a successful implementation of environmental policies. The UNECE Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters, also known as the Aarhus Convention (1998), the Directive 1990/ 313/EC on Freedom of access to information on the environment, and the Directive 2003/35/EC, that pointed out the importance of public participation in drawing up plans and programs relating to the environment, are all examples of the change in paradigm that has occurred in environmental management since the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and Agenda 21. Paragraph 23.2 of Agenda 21, the UN program of action from Rio, states that broad public participation in decision-making is a fundamental prerequisite for the achievement of sustainable development. Furthermore, participation has become a fundamental pillar of environmental processes as described in the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), in the 2002 EU Recommendation on ICZM (2002/413/EC) and in the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008). 2.1. ICZM and participation Participation is an essential requirement of the ICZM process and should have first priority in the planning and in the review of coastal zone management decisions and actions. Article 14 of the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008) requires the appropriate involvement of all stakeholders in the formulation and implementation of coastal and marine strategies, plans, programs or projects (see Table 1 for examples of participation in ICZM projects). In decision-making it is possible to distinguish among different degrees of participation according to the ‘amount of power’ that is transferred from the authority to the public. Participation characteristics vary according to the purpose it aims to fulfil; the purpose can affect the applied methods, the stakeholders involved and the intensity of the involvement (Hage et al., 2010). According to Fletcher (2003), participation adds to the ICZM process the value
of input of those who rely on the coast and which can provide valuable insight into the design of the ICZM process as well as the support of the users for the development and implementation of ICZM programs. Furthermore, governments are increasingly required to develop public–private partnerships to fully accomplish resources management goals. Other important purposes of participation are the legitimization of decision-making, the enhancement of democracy, the enlargement of citizenship and the improvement of decision-making (Petts and Leach, 2000). Moreover, participation helps to reach consensus, mutual trust and understanding among participants (Newman, 2005). However, despite the benefits that participation can bring to the decision-making process it can pose several challenges and pitfalls. Involving stakeholders can be costly, time-consuming, labour-intensive, confrontational, and can ultimately delay development and implementation of policies. Additionally, if improperly managed, stakeholders’ participation can create new conflicts or escalate existing ones (NOAA, 2007). Table 1 provides for each level of participation an overview of implemented ICZM projects. It is worthy to note how each level of participation corresponds to different aims and outcomes.
2.2. Stakeholders’ representativeness and legitimacy In order to build a constructive process, it is imperative to define who should participate and how. The importance of representativeness in a participation process is widely stressed as well as the need of including communities and individuals that have a direct stake but are not able to participate in organized groups (Kapoor, 2001). The lack of representativeness and consequently the feeble legitimacy of the whole participatory process are controversial issues. Moreover, the lack of representativeness of stakeholders limits substantially the development of knowledge integration (Cliquet et al., 2010). Therefore, before starting the participatory process it is important to define the main objectives and analyse whether there is a real possibility of involving new actors in the decision making process. Only at this point, it is possible to choose the method that will be most effective and efficient in achieving those goals (Treffny and Beilin, 2011). Article 14 of the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008) clearly states the actors who should be involved in the process, namely: ‘‘the Parties shall take the necessary measures to ensure the appropriate involvement in the phases of the formulation and implementation of coastal and marine strategies, plans and programmes or projects, as well as the issuing of the various authorizations, of the various stakeholders: the territorial communities and public
Table 1 Correspondences between level of participation and ICZM projects implementation outcome (modified from IEMA, 2002). Level of participation
ICZM projects implementation
Extended involvement Within this level of involvement the participants are able to contribute directly to the formation of a plan or proposal and to influence a decision through group discussions of activities Involvement and consultation Participants are invited to participate in formal or informal dialogue to identify specific issues of concern Information feedback This level of participation foresees the dissemination of information by the proponents. Participants are asked for feedback in order to supplement knowledge and gain better understanding of the issues at stake
Development of coastal partnerships working together across the land-sea interface, UK (Stojanovic and Barker, 2008)
Information provision The lowest level of participation corresponds to one way dissemination of information. No feedback is asked to the public
Development of a common vision for the Mont-Saint-Michel Bay, France (Cliquet et al., 2010) Identification of challenges, constraints and opportunities for sustainable flood risk management in London and Thames Estuary, UK (Mc Fadden et al., 2009) Provision of information about a new regional coastal strategy and identification of stakeholder’s opinions on Cantabria coastal issues and participation matters, Spain (Areizaga et al., 2012) Dissemination of information regarding the state of the environment of the Sevastopol Bay by an online Atlas, Ukraine. http://iczm.org.ua/en/index.php/ PEGASO_project
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
entities concerned, economic operators, non-governmental organizations, social actors and the public concerned’’.
3. Building participatory processes in the PEGASO project The role of capacity building in the development of competencies of individuals and organizations to implement ICZM is widely recognized. Nevertheless, the lack of sustained capacity and expertise among local authorities can be regarded as one of the key barriers to effective coastal and natural resources management in general (Buono et al., 2012; Le Tissier and Hills, 2010). Within the PEGASO project the capacity building plan was developed as a three tiers approach, consisting in the development of guidelines on participation methods for ICZM, the organization of on-site participation training and the dissemination of experiences and lessons learned through the project Coastal wiki. The guidelines on participation methods for ICZM (Soriani et al., 2014) aimed to acquaint PEGASO CASEs with participation theory and to provide support in the development of participatory strategy. For each phase of the ICZM process (Fig. 1) specific methods were selected based on: (a) their applicability (the methods were considered only if feasible and already tested); (b) diversity (for each phase of the ICZM process at least three methods were proposed); and (c) specificity (each proposed method described a single and concrete intervention with examples from previous implementation). The on-site participation training course was targeted to the PEGASO members responsible for the realization of participatory approaches in the CASEs and was attended by 12 participants selected within each CASE staff. The program was based on an interactive training approach, notably on practical exercises for simulation of facilitation situations by role plays. Role plays were recorded and reviewed by video analysis. Participants had to complete an exercise on a case study before the training in order to identify at least one core challenge for their CASE with regard to the application of participatory methods. Feedback regarding the training was asked during the overall duration of the course. The participants defined the overall experience beneficial because of the highly participative nature of the training and the adoption of different learning methods; however, the need of more examples of participation implementation experiences and further examples related to the specific context of the CASEs were highlighted. In the framework of the PEGASO project, capacity building was not only considered as training but also as awareness building, strengthening cooperation and integration, sharing knowledge and skills and learning common technical capabilities. In order to share the knowledge of the benefits of participation in ICZM process to a wider target than the project consortium, the guidelines
145
on participation methods for ICZM and the CASEs experiences and lessons learnt were uploaded on the Coastal wiki (http:// www.pegasoproject.eu/wiki/PEGASO_participation_methods). 4. CASEs characteristics and objectives of the participatory process The 10 PEGASO CASEs depicted a set of heterogeneous coastal situations in order to represent different coastal physical features, geographic scales, socio-economic contexts, coastal issues, conflicts among uses and ICZM experiences. Seven CASEs were selected in the Mediterranean (Al Hoceima, Morocco; Bouchesdu-Rhône, France; North Adriatic, Italy; Aegean islands, Greece; Dalyan-Köycegiz, Turkey; Nile Delta, Egypt; North Lebanon, Lebanon), and three in the Black Sea (Danube Delta, Romania; Sevastopol Bay, Ukraine; Guria region, Georgia). All CASEs had the possibilities to develop participation strategies to cope with the local coastal issues: for some of the CASEs this was the first time that such methodologies were implemented at local level. The below selection of CASEs, describes the most significant experiences both from the procedural (methodologies applied and stakeholders involved) and findings point of view. This selection offers the possibility to critically reflect on the implementation of participatory strategy within short-term research projects. The link between the selected CASEs and the participation process is finally summarized in Table 2. 4.1. Al Hoceima (Morocco) The coast of Al Hoceima is located in the central part of the Northern Coast of Morocco, along the Mediterranean Sea. The site presents a general lack of coastal planning and poor coastal resources management and conflicts generated by different land uses; residential and tourism development has compromised the shorelines and the agricultural lands; moreover, local fishery is decreasing due to overfishing and conflicts between artisanal and industrial fishery. The site is also vulnerable to climate changes impacts. In particular the Al Hoceima bay and the Ghis-Nekor coastal plain are low-lying areas seriously affected by sea-level rise and storm surges. The exacerbation of these events due to climate change is likely to affect the buffer zone and put the coastal resorts and infrastructures at risk of inundation and erosion. Furthermore, the coastal aquifers are already being salinized due to the over pumping of groundwater and the phenomenon is likely to increase due to sea-level rise. Within this context the participatory process aimed at investigating optimal ways to foster balanced and sustainable development and to support authorities and decision-makers in the management of coastal resources. Stakeholders, representing local
Fig. 1. The ICZM process (PAP/RAC, 2012).
146
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
Table 2 Participation in the PEGASO CASEs. Aims AL HOCEIMA Identification of sustainability indicators
Stakeholders involved
Methods
Barriers
Benefits
Governmental agencies – Academics – Professional associations – Local authorities – Funding agencies – Natural resources management bodies – National Park authority – NGOs
Public meetings
Significant lack of information available
Contribution to raise awareness on ICZM benefits
Overlapping role of some stakeholders Difficulties of involving general public in ICZM process
Conflicts management
Difficulties in the definition of the spatial scale to be considered
Better knowledge of stakeholders’ perceptions regarding the coastal zone
Scenario development
Discussion of a tourism development project
BOUCHES DU RHÔNE Development of environmental and territorial diagnosis and multidisciplinary prioritization of environmental issues
Semistructured interviews
Water Agency – Port Authorities – Local and regional authorities – Park authority – Maritime prefecture
Workshop NORTH ADRIATIC Improvement of the usefulness of the DSS for the assessment of climate change impacts on vulnerable coastal areas
DALYAN-KÖYCEGIZ Enhancement of participation in ICZM process
DANUBE DELTA Development of regional plans
Regions representatives – Provinces representatives – Local authorities – Port authorities – River basin authorities – Maritime infrastructure authorities – Regional environment protection agencies – Marine Protected Area – National institute for environmental research – Civil protection Agency
Expert panel
Difficult integration of scientists and field experts’ knowledge
Development of connection between scientists, practitioners and potential end-users
Regions representatives – Provinces representatives – Local authorities – Universities – Environmental protection associations – Cultural associations – Professional associations
Public meetings
Stakeholders’ hesitation to take responsibility over management
Increased interest regarding the management of the SPA
Ministry representatives – Local authorities – Natural resources management bodies – Professional associations – NGOs – Man and Biosphere management body
Semistructured interviews
Complexity of data and information harmonization
Enhancement of cooperation among stakeholders and experts. Increased awareness related to the sustainable development of the coastal area
Public meetings
authorities, funding agencies, natural resources management bodies, National Park authority as well as NGOs, participated in two workshops. In order to achieve the proposed objectives, the Al Hoceima CASE organized two focus groups. The first one aimed at the identification of sustainability indicators for monitoring the area and at the creation of two possible development scenarios for the area, while the second one addressed the possible impacts on the area of a tourism development project.
4.2. Bouches-du-Rhône (France) The coastal zone of the Bouches-du-Rhône County (120 km located in the South-east of France) is subdivided into 5 units (Camargue, Gulf of Fos, Côte Bleue, city and the Calanques of Marseille), which differ from one and other in terms of natural areas and coastal uses: urban zones, industrial zones, leisure and tourism areas, marine resource exploitation zones (farming, fishing, aquaculture) and protected areas. The participatory process organized during the PEGASO project aimed at the development of an environmental and territorial diagnosis as well as a multidisciplinary assessment of priority environmental issues. In order to identify institutional knowledge and management deadlock points regarding the priority environmental issues of the area the CASE team carried out several semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (site managers and local decision-makers) and a participative workshop. In this
CASE great attention was paid to the involvement of local stakeholders since the first phases of the project: in fact, stakeholders contributed to the definition and prioritisation of the coastal issues to be addressed during the research activity.
4.3. North Adriatic (Italy) The Western Adriatic Italian Coast is generally low, merging into marshes and lagoons (e.g. Venice, Marano and Grado lagoons) on both sides of the protruding Po river delta, the most important river flowing into the Adriatic Sea. The North Adriatic coast comprises a very fragile coastal environment subject to continuous morphological changes that can be appreciable even over short geological time. Many areas, particularly the Lagoon of Venice and around the Po River Delta, are located below the mean sea level and affected by natural or man induced subsidence. Historical observations and future projections of isostatic and tectonic movements show that the North Adriatic coast (particularly Venice, Grado and Marano lagoons) is particularly vulnerable to future sea level rise. Therefore, climate change and the related consequences on sea level rise, storminess, coastal erosion and changes in water quality are prominent issues for the case study area both considering the vulnerability of fragile ecosystems such as coastal lagoons, and the cultural, social and economic values at stake. Against this background planning and management bodies of the coastal area of Veneto and Friuli Venezia Giulia regions were invited to attend
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
an expert panel in order to improve the usefulness of a Decision Support System (DSS) for the assessment of climate change impacts on vulnerable coastal areas. The panel aimed at improving the graphic aspects, the spatial resolution and visualization typologies of the DSS. Moreover, experts were asked to propose strategies for amending the communication of climate change risks for the considered coastal areas. 4.4. Dalyan-Köycegiz (Turkey) Dalyan-Köycegiz Specially Protected Area (SPA) is situated in the South-West coast of Turkey. The area is characterized by the presence of different landscapes of rivers, fresh water lake, delta, lagoons, sandy beaches, hills and sloping pine forests. The SPA is an important nesting site of the endangered loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). The participatory process was developed with the aim of fostering public participation and collaboration in the management of the SPA. In order to achieve such an objective and increase awareness regarding Integrated Coastal Zone Management the CASE team organized three forums with the stakeholders (region, provinces and municipalities representatives, universities, environmental protection associations as well as cultural and professional associations). 4.5. Danube Delta (Romania) The coast of Danube Delta (Romania) comprised between Musura branch and Midia cape in the South (166 km) is characterized by sandy beaches and low underwater slopes. The overexploitation of natural resources has caused relevant changes in the delta subsystems and the derangement of the natural equilibrium (disappearance of fish reproduction areas, clogging of natural streams and characteristic landscapes). In order to assure sufficient and correct representation of local concerns a small-scale survey was conducted prior to the public workshop. The survey consisted of semi-structured interviews, questionnaire and field observations. In a second phase the stakeholders (ministry representatives, local authorities, natural resources management bodies, professional associations, NGOs and the Man and Biosphere management body) were invited to attend a workshop for the development of integrated regional plans by the implementation of a participatory rural appraisal method (PRA). 5. Discussion The contrasting perspectives and interests that characterize coastal areas require the development of ICZM strategies (UNEPMAP, 2008; Stojanovic et al., 2004; UNCED, 1992). Indeed, the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008) and the European Strategy for ICZM (2002/413/EC) highlight the central role of participation in the planning and in the review of coastal zone management decisions and actions. However, despite the numerous benefits provided (e.g. the legitimization of decision-making, the enhancement of democracy, the mitigation of conflicts and the provision of information) there are still some constraints that make difficult to organize and manage effectively a participatory process. Indeed, the involvement of a wide range of people in the planning process can increase its cost and, it can carry risks such as unrealistic aspirations of certain groups. Participation is both time and resources consuming. Furthermore, an inadequate legal and cultural framework can limit the advantages of participatory environmental management. The
147
examples of participation experiences of the PEGASO project confirmed the relevance of above issues. On one side, thanks to participation, stakeholders’ awareness regarding the importance of ICZM was improved; knowledge on coastal issues was shared, and the gap between coastal scientists, ICZM practitioners and decisionmakers was partly bridged. On the other side, the examples provided below confirm the complexity of stakeholders’ involvement and highlight the relevance of some specific issues. The need for a multiplicity set of reliable information was particularly stressed by the CASEs. In particular the CASEs of Al Hoceima (Morocco) and North Adriatic (Italy) highlighted the important role played by data availability and common data standards. Data on coastal issues and geographic information are essential for the successful development of ICZM efforts as they are the link between knowledge and decision-making. The participation process should not only make available to the participants comprehensive information on the issues at stake but also give them the possibility to have access to different sources of information and knowledge. Participation in general is widely advocated for the opportunities it presents regarding social learning and capacitybuilding (Tuler, 1998). However, these benefits depend on the precondition of participatory competence, which is defined by the Environment Agency (1998, p. 20) as the ability to provide participants with the procedural tools and knowledge needed to make the best possible decisions. Within this context is also interesting to describe the experience of the Danube Delta CASE (Romania). The CASE reported that a large amount of data and information regarding the area were collected in a participatory manner from the stakeholders. This helped to bridge the gap between science, practitioners’ expertise and local knowledge. However, the combination and harmonization of different sources of data and information proved to be a very difficult and time-consuming phase of the process. Moreover, during the project it became clear that most of data and information provided by local stakeholders were based on implicit assumptions as well as on the wished evolution for the considered area. The combination of the aforementioned points made the decision-making process extremely complex and difficult to be managed. On the basis of the above considerations, our study confirms that the provision of and access to different (including conflicting) information, the opportunity for questioning, debating and learning, and the promotion of the consideration of anecdotal evidence and intuitive knowledge are all important elements within a participation process. However, the Danube Delta CASE clearly points out that the management of data resulting from different sources as well as the explicitness of the assumptions made are crucial aspects that need to be properly addressed. The CASE of Dalyan-Köycegiz Specially Protected Area (Turkey) laid stress on the complexity of achieving effective and comprehensive participation where power sharing and collective decision making are not embedded in the local culture and values. Indeed, participation involves a change in the organizational culture of the society because it results in broader, flexible and longer-term goals, results and time horizons compared to the top-down approach. Therefore, an inadequate legal and cultural framework can limit the advantages of participatory environmental management (Petts and Leach, 2000). The Al Hoceima CASE (Morocco) confirms that one of the main critical point of ICZM projects is the integration of all the components of coastal management within an effective governance system. The CASE found that most of the problems and conflicts encountered proved to be attributable to institutional (non-coordination of sectoral actions, inflexibility of procedures, and absence of prospective vision) and legal aspects (obsolete texts or unenforced laws, lack of control). In order for public participation to
148
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
be effective, it requires a systems perspective that sustains and builds on the interactions among the several actors (sector agencies, non-profits and business organizations, advocacy groups, universities and so on) which compose the complex evolving reality of contemporary society (Innes and Booher, 2004). The Moroccan CASE highlighted as a weak point of ICZM projects the lack of consistency and capitalization of knowledge, as well as the lack of integration between projects and structural elements of planning policies. The examples reported by the CASE emphasized the fact that none of the former ICZM projects implemented in the area had actually carried out the identified actions. In fact, the challenge of integration and the real inclusion of projects outcomes in the decision-making instruments of national policies rarely exceed the declaration of intent. Also the CASE of Bouches-du-Rhône reported on the difficulties of promoting integrated management within short research projects. The CASE highlighted the fact that great efforts must be made at the beginning of the project to not only stimulate participation from local stakeholders, but also to create local stakeholders leadership. In this way it is possible to ensure the mobilization of the different actors throughout the process and also ensure a continuation after its end. Only in such a way the scientific tools implemented during the project can be transferred to the stakeholders in order to be used and maintained independently from the external project funding. These points raise the question on the effectiveness and possible pitfalls of participation built within short term research projects, where the proponent has not real power to carry on the decisions taken. Furthermore, it should be stressed that ICZM is a long-term process and if activities are not sustained in the long period (and this is particularly relevant in the case of research funded projects), efforts and results will be lost thus comprising trust of stakeholders in participation effectiveness. The increased knowledge regarding stakeholders’ perceptions and priorities achieved through participation was widely reported by CASEs. This element confirms the central role of participation in providing an overview of all the various interests and conflicts concerning coastal uses. However, the Bouches-du-Rhône and the North Adriatic CASEs clearly demonstrated the difficulties that stakeholders very often experience in the definition of the spatial scale to be considered for defining coastal issues and for promoting solutions. Coastal ecosystems have evolved over millennia under the joint influence of local (though sometimes large) coastal watersheds and oceanic influences. Human induced environmental changes have increased the influence of terrestrial drivers on coastal areas thus strengthening their multi-scale nature (Swaney et al., 2012). Moreover, many of the most important economic sectors that impact today on coastal ecosystems depend increasingly on global trends: tourism development, port activities and maritime transportation, offshore industries and coastal energy plants, multinational and industrial fishery. In this perspective, the mismatch between the local scale of coastal governance and the complex multi-scale nature of coastal systems makes their understanding and management still a challenge for ICZM initiatives. The importance of this issue needs to be carefully considered also in the identification of the stakeholders to be involved in the participation process. Acknowledgments This research was funded by the FP7 – Large scale integrating project PEGASO (People for Ecosystem-based Governance in
Assessing Sustainable development of Ocean and coast). Grant Agreement No: 244170. We would like to thank the anonymous referees who helped us to improve the manuscript. References Areizaga, J., Sanò, M., Medina, R., Juanes, J., 2012. Improving public engagement in ICZM: a practical approach. J. Environ. Manage. 109, 123–135. Bäckstrand, K., 2006. Democratizing global environmental governance? Stakeholder democracy after the world summit on sustainable development. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 12 (4), 467–498. Brown, J., 2014. Evaluating participatory initiatives in south Africa not just processes but outcomes too. SAGE Open 4 (2), 2158244014531966. Bulkeley, H., Mol, A.P., 2003. Participation and environmental governance: consensus, ambivalence and debate. Environ. Values 12 (2), 143–154. Buono, F., Pediaditi, K., Carsjens, G.J., 2012. Local community participation in Italian National Parks Management: theory versus practice. J. Environ. Planning Policy Manage. 14 (2), 189–208. Cliquet, A., Kervarec, F., Bogaert, D., Maes, F., Queffelec, B., 2010. Legitimacy issues in public participation in coastal decision making processes: case studies from Belgium and France. Ocean Coast. Manage. 53 (12), 760–768. Environment Agency, 1998. Consensus building for sustainable development. Report SD12, Environment Agency, Bristol. Fletcher, S., 2003. Stakeholder representation and the democratic basis of coastal partnerships in the UK. Mar. Policy 27, 229–240. Hage, M., Leroy, P., Petersen, A.C., 2010. Stakeholder participation in environmental knowledge production. Futures 42, 254–264. IEMA, 2002. Perspectives, Guidelines on Participation in Environmental Decision Making. Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), Lincoln. Innes, J.E., Booher, D.E., 2004. Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Plan. Theor. Pract. 5 (4), 419–436. Kapoor, I., 2001. Towards participatory environmental management? J. Environ. Manage. 63 (3), 269–279. Koppenjan, J.F., Enserink, B., 2009. Public–private partnerships in urban infrastructures: reconciling private sector participation and sustainability. Public Admin. Rev. 69 (2), 284–296. Le Tissier, M.D., Hills, J.M., 2010. Practitioner training for building capacity in ICZM. Ocean Coast. Manage. 53 (12), 787–795. Mc Fadden, L., Penning-Rowsell, E., Tapsell, S., 2009. Strategic coastal flood-risk management in practice: actors’ perspectives on the integration of flood risk management in London and the Thames Estuary. Ocean Coast. Manage. 52 (12), 636–645. Middendorf, G., Busch, L., 1997. Inquiry for the public good: democratic participation in agricultural research. Agric. Human Values 14, 45–57. Newman, J., 2005. Participative governance and the remaking of the public sphere. In: Newman, J. (Ed.), Remaking Governance, Peoples, Politics and the Public Sphere. University of Bristol, The Policy Press, pp. 119–138. NOAA Costal Service Center, 2007. Introduction to stakeholder participation. Social Science tool for coastal programs. PAP/RAC, 2012. THE ICZM PROCESS: A Roadmap towards Coastal Sustainability. Split, PAP/RAC. pp. 35 + Annexes. Petts, J., Leach, B., 2000. Evaluating Methods for Public Participation: A Literature Review. R&D Technical Report: E2-030. Bristol: Environmental Agency. Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J., 2000. Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Sci. Technol. Human Values 25 (1), 3–29. Soriani S., Buono F., Tonino M., Camuffo M., 2014. Participatory methods for ICZM implementation. PEGASO D4.4. Report, Accompanying Supporting Materials and Guidelines for the Use of Participatory Methods and Application for MultiScale ICZM Across the Mediterranean and Black Sea Basins. . Stojanovic, T., Barker, N., 2008. Improving governance through local coastal partnerships in the UK. Geogr. J. 174 (4), 344–360. Stojanovic, T., Ballinger, C., Lalwani, C., 2004. Successful integrated coastal management: measuring it with research and contributing to wise practice. Ocean Coast. Manage. 47, 273–298. Swaney, D.P., Humborg, C., Emeis, K., Kannen, A., Silvert, W., Tett, P., Pastres, R., Solidoro, C., Yamamuro, M., Hénocque, Y., Nicholls, R., 2012. Five critical questions of scale for the coastal zone. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 96, 9–21. Treffny, R., Beilin, R., 2011. Gaining legitimacy and losing trust: Stakeholder participation in ecological risk assessment for marine protected area management. Environ. Values 20 (3), 417–438. Tuler, S., 1998. Learning through participation. Human Ecol. Rev. 5 (1), 58–60. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (a). In: The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro. 3–14 June 1992. UNEP MAP, 2008. ICZM Protocol in the Mediterranean.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Marine Pollution Bulletin journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul
Participation in ICZM initiatives: Critical aspects and lessons learnt from the Mediterranean and Black Sea experiences Stefano Soriani ⇑, Fabrizia Buono, Marco Tonino, Monica Camuffo Ca’ Foscari University, Department of Economics, Cannaregio 873, 30121 Venice, Italy
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Available online 3 February 2015 Keywords: ICZM Participation Stakeholders Effectiveness
a b s t r a c t Public participation is recognized as a necessary tool to ensure a successful implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) strategies and plans. This paper, based on the experiences carried out in the Mediterranean and in the Black Sea within the EU FP7 project PEGASO, presents some critical aspects and lessons learnt regarding participation in ICZM projects. The research shows that data availability, the complexity of data interpretation, an inadequate legal and cultural framework and the difficulties in promoting integration of all the components of coastal management within short term projects are all elements that if not properly considered since the beginning of the participatory process may hinder public participation effectiveness. Moreover the definition of the spatial scale of coastal phenomenon as well as the discrepancy between the local scale of coastal governance and the complex multi-scale nature of coastal systems remain highly critical aspects to be addressed. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction In the last few decades public participation has been regarded as an essential component of a new model of environmental governance. By promoting the development of new partnership among the various actors involved in environmental policy and management, the search for consensus and mutual trust and the sharing of information and experiences, public participation has been recognized as a fundamental dimension of the concept of sustainable development (Bulkeley and Mol, 2003; Bäckstrand, 2006; Koppenjan and Enserink, 2009). Public participation is considered a constitutive dimension of most of the Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) plans, programs and initiatives, due to the complexity and variety of the perspectives and interests that characterize the use and management of coastal and marine resources; its importance has been also recently highlighted in the Integrated Coastal Zone Management Protocol (UNEP-MAP, 2008). However, despite the great emphasis placed on the issue, public participation remains a very complex process to be designed and managed. The difficulties to translate concepts into practice and to assess the effectiveness still remain a critical point. In particular, ⇑ Corresponding author at: Cannaregio 873, 30121 Venice, Italy. Tel.: +30 041 234 9160; fax: +39 041 234 9176. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Soriani), [email protected] (F. Buono), [email protected] (M. Tonino), [email protected] (M. Camuffo). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.12.045 0025-326X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
the evaluation of participation effectiveness in the academic literature is mainly focused on procedural aspects (aspects that contribute to the effectiveness of the process) rather than on the substantive ones (did the participatory process achieve the outcome which was intended to?). This point highlights the need for evaluations that assess what can and cannot be expected from participation (Brown, 2014; Middendorf and Busch, 1997; Petts and Leach, 2000; Rowe and Frewer, 2000). By considering some selected experiences in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, this paper aims to shed light upon the contribution that public participation can provide to ICZM and the most relevant problems, resulting from the design and implementation of a process of public participation. In particular, the work critically evaluates the results of an EU-FP7 project, PEGASO (People for Ecosystem-based Governance in Assessing Sustainable development of Ocean and coast). The project aimed at building on existing capacities and at developing common novel approaches to support integrated policies for the coastal, marine and maritime realms of the Mediterranean and Black Sea basins consistent with and relevant to the implementation of the ICZM Protocol (UNEP-MAP, 2008). Within the PEGASO project, ten ‘‘Collaborative Application SitEs’’ (CASEs) were identified in order to represent different scales, coastal issues, expertise and experiences. Each CASE had the opportunity to apply and adapt different participation methods in order to better answer to their specific characteristics and needs as well as to bridge the gap between science and decision makers. Against this background, this paper considers how participation was built within the project and presents the main lessons learnt
144
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
regarding participation in ICZM. It is organized as follows: firstly, it provides an overview on the main reasons that make public participation essential for ICZM; secondly it describes how the participatory process was built in PEGASO. It then describes the participatory processes implemented in the CASEs and finally the lessons learnt and conclusions are presented. 2. Participation in environmental management Public participation is widely recognized as a necessary tool to ensure a successful implementation of environmental policies. The UNECE Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters, also known as the Aarhus Convention (1998), the Directive 1990/ 313/EC on Freedom of access to information on the environment, and the Directive 2003/35/EC, that pointed out the importance of public participation in drawing up plans and programs relating to the environment, are all examples of the change in paradigm that has occurred in environmental management since the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and Agenda 21. Paragraph 23.2 of Agenda 21, the UN program of action from Rio, states that broad public participation in decision-making is a fundamental prerequisite for the achievement of sustainable development. Furthermore, participation has become a fundamental pillar of environmental processes as described in the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), in the 2002 EU Recommendation on ICZM (2002/413/EC) and in the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008). 2.1. ICZM and participation Participation is an essential requirement of the ICZM process and should have first priority in the planning and in the review of coastal zone management decisions and actions. Article 14 of the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008) requires the appropriate involvement of all stakeholders in the formulation and implementation of coastal and marine strategies, plans, programs or projects (see Table 1 for examples of participation in ICZM projects). In decision-making it is possible to distinguish among different degrees of participation according to the ‘amount of power’ that is transferred from the authority to the public. Participation characteristics vary according to the purpose it aims to fulfil; the purpose can affect the applied methods, the stakeholders involved and the intensity of the involvement (Hage et al., 2010). According to Fletcher (2003), participation adds to the ICZM process the value
of input of those who rely on the coast and which can provide valuable insight into the design of the ICZM process as well as the support of the users for the development and implementation of ICZM programs. Furthermore, governments are increasingly required to develop public–private partnerships to fully accomplish resources management goals. Other important purposes of participation are the legitimization of decision-making, the enhancement of democracy, the enlargement of citizenship and the improvement of decision-making (Petts and Leach, 2000). Moreover, participation helps to reach consensus, mutual trust and understanding among participants (Newman, 2005). However, despite the benefits that participation can bring to the decision-making process it can pose several challenges and pitfalls. Involving stakeholders can be costly, time-consuming, labour-intensive, confrontational, and can ultimately delay development and implementation of policies. Additionally, if improperly managed, stakeholders’ participation can create new conflicts or escalate existing ones (NOAA, 2007). Table 1 provides for each level of participation an overview of implemented ICZM projects. It is worthy to note how each level of participation corresponds to different aims and outcomes.
2.2. Stakeholders’ representativeness and legitimacy In order to build a constructive process, it is imperative to define who should participate and how. The importance of representativeness in a participation process is widely stressed as well as the need of including communities and individuals that have a direct stake but are not able to participate in organized groups (Kapoor, 2001). The lack of representativeness and consequently the feeble legitimacy of the whole participatory process are controversial issues. Moreover, the lack of representativeness of stakeholders limits substantially the development of knowledge integration (Cliquet et al., 2010). Therefore, before starting the participatory process it is important to define the main objectives and analyse whether there is a real possibility of involving new actors in the decision making process. Only at this point, it is possible to choose the method that will be most effective and efficient in achieving those goals (Treffny and Beilin, 2011). Article 14 of the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008) clearly states the actors who should be involved in the process, namely: ‘‘the Parties shall take the necessary measures to ensure the appropriate involvement in the phases of the formulation and implementation of coastal and marine strategies, plans and programmes or projects, as well as the issuing of the various authorizations, of the various stakeholders: the territorial communities and public
Table 1 Correspondences between level of participation and ICZM projects implementation outcome (modified from IEMA, 2002). Level of participation
ICZM projects implementation
Extended involvement Within this level of involvement the participants are able to contribute directly to the formation of a plan or proposal and to influence a decision through group discussions of activities Involvement and consultation Participants are invited to participate in formal or informal dialogue to identify specific issues of concern Information feedback This level of participation foresees the dissemination of information by the proponents. Participants are asked for feedback in order to supplement knowledge and gain better understanding of the issues at stake
Development of coastal partnerships working together across the land-sea interface, UK (Stojanovic and Barker, 2008)
Information provision The lowest level of participation corresponds to one way dissemination of information. No feedback is asked to the public
Development of a common vision for the Mont-Saint-Michel Bay, France (Cliquet et al., 2010) Identification of challenges, constraints and opportunities for sustainable flood risk management in London and Thames Estuary, UK (Mc Fadden et al., 2009) Provision of information about a new regional coastal strategy and identification of stakeholder’s opinions on Cantabria coastal issues and participation matters, Spain (Areizaga et al., 2012) Dissemination of information regarding the state of the environment of the Sevastopol Bay by an online Atlas, Ukraine. http://iczm.org.ua/en/index.php/ PEGASO_project
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
entities concerned, economic operators, non-governmental organizations, social actors and the public concerned’’.
3. Building participatory processes in the PEGASO project The role of capacity building in the development of competencies of individuals and organizations to implement ICZM is widely recognized. Nevertheless, the lack of sustained capacity and expertise among local authorities can be regarded as one of the key barriers to effective coastal and natural resources management in general (Buono et al., 2012; Le Tissier and Hills, 2010). Within the PEGASO project the capacity building plan was developed as a three tiers approach, consisting in the development of guidelines on participation methods for ICZM, the organization of on-site participation training and the dissemination of experiences and lessons learned through the project Coastal wiki. The guidelines on participation methods for ICZM (Soriani et al., 2014) aimed to acquaint PEGASO CASEs with participation theory and to provide support in the development of participatory strategy. For each phase of the ICZM process (Fig. 1) specific methods were selected based on: (a) their applicability (the methods were considered only if feasible and already tested); (b) diversity (for each phase of the ICZM process at least three methods were proposed); and (c) specificity (each proposed method described a single and concrete intervention with examples from previous implementation). The on-site participation training course was targeted to the PEGASO members responsible for the realization of participatory approaches in the CASEs and was attended by 12 participants selected within each CASE staff. The program was based on an interactive training approach, notably on practical exercises for simulation of facilitation situations by role plays. Role plays were recorded and reviewed by video analysis. Participants had to complete an exercise on a case study before the training in order to identify at least one core challenge for their CASE with regard to the application of participatory methods. Feedback regarding the training was asked during the overall duration of the course. The participants defined the overall experience beneficial because of the highly participative nature of the training and the adoption of different learning methods; however, the need of more examples of participation implementation experiences and further examples related to the specific context of the CASEs were highlighted. In the framework of the PEGASO project, capacity building was not only considered as training but also as awareness building, strengthening cooperation and integration, sharing knowledge and skills and learning common technical capabilities. In order to share the knowledge of the benefits of participation in ICZM process to a wider target than the project consortium, the guidelines
145
on participation methods for ICZM and the CASEs experiences and lessons learnt were uploaded on the Coastal wiki (http:// www.pegasoproject.eu/wiki/PEGASO_participation_methods). 4. CASEs characteristics and objectives of the participatory process The 10 PEGASO CASEs depicted a set of heterogeneous coastal situations in order to represent different coastal physical features, geographic scales, socio-economic contexts, coastal issues, conflicts among uses and ICZM experiences. Seven CASEs were selected in the Mediterranean (Al Hoceima, Morocco; Bouchesdu-Rhône, France; North Adriatic, Italy; Aegean islands, Greece; Dalyan-Köycegiz, Turkey; Nile Delta, Egypt; North Lebanon, Lebanon), and three in the Black Sea (Danube Delta, Romania; Sevastopol Bay, Ukraine; Guria region, Georgia). All CASEs had the possibilities to develop participation strategies to cope with the local coastal issues: for some of the CASEs this was the first time that such methodologies were implemented at local level. The below selection of CASEs, describes the most significant experiences both from the procedural (methodologies applied and stakeholders involved) and findings point of view. This selection offers the possibility to critically reflect on the implementation of participatory strategy within short-term research projects. The link between the selected CASEs and the participation process is finally summarized in Table 2. 4.1. Al Hoceima (Morocco) The coast of Al Hoceima is located in the central part of the Northern Coast of Morocco, along the Mediterranean Sea. The site presents a general lack of coastal planning and poor coastal resources management and conflicts generated by different land uses; residential and tourism development has compromised the shorelines and the agricultural lands; moreover, local fishery is decreasing due to overfishing and conflicts between artisanal and industrial fishery. The site is also vulnerable to climate changes impacts. In particular the Al Hoceima bay and the Ghis-Nekor coastal plain are low-lying areas seriously affected by sea-level rise and storm surges. The exacerbation of these events due to climate change is likely to affect the buffer zone and put the coastal resorts and infrastructures at risk of inundation and erosion. Furthermore, the coastal aquifers are already being salinized due to the over pumping of groundwater and the phenomenon is likely to increase due to sea-level rise. Within this context the participatory process aimed at investigating optimal ways to foster balanced and sustainable development and to support authorities and decision-makers in the management of coastal resources. Stakeholders, representing local
Fig. 1. The ICZM process (PAP/RAC, 2012).
146
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
Table 2 Participation in the PEGASO CASEs. Aims AL HOCEIMA Identification of sustainability indicators
Stakeholders involved
Methods
Barriers
Benefits
Governmental agencies – Academics – Professional associations – Local authorities – Funding agencies – Natural resources management bodies – National Park authority – NGOs
Public meetings
Significant lack of information available
Contribution to raise awareness on ICZM benefits
Overlapping role of some stakeholders Difficulties of involving general public in ICZM process
Conflicts management
Difficulties in the definition of the spatial scale to be considered
Better knowledge of stakeholders’ perceptions regarding the coastal zone
Scenario development
Discussion of a tourism development project
BOUCHES DU RHÔNE Development of environmental and territorial diagnosis and multidisciplinary prioritization of environmental issues
Semistructured interviews
Water Agency – Port Authorities – Local and regional authorities – Park authority – Maritime prefecture
Workshop NORTH ADRIATIC Improvement of the usefulness of the DSS for the assessment of climate change impacts on vulnerable coastal areas
DALYAN-KÖYCEGIZ Enhancement of participation in ICZM process
DANUBE DELTA Development of regional plans
Regions representatives – Provinces representatives – Local authorities – Port authorities – River basin authorities – Maritime infrastructure authorities – Regional environment protection agencies – Marine Protected Area – National institute for environmental research – Civil protection Agency
Expert panel
Difficult integration of scientists and field experts’ knowledge
Development of connection between scientists, practitioners and potential end-users
Regions representatives – Provinces representatives – Local authorities – Universities – Environmental protection associations – Cultural associations – Professional associations
Public meetings
Stakeholders’ hesitation to take responsibility over management
Increased interest regarding the management of the SPA
Ministry representatives – Local authorities – Natural resources management bodies – Professional associations – NGOs – Man and Biosphere management body
Semistructured interviews
Complexity of data and information harmonization
Enhancement of cooperation among stakeholders and experts. Increased awareness related to the sustainable development of the coastal area
Public meetings
authorities, funding agencies, natural resources management bodies, National Park authority as well as NGOs, participated in two workshops. In order to achieve the proposed objectives, the Al Hoceima CASE organized two focus groups. The first one aimed at the identification of sustainability indicators for monitoring the area and at the creation of two possible development scenarios for the area, while the second one addressed the possible impacts on the area of a tourism development project.
4.2. Bouches-du-Rhône (France) The coastal zone of the Bouches-du-Rhône County (120 km located in the South-east of France) is subdivided into 5 units (Camargue, Gulf of Fos, Côte Bleue, city and the Calanques of Marseille), which differ from one and other in terms of natural areas and coastal uses: urban zones, industrial zones, leisure and tourism areas, marine resource exploitation zones (farming, fishing, aquaculture) and protected areas. The participatory process organized during the PEGASO project aimed at the development of an environmental and territorial diagnosis as well as a multidisciplinary assessment of priority environmental issues. In order to identify institutional knowledge and management deadlock points regarding the priority environmental issues of the area the CASE team carried out several semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (site managers and local decision-makers) and a participative workshop. In this
CASE great attention was paid to the involvement of local stakeholders since the first phases of the project: in fact, stakeholders contributed to the definition and prioritisation of the coastal issues to be addressed during the research activity.
4.3. North Adriatic (Italy) The Western Adriatic Italian Coast is generally low, merging into marshes and lagoons (e.g. Venice, Marano and Grado lagoons) on both sides of the protruding Po river delta, the most important river flowing into the Adriatic Sea. The North Adriatic coast comprises a very fragile coastal environment subject to continuous morphological changes that can be appreciable even over short geological time. Many areas, particularly the Lagoon of Venice and around the Po River Delta, are located below the mean sea level and affected by natural or man induced subsidence. Historical observations and future projections of isostatic and tectonic movements show that the North Adriatic coast (particularly Venice, Grado and Marano lagoons) is particularly vulnerable to future sea level rise. Therefore, climate change and the related consequences on sea level rise, storminess, coastal erosion and changes in water quality are prominent issues for the case study area both considering the vulnerability of fragile ecosystems such as coastal lagoons, and the cultural, social and economic values at stake. Against this background planning and management bodies of the coastal area of Veneto and Friuli Venezia Giulia regions were invited to attend
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
an expert panel in order to improve the usefulness of a Decision Support System (DSS) for the assessment of climate change impacts on vulnerable coastal areas. The panel aimed at improving the graphic aspects, the spatial resolution and visualization typologies of the DSS. Moreover, experts were asked to propose strategies for amending the communication of climate change risks for the considered coastal areas. 4.4. Dalyan-Köycegiz (Turkey) Dalyan-Köycegiz Specially Protected Area (SPA) is situated in the South-West coast of Turkey. The area is characterized by the presence of different landscapes of rivers, fresh water lake, delta, lagoons, sandy beaches, hills and sloping pine forests. The SPA is an important nesting site of the endangered loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). The participatory process was developed with the aim of fostering public participation and collaboration in the management of the SPA. In order to achieve such an objective and increase awareness regarding Integrated Coastal Zone Management the CASE team organized three forums with the stakeholders (region, provinces and municipalities representatives, universities, environmental protection associations as well as cultural and professional associations). 4.5. Danube Delta (Romania) The coast of Danube Delta (Romania) comprised between Musura branch and Midia cape in the South (166 km) is characterized by sandy beaches and low underwater slopes. The overexploitation of natural resources has caused relevant changes in the delta subsystems and the derangement of the natural equilibrium (disappearance of fish reproduction areas, clogging of natural streams and characteristic landscapes). In order to assure sufficient and correct representation of local concerns a small-scale survey was conducted prior to the public workshop. The survey consisted of semi-structured interviews, questionnaire and field observations. In a second phase the stakeholders (ministry representatives, local authorities, natural resources management bodies, professional associations, NGOs and the Man and Biosphere management body) were invited to attend a workshop for the development of integrated regional plans by the implementation of a participatory rural appraisal method (PRA). 5. Discussion The contrasting perspectives and interests that characterize coastal areas require the development of ICZM strategies (UNEPMAP, 2008; Stojanovic et al., 2004; UNCED, 1992). Indeed, the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean (UNEP-MAP, 2008) and the European Strategy for ICZM (2002/413/EC) highlight the central role of participation in the planning and in the review of coastal zone management decisions and actions. However, despite the numerous benefits provided (e.g. the legitimization of decision-making, the enhancement of democracy, the mitigation of conflicts and the provision of information) there are still some constraints that make difficult to organize and manage effectively a participatory process. Indeed, the involvement of a wide range of people in the planning process can increase its cost and, it can carry risks such as unrealistic aspirations of certain groups. Participation is both time and resources consuming. Furthermore, an inadequate legal and cultural framework can limit the advantages of participatory environmental management. The
147
examples of participation experiences of the PEGASO project confirmed the relevance of above issues. On one side, thanks to participation, stakeholders’ awareness regarding the importance of ICZM was improved; knowledge on coastal issues was shared, and the gap between coastal scientists, ICZM practitioners and decisionmakers was partly bridged. On the other side, the examples provided below confirm the complexity of stakeholders’ involvement and highlight the relevance of some specific issues. The need for a multiplicity set of reliable information was particularly stressed by the CASEs. In particular the CASEs of Al Hoceima (Morocco) and North Adriatic (Italy) highlighted the important role played by data availability and common data standards. Data on coastal issues and geographic information are essential for the successful development of ICZM efforts as they are the link between knowledge and decision-making. The participation process should not only make available to the participants comprehensive information on the issues at stake but also give them the possibility to have access to different sources of information and knowledge. Participation in general is widely advocated for the opportunities it presents regarding social learning and capacitybuilding (Tuler, 1998). However, these benefits depend on the precondition of participatory competence, which is defined by the Environment Agency (1998, p. 20) as the ability to provide participants with the procedural tools and knowledge needed to make the best possible decisions. Within this context is also interesting to describe the experience of the Danube Delta CASE (Romania). The CASE reported that a large amount of data and information regarding the area were collected in a participatory manner from the stakeholders. This helped to bridge the gap between science, practitioners’ expertise and local knowledge. However, the combination and harmonization of different sources of data and information proved to be a very difficult and time-consuming phase of the process. Moreover, during the project it became clear that most of data and information provided by local stakeholders were based on implicit assumptions as well as on the wished evolution for the considered area. The combination of the aforementioned points made the decision-making process extremely complex and difficult to be managed. On the basis of the above considerations, our study confirms that the provision of and access to different (including conflicting) information, the opportunity for questioning, debating and learning, and the promotion of the consideration of anecdotal evidence and intuitive knowledge are all important elements within a participation process. However, the Danube Delta CASE clearly points out that the management of data resulting from different sources as well as the explicitness of the assumptions made are crucial aspects that need to be properly addressed. The CASE of Dalyan-Köycegiz Specially Protected Area (Turkey) laid stress on the complexity of achieving effective and comprehensive participation where power sharing and collective decision making are not embedded in the local culture and values. Indeed, participation involves a change in the organizational culture of the society because it results in broader, flexible and longer-term goals, results and time horizons compared to the top-down approach. Therefore, an inadequate legal and cultural framework can limit the advantages of participatory environmental management (Petts and Leach, 2000). The Al Hoceima CASE (Morocco) confirms that one of the main critical point of ICZM projects is the integration of all the components of coastal management within an effective governance system. The CASE found that most of the problems and conflicts encountered proved to be attributable to institutional (non-coordination of sectoral actions, inflexibility of procedures, and absence of prospective vision) and legal aspects (obsolete texts or unenforced laws, lack of control). In order for public participation to
148
S. Soriani et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 92 (2015) 143–148
be effective, it requires a systems perspective that sustains and builds on the interactions among the several actors (sector agencies, non-profits and business organizations, advocacy groups, universities and so on) which compose the complex evolving reality of contemporary society (Innes and Booher, 2004). The Moroccan CASE highlighted as a weak point of ICZM projects the lack of consistency and capitalization of knowledge, as well as the lack of integration between projects and structural elements of planning policies. The examples reported by the CASE emphasized the fact that none of the former ICZM projects implemented in the area had actually carried out the identified actions. In fact, the challenge of integration and the real inclusion of projects outcomes in the decision-making instruments of national policies rarely exceed the declaration of intent. Also the CASE of Bouches-du-Rhône reported on the difficulties of promoting integrated management within short research projects. The CASE highlighted the fact that great efforts must be made at the beginning of the project to not only stimulate participation from local stakeholders, but also to create local stakeholders leadership. In this way it is possible to ensure the mobilization of the different actors throughout the process and also ensure a continuation after its end. Only in such a way the scientific tools implemented during the project can be transferred to the stakeholders in order to be used and maintained independently from the external project funding. These points raise the question on the effectiveness and possible pitfalls of participation built within short term research projects, where the proponent has not real power to carry on the decisions taken. Furthermore, it should be stressed that ICZM is a long-term process and if activities are not sustained in the long period (and this is particularly relevant in the case of research funded projects), efforts and results will be lost thus comprising trust of stakeholders in participation effectiveness. The increased knowledge regarding stakeholders’ perceptions and priorities achieved through participation was widely reported by CASEs. This element confirms the central role of participation in providing an overview of all the various interests and conflicts concerning coastal uses. However, the Bouches-du-Rhône and the North Adriatic CASEs clearly demonstrated the difficulties that stakeholders very often experience in the definition of the spatial scale to be considered for defining coastal issues and for promoting solutions. Coastal ecosystems have evolved over millennia under the joint influence of local (though sometimes large) coastal watersheds and oceanic influences. Human induced environmental changes have increased the influence of terrestrial drivers on coastal areas thus strengthening their multi-scale nature (Swaney et al., 2012). Moreover, many of the most important economic sectors that impact today on coastal ecosystems depend increasingly on global trends: tourism development, port activities and maritime transportation, offshore industries and coastal energy plants, multinational and industrial fishery. In this perspective, the mismatch between the local scale of coastal governance and the complex multi-scale nature of coastal systems makes their understanding and management still a challenge for ICZM initiatives. The importance of this issue needs to be carefully considered also in the identification of the stakeholders to be involved in the participation process. Acknowledgments This research was funded by the FP7 – Large scale integrating project PEGASO (People for Ecosystem-based Governance in
Assessing Sustainable development of Ocean and coast). Grant Agreement No: 244170. We would like to thank the anonymous referees who helped us to improve the manuscript. References Areizaga, J., Sanò, M., Medina, R., Juanes, J., 2012. Improving public engagement in ICZM: a practical approach. J. Environ. Manage. 109, 123–135. Bäckstrand, K., 2006. Democratizing global environmental governance? Stakeholder democracy after the world summit on sustainable development. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 12 (4), 467–498. Brown, J., 2014. Evaluating participatory initiatives in south Africa not just processes but outcomes too. SAGE Open 4 (2), 2158244014531966. Bulkeley, H., Mol, A.P., 2003. Participation and environmental governance: consensus, ambivalence and debate. Environ. Values 12 (2), 143–154. Buono, F., Pediaditi, K., Carsjens, G.J., 2012. Local community participation in Italian National Parks Management: theory versus practice. J. Environ. Planning Policy Manage. 14 (2), 189–208. Cliquet, A., Kervarec, F., Bogaert, D., Maes, F., Queffelec, B., 2010. Legitimacy issues in public participation in coastal decision making processes: case studies from Belgium and France. Ocean Coast. Manage. 53 (12), 760–768. Environment Agency, 1998. Consensus building for sustainable development. Report SD12, Environment Agency, Bristol. Fletcher, S., 2003. Stakeholder representation and the democratic basis of coastal partnerships in the UK. Mar. Policy 27, 229–240. Hage, M., Leroy, P., Petersen, A.C., 2010. Stakeholder participation in environmental knowledge production. Futures 42, 254–264. IEMA, 2002. Perspectives, Guidelines on Participation in Environmental Decision Making. Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), Lincoln. Innes, J.E., Booher, D.E., 2004. Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Plan. Theor. Pract. 5 (4), 419–436. Kapoor, I., 2001. Towards participatory environmental management? J. Environ. Manage. 63 (3), 269–279. Koppenjan, J.F., Enserink, B., 2009. Public–private partnerships in urban infrastructures: reconciling private sector participation and sustainability. Public Admin. Rev. 69 (2), 284–296. Le Tissier, M.D., Hills, J.M., 2010. Practitioner training for building capacity in ICZM. Ocean Coast. Manage. 53 (12), 787–795. Mc Fadden, L., Penning-Rowsell, E., Tapsell, S., 2009. Strategic coastal flood-risk management in practice: actors’ perspectives on the integration of flood risk management in London and the Thames Estuary. Ocean Coast. Manage. 52 (12), 636–645. Middendorf, G., Busch, L., 1997. Inquiry for the public good: democratic participation in agricultural research. Agric. Human Values 14, 45–57. Newman, J., 2005. Participative governance and the remaking of the public sphere. In: Newman, J. (Ed.), Remaking Governance, Peoples, Politics and the Public Sphere. University of Bristol, The Policy Press, pp. 119–138. NOAA Costal Service Center, 2007. Introduction to stakeholder participation. Social Science tool for coastal programs. PAP/RAC, 2012. THE ICZM PROCESS: A Roadmap towards Coastal Sustainability. Split, PAP/RAC. pp. 35 + Annexes. Petts, J., Leach, B., 2000. Evaluating Methods for Public Participation: A Literature Review. R&D Technical Report: E2-030. Bristol: Environmental Agency. Rowe, G., Frewer, L.J., 2000. Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Sci. Technol. Human Values 25 (1), 3–29. Soriani S., Buono F., Tonino M., Camuffo M., 2014. Participatory methods for ICZM implementation. PEGASO D4.4. Report, Accompanying Supporting Materials and Guidelines for the Use of Participatory Methods and Application for MultiScale ICZM Across the Mediterranean and Black Sea Basins. . Stojanovic, T., Barker, N., 2008. Improving governance through local coastal partnerships in the UK. Geogr. J. 174 (4), 344–360. Stojanovic, T., Ballinger, C., Lalwani, C., 2004. Successful integrated coastal management: measuring it with research and contributing to wise practice. Ocean Coast. Manage. 47, 273–298. Swaney, D.P., Humborg, C., Emeis, K., Kannen, A., Silvert, W., Tett, P., Pastres, R., Solidoro, C., Yamamuro, M., Hénocque, Y., Nicholls, R., 2012. Five critical questions of scale for the coastal zone. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 96, 9–21. Treffny, R., Beilin, R., 2011. Gaining legitimacy and losing trust: Stakeholder participation in ecological risk assessment for marine protected area management. Environ. Values 20 (3), 417–438. Tuler, S., 1998. Learning through participation. Human Ecol. Rev. 5 (1), 58–60. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (a). In: The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro. 3–14 June 1992. UNEP MAP, 2008. ICZM Protocol in the Mediterranean.
