Exploring the challenges of integrated coastal zone management and reflecting on contributions to ‘integration’ from geographical thought

Abstract

Integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) is a challenging process, defined by stakeholder engagement and underpinned by knowledge on the integrated behaviour of coastal systems. While significant advancements in ICZM have been made, a range of difficult and important questions about ‘integration’ remain to be explored. This paper discusses opportunities for addressing such challenges of integration through the application of geographical thinking to understanding and managing coastal environments. It focuses on geographical traditions on systems thinking, the process‐based nature of geographic research and geographical contributions to conceptualising place and our relationships to it. Using UK‐based case studies the paper explores integration challenges from three different coastal contexts and management perspectives, examining: adaptation through managed realignment in a local community, integrated flood risk management in London and the Thames Estuary and enhancing the ‘socially just’ nature of coastal management. The case‐study discussion highlights the importance of ‘geographical thought’ to improving the integrative basis of strategies for managing complex coastal environments. This paper argues that ‘thinking geographically’ is one logical vehicle for increasing our understanding of, and providing solutions to, barriers which limit progress towards greater ‘integration’ in coastal management. Geography is dynamic, plural and based on the recognition that reality is contested and as such geographical ideas could add considerably to emerging cross‐disciplinary knowledge on the interactions and interdependencies of behaviours within coastal systems.

Cross-sectoral interactions of adaptation and mitigation measures

“…Long-term improvement in water quality 56 ; short-term may be negative, 53,57 Increased habitat 39,58 ; benefits most species 59 Increase/decrease urban protection 60,61 Loss of agricultural land 50,62,63 Increase carbon sequestration 42 ; increase in CH 4 and N 2 O emissions 53,55 Managed retreat Possible short-term reduction in water quality followed by overall improvement 64 Habitat gains 47 /loss 58,65 ; benefits most species Increase/decrease urban protection 60,61 Loss of agricultural land 62,63 Increase carbon sequestration 42 ; increase in CH 4 [66][67][68] ; fish nursery ground 69 ; increase in algae, but can prevent species settling on structure 67 ; coastal squeeze 70 …”

Advancing Citizen Science for Coastal and Ocean Research

“…Science provides insight to inform policy, but the ultimate outcome of the best policy option is a societal decision, with stakeholders and policy makers collaborating to consider the scientific evidence alongside other socio-economic, logistical and value-laden drivers. This move towards participatory policy-making, with stakeholders making normative judgements about the way their environments are organised, and resources managed, has effectively occurred in terrestrial policy settings (Kidd & Ellis 2012), but the move to collaboration has arguably been slower for the marine arena and has not always run smooth (McFadden 2008). The complexity of marine governance issues is suggested to be a further hurdle precluding full participatory involvement.…”

Marine Spatial Planning: Exploring the Role of Planning Practice and Research

“…Further, the relationship between long-term planning and resident’s attachment to place and acceptance of physical and social change can also be a challenge for planners. In one study, researchers found long-standing policy focus on engineering measures such as seawalls for protecting from flooding built up a public expectation for such interventions, despite the analysis in the MSP suggesting that they were counterproductive (McFadden 2008).…”