Systems Approach to Eastern Baltic Coastal Zone Management

Abstract

Relying on the results of multivariate analysis of the re-analysis case studies from the BaltCoast project, specific features of integrated coastal management (ICM) approaches in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Kaliningrad Oblast of the Russian Federation are highlighted in this paper. Eleven Eastern Baltic ICM case studies have been re-analyzed in-depth, which was the main focus of the present paper, covering a wide range of coastal landscapes, themes, policy issues, and ICM approaches. Five principal components explaining 84.86% of the total variance of ICM factor scores have been elicited by calculating rotation sums of squared loadings: (1) Stakeholder Involvement; (2) Research Base; (3) Planning Consistency; (4) Policy Environment, and (5) Development of Plans/Strategies. A truly dedicated involvement of a wide range of stakeholders throughout all process stages showed to be critical for further successful advance of ICM processes and principles based on the systems approach in the Baltic States and the Russian Federation.

Delivering Tourism Sustainability and Competitiveness in Seaside and Marine Resorts with GIS

“…Natural recreational resources, such as climate or landscape diversity, are not the only factors determining the attractiveness of coastal and maritime areas for tourism development [36]. The leisure potential of the coast and nearshore depends on many other factors, e.g., social and economic conditions, infrastructure development and accessibility by transport [37].…”

Nature-Based Solutions for Coastal Engineering and Management

“…The scene is set by a review paper that defines coastal resilience, claiming that Building with Nature approaches are intrinsic to achieving resilience [1]. All authors concur that nature-based solutions provide a means of meeting nature restoration goals as well as addressing socio-economic needs [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. While one article evaluates the cost effectiveness of a particular solution [6], a critically reflective article compares nature-based solutions with conventional engineering solutions, distinguishing four axes, two of which relate to the inclusion of multiple stakeholders and ecological knowledge [5].…”

“…While one article evaluates the cost effectiveness of a particular solution [6], a critically reflective article compares nature-based solutions with conventional engineering solutions, distinguishing four axes, two of which relate to the inclusion of multiple stakeholders and ecological knowledge [5]. The majority of articles echo the need for both engineering and ecological knowledge in the design process, and two actively involve stakeholders in their analyses [11,13]. There are six articles that include the design of a (hybrid) nature-based solution [2,4,6,9,10,13], while five articles undertake interdisciplinary experiments and measurements in the laboratory, the field, or via modeling to ascertain the performance of nature-based solutions [2,3,[7][8][9].…”

“…There are six articles that include the design of a (hybrid) nature-based solution [2,4,6,9,10,13], while five articles undertake interdisciplinary experiments and measurements in the laboratory, the field, or via modeling to ascertain the performance of nature-based solutions [2,3,[7][8][9]. A number of contributions focus on environmentally friendly Integrated Coastal Management (ICM), with two articles identifying factors most beneficial to ICM [11,12]. The study sites range from dunes to sandy coasts, and from muddy mangrove-dominated environments to vast lagoon systems in South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa.…”

“…Baltranaitė et al [11] are also concerned with sustainable coastal management. They investigate the factors necessary for successful application of a systems approach in ICM implementation, particularly in the Baltic States and Kaliningrad Oblast of Russia.…”