首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Frameworks and indicators for assessing progress in integrated coastal management initiatives
Institution:1. Animal Welfare Institute, Washington DC, USA;2. Department of Environmental Science & Policy, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA;1. Departamentos de Física y Biología, Facultad de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad del Atlántico, Km 7 Antigua Vía Puerto Colombia, Barranquilla, Atlántico, Colombia;2. Institute of Estuarine and Coastal Studies, IECS, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX, United Kingdom;3. Department of Geology, Grand Valley State University, The Seymour K. & Esther R. Padnos Hall of Science 213A, Allendale, MI, USA;1. Environmental Science Research Institute, University of Ulster, Cromore Road, Coleraine, BT52 1SA, UK;2. Australian Institute of Marine Science, PMB No.3 Townsville MC, Townsville, Queensland 4810, Australia;3. School of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia;4. School of the Environment, Flinders University, South Australia 5042, Australia;1. College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, 2-150 Iwakura-cho, Ibaraki 567-8570, Osaka, Japan;2. Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Yoshida-honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Kyoto, Japan
Abstract:The fundamental purpose of all integrated coastal management (ICM) initiatives is to maintain, restore or improve specified qualities of coastal ecosystems and their associated human societies. A defining feature of ICM is that it addresses needs for both development and conservation in geographically specific places—be they a single community, an estuary or the coast of an entire nation. The times required to achieve these fundamental goals at significant spatial scales far exceed those of the usual 4–6-year project, the dominant ICM modality in developing nations. This paper offers two simple, but elastic frameworks for assessing progress over the extended time periods involved. The first is the four Orders of Outcomes that group together the sequences of institutional, behavioral and social/environmental changes that can lead to more sustainable forms of coastal development. The second framework is a version of the more familiar ICM policy cycle. These conceptually simple frameworks are making it possible to unbundle and organize into consistent formats the usually implicit assumptions that underpin project and program designs and then group activities and outcomes along a critical path that leads—or is presumed to lead—to the desired outcomes. Each step in the ICM policy cycle and each Order of Outcomes suggest the indicators by which progress and learning can be assessed. The application of these frameworks to a diversity of ICM initiatives is proving useful in assessing progress across portfolios of ICM initiatives, extracting good practices and teasing out how different governance contexts effect the forces that shape the evolution of ICM initiatives.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号