Coastal governance

around the world

Canada Belgium

China
Jamaica

Hong kong
British Colombia
India

South Africa

What are the main coastal governance issues around the world? Our
international readers give us their views on the major coastal governance*
issues in their country and how, if at all, they are being tackled.

*Coastal governance here is interpreted as policy and legal processes by which our coasts and seas are managed by public
authorities and the arrangements in place for participation by communities, NGOs, and other stakeholders.
Please note all contributions in this article are the professional opinions of the individual authors and do not necessarily
represent the views of those organisations they are affiliated to.

The edge Summer 2007 11

Jamaica
By Dr David Smith (Director), Christopher Daly,. (Civil Engineer)
of Smith Warner International Limited (Kingston, Jamaica)
Overview of policy
Coastal governance in Jamaica is backed by
a number of policies and legal processes. Of
these, the Beach Control Act (1956) is the
most important piece of legislation. The Act
seeks to ensure proper management of
Jamaica’s coastal and marine resources and
protects the rights of the foreshore and sea
floor by prohibiting the use of these without
permission from the local environmental
regulatory body.
This body, the National Environment
and Planning Agency (NEPA), is responsible
for reviewing license applications for the
construction of docks, wharves, jetties,
breakwaters, marinas and for issuing licenses
for the construction of such structures. The
Act is currently undergoing substantive
review in order to address more
contemporary legal and management issues.
A number of relevant regulations and
policies are also in place. The 1992 Natural
Resources (Marine Parks) Regulation
established marine protected areas for the
conservation of marine resources. The
Montego Bay, Negril and Ocho Rios are
three marine parks to which these
regulations apply. These areas are Jamaica’s
primary tourist destinations.
The 1997 Coral Reef Protection and
Preservation Policy and Regulation and the
Policy on Seagrass Beds are also two
important regulations. The aims of these
polices are first to ensure the conservation of
coral reefs in order to sustain their ecological
and socio-economic functions and second,
to facilitate the control of practices which
could result in the destruction of sea grasses.
The document Towards A Beach Policy For
Jamaica (2000) specifically addresses the
controversial issue of beach access, and
issues relating to oil pollution, sewage
pollution, solid waste disposal, beach
erosion, coastal water quality, mariculture
and wild life protection. The document has
undergone a process of public consultation
and is now with the Ministry of Lands and
the Environment for completion of the
policy development process.
Despite the existence of legislation and
regulations that govern how coastal
developments, environments and issues are
dealt with, they are not fully enforced. This
leads to major deficiencies that have serious
consequences in critical areas of coastal
governance.
12 The edge Summer 2007
Key issues
Control of pollution of
coastal waters
The informal disposal of domestic, industrial
and agricultural waste directly affects the
water quality of coastal waters in Jamaica.
This problem occurs both in some inland
areas, where waste discarded into rivers
eventually end up being discharged in the
sea; and also, directly from developed coastal
areas of the country. Kingston Harbour, the
seventh largest natural harbour in the world,
is an example of an extremely polluted water
body. The problem is exacerbated by non-
enforcement of water quality and effluent
discharge standards and the malfunctioning
of some sewage treatment plants.
Monitoring of coastal resources
Beach erosion and the underlying causes and
effects are not monitored to a great extent.
One of the foundations upon which
Jamaica’s tourism sector is built on is the
promise of beach, sun and sand. Without
healthy beaches, the country’s economy
would be in greater turmoil than it already is.
Coral reef protection is also an ongoing issue.
Many reefs are destroyed as a result of tourist
activities, and poor water quality (excessive
nutrients) is also one of the primary reasons
for overgrowth of algae on coral reefs that
can suffocate them. These coral reefs act as a
sand source, and their destruction ultimately
leads to losses in sediment production and
the net erosion of beaches. In addition, they
frequently function in the role of natural
breakwaters, providing shelter to the
shorelines in their lee.
Lime Cay, Jamaica
Guidelines for coastal development
and resulting effects
The recent spate of tourism-related
developments along the coast of Jamaica
has raised the issue of creating specific
guidelines and limitations. Some resorts are
highly dense, offering hundreds of rooms to
overseas visitors. This puts a burden on the
coastal environment, as larger beach areas
are required or existing ones are being over-
utilised. The Beach Control Act does not
specifically refer to limits of beach
utilisation. The attendant socio-economic
impacts are also considerable, as basic
infrastructure, such as utilities and
healthcare facilities are not available or able
to cope with the increased numbers of
informal settlements that typically spring
up to house the service workers for these
developments.
Tackling the issues
The issues above get little attention until
serious problems occur. Apart from having
appropriate legislation in place, not much
preventative action or enforcement takes
place. Other private groups, such as marine
parks, play important roles in supporting
the protection of the environment, and
carry out frequent checks and assessments
on the health of a particular area. The scale
to which this is carried out, however, is
small and confined to only a few select areas
of our coast, such as prime tourist and
fishing areas.
Belgium
By An Cliquet, Dirk Bogaert, Frank Maes and Dino De Waen, University of Ghent
Delwaide Dock, one of the largest docks at Antwerp Harbour
Belgium is the smallest state bordering the
North Sea with a 66 km long coastline and a
territorial sea and continental shelf of 3,600
km2. Although small, it comprises several
types of coastal habitat, which are important
for a variety of flora and fauna and
accommodates many human activities
including recreation, shipping, fisheries,
industry and mineral extraction (Maes et al,
2005). Such a small and intensively-used
area needs an integrated policy but several
elements make this a difficult proposition.
Key issues
Complex institutional landscape
Since the creation of the Flemish
government in 1980, the Belgian state has
undergone several steps in its federalisation
process, resulting in a shift in competences
from the federal to regional governments.
For the coastal zone this has resulted in a
fragmentation of the governmental
institutions responsible for its management.
Most of the competences are now
divided between the federal government
(the marine part of the coastal zone) and the
Flemish Region (most matters on the
landward side of the coastal zone and some
matters at sea). The division between the
federal and the regional competences is
formed by the baseline, which is the low-
water line along the coast as marked on the
large-scale charts officially recognised by
coastal states (Cliquet, 1996). However,
divergent laws can assign jurisdiction at sea
to the Flemish Region.
At the different government levels,
several administrations are involved in
coastal zone policy including the Ministry of
Economic Affairs, the Ministry of Transport,
the Ministry of Defense and the Federal
Public Service Environment . On the
political level, several ministers are also
competent for marine issues with a Minister
for the North Sea appointed in 2003. And,
finally, at the level of the Flemish Region,
the Administration for Waterways and
Seaways, the Administration for the
Environment, the Administration for
Agriculture and Fisheries and the
Administration for Spatial Planning all have
responsibilities in the coastal zone. These
Flemish administrations are subdivided in
departments.
While there is no single integrated
coastal policy, some coordination exists for
some specific issues in the coastal zone,
including a steering group on seas and
oceans that deals with coordination on the
planning level but is limited in scope and
does not include participation of all
institutional levels (such as the local level),
nor information and participation for the
public. Another coordination structure on a
specific issue is a cooperation agreement
between the federal government and the
Flemish Region on dumping of dredged
material at sea.
Lack of participation
A second issue hampering the governance of
the Belgian coast is a lack of public
participation. Decisions within the coastal
zone allowing for public participation can be
indirect and direct. Indirect participation
can be obtained through several advisory
bodies, such as the Flemish Environmental
Council (MINA-Council) and the provincial
advisory body on spatial planning
(PROCORO). Direct participation is included
in several procedures, eg building permits or
environmental permits. These permits must
be made public, after which everyone can
express objections.
For certain coastal projects these forms
of participation are apparently inadequate.
This was the case for the first attempt to
establish marine protected areas in 1999.
Several user groups felt they had not been
involved in the process and finally the
federal government halted the attempt due
to their protest. The first planning of
offshore windmills close to the Belgian coast
created a similar problem.
In more recent attempts, the federal
government has learned from the negative
experiences in the past and in both
procedures for offshore windmills and
marine protected areas, much effort is given
to informal participation rounds, starting
form the very beginning of the process.
Tackling the issues
These two issues are intertwined with the
lack of a global and integrated policy and
cooperation. There are tools that could
mediate problems concerning the
institutional complexity and lack of
participation. Most drastically, all
competencies related to the coast could be
transferred to either the Flemish or federal
government. Alternatively, one could opt for
a comprehensive legal framework for
integrated coastal zone policy for the
Belgian coastal zone.
Less stringent than the above,
cooperation agreements between the federal
and regional governments could set up a
formal cooperation structure for integrated
coastal zone policy with different options for
institutional linkages having already been
considered (Cliquet et al, 2002).
While many key representatives are in
favour of a formal cooperation agreement,
to date, no political decisions have been
taken to formalize this agreement. The main
reason that this issue has not been brought
on the political agenda, is a lack of political
interest for integrated coastal zone policy at
both federal and Flemish level. It therefore
remains uncertain what the future will bring
for an urgently needed integrated Belgian
coastal zone policy.
For more information, see:
http://www.west-
vlaanderen.be/jahia/
Jahia/site/kustbeheer_en
The edge Summer 2007 13
South Africa
By Louis Celliers, Fiona Mackay, Sean Fennessy, Oceanographic Research Institute
Key issues
Delay in promulgation of
the National Environmental
Management: Integrated Coastal
Management Bill
This Bill was intended to be the legal
instrument that would be the mainstay of
coastal management in South Africa
(obtainable from http://www.gov.za). The
process of creating this important legal
instrument started very encouragingly with
a broad public participation process and
quickly resulted in the publication of a
Green Paper, that was soon followed by an
excellent White Paper. At the time, it was
generally accepted that the White Paper
was a fair reflection of firstly, the public
participation process and the opinions and
suggestions solicited through this process,
and secondly, it appeared to have
widespread acceptance insofar it
encapsulated the real coastal management
issue in what was then the post-apartheid
fledgling democracy.
After the White Paper was published, it
was easy to believe that the Bill was one
short step away from promulgation but
now, nearly eight years later, three different
environment ministers (Department of
Environmental Affairs and Tourism), and
more than five drafts, the Bill was
promulgated. Better late than never, but at
this point the Bill is not readily recognisable
as an iterative product of the White Paper,
which then raises serious transparency
issues in terms of the process that was
started in 1997. Even so, the promulgated
Bill is a positive step to achieving
Atlantic Beach, Cape Town
14 The edge Summer 2007
sustainable coastal development and will be
the framework for future coastal
governance. Furthermore, the Bill is
supported by other advanced
environmental legislation but often the
process to full implementation and
effectiveness is hampered by factors relating
to monitoring and enforcement, and a
weakened legal system.
A specific but parallel issue, even within
the new Bill, is the lack of a comprehensive
legal framework to manage ‘transitional
waters’, such as estuaries. There also
appears to be a discontinuity between
terrestrial and estuarine water management
policy and legislation. The current legal
framework does not implicitly resolve
departmental responsibility for waters in
the coastal zone that is not riverine, or of
the marine nearshore or offshore
environment.
The Coastal Management Bill makes
provision for establishing coastal
governance structures in all spheres of
government. Many of these structures have
already been created, most notably a
National Coastal Committee, as well as
Provincial Coastal Committees. In some
instances district Coastal Working Groups
have also already been created to represent
the local sphere of government. These
structures, which have been attended by
members on a voluntary basis, will become
compulsory according to a specific terms of
reference, specified by either the national
Minister of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism or the Member of the Executive
Councils of the respective coastal provinces.
Lack of human capital
Delivery of services and management
effectiveness of all spheres of government is
severely impeded by a lack of human
capital. There is no question that the
current and advanced South African legal
framework supports sustainable
environmental and coastal development.
However, the ability of the state to translate
this advantage into real and long-term
benefit for coastal communities and the rest
of civil society, while maintaining
ecosystem integrity, is limited due to a lack
of suitably qualified staff and high staff
turnover, which in turn leads to a lack of
continuity and understanding of coastal
issues by coastal managers. This is
particularly evident in the local sphere of
government where many of the policies
and legal instruments implemented directly
affect coastal communities.
Politicising of coastal management
and inappropriate profiteering
The limited ability of mid-level managers to
effect change due to high-level political
agendas is reducing the effectiveness of the
legal and policy framework. The pervasive
influence of politics in South Africa is
evident through all levels of civil society,
probably as a result of the policies of the
apartheid era and the subsequent
prioritisation of redress. This extends to
coastal management as opportunities for
coastal development have significant short-
term financial and political benefits. A lack
of strong moral leadership that reflects the
constitutional framework of South Africa is
the cause for serious coastal governance
issues across the three spheres of
government.
An example of the effect of these last
two coastal issues, is that from the fairly
narrow perspective of management of
harvestable marine resources, the national
authority responsible for these resources
has lost much of its research capacity to
manage them, and, because of political
agendas, is proving extremely slow to
replace this capacity. This loss of capacity
means that their response to concerns and
communications from stakeholders
(industry, communities, NGOs,) is very
poor, and also means they are failing to
meet some of their obligations to
international agreements.
Regional in-country perspectives
Hong Kong, CHINA
By Dr Kerrie MacPherson, University of
Hong Kong
It wasn't until 1975 that urban planning and
the marine environment 'met' in the Colony
Outline Plan (renamed the Hong Kong
Outline Plan) and the setting up of the
environment branch in government. This
was a time of rapid demographic and
economic growth and a rapid decline in the
urban environment. The usual clutch of
problems included insufficient sanitation
and sewerage, water supplies, inadequate
housing, squatter areas and so on.
In 1995, the Marine Parks Ordinance was
passed, providing for the designation,
protection and management of ecologically
important marine sites. This landmark
legislation however is essentially the
extension of urban zoning (or restrictive)
land-use and control to specific marine and
coastal areas of scientific interest.
However laudable such legislation has
been, Hong Kong's 6.9 million people
inhabiting a highly urbanised area of 1,650
sq km, share a fragile ecosystem strained by
industrial and urban development,
pollution, landfills and reclamation all of
which impact negatively on the marine
habitats. Furthermore with the inception of
China's open-door policy and the rapid
economic, industrial and urban
development in south China, human
pressures on marine resources and the
environment are unprecedented.
Even before the handover of Hong Kong
to China in 1997, there have been attempts
to address common cross-border
environmental problems with the
establishment of the Hong Kong-
Guangdong Environmental Protection
Liason Group. In the same year as the
passage of the Marine Parks Ordinance in
Hong Kong, China promulgated the China
Ocean Agenda 21 and initiated ICZM pilot
projects in Guangdong and elsewhere. The
Hong Kong -Guangdong group established a
series of technical subgroups to monitor
water quality, pollution control, white
dolphin (Sousa Chinensis) conservation,
fisheries management, aquaculture and red
tide monitoring.
The speed of Chinese legislation and policy
frameworks devised belies the continued
degradation of the marine environment due
to rapid urbanisation and a sectoral
approach to the environment. WWF (and
others) have urged the Hong Kong
government to ban trawling in Hong Kong's Tackling the issues
territorial waters, establishing 'no-take' Law for coastal protection
zones, or instituting a licensing/permit To protect and conserve the coastal
system based on actual assessments of fish environment, the Ministry of Environment
stocks. But the restructuring of marine and Forest (MoEF), has declared a Coastal
activities and the complex regulatory Regulation Zone (CRZ) which includes the
regimes, differing customary and statutory coastal stretches of seas, bays, creeks, rivers
legal systems between Hong Kong and and backwaters that are influenced by tidal
China, will have to be addressed before the action (landward) up to 500 m from High
'one country, two systems' become one. Tide Line (HTL) and the land between LTL
and HTL. Some activities, such as
Karnataka State, INDIA construction, mining, reclamation. have
By Dr A M Ramesh, Planning Commission either been prohibited or restricted. There
of India are also environment protection, and
prevention and control of pollution laws
Key issues which have provisions for protection of
Coastal erosion marine biodiversity.
Beach erosion is serious in certain areas
along the Karnataka Coast and becomes British Columbia, CANADA
acute during monsoon season, when the sea Association for Responsible Shellfish
is virtually roaring. Short term remedial Farming
measures are being taken in the State-funded
Key issues
Anti Sea Erosion Schemes. However, sea wall
• Siting of shellfish tenures which
construction by dumping huge stone blocks
interfere with other stakeholders and
has created more problems than benefits
lack of environmental assessments prior
especially deepening of the sea.
to siting
The coastline of British Columbia is being
Urbanisation and industrialisation
littered by obstructive and noisy aquaculture
The coast of Karnataka is increasingly
farms and the debris that is washed up on
becoming an industrial hub with large
the beaches from these farms. Although the
numbers of industries setting up along the
government has guarded against damaging
Mangalore coast. These range from
areas where eelgrass exists, the net result is
petrochemical, fertiliser, iron ore palletising,
the destruction of natural habitat where
pigments & paints, power generation, fish
beach leases exist and unknown damage to
processing plants and small scale industries.
the environment from extensive licensing of
Urbanisation is also increasing with
deep water leases in areas with little tidal
unplanned housing growth to accommodate
movement.
the industrial workforce. As a result, large
• Lack of proper testing for heavy metals
quantities of untreated domestic sewage are
such as cadmium and mercury and
being released into the coastal waters along
publication of results and warnings to
with industrial discharges. These effluents
the public regarding consumption of
impact on the already stressed coastal
shellfish containing high amounts of
ecosystem with frequent occurrence of
these metals.
blooms in the waters – an indicator of over
nitrification. It is clear that there is a need
Tackling the issues
for a planned approach to the expansion of
The issues have been ignored by
coastal cities/ towns.
government and licensing agencies in its
quest to expand the aquaculture industry
Identification of critical coastal
without adequate scientific study. Further,
habitats
the establishment of a Farm Practices Board
Along the coast of Karnataka, sparse
has also left concerned community groups,
mangrove vegetation occurs. The total area
NGOs or individuals without further redress.
of mangroves was 60 sq km in 1989 (MoEF),
NGOs, such as the Suzuki Foundation and
which had drastically reduced to 25 sq km
the Georgia Strait Alliance have addressed
by 2001 (KSRSAC and SAC). This alarming
some of these issues but government
reduction is mainly due to reclamation of
continues to ignore them.
the area for construction of brackish water
aquaculture ponds and saltpans. Depletion
in mangrove ecosystem is considered as one
of the causative factors for erosion increase
in the estuarine mouths.
The edge Summer 2007 15