Advertisement

Conflict Management and Consensus-Building for Integrated Coastal Zone Management — Does Stakeholder Involvement Fit to the Baltic Sea Region?

  • Jörg Köhn
Part of the Central and Eastern European Development Studies book series (CEEDES)

Abstract

The coastal zones are economically, socially and ecologically very diverse. Spatial management and planning processes very often base on technical, ecological and economic expertise only. They often lack stakeholder involvement and, therefore, are substantially missing the social dimension of conflicts. The picture changed after the Rio Summit in 1992. We have seen an increasing effort towards stakeholder involvement also in the management of coastal zones for the last ten years. There are many reports on different types of activity in various coastal cities and regions around the world available now. In SE Asia or in Latin America, people focus, for instance, on a sustainable management of mangroves to support subsistence economies; ICZM is still an issue with the state or state authorities in the economic zone in North America but a joint stakeholder approach in the drainage basin of the Chesapeake Bay. The opportunities for ICZM changed in the Baltic Sea region after the collapse of the Iron Curtain about ten years ago. International and interregional co-operation evolves, and the free transfer of knowledge and experience supports the improvement of the overall ecological situation in the region. Stakeholder involvement successfully takes place on the local level and on the level of small regions. International projects, founded by the EU, strongly encourage social participation and try to connect the local and regional initiatives. Stakeholder involvement will add an important dimension to ICZM in the Baltic Sea and will add the social dimension to complete management tools such as technical and economic planning for decision-making.

Keywords

Coastal Zone Conflict Resolution National Park Conflict Management Stakeholder Involvement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Benton LM, Short JR (1999) Environmental discourse and practice. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Berkes F, Folke C (1998) Linking social and ecological systems. Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Boyd R, Richardson PJ (1985) Culture and the evolutionary process. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cable S, Cable C (1995) Environmental problems. Grassroots solutions. The politics of grassroots environmental conflict. St. Martin’s Press, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Costanza R, Greer J (1995) The Chesapeake Bay and its watershed: A model for sustainable ecosystem development?. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Light SS (Eds.) Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 169–213.Google Scholar
  6. Dryzek JS (1997). The politics of the Earth. Environmental discourses. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Jansson BO, Velner H (1995) The Baltic: The sea of surprises. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Light SS (Eds.) Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 292–372.Google Scholar
  8. Habermas J (1979) Communication and the evolution of society. Beacon Press, Boston. Keohane R, Ostrom E (1995, eds.) Local commons and global interdependence. Heterogeneity and cooperation in two domains. Sage Publications, London.Google Scholar
  9. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Prugh T, Costanza R, Daly H (2000) The local politics of global sustainability. Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  11. Rijsberman F ( 1998, ed.) Conflict management and consensus building for integrated coastal management in Latin America and the Carribean. Resource Analysis, Delft, Netherlands, 50 pp.Google Scholar
  12. Senge PM, Kleiner A, Roberts C, Ross RB, Smith BJ (1994). The fifth discipline. A field-book. Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Turner KR, Adger WN, Lorenzi I ( 1998, eds.) Towards integrated modelling and analysis in coastal zones: Principles and practices. LOICZ Reports and Studies 11, Den Burg, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  14. Westley F (1995) Governing design: The management of social systems and ecosystems management. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Light SS (Eds.) Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 391–427.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jörg Köhn
    • 1
  1. 1.Bionautics Institute e.VHeiligenhagenGermany

Personalised recommendations