Suchergebnisse

Based on experience gained through the collaboration of two FP7 projects (ARCH and LAGOONS), a methodology used for stakeholders' involvement in the management of lagoons under climate and anthropogenic pressures is discussed. The central objective of the ARCH project (Architecture and roadmap to manage multiple pressures on lagoons) was to develop participative methodologies in collaboration with the involved managers, policy makers and stakeholders to manage the multiple problems affecting lagoons in Europe (10 cases). Three main challenges for the improvement of "sustainable lagoon management" were supported by the ARCH, these include the transition: from segregated disciplinary scientific results to well integrated and usable scientific knowledge; from "government" to "governance": from sectoral policies towards sustainable management; from an unaware and uninformed "lagoon community" towards an involved and well-informed community. The main objective of the LAGOONS project (Integrated water resources and coastal zone management in European lagoons in the context of climate change) was to contribute to a science-based seamless strategy – in an integrated and coordinated fashion – of the management of lagoons seen under the land-sea and science-policy-stakeholder interface; i.e., the project seeks to underpin the integration of the EU Water Framework Directive, Habitat Directive, the EU's ICZM Recommendation, and the EU Marine Strategy Directive. An approach applied to the Vistula Lagoon stakeholders' consultations process (collecting opinions from different groups of interests like public administration, researchers and experts as well as local citizens) was extremely well assessed by all participants. The role of local communities and their actual engagement in the management processes in the Vistula Lagoon Region is analysed in the paper, based on the author's observations as a facilitator of the process. Creating positive and trustful relations is a prerequisite for successful consultations with local communities. An importance of the role played by local communities in the management process is still underestimated by both managers and the communities themselves. However, building trustful relations requires time and efforts from both sides and cannot rely on a 'project to project' basis. Local communities that once got involved in the participatory management process expect continuity and implementation of their ideas through rational and fair-minded debate. Public involvement in decision making processes, if managed properly, increases the legitimacy of decisions in the eyes of those affected by them, which makes it more likely that the decisions will be implemented effectively [1]. There is an urgent need for a permanent consultation process built in a daily routine of managing organisations constituting, in a sense, their statutory task not resulting from different legislation, laws, obligations, etc. but from the will to build a participatory society. ; W oparciu o doświadczenia zdobyte dzięki współpracy dwóch projektów 7PR (ARCH i LAGOONS) przedstawiono i zanalizowano metodologię zastosowaną do zaangażowania interesariuszy w zarządzaniu zalewami i lagunami będącymi pod presją zmian klimatycznych oraz antropogenicznych. Głównym celem projektu ARCH (Architecture and roadmap to manage multiple pressures on lagoons) było opracowanie i przetestowanie metody partycypacyjnego zarządzania opartego o współpracę naukowców, decydentów i interesariuszy (10 studiów przypadku). Trzy główne wyzwania zaadresowane w projekcie to przejścia: od dyscyplinarnych wyników badań do zintegrowanej i użytecznej wiedzy; od "rządzenia" do "zarządzania", od polityki sektorowej do zintegrowanego planowania i zarządzania, od nieświadomej i niezaangażowanej społeczności do wspólnoty zaangażowanych i dobrze poinformowanych interesariuszy. Głównym celem projektu LAGOONS (Integrated water resources and coastal zone management in European lagoons in the context of climate change) było przyczynienie się do wypracowania strategii zarządzania zalewami opartej na wiedzy i umożliwiającej minimalizację problemów związanych z interakcjami na różnych płaszczyznach (ląd-woda, wiedza- -polityka-interesariusze). Podejście zastosowane w procesie konsultacji z interesariuszami Zalewu Wiślanego (zbieranie opinie różnych grup interesów, takich jak administracja publiczna, naukowcy i eksperci, społeczności lokalne) było bardzo dobrze ocenione przez wszystkich uczestników procesu. Rola społeczności lokalnych i ich rzeczywiste zaangażowanie w procesy zarządzania w regionie Zalewu Wiślanego są analizowane w oparciu o obserwacje autorki jako moderatora procesu. Tworzenie pozytywnych relacji i zdobywanie zaufania jest warunkiem sprowadzenia skutecznych konsultacji z lokalnymi społecznościami. Znaczenie społeczności lokalnych w procesie zarządzania jest wciąż niedoceniane zarówno przez menedżerów, jak i przez same społeczności. Budowanie relacji opartych na zaufaniu wymaga czasu i wysiłku z obu stron i nie należy oczekiwać, że jest to możliwe na zasadzie realizacji incydentalnych projektów. Lokalne społeczności, które raz zaangażowały się w proces zarządzania partycypacyjnego oczekują kontynuacji tego procesu i realizacji swoich pomysłów poprzez racjonalną i umożliwiającą wymianę poglądów debatę. Zaangażowanie społeczeństwa w procesach decyzyjnych, jeżeli są one odpowiednio zarządzane, zwiększa prawomocność decyzji w oczach osób poddanych ich działaniu, co sprawia, że jest bardziej prawdopodobne, że decyzje będą skuteczniej realizowane. Istnieje pilna potrzeba wbudowania procesu konsultacji ze społecznościami lokalnymi w codzienną praktykę organizacji zarządzających obszarem Zalewu Wiślanego, tak by stało się to niejako ich statutowym zadaniem nie wynikające z różnych przepisów, ustaw, zobowiązań, itp, ale z chęci budowania społeczeństwa partycypacyjnego. ; Renata Kozak

This article shares the experiences, observations, and discussions that occurred during the completing of an ecosystem services (ES) indicator framework to be used at European Union (EU) and Member States' level. The experience base was drawn from 3 European research projects and 14 associated case study sites that include 13 transitional-water bodies (specifically 8 coastal lagoons, 4 riverine estuaries, and 1 fjord) and 1 coastal-water ecosystem. The ES pertinent to each case study site were identified along with indicators of these ES and data sources that could be used for mapping. During the process, several questions and uncertainties arose, followed by discussion, leading to these main lessons learned: 1) ES identification: Some ES that do not seem important at the European scale emerge as relevant at regional or local scales; 2) ES indicators: When direct indicators are not available, proxies for indicators (indirect indicators) might be used, including combined data on monitoring requirements imposed by EU legislation and international agreements; 3) ES mapping: Boundaries and appropriate data spatial resolution must be established because ES can be mapped at different temporal and spatial scales. We also acknowledge that mapping and assessment of ES supports the dialogue between human well-being and ecological status. From an evidence-based marine planning-process point of view, mapping and assessment of marine ES are of paramount importance to sustainable use of marine natural capital and to halt the loss of marine biodiversity. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:726-734. © 2016 SETAC.

This paper examines the concept of maritime multi-use as a territorial/SPATIAL governance instrument for the enhancement of sustainable development in five EU sea basins. Multi-use (MU) is expected to enhance the productivity of blue economy sectors, as well as deliver additional socio-economic benefits related to the environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development. The paper provides a definition of maritime multi-use and identifies the multi-uses with the highest potential in EU sea basins. In each sea basin, multi-use plays a different role as concerns sustainable development. For the Eastern Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, the MU focus should remain on the environmental pillar of sustainable development. In the North Sea, North Atlantic and Western Baltic Sea, addressing social sustainability seems a key precondition for success of MU in enhancement of sustainable spatial development at sea. Moreover, it has been suggested to introduce MU key global strategies such as SDGs or Macroregional strategies and action plans and to supplement maritime spatial planning with sectoral incentives and educational efforts as key vehicles supporting MU. The paper concludes by identifying aspects which, in order to inform maritime spatial planning and maritime governance regarding a more conscious application of the aforementioned concept, require further investigation. Key tasks are related to: more profound evaluation of performance of policies supporting MUs, researching the impact of MU on societal goals and on the MU costs and benefits, including external ones, and finally identifying the impact of MU on the development of various sectors and regions on land.