Integrated coastal resource management and planning - Ecosystem services and coastal governance

Pressures on coastal resources are expected to increase, as are the number of competing societal considerations in the coastal zone. There is a need for integrated and sustainable management and use of the coastal zone across sector interests. In the Coreplan project, we investigated whether the methods for valuing and weighing ecosystem services can be useful tools for marine spatial planning and resource management in the coastal zone. The concept of 'ecosystem services' describes the benefits humans derive from ecosystems, such as food provision; climate regulation and waste absorption; as well as recreation and aesthetic experiences. The ecosystem service approach is meant to highlight the fact that in addition to having intrinsic value, nature contributes concrete services of benefit to human well-being, and these services are valuable to us. However, assigning a monetary value to ecosystem services can be difficult and considered ethically challenging. An important part of this project was therefore to consider if this approach is appropriate in coastal zone planning and management. As part of the Coreplan project we have conducted a review of how Norwegian authorities are working to introduce an ecosystem services approach to the governance of the coastal zone. We examined relevant laws, regulations and guidelines and investigated various initiatives for carrying out mappings of ecosystem services in Norway, and discussed how this can play a part in the municipal coastal zone planning processes. Our review shows that the use of an ecosystem service approach is not yet an integral part of Norwegian spatial planning, nor have such an approach been adopted by the municipalities in their efforts to develop coastal zone plans, even though many of the principles contained therein seem to be a good fit for the Norwegian planning system. This applies particularly to the inclusion of stakeholders and the emphasis of different types of interests and knowledge. The main challenge seems to be associated with the avilability of the necessary data or expertise, and the need for a usable tool or method for visualising these ecosystem services and integrating them into the considerations to be made as part of the planning process. Although the term is not actively used in these planning processes, we see that many are concerned with the values in the coastal areas. We examined how the terminology used by the local communities and organizations fit in with the concept of ecosystem services. We assessed various ecosystem service frameworks, such as the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, TEEB, CICES and IPBES, for evaluating ecosystem services in the areas we researched. Based on the former, we specifically identified and categorized the ecosystem services in Troms through the analysis of consultative statements to the coastal zone plan for central and southern Troms. We categorized the hearings based on whether they were locally, regionally or nationally rooted. It turned out that the hearings from the three levels each had a different focus. The local communities in particular were very concerned with cultural and supporting services. We have examined if current knowledge producing procedures, in particular in relation to impact assessments, can be improved using ES frameworks. The answer is not clear-cut, but the conducted research show that there is a significant potential for further developing and improving knowledge production practices thus contributing to improve decision making processes concerning area planning and coastal zoning. Not all interests related to the coastal zone are included in the term ecosystem services, for example results of human activity such as (the protection of) buildings and structures. We may also identify services that belong to several of the categories of ecosystem services. Thus, our recommendation is that the authorities clarify the instructions for planners on how to implement the ecosystem service perspective, and how to safeguard any interests falling outside the scope of that perspective. Social scientists, economists and biologists from the following partners have been cooperating on the Coreplan project: The Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research (Nofima), the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU), the Norwegian College of Fishery Science and the Centre for Sami Studies at the Arctic University of Norway (UiT), and the University of Ottawa, Canada. Several scientific papers have been published, and more are to come. A summary report in Norwegian is available. Findings from the project has been presented to and discussed with stakeholders yearly and in addition at participatory workshops in both Troms and Hordaland in October 2018. We also made a project web page, coreplan.no, where we regularly publish information about the project.

Findings indicate that some interests are not sufficiently covered in the current coastal zone planning system and that planners are positive to the ecosystem services (ES) concept and methods, even though they are not familiar with the term or its application. This indicates a need for tools that provides clear-cut advices regarding priorities and trade-offs. The ES concept may represent one such tool, but it does not represent a one-size-fits-all solution. COREPLAN identified possible advantages, challenges and dilemmas related to implementing an ES approach into existing governance practices. The project results may contribute to increased awareness of coastal nature values, our knowledge about them and their inclusion in governance processes. The project has also led to increased international cooperation and competence building among researchers, as well as increased knowledge on coastal planning practices and challenges.

Pressures on coastal resources are expected to increase, as are the number of competing societal considerations in the coastal zone. Climate change and changing environmental conditions demand new forms of adaptation. The COREPLAN project addresses the need for integrated and sustainable management and use of the coastal zone across sector interests. The coastal zone and the ecosystem services (ES) it provides constitute the point of departure for COREPLAN. By seeking ways to incorporate the methods for valuing and weighing (ES) into marine spatial planning and resource governance, COREPLAN aims at improving the coastal governance regime in Norway. COREPLAN addresses the current and future challenges related to coastal governance and to the trade-off between ES representing different stakeholders and values, as well as different types of knowledge. COREPLAN will develop scenarios for ES based governance where stakeholder's preferences, values and practical knowledge, can be combined with societal objectives and scientific knowledge to support decisions. COREPLAN will apply a systems approach to governance, involving aspects of environmental, social and economic character. COREPLAN is an inter-disciplinary study where social scientists, economist and biologists cooperate. Case studies will be carried out in two parts of Norway; the counties Troms and Hordaland, as well as in British Columbia, Canada; areas with high complexity regarding stakeholders, activities and possible trade-offs between different ES. The Canadian case will provide descriptions of a different governance structure. Through these case studies COREPLAN will address multiple ES that provide benefits and represent substantial value, while at the same time covering different governance approaches.