Facilitating Integrated and Responsive Coastal Governance

In the FAIRCoast project, we have analyzed how different forms of integration can contribute to more sustainable management of the coastal zone in Norway. There is a lot of talk about integrated management of coastal areas, but what does it really mean? And why is it so difficult to achieve? Part of the reason may lie in the way we talk about integration. It is often seen as the opposite of fragmentation, and the less fragmented we are, the more integrated we become. However, fragmentation is not necessarily the best description of the way the planning system has developed. If we rather choose to see it as differentiation, in a society with functional division and specialized units, we get a different starting point. We can then accept different "degrees" of integration as precisely "differentiated integration" and not as something incomplete. Coastal zone plans are a central tool for achieving integrated area use in the municipalities. But how are coastal zone plans used as a tool to achieve integrated management of coastal areas, what is meant by integrated management, and how has this changed over time? Our analysis shows how the expectations for integrated planning at national level go from being mostly about ensuring environmental sustainability and more democratic and legitimate planning, to also contributing to more efficient and cost-effective planning processes as well as facilitating business development. In practical municipal planning over a 30-year period, we see a transition from planning to facilitate aquaculture, to a greater focus on sustainability and planning across ecosystems. The complexity increases: not only does the management of the coastal zone become more complex as the number of interests increases, but the planning itself becomes a very complex exercise as more knowledge and more tools are needed to handle the very varied aims and interests. Impact assessment is an important tool for considering proposals for changed land use in municipal coastal zone plans. Transparency and consistency in the processes and assessments are important for legitimacy. For example, detailed descriptions of the knowledge base and assessment methods and reference to national databases and science can increase transparency and the possibility of consistent assessments. But for some groups it can be experienced as an overwhelming flood of information and scientific works are seen as inaccessible "black boxes". Trade-offs between different considerations must be made, and here there is room for administrative and political discretion. It may not be transparent how trade-offs are made. Clearer rules for trade-offs can increase the consistency of the trade-offs, but room for discretion is necessary. Local conditions can vary so much that fixed rules will not be suitable. To increase transparency, the administration in the written summaries for each proposal should be clear about the trade-offs made, especially since politicians and the public typically have limited time to carefully study planning proposals and impact assessments. The coastal zone is strongly affected by climate change, but also plays an important role when we have to mitigate the effects of and adapt to climate change. Our study shows that it is challenging to integrate municipal climate planning and coastal zone planning, because they have different planning histories and driving forces, and that different technologies are used to make coastal climate and coastal space manageable for municipalities. Ultimately, this leads to the obfuscation of the coastal zone as an arena for countering climate change, and rather turns it into an arena for increased growth, which preserves the status quo. Keeping pace with the growth of the aquaculture industry, public aquaculture regulation in Norway has become a highly advanced regulatory field, comprising five ministries, related directories and regional offices, regional county authorities, and municipalities, all with designated responsibilities for specific areas such as environment, area planning, health and safety, fish welfare, and more. A question is whether the structure is overly complex and fragmented, and ultimately whether it is capable of answering the urgent call for sustainability which requires an integrated approach to governing. We identify how bureaucrats navigate towards fulfilling aims related to sustainability. As public servant they heed the roles and responsibilities of their offices, but are capable of using their discretionary space to balance between strategies of expansion and strategies of environmental precaution. However, discretion is also reliant on collaboration with other agencies. Such capabilities are rarely prioritized, unless this is explicitly included in their mandates, or management promote collaboration. Lack of collaboration across agencies, and their designated fields of responsibilities, hinders an integrated approach to coastal governance of aquaculture.

In the FAIRCoast project we have analysed different integration challenges in Norwegian coastal zone planning, and how different forms of integration can contribute to more sustainable management of the coastal zone in Norway. Through the international research collaboration an analytical framework has been developed. The analytical approach has been used in the investigation of marine management plans in England to reveal how the ambitions for integrated management are gradually problematized and curtailed throughout the process. To approach were then used in the analysis of governance ideals of integrated coastal zone planning in a Norwegian context. The project has therefore contributed to building competence in the research group. Empirically FairCoast has contributed with knowledge about integration practices, in municipal coastal zone planning, including environmental impacts assessment, highlighting both challenges and initiatives to improvement. One focus area has been on coordination of sectoral authorities in coastal governance, with an emphasis on aquaculture industry and regulation as an empirical case. In this industrial sector, coastal governance is found to be partly fragmented and highly complex, despite a long-standing focus on integration and coordination across different agencies. Even though county authorities have, and exercise, a coordinating role, few other regional agencies prioritize collaboration, or even see such work practices as parts of their remit. With current changes underway in Norwegian aquaculture regulation, which most likely will affect the regulatory mechanisms available, there is an opportunity to address some of the challenges the lack of collaboration between regulatory agencies represent.

Coastal ecosystems, space and waters are under increasing pressure. Much of the demographic and industrial development take place along the coast, and the international policies on Blue Growth are expected to increase these pressures further, resulting in more conflicts of interest. Fulfilling the UN Sustainable Development Goals implies that new ways of utilizing marine resources and space needs to be found, which may put extra pressure on governance systems that are already characterized by different mandates and at times overlapping and unclear authorties. Due to the ever increasing complexity, there is a need for more responsive and integrated governance of the coastal zone to ensure sustainable use and non-use of coastal space and resources. Challenges to coastal zone integration concern several dimensions; governing across the sea-land boundary and multiple layers of marine space at different geographical scopes; time spans and seasonal variations in use; across governance levels, institutions and sectors; and the interface of science and policy in governance processes. The empirical starting point of FAIRCoast is coastal zone planning processes and marine sector management in Norway. The project will analyse a range of factors related to how governance practices hinder or facilitate integration. Cases include the choice and practice of using different types of spatial plans; efforts to coordinate sector authorities; and the role of strategic environmental assessments’ in making trade-off decisions. We will study structures, processes and instruments, and how they contribute to or hinder inclusion, coordination and balancing of interests and stakeholders across the various dimensions. Through this, FAIRCoast will identify barriers to and mechanisms for integration, and suggest models for more integrated and sustainable governance of coastal areas and resources.