The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

REVIEW OF INTEGRATION AMONG PLANS FOR THE COAST IN SCOTLAND: Analysis of the SCF Coastal Plans Inventory

CHAPTER SIX MEASURES OF THE LEVEL OF INTERGRATION

Need for Indicators

6.1 The research study involved the development of a set of indicators to assess integration within the plans in the case study areas. Some work has already been carried out in this area and The Scottish Executive, in association with SCF, recently published research into the use of indicators to measure the state of the coastline and the effectiveness of ICZM (Cordah, 2001). Indicators are effective in the measuring of performance of ICZM projects and to simplify the communication of information.

6.2 The recent indicators detailed in the Cordah report focused on providing quantitative data to simplify and compare. However, if the objective is to measure integration between plans and strategies, it is unlikely that quantitative indicators would be of much use. The purpose of this study is to examine emerging trends and innovative practices, and therefore there will be a need for qualitative study. The generation of "meaningless" numbers was avoided.

Approach to Assessment of Level of Integration

6.3 Assessment implies some form of quantitative and/or qualitative measurement and this, in turn, requires the identification of a common baseline or starting point against which achievements or performance can be measured. It also requires that we have some firm idea of what it is we are trying to achieve through the process of Integrated Management in Coastal Zones.

6.4 Since the study is seeking evidence through the analysis of a number of case studies, baselines will be needed for both the national and local levels.

The Baseline

6.5 The main factor to be considered regarding baselines is the extent of coverage of plans in the case study areas. As ICZM initiatives are currently undertaken at the local level and as a voluntary action, plan preparation activities are assumed not to be comprehensive at this point in time. Therefore an assessment would be made for each of the case study areas on the presence and absence of plans, compared to the expected full range as detailed in Table 1 and Figure 1. An analysis would also be made at the same time of the geographic coverage of plans within the case study areas. In addition, an assessment would be made of plans against the planning cycle as detailed in Table 4 to determine the stage in preparation of the documented plans.

The Ideal Scenario

6.6 What we are trying to achieve, the 'ideal' of ICZM, is reflected in its definition, viz.

'A multidisciplinary process that brings all those involved in the development, management and use of the coast within the framework which facilitates the integration of their interests and responsibilities.'

6.7 This clearly identifies the process and the framework itself as being central features of the integration effort. It suggests that the better the underlying framework, the more comprehensive the process employed, the higher will be the level of integration achieved. The 'ideal' of ICZM is also reflected in the 'Principles' of ICZM as set (see chapter 2) out by the European Commission. Whilst these principles offer little scope for quantitative measurement, for the moment they represent the only practical guidelines available against which to assess the level of integration achieved in any given situation.

6.8 Accordingly what is needed is a picture of the stage reached in the evolution of integrated management systems in Scotland and the identification of a number of indicators to assess or measure its effectiveness.

6.9 ICZM probably has no formal starting point and no predetermined levels of achievement. However, the continuing evolution of ICZM in any area might be described as in the figure below:

Figure 5: Integration Timeline

6.10 The study will need, using appropriate indicators, to determine and describe where Scotland (as a whole) and where each case study is positioned on this continuum and then, given the present understanding of 'best practice' in ICZM and the principles of ICZM, assess where they ought to be. This is noted in the conclusions.

6.11 The analysis suggests that this investigation needs to be focused primarily on the efficacy of the ICZM process and framework in Scotland and that it is not necessarily concerned with the achievements of ICZM on the ground (though this cannot be overlook for the delivery of ICZM). Accordingly the search for appropriate indicators is centred on the system of planning and management for coastal areas.

6.12 The following 'search areas' were adopted.

The Completeness or Comprehensiveness of Plans and Management

6.13 The 'completeness' of the system in operation in Scotland and in the case study areas, as represented by the hierarchy of activity and the range of plan types and levels extant, allows the question "is it possible to achieve a high level of integration?" to be asked. Also, are there significant gaps in the system itself that would effectively prevent integration in some critical area? Is the system sufficiently robust?

Action: Analysis of the Inventory with this in mind.

6.14 Completeness of the hierarchical relationship between plans and initiatives having regard to:

• level of activity - National, Sub national/regional, local and sub-local (community);
• statutory versus non statutory;
• sectoral participation (opportunities for?);
• community participation.

Action: Comparison with the theoretical 'ideal' hierarchy of relationships.

6.15 The 'completeness' of the system, having regard to the geographical coverage of the range of plans. Again, it is necessary to inquire whether the system is so organised as to allow comprehensive spatial coverage (and hence sectoral coverage?) and are there physical gaps in the system?

6.16 Are all of the issues that are of importance in coastal zones (or the zones in question) being addressed by the appropriate agencies on all levels?

Action: Analysis of case studies for 'gaps' in coverage.

Best Practice and Principles

6.17 Is the approach to integration in line with EU 'principles' of ICZM thinking? Is it in line with so called 'best practice' (as detailed in the EU Demonstration Projects)?

Action: Analysis of documents to trace reference to current practice and experience, identify examples where experience might have indicated a different approach, etc?

6.18 Is the statutory process (at least) working? Are the rules being observed?

Action: Analysis to check that plans are up to date, consultations carried out, notification posted, policies followed, etc.

Quality of Output - Innovation/Creativity

6.19 Is there consistency amongst the policies and actions set out in the different plans across and amongst all levels of administration and interest?

6.20 Is there evidence that ICZM effort is giving rise to innovation in finding solutions to problems (opening up new opportunities), in ways of encouraging participation, ways of consulting and disseminating information, etc?

Action: Requires critical analysis of current documents.

6.21 Do current planning/management efforts and initiatives represent an improvement (assessed against the EU Principles for example) over earlier plans and initiatives or plans and initiatives which are not linked to an ICZM effort?

6.22 Is there evidence of a positive progression of attitude (to integration) on the part of authorities, statutory undertakers, the public, etc?

Action: Compare ICZM documents with non-ICZM documents, consult practitioners.

Participation and Consensus

6.23 Participation by all players and the generation of consensus are two central pillars of ICZM. Measurement of the levels of participation achieved through the process and of the level of consensus generated will be sought.

• Practical evidence of participation and the methods employed to facilitate participation.
• Evidence of effective dissemination of information and results.
• Evidence of interaction between authorities and groups, public and private, etc.

Action: Check case studies for records of meetings, lists of participants (classified by level, etc), evidence of task sharing, membership of action groups, evolving organisation to deal with specific issues/problems. Seek evidence from participants, interview key players to determine their perception of the level of integration so far achieved and their understanding of the system.

Appraisal Routine

6.24 It is recognised that these 'search areas' will at best yield only qualitative indicators of the level of integration, however this would represent an advance on the present situation and would possibly provide a platform for the formulation of quantitative indicators in the future.

6.25 This study is a strategic review of the plans that have an influence on the coastal zone. To ensure consistency, the study team formulated a standard approach to the analysis based on the use of schedules and checklists relating to the areas of investigation outlined above.

6.26 Table 6 shows the structure used for the review process, detailing the elements considered across each case study. The next chapter summarises the findings of the case study reviews, concentrating on the main issues brought out in the review.

6.27 The case study reports do not detail all the reports studied. It is noted where there are gaps in the review, and where reports were not available at the time of the study, but details of each report are not included so not to prejudice the interpretation of this report.

Table 6 Assessment Structure

« Previous | Contents | Next »