1 / 38

Social and economic aspects of ICZM; functionality and valuation

Social and economic aspects of ICZM; functionality and valuation. Annemie Volckaert First BeNCoRe Conference 26/04/2007. Outline presentation. Socio economic impact of major activities Overview recent studies Gaps Socio economic impact: challenges

aden
Download Presentation

Social and economic aspects of ICZM; functionality and valuation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Social and economic aspects of ICZM; functionality and valuation Annemie Volckaert First BeNCoRe Conference 26/04/2007

  2. Outline presentation • Socio economic impact of major activities • Overview recent studies • Gaps • Socio economic impact: challenges • Comment Green Paper topic “how can quality of life be maintained in coastal regions”

  3. Users of the Belgian part of the North Sea • Belgian part of the North Sea (BPNS): • Part of southern North Sea • 3600 km² • Different users • Shipping & anchorage • Fishery/ mariculture • Aggregate extraction • Dredging • Dumping • Military exercises • Off-shore constructions • Wrecks, buoys, masts • Cables & pipelines • Tourism/ recreation • Nature areas

  4. Sustainable management of North Sea • Socio-economic Impact on the Environment • Identification • Valuation

  5. I. Maritime transport • Shipping: • Commercial (incl. ferries) • Fisheries • Offshore industries: wind energy, aggregate extraction, dredging & dumping, etc. • Recreational • Risk analysis of Marine Activities in the Belgian Part of the North Sea (RAMA) – SPSD II (2006) • Evaluation of marine degradation in the North Sea (MARE-DASM) – OSTC (2002)

  6. Risk analysis of Marine Activities in the Belgian Part of the North Sea (RAMA) Supported by the Federal Science Policy

  7. Goals • Risk-analysis of shipping incidents with environmental damage on the Belgian part of the North Sea • Study area: BPNS • Excl. Scheldt traffic • Excl. Noordhinder TSS • Data: • Database IVS-SRK • Data period 01/04/2003 – 31/03/2004 • Data on ferries from Ostend

  8. Impact valuation Historical data Modelling GIS based analysis Qualitative impact table

  9. Release assessment: Cargo spill risk • Tonnes/yr spilled • Highest risk class 8 (dangerous, no info) • Total: 539 t/yr • Containers: 390 t/yr • Class 1 (MP, cat A) • Total: 12.3 t/yr • Containers: 9.9 t/yr • Class 2 (crudes) • Total: 101 t/yr • Oil tankers: 101 t/yr

  10. Exposure and effect assessment • Selection of two scenarios • Worst case oil: 17.000 ton/accident; crudes • Worst case HNS: 8.000 ton/accident (1.000 ton/accident); acetone cyanohydrine • Sensitivity analysis (GIS-based) • Ecological parameters (e.g. Ramsar, MPA, beach reserve) • Socio-economic parameters (e.g. ports, spawning site, extraction zone, wind farm) • 3 Scenarios (general, winter, summer ~ interests) • Effect analysis • Exposure assessment (PEC) • Consequence assessment (PNEC) • Risk characterisation (PEC/PNEC)

  11. Summer scenario

  12. Effect analysis : worst case • Exposure assessment: • MU slicklets model (BMM) • 12,6 km² oil spill • In 13 hours Zwin • Consequence assessment: • LC50 aromatic comp. • Direct loss biota: 12% - 68% • Bird loss open sea: 471 • Bird loss Zwin: 741 Seabirds; 2595 Water birds • Exposure assessment: • No model available HNS (sedimentation) • 0,01 mg/l (critical effect concentration = 1% loss biota) • 75 simulation days • Consequence assessment: • Ecological impact area • 8.000 ton: 70% BPNS • 1.000 ton: 40% BPNS

  13. Evaluation of marine degradation in the North Sea (MARE-DASM)

  14. Goal • Development of mathematical models assessing the risk and damage • Identification & quantification of the different contaminants in the marine environment • Socio-economic assessment criteria to determine the cost of degradation • Development & evaluation of technical and legal procedures

  15. Socio-economic assessment • Valuation of the non-use value of BPNS in case of an accidental oil spill • Contingent Valuation method (questionnaire) • Scenario: 10.000 m³ spill • Scenario: 5.000 m³ spill • Scenario: 200 m³ spill • Willingness to pay: between 375 and 606 million €

  16. II. Industries • Offshore: • Wind energy • Aggregate extraction • LNG transport • Environmental impact assessment • MAREBASSE: Management, Research and Budgeting of Aggregates in Shelf Seas Related to End-users - SPSDII • Balancing the Impacts of Human activities on the Belgian Part of the North Sea (BALANS) – SPSDII • Aggregate extraction

  17. EIA as a legal instrument to evaluate impacts • Legal basis: • International: EIA directive (85/337/EC) • National: • Marine Law (20/01/1999) (art.28 §1) • RD 09/09/2003: rules & procedures EIA • Master Plan North Sea • Political priorities • Delimitation of zones • RD 17/05/04 • RD 01/09/04

  18. EIA as a legal instrument to evaluate impacts • Offshore windfarms • C-Power: 60 turbines (5-7 MW), 30 km offshore • Eldepasco: 36 turbines (5-7 MW), 38 km offshore • Bligh Bank: 69 turbines (5 MW), 45 km offshore • Sand- and gravel extraction • Zeegra • AWZ-Coast

  19. EIA as a legal instrument to evaluate impacts • Impact valuation of the activity on different disciplines: • Soil • Water • Atmosphere & Climate • Noise & Vibrations/ Electromagnetic fields • Fauna & flora & biodiversity • Seasight • Users • Safety (shipping, radar, oil) • Major challenges: cumulative effects

  20. III. Fisheries • Commercial fisheries • Small fleet • Big fleet • Shrimps • Anglers (recreational) • Balancing the Impacts of Human activities on the Belgian Part of the North Sea (BALANS) –SPSD II

  21. Balancing the Impacts of Human activities on the Belgian Part of the North Sea (BALANS)

  22. Goals & methodology • Focus on: • shrimp fisheries • Aggregate extraction • Procedure • Conceptual model development • Translation into a system-thinking environment • Data entry • Integrated conceptual policy & interface development (STELLA model) • Scenario development

  23. Conceptual model (sand & gravel)

  24. Outcome • Improve understanding of the activity • Manage the effects of policy choices on sustainable management

  25. IV. Human induced impacts • Evaluation of climate change impacts and adaptation responses for marine activities (CLIMAR) • Coastal flooding • Fisheries • Ballast water & invasive species

  26. Evaluation of climate change impacts and adaptation responses for marine activities (CLIMAR)

  27. Methodology

  28. CESSE-ULB & VITOContribution to SPICOSABY Dr. WALTER HECQ Ir. MATEO CORDIER GUY ENGELENJOACHIM MAESLEO DeNOCKER

  29. SPICOSA SPICOSA Fact sheet Science and Policy Integration for Coastal Systems Assessment (http://www.eucc.net/spicosa/) 54 Partner institutes, 22 countries, 18 study sites 6th FP 1 Feb 2007 – 1 Feb 2011 Objective: Develop a system dynamics modelling approach to support decision-making processes enabling integrated assessment of coastal systems in Europe Fully interlinked processes: physical & ecological; economic, demographic & societal; environmental & land use. at appropriate abstraction levels

  30. Carrying out of economicassessment : b) Assistance to SAF modellingin : Integratingeconomicassessmentmethodology (Input - Output tables…) in the systemic model EXTEND) CESSE – ULB contribution to SPICOSA Carrying out of economicassessment : c) Assistance toStudy Site Applications in : • Selecting a methodology for economicevaluation • Adaptingit to the SSA specificities • Carrying out the methodology on field (and real presenceon field for few selected SSA) Carrying out of economicassessment : a)reviewingsuccess of application in otherprojectshavingcarried out economicassessments (with spatial dimensions)

  31. Conclusions • Interdisciplinary approach is a must! • Same language/Terminology: • Between different partners • Scientific team & stakeholders • Good data base is fundamental • Importance of stakeholders (private, institutes, etc.) • Concrete problem formulation • Data delivery • Expertise • Valuation • Visualisation of results (GIS maps, models) • Dissemination to public (awareness; language)

  32. Socio-economic impact: challenges • Other important players: • Commercial fisheries and recreational anglers • Tourism • New developments: LNG tankers, offshore energy, mariculture, harbour expansion • Demography (older population) • Other important impacts of users: • Mobility • Ballast water • Invasive species • Climate change • Cumulative impacts

  33. Socio-economic impact: challenges (2) • Problem formulation: Tackling problems of public concern • Improving communication with private sector • Improving communication with policy • Methodological: • Good data base with relevant parameters • Accessible quality data • Quantification of impacts (modelling) • Valuation of non-use values of the BPNS: • Contingent Valuation method (Willingness to pay) • Other methodologies?

  34. Socio-economic impact: challenges (3) • Broader scale: • Sea/coastal/hinterland interface • Border-crossing problems: climate change, cumulative effects, etc. • Cooperation with neighbouring countries (Nl, En, Fr) • Data input • Methodology • Integrated results • European level (e.g. Spicosa)

  35. Socio-economic impact: challenges (4) • Policy instruments • Spatial planning (European scale) • Integrated decision models (Balans, Climar,…) • Coordinating institutes • Need for innovative and flexible research

  36. Green paper • The issue on how quality of life in coastal regions of Europe can be maintained, while continuing to develop sustainable income and jobs? Development inevitably brings with it pressures on space and the environment. It requires improvements in accessibility to, and internal mobility within, coastal zones, in particular small islands, through transport infrastructure improvements. It also calls for the supply of general interest services (health, education, water and energy supply, telecommunications, postal services, waste water and waste treatment) in order to improve the quality of life in coastal zones, in particular during peak tourist seasons

  37. Green paper (2) • Quality of life • Seasonal variation: tourist peak • Positive: jobs but temporarily • Negative: conflicts, facilities (WTP, water), … Good indicator Database: Coastal zone (kustbarometer) Marine zone Integration between zones

  38. Green paper (3) • Possible solutions to improve quality of life • Spatial planning larger scale • Diversification of tourism • Connection sea/coast/hinterland • Needs: families, older people, etc. • Sustainable fisheries • New techniques • Alternatives • Conflict with anglers at sea • Legal & policy instruments • Control (safety, pollution) • Integration WFD, Maritime strategy, etc. • Coordinating institute to manage integration Sustainable income and jobs Decrease pressure on environment Improve quality of life

More Related