Facts,Fictions, and Failures of Integrated Coastal Zone Management in Europe

Nearly 40 years on since its first tentative steps in North America, this article considers whether Integrated Zone Coastal Management (ICZM) in Europe has grown to maturity as a form of governance. The article summarizes the findings of recent research concerning the levels of implementation of coastal management in Europe, with particular reference to the UK experience. A research framework is used to identify the different motivations behind the social actor groups involved in coastal management. The application of this framework reveals four major findings about gaps in implementation: (1) the complexity of responsibilities at the coast continues to prevent agencies from taking a “joined-up” approach; (2) a policy vacuum is constraining implementation from national to local scales; (3) informational obstacles are significant in preventing co-ordination between science and policymakers, and between different sectors; (4) a democratic deficit is preventing implementation in the working practices of coastal stakeholders, with little opportunity in decision making for public comment or local accountability, especially offshore. The article also explores different conceptualizations of the role of coastal management and planning held across Europe, providing an analysis using the Strategic Management literature and the experience of the EU Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (1996–1999). Recent arrangements, with the availability of priming funds from the European Commission and emphasis on “pilot” and “demonstration” methods, have tended to encourage a project-based approach to ICZM that may fail to realize long-term objectives. The article seeks to present an analysis of the behaviors of scientists, academics, policymakers, and practitioners, and will be of interest to all those seeking to establish ICZM within the wider system of governance, as supported by the Commission of the European Community (2000) Communication on ICZM (COM 547). Some technical solutions are also offered from the UK experience that will be of use to coastal project officers working at national and regional levels.     

Scientific research about climate change mitigation in transport: A critical review

This paper seeks to develop a deeper understanding of the research on climate change mitigation in transport. We suggest that work to date has focused on the effects of improvements in transport technologies, changes in the price of transport, physical infrastructure provision, behavioural change and alternative institutional arrangements for governing transport systems. In terms of research methodologies, positivist and quantitative analysis prevails, although there are signs of experimentation with non-positivist epistemologies and participatory methods. These particular engagements with climate change mitigation reflect mutually reinforcing tendencies within and beyond the academic transport community. We first draw on a revised version of Thomas Kuhn’s philosophy of science to explore the path dependencies within transport studies, which are at least partly responsible for the predisposition towards quantitative modelling and technology, pricing and infrastructure oriented interventions in transport systems. We then employ the governmentality perspective to examine how transport academics’ engagements with climate change mitigation depend on and align with more general understandings of climate change in UK society and beyond. The analysis makes clear that ecological modernisation and neo-liberal governmentality more generally provide the context for the current focus on and belief in technological, behaviour change, and especially market-based mitigation strategies. While current research trajectories are important and insightful, we believe that a deeper engagement with theoretical insights from the social sciences will produce richer understandings of transport mitigation in transport and briefly outline some of the contributions thinking on socio-technical transitions and practice theories can make.