Methodological Manual for
Sustainable Coastal
Tourism Development:
the ICZM Approach
By:
Željka Škaričić
Programme Officer
PAP/RAC
MANUAL
• A document commissioned by UNEP/DTIE
• Prepared by PAP/RAC
• Practical tool needed for both
ICZM and tourism sector
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
1. Introduction
•
•
•
purpose and scope of the Manual
structure
instructions how to use the Manual
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
2. Tourism in coastal areas
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
overview
magnitude
tourism growth vs. tourism development
impacts and challenges
need for planning
emerging destinations
SIDS
global issues (poverty alleviation, climate change,
natural disasters, biodiversity loss)
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
3. Tourism planning frameworks
•
•
•
UNEP/GPA key principles
rationale for tourism planning
territorial levels
•
integrated tourism planning
•
approaches to integrated tourism planning (WTO, UNESCAP,
European Charter, Natura 2000)
ecological footprint
tourism carrying capacity
environmental assessment
•
•
•
kinds of integration
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
4. The ICZM approach for sustainable
tourism development
•
•
•
•
•
•
principles of ICZM
ICZM process
benefits of ICZM
ICZM in practice
ICZM and tourism
current challenges for ICZM
Tourism
development
plan
TCCA
Coastal
Integrated
Area
Coastal
Management
Management
Plan
Process
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
5. Strategic planning for sustainable tourism
development in coastal areas
•
•
•
•
UNEP/WTO 12 Sustainable Tourism aims
ICZM principles
strategic planning approach
stakeholders involvement
1. Decision to begin the
Strategic Planning
2. Vision Statement
3. Stakeholders involvement
4. Report on Tourism
Development
5. Carrying Capacities
Assessment
6. Description of the
Current Scenario
7. Definition of
Alternative Scenarios
8. Strategy for
Sustainable Tourism
9. Formulation of the
Action plan
12. Review
11. Monitoring
10. Implementation
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
6. Expectations, rights and responsibilities
•
•
•
•
•
•
governments
business (travel and tourism industry)
research and academic institutions
intergovernmental organisations
conflict management
regional and international co-operation
STRUCTURE OF THE MANUAL
7. The way forward
•
•
main conclusions
using of the Implementation Guide
Annex: Implementation Guide
S te p 5 : T h e d e stin a tio n ’s C a rry in g C a p a city A s s es sm e n t
G e n e ra l o v e rv ie w
B rie f ex p lan atio n
A fter To u rism d ev e lop m e n t h as be e n stu d ie d , w e h av e to d e fin e its in te ractio n w ith the
d e stin atio n /sy ste m ’s carry in g cap acitie s. In its bro ad e st se n se , carry in g capacity refers to
th e ab ility of a sy ste m to su pp ort an activ ity o r fe atu re at a g iv e n lev e l. In th e co astal
zo n e , th e se sy ste m s can v ary gre atly in b o th scale an d ty p e , an d ran ge fro m sm all salt
m arsh e s to large b e ach resorts to e n tire co n tin e n tal co asts.
T h e an aly sis aim s to secu re a co m p re h e n siv e k no w led g e of th e sy ste m .
T h e d estin atio n is h e re p e rce iv ed as a te rrito rial sy stem co m po se d of its cap acitie s:
p h y sical, eco log ical, so cial, e co no m ic an d p o litical.
T h e cap acitie s w ill be calcu late d n o t b y co n sid ering a sp e cific stage o f to urism
d e ve lo p m e n t b u t in th e ir abso lu te v alu e as th e ab ility of th e de stin atio n to re ge n e rate its
re so u rce s in a re n e w ab le w ay .
O b jectiv e s
A n aly sis is b ase d o n th e m e th odo lo gy o f T o urism C arry in g C ap acity A sse ssm e n t.
•
D e fin e th e cap acitie s o f th e d e stin atio n /sy ste m .
•
A sse ss th e carry in g cap acitie s o f th e sy stem u n d er to u rism d ev e lo p m e n t pre ssure s.
E x p e cted o u tp u ts
•
A ctiv itie s
W h a t to do
R e po rt o n th e A ssessm e n t o f C arry in g C ap acitie s of th e de stin atio n /sy ste m .
A ctio n 1 - D a ta G a th e rin g
A d ig ital G IS can b e o rg an ise d fro m e x istin g d ata so u rce s. In add itio n , a p ho to grap h ic
su rv ey can b e co nd u cte d , p o te n tial de v e lo p m e n t are as m u st b e v isite d , an d d ata fro m a
w id e ran ge o f re po rts an d stu d ie s h as to be acq u ired and in corpo rate d .
A ctio n 2 - Q u a lita tiv e d e s crip tio n o f e a ch ca p a city
A ge n e ral d escrip tio n of th e fo llo w in g asp e cts: en v iro n m e n tal, p h ysical, socio -cu ltu ral,
e co n om ical an d po litical.
T h e in d iv id u al cap acitie s w ill b e e xp re ssed th ro u g h a q u alitativ e an aly sis.
A ctio n 3 - Q u a n tita tiv e d es crip tio n
T h ro u g h a se le ctio n o f app ro p riate in d icators to d escribe th e syste m ’s carry in g cap acitie s:
- E co lo g ical carry in g cap acity
- Ph y sical carry in g cap acity
- S o cio -cu ltu ral carry in g cap acity
- E co n o m ic carry in g cap acity
- Po litical C arry in g cap acity
T h is actio n w ill co n sist o f d efin in g a se t of m e asurab le in d icators fo r e ach cap acity .
A ctio n 4 – T h e d e fin itio n o f th res h o ld s
D e fin itio n o f th e acce p tab le lim its of to u rism de v elo p m e n t fo r e ach cap acity o f th e
sy ste m . T h is proce ss m u st le ad to th e id e n tificatio n o f m in im u m an d m ax im u m th re sho ld
v alu e s for e ach se t o f in d icato rs lin k ed to its re late d cap acity .
When to do it and for
how long
Carrying Capacity Assessment starts together with the tourism Development analysis and
incorporates its results.
The Carrying Capacity Assessment can last from 3 to 6 months.
How to do it
How should the capacities be described?
Each capacity will be described by a set of indicators. The number of indicators can vary
for each capacity. The number of indicators also varies from capacity to capacity
according to differing variables and availability of data. For more information about
Sustainable Tourism Indicators, please refer to the in-depth section of Chapter 5.
Each indicator will be characterised by a minimum and maximum acceptable value. The
calculation of threshold values for each set of indicators of Action 3 is the most sensitive
aspect of the Carrying Capacity Assessment. The calculation of these acceptable limits will
be employed also in the following phases of the planning process. These threshold values
define the range of sustainability for that specific capacity included in a minimum and
maximum value. The most delicate aspect is to define the limits of sustainability for each
indicator. These limits are variable in time and in space.
How to define a threshold for indicators?
1) A minimal threshold
Define legal environmental indices as the minimum acceptable value.
•
•
Define local parameters for the social thresholds which could arise from a consensus
of local interests and, consequentially be strictly dependent on the different territorial
aspects. The indicators describing the social capacity must reach a minimally
acceptable value.
2) A maximal threshold
High environmental standards (surpassing legal compliance) indices as the maximal
•
value.
High social and cultural satisfaction (full consensus on the development).
•
Environmental and social indices compatible with maximal economical capacity
•
(investments) to satisfy those indices. Beyond these values, the destination will not
be economically capable of getting these results.
To enable indicators in the same figure to tally, the values will be standardised. The
minimum and maximum value for each indicator will be represented in the same vertical
line (using different weights).
With whom to do it
An interdisciplinary project team.
EXAMPLE
An assessment of drinking water carrying capacity
Water used for human consumption has a health-related carrying capacity, as
consumption in excess of this capacity poses a public health risk. Unlike roads, bridges, or
schools, once the carrying capacity of a water supply has been reached, it can no longer
be "fixed." For example, the American Environmental Protection Agency has set the
carrying capacity for nitrogen in drinking water at ten parts per million (ppm). Once
drinking water supply has exceeded its capacity for nitrogen, the supply no longer meets
federal and state health regulations and no longer constitutes potable water. At issue is
the "fix." Without reducing the sources of nitrogen themselves, there is no existing way
of remedying the increased nitrogen levels. In other words, the water at the well cannot
be effectively treated to remove nitrogen. Thus, the only effective means of reestablishing the potability of well water is to reduce nitrogen levels over time by slowing
or ceasing nitrogen inputs into groundwater. Ironically, this requirement could have been
avoided simply by limiting nitrogen inputs to the carrying capacity of the well in the first
place.
An assessment of coastal waters carrying capacity
The ability of coastal waters to assimilate nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus has
been the subject of intense research. While little doubt remains that coastal systems have
carrying capacities, an oft-debated issue is whether coastal waters of different regions
have the same carrying capacity. Given their variations in water temperature, flushing,
salinity and depth, coastal water bodies are believed to have unique carrying capacities
that do not lend themselves to generalities. Nevertheless, when the carrying capacities of
individual water bodies can be determined, the imposition of regulations can ensure that
the capacity will not be exceeded. As in the case of potable drinking water, preventing the
carrying capacity from being exceeded requires virtually the same effort as the necessary
"fix" required after the carrying capacity has been reached.
PILOT PROJECT
Baška Voda near Split (Croatia)
PILOT PROJECT
Analysis
•
•
•
beach users opinion investigation
BARE method
carrying capacity assessment (physical, ecological, social)
PILOT PROJECT
Vision
•
•
•
•
•
environmental quality
visitor’s satisfaction
brand
economic sustainability
local prosperity
PILOT PROJECT
Best scenario
•
•
•
•
•
•
number of beach users reduced to the recommended CC (5
m2/person)
improvement and diversification of the offer on beaches
economic instruments (eco-tax)
creation of a specialised agency for beach management
environmental management principles
possible extension of beaches (feasibility study, EIA)
PILOT PROJECT
Action plan
OBJECTIVE ACTIVITY
Initiation of
sustainable
beach
management
INDICATOR COSTS
Creation of the Agency
Agency for
registered
Beach
before 2009
Management
50,000 €
(first year):
premises,
employees
SOURCE OF
FINANCING
Municipality,
International
funds