Conclusion
A world without property
When modelling land territory with GIS, you are working with geographic objects, areas or structures that generally have a recognized
ownership: the field, the lighthouse, the road, the forest, all belong to
“somebody” that is more-or-less recognized by other people. When
you go into the water, the system of territorial appropriation is completely different. The coastal marine territory belongs to nobody (or to
everybody). One possible explanation for the fragmentation of coastal
information is that it results from the various views of this territory,
with corresponding fragmentation of responsibilities. Before the availability of GIS, this fact was hiclden. As we saw in the session of this
meeting devoted to legal aspects, GIS generally, and coastal GIS specifically, can be a provocative tool. Perhaps we should use it as such, that
is to deliberately provoke some brainstorming about the problem of
dividing this offshore territory from various points of view. The very
big difficulty we have, arising from this, is to understand and represent how this fragmentation of territorial claims relate to the coastal
system in its wholeness.
Conclusions
The wide-ranging and thoughtful presentations made at CoastGIS‘99,
as well as the closing panel discussion reported on here, provide ample
testimony to the vibrancy of the coastal GIS community as we head
into the 2 1
st Century. With the very open community represented at
our meetings we have a real possibility, at the international level, to
foster the sharing of perspectives among researchers, decision-makers,
and technicians coming from the separate fields of GIS and integrated
coastal zone management respectively.
The need for approaches to coastal management that go beyond the
purely local or national, and the various factors that currently mitigate
against achieving these more global perspectives, were much debated
in Brest. Of particular interest here, were the several discussions about
cultural nuances, the comparative terminology and semantics used in
describing (and understanding) coastal spaces, ancl the ways that these
shape people’s perspectives and impact on our appreciation, use and
regulation of the coast. In this regard, the very cosmopolitan nature of
the CoastGIS series of meetings was seen as a major asset that deserved
to be exploited and further developed. For example, one specific suggestion was that CoastGIS participants might collaborate via the Internet, to develop a series of linked Websites, in French, Spanish, English
and other languages as required, explaining how the coastal environment
is managed in different areas around the world, and offering good illustrations and case studies of such management issues and information
problems (and, if appropriate, their solution) found in each region. As
317
A world without property
When modelling land territory with GIS, you are working with geographic objects, areas or structures that generally have a recognized
ownership: the field, the lighthouse, the road, the forest, all belong to
“somebody” that is more-or-less recognized by other people. When
you go into the water, the system of territorial appropriation is completely different. The coastal marine territory belongs to nobody (or to
everybody). One possible explanation for the fragmentation of coastal
information is that it results from the various views of this territory,
with corresponding fragmentation of responsibilities. Before the availability of GIS, this fact was hiclden. As we saw in the session of this
meeting devoted to legal aspects, GIS generally, and coastal GIS specifically, can be a provocative tool. Perhaps we should use it as such, that
is to deliberately provoke some brainstorming about the problem of
dividing this offshore territory from various points of view. The very
big difficulty we have, arising from this, is to understand and represent how this fragmentation of territorial claims relate to the coastal
system in its wholeness.
Conclusions
The wide-ranging and thoughtful presentations made at CoastGIS‘99,
as well as the closing panel discussion reported on here, provide ample
testimony to the vibrancy of the coastal GIS community as we head
into the 2 1
st Century. With the very open community represented at
our meetings we have a real possibility, at the international level, to
foster the sharing of perspectives among researchers, decision-makers,
and technicians coming from the separate fields of GIS and integrated
coastal zone management respectively.
The need for approaches to coastal management that go beyond the
purely local or national, and the various factors that currently mitigate
against achieving these more global perspectives, were much debated
in Brest. Of particular interest here, were the several discussions about
cultural nuances, the comparative terminology and semantics used in
describing (and understanding) coastal spaces, ancl the ways that these
shape people’s perspectives and impact on our appreciation, use and
regulation of the coast. In this regard, the very cosmopolitan nature of
the CoastGIS series of meetings was seen as a major asset that deserved
to be exploited and further developed. For example, one specific suggestion was that CoastGIS participants might collaborate via the Internet, to develop a series of linked Websites, in French, Spanish, English
and other languages as required, explaining how the coastal environment
is managed in different areas around the world, and offering good illustrations and case studies of such management issues and information
problems (and, if appropriate, their solution) found in each region. As
317