activity, generating tax revenue, which in turn leads to leveraging of the overall
public investments in the project. As a result of positive environmental and economic positive side effect outcomes, the beach nourishment solution has become
economically more attractive than conventional solutions (De Bel et al. 2018). It is a
good example on how a flood risk and coastal defence management project through
nature-based solutions became an opportunity for cross-sectoral collaboration and
business development.
Besides offering sustainable solutions to anthropogenic pressures, nature-based
solutions for environmental issues in coastal and rural areas can also provide
additional benefits in terms of landscape restoration and creating new avenues for
recreational activity. In coastal-rural areas, it can create the basis for a circular
economy through water recycling and reuse – as an alternative to expensive conventional water treatments, biological treatment using plants to absorb nutrients is,
for instance, highly effective in the tropics where plants grow year round; however
this option is often ignored by sewage designers from temperate zones, where plants
only grow part of the year. Scientific findings also point out the advantages of land
disposal for secondarily treated sewage effluence and wastewater reuse options. As
an alternative to coastal discharges, areas with extensive wetlands could possibly be
part of a secondary treatment/overland flow system, with the already nutrient-rich
wetlands ‘treating’ the final effluent material. Also, instead of being expensively
treated and ejected into the system, waste water could be reused, particularly by the
agricultural sector which requires nutrient inputs or by coastal golf courses which are
often in need of nutrient-rich effluent waters for irrigation to provide water and
fertilizers at lower costs (see details in COASTAL Deliverable D09). A welldesigned and planned water recycling and reuse system with nature-based solutions
over the whole coastal-inland system (that includes stakeholders from coastal and
rural areas in the design process) would reduce the impact of inland polluted water
onto the coastal-sea ecosystems and by extension the impact on activities such as
fishery, aquaculture and coastal tourism, which are dependent on good seawater
quality.
Finally, a tool such as a spatial planning management strategy designs above the
rural-coastal-marine boundaries can foster land-sea synergies and improve coastalrural collaboration by developing a common vision for the whole area from the rural
hinterland to the sea. This will allow the creation of a coherent and sustainable
development plan for the future by taking into account rural-coastal-marine socioenvironmental and economic interdependency. Such a strategy should be based on
land-sea synergies and stakeholders’ collaboration. However, the success of such a
strategy will depend on the development of a global governance at the EU level,
implying a deeper integration of the, still, siloed policies, i.e. between the WFD, the
MSPD, the CAP and the ICZM approach which lack interconnections, as mentioned
previously.
122
E. Akinsete et al.
public investments in the project. As a result of positive environmental and economic positive side effect outcomes, the beach nourishment solution has become
economically more attractive than conventional solutions (De Bel et al. 2018). It is a
good example on how a flood risk and coastal defence management project through
nature-based solutions became an opportunity for cross-sectoral collaboration and
business development.
Besides offering sustainable solutions to anthropogenic pressures, nature-based
solutions for environmental issues in coastal and rural areas can also provide
additional benefits in terms of landscape restoration and creating new avenues for
recreational activity. In coastal-rural areas, it can create the basis for a circular
economy through water recycling and reuse – as an alternative to expensive conventional water treatments, biological treatment using plants to absorb nutrients is,
for instance, highly effective in the tropics where plants grow year round; however
this option is often ignored by sewage designers from temperate zones, where plants
only grow part of the year. Scientific findings also point out the advantages of land
disposal for secondarily treated sewage effluence and wastewater reuse options. As
an alternative to coastal discharges, areas with extensive wetlands could possibly be
part of a secondary treatment/overland flow system, with the already nutrient-rich
wetlands ‘treating’ the final effluent material. Also, instead of being expensively
treated and ejected into the system, waste water could be reused, particularly by the
agricultural sector which requires nutrient inputs or by coastal golf courses which are
often in need of nutrient-rich effluent waters for irrigation to provide water and
fertilizers at lower costs (see details in COASTAL Deliverable D09). A welldesigned and planned water recycling and reuse system with nature-based solutions
over the whole coastal-inland system (that includes stakeholders from coastal and
rural areas in the design process) would reduce the impact of inland polluted water
onto the coastal-sea ecosystems and by extension the impact on activities such as
fishery, aquaculture and coastal tourism, which are dependent on good seawater
quality.
Finally, a tool such as a spatial planning management strategy designs above the
rural-coastal-marine boundaries can foster land-sea synergies and improve coastalrural collaboration by developing a common vision for the whole area from the rural
hinterland to the sea. This will allow the creation of a coherent and sustainable
development plan for the future by taking into account rural-coastal-marine socioenvironmental and economic interdependency. Such a strategy should be based on
land-sea synergies and stakeholders’ collaboration. However, the success of such a
strategy will depend on the development of a global governance at the EU level,
implying a deeper integration of the, still, siloed policies, i.e. between the WFD, the
MSPD, the CAP and the ICZM approach which lack interconnections, as mentioned
previously.
122
E. Akinsete et al.