2.1 Encircling the Beginning: Where (I)CZM Started
17
the responsibility for coordinating development on public land 600 m to seaward and
200 m inland” (Gourlay, 1996, pp. 20–21). Until the 1980s administration and planning
was scattered to many agencies and also on different levels. With the publication of the
Victorian Coastal Management Act in 1995 two levels of agencies were established to implement the objectives of the Act: the Victorian Coastal Council (VCC) and the Regional
Coastal Boards (RCB).
The VCC is the “statewide lead agency . . . whose primary role is to prepare for the
Government the major strategic planning document for Victoria: the Victorian Coastal
Strategy” (Wescott, 2004, p. 97). The RCBs consist of representatives from local governments and three members of the RCB are sitting in the VCC to ensure a strong link
between state and local level. “The RCBs role is to implement the Coastal Strategy
regionally and to ensure local input to decision-making is received” (Wescott, 2004,
p. 97).
An important document is the Victorian Coastal Strategy (VCS, recently 2014) which
should bridge the international, national and regional (i.e., Victorian) approaches of coastal
planning and management. In the VCS 2014 it is said that “ICZM is the basis for coastal
planning and management in Victoria and is achieved through formal and informal collaboration and coordination between all different groups who use and manage the coast”
(VCC, 2014, p. 11).
Further information on Victorian ICZM approach and the Port Phillip Bay can be found
at specific websites.
3 A comprehensive description of coastal management in Australia can
be found in Harvey and Caton (2010).
Exercise
The rough descriptions of the first steps in (I)CZM in the USA (San Francisco Bay)
and in Australia (Port Phillip Bay) show different reasons (sedimentation, erosion and
water quality problems) and different triggers (bottom-up and top-down
4 ) to start such
a process. Given the provided sources of information and the available information on
respective websites in the Internet prepare a comparison of both approaches.
• What are the differences and similarities of both ICZM approaches?
• What about the current status of the Bays?
• What are the shortcomings and barriers for the implementation of these ICZM
approaches?
• What are the lessons learned based on the result of this comparison?
3 www2.delwp.vic.gov.au/, ccb.vic.gov.au, www.vcc.vic.gov.au
4 Bottom-up is understood as initiative by stakeholders with no legal status, for example, private
persons; top-down is understood as action initiated by, for example, governmental bodies or from a
central point upper in a hierarchy.
17
the responsibility for coordinating development on public land 600 m to seaward and
200 m inland” (Gourlay, 1996, pp. 20–21). Until the 1980s administration and planning
was scattered to many agencies and also on different levels. With the publication of the
Victorian Coastal Management Act in 1995 two levels of agencies were established to implement the objectives of the Act: the Victorian Coastal Council (VCC) and the Regional
Coastal Boards (RCB).
The VCC is the “statewide lead agency . . . whose primary role is to prepare for the
Government the major strategic planning document for Victoria: the Victorian Coastal
Strategy” (Wescott, 2004, p. 97). The RCBs consist of representatives from local governments and three members of the RCB are sitting in the VCC to ensure a strong link
between state and local level. “The RCBs role is to implement the Coastal Strategy
regionally and to ensure local input to decision-making is received” (Wescott, 2004,
p. 97).
An important document is the Victorian Coastal Strategy (VCS, recently 2014) which
should bridge the international, national and regional (i.e., Victorian) approaches of coastal
planning and management. In the VCS 2014 it is said that “ICZM is the basis for coastal
planning and management in Victoria and is achieved through formal and informal collaboration and coordination between all different groups who use and manage the coast”
(VCC, 2014, p. 11).
Further information on Victorian ICZM approach and the Port Phillip Bay can be found
at specific websites.
3 A comprehensive description of coastal management in Australia can
be found in Harvey and Caton (2010).
Exercise
The rough descriptions of the first steps in (I)CZM in the USA (San Francisco Bay)
and in Australia (Port Phillip Bay) show different reasons (sedimentation, erosion and
water quality problems) and different triggers (bottom-up and top-down
4 ) to start such
a process. Given the provided sources of information and the available information on
respective websites in the Internet prepare a comparison of both approaches.
• What are the differences and similarities of both ICZM approaches?
• What about the current status of the Bays?
• What are the shortcomings and barriers for the implementation of these ICZM
approaches?
• What are the lessons learned based on the result of this comparison?
3 www2.delwp.vic.gov.au/, ccb.vic.gov.au, www.vcc.vic.gov.au
4 Bottom-up is understood as initiative by stakeholders with no legal status, for example, private
persons; top-down is understood as action initiated by, for example, governmental bodies or from a
central point upper in a hierarchy.