Iczm Report Volume 1 Relevance To India and Summary of International Experiences

Draft July 3, 2019
Towards the Development of the Next Phase of Integrated

Coastal Zone Management in India:
Application of Lessons Learned from an International
Review of Implementation of ICZM
For discussion at the International Conference on
Integrated Coastal Zone Management: Lessons Learned and Relevance for India
July 9-11, 2019, Chennai
Biliana Cicin-Sain, Indumathie Hewawasam, Tony George Puthucherril, Miriam

Balgos, Alexis Maxwell, Brian Cortes, and Richard Delaney
Global Ocean Forum
Any views expressed in this draft document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
views or policies of the sponsoring organizations.
Comments/corrections are kindly solicited and may be sent to Dr. Biliana Cicin-Sain, bilianacicin-
sain@globaloceans.org, and to Dr. Indumathie Hewawasam, induhewawasam5@gmail.com
This Volume 1 of a two-volume series on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM): 1) presents a
brief summary of experiences and of lessons learned on ICZM implementation in case studies of 6
countries and two regions, and 2) analyzes the current context of ICZM in India, discusses challenges for
development of the next phase of ICZM in India, applies some insights/lessons drawn from the case
studies to the Indian context, and develops some points for consideration in the next phase of India’s
ICZM work.
The accompanying Volume 2, Review of International Experiences in Integrated Coastal Zone

Management (ICZM) and Relevance to India, presents more detailed case studies of the international
experiences.
Prepared for the World Bank pursuant to Contract # 7190936

on Unlocking India Blue Economy Potential 1
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1. Lessons Learned from an International Review of ICZM Implementation
1.1. Purposes of this Chapter .......................................................................................................................3
1.2. Brief Summaries for the Experiences of 6 nations and 2 regions in ICZM ..........................................5
1.3. General Lessons Drawn from the ICZM Case Studies .........................................................................21
1.4. Stable and Continuous Sustainable Financing .....................................................................................24
1.5. Capacity Development ..........................................................................................................................25
1.6. Putting it All Together ..........................................................................................................................26
Chapter 2. India: Evolution of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) and Strategic Directions
for the Way Forward
2.1. Background ..........................................................................................................................................27
2.2. Institutional and Regulatory Framework..............................................................................................27
2.3. Implementing ICZM ..............................................................................................................................33
2.4. Lessons Learned from the Global Review of Experience in ICZM and Relevance to India .................. 34
2.4.1. ICZM is a long-term process and Horizontal and Vertical Integration Evolve in Stages ...... 35
2.4.2. ICZM and Federalism ............................................................................................................35
2.4.3. Decentralization and Clarity in the Institutional Framework ...............................................36
2.4.4. Incentives for the States ........................................................................................................... 37
2.4.5. Conflict Resolution ................................................................................................................... 37
2.4.6. Capacity Building ..................................................................................................................... 37
2.4.7. Financial Sustainability ............................................................................................................ 38
2.4.8. Leveraging Complementary Financing for ICZM .................................................................... 39
2.4.9. ICZM and Resilience to Climate Change ................................................................................. 41
2.4.10. ICZM and Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) .......................................................................... 42
2.5. Strategic Directions for The Way Forward ..........................................................................................42
2.6. Recommendations for Achieving a New Model of ICZM Governance .................................................47
LIST OF BOXES
Box 2.1. Powers and Functions of SCZMA (Example from the State of Gujarat) .......................................32
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1. Countries and Regions Covered in the White Paper .................................................................. 3
Figure 2.1. CRZ Centre-State Relations .......................................................................................................... 33
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Differences between CRZ 2011 and 2019 ...................................................................................29
Table 2.2. Pathway to Establishing a Coastal States Organization (CSO) .................................................46
Table 2.3. Key Recommendations, Activities Time Frame, Responsibility and Indicators for Monitoring 48
2
Chapter 1
LESSONS LEARNED FROM AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF ICZM
IMPLEMENTATION
1.1. Purposes of this Chapter

The purposes of the Report are two-fold:
1) To review and analyze the ICZM experiences of 6 countries and 2 regions, especially with regard to the
following variables:
1. Policy, institutions, and governance issues related to Federal, State, and Local interactions on ICZM,
including division of authority and responsibilities, and integration among government levels;
2. Sustainability of financial flows to support ICZM, including the relative roles of Federal, State, and Local
governments and of the private sector;
3. Capacity development at all levels of government (Federal, State, and Local) to carry out ICZM
4. Linkages between ICZM and ocean planning, Blue Economy, and climate change and disaster risk
management
2) To draw lessons from these experiences which may be of relevance to the Government of India as it embarks upon
the next phase of its ICZM program to considerably expand ICZM in India, particularly in terms of:
1. The roles of National and State/UT and Local actors and stakeholders for greater efficiency in ICZM
implementation;
2. Financial flow models for investment support for effective ICZM implementation at State/UT and local
levels;
3. Capacity to promote science, data/information sharing, education, communications, and awareness raising,
and the roles of the public sector, academic institutions, and NGOs.
3
Figure 1.1. Countries and Regions Covered in the White Paper
Cases Selected for Analysis

This Chapter provides very brief summaries of ICZM cases in 6 nations: United States, Canada, Mexico,
Brazil, South Africa, and Japan, and in 2 regions: The European Union (comprising 28 nations), and the
East Asian Seas (involving 11 nations in East Asia and coordinated by the Partnership for Environmental
Management of East Asian Seas (PEMSEA). The map below shows these countries and regions.
The rationale for selecting these countries and regions was as follows. Five of the countries selected—United
States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa—are major coastal/ocean countries with extensive coastlines and
Exclusive Economic Zones, and with long experience in ICZM, much like India. As well, all of these countries
have federal systems of government with shared authority and responsibility over the coast and ocean by national
and state/provincial authorities, as does India.1 Although having a unitary (and not a federal) form of
government, Japan was also selected because of the highly effective way in which national ocean policy was
created and implemented, and because of the special relationship between the national level of government and
the local communities embodying the concept of “satoumi” which may be of interest to India with its rich and
extensive local community heritage. With regards to the regions selected for review, first, the European Union
(comprising 28 nations) also has extensive coastlines and abuts several seas with varying conditions and
circumstances; the European Union has been a leader in ICZM since the 1990s when it first initiated a major EU
program on ICZM. This was followed by major initiatives and ultimately authoritative policies, on Integrated
Maritime Policy and on Marine Spatial Planning. The second region selected for review, the East Asian Seas
region, led by the Partnership for Environmental Management of East Asian Seas and incorporating 11
East Asian Seas countries has been a leader in introducing ICZM concepts and practices in the 11 East Asian
Seas countries.
As discussed in Volume 2, Integrated Coastal Zone Management may be defined as “a continuous and dynamic
process by which decisions are taken for the sustainable use, development, and protection of coastal/marine areas
and resources” ICZM involves a management process that acknowledges the interrelationships among coastal
and ocean uses and the environments they affect. In a geographical sense, ICZM typically embraces upland
watersheds, the shoreline and its unique landforms (beaches, dunes, wetlands), nearshore coastal and estuarine
waters, and the ocean beyond to the extent is it affected by or affects the coastal zone. Given that many nations
have claimed jurisdiction over 200 nautical-mile ocean zones, the coastal areas in some cases incorporate the
entire offshore zone.
The goals of ICZM are generally to attain sustainable development of coastal/marine areas; reduce vulnerability
of coastal areas and their inhabitants to natural hazards; and maintain essential ecological processes, life support
systems and biological diversity in coastal and marine areas. ICZM is multipurpose oriented; it analyzes
implications of development, conflicting uses, and interrelationships between physical processes and human
activities; and it promotes linkages and harmonization among sectoral coastal and ocean activities. A key aspect
of ICM is the design of institutional processes of integration/harmonization to overcome the fragmentation
inherent in the sectoral management approach and in the splits in jurisdiction between levels of government
(national, state/provincial, local) at the land-water interface.
The major functions of ICZM include: 1. Area Planning--Plan for present and future uses of coastal and marine
areas; provide a long-term vision; 2. Promotion of Sustainable Development--Promote appropriate uses of
coastal and marine areas; 3. Stewardship of Resources--Protect the ecological base of coastal and marine areas;
preserving biological diversity; ensuring sustainability of uses; 4. Conflict Resolution--Harmonize and balance
1
South Africa is a quasi-federal state.
4
existing/potential uses; addressing conflicts among coastal and marine uses; 5. Protection of Public Safety--
Protect public safety in coastal and marine areas typically prone to significant natural, as well as climate-change
induced hazards; 6. Proprietorship of Public Submerged Lands and Waters--As governments are often outright
owners of specific coastal and marine areas, manage government-held areas and resources wisely and with good
economic returns to the public.
While ICZM requires an integrated approach to achieve coherence among uses and among levels of government,
it should be noted that ICZM does not replace sectoral management (such as for fisheries, for example), but
instead supplements sectoral management. Policy integration in ICZM is typically best performed at a higher
bureaucratic level than sectoral management.
Dimensions of integration that should be addressed in ICZM include: 1. Intersectoral integration among various
sectors and uses of the coast and ocean); 2. Intergovernmental integration (to ensure consistency in the actions of
national, state, and local governments); 3. Spatial integration (considering land and sea processes and uses); 4.
Science-management integration (application of natural and social sciences to address the problems and issues of
the coastal zone); 5. International integration, which may be needed to address transboundary resources and
processes outside the scope of national authorities.
Planned International ICZM Conference

A more detailed analysis of the relevance of possible lessons from other country and regional cases to India will
be prepared after the conduct of a Government of India/World Bank International ICZM Conference (to be held
in Chennai in India on July 9 to 11, 2019). The conference will provide an opportunity for international ICZM
experts from various countries and regions to present lessons learned, and issues and opportunities from their
respective countries and regions and for Government of India and World Bank officials to present their vision
and plans for the next phase of ICZM in India.
1.2. BRIEF SUMMARIES OF THE EXPERIENCES OF 6 NATIONS AND 2 REGIONS

IN ICZM
1.2.1. Lessons Learned on ICZM in the United States
1. Introduction
The United States is a major coastal and maritime nation. The US coastline extends for 19,924 km, and its
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of 11.5 million km is the world’s largest. Ocean and coastal ecosystems and
sectors are clearly a central driver of the US economy, supporting marine transportation, fisheries and
aquaculture, energy production, recreation, biotechnology, and other uses. US coastal shoreline counties
(including the Great Lakes) account for 41 per cent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) and contribute
about 44 million jobs and US$2.4 trillion in wages. 35 US coastal states and territories generally have authority
between 0 and 3 statute (geographical) miles offshore, with the exception of Texas and Florida, the authority of
which extends over 3 marine leagues (about 10 statute miles) into the Gulf of Mexico. The Federal government
has jurisdiction over the ocean area from 3 to 200 miles offshore.
The US enacted the first comprehensive coastal management law in the world, the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972, a cross-sectoral and multiple-use law, which authorized the establishment of a federal program to
encourage and assist the states in developing and implementing programs to manage their coastal areas, and to
create coastal management plans (which had to receive federal approval) and to implement these over time, with
the benefit of federal funding support. Since its inception 47 years ago, the US coastal management program has
5
achieved many successes in terms of management and protection of the coastal zone and ocean and is active in
34 out of 35 coastal states and territories.
Major objectives of the 1972 CZMA legislation can be summarized as follows: 1. To sustainably manage
resources and activities/uses within the coastal area (land and water uses); 2. To protect, conserve and restore
sensitive habitats (wetlands, dunes, estuaries); 3. To manage hazards and shore erosion; 4. To ensure public
access to the coast.
The major features of the legislation were as follows:

1. Recognizing that conflicts existed among competing uses in the coastal zone (often conservation versus
development), as well as among the overlapping authorities of the three levels of government, the Act
designated one level of government–the state–as the appropriate one to take the lead in developing plans to
manage land and water uses in the coastal zones, with the oversight and coastal management approval by the
Federal government;
2. The program was a voluntary one, with no sanctions imposed against states choosing not to prepare CZM
programs under the Act;
3. Federal grants-in-aid were to be made available for a limited period to state governments (and through them,
to local governments) for developing CZM programs, and after federal approval of state coastal zone
management programs, grants were to be available to the states for implementing and administering such
programs;
4. Federal agencies were called upon to assist states in the CZM process and, after program approval, to act
consistently with the policies contained in the federally approved state coastal zone management plans.
Implementation of the CZMA took place through the designation of a “lead” agency at the Federal level, the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and a “lead” agency at the State level (which state agency
was selected varied from state to state, but a typical pattern has been the appointment of a lead agency such a
state Department of the Environment together with the formation of a special entity, commission, or other under
the direction of the chief executive of the state, the Governor).
2. Federal-state-local Interactions
Through the CZMA, the relative rights and responsibilities of the Federal and State governments were clearly
delineated, as were the processes to be followed in the preparation of coastal management plans for each
state/territory, and subsequent review and ultimately approval by the Federal government.
The CZMA went further than any previous legislation in giving the states a voice in the actions of federal
agencies affecting their coastal zones once the state CZM program had been approved at the national level. The
real strength of the novel “federal consistency” provisions established by Section 307 of the Act was to be
determined later as states attempted to use this power to gain greater control in the federal offshore oil and gas
leasing program. The CZMA embodied an unusual form of federalism. The underlying concept of the Act–the
driving force--was contained in the following quid pro quo: If states adopted CZM programs that were judged to
meet the national interest and other tests found in the Act, and if the states were willing to enforce their programs
in relation to local and state interests (public and private), federal agencies would be bound by the coastal policies
contained in those programs as well. Taken together, the various provisions of Section 307 required, in effect,
that federal activities, federal development projects, federal licenses and permits, and federal assistance action
be consistent with approved state CZM programs. This aspect was to become very important in the late 1970s
and early 1980s as states began to differ with the federal government over offshore oil leasing policies in federal
waters.
6
Section 312 of the CZMA required periodic performance reviews conducted by the Federal agency NOAA
evaluating of each state’s achievements and weaknesses. While precise quantitative metrics for outcomes of
coastal management are difficult to apply, these “312 Evaluations” together provide a convincing narrative of
many successful years of integrated coastal management by the states. However, because the US coastal
management program is oriented toward the states, few systematic evaluations have been conducted of the
impact of the program as a whole. Findings of such evaluations point to a number of beneficial impacts (a multi-
purpose, multiple-use approach; responsible for halting coastal degradation trends; started new processes at state
and local levels; the power of the consistency clause insured that federal agencies, in general, abided by the state
CZM plans; and the federal government and states entered into and maintained strong cooperation).
Some weaknesses in the CZMA program that have been noted, include: The fact that there was no initial
baseline of coastal conditions, which made it difficult to measure success over time; little science in policy
development in the initial decades (this appears to have changed at present given the concerns over climate
change impacts); until the decade of the 2000s, the ocean side was not addressed much in most cases, but this has
now changed quite dramatically; and the program has suffered from being low on the organizational hierarchy of
the Department of Commerce at the federal level (the hierarchy being Department of Commerce, NOAA,
National Ocean Service/Office for Coastal Management) therefore lacking at times, sufficient visibility.
3. Financial Sustainability
In contrast to other cases covered in this Volume, under the Coastal Zone Management Act, steady continuing
support has been provided to the participating coastal states over the life of the program, both in terms of federal
funds as well as state matching funds.
The annual federal appropriation for “core” funding is distributed to the eligible state coastal management
programs by NOAA/Office for Coastal Management using a formula based primarily on length of shoreline and
coastal population. In addition to the base or core annual funding, another section of the CZMA provides
additional funds for innovative projects that would enhance existing programs. The annual federal funding for
Section 306 Administrative Grants has averaged around $70 million in recent years with individual state grants
averaging $2 million annually. Coastal states are required to provide an equal funding amount in matching
funds. Additional funding via Section 309 varies annual depending on the federal budget for that year. It should
be noted that federal funds are less like grants but rather, more like a “cooperative agreements” that are based on
detailed descriptions of how tasks will be carried out by the states.
4. Capacity Development, Education, and Awareness Raising

Each of the 34 active coastal programs has extensive programs in public education about the importance of the
coast and ocean and the issues facing these areas. This is, in part, related to the fact that public education was
emphasized in the implementation of the CZMA since its outset in 1972 and because of the generally high level
of public interest that exists in the US coastal states about these issues. As well, the lead federal agency,
NOAA/Office for Coastal Management, routinely distributes relevant information on coastal management to its
constituencies and to the general public.
An important component of the CZMA is the National Estuarine Research Reserves (NEERS). NEERS is a
network of 29 protected areas representing different biographic areas where long-term research, water-quality
monitoring, education and coastal stewardship is conducted and shared widely among all ICZM State Programs.
There are several organizations beyond the Federal National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
and State CZM Programs that together help build technical and staff capacity on an ongoing basis. The Coastal
States Organization represents the interests of coastal states in federal matters, provides information, updates and
alerts to coastal states of developments at the Federal level, maintains a national network for sharing best
7
management practices in the coastal states, and helps to identify emerging issues and problems and to develop
consensus among the coastal states on how to respond to those issues. Another independent government agency,
the Coastal Services Center, provides a wide range of technical and scientific support to all coastal states
including training and other capacity building activities. In addition, the Sea Grant Program, which is a
consortium of university-based research entities, conducts coastal and ocean research on issues that are identified
as priority problems for coastal managers. Lastly, the Coastal Society, is an informal association of coastal
management practitioners, students and many others who share an interest in coastal management and are willing
to share lessons learned, mentor students, and explore new ideas in coastal management.
5. In Conclusion
The US coastal management program, involving both the Federal and State elements, has operated relatively
successfully over the 47 years of its existence. As new challenges have arisen, including the need for regional ocean
management, fostering the Blue Economy, and responding to the serious issues of climate change, the US coastal
management program has risen to address these challenges, and is working cooperatively bringing the states together
federal agencies to forge new directions on these prominent issues.
1.2.2. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Canada
1. Introduction
Canada, made up of ten provinces and three territories, borders the North Pacific, the Arctic, and the North
Atlantic oceans. With the longest coastline in the world at 245,000 km, Canada relies on its extensive EEZ for
many essential industries, including fishing, offshore energy, and shipping. Another aspect of having such an
expansive coastal zone is the diversity of ecosystems found in each region, with each region requiring
specialized action. Environmental issues in oceanic areas and recognition of the need to sustainably maximize
economic benefits from marine resources, served as the catalyst for Canada in developing Integrated Coastal
Zone Management (ICZM) policy initiatives. Canada has also developed national Integrated Coastal and Ocean
Management (ICOM) policy at the federal level. The Oceans Act in 1996 incorporates ICOM policy based upon
three core principles: sustainable development, integrated management, and the precautionary approach; and
serves as the overarching legislated oceans policy framework for the integrated management of Canada’s
oceans, led by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). The Oceans Act led to the development of
Canada’s Ocean Strategy and the Integrated Management and Operational Framework in 2002. The Oceans
Action Plan in 2005 resulted in significant progress, but was superseded by the Health of the Oceans Plan in
2008. Currently, the Oceans Protection Plan is the major operating initiative of the federal government.
The Canadian Constitution divides federal and provincial responsibilities in the coastal zone, and thus makes
cooperation between the federal and provincial governments necessary for ICOM, where the federal
government leads on policy and incorporates provinces through a collaborative and consultative process. The
DFO takes the lead in the development of national oceans strategy and integrated management initiatives, but is
meant to liaise with other federal departments in implementing ICOM and ICZM. Memoranda of
Understanding (MOUs) between the federal and provincial governments facilitate overall coordination and help
to overcome the jurisdictional difficulties regarding implementation of policies in the coastal zone. Existing and
developing regional governance mechanisms allow the provincial level to collaborate for the development of
joint programs, work plans, and approaches. Management and advisory bodies support specific integrated
management plans, which generally include federal and provincial level representation, and also include a range
of other stakeholders (aboriginal peoples, NGOs, citizens, etc.). Implementation of these efforts, however, tends
to be inconsistent and subject to political changes at both federal and provincial levels of government.
8
ICZM in Canada is embedded within a broader policy, and does not have specific binding or funding
legislation. Prior to the implementation of Phase I of the national Oceans Action Plan in 2005, funds for ICZM
policy came from a reallocation of resources within DFO rather than from a centrally approved funding
mechanism through the government budget. A new federal government beginning in 2006 resulted in
substantial cuts to the federal ocean budget, and a move away from the Oceans Action Plan. From 2007 to 2012,
ICZM policy was funded through the Health of the Oceans Initiative (HOI) under the National Water Strategy.
From 2012 to 2014 one year funding extensions were granted to the Health of the Oceans. In 2014, five years of
funding were approved under the National Conservation Plan, however, even with the five-year extension, a
lack of adequate funding remained an issue for the implementation of federal ICOM and ICZM programs. In
2015, the election of a Liberal federal government pledged to renew Canada’s commitment to ICOM and in
2016 the Oceans Protection Plan was launched with funding of CAN$1.5 billion over five years to address four
main priority areas: marine safety; marine ecosystems and habitat protection and restoration, especially in
Canada’s Arctic; partnerships and co-management with Indigenous communities; and oil spill cleanup research
and methods to ensure evidence-based emergency response.
4. Capacity Development, Education and Awareness Raising

Enhanced partnerships with academia, international scientific organizations, and sister agencies in other state
governments have helped to facilitate and develop tools for the application of ecosystem-based considerations
of ocean issues, and have also helped to build scientific advisory peer review processes to support ocean
managers. In 1993, the Coastal Zone Canada Association (CZCA) was established to bring together
governments, academia, industry, community and Aboriginal groups to engage in greater cross-sectoral
dialogue in support of ICOM and ICZM. In addition to the actions designed to implement the ICOM aspects of
the Oceans Act, the Oceans Action Plan sought to improve information-sharing through connecting information
networks, to promote innovation and new technologies. Additionally, under the Oceans Protection Plan, the
government is investing to engage with Indigenous and coastal communities to support regional planning that
ensures environmental, traditional knowledge, and cultural knowledge is incorporated into identifying
appropriate sites of refuge. At various times, network organizations have been used to link groups and
individuals in support of ICOM, such as the Ocean Management Research Network in 2001, the Canadian
Healthy Oceans Network in 2008, and currently the Oceans Network for data management and the Ocean
Supercluster to link industry, academia and government. Overall, capacity and education have helped to
implement integrated management and marine conservation under the Oceans Act.
5. In Conclusion
Canadian ICZM policy does not have an authoritative maritime spatial planning roadmap for the provincial
levels to implement. Given that coastal land planning resides within the purview of the provinces, ICZM efforts
to regulate development, address natural hazards, and respond to sea-level rise take place at the provincial and
municipal levels of government, although these are often done with assistance from federal departments such as
DFO, Environment Canada, and Natural Resources Canada. However, one important aspect of the Oceans Act
is the establishment of a national system of marine protected areas. Various governmental and independent
review efforts have occurred to assess the implementation of the Oceans Act. Currently, the necessity to adapt
to climate change impacts is renewing the drive for ICZM, and likely this will play an increasingly important
role in stimulating Canada’s various levels of government to move more quickly towards implementing the
integrated planning sections of the Oceans Act, either through complementary provincial legislation or
collaborative efforts with the Government of Canada.
1.2.3. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Brazil
1. Introduction
9
Brazil has one of the world’s longest coastlines at 7,491 km. In addition to the diverse array of ecosystems
across the coastal zone, Brazilian coastal industries include oil and gas, shipping, fishing and aquaculture,
tourism, resource extraction, and reforestation. More than a third of Brazil’s population lives near the coast,
with further development expected to place more stress on the coastal ecosystems. In 1988, the National
Coastal Management Plan (PNGC) in Brazil was established by law within the framework of the National
Policy for Sea Resources (PNRM) and the National Policy on the Environment (PNMA). The PNGC
established the principles on which were based the coastal management concepts and definitions, objectives and
rules, as well as instruments, competences, and resources in Brazil. The PNGC was superseded by the revised
National Plan of Coastal Management (PNGC II) in 1997, which contains principles that direct coastal
management, as well as norms and rules for its implementation in states and counties. PNGC II provides for
decentralized, integrated, and participatory coastal management process where the division of responsibilities
and tasks is made possible and favors the involvement of municipal governments in the process of regional
development. A year later, through a CIRM Resolution, the Federal Action Plan for the Coastal Zone (PAF)
was created, which is an action instrument for setting a benchmark for programmatic activities of the state in the
coastal territories. It aimed to articulate the activities and actions of the nation regarding the PNGC. The PAF
was revised in 2005 to include new lines of action: territorial planning of the coastal zone; conservation and
protection of natural and cultural heritage; and monitoring and control, each defined with specific focus, goals,
areas of expertise, activities, and institutional arrangements. A Federal Decree in 2004 provided more specific
rules for use and occupation of the coastal zone, establishing criteria for the management of the waterfront. This
Decree defined the ORLA Project, which delimited the coastal zone between the 10 m isobath (seaside) and the
linear distance of 50 m in urbanized and of 200 m in non-urbanized areas, from the high tide line (or the end
limit of adjacent terrestrial ecosystem) (landside).
Brazil involves all three levels of government, i.e., federal, state, and municipal, in the planning and
implementation of ocean and coastal management.
The Inter-Ministry Commission for Sea Resources (CIRM) is the main implementing arm of ICM in Brazil at
the federal level. CIRM is a ‘multidisciplinary’ unit supervised by the Brazilian Navy. Its secretariat, SECIRM,
gathers and supervises all programme activities of the PNRM, including the National Programme of Coastal
Management (GERCO). CIRM proposes the general rules of the policy, monitors the results, suggests possible
changes to the President, and establishes connections with other ministries, state governments, and the private
sector to attain the necessary support for the execution of the plans and programmes of PNRM. CIRM is
composed of the Office of the Presidency of the Republic and various sectoral ministries with relevant mandates
on the coastal zone. Two other bodies were formed to provide guidance on coordination and integration of
coastal management in Brazil: 1) the Coordination Group of Coastal Management (COGERCO), which was
tasked with defining the decentralized and participatory institutional model for coastal management in the
country; and 2) the Coastal Management Integration Group (GI-GERCO) which ensures that PNGC actions are
compatible with sectoral public policies concerning the coastal zone. The online platform Fórum do Mar (Sea
Forum) was established in 2010 by civil society to provide a broad and participatory platform for contact and
dialogue among government, civil society, and social actors in light of their shared responsibilities.
States exercise autonomy in the execution of regional proposals, as long as these are consistent with the
principles of the national plan. States and municipalities are called on to draw and carry out their respective
plans in compliance with the national objectives established (Law No. 7.661/88) although it is the responsibility
of the state to indicate emergency areas to address. The decentralization means a change of competences in
many respects, especially social, but overall a transfer of autonomy and real decision-making power to the
states, and more specifically to the municipalities. As a consequence of these transformations, local
governments have an expanded presence in the state apparatus and in the definition of public policies. As each
10
city government organizes and develops its own management plan according to the national plan, the exchange
of information and solutions at the state level is facilitated and optimized along with regional analysis and
proposals. Presently, however, local government implementation is hampered by limited resources.
Although in Brazil there is a clear definition of the role that the federal government plays in the establishment
of coastal management policies, there is no established governance model for the roles and functions of, and
interactions between and among states and municipalities in PNGC. Likewise, there is no consistency in the
implementation of coastal management programs among states and among coastal municipalities. In the states,
ICZM programs are predominantly linked to state environmental or planning secretariats or to foundations with
government supervision. In the case of municipalities, coastal management actions are predominantly
conducted by municipal environmental secretariats under the supervision of a municipal environmental council.
The Coastal Ecological Economic Zoning (CEEZ), which is developed and implemented at different levels in
Brazilian coastal states, is the most used instrument of coastal management among the set of instruments
provided by Decree 5.300/2004. It is used in prioritizing uses and activities of the coastal zone, especially for
the conservation and protection of natural resources. It guides the process of territorial planning for the coast,
guaranteeing the conditions for sustainable development, by supporting actions of monitoring, environmental
licensing, and elaboration of economic instruments.
Support for states ICM implementation was provided through the creation, in 1990, of the “Ecosystem
Protection” component of the National Environment Program. Through the National Programme of Coastal
Management, funds were provided as a loan agreement between the Federal Government and the World Bank,
in order to support initial activities at eight state projects focused on the management of the coastal zone.
In 2005, when the Brazilian government issued Decree No. 5.300 which defined the rules for use and
occupation of the coastal zone and the reformulation of management instruments, defining the government
levels for their implementation, no sources of financial resources or support were identified or suggested for the
implementation of this public policy. Up to the present, the Brazilian ICZM program has not received federal
funds for implementation. The initiatives and programs developed in the states and municipalities depend on
their state and municipal budgets each year. Such situation has produced a significant inequality among coastal
states in ICM implementation. Likewise, there are very different situations from year to year in each state,
reflecting not only the national economic situation, but the specific budgetary conditions in the states. This is a
reality repeated at the municipal level, where some budgetary restrictions have caused the discontinuation of
coastal management actions. As a whole, there is considerably weak financial support for Brazilian coastal
management at its federal, state, and municipal levels.

The Brazilian National Programme of Coastal Management does not have a permanent system of education or
development of human resources. In the several years of the program’s existence, there have been temporary
initiatives or initiatives related to disparate objectives, including the following:
With United Nations Train-Sea-Coast Program support, the Federal University of Rio Grande-FURG and the
CIRM had trained managers from federal, state and municipal institutions with responsibilities regarding coastal
management activities (1995-2009).
Through the current Orla Project (Integrated Management of the Marine Shoreline Plan) jointly implemented by
the Ministries of Environment and Planning, training workshops are being conducted with the main local
stakeholders to generate participatory proposals for integrated coastal municipal management plans.
11
The only Master’s program in coastal management in Brazil is being offered by the Federal University of Rio
Grande-FURG. Started in 2009, the program has produced around a hundred dissertations on technical and
governance aspects of coastal management (the program, however, will be terminated in 2020, per the Ministry
of Education).
5. In Conclusion
Assessment of Brazilian ICM policy basis and initiatives indicate that ICM and marine spatial planning
frameworks are appropriate especially with respect to: The integration of landward and seaward issues
management; improvement of the knowledge about coastal and marine resources; and a risk management
approach. Assessment of GERCO and measures it has promulgated indicate that the definition and delimitation
of the coastal zone, the institutional processes of coordination and cooperation within the GERCO, and the
diagnostics and territorial planning of the coastal zone are adequate.
Historically, the country’s policy has followed a top-down approach, though now to a lesser extent. The policy
could be more participatory, especially in the identification and analysis of major issues and problems,
providing opportunities for all stakeholders to shape the policy and participate in the implementation of
strategic actions, thereby leading to increased efficiency.
As is true for the PNRM, it is difficult to assess progress achieved in the implementation of GERCO in Brazil
because targets and success indicators are rarely taken into consideration in the implementation of its plans and
programs--social, economic, and ecological indicators have not been well established. The GERCO still needs
to fully meet the major global goal of ICM with respect to the improvement of the quality of life of coastal
populations that depend on coastal resources and with respect to the environmental conservation of the
Brazilian coastal zone.
1.2.4. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Mexico
1. Introduction
Mexico’s marine area is larger than its terrestrial area and comprises approximately 11,600 km of coastline,
bordering the Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, Pacific Ocean, and Gulf of California. Mexico has extremely
high biodiversity and endemism, making the protection of the coastal zone a high priority. Supported industries
include fishing, shipping and port development, tourism, and energy development. Roughly 14% of Mexicans
currently live near the coast, although the rate of coastal migration is increasing. Integrated Coastal Zone
Management in Mexico took significant steps forward in 2006 with the publication of PNDSOC (National
Environmental Policy for the Sustainable Development of Oceans and Coasts: Strategies for its Conservation
and Sustainable Use), an integrated policy for the environmental sector with regard to oceans and coasts which
was institutionalized in 2018. The policy ensures that each federal agency has the ability to communicate and
collaborate with each other to fulfill its duties, since a lack of coordination among federal agencies has plagued
initiatives in the past. Additionally, PNDSOC was designed to develop integrated management strategies for
Mexico’s coastal zones, strengthen the coordination between relevant federal, state, and local governments and
private institutions, and improve the economic, social, and ecological welfare of coastal regions.
ICZM can be implemented at different levels in Mexico. Considering that the coastal zone is under the
jurisdiction of the federal government, Integrated Coastal Zone Management practices fall under the
responsibilities of the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) in conjunction with
the Inter-Ministries Commission for Oceans and Coasts (CIMARES). CIMARES is ultimately under the
12
jurisdiction of the Secretariat of the Navy. SEMARNAT led the project to prepare PNDSOC, which aimed to
establish an inter- and intra-institutional coordination mechanism for efficiently addressing current and
emerging management and planning issues in the ocean and coastal zones. CIMARES may also implement
ICZM strategies in individual regions of Mexico, such as the Gulf of Mexico region or the Mexican Caribbean
region. At the local level, ICZM may be implemented for any municipality’s coastal zone or even at a smaller
scale, like a city’s waterfront. Each coastal municipality has an environmental or development department that
is granted responsibility over ICZM through signed agreements with the federal government.
Two innovative financing mechanisms being utilized by Mexico include the Temporary Employment Program
(PET), a cash-for-work social safety net program created to assist in economic recovery from natural disasters,
and the Mexican Nature Conservation Fund (FMCN), a private, civil association that directs funding toward
maintaining biodiversity and sustainable resource use throughout Mexico’s coastal region. Over time, the PET
has become a major support mechanism for coastal regions, directing funds towards mangrove and wetlands
hydrological systems restoration, marine mammal and turtle protection, and beach, river, cenotes, and wetlands
clean-up actions. Additionally, the program has been applied to enhancing coastal resilience in the face of
climate change, while some states and municipalities have been able to build and train their own environmental
and Land-Sea Use Plan departments

The Sectoral and Regional Integration division within the Directorate General for Environmental Policy has
emphasized Land-Sea Use Plans as a central component to sustainable management with the goals of green
development and climate change adaptation. LSUPs have evolved to become a key tool for local governments
in addressing risk and vulnerability issues. As a binding instrument, having a published LSUP allows coastal
communities to access resources necessary to prevent and alleviate coastal disasters. LSUPs often involve all
three levels of government, as well as academia, NGOs, organized social groups, stakeholders, and the private
sector, in order to “provide general environmental, social, economic assessment of the threats that each marine
zone faces.”
Quesada et al. (2018) note that Mexico currently faces obstacles in implementing ICM practices, namely the
lack of adequate legal and policy frameworks for ICM and the struggle to enforce existing ICM laws and
policies. It is therefore essential that Mexico place a stronger political emphasis on implementing a robust
policy and legal framework for ICM, in addition to maintaining strong enforcement measures.
1.2.5. Lessons Learned on ICZM in the European Union
1. Introduction
The European Union (EU) is made up of 28 member states and has expansive marine waters which are divided
into different maritime basins or eco-regions with varying characteristics and political realities. The coastal
zone, a strip of land and sea areas of varying width depending on the nature of the environment and
management needs, takes up more space than total land area, contributes roughly 566 billion euros to European
economies, and supports over 200 million European citizens. Prior to the initiation of ICZM, there were
existing networks among the EU regions, especially the four Regional Sea Conventions. The integrated coastal
zone management (ICZM) concept began to form in the EU after the conclusions from the UN Earth Summit of
Rio de Janeiro in 1992 were unveiled beginning with the 1973 Resolution on the Protection of Coastline by the
Council of Europe, followed by the adoption of the 1983 European Regional/Spatial Planning Charter. This was
further followed by a Model Law on coastal protection and a code of conduct for coastal zones. European
Community Action Programmes from 1973 to 1976 and 1977 to 1981, led to the European Coastal Charter in
1981 followed by the European Parliament 1982 Resolution supporting the principles of the Coastal Charter,
13
both of which supported the need for integrated coastal planning. A Demonstration Programme on ICZM was
operated by the EU Commission from 1996 to 1999, a consultative process, to gain consensus on what would be
necessary to initiate ICZM in Europe. This led to a Communication from the Commission to the Council and
the European Parliament on "Integrated Coastal Zone Management: A Strategy for Europe,” and a proposal for
a European Parliament and Council Recommendation concerning the implementation of ICZM in Europe,
which was adopted in 2002. ICZM was confirmed through the 6th Environmental Action Programme of the
European Community, 2002-2012 by the European Parliament and Council.
Focusing on the marine side of the coastal zone, the Commission for Fisheries steered a new Maritime Policy
Task Force to consult widely on a new Maritime Policy in the EU between 2005 and 2009. A consultation
document was produced in 2006 called ‘the Green Paper,’ which led to the Integrated Maritime Policy for the
European Union (IMP) in 2007, called ‘the Blue Book,’ and an action plan. IMP sought to increase coordination
and cooperation, bringing together the experiences and expertise of the various maritime sectors. The
Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DG MARE) set up governance mechanisms to
implement the policy–an Interservice group consisting of the different directorates-general in the maritime
sectors and a Member States expert group were set up for political development of the IMP. 2008 saw the
development of Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and Council, the Marine Strategy Framework
Directive (MSFD), to establish a framework for community action in marine environmental policy and serve as
the first legislation taking into account the EU’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The MSFD is in effect until
2020. In 2012, the Blue Growth Strategy, born out of the ‘Europe 2020’ strategy to explore growth sectors of
the EU economy, helped to launch a second phase of IMP focusing on policy implementation, and reaching full
institutionalization.
As a part of the 2012 Blue Growth strategy, legislation was proposed for maritime spatial planning (MSP) in the
EU. After several years of observation and pilot studies, the European Parliament and the Council adopted
Directive 2014/89 EU, which established a framework for maritime spatial planning, and a tool for facilitating
coherent, integrated, participatory, transparent and transboundary decision making for offshore areas. The
Directive applies to marine waters of Member States, but does not apply to coastal waters or parts thereof
falling under a Member State’s town and country planning. The Directive calls for the establishment of
maritime spatial planning in each State, including taking into account land-sea interactions. When establishing
and implementing maritime spatial planning, Member States need to consider economic, social, and
environmental aspects to support sustainable development and growth in the maritime sector, applying an
ecosystem-based approach to promote the coexistence of relevant activities and uses. The Directive calls for
achieving coherence between maritime spatial planning and other processes, including land-based planning
systems and integrated coastal management programmes, where these exist. Implementation of the Directive,
in terms of the creation of Marine Spatial Plans and their submission to the EU, is expected to take place no
later than March 31, 2021. The Directive was the first in the world to create a mandate at the supranational level
where sovereign countries must coordinate and implement maritime planning.
The EU has various layers of new initiatives and regulations on ICZM and on marine management. The EU
operates as a political arm, disseminating information to the Member States, which reaches down to provinces
and localities. The EU is a supranational entity, but is comparable to a federal state due to its legal framework.
There is a parallel and hierarchical system in the EU, where the EU and Member States have some separate and
some overlapping responsibilities. The EU has the power to bind Member States to certain legislation, however
for ICZM, cooperation between the EU and Member States is imperative. While top-down coordination is at
play, where general guidance is given to Member States from the EU level, Member States largely determine
ICZM specifics at the local level. This is an example of the subsidiarity principle, where authority for action is
developed at the lowest level due to localities being best equipped to handle specific policy. The Lisbon Treaty
14
of 2009, or the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union of 2009, helps to clarify the roles of the EU
versus the Member State level, with EU law taking general priority over the Member States. Starting in 2005, a
regional approach was created in EU, using regional and sea basin strategies to share best practices and
experiences across Member State borders.
Generally in practice, EU funding can help support the delivery of ICZM at local levels. Local integrated
coastal projects have received large amounts of money from EU funds for project support. The regional and sea
basin strategies beginning in 2005 assisted in identifying where EU funds should be targeted. Funding for IMP,
beginning in 2007 was provided by the EU under Regulation 508/2014. In 2014, IMP received a budgetary
allocation of 5 percent of the total volume of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund for the timeframe 2014
to 2020.

Many EU funded projects have supported ICZM education, for example the COREPOINT (Coastal Research and
Policy Integration) project, which aims to advance ICZM in northwest Europe through a network of local
authorities. The European MSP Platform through OURCOAST was implemented between 2009 and 2011, and
ensures that lessons learned and experience from ICZM can be shared and are accessible. A 2010 study by
Ballinger et. al, assessed local ICZM development against the European Progress Indicator using ‘expert’
surveys to assess the operational aspects of ICZM principles to assess ICZM progress. Adherence to ICZM
principles was mixed at the national, regional and local levels, however stakeholder engagement at the local level
showed promise. This study helped assess the operational aspects of ICZM principles to assess ICZM progress.
1.2.6. Lessons Learned on ICZM in South Africa
1. Introduction
The South African coastal zone is home to many of South Africa’s largest cities, and incorporates industries
such as fishing, tourism and recreation, and port development. Direct benefits from coastal goods and services
were estimated to be about 35% of South Africa’s GDP. The National Environmental Management Act
(NEMA) was established in 1998, followed by the 2008 Integrated Coastal Management Act (ICM Act).
NEMA focused on the coordination of the legislative framework regarding environmental policy, while the
ICM Act established definitions, ensured equal access to coastal public property, integrated management, and
prevented coastal degradation. The 2008 ICM Act also required the implementation of Coastal Management
Plans (CMPs) at each level of government, with the National Coastal Management Plan (NCMP) guiding the
Provincial and Municipal Coastal Management Plans (PCMPs and MCMPs).
National and provincial governments in South Africa are tasked with forming their own coastal committees in
charge of implementing the ICM Act of 2008 and the NCMP. While it remains optional for municipalities to
form a coastal committee, most tend to avoid it due to lack of expertise, funding, direction, and motivation from
public demand. In addition to the National Coastal Committee (NCC), the Provincial Coastal Committees
(PCCs), and the optional Municipal Coastal Committees (MCCs), the environmental body MINMEC ensures
intergovernmental coherence of policy by including the Minister of Environmental Affairs, members of the
PCCs, and the South African Local Government Association (SALGA).
The National Coastal Management Plan, prepared in 2014 by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA),
openly discusses the financial shortfalls of ICZM implementation. In acquiring additional funding, the NCMP
recommends emphasizing the potential benefits of effective coastal management, such as poverty alleviation,
15
job creation, and economic development. The document also suggests promoting tourism as a means of
financing other ICM programs via generated taxes. Another avenue would be for the Minister of
Environmental Affairs to levy fees, costs, and rents on public coastal services, although this method would
require approval from the Minister of Finance.

In 2009, the DEA created a Human Capital Development Strategy (HCDS) to combat the diminishing capacity
found in all levels of South Africa’s government, with specific input from provincial and municipal
governments. Looking ahead, the DEA hopes to develop a National HCDS specifically targeting coastal
management. Additionally, they hope to link academic institutions with government officials to provide in-job
training for those in charge of managing the coastal zone. One of the most urgent capacity shortfalls is the lack
of expertise in coastal management, particularly at the municipal level, with some advocating for greater efforts
towards skill-retainment and mentoring of new staff. Others advocate for greater public education and
awareness in the hopes of increasing public demand for coastal management services.
South Africa has one of the most ambitious, innovative, and integrated coastal management frameworks in
existence today. However, the framework alone cannot fulfill its role without adequate support. Many
departments lack the necessary funds and expertise, while some issues regarding jurisdictional responsibilities
have yet to be clarified. Ultimately, proponents of coastal management will require greater political will and
public attention to receive the required resources. As the effects of climate change become more apparent and
undeniable, present action represents the best way to mitigate future catastrophe.
1.2.7. Lessons Learned on ICZM in East Asia
1. Introduction
The Seas of East Asia has a combined coastline of 235,000 km, and close to 72% of the approximately 2 billion
people of the countries bordering the Seas of East Asia live within 100 km of the coastline. Much of the
economic development in the region occurs along the coast, especially that involving marine-related industries
such as oil refineries, petrochemical manufacturing, food processing, shipbuilding and repair. The region’s seas
serve as important conduits for 90% of world trade through shipping and produce 80% of global aquaculture
output and around 60% of the world’s capture fisheries. Ecologically, the region is home to 31% of the world’s
mangroves, 33% of seagrass beds and a third of the world’s coral reefs. ICM in East Asian countries (China,
Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Cambodia, Philippines, Singapore, Indonesia, Timor-Leste, Japan, Vietnam,
Laos) largely developed as a replication of the US experience in coastal management mainly through donor-
assisted initiatives. Local-level proliferation of coastal resource management happening in various countries in
East Asia influenced the adoption of the East Asian Seas Action Plan in 1981 with subsequent establishment of
the UNEP Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) to oversee its implementation. The Action
Plan aimed to provide a framework for a comprehensive and environmentally-sound approach to coastal area
development.
In 1993, the initiation of a GEF/UNDP) Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia
(PEMSEA) project in the region provided the opportunity to develop, verify and demonstrate the effectiveness
of ICM practices and the subsequent replication and scaling up throughout national coastlines. The ability to
continue such project operation over the last 25 years enabled a systematic analysis of the concept and practices
of ICM in more than 67 locations in nine countries in the region under varied socioeconomic, political, cultural,
and ecological settings following a framework and process which allow a systematic, process-oriented,
participatory, planning and management of the coastal areas towards achieving sustainable development goals.
16
Other ICM-related initiatives implemented in the region include: 1) ASEAN-US Coastal Resources
Management Program; 2) ASEAN-Australia Coastal Living Resources Project; and 3) ASEAN-Canada
Cooperative Programme on Marine Sciences. These externally-funded programs provided valuable scientific
foundations for coastal resources management in the region. In addition, ICZM initiatives at the national and
sub-national levels were initiated by non-government and government organizations working with local
government organizations, which mostly involved the establishment of marine protected areas, supported by
external donors.
In 2003, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, DPR Korea, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, RO
Korea, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, and in 2006, Lao PDR and Timor-Leste, adopted the Sustainable
Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia (SDS-SEA), which is a regional marine strategy for achieving
sustainable coastal and ocean development in East Asia. The development of the marine strategy was largely
based on relevant international conventions and other international and regional instruments, as well as the
lessons learned from the coastal and ocean governance experiences in the region – particularly from a decade of
efforts and activities undertaken by the PEMSEA. The development of the SDS-SEA was consultative and by
consensus (2000-2003), followed by the identification of the values that the people of East Asia attach to the
seas and the threats to them. The SDS-SEA, a non-binding instrument, provides a policy framework for
building partnerships, a regional marine environment resource facility, and a regional mechanism to support
existing efforts.
The regional institutional arrangements adopted for SDS-SEA include: The East Asian Seas Partnership
Council, the governing body; the PEMSEA Resource Facility, which is made up of the Secretariat Services and
the Technical Services; the Regional Partnership Fund, which is a trust fund built up from donor contributions
and other income; and the EAS Congress, a venue that occurs every three years for evaluation of progress
achieved in the implementation of the SDS-SEA and for sharing of experiences and exchange of information.
The SDS-SEA allows country partners to comply with the strategy’s provisions according to their respective
capacities. In July 2012, a SDS-SEA Implementation Plan (2012–2016) was adopted to address, among others:
the mainstreaming of SDS-SEA objectives, targets, and actions and converging sectoral initiatives and
programs in priority coastal, marine, and watershed areas within the framework of national ICM programs. A
new implementation plan for 2018-2022 has been adopted in 2018, which is composed of priority management
and governance programs.
The scope of the SDS-SEA is broader than any individual international instrument or regional programme in the
region. Its implementation entails and facilitates partnerships, involving national and local governments, civil
society, the business sector and regional governance mechanisms, such as ACB, ASEAN, ATS, CTI, COBSEA,
ESCAP, FAO/APFIC, IOC-WESTPAC, NOWPAP, SSME, UNDP/RCF, UNEP GPA, The World Bank,
WCPFC, YSLME and others. The Strategy also provides the framework and platform for collaborative and
joint initiatives with UN agencies, international programmes and projects, ODA programmes and international
and national NGOs, such as WWF and IUCN.
Although the ICM policy framework requires working with all administrative levels, the emphasis is on national
governments for overall policy-making, and on local governments, because devolution of authority in a number
of member countries vested the mandate and responsibility for coastal management on local governments, and
also to illustrate local benefits and on-the-ground impacts of sound resource planning and implementation.
The first SDS-SEA Implementation Plan (2012-2016) targeted at least 20% of the region’s coastlines to be
covered by ICM programs by 2015. By June 2015, >14% of the regional coastline coverage was achieved. The
17
new SDS-SEA implementation plan (2018-2022) now has a target of at least 25% of the region's coastline and
contiguous watershed areas to be covered by ICM programs.
External funding (from the US, Australia, and Canada as well as the Asian Development Bank and the World
Bank) supported the implementation of various ICM initiatives carried out within and outside the framework of
the ASEAN. In addition, significant funding from foundations and NGOs supported national and sub-national
initiatives on ICM with counterpart funding from national and local governments took place.
Over the long term, a country- and stakeholder-owned, self-sustaining regional mechanism to implement the
SDS-SEA has been evolving. Meanwhile, the regional partnership mechanism continued to operate with GEF
funding for national and regional implementation of the SDS-SEA and to facilitate the operation of its
implementing mechanism. As well, six participating countries (China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the
Philippines, East Timor, and Singapore) contributed financial support to the PEMSEA Secretariat.
Successful financing mechanisms were adopted in PEMSEA demonstration sites particularly in Xiamen, China
and Batangas, Philippines. In Xiamen, the local government implemented several laws for financing marine
environment protection, ecosystem restoration, disaster risk reduction, and endangered species protection
through mandatory allocation of fiscal budget in the Xiamen's Regulations in the Protection of Marine
Environment. In Batangas, supporting policy and legislations were available for ICM program implementation,
e.g., the national ICM strategy as well as several key sector-specific legislations have provisions supportive of
implementing ICM action plans.
The sustainable financing mechanism for SDS-SEA involves the identification and selection of appropriate
investment options including regular government budget allocation, user fees and taxes, and public-private
partnerships. PEMSEA identified other financial funding flows linked to ICM implementation in the region,
including: (i) philanthropic donations given without return considerations; or (ii) capital in the form of debt,
equity or its hybrid variations along with the requirements and expectations of various investors, donor agencies
and foundations across the grant and investment spectrum. ICM implementation and scaling-up initiatives
through PEMSEA have catalyzed US$9-11 billion in public and private sector finance, which represents a 277
to 1 “return” over a cumulative GEF investment of US$36.1 million since 1993, emphasizing the great value
and impact of ICM in placing the requisite enabling environment and catalyzing ocean finance.

The Association of Southeast Asian Marine Scientists (ASEAMS) was launched by UNEP in 1987 in order to
involve the science community in the management of coastal resources and to provide a mechanism for inter-
regional cooperation. The East Asian Seas Action Plan’s scientific base was considerably broadened with the
training of 500 technicians and scientists from East Asia. The ASEAN initiatives on coastal resources
management included strong components on capacity development, especially to strengthen marine scientific
research in the region. Of particular significance was the development of a manual of survey methods (Dartnall
and Jones 1986) under the ASEAN-Australia Cooperative Program on Marine Science, which was widely used
throughout the region in the assessment of the status of living resources in coastal areas preliminary to
management planning or establishment of marine protected areas.
Training materials and other publications for ICM-related initiatives, especially on fisheries management in the
region were produced by the International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (WorldFish
Center) and other environmental NGOs. A National Course for Integrated Coastal Management in the
Philippines was developed and implemented through the joint efforts of government agencies and NGOs to
build a pool of coastal managers in each region of the country and to develop a training package for local and
18
regional use, with subsequent adaptations, a Training of Trainers, and repackaging and implementation in
Indonesia and Vietnam.
PEMSEA carried out capacity development initiatives to facilitate the implementation of the SDS-SEA and the
continuing efforts to promote and scale up ICM in the region, including: Special Skills Training Programs;
Internship Programs; ICM Graduate Program; ICM Learning Centers; Model ICM Training Manual; Regional
Task Force/National Task Force; Regional Center of Excellence; Workshops/Seminars;
Communication/Publications; The East Asian Seas (EAS) Congress; and the Ministerial Forums. Of particular
importance is the PEMSEA Network of Local Governments (PNLG) for ICM promotion at local governments.
PNLG meets annually for exchange of information and experiences in ICM practices and strengthening of
technical skills and management know-how of the members in addressing emerging issues confronting local
governments with regard to sustainable growth and development.
PEMSEA employs a strategic approach to building the skills of a critical mass of ICM leaders and practitioners
in the East Asian Seas region since its start-up in 1993, which involves: 1) Learning by doing through ICM
program development and implementation; 2) Using working models for ICM training, replication and scaling
up; 3) Mobilizing regional and national task forces and knowledge and skills transfer; and 4) Hands-on training
for young professionals.
5. In Conclusion
The need to expand beyond the pilot areas covered by ICM initiatives in the region as well as take into
consideration climate change and sea-level rise which will further impact on the East Asian coasts are well-
recognized. Several countries in East Asia have developed and implemented national policies, strategies or
action plans for coastal and ocean management, which have adopted ICZM as their national strategy to ensure
the sustainable development of the countries’ coastal and marine environment towards a Blue Economy. In
2012, Ministers from 10 partner countries of PEMSEA signed the Changwon Declaration Toward an Ocean-
based Blue Economy: Moving Ahead with the SDS-SEA. Cross-fora collaboration to expand the Blue Economy
were among the four priority areas for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Ocean and Fisheries
agenda adopted by APEC Ocean and fisheries ministers in 2014. In a region where economic development is on
a fast-track course, ICZM serves a vehicle for ensuring sustainable use as well as conservation of the coastal
environment and resources.
1.2.8. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Japan
1. Introduction
Surrounded completely by oceans, Japan has depended heavily on the oceans for food, transportation, industry,
recreation, trade, and the exchange of people and cultures for many centuries. Half of the population lives in
coastal cities and communities, resulting in 40% of the animal protein intake of the Japanese being provided by
fish and fishery products. The Sea of Japan is rich in fauna and flora, with some 3,100 species of fish and 5,500
species of algae having been identified. In Japan, during the 1990s, there was a realization that some marine
and coastal problems may have been occurring due to adverse effects of sectoral management; hence a
government call for more vertically and horizontally integrated coastal management was made. In 2000, the
former National Land Agency (presently the National and Regional Planning Bureau of the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism) issued “The Guidelines for Comprehensive Management of Coastal
Zones,” which was drawn up as complementing document to “The 5th Comprehensive National Development
Plan,” endorsed by the Cabinet in 1998. It contains well-formulated guidelines based on internationally
recognized common concepts and methods, and emphasized, among others, the participation of the local
communities and stakeholders. Japan entered into a beginning phase of ICM practice in April 2007 through the
enactment of the Basic Act on Ocean Policy, which stipulated the application of the ICZM approach in Article
19
25. This was the first time that the stipulation with cross-sectoral comprehensive ocean management has
appeared in a Japanese statute act. The Basic Act on Ocean Policy aims to “contribute to the sound development
of the economy and society of our State and to improve the stability of the lives of citizenry as well as to
contribute to the coexistence of the oceans and mankind.” Among other sites, ICM is currently being
implemented in six model sites in Japan within the framework of the Partnerships in Environmental
Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA). The Munakata coastal area, characterized by its aesthetic
landscapes, is another site in Japan where the development of local ICM is being promoted through the
formulation of an ICM program which mainly addresses resource use conflicts related to coastal tourism and
recreational use.
In the Japanese framework of coastal management, responsibilities for coastal management are delegated to
various agencies at the national, prefectural, and municipal levels. The history of policy-making and
management towards ICM in Japan shows the importance of not only vertical approaches, but also horizontal
and multi-stakeholder approaches involving governments, NGOs, and the business sector as well as the
application of old and new measures. Recent ecosystem-based management efforts like the fishers-based
watershed management and coastal habitat restoration projects have purposely included those who benefit from
conservation efforts, such as fishers and landowners, in addition to local government, engineering firms, and
other community members.
Contemporary approaches to ocean and coastal policy-making originate from the top, i.e., prescriptions
emanating from global agreements such as the integrated and ecosystem-based management approaches, as well
as from the bottom, e.g., the saotumi approach, which is essentially a community-based approach.
The development of cross-sectoral comprehensive ocean management in Japan was initiated at the national
level. In 2002, the Nippon Foundation prepared the "Proposition on Japanese Ocean Policy in the 21st Century"
which formed the basis for the Basic Act on Ocean Policy, which was passed in 2007. Under the Act, the
headquarters for Ocean Policy has been formed in cabinet, and the secretariat has been placed in the cabinet
office.
No specific section nor bureau has been set for the ICM implementation in most prefectures’ and local
governments’ level. Section or bureau for construction, port and harbor, fisheries and environment act as focal
points and linkages for the implementation of ICM in the national level. To strengthen this link, more
interactions with local stakeholders are needed. For example, the Public-Private Partnership Forum in Tokyo
Bay is one of typical attempt to enhance the link of National-Prefecture-Local interactions.
The satoumi is an ecosystem-based approach adopted by coastal communities in Japan to reconcile sustainable
ecosystem use and conservation of biodiversity. A great variety of conservation measures including centuries-
old (e.g., river basin forestry) as well as recent ones (e.g., seagrass transplants and constructed tidal flats) are
applied. The involvement of local communities and the voluntary contribution of significant labor by ecosystem
users, mostly fishers, are essential to their success.
There is no mechanism for provision of direct financial support from the national government to local
governments devoted to the implementation of their ICM plans, which poses a significant constraint. This
problem is currently being addressed by the provision of subsidies by MLIT, MAF and MOE to local
governments, which are listed in a guide book. Each of these ministries is trying to set a “one stop service”
window for subsidy applications. Local governments are also exerting significant efforts to secure the financial
sustainability of their ICM initiatives through other means. In the Mie prefecture, Shima city, for example,
20
satoumi implementation is supported with an official budgetary allocation. In Bizen city, Okayama prefecture, a
promotion council for branding “satoumi” and “satoyama” as ICM has been established and financed by
“furusato” tax payment (special deductions paid to local governments from hometown taxes). The promotion
council is being restructured as a self-funded private organization.

Population decline, the aging out of the population, and the consequent drop in the number of tax payers result
in the reduction of budget, human resources and activities in local governments in Japan. This situation calls for
more efficient use of budget and human resources and the involvement of stakeholders in ICM, which is being
addressed, inter alia, by capacity development of government officers and increasing education and awareness
of stakeholders. Among the initiatives carried out for this purpose include:
The revision of the Integrated Strategies for Cities-People-Business Creation in 2018 to promote the
strategies and provide support for the needed information base, human, financial and other resources, as
well as capacity development and public education programs.
Some organizations (e.g., The Nippon Foundation, Ocean Alliance of the University of Tokyo, and the
Ocean Policy Research Institute of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation) are currently supporting the
implementation of ocean education.
A Public-Private Partnership Forum has been established through the Tokyo Bay Renaissance Project to
promote public relations and participation in the project.
Science has played a major role in the country’s trajectory of economic development after WWII, particularly in
technology development. Science was also a major driving force in Japan’s ocean governance upon the
recognition that economic development has wrought major damage on the marine environment and its
resources. Capacity for science is an important area of capacity development in ICM for Japan since science is
among the measures emphasized in the first, second and third Basic Plan on Ocean Policy to set out the basic
directions of policy measures that the government should implement. Science also plays an important role in the
establishment of ecosystem-based satoumis.
5. In Conclusion
Japanese ICM has experienced the constraint of sectoral approaches of government system and inadequate
setting of ICM boundaries. Gradual changes have been observed throughout the recent revisions of the Basic
Plan on Ocean Policy, the Basic Plan on Seto Inland Sea, and Action Plans for Bay Renaissance. The more
participation and inclusion of stakeholders are realized, and the more comprehensive planning and project
execution are targeted in line with achievement of the SDGs.
ICM is now recognized as a system for the achievement of sustainable development of the local cities and
towns. In this system, ownership by multi-stakeholders is key to successful implementation, since local
governments are facing serious problems associated with population decline. Private sector involvement in a
multi-stakeholder ICM process is especially important. The satoumi concept is attractive to fishermen and local
residents. To promote its adoption among private companies and industries, utilizing the Blue Economy concept
as a demonstration of the satoumi concept can be a potential solution.
1.3 General Lessons Drawn from the ICZM Case Studies

A central aspect of ICZM must address the interrelationships among federal, state, and local authorities—in the
literature, these are generally referred as a combination of a “two-track” approach—top down and bottom up.
21
The national government must develop the overall national vision about coastal and ocean management,
mobilize the interest and commitment of state authorities; enable through policy guidance, financial support,
and capacity development, the work of state authorities to carry out coastal management processes; and
facilitate, as well, and together with state authorities, the work of local authorities in carrying out national and
state guidance on coastal management, since these are the closest authorities to the people and understand the
special perspectives/needs of their coastal populations.
1.3.1 Delineating federal/state/local interactions

In terms of delineating federal/state/local relationships, it is important to specify, in national legislation and
policy:
1) The authorities and responsibilities vested at each level of government—federal, state, and local—with
specificity as to exactly which level has authority and is responsible for what activities/processes;
2) The amount and modalities of financial support to be passed down to the states and localities from the
national level, including periodicity, procedures and conditions for support, and approaches to periodic
performance evaluation, including yearly monitoring and reporting.
1.3.2. Experiences in Different Nations and Regions

The experience in the different countries that we have examined clearly demonstrate:
1) The advantages of basing ICZM in legislation (passage of a coastal law by the national parliament) rather
than solely on policy pronouncements or on regulatory policies affecting only parts of the relevant coastal and
ocean areas. As an example, US represents a clear case of the value of having a strong national coastal zone
management law—the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, which delineated very specific authorities and
responsibilities among federal and state levels of government and involved continuous financing over time--
which has, over the 47 years of its existence, assured the effectiveness of ICZM in over 90% of US coastal
areas, notwithstanding political cycles and associated changes in policy emphases, over time.
2) The desirability of clearly specifying lead authorities for ICZM at the federal level and at the state level, with
a clearly designated Lead Agency on ICZM at each level of government
In structuring the relationship among Federal, State, and Local entities regarding ICZM, it is important to recall
that ICZM must involve integration along various dimensions: Intersectoral (including all uses of the coastal
zone and ocean); intergovernmental (appropriately linking the federal, state, and local authorities), spatial
(linking land and sea components); and interdisciplinary, bringing together the capabilities of the natural and
social sciences, policy, and law to bear on difficult problems of management facing the coastal zone and ocean.
To achieve these purposes, a strong Lead Agency at the federal and state level is essential. It is desirable, as
well, that the Lead Agency be located at a higher level in the respective governmental bureaucracy to enable it
to play the key coordination role needed of other sectorally-oriented agencies (such as for example, at the
federal level in Brazil, the Brazilian Inter-Ministerial Commission on Sea Resources, or in the US case an
ICZM unit based in a Governor’s office at the State level).
With regard to the local level, in many federal systems, the local level is a creature of the state and therefore, the
relationship established on ICZM between state and local authorities will tend to vary from country to country.
In Brazil, deliberate efforts have been to transfer autonomy and real decision-making power to the states, and
more specifically to the municipalities. As a consequence of these transformations, local governments have an
expanded presence in the state apparatus and in the definition of public coastal policies. As each city
22
government organizes and develops its own management plan according to the national plan, the exchange of
information and solutions at the state level is facilitated and optimized along with regional analysis and
proposals. Presently, however, local government implementation is hampered by limited resources.
In East Asia, ICZM efforts emanating from the regional level through PEMSEA have focused particular
attention on the role of national governments and of local authorities (metropolitan governments) since
metropolitan authorities in this region tend to be strong with significant resources and control over large parts of
the coastal zone.
1.3.3 Achieving Collaboration Among Federal, State, and Local Entities

As a good example of intergovernmental collaboration, in the United States, the 1972 Coastal Zone
Management Act (CZMA) has motivated coastal states to fully participate in the national CZM program with
two incentives–shared and delegated authority and substantial funding for CZM planning and implementation.
Sections 305 and 306 of the CZMA provided to each of the 35 coastal, Great Lake and US Territories multi-
year funding to support a comprehensive planning process in each state that resulted in a set of coastal policies
backed by enforceable regulations that addressed the national goals set out in the CZMA but which were
tailored to each state’s particular coastal resources, institutional and governance arrangements and other
variations. An even more powerful incentive was provided in Section 307, the Federal Consistency provision,
by which after a State CZM Program is approved by both that State and the Federal government, all future
federal activities (defined very broadly) are to be reviewed by the State CZM Program to assure consistency
with the policies and goals of the approved CZM program. This unique delegation of power to create legally
binding “states’ rights” has provided a productive framework for early coordination and successful negotiation
of solutions to federal/state conflicts in the vast majority of decisions ever since.
1.3.4 Ensuring Political Will for ICZM Over Time

Important at the outset of an ICZM program is to develop the requisite political support at both the national and
state levels. For example, at the outset of the Coastal Zone Management Program in the US, extensive political
efforts were made with the Governors in each coastal State to ensure their participation in this voluntary
program, together with frequent contact with the US Congress to ensure continuing political support for the
program. On the other hand, in South Africa, the lack of political will is cited as a major reason for the failures
of the ICM Act. In particular, the failure to appoint a National Coastal Committee has hindered collaboration
among government agencies and prevented agencies from making significant progress in ICM implementation.
Political apathy on ICZM is partly attributed to the much stronger emphasis on economic development along
the coast.
One of the most difficult factors affecting ICZM implementation is that efforts rise and wane given changes in
political priorities with new administrations and new parliaments. Informal mechanisms that may help to ensure
continuing political support of ICZM programs include the establishment of coastal ocean groupings within the
National and State legislatures to ensure continuing political support and corresponding budgets.
Informal mechanisms may help to ensure continuing support of ICZM programs. For example, in the United
States, the Coastal States Organization represents the interests of coastal states in federal matters, provides
information, updates and alerts to coastal states of developments at the Federal level, maintains a national
network for sharing best management practices in the coastal states, and helps to identify emerging issues and
problems and to develop consensus among the coastal states on how to respond to those issues. The Coastal
Zone Canada Association (CZCA) was established to bring together governments, academia, industry,
community and Aboriginal groups to engage in greater cross-sectoral dialogue in support of ICOM and ICZM.
The CZCA organized the first Coastal Zone Canada (CZC) conference in 1994 and has held CZC conferences
23
every two years since. The CZCA was influential in the drafting of the Oceans Act through its 1996 CZC
conference and in the development of the Oceans Action Plan at its 2004 conference.
1.3.5 Phased Development of ICZM

In particular cases, lack of sufficient resources or political will might necessitate starting ICZM on more limited
basis than a truly national program. For instance, the ICZM effort might start with the development of a
demonstration program in a limited number of states. As a factor of available funding, only eight states in Brazil
carried out initial activities focused on the management of the coastal zone with financial support from the World
Bank. In the case of the PEMSEA program in East Asia, there was a deliberate decision to begin ICZM in this
region of 11 nations on a pilot basis to demonstrate the value of various methodologies/approaches. If such an
approach is appropriate, then it should be structured in such a way that it can be scaled up to encompass the
whole coastal zone and corresponding coastal areas in the country.
1.3.6 Measuring Progress on ICZM Implementation

Monitoring and evaluation including the development and application of indicators have to be systematically
incorporated in ICZM plans and programs early in the process in order to demonstrate the feasibility of ICM
strategies and interventions on the ground.
In Canada, the new Oceans Action Plan provided the government’s framework for sustainably developing and
managing Canada’s oceans, but it did not address all the barriers to implementing a national oceans strategy.
These included the need for strong leadership and co-ordination over the long term, adequate funding, and an
accountability framework with appropriate performance measures and reporting requirements.
In Brazil, it is difficult to assess progress achieved in the implementation of the National Programme of Coastal
Management (GERCO) because targets and success indicators are rarely taken into consideration in the
implementation of its plans and programs--social, economic, and ecological indicators have not been well
established. The GERCO still need to fully meet the major global goal of ICM with respect to the improvement
of the quality of life of coastal populations that depend on coastal resources and with respect to the
environmental conservation of the Brazilian coastal zone.
In the East Asian Seas region, the Sustainable Development Strategy from 2003 to 2015 involved four primary
targets, one of which called for a comprehensive progress report every three years on ICZM implementation
and climate change adaptation. More recently, member states have adopted the Post-2015 Strategic Targets,
which outline the key steps for ICZM implementation until 2021. One of those Strategic Targets calls for a
“regional State of Oceans and Coasts reporting system to monitor progress, impacts and benefits, and to
continually improve planning and management of SDS-SEA implementation.”
In South Africa, the ICM Act of 2008 created several goals and deadlines for ICZM implementation in the
future. While some deadlines were missed due to a lack of capacity, this framework allows for a periodic review
of how well the nation is achieving their targets. This case also emphasizes the importance of maintaining an
enforcement mechanism to either ensure that each deadline is met or justify why it is not met. In Mexico, the
Land-Sea Use Plans (LSUPs) act as the best way to measure local progress on ICZM implementation, with each
municipality having the opportunity to form their own plan and more municipalities choosing to do so. National
and state progress is more difficult to measure since the broader ICZM policies like PNDSOC do not typically
set out measurable goals or deadlines.
1.4 Stable and Continuous Sustainable Financing
24
Stable and continuous sustainable financing from public finances is essential for maintenance of an ICZM
program over time.
1.4.1 Experiences in Different Nations and Regions

In the US, for example, this has been achieved through the provision of federal funds, first for creation of the
ICZM program, and then for its implementation. The federal funds have been essential in supporting the US
ICZM efforts over time and, in general, insuring a cooperative model of federalism. While the states have
received core support for ICZM planning and management, according to a formula incorporating such factors as
population size, there have been, as well, competitive federalism opportunities for financing, whereby the states
compete with each other to access special ICZM funds devoted to such special focal areas as achieving regional
ocean planning and management.
In contrast, for example, the Brazilian ICZM program has not, to date, received federal funds for
implementation. The initiatives and programs developed in the states and municipalities depend on their state
and municipal budgets each year. This situation has resulted in a significant inequality among coastal states in
ICM implementation. Likewise, there are very different situations from year to year in each state, reflecting not
only the national economic situation, but the specific budgetary conditions in the states. This is a reality
repeated at the municipal level, where some budgetary restrictions have caused the discontinuation of coastal
management actions. As a whole, there is considerably weak financial support for Brazilian coastal
management at its federal, state, and municipal levels.
A sustainable financing mechanism was included in PEMSEA’s governance framework for an ICM system, to
provide sustained funding for management interventions and maintenance of environmental improvement
infrastructure. The financing mechanism involves the identification and selection of appropriate options for
developing sustainable financing mechanisms including regular government budget allocation, user fees, and
taxes. PPPs were successfully implemented in Xiamen, China, and in Batangas, Philippines. In addition, the
Regional Partnership Fund (RPF) in East Asia is a trust fund built up from donor contributions and other
income arising from the sale of publications, software and services from Technical Services. The Fund is used
for specific activities toward attaining the goals and objectives of PEMSEA.
An innovative financing mechanism, the Coastal Zone Management Trust in Quintana Roo, Mexico aims to
aims to support climate resilience, demonstrating how both public and private capital can be used to preserve
natural assets. The trust fund receives taxes collected by the government from local hotel owners and the
tourism industry in order to continuously maintain the coral reef and local beaches and also buy an insurance
policy. The reef insurance pays out when a certain windspeed crosses the area covered by the insurance to fund
the repair and rebuilding of the coral reef, restoring its protective power and hence its financial benefit to the
local economy. Collectively, through the trust fund-purchased insurance, the local community maintains and
restores an important asset from storm damage and protects its interests through risk transfer. The trust fund
also supports activities to continuously manage and conserve the coastal area–both before and after a storm
event–-so that the reef is better able to withstand storm damage when a hurricane hits.
1.5 Capacity Development

Building of capacity in ICZM among the federal, state, and local entities involved in ICZM implementation, as
well as capacity among user groups and the public, is an essential ingredient of success for ICZM. Here we
highlight examples of effective capacity development as well as delineate unmet capacity development needs.
1.5.1 Experiences in different nations and regions

Organizations that Effectively Contribute to CZM Capacity Building–United States
25
In the broader context of coastal management in the US, there are several organizations beyond the Federal
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and State CZM Programs that together help build
technical and staff capacity on an ongoing basis. The Coastal States Organization represents the interests of
coastal states in federal matters, provides information, updates and alerts to coastal states of developments at the
Federal level, maintains a national network for sharing best management practices in the coastal states, and helps
to identify emerging issues and problems and to develop consensus among the coastal states on how to respond
to those issues. Another independent government agency, the Coastal Services Center, provides a wide range of
technical and scientific support to all coastal states including training and other capacity building activities. In
addition, the Sea Grant Program, which is a consortium of university-based research entities, conducts coastal
and ocean research on issues that are identified as priority problems for coastal managers. Lastly, the Coastal
Society, is an informal association of coastal management practitioners, students and many others who share an
interest in coastal management and are willing to share lessons learned, mentor students, and explore new ideas
in coastal management.
Information Networks that Effectively Promote Ocean and Coastal Management–Canada

Increased partnership with academia, international scientific organizations, and sister agencies in other
governments has helped to facilitate and develop tools for the application of ecosystem-based considerations of
ocean and coastal issues in Canada. This partnership has also helped to build scientific advisory peer review
processes to support ocean managers. In 1993, the Coastal Zone Canada Association (CZCA) was established to
bring together governments, academia, industry, community and Aboriginal groups to engage in greater cross-
sectoral dialogue in support of ICOM and ICZM. The CZCA organized its first Coastal Zone Canada (CZC)
conference in 1994 and has held CZC conferences every two years since. The CZCA was influential in the
drafting of the Oceans Act through its 1996 CZC conference and in the development of the Oceans Action Plan
at its 2004 conference.
The implementation of the Oceans Act and Oceans Action Plan in Canada, sought to improve information-
sharing through connecting information networks, to promote innovation and new technologies. The Ocean
Management Research Network was established in 2001 to bridge the gap between natural and social sciences. In
2008, the Canadian Healthy Oceans Network a university-government partnership focused on conservation and
sustainable ocean use in Canada was created. Investment in capacity and education have helped to implement
integrated management and marine conservation under the Oceans Act. Under the Oceans Protection Plan, the
government is investing to engage with Indigenous and coastal communities to support regional planning that
ensures environmental, traditional knowledge, and cultural knowledge to identify appropriate sites of refuge.
National and Regional Initiatives to Develop Capacity in East Asia

The initiatives of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) with external funding support from the
United States, Canada, Australia and other donor countries as well as those by the International Center for Living
Aquatic Resources Management provided valuable scientific foundations for the management of fisheries,
coastal resources and the coastal environment in the region. In addition, ICZM efforts at the national and sub-
national levels which were initiated by non-government and government organizations working with local
government units, had strong capacity development components especially in the establishment of marine
protected areas. These initiatives altogether helped develop capacity for ICM in various countries in the region.
In Japan, science was a major driving force in Japan’s ocean governance and is among the measures emphasized
in its Basic Plan on Ocean Policy.
The Partnership for Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA), facilitates information
dissemination and capacity building; provides technical services for projects and programs, conducts training
courses, and provides technical assistance to participating countries. A highly successful activity has been the
training of local government officials in ICZM in the region, the fostering of periodic interaction among the local
26
officials through the PEMSEA Network of Local Governments, and the conduct of the triennial East Asian Seas
Congress.
Capacity and Resources Constraints in South Africa. In South Africa, the Department of Environmental Affairs
aims to develop a National Human Capacity Development program specifically focused on coastal management.
The Department hopes to link academic institutions with government officials to provide “in-job training” for
those in charge of managing the coastal zone. Quesada et al. (2018) specifically cited the provincial
governments as lacking employees with critical expertise in the field of coastal zone management. It is most
likely the case that municipal governments are experiencing similar issues as provincial governments to a greater
extent since local leaders tend to have fewer resources available to them.
1.6. Putting it All Together

Around the world, we have seen instances of nations adopting various layers of policy and law and
accompanying activities focused on different aspects of ocean and coastal management, generally first starting
with the land side of coastal areas, then adding different layers of policy and law—such as management of the
marine side of the coastal zone, encouraging Blue Economy approaches, applying marine spatial planning
approaches, addressing the consequences of climate change on coastal areas and oceans. Sometimes these
efforts are disconnected from one another and do not follow a similar pattern of having existing ICZM agencies
and authorities implement the new initiatives. A major question in these cases is how do the various layers of
policy and law become integrated into a coherent whole. This is indeed one of the major challenges in the next
phase of ICZM.
We turn now to Chapter 2 to a discussion of ICZM issues and approaches in India, focusing, in particular, on
the next phase of ICZM development in India, and drawing, as appropriate, lessons that have been learned from
the experiences of ICZM in the various countries and regions discussed in this chapter.
Chapter 2
INDIA: EVOLUTION OF INTEGRATED COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT (ICZM)
AND STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS FOR THE WAY FORWARD
This chapter begins with a brief background of the coastal resources and threats in the coastal areas in India, the
institutional and regulatory framework, followed by a discussion of key lessons learned from the global review
of ICZM and their relevance to India. The international case studies of ICZM are provided in Volume II of this
report and brief summaries of the studies are provided in Chapter I of this volume. The discussion is followed
by strategic directions for ICZM in India including a potential governance model for enhanced efficiency in
coastal and marine resources management.
2.1. Background
The coastline of India is about 8,000 kilometers including the islands of Andaman and Nicobar and
Lakshadweep. More than 250 million people live in nine coastal states and four union territories2. The coastal
areas play a critical role in contributing to the national and local economies. India’s coast includes seventy-
seven cities of which Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Kochi, and Visakhapatnam are among the largest and most
densely populated urban cities in South Asia. Major industries including petrochemicals, shipbuilding, and
power plants (coal, oil gas and nuclear energy) are located on the coast. 95 percent of India’s trade by volume
and 70 percent by value takes place through maritime transport. Coastal tourism is one of the fastest growing
2
Coastal States: Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal and Union
Territories: Puducherri, Daman and Diu, Andaman and Nicobar islands and Lakshadweep.
27
industries in India contributing to about 6.23 percent to the national GDP providing employment to 8.78 percent
of the country’s labor force. Coastal areas include more than 1382 islands, 1093 beaches, coral reefs, seagrass
beds, saltmarshes, turtle nesting grounds, and 6,740 km2 of mangroves, including the Sundarbans which are
among the largest estuarine mangrove forests in the world.
Unsustainable resources exploitation and development and land-based sources of marine pollution are some of
the major threats to coastal waters and resources. These problems will likely be exacerbated by sea level rise
and climate change. India has already been identified as one of the most vulnerable countries to the problems
posed by accelerated sea level rise, and other climate hazards including intense tropical cyclones and associated
storm surges and ocean warming. Recently Cyclone Fani barreled through coastal Odisha, causing widespread
destruction. Over-exploitation of groundwater is resulting in increased salinity turning fertile coastal lands into
wasteland. The destruction of mangroves can compound these climate impacts.
2.2. Institutional and Regulatory Framework
2.2.1. Indian Constitution and Coastal management

At its inception, the Constitution of India, 1950 did not have any explicit reference to environmental protection.
Following the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment (1972) and the growing awareness of the
need to protect the environment, the Parliament of India passed the Forty Second Constitution Amendment
Act, 1976 which succeeded in greening the Constitution to a large extent. This amendment made far-reaching
changes to the scheme of federal distribution of legislative powers including the transfer of legislative authority
for environment protection to the national government. Based on this authority, the central government enacted
the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Act is an umbrella statute, an enabling law, which confers wide
powers on the Union executive to make delegated legislation on almost every aspect of the environment. The
centralization of authority resulted in divesting the States of their authority to legislate on matters relating to
protection of the environment. In S Jagannath v Union of India, (AIR 1997 SC 811) relating to a legislative
conflict between state laws on coastal aquaculture and the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification of
1991, the Supreme Court held in favor of the national government. There are no direct or specific laws on
coastal management at the State or UT level, and no provision for formulating legislation for coastal resource
management at the state/UT level in Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) 2019. This issue is discussed in more
detail later in this chapter.
2.2.2. Decentralization and Local Self Government

India has an established a robust system of local self-government via the 73rd and 74th constitutional
amendments.3 These amendments created a third tier of institutions for good governance at the panchayat and
municipal levels which included in the 11th and the 12th Schedules the authority for land improvement,
fisheries, minor irrigation, drinking water, rural housing and poverty alleviation. These provisions are relevant
in that they can spur the development and implementation of an ICZM agenda. In almost all states including the
coastal states, the state governments have enacted legislation that have devolved considerable powers to enable
the panchayats and municipalities to act as viable units of local self-government.
2.2.3. Grants-in-Aid
3
73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments were passed by Parliament in December, 1992. These amendments added two new parts
to the Constitution. The 73rd Amendment added Part IX titled “The Panchayats” and 74th Amendment added Part IXA titled “The
Municipalities”. www.pbrdp.gov.in/documents/6205745/98348119/Panchayati%20Raj%20System
28
Part XII of Article 275 (1) of India’s Constitution provides for grants to be made by the Center to the States
introducing the concept of ‘grants-in-aid’.4 Parliament may allocate different grants-in-aid to different States
after considering the recommendations of the Finance Commission. The Finance Commission makes
recommendations for grants-in-aid to the States out of the Consolidated Fund of India. Grants may be
transferred for enhancement of human development indices such as education, income generation, health
irrigation, roads, bridges, forests, electrification, communication, agriculture, water harvesting, resettlement of
displaced persons, tribal land management etc. Provision is also made for other grants: “The Union or a State
may make any grants for any public purpose, notwithstanding that the purpose is not one with respect to which
Parliament or the Legislature of the State, as the case may be, may make laws”. These financial provisions
empower the Central Government to create specialized coastal management programs that involve substantial
funding provided the same is for a public purpose.
2.2.4. Evolution of ICZM: Legislative/Regulatory Framework
The need to protect India’s coastline was realized in 1981 with the directive that the coastal zone up to 500
meters from the high-tide line (HTL) be kept free from all development activities. This 1981 Directive was
formalized in 1991 into a Notification called the CRZ Notification which was a piece of delegated legislation
brought out under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986. CRZ 1991 established a zoning scheme (CRZ-I,
CRZ-II, CRZ-III, and CRZ-IV) with restrictions on establishing or expansion of industry. The 1991 notification
was amended about 25 times pursuant to requests from various stakeholders. Subsequently, a new notification
was issued in 2011 based on the recommendations made by the committee chaired by Dr M S Swaminathan on
coastal regulation. This 2011 CRZ Notification aimed at ensuring livelihood security of the fishing communities
as well as other local communities who inhabit the coastal areas, conserving and protecting coastal areas and
promoting development in a sustainable manner based on scientific principles. The CRZ area was classified as
CRZ-I (ecologically sensitive areas), CRZ-II (built-up areas), CRZ-III (rural areas) and CRZ-IV (water areas).
.
In order to address the concerns related to coastal environment and to ensure sustainable coastal development,
the Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Climate Change (MOEFCC) constituted a Committee under the
Chairmanship of Dr. Shailesh Nayak. On the basis of the report from the Shailesh Nayak Committee, the CRZ,
2018 was issued, subsequently notified as the CRZ 2019. Some differences between CRZ 2011 and CRZ 2018
are outlined in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1. Differences between CRZ 2011 and 2019

CRZ 2011 CRZ 2019
CRZ area in relation to land alongside CRZ area in relation to land alongside tidally
tidally influenced water bodies influenced water bodies - Reduced to 50 m
- 100 m
CRZ-I – areas that are ecologically CRZ I - environmentally most critical
sensitive and the geomorphological Sub-classifies CRZ-I into CRZ-IA and CRZ-IB
features which play a role in
maintaining the integrity of the coast
4
Grants-in-aid are given by the Union Government to State Governments and/or Panchayati Raj Institutions. Union Government also
gives substantial funds as grants-in-aid to other agencies, bodies and institutions. Similarly, the State Governments also disburse
grants-in-aid to agencies, bodies and institutions such as universities, hospitals, co-operative institutions and others. The grants so
released are utilized by these agencies, bodies and institutions for meeting day-to-day operating expenses and for creation of capital
assets, besides delivery of services. /cag.gov.in/sites/default/files/audit_report_files/Union_Finacne_Report_50_2015_chap_5_0.pdf
29
CRZ-1A covers ecologically sensitive areas
Sub-classified as CRZ IA and IB – (ESAs) -only activities like eco-tourism subject to
fairly strict controls on new an eco-tourism plan are allowed. Special
construction; activities such as conservation requirements are specified for
reclamation not permitted mangroves, salt marshes etc.
The CRZ-I B is the inter-tidal zone (the area that

falls between the LTL and HTL). Activities like
land reclamation, facilities for storage of
petroleum products and liquefied natural gas,
modernization of fish processing facilities and
discharge of treated wastewater or cooling water
from thermal power plants are permitted.
CRZ - III predominantly rural areas CRZ-III is further sub-classified into CRZ-III A
Up to 200m from HTL on landward side(If population density is more than 2,161 per sq.
in the case of seafront and 100m on km.), NDZ =50 m after CZMP approval, if not
tidally influenced creeks 200m and CRZ-III B (If population density is less
than 2,161 per sq. km.). NDZ = 200m
Vacant plots beyond NDZ can be developed for
tourism development, airport development, ‘home
stay’ for fisherfolk, limestone and atomic mineral
mining.
CRZ-IV – also categorized into IVA, The CRZ-IV is categorized into: (a) CRZ- IV A
IVB which is the water and sea bed area from LTL up
to 12NM into the sea; and (b) CRZ- IV B which is
the water and underlying sea bed area between the
LTL of the bank of tidal influenced water bodies
to the LTL on the opposite side of that bank.
Traditional fishing; power generation through
non-conventional energy sources; establishment of
weather radar and ocean observation platforms;
facilities for discharging treated effluents into the
water; exploration and extraction of oil and natural
gas; and projects of the Department of Atomic
Energy are allowed
Identifies certain coastal areas as “Areas requiring
special consideration”. Included under this
category are “Critically Vulnerable Coastal
Areas”, “Backwater islands and islands along the
mainland coast” and the “CRZ falling within the
municipal limits of the megapolis, Greater
Mumbai”.
2.2.5. Definition of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ)
The CRZ 2019 defines the coastal regulation zone which is 500m landward from HTL, between LTL and HTL
and up to territorial water limits. Additional elements include, the “intertidal zone” (the land area between the
HTL and the Low Tide Line (LTL)); and the water and the sea-bed area between the LTL to the territorial water
limit (12 NM) in the case of the sea.
.
30
2.2.6. Zonation under CRZ 2019
CRZ 2019 classifies the CRZ into five categories: namely, the CRZ-I, CRZ-II, CRZ-III, CRZ IV and finally,
Areas that Require Special Consideration. Prohibited activities include: (i) setting up of new industries, new
fish processing units and expansion of existing ones; (ii) situating port and harbor projects in high eroding
stretches of the coast; (iii) manufacture or handling of oil, the storage or disposal of hazardous substances;
(iv) land reclamation; (v) bunding or disturbing the natural course of seawater, and the discharge of
untreated waste and effluents. Table 2.1 outlines some of the key differences between CRZ 2011 and CRZ
2019.
2.2.7. Permitted Activities Under CRZ 2019

Development activities in the CRZ-I and the CRZ-IV are subject to clearance by MOEFCC, based on the
recommendation of the concerned State Coastal Zone Management Authority (SCZMA). Development
activities in the CRZ-II and CRZ-III areas are subject to clearance by the respective SCZMA. Any project
subject to the provisions of the CRZ 2019 as well as the EIA notification, 2006 require a composite
Environmental and CRZ clearance. CRZ, 2019 spells out the detailed procedure for CRZ clearance and
post-clearance monitoring which requires the project proponent to submit half-yearly compliance reports in
respect of the stipulated terms and conditions relating to the environmental clearance. These compliance
reports should be placed in the public domain.
CRZ 2019 permits temporary tourism facilities such as shacks, toilet blocks, changing rooms, drinking water
facilities on beaches within 10 meters of the water-line. State and town planning authorities are empowered to
grant permission. Temporary tourism facilities are also permitted in NDZ of the CRZ-III areas. In the mangrove
buffer, laying of pipelines, transmission lines, construction of road on stilts, etc, that are required for public
utilities are permitted.
2.2.8. The Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP)

CRZ 2011 required all states to prepare a CZMP. All developmental activities are regulated by State
Government, UT administration, local authority within the framework of an approved CZMP. There are
detailed rules regarding its preparation and approval. The CZMP draft has to: (i) be prepared in 1:25,000
scale map identifying and classifying the CRZ areas within the respective territories; (ii) demarcate HTL
and the LTL; (iii) 200 meters and 500 meters from HTL, as applicable in the various CRZ categories; (v) ;
(vi) ESAs or the CRZ-IA areas should also be clearly demarcated on the CZM Maps.
The draft CZMP needs to be: (i) submitted by the State Government or the Union territory to the concerned
State Coastal Zone Management Authority (SCZMA) for appraisal; (ii) publicized and suggestions and
objections should be received in accordance with the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; (iii) Public
hearing is to be held at the district level by the concerned CZMA; (iv) revised based on the suggestions and
objections received; (v) submitted to MOEFCC for approval; (vi) approved CZMP shall be placed on the
website of MOEFCC as well as on the websites of State or Union Territory CZMA. The CZMP is revised
once every five years.
2.2.9. Enforcement
MOEFCC, State Governments, UT Administrations, NCZMA and the concerned State or UT CZMA have
powers of enforcement under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. However, it is the concerned State
Government or the UT CZMA that is primarily responsible for enforcing and monitoring the CRZ 2019. To
assist them in this task, the State Government and the UT administration can constitute District level
Committees under the Chairmanship of the concerned District Magistrate comprising of at least three
representatives from local traditional coastal communities that includes fisherfolk.
31
2.2.10. Institutional Framework
National Coastal Zone Management Authority (NCZMA). The current NCZMA was constituted under the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 by Notification dated October 6, 2017 to be functional for a period of two
years. NCZMA is mandated to: (i) co-ordinate the actions of the State Coastal Zone Management Authorities
(SCZMAs) and the Union territory Coastal Zone Management Authorities (UTCMAs); (ii) examine the proposals
for changes or modifications in the clarification of Coastal Zone Areas and in the Coastal Zone Management
Plans; (iii) review cases involving violations of the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act (MOEFCC,
2017). The powers and functions of this Authority are subject to the supervision and control of the Central
Government.
32
The Society of Integrated Coastal Management (SICOM), under MOEFCC, has a vision for vibrant, healthy
and resilient Coastal and Marine Environment for continuous and enhanced outflow of benefits to the Country
and the Coastal Communities5. SICOM is the National Project Management Unit of the World Bank supported
ICZM project and has the mandate for strategic planning, management, execution, monitoring and
implementation of the project. SICOM supports the participating states with preparation for the second phase of
the World Bank supported ICZM.
The National Center for

Sustainable Coastal Management
(NCSCM), established under Box 2.1. Powers and Functions of SCZMA (Example
MOEFCC assists in the protection, from the State of Gujarat)
conservation, rehabilitation, GSCZMA has the power to: (i) to take measures to protect and
management of the coast. It advises improve the quality of the coastal environment; (ii) prevent,
the State/Union Territory abate and control environmental pollution; (iii) inquire into cases
governments and other of alleged violations; (iv) identify economically important
stakeholders on policy and stretches in the CRZ and prepare Integrated Coastal Zone
scientific matters relating to ICZM. Management Plans (ICZMP) for the same. The powers and
The vision of NCSCM is to functions of the Authority are subject to the supervision and
“promote sustainable coasts control of the Central Government. Specific measures include:
through increased partnerships, (i) Examine proposals for changes or modifications in
conservation practices, scientific classification of CRZ areas and in the CZMP and make specific
research and knowledge recommendations to the NCZMA
management for the benefit and (ii)Inquire into cases of alleged violations of the provisions of the
well-being of current and future Environment (Protection) Act;
generations”. (iii) Review cases involving violations of the provisions of the
Environment (Protection) Act and refer such cases, with
State Coastal Zone Management comments, to the NCZMA for review.
Authority (SCZMA). The (iv) identify ESAs in the CRZ and formulate area-specific
SCZMAs were established by the management plans for such identified areas.
national government acting on the (v) identify coastal areas highly vulnerable to erosion or
mandate under section 3 (1) and (3) degradation and formulate area specific management plans for
of the Environment (Protection) such identified areas.
Act, 1986. The constitution and (vi) identify economically important stretches in CRZ and
functions of SCZMAs are similar. prepare ICZMP for the same.
For discussion in this section, the (vii) submit the plans prepared by it to the NCZMA for review
Gujarat State Coastal Zone and approval.
Management Authority (viii) examine all projects proposed in CRZ and give
(GSCZMA) is selected as an recommendations, before they are sent to MOEFCC.
example. Powers and key functions (ix) ensure compliance with all specific conditions that are
of the Authority are outlined in Box stipulated in the CZMP
2.1. The Chairman of the (x) furnish report of its activities at least once in six months to
GSCZMA is the Principal the NCZMA.
Secretary, Forest and Environment
and members include high ranking
officials in different agencies in the
State of Gujarat. The current institutional framework
for ICZM is outlined in Figure 2.1. below.
5
http://sicom.nic.in/about-us/about-sicom [Sidebars are great for calling out important points from your
text or adding33
additional info for quick reference, such as a
schedule.
They are typically placed on the left, right, top or bottom of the
page. But you can easily drag them to any position you prefer.
Figure 2.1. CRZ Centre-State Relations
2.3. Implementing ICZM
ICZM was adopted by India in response to increasing population pressure, rapid urbanization, degradation of
coastal areas, and missed economic opportunities. The Government of India (GOI) launched the ICZM project
in 2010 with support from the World Bank. Pilot activities were initiated in the States of Gujarat, Odisha, and
West Bengal. The objectives of the Project were: (i) to develop institutional capacity to implement the CRZ,
2011; (ii) address issues relating to climate change, especially sea level rise; (iii) conserve and protect the
fragile coastal ecosystems; and (iv) address coastal pollution and improve the livelihood of local communities.
Key outcomes of the project include: the establishment of SICOM with the responsibility of: (i) coordinating
efforts of various Ministries, States and UTs; (ii) project management including procurement, and financial
management; (iii) capacity building for participating States and UTs; and (iv) monitoring and evaluation.
2.3.1. The National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Zone Management

The National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Zone Management (NCSCM)6 was set up as an autonomous body
that functions under the MOEFCC in 2011. It has a key role in: (i) promoting integrated and sustainable
management of coastal and marine areas; (ii) advising the Union, the States and Union Territory Governments
and other associated stakeholders on policy, and scientific matters relating to ICZM. Services to the States
include: (i): shoreline change assessment; (ii) coastal vulnerability assessment; (iii) Coastal and marine
environmental monitoring; (iv) mapping of coastal land use land cover; (v) preparation of CZMP; (vi)
assessments of carrying capacity studies on tourism, islands and coastal areas; (vii) CRZ maps at state and local
levels; (viii) capacity building in ICZM; and (ix) Decision Support System for Coastal Management. Major
6
http://www.ncscm.res.in/
34
outputs of NCSCM in implementing CRZ 2019 include: (a) successful completion of Hazard line demarcation;
and (b) demarcation of boundaries of the Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESAs) along the entire coast of India.
2.3.2. NCSCM and the Network of Universities

Fourteen institutions have formed a consortium with NCSCM, and the Anna University in Chennai acts as the
hub to guide and coordinate the implementation of various ICZM approaches. The Center is developing a
repository of information and knowledge on ICZM practices in India and elsewhere.
2.3.3. ICZM implementation at the State Level
Participating States received support from the MOEFCC in the form of grants. States also contributed a
percentage towards the budget. Specific projects were implemented by different State agencies (shoreline
protection works by the State Water Resources Department; eco-tourism projects by the Department of
Tourism; mangrove plantation by the State Forest Department; livelihood improvement by the Fisheries
Department, Industries Department). Key interventions included: (i) establishment of a sewage treatment plant
to abate the pollution load in the Gulf of Kachch; 16,500 ha of mangrove plantation in the Gulf of Kachch
region, coral reef regeneration, mangrove and shelterbelt plantation, eco-tourism and the establishment of a
Marine Research, Conservation and Information Centre cum Marine Oceanarium in the State of Gujarat; (ii)
conservation of marine biodiversity and archaeological heritage sites, shoreline protection, livelihood support
for fishing villages in the periphery of the Chilika Lake and the Gahirmatha Wildlife Sanctuary; cyclone
shelters; and environmental sanitation in Odisha State; (iii) mangrove plantation, shoreline protection for the
Digha beach and Sagar Island; building a sewerage system, environmental sanitation, solid waste management;
improving the infrastructure of the fish auction center; connecting Sagar Island to the grid; and promoting
livelihood security in Sagar Island in West Bengal.
2.3.4. The National Coastal Mission (NCM) of 2017

NCM was established under the National Action Plan on Climate Change. Some of the primary objectives of
this mission are to introduce marine spatial planning; protect highly eroding shorelines; pollution abatement;
rejuvenate low-lying coastal areas for aquaculture and agriculture; enhance sewage and effluent treatment
capacity; and enhance scientific knowledge. NCM: (i) underscores the need to harmonize the principles of
ICZM into the development, protection, and conservation of coastal spaces; (ii) articulates ICZM as one of
India’s climate adaptation strategies; (iii) articulates India’s vision as to transform (in a phased manner) the
country’s coastal marine sector into the world’s best managed productive ecosystem; (iv) calls for developing
carbon neutral villages through green spaces, water and salinity management, cleanliness and hygiene
management, energy management to provide sustainable livelihoods through eco-friendly agriculture and
fisheries practices.
While the Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change monitors the mission’s progress, it is the MOEFCC
which has the responsibility to ensure the overall co-ordination of the NCM. Specifically, at the national level,
the mission is co-ordinated by SICOM and at the State level, Steering Committees are to be constituted under
the chairmanship of Chief Minister/Chief Secretary. There is also to be a State Mission Director who will chair
the State Mission Management Units (SMMUs) with members from relevant departments/partners. The Mission
activities at the District and Village/City level, is facilitated by the District Collector and Gram
Panchayat/Urban Local Body respectively with multi-stakeholder participation. The Mission implementation
would spread over 10 years (2019-2020 to 2028-2029).
35
2.4. Lessons Learned from the Global Review of Experience in ICZM and Relevance to
India
This section outlines lessons from the review of global experience of ICZM7 that are most relevant to India and
which merit consideration by GOI, towards greater efficiency in ICZM implementation. The discussion includes:
the time frame for achieving benefits and outcomes from ICZM; governance models that support ICZM; roles
and responsibilities of different tiers of government; capacity building for all levels of government and in coastal
communities; and financial sustainability. The categories selected are considered key elements for successful
ICZM.
2.4.1. ICZM is a long- term process and Horizontal and Vertical Integration Evolve in Stages
The longest experience in ICZM is in the USA with the enactment of the Coastal Zone Management Act, 1972.
In Canada the first attempt to coordinate the various levels of government was the 1987 Oceans Policy and the
Oceans Act was adopted in 1996 which provides the guiding principles on ICZM. In East Asia ICZM has
evolved over 20 years. In the European Commission (EC), interest in assessing issues in the coastal areas and
identifying responses started in 1973. From 1996 to 1999, thirty-five demonstration projects were launched to
test new models and solutions for ICZM which led to the adoption of “Integrated Coastal Zone Management: A
Strategy for Europe,” in 2002. In Brazil, the National Coastal Management Plan (PNGC) was developed in
1988, which was superseded by the PNGC II and the Federal Action Plan (PAF). This was revised in 2005 to
include territorial planning; conservation and protection of natural and cultural heritage; monitoring and control.
Mexico also has more than 30 years’ experience with coastal management, with the Federal Oceans Law of
1986, governing national boundaries and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in accordance with international law.
ICZM in India has evolved over a period of over 10 years to transition from a top-down regulatory
approach to a more science-based management approach. In keeping with GOI’s emphasis on
decentralization, the next phase of ICZM should focus on strengthening the mandates and building
capacity at sub-national levels. Devolving greater decision-making power combined with improvements
in capacity building and finance will lead to greater progress in ICZM.
2.4.2. ICZM and Federalism

Cooperative Federalism is a model of intergovernmental relations that recognizes the overlapping functions of
the national and state governments. Cooperative federalism asserts that governmental power is not concentrated
at any governmental level or in any agency. Instead, the national and state governments share power8. In
Cooperative Federalism, national and state governments are simultaneously independent and interdependent
with an overlap of functions and financial resources. Authority is horizontally organized for efficiency in
outcomes. In most of the countries with a federal system of governance that were reviewed, cooperative
federalism is predominant in the governance of coastal and marine resources.
In the United States, the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) motivated coastal states to fully
participate in the national CZM program with two incentives–shared and delegated authority and substantial
funding for CZM planning and implementation. Sections 305 and 306 of the CZMA provided multi-year
funding to coastal states for comprehensive planning process that resulted in a set of coastal policies backed by
enforceable regulations. The regulations addressed the national goals set out in the CZMA but were tailored to
each state’s particular circumstances. In Canada, within a cooperative federalism model, the federal government
7
Volume II of this report contains the full case studies which are summarized in Chapter 1 of this Volume (Volume I).
8
http://encyclopedia.federalism.org/index.php/Cooperative_Federalism
36
has primary jurisdiction over Canada’s ocean areas and the provincial level has expanded landward jurisdiction
and on the seabed within the coastal inter-tidal area within the province9. Authority for coastal land planning
resides with the provinces. Authority to regulate development, address natural hazards, and respond to sea-level
rise are at the provincial and municipal levels of government, although these are often done with assistance from
federal departments.
In India, the model of governance as outlined in CRZ 2019 is one of cooperative federalism. However, there is
an increasing discussion of competitive federalism to promote a more growth and business-oriented pitch.
Under this model, State-level changes in regulation are encouraged. States that align their legal and regulatory
policies to echo the central government’s development themes will have an edge. Competitive federalism is
welcomed by many States and industry on the supposition that healthy competition among states will open up
more investment opportunities and lead to significant job creation and economic development. Some potential
risks in this model include the possibility of states creating whole new sets of policies and regulations with great
variance among states which could result in increased complexity and bureaucracy.
ICZM in India is through a Cooperative Federalism model which needs to be strengthened by: (i) providing
greater authority to the State, UT and Districts to regulate the use and management of coastal and marine
resources within their jurisdictions; (ii) identifying a conflict resolution mechanism at State/UT and District
levels; and (iii). Enhancing capacity at sub-national levels to be more competitive in mobilizing public and
private capital to support ICZM over the long term. A blend of cooperative and competitive federalism is
in keeping with the government’s policy of greater decentralization. Capacity needs to be developed at sub-
national levels to be ready to participate in such an approach.
2.4.3. Decentralization and Clarity in the Institutional Framework

One of the fundamental principles in ICZM is that the process should be public-oriented and participatory in
nature. Almost all the ICZM cases reviewed emphasize the need for harmony between the top-down and the
bottom-up dimensions of ICZM. Clarity in policy, legislative and institutional frameworks is also a critical
element of success in ICZM. In Mexico, the lack of adequate legal and policy frameworks posed a serious
challenge in enforcing existing ICZM laws and policies. A robust policy and legal framework for ICZM was
recommended by Quesada et al (2018). In South Africa, Sowman and Malan, (2018) note that the failure to
appoint a National Coastal Committee had hindered collaboration among government agencies preventing
significant progress in ICZM implementation.
In the USA, the CZMA specifies that the federal level is responsible for: (a) inter-agency coordination; (b)
federal grants to the states; (c) training; (d) setting national goals for the development of state CZM; (e)
India has no specific provision for coastal states, UTs and Districts to enact laws relating to the use and
management of coastal resources. However, as mentioned earlier, under the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules
to the Constitution of India, the Local Self Government (LSGs) institutions have powers over Land
improvement, water management, watershed development, fisheries, social forestry, rural housing, roads,
culverts, bridges, ferries, waterways, education, etc. These powers need to be backed by national legislation
to provide the mandate and authority to promote ICZM at the sub-national levels. India’s ICZM policy,
regulatory and institutional framework need to be strengthened to be in greater harmony with the
Constitution of India and the Government’s decentralization policies.
9
Mageau et al. 2015
37
resolution of overlapping or conflicting jurisdictions; and (f) ensuring that state ICZM policies/plans are backed
by enforceable laws and regulations. States are empowered to formulate laws and regulations to develop and
implement CZMPs. In Brazil, states have autonomy in the execution of regional proposals, as long as these are
consistent with the principles of the national plan. The Coastal Management Integration Group ensures that
actions of the National Coastal Management Plan are compatible with sectorial public policies concerning the
coastal zone.
2.4.4. Incentives for the States

In the USA, the Federal Consistency provision is an effective tool to promote intergovernmental collaboration.
The CZMA embodied an unusual form of federalism. If states adopted CZM programs that were judged to meet
the national interest and other tests found in the Act, and if the states were willing to enforce their programs in
relation to local and state interests (public and private), federal agencies would be bound by the coastal policies
contained in those programs (Section 307 of the CZMA)
In India, the Union Government transfers resources collected through federal taxes to the States. The Planning
Commission provides grants to the States as development grants for specific programs. These are negotiated and
linked to specific goals. The Finance Commission makes grants which are not linked to specific programs
(untied) (Tilak, J.2017). The 15th Finance Commission (constituted in 2017) is expected to deliberate the concept
of competitive federalism and discusses nine performance-based incentives based upon which resources will be
transferred to the States. Among them are: (a) achievements in implementation of flagship schemes for disaster
resilient infrastructure, sustainable development goals ,and quality of expenditure; (b) progress made in
promoting ease of doing business; and (c) progress made in sanitation and solid waste management.
Capacity needs to be built in the sub-national levels to transition towards a two-track approach such as in
the USA. This would include: (i) assigning greater authority to sub-national levels to manage the coastal
resources and areas within their jurisdiction; (ii) developing skills in planning, budgeting, negotiation,
financial management specifically at state and local levels; (iii) designing innovative programs backed by
science and technology to leverage the performance-based grants from the public sector and
complementary funds from the private sector.
2.4.5. Conflict Resolution

In Xiamen, China, an integrated functional ocean zoning scheme was adopted and enacted. Marine Use
Regulation addressed multiple-use conflicts in the coast. Regulatory instruments addressed common property
rights issues. The City Government used economic instruments to regulate the type and level of sea use, thereby
resolving several outstanding use conflicts and effectively reversing the trend of environmental degradation. The
approach was adopted through national legislation in China in 2002 demonstrating a bottom-to-top approach to
marine and coastal resource management.
In India the ICZM process requires clearly defined mechanisms for enforcement including conflict
avoidance and resolution at multiple levels. Under the current situation, in case of disputes, the aggrieved
parties would have to seek refuge in the court system as established and if the dispute is between the
constituent units of the federation, then constitutionally, the dispute will have to be litigated before the
Supreme Court of India in accordance with article 130 of the Constitution of India. The above gaps in the
regulatory framework need to be addressed.
38
2.4.6. Capacity Building
Enhancing coastal resource management and resilience requires building capacity within each tier of government
and within user groups. Some examples from global experience in ICZM are discussed below.
In the United States the Coastal States Organization represents the interests of coastal states in federal matters,
provides information, maintains a national network for sharing best management practice, and helps identify
emerging issues and problems. The Coastal Services Center provides technical and scientific support to all
coastal states including training. The Sea Grant Program, a consortium of university-based research entities,
conducts coastal and ocean research on issues that are identified as priority problems for coastal managers.
In Canada, increased partnership with academia, international scientific organizations, and sister agencies in
other governments helped to facilitate and develop tools for the application of ecosystem-based governance of
the coastal areas. The Coastal Zone Canada Association (CZCA) brings together governments, academia,
industry, community and Aboriginal groups to engage in greater cross-sectoral dialogue in support of ICZM.
The Ocean Management Research Network was established in 2001 to bridge the gap between natural and
social sciences. In 2008, the Canadian Healthy Oceans Network, established a university-government
partnership focused on conservation and sustainable ocean use.
In East Asia, the Partnership for Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA, facilitates
information dissemination, capacity building, technical services to member countries. The PEMSEA partnership
network, including governments, technical institutions and industry groups, helps address a broad range of
scientific, governance and management issues and promotes interaction among local officials implementing
ICZM.10
A Coastal States Organization (CSO) in India along the lines of the model in the USA, can facilitate: (i)
identification of issues of common concern in the Coastal States and UTs; (ii) help in effective utilization of
resources; (iii) shape coastal law; (iv) provide a forum to resolve interstate disputes; (v) strengthen capacity
to leverage financial resources for innovation; (vi) build capacity to be competitive in identifying incentives
to participate in “competitive federalism”; and (vii) help leverage federal funding and support to state-
based ICZM and disaster management programs. A pathway to establish a CSO is outlined in Table 2.3.
Network of Academic and Research Institutions. Expanding and formalizing the current network of 14
Universities working with NCSCM can help decision-makers define the problems faced by coastal areas,
identify and propose solutions. This network should be strengthened to support the coastal States and UTs
and the district level in research, [policy making?], planning, monitoring, sharing experiences and
leveraging finance to support innovation in addressing priority issues.
Environmental Education and Communication (EEC) Campaign. An EEC campaign targeting all levels
of government, the private sector and coastal communities will serve to generate greater public
ownership of the program and “a Call to Action.” It will help to: (i) heighten understanding of ICZM
policies; (ii) disseminate good practices in implementing CRZ 2019; and (iii) support new interventions in
ICZM, MSP, Blue Economy, Climate Change Adaptation, marine pollution and shoreline management.
2.4.7. Financial Sustainability

In South Africa, the National Coastal Management Program (2014) notes the inadequacy of funding for
implementation, and emphasizes potential benefits of ICZM, such as poverty alleviation, job creation, and
economic development to generate budgetary support. Sowman and Malan note that the failure of ICZM is largely
10
http://www.pemsea.org/
39
attributed to inadequacy of financing and skills. The authors recommend the development of a sustainable
financing mechanism via generated taxes, levies, and rents on public coastal services for sustainability.
In Brazil, similarly to South Africa, the states and municipalities depend on their state and municipal budgets
each year for ICZM. Investment in ICZM reflect inequity due to the unequal budgetary conditions in the states.
At the municipal level, these budgetary restrictions have caused the discontinuation of coastal management
actions.
In Canada, “ups and downs” in availability of financing created challenges for ICZM implementation during the
1990’s. The situation greatly improved in 2015, resulting in a commitment of CAN$1.5 billion over five years
to address four main priority areas: marine safety; marine ecosystems and habitat protection and restoration,
partnerships and co-management with Indigenous communities; and oil spill cleanup research and methods to
ensure evidence-based emergency response.
In Xiamen, China, the local government implemented legislation for financing marine environment protection,
ecosystem restoration, disaster risk reduction, and endangered species protection. Mandatory allocation of fiscal
budget was included in the Xiamen's Regulations in the Protection of Marine Environment, which required
municipal and district governments to gradually increase investment in marine ecosystem restoration, marine
disaster preparedness and risk reduction, and marine environment pollution treatment. In addition, operational
funds were included in the fiscal budget of the different levels of national and local governments. Special funds
were allocated from the local government budget to undertake specific activities which were unique and
beneficial to the areas concerned. For example, Article 4 of the Xiamen Chinese White Dolphin Conservation
Regulation (1997) stated that the municipal government was required to establish the Chinese White Dolphin
Conservation and Development Special Fund to support conservation of the species, MPA management, and
scientific research, education, and awareness.
In the United States, recognizing that capturing impacts and benefits of ICZM requires planning, negotiating
and sustained financing, annual federal funding for ICZM in Grants to the states has averaged around $70 million
in recent years. The states are required to provide matching funds. Additional funding is also provided via
Section 309 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) which varies depending on the federal budget for a
particular year. Annual federal appropriation for “core” funding for coastal management is distributed to the
eligible state coastal management programs by the NOAA Office of Coastal Resource Management (OCRM)
using a formula based primarily on length of shoreline and coastal population 11
Regulation 16 U.S.C. S 14566 which provides additional funding referred to as: CZM Enhancement Grants (S
309) under a version of “competitive federalism” is found in Section (c) “…The Secretary shall ensure that
funding decisions under this section take into consideration the fiscal and technical needs of proposing States
and the overall merit of each proposal in terms of benefits to the public. This funding is now referred to as
funding for “Projects of Special Merit.”
.
2.4.8. Leveraging Complementary Financing for ICZM
11
Regulations 16 U.S.C. S 1455 CZMA (Section 306) refers to: “Allocation of grants to coastal states. Grants under this section shall
be allocated to coastal states with approved programs based on rules and regulations promulgated by the Secretary which shall take
into account the extent and nature of the shoreline and area covered by the program, population of the area, and other relevant factors.
The Secretary shall establish, after consulting with the coastal states, maximum and minimum grants for any fiscal year to promote
equity between coastal states and effective coastal management.
40
While the current level of financing for ICZM may be appropriate in India, the issues in coastal and marine areas
are significant and likely to be serious due to shifting populations, migrant communities, pollution from industry
and inadequate solid waste and sewage disposal. These issues will be compounded by impacts of climate change.
The GOI and the World Bank have emphasized the need to leverage other sources of financing to complement
government and multilateral funds, particularly private sources of funding. There is a range of experience around
the world in developing and implementing innovative financing instruments and platforms. A few of them are
discussed below.
In Mexico, the Mexican Nature Conservation Fund (FMCN), a private, civil association (founded in 1994)
supports biodiversity conservation and sustainable resource use throughout Mexico’s coastal region. FMCN has
received funding from the federal government, the Global Environmental Facility (GEF), the US Agency for
International Development (USAID), and the World Bank. FMCN awards grants to implement and maintain
protected areas in coastal areas and works with members of the public, private, academic, NGO, and social
sectors (Harstad, 1999).
The Temporary Employment Program (PET), a cash-for-work social safety net program was created to assist in
economic recovery from natural disasters, especially those affecting the fisheries industry. PET provides support
for mangrove and wetlands restoration, marine mammal and turtle protection, and beach, river, cenotes, and
wetlands clean-up actions; enhancing coastal resilience in the face of climate change. (Alvarez-Torres et al.
2015).
In East Asia, the Regional Partnership Fund (RPF) established by PEMSEA is a trust fund serviced by donor
contributions and other income arising from the sale of goods (publications, software) and services from the
PEMSEA Technical Services. The Fund is used for specific activities toward attaining the ICZM related goals
and objectives. A sustainable financing mechanism was included in PEMSEA’s governance framework for an
ICZM system, to provide sustained funding for management interventions and maintenance of environmental
improvement infrastructure (Cardinal 2018). The financing mechanism involves the identification and selection
of appropriate options for developing sustainable financing mechanisms including regular government budget
allocation, user fees, and taxes. PPPs were successfully implemented in Xiamen, China, and in Batangas,
Philippines. (Cardinal 2018).
Carbon Financing in India

In the Sunderbans12, West Bengal State, the Indian Foundation Nature Environment and Wildlife Society and
Livelihoods Funds13 are implementing a project to plant more than 16 million mangrove trees to: (a) strengthen
existing man-made embankments that protect the homes and farmlands from flooding; (b) to restore biodiversity
in the mangrove forest which provide nurseries for fish, molluscs and crustaceans which bring additional
economic and nutritional value to the communities; (c) leverage the carbon economy to generate social,
environmental and economic impacts in the communities. Livelihoods Funds operate two investment funds into
which 12 international private companies have invested14. The project is supported by the International Union
for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Inter-American Development Bank, and several other partners.
12
The Sundarbans mangrove forest, one of the largest such forests in the world (140,000 ha), lies on the delta of the Ganges,
Brahmaputra and Meghna rivers. India’s Sundarbans World Heritage site was inscribed in 1987 (World Bank, 2014)
13
http://www.livelihoods.eu/projects/news-india/
14
http://www.livelihoods.eu/our-funds
41
This model may be replicated in other wetlands and deltas along India’s coast with the same partners
or others. The NCSCM has carried out research on Blue Carbon, Carbon offsets and biodiversity in
the Deltas. This work may help in identifying appropriate locations for potential Carbon financing
projects.
National Coastal Resilience Fund in USA

A National Coastal Resilience Fund was set up through the joint collaboration of the Fish and Wildlife
Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Fund allocated $28.9 million to
fund 35 projects under the 2018 National Coastal Resilience Fund. These projects cover 22 states and Puerto
Rico to restore, increase, and strengthen natural infrastructure: (i) the landscapes that help absorb the impacts of
storms and floods; (ii) to protect coastal communities from storm and flooding impacts; and (iii) enhance fish
and wildlife habitat. The total investment, including non-federal match, was $67.2 million15. The Fund seeks to
protect life and property, safeguard people and infrastructure, strengthen the economy, and conserve and restore
coastal and marine resources. Award recipients include state and local government agencies and nonprofits who
will use these funds to increase their ability to prepare for and recover from a variety of coastal threats,
including hurricanes, tsunamis, and sea level rise. Project focus areas include flood protection, infrastructure
improvement, restoration of coastal habitat, and proactive community planning initiatives.
Nature-based insurance provides immediate funding for post-storm restoration of coral reefs. Local
governments, local private sector and insurance companies are participants. Based on the experience in Quintana
Roo, Mexico, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and UNDP note that this pilot would be scalable to at least 10
countries providing coverage protecting millions of people and billions of dollars in built assets; scalable to other
forms of natural capital beyond coral reefs.
2.4.9. ICZM and Resilience to Climate Change

The NCM highlights resilience to climate change as an urgent priority. The devastation caused in Odisha State
by the recent Cyclone Fani is a reminder that urgent action is needed to strengthen the capacity of coastal states
to build resilience and adapt to climate change and sea level rise. Using public funds to leverage private funds is
gaining momentum, particularly in climate change projects16. World Resources Institute (WRI) financing for
Climate resilience may come from private sector investors—whether individual investors, private equity
including venture capitalists, or larger institutional investors like pension funds, insurance companies, or from
global, regional, and local financial institutions. Green bonds17 issued by the World Bank and the International
Finance Corporation (IFC) are a powerful source of private sector led climate finance. These Bonds support
environmentally friendly activities, including projects that help mitigate climate change or strengthen climate
resilience. The World Bank has issued US$8.5 billion in green bonds since it launched its first labeled green
bond in 2008, which include projects for public and private sector managed initiatives.
In the US, State CZM Programs provide the leadership and tools to help local coastal communities prepare for
and adapt to a warming climate and rising seas. Actions range from vulnerability studies and policy changes to
reducing risk and improved building codes for resilience. 18
15
Project descriptions and additional information can be found at www.nfwf.org/coastalresilience/Documents/2018grantslate.pdf
16
www.wri.org/our-work/project/climate-finance/climate-finance-and-private-sector
17
http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/Climate/FinanceClimateAction_Web.pdf
18
Advancing Critical Solutions to Protect Coastal Communities and Coastal Zone Management Programs and
42
In Mexico, the Sectoral and Regional Integration division within the Directorate General for Environmental
Policy has emphasized Land-Sea Use Plans (LSUPs) as a central component to sustainable management with the
goals of green development and climate change adaptation. LSUPs have evolved to become key tools for local
governments in addressing risk and vulnerability issues. LSUPs involve all three levels of government, as well as
academia, NGOs, organized social groups, stakeholders, and the private sector.19
Mexico - Climate Change Mitigation – Public and Private Funds to Preserve Blue Assets
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has supported Mexico in establishing a Coastal Zone Management Trust in
Quintana Roo, a top coastal tourism state. The Trust Fund demonstrates how both public and private capital can
be used to preserve natural assets. The fund receives taxes collected by the government from local hotel owners
and the tourism industry. The fund has bought a reef insurance which pays out when a certain windspeed crosses
the area. The insurance finances the repair and rebuilding of the coral reef, restoring its protective power and
hence its financial benefit to the local economy. The trust fund is governed by a technical committee and
includes a scientific committee. The TNC notes that this experience can be replicated in coastal economies
dependent on natural features but faced with an increasing risk from storms and sea-level rise.
The type of financing instrument needs to be determined based on the context, needs, location, availability of
partners and engagement of stakeholders. Engagement of key partnerships can assist in leveraging financing from
the public and private sector. The Network of Universities and Research Institutions in cooperation with NCSCM
may initiate partnerships with appropriate private financial entities to leverage funding for long-term support for
ICZM and climate change resilience.
2.4.10. ICZM and Marine Spatial Planning (MSP)

The NCM identifies the need to link MSP with ICZM efforts and CRZ 2019 identifies the water area and the sea-
bed area between the Low Tide Line up to twelve nautical miles on the seaward side as CRZ-IV A. In the
European Union (EU) a Directive (2014/89) was issued to establish a framework for MSP. The Directive calls
for the establishment of MSP in each State: (a) to consider economic, social, and environmental aspects to support
sustainable development and growth in the maritime sector; (b) apply an ecosystem-based approach; (c) achieve
coherence between MSP and other processes such as ICZM.20 MSPGlobal, the joint initiative of IOC-UNESCO
and the European Commission note that by fostering integrated management practices to protect and restore
marine and coastal ecosystems, strengthen resilience and promote a healthy and productive ocean, MSP has
proven to be an important means to achieve global ocean governance goals and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development. (https://en.unesco.org/mspglobal).
MSP may be initiated in locations where: (i) resource use conflicts are apparent; (ii) such conflicts pose obstacles
for growth of ocean economy; (iii) where adequate research is available; and (iv) where leadership is committed
to linking ICZM with MSP
2.5. Strategic Directions for The Way Forward
the Blue Economy.

19
Alvarez-Torres et al. 2015.
20
Significant information resources on MSP are available at MSPglobal, the initiative launched by UNESCO’s Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission (IOC-UNESCO) and the European Commission to promote cross-border MSP.
43
Lessons from the ICZM experiences reviewed demonstrate that ICZM is a long-term process. Olsen et al (1998)
note that completion of an initial cycle typically requires 8-15 years. Olsen et al (1998) note further that in order
for ICZM to have a significant impact on coastal ecosystems, initiatives need to scale up from pilot initiatives
into comprehensive large-scale long-term interventions supported by adequate policy, financing and capacity.
The decade of investments in ICZM in India has put in place some key elements in institution building and also
tested some pilot initiatives on the ground. India has completed the first cycle of ICZM with key institutions
established and the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification under implementation. Additionally, ICZM in India
has evolved from a top-down regulatory program to a science-based approach.
India’s goal of moving to a second phase in ICZM to cover the entire coastline will require strengthened
regulatory and institutional frameworks, greater clarification of roles and responsibilities of institutions, with
particular focus on sub-national level. Strengthening the mandate of sub-national level for governance of the
coastal and marine resources in conformity with government’s emphasis on decentralization requires regulatory
and institutional reform, capacity building, adequate financing and partnerships with the private sector and
community organizations. Leveraging public financing in an era of competitive federalism requires capacity at
the state/UT and district level for planning, budgeting, performance monitoring and innovation. Successful
experience in PPPs need to be scaled up and replicated. India’s experience with leveraging private capital, such
as in Carbon Financing may be replicated in appropriate locations. Partnerships with international and regional
agencies to build capacity and with the private sector and coastal communities will strengthen the decision-
making process.
State/UT/District coastal agencies are linked to sectoral agencies and to the coordinating bodies (SICOM,
CZMAs, NCZMA), centers of excellence (NCSCM), networks (University Network), civil society and
scientific organizations. These linkages provide downward as well as upward feedback to strengthen each level
of government. All stakeholders are engaged in discussions and joint actions toward effective management.
Coastal management institutions at every level of government are backed by regulatory and enforcement
powers. The above elements are discussed below in a comprehensive ICZM model for India.
2.5.1. Enhancing Center-State-Local Linkages

ICZM implementation requires a solid scientific understanding of coastal and systems, clearly articulated vision
and goals, well-reasoned and enforceable policies and regulations and effective leadership at each level of
government. In such a model, the national level is responsible for policy and regulatory functions, the State
level is responsible for decision-making and the local level is responsible for implementation of ICZM. The
decision-making powers of State and local level are backed by regulatory authority for governance of coastal
and marine resources within their respective jurisdictions. State legislation will govern resource use and areas
including permitting and enforcement in conformity with national legislation including CRZ 2019. The powers
of the districts will be backed by by-laws and local coastal management plans to govern resource use within the
jurisdiction of the districts. Key elements of the potential ICZM model are outlined below.
NCZMA is currently limited to reviewing and endorsing State CZMPs. NCZMA however, is well placed to be
assigned a greater role: (i) to be a more permanent entity rather than an institution with a two year mandate; (ii)
provide leadership for developing ICZM policy; (iii) identify interventions including draft legislation and
regulations for supporting decision making at sub-national level; (iv) coordinate with other Ministries which
have authority for governance of coastal and marine resources and of issues related to climate change; (v)
ensure consistency of national ICZM goals and policies with other government policies including those related
to decentralization, finance, environment, fisheries, water, pollution, shipping and navigation, commerce and
infrastructure; (vi) ensure consistency of state legislation (once States are authorized to regulate) with national
goals; vii) make recommendations for the allocation of human and financial resources for ICZM
implementation.
44
SICOM currently functions as the project management unit for the World Bank supported ICZM project.
Other functions of SICOM includes: support to the States to develop proposals for a second phase of ICZM; and
monitoring of progress of state programs. SICOM may have a broader mandate than its current project focused
mandate which may be to: (i) guide and facilitate the achievement of the goals of NCM as well as State-wide
ICZM; (ii) maintain a sound database with specific indicators to monitor performance of State CZMPs and
ICZMPs; (iii) maintain a comprehensive data base on coastal and marine resource use, issues and management;
(iv) strengthen capacity at the state level for governance of coastal and marine resources; gathering and
processing of data on resource use; procurement, disbursement and financial management; (v) establish a
financing mechanism to ensure targeted support for ICZM over the long term; (vi) support sub-national levels in
leveraging public and private capital to support ICZM and related projects.
NCSCM may be strengthened to become a world class coastal management institution through: (i) enhanced
expertise to address emerging issues such as resilience to climate change and sea level rise; (ii) knowledge
generation at all levels of government and in the private sector and communities using science to influence
policy and development models; (iii) develop needed skills to leverage public and private financing for specific
areas including resilience to climate change, Carbon Finance, Biodiversity Offsets and Living Shorelines,
Marine Spatial Planning; (iv) capacity development towards greater financial independence; and (vi) initiate
formal and informal partnerships with other global and regional centers of excellence in coastal management.
States and UTs may be empowered to: (i) legislate, plan and manage the use of coastal and marine resources
within their jurisdiction. The policies, plans and legislation should be consistent with national policies while
being focused on issues with the jurisdiction of State/UTs; (ii) coordinate activities in consultation with
national as well as agencies within respective State and UT governments and the private sector; (iii) submit
their plans, legislation and programs through the SCZMAs to the NCZMA for review. NCZMA will review
these laws and plans to ensure that they are consistent with national laws; (iv) once approved, NCZMA will
submit to MOEFCC for approval; (v) once approved MOEFCC will allocate funding to implement the
proposals; (vi) establish a conflict resolution mechanism at State level. This will enable conflicts over resource
allocation and use to be adjudicated at State and UT level. This mechanism may be established within the
respective SCZMA or within a potential Coastal State Organization.
The District Level, as discussed earlier in this chapter the Districts are mandated by the Constitution to have
powers over Land improvement, water management, watershed development, fisheries, social forestry, rural
housing, roads, culverts, bridges, ferries, waterways, education, etc. In a new model, these powers can be
backed by national legislation to provide decision making powers to district authorities over coastal and marine
resources within their jurisdiction. Such authority will include the power to formulate by-laws, permitting and
enforcement in conformity with national policies and goals. Such empowerment is in conformity with the
government’s decentralization policies. The districts are supported to develop Local Coastal Management Plans
which are reviewed and approved by the respective SCZMA. The districts have capacity for: (i) integrated
planning; (ii) regulation and enforcement; (iii) coordination with other sectoral agencies within the district and
with the States; (iv) resilience to climate change and sea level rise; and (v) financial management.
2.5.2. ICZM Framework Law

CRZ Notification 2019 needs to be transformed from a Zoning Regulation into a Framework legislation on
Coastal Zone Management such as in the USA and Canada models. ICZM Framework law may encompass (i)
clarification of roles and responsibilities of all levels of government including the district level; (ii) clarity in
permitting and enforcement; (iii) horizontal and vertical integration; (iv) incentives for sub-national levels (e.g.
Federal Consistency provision of the CZMA (US); (v) stipulate regular allocation of financial resources; (vi)
identifying mandates to leverage finance (borrowing and grants); (vii) establishing financing instruments at both
45
national and state level; and (viii) conflict resolution mechanism within state and local level as well as between
states.
2.5.3. Financing for ICZM

The National government provides ‘grants-in- aid’ to the States after considering the recommendations of the
Finance Commission. States and UTs need to develop capacity to negotiate and access grants from the national
government which are based on “performance-based incentives”. The CSO discussed above can assist States
and UTs negotiate these grants. CSO can also support states and UTs with developing performance criteria to
monitor disbursements and financial management. States also need to develop capacity to borrow, establish
financing mechanisms and identify partnerships to leverage private capital.
2.5.4. Planning and Budgeting

Planning and budgeting are basic ingredients of success in ICZM. Successful implementation of ICZM over the
long term depends entirely on the ability to executing entities to leverage adequate financial resources, which
includes public as well as private funding. Under a new model, ICZM agencies at all levels will develop capacity
to plan, budget and access public and private funding. Funding for the States/UTs/districts is based on plans
and budgets prepared by the States and UTs for the respective fiscal year. These plans and budgets are reviewed
by the State CZMAs and then submitted with their endorsement to the NCZMA. The process is the same as being
currently adhered to for CZMPs and ICZMPs, except for the introduction of the budgets. At the district level, the
entities having the mandate to implement programs for coastal management prepare a plan and budget for their
programs and submit the same to the respective SCZMA. Upon endorsement, the SCZMA includes the allocation
for districts within their budgetary proposal that is submitted to the NCZMA for approval. The NCZMA review
the plans and budgetary proposals from the State/UT/Districts and approve them if they are in conformity with
national policies and legislation. The State/UT and Districts consult with their colleagues in sectoral agencies
prior to submission to avoid duplication. Given that SCZMAs constitute representatives from different sectors
the likelihood of duplication and redundancy is minimized.
2.5.5. Leveraging International or Private Financing

Given the nature of the issues and threats in coastal areas, it is likely that funding needs will exceed the availability
of public resources. Capacity is being developed under the new model at all levels in government to leverage
resources from other sources including multilateral, bilateral and private sources. State/UT and Districts have
received the consent of the Central or State Government, to borrow money by way of loans or issue of bonds,
debentures to support ICZM implementation.
2.5.6. Process to Access Private Funding
(i)Carry out an assessment of lessons learned in India including the Green Climate Fund, the Carbon Offsets in
the Sunderbans and the Clean Ganga Fund;
(ii) Carry out an assessment of international experience in innovative financing models with special reference
to India. The assessments will take into consideration that financing instruments need to be tailored according to:
(i) the context; (ii) the demand, needs, capacity and regulations for establishing financing instruments including
financial regulations; and (iii) the interest of the partners and financiers.
(iii) Need for Science. Proponents recognize that proposals have to be backed by adequate science. For example,
a Carbon Offset program such as in the Sunderbans can be replicated if such proposal is based on sound scientific
information regarding biodiversity offsets and blue carbon values in given locations. In this case, NCSCM has
carried out research on the subject which should provide the information and scientific base for mobilizing the
requisite partnerships.
2.5.7. Coastal Conservation Trust (CCT)

46
An Indian CCT may be set up along the lines of the Mexican Nature Conservation Fund to support biodiversity
conservation and sustainable resource use in the coastal areas. The CCT can receive funding from national, state
and district sources as well as from private donors in India and overseas including multilaterals such as GEF,
IUCN, EU and private corporations in India. This mechanism can be set up as a revolving fund and set up at the
level of the Coastal States Organization (CSO) with concurrence of MOEFCC and the Ministry of Finance. A
Financial Specialist experienced in fund raising can be recruited to assist in mobilizing funds. Once sufficient
funds are raised, a call for proposals can be sent to State/UT and districts specifying criteria for selection. A
panel comprising CSO and representatives of NCSCM, SICOM and the Network of Universities can screen the
proposals and those that are in conformity with selection criteria will receive conservation grants. Monitoring
and Evaluation Specialist at CSO can carry our periodic monitoring of progress.
2.5.8. Blue Asset Restoration and Infrastructure Fund (BARIF)

BARIF or similar fund may be established at SICOM in consultation with MOEFCC and under guidance from
Ministry of Finance. BARIF can draw on lessons learned from the National Coastal Resilience Fund (NOAA,
USA) and support project proposals aiming to strengthen: (i) natural infrastructure, including Living Shorelines -Blue
Assets that help absorb the impacts of storms and floods; (ii) physical infrastructure to protect coastal communities from storm
and flooding impacts; and (iii) innovative financing proposals that combine shoreline management with desalinization and
provision of safe ground water to communities; marine pollution projects that are integrated with marine spatial planning
projects; and (iv) solar energy for Climate Smart Villages21. BARIF can be financed by donor contributions including
from Indian Corporations. BARIF may receive public funding earmarked for competitive grants under the
Competitive Federalism model.
2.5.9. Capacity Development and Partnerships

Building capacity at all levels is vital for the success of the ICZM program. In a potential new ICZM model, all
levels of government will enter into partnerships with global and regional centers of excellence in coastal and
marine resources management as well as with the private sector in India towards greater efficiency in ICZM.
Such partnerships will help build capacity in new technologies particularly in relation to resilience to climate
change. Partnerships can also help in identifying financing opportunities and building capacity to leverage
funding. partnerships with international public and private institutions will assist in establishing financing
platforms/instruments. Partnerships with the private sector and coastal communities will help promote
efficiency in decision-making.
2.5.10. Strong leadership

Strong leadership is a pre-requisite for sustained progress in ICZM. ICZM implementation requires a solid
scientific understanding of coastal and systems, clearly articulated vision and goals, well-reasoned and
enforceable policies and regulations and effective leadership at each level of government and each sector of the
society. Strong leadership needs to be developed at all levels of government.
2.5.11. Long-term Planning

Planning for this program will be long term and not limited to a project cycle. This will involve a long-term
vision incorporating the Blue Economy and ensuring capacity development and financing for governance of
coastal and marine resources and areas. The planning horizon may involve 20-30 year time frame.
2.5.12. Coastal States Organization (CSO)

As discussed in Section 2.15 of this chapter, a CSO can help enhance the leadership that states and UTs can
play in governance of coastal and marine resources within their jurisdiction. CSO can assist in: (i) shaping
state/UT legislation and regulations; (ii) represent the coastal states/UTs in policy, legislation and regulatory
21
www.ruralelec.org/project-case-studies/solar-village-connected-community-solar-india
47
matters at the national level; (iii) advocate for funding for coastal and marine resource management programs;
(iv) assist in leveraging external resources; (v) disseminate and share information. Table 2.2 outlines a potential
pathway towards establishing a CSO.
Table 2.2. Pathway to Establishing a Coastal States Organization (CSO)
Activity Timeline Responsibility

1. Agree on Type of Organization and process for establishment of Mid-End SICOM as
a CSO 2020 Coordinating
-Reach agreement that CSO will be an independent entity Agency
-Agree that CEO of CSO will be a private person recognized by all NCSCM
stakeholders as being an expert on ICZM and on Center-State linkages States/UTs as
-Agree that CSO will have coastal state and UT representation member agencies
2. Agree on Mandate of the CSO and CEO of CSO End 2020 SICOM as
Coordinating
Agency
NCSCM
States/UTs as
member agencies
3. Procure Legal Specialist Beginning SICOM as

Seek legal assistance drawing up: 2021 Coordinating
-Constitution of CSO; and Agency
-Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) between State/UTs and CSO NCSCM
States/UTs as
member agencies
4. Procure Financial Consultant. Beginning SICOM as

Seek assistance of a Financial Specialist 2021 Coordinating
-to draw up an operational budget for the CSO including estimates of Agency
allocations from the national, state and UT budgets NCSCM
-estimated disbursements (operational costs including consultancies, States/UTs as
staff salaries, rent of office facilities, travel (to and from coastal states member agencies
and UTs), awareness raising seminars and administration, cost of
publications
-finance gap
-plans for leveraging needed resources including private funds to support
urgent interventions at state and UT level
5. Seek approval to establish the CSO Mid 2022 SICOM

-Submit the full package describing the proposal to SICOM and NCSCM
NCSCM for their review and inputs States/UTs as
-The package will include minutes of meetings with State and UTs member agencies
confirming agreement to set up the CSO; the role, benefits, mandates
and responsibilities of the CSO; mandate of the CEO of CSO and the
profile of the person required to head the institution; draft constitution of
48
the CSO; draft MOUs between CSO and States/UTs; and draft
operational budget of CSO
-Submit draft document package to NCZMA for review and
endorsement
-Review and Consultations at NCZMA level
-Submission of the package to MOEFCC by NCZMA
2.6. Towards a New Model of ICZM Governance

Following the discussion above, Table 2.3 below, outlines strategic recommendations, an estimated time frame
to achieve outputs, responsibility for the activities and indicators for monitoring.
49
Table 2.3. Key Recommendations, Activities Time Frame, Responsibility and Indicators for Monitoring
Recommendation Short term Medium Term Long Term Responsibility Indicators

(2020-2025) (2025-2030) (2030-2040)
Environmental Develop and launch an Continue to Continue NCSCM -Level of investment in
Education and EEC campaign with implement the EEC implementation of SICOM EEC including the
Communication components targeting the campaign at all the EEC campaign CSO, State/UT development and
(EEC) relevant government levels of targeting the Districts dissemination of a
agencies, the private government and in districts and coastal Private sector State of the Coast
sector and coastal particular at the communities communities report
communities state/UT/District -Change in public
levels and in coastal awareness of ICZM,
communities CRZ 2019 and
innovations on ICZM
at the State and District
level
-Changes in behavior
and attitude among
constituents regarding
the coastal
environment and use of
coastal resource
Regulatory Reform: 1. Initiate consultations 1. Formulate a 1. Support the MOEFCC -A participatory and
Transition of CRZ and reach agreement at comprehensive implementation of NCZMA consultative process is
2019 from a Zoning the different levels of ICZM law the ICZM law SICOM in place led by a
Regulation into a government and with 2. Formulate 2. Launch an NCSCM legislative committee
Comprehensive non-governmental actors regulations on education campaign Network of representative of key
Framework Law on including community specific at all levels of Universities coastal stakeholders to
ICZM organizations on the matters/issues government and in Private sector develop a framework
goals, objectives and 3. Generate public the private sector Coastal States legislation for coastal
potential outcomes of a support of the law and communities on UTs and marine resources
comprehensive ICZM 4. Support the the provisions of the Districts management in India
legislation including: passage of the law new Law
50
a) roles and 5. Continue public 3. Build capacity at Coastal -A green/white paper
responsibilities for all consultations all levels of Communities containing the
agencies with a mandate 6. Build capacity at government to government’s
for coastal resources at all levels of implement the Law preferences regarding a
the national, state and government to in partnership with broad ICZM policy for
local levels; implement the Law different actors India has been
b) guidance on planning, in partnership with including prepared and used in a
permitting and different actors multilateral consultative process
enforcement; including agencies, bilateral towards the
c) vertical and horizontal multilateral agencies, private development of an
integration; agencies, bilateral actors and overall ICZM
d) conflict resolution agencies, private community framework law for
e) establishment of a actors and organizations India
targeted financing community -A legislation has been
mechanism organizations introduced/debated/
f) rules regarding PPP adopted on an overall
g) ICZM and climate ICZM framework law
change, Blue Economy, for India
Marine Spatial Planning
(Responsibility
MOEFCC and related
agencies at the national,
state and local level)
Develop and 1. Reach agreement on a 1. Continue Continue to build MOEFCC -A sustainable
implement a sustainable development capacity building at capacity, SICOM development
governance model model for managing all levels of particularly at the NCSCM governance model for
for sustainable coastal and marine government in local level and in NCZMA coastal and marine
coastal and marine resources (some accordance with the coastal communities States/UT resources has been
resources suggestions are provided governance model to implement the developed and
management in the section below) 2. Strengthen ICZM legislation, legislated as part of an
2. Reach agreement on capacity to regulations and overall ICZM
regulatory and implement the new enforcement framework law for
institutional reform ICZM legislation mechanisms and to India
required to implement and Regulations carry out
the new model monitoring
51
3. Develop capacity at all 3. Strengthen Strengthen capacity
levels of government to existing for monitoring, data
implement the partnerships and collection
governance model initiate new Scientific
mentioned above: partnerships for assessments
specific areas include: greater efficiency in New technology
regulation, permitting, ICZM
enforcement, planning, 4. Strengthen
budgeting, monitoring, capacity for
financial management, monitoring,
leveraging private information
capital, science and gathering and data
technology for collection
innovation 5. Strengthen
4. Implement the model capacity for
in partnership with scientific
government, private and assessments and
community actors. new technology,
5. Strengthen capacity innovative
for vulnerability financing
assessments, innovation,
public private
partnerships, innovative
financing, MSPs
Establish a Coastal 1. Reach agreement with Operationalize CSO Continue to support MOEFCC -A functional CSO has
States Organization national agencies and all to support the CSO and States and NCZMA been established as an
(CSO) Coastal States and UTs States and UTs UTs SICOM independent entity with
on the role, profile, NCSCM coastal states
benefits, mandate of a Network of representation and
CSO Universities clear mandates
2. Seek legal assistance NGOs
in finalizing: a Coastal States
constitution; and UTs
Memoranda of
52
Understanding for CSO
and members
3. Reach agreement on
the role and
responsibilities of the
CEO
4. Develop operational
budget for CSO
5. Obtain approval for
CSO (details in Table
2.3- Pathway towards
setting up CSO)
Leverage public and 1. Assess the 1. Establish Build on the MOEFCC -An analysis is carried
private financing to requirements (including financing experiences to scale NCMSC out regarding the
ensure long term regulatory reform) for mechanism to up and replicate SICOM regulatory system
support for ICZM ensuring public funding support ICZM over successful Coastal States (including permitting
for ICZM over the long the long term. experiences in CSO procedures) for
term Maybe at the level ICZM governance, UTs business ventures in
2. Develop capacity at all of SICOM, or at a PPPs and resilience Districts the coastal zone to
levels of government potential Coastal to climate change Financial identify inefficiencies,
responsible for coastal States Organization specialists with disincentives,
resources management to or Trust Funds to Address the issues experience with bottlenecks,
carry out budgeting, finance specific and strengthen financial complexity, length of
mainstreaming ICZM issues faced by capacity in instruments time (duration), costs,
3. Assess opportunity to individual Coastal disbursement, Private Sector and clarity,
leverage private capital states financial transparency (or lack
in support of coastal 2. Strengthen management and thereof) in the
management including capacity to monitoring. permitting process
for resilience for climate implement the -An efficient and
change in the coast financing transparent permitting
4. Develop partnerships mechanisms process (regulatory and
with international and ensuring non-regulatory) is in
national agencies who transparency and place to attract private
have experience with accountability, sector
53
leveraging private capital 3. Strengthen engagement/investment
for sustainable capacity for in the coast
development natural financial -Number of financing
resources management, management, instruments identified
water resources disbursement and and established at the
management, and monitoring. national level and state
pollution management 4. Scale up and level
5. Study the experiences replicate successful -Level of national
of and replicate lessons PPPs financing (grants-in-
learned in: resilience to aid) mobilized for
climate change, carbon ICZM
financing; and PPPs in -Number of PPPs
infrastructure; Clean initiated and under
Ganga, Green Climate implementation in
Fund and other financing coastal areas
mechanisms -Level of private
6. Initiate pilot PPPs at financing leveraged in
the State level support of ICZM
7. Assess governance
mechanisms for
establishment of a
finance mechanism for
ICZM support over the
long term.
8. Establish financing
mechanism to support
ICZM
Framework for 1. Establish a Framework Use the Framework Update the SICOM -A framework for
Learning and for Learning and in performance Framework NCSCM Learning and
Adaptation Adaptation in monitoring and Network of Adaptation is
consultation with leveraging Monitor progress Universities established with clearly
national and sub-national financing Private sector defined objectives,
levels of government, Use the outcomes Coastal States responsibilities, and
private sector and Update the and lessons learned UTs deliverables on
communities. The Framework Districts monitoring, evaluation,
54
Framework should in developing a Coastal knowledge exchange
include: Monitor progress follow-on phase Communities and capacity building
a) baseline information and adapt the and legislated as part of
b) intermediate goals program based on the establishment of an
c) final outcomes lessons learned overall ICZM
d) performance framework law for
indicators (short, India
intermediate, and final,
see below for sample
indicators*)
e) pressures – regional
differences
f) skills developed
g) finances leveraged
2. Implement the
Framework in
partnership with national,
state and local agencies
and partners
55
Sample key indicators to assess and compare States’/UTs’ ICZM institutional capacity and performance
Consistency with and implementation of national ICZM objectives, policies, and regulations:
1. Is there an ICZM process, institutional structure, and capacity in place at the State/UT level that is consistent with the overall ICZM
policy framework at the federal level?
2. Is there an ICZM process and institutional structure and capacity in place at the State/UT level that is: a) holistic; b) long-term; c)
adaptive?
3. Does the State/UT follow an ICZM process which supports and links: a) federal and state/local levels; b) all relevant sectors?
4. Does the State/UT follow an ICZM process based on participatory planning and management?
Evidence-based decision making:

1. Does the State/UT ICZM process: a) address issues that are specific at the local level; b) work with natural processes/ecosystem-based,
based on best available science?
Results on the ground:

1. Does the State/UT ICZM process have baseline data on the coastal environment, resources, and uses?
2. Does the State/UT ICZM process monitor progress and assess on-the-ground impacts of management interventions on a regular basis?
56
References
Alvarez-Torres, P., Díaz-de-León-Corral, A., Perez-Chirinos, G., Aguilar, J. C., Rosado, R., Burgoa, F. E.,
Cortina, S., Ibáñez, M., Brachet, G., Sevilla, N.P.M., Rivera-Arriaga, E., Adeath, I. A. (2015). Development of
a National Ocean Policy in Mexico. In B. Cicin-Sain, D. VanderZwaag, and M.C. Balgos (Eds.) Routledge
Handbook of National and Regional Ocean Policies, Abingdon.
Cardinal, R. (2018). Financing Mechanisms and Economic Instruments to Leverage ICM Program
Implementation and Sustainability: Experience from Xiamen and Batangas. Case study 9, pp. 129-138.
Coastal States Organization. www.coastalstatesorg/csopublications;
Coastal States Organization (2018) Coastal Zone Management Programs and the Blue Economy.
http://www.coastalstates.org/?wpdmdl=9328
Global Ocean Forum. 2019. Review of International Experiences in Integrated Coastal Zone Management
(ICZM) and Relevance to India: Volume II
Government of India. 2019. Coastal Regulation Zone Notification.
Government of India. 2017. National Coastal Mission.
Govt. of Odisha, Preliminary Project Report ICZM Phase – II
Govt. of West Bengal, Integrated Coastal Zone Management of West Bengal State Project Report (2010).
Greenfeld, B. (2016) Coastal Zone Management: Advancing Critical Solutions to Protect Coastal Communities.
A publication by the Coastal States Organization
Harstad, J. (1999). The Mexican Nature Conservation Fund (English). Washington, DC: World Bank.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/989431468774668172/The-Mexican-Nature-Conservation-
FundPaisley, R.K., Curlier, M., Leon, C., Graizbord, Bricklemyer, Jr., E.C. (2003). Integrated Coastal
Management (ICM): A Brief Legal And Institutional Comparison Among Canada, The United States And
Mexico, 9 Ocean & Coastal L.J. Available at: http://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/oclj/vol9/iss2/4
Hindu Business Line. www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/cyclone-fani-impact-odisha-seeks- 14-bn-for-

reconstruction/article27056159.ece
Jagannath v Union of India AIR 1997 SC 811.

Livelihoods. http://www.livelihoods.eu/our-funds
Mageau, C., VanderZwaag, D.L., Huffman, K., and Farlinger, S. (2015). Oceans Policy: A Canadian Case Study
In Cicin-Sain, Biliana; Vanderswaag, David; and Balgos, Miriam. (2015). Routledge Handbook of National
and Regional Ocean Policies.
MSPGlobal. https://en.unesco.org/mspglobal
https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/Innovative_Finance_Resilient_Coasts_and_Comm
unities.pdf
57
Olsen et al (1998). A Common Framework for Learning from ICM Experience. Ocean & Coastal Management,
Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 155-174, 1997 ~) 1998 Elsevier Science Limited. Printed in Northern Ireland
PEMSEA. 2010. Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia. Capacity Development
Initiatives in the East Asian Seas Region: A PEMSEA Report.
https://www.un.org/Depts/los/general_assembly/contributions_2010/PEMSEA.pdf
PEMSEA (2015) Blue Economy for Business in East Asia, http://www.pemsea.org; Ocean Policy Research
Institute (2018) Guidebook for Coastal Cities Creation –Implementation of Blue Economy-
http://www.spf.or.jp etc. ICOM
Puthucherril, T. G. Towards Sustainable Coastal Development: Institutionalizing Integrated

Coastal Zone Management and Coastal Climate Change Adaptation in South Asia
Quesada, G. C., Klenke, T., & Mejía-Ortíz, L. M. (2018). Regulatory Challenges in Realizing Integrated Coastal
Management—Lessons from Germany, Costa Rica, Mexico and South Africa. Sustainability, 10(10), 3772.
doi:10.3390/su10103772
Sowman, M., Malan, N. (2018). Review of progress with integrated coastal management in South Africa since
the advent of democracy. African Journal of Marine Science. 40. 121-136. 10.2989/1814232X.2018.1468278
The Nature Conservancy

https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/TNC_Mexico_CoastalManagementTrust_Facts
heet.pdf
UK-India Business Council. www.ukibc.com/competitive-federalism-in-india/
World Bank. (2017). What is the Blue Economy? http://www.worldbank.org;
World Bank.
http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/Climate/FinanceClimateAction_Web.pdf
World Bank. 2019. 10 Years of Green Bonds: Creating the Blueprint for Sustainability Across Capital Markets
www.worldbank.org/en/news/immersive-story/2019/03/18/10-years-of-green-bonds-creating-the-blueprint-for-
sustainability-across-capital-markets
World Resources Institute. /www.wri.org/our-work/project/climate-finance/climate-finance-and-private-sector
https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/Innovative_Finance_Resilient_Coasts_and_Com
munities.pdf
58

Iczm Report Volume 1 Relevance To India and Summary of International Experiences

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iczm Report Volume 1 Relevance To India and Summary of International Experiences

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft July 3, 2019

Towards the Development of the Next Phase of Integrated

Biliana Cicin-Sain, Indumathie Hewawasam, Tony George Puthucherril, Miriam

The accompanying Volume 2, Review of International Experiences in Integrated Coastal Zone

Prepared for the World Bank pursuant to Contract # 7190936

1.1. Purposes of this Chapter

Cases Selected for Analysis

Planned International ICZM Conference

1.2. BRIEF SUMMARIES OF THE EXPERIENCES OF 6 NATIONS AND 2 REGIONS

1.2.1. Lessons Learned on ICZM in the United States

The major features of the legislation were as follows:

4. Capacity Development, Education, and Awareness Raising

1.2.2. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Canada

4. Capacity Development, Education and Awareness Raising

1.2.3. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Brazil

4. Capacity Development, Education, and Awareness Raising

1.2.4. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Mexico

4. Capacity Development, Education, and Awareness Raising

1.2.5. Lessons Learned on ICZM in the European Union

4. Capacity Development, Education and Awareness Raising

1.2.6. Lessons Learned on ICZM in South Africa

4. Capacity Development, Education and Awareness Raising

1.2.7. Lessons Learned on ICZM in East Asia

4. Capacity Development, Education, and Awareness Raising

1.2.8. Lessons Learned on ICZM in Japan

4. Capacity Development, Education, and Awareness Raising

1.3 General Lessons Drawn from the ICZM Case Studies

1.3.1 Delineating federal/state/local interactions

1.3.2. Experiences in Different Nations and Regions

1.3.3 Achieving Collaboration Among Federal, State, and Local Entities

1.3.4 Ensuring Political Will for ICZM Over Time

1.3.5 Phased Development of ICZM

1.3.6 Measuring Progress on ICZM Implementation

1.4 Stable and Continuous Sustainable Financing

1.4.1 Experiences in Different Nations and Regions

1.5 Capacity Development

1.5.1 Experiences in different nations and regions

Information Networks that Effectively Promote Ocean and Coastal Management–Canada

National and Regional Initiatives to Develop Capacity in East Asia

1.6. Putting it All Together

2.2. Institutional and Regulatory Framework

2.2.1. Indian Constitution and Coastal management

2.2.2. Decentralization and Local Self Government

2.2.4. Evolution of ICZM: Legislative/Regulatory Framework

Table 2.1. Differences between CRZ 2011 and 2019

The CRZ-I B is the inter-tidal zone (the area that

2.2.5. Definition of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ)

2.2.7. Permitted Activities Under CRZ 2019

2.2.8. The Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP)

The National Center for

2.3. Implementing ICZM

2.3.1. The National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Zone Management

2.3.2. NCSCM and the Network of Universities

2.3.3. ICZM implementation at the State Level

2.3.4. The National Coastal Mission (NCM) of 2017

2.4.2. ICZM and Federalism

2.4.3. Decentralization and Clarity in the Institutional Framework

2.4.4. Incentives for the States

2.4.5. Conflict Resolution

2.4.7. Financial Sustainability

Carbon Financing in India

National Coastal Resilience Fund in USA

2.4.9. ICZM and Resilience to Climate Change