4.7 Article

Marine Spatial Planning: Assessment of the intensity of conflicting activities in the marine environment of the Aegean Sea

期刊

OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 220, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106079

关键词

Geographical information systems; Multiple criteria analysis; Spatial analysis tools; Cyclades; Aegean Sea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a methodology for ranking and evaluating conflicts in the marine environment using a combination of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Multiple Criteria Analysis (MCA). The Cyclades in the Aegean Sea, Eastern Mediterranean, is used as a case study area. The methodology involves the development of a geospatial database, the creation of a conflict matrix, the identification of conflicting activities, and the application of MCA for evaluating conflict intensity. Suggestions for supporting effective MSP in the study area are also made.
In coastal and marine environments, numerous activities take place which might result in two types of conflicts: the user-user conflicts and the user-environment ones. Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) is a recently developed framework with the aim to assess and resolve this kind of conflicts. In this paper, a methodology for ranking the detected conflicts in the marine environment according to their intensity is presented, using a combination of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Multiple Criteria Analysis (MCA). The Cyclades in the Aegean Sea, Eastern Mediterranean, was used as the case study area. The methodology involves the development of a geospatial database, the creation of a matrix of conflicts in order to define the conflicting activities based on the current legislation, the identification and delineation of the conflicting activities in the area using spatial analysis tools, and the application of MCA for evaluating and ranking the intensity of these conflicts. Finally, suggestions for supporting effective MSP in the study area are made.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据