4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Management of the Kenyan coast

期刊

OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 48, 期 11-12, 页码 901-931

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2005.03.005

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe the changes in the management of marine resources in Kenya from traditional management, through the era of marine protected areas and the fisheries sector, towards the initial developments of an integrated coastal area management system, which has only been active since the early 1990s. The first meetings between sectors were held in the mid-1990s where the responsibilities of management were agreed upon and from which a number of memorandums were initiated as part of the integrative process that was lead by the Coast Development Authority. Two integrated coastal management (ICM) pilot projects started in the mid- to late 1990s were undertaken to test the effectiveness of the process in two tourist beaches north of Mombasa and later Diani. These ICM programs primarily focused on infrastructural development and resource access issues and participants needed to be reminded that that the objectives of the ICM process were to improve natural resource management and protect biodiversity. There was also the problem that government and the larger economic interests were involved in policy and planning but the poor and associated communities were often marginalized because they lacked effective formal organizations and finances to represent them. The financial Support for projects prior to 2003 was generally less than US $ 150 000 and this and the poverty of the institutions and difficulties of establishing financial sustainability limited the programs and their problem solving. Nonetheless, there has been sustained progress and lessons learned concerning interactions with stakeholders, zoning of activities, linkages among groups, and improvements in the environment that should form the basis for further integration and solutions. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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