CHAPTER FOUR OVERVIEW
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 The marine environment, human uses and marine spatial planning
The marine environment provides humans with many ecosystem goods and services such as climate buffering, oxygen production, food resources, tourism and recreation, mining, shipping and pharmaceuticals (Ansong et al., 2017). Additionally, the marine environment provides jobs connected to the ocean, providing a source of livelihood for coastal communities (Liquete et al., 2013). Unsustainable use, ocean warming, acidification and pollution are now threatening the ocean’s ability to provide the ecosystem services upon which humans depend (Leslie, 2005).
Since access to the marine environment is often unrestricted, there is potential for the unsustainable use of resources as well as conflicts between ocean users (Ehler & Douvere, 2009). Increasing population growth has resulted in more demand and less supply of these resources (Branch & Branch, 2018). The oceans now have decreased capacity to provide sustainable resources (Neumann et al., 2017). Spatial representation of human activities in the ocean and an assessment of the relative impacts associated with these activities are important in monitoring, mitigating, and reducing negative impacts. Marine spatial planning (MSP) approaches can assist with this mitigation and promote healthy oceans and sustainable blue economies (Dailianis et al., 2018).
Ehler & Douvere (2009) define MSP as “a public process of analysing and allocating the spatial and temporal distribution of human activities in marine areas to achieve ecological, economic and social objectives that are usually specified through a political process”. MSP is considered to be a “suitable” management option which is a “spatially explicit” process that accounts for the management of multiple pressures (Parravicini et al., 2012). MSP informs the spatial delineation of marine activities to support sustainable current and future uses of the marine environment while attempting to maintain ecosystem services to meet economic, ecological and social objectives (Ban et al., 2013b)
59 | P a g e To fulfil the effective development of MSP, Ehler and Douvere (2009) outlined the ten steps which must be undertaken, with an emphasis that MSP can produce various environmental, economic and social benefits when properly developed. Figure 4.1 frames the study by addressing steps 4 and 5 from Ehler & Douvere (2009). Step 4 involves identifying relevant stakeholders as a way to achieve multiple objectives and reflect various perspectives on the uses, conflicts and opportunities occurring in the MSP area of study. Step 5 involves collating and mapping human uses and pressures in the area of study (Ehler & Douvere, 2009).
Figure 4. 1: Steps in MSP (Source: Ehler and Douvere, 2009).
4.1.2 Participation and GIS
Understanding how spatial plans can conserve important species and ecosystems that support the needs of the various stakeholders is important in achieving goals for managing the marine environment (Levine and Feinholz, 2015). Advancements in GIS-based tools have allowed for the rise in techniques used to combine quantitative and qualitative data into maps of stakeholder uses to support spatial planning (Stelzenmüller et al., 2013).
1. Idenitfying need and establish
authority
2. Obtaining financial support
3. organising the process through
preplanning
4. Organising stakeholder participation
5. Defining and analysiing exiting
conditions 6. Defining an analysing future
conditions 7. Preparing and
approving the spatial management plan
8. Implementing and enforcing the
spatial management plan
9. Monitoring and evaluating performance
10. Adapting the marine spatial
management process
60 | P a g e The information from stakeholders can be collected through participatory mapping methods to result in multiple levels of information such as social uses, ecological patterns and concerns (Levine & Feinholz, 2015). Participatory GIS, Public participation GIS and Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) are terms used for social and participatory research methods of collecting spatial information (Brown et al., 2017).
In this study, the participatory method of collecting spatial information will be referred to as participatory GIS. Participatory GIS aims to identify attributes of a place that range on a scale from subjective perceptions of the place to objective location based on the participant's knowledge and experience in the study area (such as human uses and behaviours) (Brown et al., 2017). Littaye et al. (2016) emphasised that the participatory approach is beneficial in facilitating the need to address socio-environmental issues and promote knowledge.
4.1.3 Expert Knowledge
Perera et al.'s (2012:3) definition of experts involves key categories of individuals, namely;
• “scientists, who conduct research and publish their knowledge formally
• practitioners, who apply scientific knowledge management but typically do not conduct research and publish their knowledge formally
• stakeholders, who have an interest in the outcome of applying ecological knowledge to inform conservation or resource extraction issues; and elders of local societies (aboriginal or other) who are rich sources of traditional knowledge.”
Expert knowledge can be a valuable source of information to supplement existing geographic information (Aswani & Lauer, 2006; Goodchild & Li, 2012). Expert knowledge can also provide information that may be difficult to observe directly (Uusitalo et al., 2016). In addition, including community participation and local knowledge in the decision-making process of a management plan is key to obtaining more comprehensive information and developing successful management plans (Levine & Feinholz, 2015).
Cowling et al. (2003) emphasize that using expert knowledge in conservation planning involves challenges such as data being biased towards the experts’ fields of expertise on locations and taxa. Using scientific data and expert knowledge can lead to the production of gap-filling knowledge in the scientific understanding and development of priorities for management plans (Noble et al., 2020).
61 | P a g e The research objective of this Chapter is to identify and map the spatial extents and intensities of human pressures in Algoa Bay to assist with the development of a MSP for the bay (Dorrington et al., 2018). This will build onto the information collated by the 2018 NBA (Sink et al., 2019) and the Algoa Bay Project (2019).
The Algoa Bay Systematic Conservation Planning (SCP) report (Algoa Bay Project 2019) collected all available data on human uses in Algoa Bay. Some of the data layers included expert data, which provided a base for this research. This study will build onto the existing data by expanding the knowledge base, including more stakeholders, integrating as many uses as possible and building a holistic picture of the uses of the ocean. The data provided from this Chapter are used in the next Chapter to develop a map of cumulative impacts.