Windmills On The Plains, Spring 2006

Windmills on the plains “It is easy to see,” says Don Quixote on sighting the 30 or 40 windmills on the plains of La Mancha, “…those are giants; and if thou art afraid, away with thee out of this and betake thyself to prayer while I engage them in fierce and unequal combat.” “What giants?” said Sancho Panza.

S

ince 1992 over 40 estuary and firth partnerships have been voluntarily established in the UK following the English Nature and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Estuaries and Firths Initiatives. None receive direct government support, instead relying on partner financial support. Despite this, most continue to show their worth in countless ways; improving decisionmaking, resolving conflicts, implementing practical projects, raising awareness. Such is the noble legacy of these partnerships. But for those involved in their management, there is a less heroic story: last minute budget deals; cajoling council resource committees, the loss of talented corestaff and an endless struggle to maintain funding. Critically, this funding dependency culture has compromised the freedom of partnerships to challenge the policies and practices of their funding masters. Short-termism is the order of the day in the very policy sector that should be underpinned and driven by the longterm issues of sustainability. Hundreds of staff years have been wasted in the pursuit of funding and a few partnerships have been lost along the way. Now a new threat looms in the unlikely shape of the Government’s

14

The edge Spring 2006

Marine Bill. The objective of the Marine Bill is clear; to provide a strengthened and simplified system for the governance of our coastal and marine waters, including the possibility of a new marine management organisation. The threat lies in a Government agenda that reinforces the split between the management of land and sea. This will result in the policy ‘squeeze’ of coastal management between a reinforced marine administration and terrestrial governance frozen at the mean low water mark, DEFRA vs the ODPM. But this Marine Bill should also be an opportunity for coastal partnerships to build themselves a secure, sustainable future. The case is simple – coastal partnerships deliver sustainable development; their key weaknesses rest with the fickleness and fragility of their partners. The solution is equally simple – the inclusion in the Bill of a duty on all relevant and competent bodies with a statutory interest in the coast and inshore waters to participate in and implement ICZM in agreed coastal waters of national and regional importance. The responsibility and power for cothe statutory coordinating this activity would rest with a nominated local authority within the area.

Fanciful? Radical? Hardly. The proposal is based on experience of a similar policy area – the statutorily designated Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs). Like the coast, UK AONB management has been subject to stop-go initiatives for over three decades. Two government actions have revolutionised their management. Firstly, a few simple clauses in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act of 2000 imposed a responsibility on local authorities to prepare, publish and review management plans for AONBs in their areas. This was backed up by relatively modest financial incentives from Government to local authorities for a guaranteed period of up to 10 years to implement the process and establish joint steering committees. Now all AONBs are under active management with national coverage of management plans close to completion. This approach has the potential to transform UK coastal management in a similar way to that achieved at a broader spatial scale by the much-praised and envied US Coastal Zone Management Act, and its federal consistency provisions. The 2002 EU Recommendation on ICZM specifically asks Member States to identify in their National Strategies “sources of long term financing for

for coastal management, particularly if linked to the proposed statutory duties above. Less complex is for direct funding for core costs to be met on a contractual basis for a period of up to 10 years linked to the preparation of management plans and their implementation. Based on the AONB Model, the annual cost to Government would be some £2-3 million; a comparable sum to the plethora of current grant arrangements. Monies would be channeled through a national agency and have an attractive 75% grant rate to encourage a multiplier effect. Although still a grant, the 10-year period would provide the political stability to allow the process to become properly embedded and free core staff from the demoralising annual search for new funds, or new jobs. Finally, the very existence of a statutory duty would in itself be a powerful lever on those less-

©Barry Needle

integrated coastal zone management initiatives… and examine how to make the best use of existing financing mechanisms both at Community and at national level.” This has probably been most awkward clause for the Government keen to pass the funding buck to the Lottery or other short-term funders. But with the political will, the complex Standard Spending Assessment (SSA), the means by which central government distributes funding to local authorities, could be used for funding. The formulae on which this grant distribution is based could be adjusted to factor in the additional responsibilities

Severn Estuary

View from the ground The Severn Estuary Partnership The Severn Estuary Partnership (SEP) is the only organisation taking an estuary-wide approach to implement the recommendations of the Strategy for the Severn Estuary (2001). The 14 local authorities involved in supporting the SEP have to justify funding on an ad-hoc annual basis. It is difficult for them to support the SEP with its voluntary status alongside other statutory responsibilities. Statutory agencies are still required to justify funding on a project basis – even though it is recognised that ICZM is a process. The lack of authority and resources has limited the overall effectiveness of ICZM efforts to date. Estuary Partnerships have prepared the groundwork for highly effective ICZM delivery in the UK, but are unlikely to survive in the absence of stronger statutory support. A new ICZM Framework Law utilising existing powers, or a new mechanism toput a duty on local authorities and statutory bodies to support ICZM processes, is needed.

enthusiastic partners. Natasha Barker, Severn Estuary Partnership Officer Coastal partnerships can no longer rely on the old chivalrous voluntary virtues to carry them through; they will need real teeth and real funding to be truly fit for purpose in the 21st Century. The chivalrous Don Quixote ends up as a pitiable and lovable old man while the pragmatic Sancho Panza becomes the wise ruler; as he says, “in battle …it is the tripes that carry the heart and not the heart the tripes”. Brian Shipman is a member of the CoastNET Board of Trustees with 25 years experience of coastal management in the UK and Europe.

The Humber Management Scheme Partnership The Humber Management Scheme (HMS) receives statutory support via the Habitats Regulations. The HMS partnership was formed to work on a voluntary management strategy for the Estuary. What benefits does statutory support bring to the current partnership? Meetings continue in a constructive manner, due to delegates’ enthusiasm and their belief in the benefits of collective management. The partnership comprises a wide range of organisations, all of whose support is critical to the effective development and implementation of the Humber Management Scheme. Statutory support makes it easier for partners to solicit support within their organisations and secure the necessary funds. In delivering secure funding and permanence, the statutory support underpins the partnerships work and shifts focus from project management to long term planning. Chris J Manning, Humber Project Manager The edge Spring 2006

15