Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution

The Marine Conservation Society (MCS) welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to the Royal Commission on its review of environmental planning.

MCS is the UK's only charity dedicated solely to the protection of the marine environment and its wildlife. Since its formation in 1983, MCS has taken a close interest in planning and management in the coastal zone and has contributed to a range of Government consultations and House of Commons Select Committee reports on coastal planning policy.

The Society has been frustrated at the slow progress with respect to implementation of the House of Commons Select Committee report and whilst welcoming this further review of the environmental planning regime, remain concerned that previous recommendations with regard to environmental planning in the coastal and marine environment have yet to be implemented and many of the points made in this response have been reiterated over the last eight years to little effect.

MCS believes that far too little attention has been paid to the need for a strategic, integrated and sustainable approach to planning in the coastal and marine environment and this has caused significant damage to marine habitats and increased threats to marine species.

MCS therefore urges the Royal Commission to make special consideration of the need to address coastal planning issues at the earliest possible opportunity. The division between planning control systems at sea and on land was identified by the House of Commons Select Committee report on Coastal Protection and Planning as forming the root of many of the problems with current coastal policies. Harmonisation of the planning systems above and below the low water mark is a recommendation which the Government has yet to address, but which is imperative if there is to be an integrated approach to planning in the coastal zone.

This response will therefore focus on an assessment of the current regimes and their effectiveness in achieving environmental goals in the coastal and marine environment. Numbering used in Annex A of the consultation document has been used throughout the response.

1.       Environmental Sustainability

1.a       MCS supports the pursuit of sustainable development and believes that if applied correctly this will have benefits for environmental protection. However, as yet, the balance of social, economic and environmental needs remains balanced against the environment. In the marine environment this is largely because a mechanism by which environmental resources can be 'valued' (including living and non-living marine resources, marine biodiversity, seascapes, recreational use and marine heritage) has not been developed. Until we are able to apply an environmental value to our coastal and marine resources, economic considerations, which are more easily valued, will continue to override environmental objectives.

Sustainable development has not been applied consistently to the marine environment. Whilst fisheries policies are being reviewed to incorporate a long-term sustainable approach, other extractive industries such as aggregate extraction, energy extraction (oil and gas and wind) continue to develop without any long term planning or strategic assessment of demand and supply, and the cumulative and combined environmental impacts that development in these sectors will have.

1.b       MCS recognises the need in many cases to balance environmental objectives against other issues. However, we believe that there is the need to identify those objectives that are imperative. These will include the protection of natural processes, protection of water sources, preservation of biodiversity and protection of nationally and internationally important habitats and species. Some of these may already be determined, as in the case of internationally important habitats and species for which the UK has obligations to conserve, enhance or restore. Determination of other imperatives would need to be undertaken through a UK assessment of the fundamental processes and habitats which support the functioning of biological systems throughout the soil, air and water interfaces and ecosystems. Key sites or habitats may then need to be set aside as exclusion zones within which activities and inputs from direct and diffuse sources are strictly regulated.

1.c       MCS believes that the regulation of development activities would be best placed under the responsibility of a Minister, Department or Government agency that has environmental protection as their main purpose. This is currently not the case for a number of developments in the marine environment. For example, the oil and gas industry is currently both promoted and supposedly monitored and regulated by the Department of Trade and Industry. DTI has a primary function to promote and encourage development and protect economic interests and yet it is also the regulatory authority. This poacher/gamekeeper situation has been proven to serve the best interests of the industry at the expense of the environment with inadequate monitoring and inaccurate reporting of environmental impacts. Regulation of marine activities is undertaken by a range of Government departments, which leads to confusion and a lack of integration and consistent application of environmental policies. For example, aggregate extraction is regulated by DETR, coastal protection by the Environment Agency, dumping of dredged sediments by MAFF, energy extraction by DTI and shipping by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. Communication and integration amongst these bodies is evidently inadequate, generally progressed by individuals rather than any underpinning Government policy or process.

1.d       As stated in (1 a) above, planning in the marine environment, maintains a presumption in favour of development, partly due to the lack of 'value' placed on marine resources and biodiversity and partly due to a lack of data on marine biological systems and their sensitivity to human activities, which precludes making a sound scientific case against development. There is an urgent need for the further development of our knowledge about the biological and ecological characteristics of the UK Continental Shelf with a commitment to undertake a full ecological survey and support research into the sensitivity of marine habitats and species to specific activities.

1.e       There has been a move towards better planning, monitoring and management of marine development with the implementation of the EC Directive on Environmental Assessment which requires environmental assessments to be undertaken prior to consent of applications, however this is currently being undertaken on a piece meal project by project basis, with a distinct lack of strategic planning. The EC Directive on Strategic Environmental Assessment will hopefully address this problem, but there is as yet no indication of the scope of the Directive as to whether it will apply beyond mean low water. It is important that this Directive is applied to marine systems and that consequently the combined and cumulative impacts of developments are considered in an holistic approach.

Planning is only the first stage in the process and few developments are adequately monitored or managed throughout their period of activity. Monitoring of marine dumping sites is an example where these principles have been well applied, but biological monitoring is not required during the period that a developer holds a licence to extract aggregate or oil and gas. This precludes the ability to measure the accuracy of predicted environmental statements or to identify when an impact becomes significant and exceeds the threshold of no significant impact, at which a development or activity should be suspended or more closely managed.

1.f       Cumulative impacts of development are not being taken into account to any level of adequacy within the marine environment. MCS has made a number of objections to aggregate license applications on the basis of this lack of consideration. Each project proposal is presented and considered in isolation with no consideration for synergistic or antagonistic effects with other developments in the area. In addition to the cumulative effects, combined effects of different types of development are also not considered. The disparate nature of much of the data on the UK Continental Shelf makes an assessment of these cumulative and combined impacts difficult to undertake. There is an urgent need to support projects which are planned, or underway, which aim to facilitate the integration and compilation of a central source of data on marine biological, geological, and oceanographic characteristics, together with sites either being developed or proposed for development.

1.g       Effective environmental planning in the coastal and marine environment is significantly hindered by a lack of resources for the maritime functions of Government agencies and conservation advisory bodies. The country conservation agencies have been faced with static grants in aid from Government whilst their responsibilities to achieve conservation objectives under international agreements such as the Habitats Directive and national measures such as the Biodiversity Action Plan have increased considerably. The Joint Nature Conservation Committee, the Government's advisory body on all conservation issues both terrestrial and marine has also faced cuts and maintains its maritime functions on a skeleton staff.

2.       Boundaries

2.a      Coastal planning is currently based on a framework of administrative boundaries which is highly inappropriate and, as has been stressed on several occasions during previous consultations, MCS believes that there is an urgent need for the development of a national coastal strategy which sets national objectives and principles to guide regional and local coastal planning decisions. Despite recognition in Planning Policy Guidance 20 for coastal planning that local authorities should work together on coastal matters and that planning policies for neighbouring areas should be consistent, local authority boundaries are still closely adhered to. MCS made recommendations in 1992 on PPG20 that appropriate geographic regions where authorities should work together to prepare coastal zone plans should be identified and that central Government should set up a CZM unit to encourage, support and develop effective CZM though out the UK. The English Coastal Forum has been ineffective in this respect, whilst the Scottish Coastal Forum is making more progress. However, these fora do not of themselves have the authority or power to develop a national coastal policy and are restricted by a lack of central Government commitment. A paper prepared by Wildlife and Countryside Link, the umbrella body for environmental organisations in England has been developed which outlines our views on the development of a coastal zone management strategy. (Although this paper is still in draft form, a copy of the most recent version is attached - final copies should be available from Wildlife and Countryside Link in July).

2.b       There are a wide range of plans affecting the coastal zone which are managed by different authorities and agencies from shoreline management plans and local environmental action plans managed by the Environment Agency to management plans for Special Areas of Conservation and estuary management plans managed by conservation agencies, in conjunction with local authorities. The complexity of responsibilities leads to confusion and inaction when it comes to management of coastal zone development. The Local Government Association has recently produced a paper (On the edge: the real issues on the coast, LGA 1999) which sets out the issues and the questions which must be addressed if local government is to effectively plan and manage the coastal zone and MCS hopes that this document will be considered in the Royal Commission's study.

2.c       MCS believes that land use planning should be pursued on the basis of sound environmental principles including sustainability, the precautionary principle and clean production. These principles should underpin the decision making process throughout the planning system. The planning phase of developments is an opportunity to pre-empt future risks and impacts as well as put in place management requirements that can help deliver other policy targets and as such planning legislation should provide for consideration of all these aspects.

2.d       The provision of information to aid management decisions is key to the effectiveness of coastal planning. GIS is becoming widely used at the national level and could provide a very important tool for strategic planning and monitoring, but remains somewhat out of reach of those on the ground, who need to utilise the information contained on a day to day basis. Efforts need to be made to increase the scope of the data available, accessibility and use of data via GIS. A GIS system serving the UK as a whole which is fully maintained and freely accessible would facilitate the decision making process and provide for greater transparency.

However, there are underlying information deficiencies which need to be addressed before such a GIS system could be fully effective. These were identified in a recent study by the Isle of Wight Council - Managing the coast of central southern England and include:

• The number of different institutions and methodologies involved in data collection and analysis;
  
• The ownership of data by different bodies including the Government, commercial, academic and voluntary sectors;
  
• A lack of baseline data and indicators to assess environmental conditions and trends
  
• Absence of quantitative data of human influences on coastal zones.

3.      Integration and co-ordination

3.a      In the coastal and marine zone, the most significant gaps in co-ordination exist at the highest level - between Government departments. The establishment of the Inter-departmental Group on coastal issues has not successfully addressed this gap as the group is unaccountable to the public, with meetings being closed and no access to agendas, minutes or papers. MCS believes that the IDG has a role to play in co-ordinating Government policy relating to coastal planning, but it must become more transparent and allow representations to be made by interested parties.

May 2000

A Wildlife and Countryside Link paper supported by the following organisations:

WCL recommends that the following principles and processes be embodied in the Government strategy to achieve long-term stability of the coastal zone and its resources through integrated management based on the principles of sustainable use.

1.      Government Commitment to an Integrated Coastal Zone Management Strategy

An integral part of demonstrating the Government's commitment to the UK coast will be to place a duty on the Minister to produce and maintain a national coastal zone management (CZM) strategy. It is envisaged that this could be delivered through an overarching framework paper, similar to the Integrated Transport White Paper, with daughter papers on specific policy areas, e.g. Flood Defence.

The framework for delivering the strategy would be largely based on policy mechanisms, though some new legal measures will be needed, for example, to provide a statutory basis for CZM plans.

2.      Establishment of an Effective Framework of Responsibility for Delivering Advice to Government

Co-ordination of Government coastal policy at the highest level is essential. An effective framework needs to be established to deliver advice to Government, allocate responsibilities and to take forward the development of a national CZM strategy. This would involve a tiered approach including the Interdepartmental Group (IDG), the DETR Coastal Policy Unit and a National Coastal Advisory Body as illustrated below.

A.   Overall accountability should rest with the DETR Minister.
B.   There is an essential role for the IDG to play in co-ordinating Government policy relating to the coast but to be effective, the IDG must become more transparent and publicly accountable.
C.   The delivery of CZM in the UK will require the maintenance of a dedicated and adequately resourced coastal policy unit which, WCL believes, would sit naturally within the DETR. The role of the Unit would be two-fold: the focal point and lead on Government coastal policy, advising Government Departments and liaising with the statutory agencies; and developing and implementing a national coastal zone strategy (see Section 4).
D.   See Section 3.

3.   Terms of Reference of a National Coastal Advisory Body

It is envisaged that the national coastal advisory body will be chaired by a high profile independent member of the group, with DETR acting as the body's secretariat. The function and purpose of the body is to provide independent expert advice to Government on the development and implementation of a UK strategy for the integrated and sustainable management of the coastal zone, for example:

• Identification of specific deliverable targets based on a time tabled work plan.

• Establishment of ad hoc working groups to research and advise on specific issues.

• Reporting timescale i.e. annual programme of fixed-term projects, reporting to the Minister each year. For example, the Body's first project would be to advise on the national strategy for coastal management.

• Membership e.g. Government conservation, countryside, environment and heritage agencies; local government (either Government department or Association); Crown Estate; NGO representation; and academics. The aim is to create a multi-disciplinary group whose members are appointed on merit and expertise rather than sectoral interests.

• Accountability and accessibility - the Body should report to DETR policy unit, which would feed through information to the IDG.

• Monitoring - a state of the coast report to be published every five years by DETR policy unit which is then independently assessed by the national coastal advisory body.

The national coastal zone strategy must be based on sound environmental practice to ensure that the use of and investment in the coast is sensitive, constructive and sustainable. The first step in developing such a strategy must be to clarify its aims, objectives and standards.

Aim:
" To reconcile demands for coastal zone resources, to ensure their sustainable use, and as far as possible to resolve conflicts of use by integrating planning and management on a scale defined by natural coastal processes rather than by administrative boundaries".

Objectives and Standards:
Please see the Annexes for an illustrative list of the types of objectives to be identified at a national level (Annexe I) and regional level (Annex II), and minimum standards to be attained by coastal zone management plans (Annex III).

Implementation:
The national coastal zone strategy should be interpreted at a regional level and implementation overseen in the first instance by a regional authority. This is to ensure that issues which require coastal zone planning on a scale larger than the local/estuary level are given adequate attention. It should also ensure that local CZM initiatives take full account of neighbouring initiatives thus achieving full integration of coastal policy and action.

5.      Future of the Coastal Forum

There is general agreement that the Coastal Forum no longer serves a constructive purpose in shaping UK coastal policy. WCL suggests that the Forum be replaced by a National Coastal Conference that could provide the basis for an exchange of views and information between the four nations. The production of Wavelengths could be continued to report on the work of the DETR coastal policy unit, in addition to the activities of the other national coastal fora and local initiatives.

• To preserve, protect, develop and where possible, to restore the resources of the UK's coastal zone for this and succeeding generations;

• To encourage and assist the regions to exercise effectively their responsibilities in the coastal zone through the development and implementation of management plans to achieve the wise use of land and water resources of the coastal zone, giving full consideration to ecological, cultural, historic and aesthetic values as well as the needs for compatible economic development;

• To encourage the preparation of special area management plans which provide for increased specificity in protecting significant natural resources, reasonable coast-dependent economic growth, improved protection of life and property in hazard areas and improved predictability in governmental decision-making;

• To encourage participation and co-operation of the public, regional and local governments, and other regional agencies, as well as of the national agencies with programmes affecting the coastal zone, in carrying out the purposes of the strategy;

• To encourage co-ordination and co-operation with and among the appropriate national, regional and local agencies, and international organisations where appropriate, in collation, analysis, synthesis and dissemination of coastal management information, research results, and technical assistance, to support regulation of land use practices affecting the coastal and ocean resources;

• To respond to changing circumstances affecting the coastal environment and coastal resource management by encouraging regions to consider such as ocean uses potentially affecting the coastal zone.

• The protection of natural resources, including wetlands, floodplains, estuaries, beaches, dunes, reefs, and fish and wildlife and their habitat, within the coastal zone.

• The management of coastal development to minimise the loss of life and property caused by:
  
  - improper development in flood-prone, storm surge, geological hazard, and erosion-prone areas, or in areas likely to be affected by or vulnerable to sea level rise, land subsidence, and saltwater intrusion; and
  - the destruction of natural protective features such as beaches, dunes and wetlands.

• The management of coastal development to improve, safeguard, and restore the quality of coastal waters, and to protect natural resources and existing uses of those waters.

• Priority consideration given to coastal-dependent uses and orderly processes for siting major facilities related to national defence, energy, fisheries development, recreation, ports and transportation, and the location, to the maximum extend practicable, of new commercial and industrial developments in or adjacent to areas where such development already exists.

• Public access to the coasts for recreation purposes.

• Assistance in the redevelopment of deteriorating urban waterfronts and ports, and sensitive preservation and restoration of historic, cultural and aesthetic coastal features.

• The co-ordination and simplification of procedures in order to ensure expedited government decision-making for the management of coastal resources.

• Continued consultation and co-ordination with, and giving adequate consideration to views of, affected national agencies.

• The giving of timely and effective notification of, and opportunities for public and local government participation in, coastal zone management decision-making.

• Assistance to support comprehensive planning, conservation, and management for the living marine resources, including planning for the siting of pollution control and aquaculture facilities within the coastal zone, and improved co-ordination between local and national coastal zone management agencies and conservation agencies.

• The study and development of plans, in any case in which the Minister considers it to be appropriate, for addressing the adverse effects upon the coastal zone of land subsidence and of sea level rise.

• The identification of the boundaries of the coastal zone subject to the management programme;

• A definition of what shall constitute permissible land uses and water uses within the coastal zone which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters;

• An inventory and designation of areas of particular concern within the coastal zone;

• An identification of the means by which the state proposes to exert control over the land uses and water uses referred to above, including a list of relevant laws, regulations and judicial decisions;

• Broad guidelines on priorities of uses in particular areas, including specifically those uses of lowest priority;

• A description of the organisational structure proposed to implement such a management programme, including the responsibilities and interrelationships of local, area-wide, regional and national agencies in the management process;

• A definition of the term 'beach' (and other coastal features) and a planning process for the protection of, and access to, public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historic, aesthetic, ecological or cultural value;

• A planning process for energy and other major facilities likely to be located in, or which may significantly affect, the coastal zone, including a process for anticipating the management of the impacts resulting from such facilities;

• A planning process for assessing the effects of, and studying and evaluating ways to control, or lessen the impact of, shoreline erosion, and to restore areas adversely affected by such erosion.

  Top

  ---

  Back to Index of evidence to the Environmental Planning Study