4.7 Article

Prioritising coastal zone management issues through fuzzy cognitive mapping approach

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 97, 期 -, 页码 56-68

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.11.006

关键词

Integrated Coastal Zone Management; Fuzzy cognitive mapping; Public participation; Lebanon

资金

  1. EC-SMAP III [MED/2005/110-659]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effective public participation is an essential component of Integrated Coastal Zone Management implementation. To promote such participation, a shared understanding of stakeholders' objectives has to be built to ultimately result in common coastal management strategies. The application of quantitative and semi-quantitative methods involving tools such as Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping is presently proposed for reaching such understanding. In this paper we apply the Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping tool to elucidate the objectives and priorities of North Lebanon's coastal productive sectors, and to formalize their coastal zone perceptions and knowledge. Then, we investigate the potential of Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping as tool for support coastal zone management. Five round table discussions were organized; one for the municipalities of the area and one for each of the main coastal productive sectors (tourism, industry, fisheries, agriculture), where the participants drew cognitive maps depicting their views. The analysis of the cognitive maps showed a large number of factors perceived as affecting the current situation of the North Lebanon coastal zone that were classified into five major categories: governance, infrastructure, environment, intersectoral interactions and sectoral initiatives. Furthermore, common problems, expectations and management objectives for all sectors were exposed. Within this context, Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping proved to be an essential tool for revealing stakeholder knowledge and perception and understanding complex relationships. (C) 2011 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