key stakeholders meeting. 25 september 2003. beachy head to selsey bill shoreline management plan...

Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.

Beachy Head to Selsey BillShoreline Management Plan1st Review

Key Stakeholders Forum

Roger Spencer (Arun DC)Adam Hosking (Halcrow Group)

[email protected]


Structure for today

• Introductions• Presentation

– SMP background– Stakeholder Involvement Strategy– Issues Identification Approach

• Questions on Approach• Break-out sessions to review issues table• What next in SMP?


Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs)

• The SMP is a (non-statutory) policy document for coastal defence management planning

• It will however take account of other existing planning initiatives and legislative requirements

• It will inform wider (statutory) strategic planning, but

• It will not set policy for anything other than coastal defence management


COASTAL DEFENCE PLANNINGThe UK Strategic Framework

Shoreline Management Plans

Identify general policies, e.g. “hold the line” and general implementation requirements

e.g. SMP4d

Strategy Plans Identifies nature and timing of works to be undertaken

e.g. Rivers Arun to Adur

Schemes Design and construction of capital works and maintenance

e.g. Shoreham & Lancing Sea Defences


Aim of the SMP

• To promote sustainable management policies for a coastline into the 22nd century

• Seek to achieve long-term objectives without committing to unsustainable defences

• Consider objectives, policy setting and management requirements for 3 main time periods….

…. 0-20 years, 20-50 years and 50-100 years• Provide a timeline for management changes, which

will provide direction for decision makers to move from the present towards the future


Why review the SMP?

• SMPs are working documents that need to be revised to incorporate up-to date information and changes in policy guidance and ongoing shoreline evolution

• First SMP was produced in 1996/7• New SMP needs to take account of:

– Latest technical studies (e.g. Futurecoast)– Issues identified by most recent defence planning (i.e.

coastal defence strategy plans which now cover most of the SMP area)

– Changes in legislation (e.g. EU Habitat Directive)– Changes in national defence planning requirements


SMP work flow

6 . F ina lise S h ore lineM anag em en t P lan

M ay

5 . P ub lic co nsu lta tionApril - M ay

4 . P o licy ap pra isalNovem ber - M arch

3 . D e fin e o b jec tivesSept - Novem ber

2 . In itia l d a taassessm ent

July - Aug

1 . D ata G atheringJune - Septem ber


SMP work flow: Data Gathering

Project team

June 2003Coastal Group Meeting

Agree Stakeholder Engagement Strategy and overall approach

July 2003Develop initial Stakeholder Engagement materials

Stakeholder list, letter/questionnaire

August 2003Issue Stakeholder Engagement Materials

As well as identifying issues, seek to identify what other information is available

August 2003 Field Visit Key project team members

August/ September 2003

Stakeholder FeedbackIdentification of information and issues.

August/ September 2003

Information Collection From Stakeholders.


SMP work flow : Initial data assessments and define objectives

September 2003 Analyse Responses Develop Issues Table

September 2003 Stakeholder meetingReview and discussion of identified issues

September/ October 2003

Conduct theme reviews

Obtain data from designated sources

September/ October 2003

Develop process understanding

Assess shoreline evolution for base cases

October/ November 2003

Complete issues table Define and rank objectives

November 2003 Stakeholder meetingReview/ agree objectives and ranking

November 2003 Finalise Objectives


SMP work flow: Policy appraisal and SMP production

December/ January 2003

Policy Scenario Assessment

Use objectives and process baseline to identify appropriate policies for SMP and assess shoreline response to policies

February 2004 Stakeholder MeetingStakeholder review of proposed policies

February/ March 2004

Finalise policy and draft document

April/May 2004 Public ConsultationDraft document available for review

May 2004 Complete SMPDetermine changes needed and amend draft document


Role of Issues & Objectives(‘Issues’ are raised by stakeholders/reviews, ‘objectives’ aim to resolve issues)

• Central to new approach to SMPs– Informs selection of policies– Provides focus for stakeholder consensus

• Policy appraisal is ‘objective led’• Objectives appraised to identify most suitable

shoreline management policy


SMP Management Model

CONTRACTORCLIENT

MANAGEMENTGROUP

Other individualstakeholders

andorganisations

not on theForum

KEYSTAKEHOLDERS’

FORUM


Remit of Key Stakeholders’ Forum

• Comprises representatives of the key stakeholder organisations likely to be affected by the SMP

• Suggests issues and their priorities to be considered within the SMP

• Meets periodically throughout production of SMP

• Provides comment on proposals of Client Management Group and the Contractor


KSF MembershipEastbourne BC Wealden DC Lewes DC

Brighton & Hove CC Adur DC Worthing DC

Arun DC Chichester DC English Nature

Environment Agency West Sussex CC East Sussex CC

English Heritage Sussex Wildlife TrustSussex Downs

Conservation Board

Sussex Sea Fisheries RSPB National Trust

Royal Yachting Association

Sussex Association of Local Councils

National Farmers Union

Brighton Marina Co. Railtrack Shoreham Port*

Littlehampton Harbour Board*

Defra, FCD*Defra, Fisheries

Inspectorate*

Southern Water* Sea Containers Ports* South Coast Power*


Approach to Stakeholder Involvement

• Identified organisations and individuals with an interest in the preparation of the SMP

• Letter of Invitation explaining reasoning and background to all Stakeholders

• Questionnaire to all Stakeholders asking for contact details, data and concerns/issues

• Discussions with the Client Management Group comprising the local authorities, Environment Agency, English Nature and Defra


Approach to Identifying Issues

• Familiarisation visits to whole coastline, concentrating on sensitive areas

• Review of current SMP

• Review of information and other documents provided by authorities and found on the internet

• Issues raised in the responses to the questionnaires sent to 150 stakeholders


Issues based methodology

• Provides systematic and consistent evaluation process of subjective and objective criteria

• Identifies what really matters not just the obvious• Offers a strategic approach• Based upon ‘Quality of Life Capital’, developed by

Countryside Agency, English Nature, English Heritage and the Environment Agency


Identification of Issues

Location Feature Issue associated with Feature

FCD Issue?

Affect policy?

Why is issue important?

Who are beneficiaries?


Issues Table for Sub-Cell 4d (cont)

• Beneficiaries ranked as:– Individuals – not organisations– Local – residents, groups in immediate area– Regional Users – local authorities, regional

communities, organisations and businesses– National Users – National organisations– International Users


Issues Table for Sub-Cell 4d

• Three forms of issues– technical– environmental– socio-economic

• Generic issues for:– Towns and other settlements– Open coast


• Protecting people and their homes• Protecting commercial property and the local

economy• Protecting local infrastructure and services• Protecting recreation and tourism sites and

activities• Maintaining access to the beach• Protecting of specific designated sites and

features

Generic Issues for Towns


• Preserving environmental designations e.g. SSSI, SNCI, SPA, AONB, NNR

• Protecting agricultural land• Maintaining access to the beach for

launching/recreation• Protecting marine archaeological sites• Protecting coastal developments

Generic Issues for Open Coast


Structure for today

• Introductions• Presentations

– SMP background– Stakeholder Involvement Strategy– Issues Identification Approach

• Questions on Approach• Break-out sessions to review issues table• What next in SMP?


Break out sessions

• Divide into groups• Consider in turn,

– the ISSUES (does it affect policy?), – the FEATURES these relate to– Why is this important, i.e. what are the

BENEFITS– WHO benefits

• Remember to also consider TIMESCALES over which these apply (0-20, 20-50, 50-100 years)


Next Steps

• Finalise the issues table• Use process study to appraise potential future

flooding and erosion risks (over 20, 50 and 100 years)

• Use ‘theme reviews’ to rank shoreline management objectives

• Review by Stakeholders.• Policy Appraisal


Converting Issues to Objectives

Ranking objectives is based upon answering 4 questions:

• At what scales (spatial/temporal) is the benefit important? If the feature were lost tomorrow, at what (spatial) scale would there be an impact? Also, is the feature, or benefit, of finite temporal importance (i.e. less that 100 years?).

• Can the benefit be substituted? Can the benefit can be replaced at the appropriate scale.

• Is there enough of the benefit? Scarcity of the benefit at the scale at which it is important.

• Importance of the benefit at the SMP scale or greater? If the feature were lost tomorrow, what would the impact be?


Objective SettingRanking of Objectives

Rank Criteria

Very High High importance and rarity, international/national/regional scale limited potential for substitution

High High importance and rarity, international scale but potential for substitution

High High importance and rarity, local or regional scale, and limited potential for substitution

Medium Medium importance and rarity, regional scale, but limited potential for substitution

Low Medium importance and rarity, local scale, but potential for substitution

Negligible Low or very low importance and rarity, local scale


Policy Appraisal

Once we have defined and agreed the ranked objectives, they will be used in policy appraisal.

There are 4 possible policy options:

• hold the existing defence line• advance the existing defence line• managed realignment• no active intervention

These will be appraised to develop ‘policy scenarios’ which will be tested against process understanding to determined preferred policy.

Review by Key Stakeholders and Elected members.


Points to consider

In answering the questions for the range of issues affecting the coast we need to consider:

• What should we use to appraise whether there is enough of a benefit e.g. housing or shops? County/Regional housing targets?

• Are all SSSI sites unique, or should we count some as re-creatable? (EN/CWT guidance)

• Are all urban assets more beneficial than rural assets, due to future regeneration/development potential? (Development sites or more general)

• How should we appraise importance of features such as recreation areas? Primary users, e.g. local, etc?


Meeting 2

• Thursday 27 November 2003

• Review objectives

• Appraise Ranking

• Agree way forward with policy appraisal.

• Comments to: [email protected]

key stakeholders meeting. 25 september 2003. beachy head to selsey bill shoreline management plan...

Documents

key stakeholders meeting

smp work flow slide

management requirements

management changes

new smp

coastal group meeting

smp area changes

future slide