A DEcision MAking (DEMA) Tool to Be Used in Ecosystem-Based Management System (EBMS) Applications
Beaches are basically managed mirroring user’s perception and normative requirements to obtain performance standards or distinctions made on well-known Quality Management Systems and/or Environmental Management Systems. However, when these systems are used in the management of these natural public goods, present practices do not fit with the Ecosystem Approach Strategy (EA) launched by United Nations at the end of last Century. To overcome this reality, an application of the Ecosystem-Based Management System (EBMS) was developed recently as a formal way to practice this approach at the beach social-ecological system. The EBMS is a stepwise process that combines environmental quality and risk management system theory with the EA principles. The EBMS is composed of three interactive pillars: Managerial, Information and Participatory. The Managerial pillar is the “engine” of the EBMS, following the classical Plan-Do-Check-Act managerial policy scheme. As a part of the Planning phase, a factual approach to decision making is suggested: DEMA (DEcision-MAking) tool. DEMA is a formal prioritization tool intended to help managers to determine, based on a social cost-benefit analysis and the vision established for a particular social-ecological system, which projects should be the first. DEMA uses risk management theory to decide what future activities should be selected in the policy cycle to avoid those identified risks that could impede us to get the desired vision for the beach under management. DEMA is using a framework of indicators related to the identified ecosystem services given by these systems, valuating and rating them to further prioritization of actions.
This work was carried out within the framework of the PLAYA+ project (CGL2013-49061) of the National Research Plan of Spain in R + D + i, as well as the KnowSeas + project (201530E018). We thanks the managers of the present book for allow us to present this paper here.
- Cormier R, Kannen A, Elliott M et al (2013) Marine and coastal ecosystem-based risk management handbook. ICES cooperative research report, vol 317, p 59Google Scholar
- Cormier R, Kannen A, Elliott M et al (2015) Marine spatial planning quality management system. ICES cooperative research report, vol 327, p 106Google Scholar
- Deming EW (1986) Out of the crisis. MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge, p 523Google Scholar
- Ehler C, Douvere F (2009) Marine spatial planning: a step-by-step approach toward Ecosystem-Based Management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Program. IOCAM Cooperative Research Report, 273, p 22Google Scholar
- European Environmental Agency (EEA) (1999) Environmental indicators: typology and overview. Technical report, vol 25. EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
- Fox MJ (1994) Quality management systems. Chapman & Hall, USAGoogle Scholar
- Hardy M (2008) Ocean risk analysis framework. Canadian fisheries and oceans report, p 29Google Scholar
- Ibañez S (2016) Normalización y Certificación como Herramientas para la Gestión Sostenible de Playas. AENOR, MadridGoogle Scholar
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Olsen SB, Page GG, Ochoa E (2009) The Analysis of Governance to Ecosystem Change: a handbook for assembling a baseline. LOICZ reports and studies, 34, p 87Google Scholar
- Rice J, Trujillo V, Jennings S et al (2005) Guidance on the application of the ecosystem approach to management of human activities in the european marne environment. ICES cooperative research report, vol 273, p 22Google Scholar
- Steffan W, Richardson K, Rockström J et al (2015) Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Ecology 347(6223)Google Scholar
- UNEP-WCMC (2011) Developing ecosystem service indicators: experiences and lessons learned from sub-global assessments and other initiatives. Secretariat of the convention on biological diversity, Technical series, vol 58, p 118Google Scholar