Reflexiones sobre la puesta en valor del Monasterio de San Prudencio de Monte Laturce

[ES] Los datos de este registro provienen de la una actividad académica que también aparece descrita en el repositorio y desde donde se puede acceder a otros trabajos relacionados con el Monasterio:

Policy analysis of shoreline restoration options on private shorelines of Puget Sound

Puget Sound shorelines have historically provided a diversity of habitats that support a variety of aquatic resources throughout the region. These valued natural resources are iconic to the region and remain central to both the economic vitality and community appreciation of Puget Sound. Deterioration of upland and nearshore shoreline habitats, have placed severe stress on many aquatic resources within the region (PSAT, 2007). Since a majority of Washington State shorelines are privately owned, regulatory authority to legislate restoration on private property is limited in scope and frequency. Washington States’ Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) requires local jurisdictions to plan for appropriate future shoreline uses. Under the Act, future development can be regulated to protect existing ecological functions, but lost functions cannot be restored without purchase or compensation of restored areas. Therefore, questions remains as to the ecological resilience of the region when considering cumulative effect of existing/ongoing shoreline development constrained by limited shoreline restoration opportunities. In light of these questions, this analysis will explore opportunities to promote restoration on privately owned shorelines within Puget Sound. These efforts are intended to promote more efficient ecosystem management and improve ecosystem-wide ecological functions. From an economics perspective, results of past shoreline management can generally be characterized as both market and government failure in effectively protecting the publics’ interest in maintaining healthy shoreline resources. Therefore coastal development has proceeded in spite of negative externalities and market imbalances resulting in inefficient resource management driven by the individual ambitions of private shoreline property owners to develop their property to their highest and best use. Federally derived property rights will protect continuation of existing uses along privately owned shorelines; therefore, a fundamental challenge remains in sustainable management of existing shoreline resources while also restoring ecological functions lost to past mistakes in an effort to increase the ecologic resiliency within the region. (PDF contains 5 pages)

Adapting to climate change: Combining economics and geomorphology in coastal policy

How is climate change affecting our coastal environment? How can coastal communities adapt to sea level rise and increased storm risk? These questions have garnered tremendous interest from scientists and policy makers alike, as the dynamic coastal environment is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Over half the world population lives and works in a coastal zone less than 120 miles wide, thereby being continuously affected by the changes in the coastal environment [6]. Housing markets are directly influenced by the physical processes that govern coastal systems. Beach towns like Oak Island in North Carolina (NC) face severe erosion, and the tax assesed value of one coastal property fell by 93% in 2007 [9]. With almost ninety percent of the sandy beaches in the US facing moderate to severe erosion [8], coastal communities often intervene to stabilize the shoreline and hold back the sea in order to protect coastal property and infrastructure. Beach nourishment, which is the process of rebuilding a beach by periodically replacing an eroding section of the beach with sand dredged from another location, is a policy for erosion control in many parts of the US Atlantic and Pacific coasts [3]. Beach nourishment projects in the United States are primarily federally funded and implemented by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) after a benefit-cost analysis. Benefits from beach nourishment include reduction in storm damage and recreational benefits from a wider beach. Costs would include the expected cost of construction, present value of periodic maintenance, and any external cost such as the environmental cost associated with a nourishment project (NOAA). Federal appropriations for nourishment totaled $787 million from 1995 to 2002 [10]. Human interventions to stabilize shorelines and physical coastal dynamics are strongly coupled. The value of the beach, in the form of storm protection and recreation amenities, is at least partly capitalized into property values. These beach values ultimately influence the benefit-cost analysis in support of shoreline stabilization policy, which, in turn, affects the shoreline dynamics. This paper explores the policy implications of this circularity. With a better understanding of the physical-economic feedbacks, policy makers can more effectively design climate change adaptation strategies. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Non-governmental organizations and multi-sited marine conservation science: A case study

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are now major players in the realm of environmental conservation. While many environmental NGOs started as national organizations focused around single-species protection, governmental advocacy, and preservation of wilderness, the largest now produce applied conservation science and work with national and international stakeholders to develop conservation solutions that work in tandem with local aspirations. Marine managed areas (MMAs) are increasingly being used as a tool to manage anthropogenic stressors on marine resources and protect marine biodiversity. However, the science of MMA is far from complete. Conservation International (CI) is concluding a 5 year, $12.5 million dollar Marine Management Area Science (MMAS) initiative. There are 45 scientific projects recently completed, with four main “nodes” of research and conservation work: Panama, Fiji, Brazil, and Belize. Research projects have included MMA ecological monitoring, socioeconomic monitoring, cultural roles monitoring, economic valuation studies, and others. MMAS has the goals of conducting marine management area research, building local capacity, and using the results of the research to promote marine conservation policy outcomes at project sites. How science is translated into policy action is a major area of interest for science and technology scholars (Cash and Clark 2001; Haas 2004; Jasanoff et al. 2002). For science to move policy there must be work across “boundaries” (Jasanoff 1987). Boundaries are defined as the “socially constructed and negotiated borders between science and policy, between disciplines, across nations, and across multiple levels” (Cash et al. 2001). Working across the science-policy boundary requires boundary organizations (Guston 1999) with accountability to both sides of the boundary, among other attributes. (Guston 1999; Clark et al. 2002). This paper provides a unique case study illustrating how there are clear advantages to collaborative science. Through the MMAS initiative, CI built accountability into both sides of the science-policy boundary primarily through having scientific projects fed through strong in-country partners and being folded into the work of ongoing conservation processes. This collaborative, boundary-spanning approach led to many advantages, including cost sharing, increased local responsiveness and input, better local capacity building, and laying a foundation for future conservation outcomes. As such, MMAS can provide strong lessons for other organizations planning to get involved in multi-site conservation science. (PDF contains 3 pages)