[[publications]] › feedback on the ICZM Nellore report
----
Smal, A., Olieman, A.M., Van Lieshout, K., Buirma, T., Van der Meer, T., Schöler, N., and Glabischnig, M. (2011) --- Integrated Coastal Zone Management in Nellore: An assessment report. --- //University of Amsterdam - Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies// (supervised by Bavinck, M. and Van der Pijl, W.) --- #%[[http://olieman.net/docs/IntegratedCoastalZoneManagementNelloreIndia.pdf pdf]]#% ''full text''

This report was written in the context of the //Water Governance// course at the University of Amsterdam. Because it has not been submitted for peer-review, we would like to use the feedback that we have received to make readers aware of the shortcomings of our work.

The following was written by our tutor, Willem van der Pijl, in response to the report:

	- 	Good use of academic and public sources.	
	- 	Well written, proper academic standards.	
	- 	Only the stakeholder analysis remains a little messy. 	
	- 	Overall you have gone through an intense process and managed to produce a very impressive report which is of a professional standard.
	
	
	Impressed by how clear the problem and objective tree has been constructed and how the theory of resilience thinking is incorporated in the main objective to achieve or strive for negotiated and commonly accepted management solutions. I think that you succeeded to develop a coastal scenario that reflects to a large extent local reality. I find it very interesting that you visualize how social indicators (read: dynamics/issues), are the cause of environmental/natural problems. Here you explicitly indicate that natural/environmental issues have to be governed through humans and social dynamics. 
	
	You have made good use of solution analysis with risk/cost/ resilience matrix. Good suggestions about where the primary focus for the administrator should be. Management solutions are very detailed and as far as possible also comprehensive. 
	
	I think that you could have taken the suggested management plan to a next level by further linking the solutions to the international/global level. In your solutions I miss the international NGO’s, engaged with sustainable aquaculture practices, as possible providers of capital and knowledge. I would argue that they are important partners if it turns out that local and national authorities have low level of interest. This is especially true because of the export-orientated character of the entire aquaculture sector. International NGO’s but also international buyers of cultured seafood might be interesting partners who may enhance the financially feasibility of management solutions.  I was a little bit surprised that this did not come back in your management solutions because these stakeholders were included in the stakeholder analysis.

{{nocomments}}