Intercoast Network • Fall 1997
15
by Marc Staljanssens
I
CO MIS is a geographic-based, policy modeling tool developed to assist
decisionmakers in selecting the best coastal zone development alternatives
from a number of feasible choices on the basis of pre-defined priorities.
Sensitivity analysis capabilities of the decision support software allow for
the simulation of “what if ” scenarios. Basic research on the ICO MIS concept
was carried out in Guinea and Thailand, and a successful pilot project took place
in India. ICO MIS can be applied at the na-
tional or local level. O n a local level, or in the case of small island countries,
the whole ICO MIS system can be PC- based. Requirements for use of the
ICO MIS tool include: ■
Data input, storage, retrieval and management utilities database,
spreadsheets; ■
A remote sensing geographic infor- mation system;
■ Various expert systems and model-
ing utilities; ■
A multi-objective decision support software;
■ Data output and presentation utili-
ties map maker, graphs and chart drawing; and
■ A user interface.
The logical steps in the application of ICO MIS are:
1. Problem definition.
The nature of the problem typically is a
conflict of interests such as the expan- sion of shrimp culture in an area of
mangrove conservation. Since decisions in these matters are urgently required,
ICO MIS is problem-oriented rather than comprehensive. An inventory of
the problems will determine informa- tion needs.
2. Definition of the coastal zone.
An important requirement for the setting of an effective ICO MIS is
the clear definition of the extent of the coastal zone. From both management
and scientific viewpoints, the extent of
the coastal zone will vary according to the nature and extent of the prob-
lem and the resources considered, and be limited by administrative or politi-
cal boundaries. In definition of the limits, it is important that all features
and factors that influence the manage- ment and development of the coastal
zone be included.
3. Assessment criteria.
As- sessment criteria specific to each policy
objective are chosen to evaluate the degree of achievement of policy mea-
sures. They are chosen in roughly equal numbers in order to avoid introducing
a bias in the multi-criteria analysis.
4. Sustainability analysis.
Existing or planned activities are iden- tified and formulated on the basis of the
policy measures. Specific biophysical and social economic requirements and
limitations correspond to each activity and are matched to the resource quali-
ties. Not only is the existing situation considered but also the impact of
planned policy measures and activities is simulated, and the areas of conflict
identified.
5. Formation of policy alter- natives.
Policy measures guide development toward the fulfillment of
objectives related to integrated coastal management. To be realistic, the for-
mulation of the various alternatives must take all relevant objectives and
corresponding measures into account as these will determine a combination
of activities for each alternative. Modeling is a useful means, for exam-
ple, to include estimates of trends in autonomous developments in the alter-
natives, or a prognosis of the effects of a planned policy measure.
6. Policy schemes.
