Project part-financed by the European Union (European Regional Development Fund)

The Interreg IVB North Sea Region Programme


Disclaimer:
The authors are solely responsible for the content of this report. Material included herein does not represent the opinion of the European Community, and the European Community is not responsible for any use that might be made of it.
Back to overview reports



Analysis of the TIDE Estuarine Conflict Matrices

Table of content

Authors:

by N.D. Cutts & K.L. Hemingway



6c. Conflict Interaction Typology

The analysis has identified a series of user interactions that are present across most zones in the TIDE estuaries, and these are shown as a mean score across all zones and all estuaries in Figure 27 and Table 9. Table 9 therefore summarises the main interactions observed from the conflict matrix process across the TIDE estuaries, both antagonistic and synergistic.

Eight high scoring conflicts were recorded. These centre around:
  • Conservation on Navigation;
  • Conservation on Access;
  • Access on Conservation;
  • Flood Protection on Conservation;
  • Navigation on Conservation.
Within these categories, further typologies are identified.
  • Conservation on the intertidal zone is impacted by:
    • Recreational access along the banks & intertidal zone;
    • Provision of flood bank protection;
    • Capital dredging for navigation.
  • Conservation on the subtidal zone is impacted by:
    • Capital dredging for navigation;
    • Maintenance dredging for navigation.
  • Capital dredging for navigation impacted by:
    • Conservation of the subtidal zone.
  • Maintenance dredging for navigation impacted by:
    • Conservation of the subtidal zone.
  • Recreational access along banks and the intertidal zone impacted by:
    • Conservation on the intertidal zone
In addition, a series of synergisms were also identified. Unsurprisingly, many of these were within a high level topic, e.g. intertidal conservation on subtidal conservation, and maintenance dredging on vessel movement. However, there were some high scoring inter topic associations also identified. These were in relation to the provision of flood protection banks/dykes and port related activity adjacent to the estuary, industrial activity adjacent to the estuary and housing provision adjacent to the estuary.

An average of the conflict scores across all zones and all TIDE estuaries illustrates the main sectors of potential estuarine user conflict which may require management focus (shaded red in Figure 27), together with areas of synergistic potential (shaded green in the Figure 27), the severity of the conflict (or value of synergism) indicated by the intensity of the shading with darker shading for more intense interactions.



As noted earlier in text, interaction areas are frequently aligned with conservation protection - flood protection - ports and navigation requirements, with the specific synergisms resulting from flood protection services also notable in addition to those that occur within a topic area.

As such, the identification of these relatively generic high scoring interactions (both negative and positive) are of value in terms of establishing a typology of management needs, this in turn providing a basis for the translation of management requirements into an Ecosystem Service common currency, and thus linking this to the provision of mitigation and compensation measures. However, whilst these high level typologies provide an indication of the main interaction areas, it is important to emphasise that estuary specific interactions will require specific management focus as discussed in detail in earlier sections of this report. This focus necessarily will have both estuary and topic specific components, although again, the application of these, using appropriate mitigation/compensation measures can be assessed using an Ecosystem Services approach .

Table 9: Strong negative and positive associations between uses/users for all TIDE estuaries combined.
Impact of Impact On Score
Category Activity Category Activity  
Conservation Protected subtidal area Navigation Capital dredging -7
Conservation Protected subtidal area Navigation Maintenance dredging -7
Conservation Protected intertidal area Access (e.g. disturbance) Recreational access on the banks & intertidal -9
Access (e.g. disturbance) Recreational access on the banks & intertidal Conservation Protected intertidal area -8
Flood/Coast protection Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall) Conservation Protected intertidal area -8
Navigation Capital dredging Conservation Protected subtidal area -7
Navigation Capital dredging Conservation Protected intertidal area -7
Navigation Maintenance dredging Conservation Protected subtidal area -7
Conservation Protected subtidal area Conservation Protected intertidal area 9
Conservation Protected intertidal area Conservation Protected subtidal area 10
Flood/coast protection Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall) Ports & Harbours Port related activity adjacent to system 7
Flood/coast protection Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall) Industry Industrial activity adjacent to system 7
Flood/coast protection Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall) Residential Housing adjacent to system 8
Navigation Channel stabilisation Navigation Vessel movement 8
Navigation Capital dredging Navigation Vessel movement 7
Navigation Maintenance dredging Navigation Vessel movement 9


Back to top
6b. Salinity Zone Associations 7. DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

Important to know

Reports / Measures / Tools

Report: Zonation of the TIDE estuaries (Functioning)
Report: Ecosystem Service Assessment of TIDE Estuaries (Functioning)
Report: Legislative Drivers & Sectoral Plan Review of TIDE Estuaries (Governance)


Management issues

How can management actions be prioritised based on conflict assessment outcomes?
How can multiple estuarine resource use be managed in an integrated way within the existing planning system?
How can the Ecosystem Services Approach be used to support management decisions?
How do TIDE estuaries deal with management problems?
How does the societal demand for ecosystem services vary along the estuary gradient?
What are the key areas of conflicts or synergies in TIDE estuaries?
What tool is available to help manage multiple users of a resource in an integrated way (i.e. achieving more holistic management)?
What tools are useful for involving local communities and stakeholders?
Which aspects do I have to take into account in order to make a measure a success?
Which synergistic effects and conflicts can be expected by planning and implementing a certain measure?


Keywords

Conflict matrix - used throughout the reportEcosystem services approachEstuary / estuarinePolyhaline / mesohaline etc.