Acronyms

Access

Logo

Contact

PANEL DISCUSSION

Prof. Mimura:	Now I'd like to start the panel discussion. The purpose of this panel discussion is to respond to your questions and comments from the floor, and after that, we'll focus on some interesting subjects. I want to make this panel discussion as frank and friendly as possible, so please don't hesitate in giving us questions and comments.
Questioner:	My name is Kusumita Jai. I am from the Southeast part of India. I am involved in integrated coastal zone management education. This is mainly the training of the decision makers in integrated coastal zone management. In so doing, I worked under the collaboration with a UK institution in about the last 2 years. What we found were important difficulties in educating; transferring knowledge to the decision-makers such as the specifics of the scientific research we are doing on the coast. So, the problem is how can we communicate with the decision-makers, how can we adapt our methodology and modules to transfer the information. We have collected a lot of information using remote sensing, DES, DPS, everything. But when we take this information to the decision-making level it should be in a very simple and meaningful format. We should have a proper linkage between the scientists and the policy-makers. How can this be done? How can this output be taken to the policy-makers? That is the first question. And then, when we are doing that, many countries in the Asia-Pacific region are doing similar research. How do we share this information, and how do we interact with these different institutions in the same area? And, who will supervise these interactions, and how can we form a network to make such interactions work? These are the two questions from my side.
Prof. Mimura:	Whom do you want to ask? Could somebody respond to him?
Dr. Lee:	Since I mentioned a little bit about training in my talk, I think I could comment. Up to now a lot of concerns regarding training programmes are being addressed so as to improve the decision-making process in social science-related fields, but we feel that training for scientific technologies, actually for transfer technologies that are essential for coastal management, is very helpful. A couple of months ago Dr. Kullenberg in IOI (International Oceans Institute) visited Qingdao and he discussed the importance and necessity of this kind of training, so we agreed to organise such a programme; for example coastal modeling technologies or coastal zone management. It's a different kind of training from the coastal management that we mentioned, but we are trying to organise that sometime next year if we can find the proper sponsors. We feel that these two approaches are both necessary. Another thing is how to organise a lot of interaction. Maybe we need to organise inside the countries first as there are many agencies and people in each country. We need some kind of clearly organised interaction inside the countries themselves in addition to between the countries in the regions. Maybe those agencies should be involved in technical organisations for international activities in the regions inside the country. I think there are some kinds of indications to organise that.
Prof. Mimura:	Are there any other responses please?
Prof. Aksornkoae:	Regarding the question of how scientists can work in cooperation with the policy-makers, I think that many countries in Asia have some conflict among scientists and politicians or policy-makers. But so far, now in Thailand I think that the scientists and the policy-makers can work together very smoothly after they understand. Because formerly, the policy-makers, Ministers or politicians complained that scientists write everything in a science so difficult to understand, because they have no scientific background. So, we are now trying to accommodate and most of the cabinet or the Ministers in Thailand now have many scientists as advisors. And, from past experience, I think that in many countries the policy-makers managed the coastal resources without any scientific background, so they are well aware that if we manage without background knowledge, the management cannot be sustained. The politicians or policy-makers understand and now they are trying to move to work closely with the scientists. That is the other way. So, we have to work together.
Prof. Mimura:	Professor Menasveta, you have something to say?
Prof. Menasveta:	Yes, regarding how to share the information and data, I think that there's a need for us to set up something like a network for a database, because now we can communicate by email which is quite easy. So, if we can assign a certain international organisation or agency like EMECS or APN to do the job, that would be easier. And, I think that organisations in countries in these regions also have their own web site, which is a compilation of all their information and data. If they can share that information through international web sites, then this will be a way to access any countries regarding their environmental management of coastal areas. This can be something like a concept of one-stop shopping: there's no need to access several web sites, which is very hard to do. We could just go to one web site and then go to the other existing web sites. I think that this will be the way and means to share information and data. Regarding how to make the decision-makers understand our scientific findings, I think that that should be the political view of the politicians. I think most of them know that sometimes they have a policy and it depends on the budget available, so with this limitation, some politicians try to deviate from what they think or want to do. Sometimes this is a problem, especially during this period because we have a bad economy right now and not enough budget. They want to do something, but they cannot deny, so they try to pretend that they don't understand, but I think that in fact they understand very well. So, it also depends on the situation of the world economy. I think that if we have money, there'd be no problem. For example in Japan, I remember when I came here in 1970 I dropped by in Tokyo on the trip to my studies in the States, I could see polluted canals near Haneda airport. On the way back this time I stopped in Tokyo again in Haneda airport, and it has changed; now I could see the same canals with people fishing. The water quality is good, because in that period Japan put out a lot of money and invested in solving their pollution and environmental problems. They had the money and the political view to do it, so within a short period of time, only four, five years, they could manage it. Tokyo Bay used to have alga bloom and red tides before 1970, but after having set up the water treatment system - wastewater treatment system - the problem has decreased to the minimum. So, everything depends on the economy, on money. If you have money, and if you have people who have knowledge, you can solve the problem. This is my reaction to your first comment.
Prof. Mimura:	Another important question is about regional cooperation, so our rapporteur Dr. Yatsu, who is Director of the Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research, might have something to answer.
Dr. Yatsu:	I think in terms of the regional cooperation on coastal zone management, maybe the International EMECS Center - the secretariat of this forum - could have the potential to be a kind of center of excellence for the various types of activities with regard to coastal zone management. But from the scientific research viewpoint, we, APN (Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research) have put higher priority on coastal zones among the four priority areas, including climate and biodiversity, and we also put higher priority on coastal zone management. And actually, we funded several research projects on coastal zone management, for example, the impact of climate change on coastal zones in the Asia-Pacific region. So, we will certainly be continuing these kinds of activities in the future, and APN can collaborate with other international organisations like the International EMECS Center, or others like the joint organisation of this Asian forum.
Prof. Mimura:	Now I'd like to invite another question or comment.
Prof. Ghosh:	Mr. Chairman, I am Professor Santosh Ghosh of the Center for Built Environment, Calcutta, India. Now we the experts, if we can call ourselves experts, have some problems. We know our subject very well, but we know very little about the area and the people who live on the coast. This difference of knowledge always surfaces in all our discussions. This morning we had very nice presentations, some put out little information for some reasons, but some appeared very contradictory to me, or there was the absence of a few items. Firstly, we'll start with the last one. It was a very good presentation but does it talk about the prawn or shrimp culture in terms of economic benefit? The speaker didn't say whether it is good or bad, but only mentioned it. Now in India, the Supreme Court of Justice has banned this income source because it destroys the ecology of the area. It is a very contradictory thing. The second point is that most of the discussion focused on the effects of something, like human activity, pollution, and so on, and not on the causes of these. One of the major factors of the coastal problems of any Asian country is the upstream/downstream problem; the problem starts upstream and comes downstream to the coastal area. This should have been focused on a lot more. Thirdly, which I mentioned in the beginning: How do we approach the coastal area people? These are not barren lands with birds and animals only. Millions of people live there for their livelihood, and most of the people in Asian countries are poor and live in coastal areas. They're diversified, they're doing agriculture on tidal swamp, and they're doing some other economic activities which are detrimental to the coastal environment. How can we convince them? What are the educational objectives? They have no Internet or e-mail access. So how will we reach them? Through television? Through public campaigns? Many countries have achieved something, but not enough. I think there are other issues that should have been focused on, and I'd like to have a discussion opened. If the experts throw some light on this issue, it will be beneficial.
Prof. Mimura:	Thank you very much for pointing out those very important issues. I think some of the panelists want to respond to him, for example the upstream/downstream relationship with the coastal zone environment. So, is there anybody who would like to respond to him? Dr. Lee?
Dr. Lee:	Actually it is true that there is a need to deal with upstream and downstream. Unfortunately, there are only a few examples, like for example in the Philippines or in the East-Asian Sea region, which deals in actual implementation of it. There are plans, like for example strategic environmental programs, which are trying to deal with that but they are not yet in actual implementation. Like, for example, linking the Mekong initiatives with the Palan Gulf, and there is a new program in the Philippines on ecological governance, also linking upstream and downstream effects, but as of the moment they are in their initial stages. Also, this bottom-up and top-down issue is also being dealt with in the Philippines, especially with the mediation of many NGOs. It depends I guess on the social structure of the societies which are in the region. In the Philippines there is a very strong NGO movement and participation, or enhancing participation, of the local communities, and the scientific community also plays an active role in this forum, but it depends, as I said, on the history of the area. For example, Indonesia is trying to learn the lessons that the Philippines are also learning in terms of how NGOs engage with the local governments and on national government levels. The others would be having various types of media to reach the actual stakeholders on the ground, and I guess this will also be dealt with further in this session and in the NGO forum.
Prof. Mimura:	Professor Menasveta you have the floor.
Prof. Menasveta:	With regard to the upstream and downstream effects, I would like to recommend you to read a comprehensive report, which is published by GESAM. GESAM stands for the Group of Experts for the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection. It is not an agency; it is a group of experts that are supported by the UN system. They have set up a working group to study the impact of land-based activities concerning the cost of pollution, and they have published this publication summarising up-to-date information concerning the impact of land-based activities. For the trend that you mentioned, I agree that in India the Supreme Court has banned the shrimp culture, but in India the system you have for culturing shrimp is different from other areas. You are using what we call the tradition-type system requiring low-lying areas such as mangroves, which is evidently not good. But in some other countries like in Thailand, it's different. We are using what we call the intensive-type system in which there is no need for us to use mangroves anymore. It is true that in the past about 50% of mangroves have been destroyed, and shrimp culturing accounts for about 50% of the activities responsible for mangrove destruction. But now this is no longer a problem. We have changed shrimp farming from the traditional system into the intensive-type system, which needs an area of higher elevation above that of mangroves. With this system we can incorporate the cross-recirculating water system with the waste treatment system inside the shrimp farm itself. So with this system, only a very small amount of the waste is discharged from the farm, and the water can be reused. We are using this responsible system right now.
Prof. Mimura:	So, Professor Aksornkoae.
Prof. Aksornkoae:	I am very shocked. I think that I agree with Professor Ghosh who mentioned two impacts on the coastal resources, one being upstream/downstream. I think that I had read an article in a Bangkok newspaper that mentioned one river along the Sundabang Bay called the Koa River. They had blocked fresh water upstream, and then the seawater went upstream and increased salinity; most of the marine animals disappeared because of the very high salinity. We also have many areas in Thailand where bans are imposed. I think that we need some very detailed studies, for example experience from the Koa River. I think that is very important. Many countries try to build dams to block fresh water going to the coastline. They need the water for rice cultivation. It's very dangerous. So, I think that this issue is very important. And, as for the shrimp farming in Thailand, one of the problems we are trying to solve is that we share traditional and intensive systems. Some farmers have changed from intensive to traditional; they plant the main crop and cultivate it together with the shrimp. I think I went to see it at Koa or somewhere and saw the same problem. I think that we need more study about these two issues.
Prof. Mimura:	Dr. Hosokawa, I heard that the Japanese government is interested in the kind of watershed planning in relation with coastal zone management. Recently I heard that your institution is developing a research project to cover the whole river watershed area and coastal zone, focusing on the Tokyo Bay area. Could you share some of the Japanese experiences?
Dr. Hosokawa:	Thank you Professor Mimura. I'm from the National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management, and this institute has tried to make a comprehensive research project to manage the Tokyo Bay area from a wider viewpoint. This research project has tried to connect with the research product of the watershed study from another department. It's a very challenging project and it's not easy to find a solution, but we understand that the upstream/downstream affect on coastal areas or on water quality or sea sediment quality is very much affected by upstream human pressures. So, if you try to improve the coastal environment, we have to improve or we have to consider upstream conditions as many of the speakers mentioned in their excellent presentations. It's the first step, but we are trying to make comprehensive studies.
Prof. Mimura:	Please, Dr. Lee.
Dr. Lee:	I would like to comment on the cause of coastal environment change. The coastal environment is a very complicated process and still we don't have enough understanding so we have to base it on some kind of empirical basis. So, we need a good monitoring program to identify the cause of coastal environment changes. So, it is very important to have this coastal monitoring program. What I want to mention here is that there is a large difference in the economic level or science and technology standards in this region. Different countries have different standards. It's important to keep a similar standard of data quality or data quality control in the same region, which is very important to identify or to evaluate many of the causes of environmental changes. Maybe this kind of problem is an international agency related problem. There needs to be more interest, more attention on updating similar standards of data quality control for monitoring programs.
Prof. Mimura:	So, I'd like to ask or invite ... please.
Mr. Hasegawa, Consultant: (A question for Dr. Yu given by the speaker in Japanese and interpreted as follows):	My name is Hasegawa and I am a consultant. Dr Yu is the only one who is not speaking. In the Guangzhou population in 2010 to 2020, there is a projected increase in the population of about 70%. This is not a natural increase, but there is a movement of the population from the local area to Guangzhou City. In order to live, we have to increase the numbers of plants, and the wastewater from plants and domestic waste will be increased in volume. If the population is increased, it is impossible to increase the numbers of plant and domestic waste treatment systems and therefore effluent will go into the bay. And then, the management of the gulf, in the occurrence of, let us say, a red tide, or if there is a dangerous signal to fish. If such a signal is emitted, then it will be sent to the policy-makers and actions are necessary. Even if you have a good database system, it will not work out very well. In China, the population is very large and one province has a very large population equivalent to a major city here in Japan. So, you cannot catch good fish or have a good quality environmental system and you just have to create a new system to cope with the increase of the population.
Prof. Mimura:	Dr. Yu, could you respond to him?
Dr. Yu:	Maybe the size of the population is a bit different according to the status data of 1999. The population was 8.6 million, and then around November 1, 2000 it reached 9.94 million. So, the population increased by about 1 million in a year, but the data in 1999 was not complete. In the 5th National Population Census, the government said that if you didn't register a population number in the future you couldn't get permanent residency like in Guangzhou. One year ago, maybe some people didn't want to register their family members, so if we prepared a family-hold population and non-family hold population we could easily find out the problem of population size. So, I think in our plan, we related the population size and economic growth rate, and we used 50-years of data to simulate population growth. I think population size won't cause a big problem. In our ecological planning, we have already made policy suggestions. Water resources are a big problem especially from domestic sewage and wastewater. In 2000, industrial wastewater made up 26% of total wastewater, and domestic wastewater made up about 74%. The Environmental Protection Agency of Guangzhou is conducting a plan to reduce domestic sewage and wastewater, which is under progress. From our study, I think the population growth in this plan won't cause a big problem.
Prof. Mimura:	In my understanding, another important point of Mr. Hasegawa's question is that if the population of Guangzhou increases, then there will be more pressure on the marine environment. So, if something dangerous happens in the coastal sea, can the government detect it very easily, and can they incorporate these danger signs into their policy? His question is whether there is such a dynamic feedback system between the real world and the policy-making process in your country. That is another important point of his question, so could you provide an explanation for them?
Dr. Yu:	In our formal planning maybe scientists just make one big plan and then take a lot of documents and hand them to the government. No one reads the documents because there are too many and cannot be understood. In our plan, which is in progress now, we are developing an environmental information system that has a very easy-to-use interface. The staff of environmental agencies can operate it and can update by themselves. If the conditions change, they can put their data in the system, and then they can get policy suggestions immediately. I think that between scientists and the government, we must provide some easy interfaces that let the officers know what the scientists want to do, and how to use that kind of achievement of research.
Prof. Mimura:	Now I'm afraid that there is very little time remaining. I'd like to ask for the last question from the floor. Would somebody like to give us a question or comment?
Questioner:	(questioner is not holding a microphone and therefore initial dialogue cannot be heard) ... in the report from Professor Aksornkoae of Kasetsart University. Your information and other ideas interest me and this is not a request. I would like to make a comment and ask for your ideas. This is the special occasion of the 5th EMECS conference to begin in the 21st Century. I would like to base on reports, that I think of the mangrove forest not only as a natural resource of the coastal zone, but the mangrove forest is our natural heritage. Because I understand your idea, your concept, that the mangrove forest is a natural habitat for many flora, fauna, and ecosystems. That is why I would like to hear from Professor Aksornkoae: Should the organization of mangrove sustainable management network belong to, or be under the umbrella of, EMECS, IGES, APN or others, not only in Asia, but over the world? Because I know that in Brazil, Costa Rica, and other tropical countries, the mangrove is our royalty and natural heritage.
Prof. Mimura:	Prof. Aksornkoae, could you respond to him?
Prof. Aksornkoae:	I think that's a very good question. I think everybody agrees that the mangrove is very important, and maybe is part of our world heritage. As for the network, there is now a regional network, because we have a UNDP/UNESCO project on the Asian and Pacific islands. We have about 14 countries in the network, and in every country they have a national mangrove committee. We have to connect each country by working through what we call NATMANCOM (National Mangrove Committee), in the regional community and also in the global community. I'm not sure if you're aware of it, but we also have ISME (International Society for Mangrove Ecosystems), which has about 80 member countries. Many Japanese scientists have become members, and the headquarters are in Okinawa at Ryukyu University. We have now set four regions in a network for information: one center for Asia in India, a second center for the Pacific Islands in Fiji, for Latin America in Brazil, and for Africa in Ghana. So, we have four substations for collecting data for the mangrove, and this is sent to the headquarters in Okinawa. So, ISME plays a very important role in connecting countries globally. We also have GLOMIS (Global Information Mangrove Institutes). From GLOMIS you can get information on the Web at www.glomis.com, and here you can get information on what is going on in mangroves in the world. This is our link between the regional and global areas. So, you are encouraged to register as a member of ISME and then you will learn a lot about the global mangrove network.
Prof. Mimura:	Before closing I'd like to give the panelists the opportunity to say some remaining words if they have any. Is there anything that you would like to add?
Prof. Aksornkoae:	I would like to have the last word. I think that so far in the coastal area we know exactly what the problems are. We need action. We need cooperation. In the future we should have very good planning. No more talking about problems. No more concept - but action! So, why don't we work together to serve our coastal resources in the future? Thank you very much.
Prof. Mimura:	This is a very encouraging message from Professor Aksornkoae. This Asian forum is the first session of this EMECS 2001 conference, and I'm sure that this is a very successful and fruitful session. I want to point out just four points as a kind of conclusion for this session. Firstly, we have the present situation of the Asian coastal zones, and the problems associated with our coastal zones. We can recognize again that the coastal zone is a precious common asset for the Asian region and on the basis of this coastal zone many people are living, and extending their activities. So we can understand again that the coastal zone is a precious foundation for the well-being of the human beings in the Asian region - of course not only for Asians, but also for people in the world. Secondly, although the coastal zone is a precious asset for us, it's facing serious problems and there is some commonality in the problems of the region. We hear about problems like water pollution, degradation of mangroves, coral reefs, and sea grass beds in many places from various speakers. We can recognise that the Asian coastal zone faces common problems. Many of the problems are caused by human pressure including population growth and land-based activities of the people. Thirdly, I received a quite bright message from our session that many presenters indicated to us some trials to solve the present problems. Dr. Lee indicated the importance of the scientific and technological approach of integrated coastal zone management, and Dr. Yu showed us the quite systematic approach for the ecological design of the mega-city of Guangzhou. Also, Professor Alino indicated some existing trials of the adaptive measures to solve the present pressures, and many other presenters also indicated many examples of the solutions for the problems including the education and cooperation of local people. One feature of our session is to examine not only the present problem, but also the direction of the future solution of our problem. My fourth point is that although we had a very active discussion and heard very comprehensive presentations, I have the impression that I can't get the whole picture of the situation of our coastal zones. What is the concrete and comprehensive problem in our region? And what is the most desirable approach to solving that problem. We need such a kind of comprehensive or whole picture in our zone. Regarding this subject, I already introduced in my opening address that the International EMECS Center has a plan to do a comprehensive environmental assessment for the Asian coastal zone. This is a project to edit and publish a kind of white book of the Asian coastal zone environment. The discussion given in this session is a good basis to start this project and after this Asian forum we will work to realize this project in the future. Fortunately, the next EMECS conference in 2003 will be held in Thailand, and I want to hear the continuing discussion toward developing this kind of comprehensive assessment of the Asian coastal zones. Lastly, I really appreciate the very interesting presentations and active participation in the discussions, and would like to convey my thanks. I would now like to close this session. Thank you very much.

-Back to Asian Forum Top-