|Appears in Collections:||Biological and Environmental Sciences Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Resolving conflicts in public health protection and ecosystem service provision at designated bathing waters|
|Keywords:||Alternate ecosystem services|
Faecal indicator organisms
Revised Bathing Waters Directive
|Citation:||Quilliam R, Kinzelman J, Brunner J & Oliver D (2015) Resolving conflicts in public health protection and ecosystem service provision at designated bathing waters. Journal of Environmental Management, 161, pp. 237-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.07.017|
|Abstract:||Understanding and quantifying the trade-off between the requirement for clean safe bathing water and beaches and their wider ecosystem services is central to the aims of the European Union (EU) Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), and vital for the sustainability and economic viability of designated bathing waters. Uncertainty surrounding the impacts of ensuing bathing water policy transitions, e.g. the EU revised Bathing Waters Directive (rBWD), puts new urgency on our need to understand the importance of natural beach assets for human recreation, wildlife habitat and for protection from flooding and erosion. However, managing coastal zones solely in terms of public health could have potentially negative consequences on a range of other social and cultural ecosystem services, e.g. recreation. Improving our knowledge of how bathing waters, surrounding beach environments and local economies might respond to shifts in management decisions is critical in order to inform reliable decision-making, and to evaluate future implications for human health. In this paper we explore the conflicts and trade-offs that emerge at public beach environments, and propose the development of an evaluative framework of viable alternatives in environmental management whereby bathing waters are managed for their greatest utility, driven by identifying the optimal ecosystem service provision at any particular site.|
|Rights:||The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.|
|Quilliam et al JEM_2015a.pdf||Fulltext - Published Version||510.8 kB||Adobe PDF||Under Embargo until 2999-12-16 Request a copy|
Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.