Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.creatorPapageorgiou M.en
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-31T09:43:08Z
dc.date.available2023-01-31T09:43:08Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.08.032
dc.identifier.issn09645691
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11615/77682
dc.description.abstractUnderwater Cultural Heritage (hereinafter UCH) constitutes an invaluable resource that has been poorly – if at all – addressed in most spatial planning attempts, due to the sectorial approach that has prevailed so far when planning in the sea. Lately however, that spatial planning in the marine space (MSP) is being re-launched under a place-based approach, the chances and challenges for UCH are considerably different. According to the existing international legislation (UNCLOS), coastal states can only interfere with UCH up to their Contiguous Zone (24 nm from the baseline), whilst beyond that limit UCH is left “abandoned” (unless “flag” or “cultural origin” states claim their protection). Of course, this “freezing” of jurisdictions beyond the CZ, means that for the greatest part of the oceans and seas, UCH protection totally depends on the wise regulation of all other human activities that affect directly or indirectly, cultural heritage. The paper argues that MSP under a place-based approach is a unique opportunity for better protection and wiser management of UCH in greater distances than ever, provided that coastal states proclaim their EEZ (in order to extend as much as possible the area within which they can practice MSP and therefore, tackle conflicts and encourage synergies with UCH). The paper proposes a five-step strategy for considering UCH in MSP. Step 1: Register and evaluate UCH sites and objects, Step 2: Identify ways to upgrade the economic value of UCH, Step 3: Select the most appropriate type of protection zoning, Step 4: Provide regulations and restrictions for activities within the UCH protection zone, Step 5: Ensure integration and cohesion of the planning adopted in the UCH buffer zones with the spatial/sea-use planning adopted in the wider marine area. The paper concludes by highlighting that beyond any strategy, the greater challenge and stake is how to compromise blue growth trend with UCH preservation and promotion. © 2018 Elsevier Ltden
dc.language.isoenen
dc.sourceOcean and Coastal Managementen
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85052750073&doi=10.1016%2fj.ocecoaman.2018.08.032&partnerID=40&md5=6e470b95ee86be8a5f0d888fe554f348
dc.subjectMarine biologyen
dc.subjectCultural heritagesen
dc.subjectCultural originsen
dc.subjectEconomic valuesen
dc.subjectHuman activitiesen
dc.subjectPlace-baseden
dc.subjectProtection zonesen
dc.subjectSpatial planningen
dc.subjectUNCLOSen
dc.subjectLaws and legislationen
dc.subjectcoastal zone managementen
dc.subjectcultural heritageen
dc.subjecteconomic analysisen
dc.subjectenvironmental protectionen
dc.subjecthuman activityen
dc.subjectinternational organizationen
dc.subjectlegislative implementationen
dc.subjectmarine environmenten
dc.subjectplanning legislationen
dc.subjectregulatory approachen
dc.subjectspatial planningen
dc.subjectstrategic approachen
dc.subjectunderwater environmenten
dc.subjectElsevier Ltden
dc.titleUnderwater cultural heritage facing maritime spatial planning: Legislative and technical issuesen
dc.typejournalArticleen


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem