Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve Kıyı Koruma Alanları Planlama Sürecine Entegrasyonu

8/13/2019 Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve Ky Koruma Alanlar Planlama Srecine Entegrasyonu

1/42

Ekonomik PrensiplerinDeniz ve Ky Koruma Alanlar Planlama

Srecine Entegrasyonu Klavuzu

Guidelines on the Integration of Economics into Planning Applicationsin Coastal and Marine Areas in Turkey

C.EVRE VE EHRCLK

AKANLII

RE VE EH RC L KGl bireyler.

Gl toplumlar.


2/42


3/42

Ekonomik Prensiplerin

Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarPlanlama Srecine Entegrasyonu

Klavuzu

Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarSistemininGlendirilmesi Projesi

2011

Hazrlayanlar

Camille Bann ve Esra Baak

T.C.EVRE VE EHRCLKBAKANLII

T.C.EVRE VE EH RC L KBAKANLIIGl bireyler.

Gl toplumlar.


4/42ii Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarPlanlama Srecine Entegrasyonu Klavuzu

2011 evre ve ehircilik Bakanl

Tabiat VarlklarnKoruma Genel Mdrl (TVKGM)

Alparslan TrkeCad. 17. Sok. No.10 06510 Betepe/Yenimahalle/Ankara

Tel: +90 (312) 222 12 34 Faks: +90 (312) 222 26 61 http://www.cevresehircilik.gov.tr/gm/tabiat/

www.dka.gov.tr / www.mpa.gov.tr

BirlemiMilletler Kalknma Program(UNDP)

Birlik Mahallesi 415. Cadde No. 11 06610 ankaya/Ankara

Tel: +90 312 454 1100 Faks: +90 312 496 1463 www.undp.org.tr

Gl bireyler. Gl toplumlar.

Bu yayn tamamen ya da ksmen yeniden yazlabilir ve herhangi bir ekilde eitsel ya da kar amac

gtmeyen amalarla, basksahibinden zel izin alnmakszn, kaynaa atfta bulunarak kullanlabilir.TVKGM veya UNDP, bu yaynn kaynak olarak kullanld tm yaynlarn bir kopyasn almaktanminnet duyacaktr. Bu yayn, herhangi bir ticari ama iin TVKGM veya UNDP den yazlizin almak-szn tekrar satnn yaplmasamacyla kullanlamaz.

Bu eser kaynaka amacyla u ekilde atfedilebilir: Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). Ekonomik PrensiplerinDeniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarPlanlama Srecine Entegrasyonu Klavuzu - Guideline on the integra-tion of environmental economics and economical principles for the planning applications. PIMS 3697:Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarSisteminin Glendirilmesi Projesi. Teknik Rapor Serisi 5:38 sf.

Bu yay

n Kresel evre Fonu (GEF) mali desteiyle T.C. evre ve ehircilik Bakanl

Tabiat Varl

kla-rnKoruma Genel Mdrl (TVKGM) tarafndan BirlemiMilletler Kalknma Program TrkiyeTemsilcilii (UNDP Trkiye), T.C. Orman ve Su leri BakanlDoa Koruma ve Milli Parklar GenelMdrl, T.C. Gda Tarm ve Hayvanclk Bakanl Balklk ve Su rnleri Genel Mdrlortaklnda yrtlen byk lekli Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarSisteminin Glen-dirilmesi Projesi kapsamnda baslmtr.

Teknik Rapor Serisi: 5

Yazarlar: Camille Bann ve Esra BaakDzelti: Glden Atkn Genolu ve Harun GlsoyKapak ve Tasarm: Evren alayanKapak Fotoraflar: ldeniz, TVKGM Arivi Kayakyde iekler, TVKGM Arivi Caretta caretta, TVKGM AriviFotoraflar:1. TVKGM Arivi, 2. BarAkal, 3-6. TVKGM Arivi

Bu belge, evre ve ehircilik Bakanl, GEF ve BirlemiMilletler resmi belgesi olarak dnlmemelidir.


5/42iiiTrkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarSisteminin Glendirilmesi

nsz

tarafdenizlerle evrili olan lkemizde doalyaps ve iklimsel koullar nedeniyle kyalanlarbyk bir biyolojik eitlilie sahip olup bualanlara ilikin sorunlar gn getike artmaktadr.

Son yllarda hzl kentleme, sanayileme, tur-izm, ikinci konut vb gelimelerden dolay arpkyaplama ve plansz gelime yaanmakta, kyvedeniz alanlar bu sorunlardan ciddi anlamda et-kilenmektedir.

zellikle ekonomik alanlardaki gelimeler deniz ta-maclnda arttrmakta kalknma, barnma, tica-ret, rekreasyon ve temel ihtiyalarkarlamak iinkyve deniz alanlarnn kullanmna ballk gitgi-de artmaktadr. Bunun yansra hzlkentlemeninve yaplamann kyalanlarzerindeki basksku-mul, tuzcul ve bataklk alanlarn kayb, kyve de-niz kirlilii, kyekosisteminin kaybve bozulmasgibi birok sonucu dourmaktadr. Ky ve denizalanlarnn biyolojik eitlilii ve verimlilii giderekartan bir baskya maruz kalarak, bu alanlarda telafi-si mmkn olmayan zararlar oluturmaktadr.

Korunmasgerekli en nemli deerlerimizden olankyve deniz alanlarzerindeki bu basklarn gide-rilmesine ve bu sorunlarn zmne ynelik olarakbu alanlarn srdrlebilirlik ilkesi erevesinde,doal yapsnbozmadan, koruma ve kullanma den-

gesi gzetilerek deerlendirilmesi amacyla; temel-de etkin bir uygulama ve denetim sreci ieren biryapsal dzenleme ve altyap oluturulmas, ilgilitm kurum ve kurulularn kapasitelerinin bu yap-sal dzenleme uyarnca arttrlmas, tm paydalararasnda ibirliinin ve koordinasyonun arttrlmas,etkin ve verimli bir iprogramve finansal kaynakmodeli oluturulmasbyk nem tamaktadr.

Tabiat VarlklarnKoruma Genel Mdrl tmbu hususlarn bilinciyle, 8.592 km kyuzunluunasahip lkemizin ky ve deniz alanlarnda ulusal

mevzuatmz ve lkemizin taraf olduu uluslarara-sszlemelerle nesli tehdit ve tehlike altndaki trve habitatlarn aratrlmasve korunmas, kyvedeniz alanlarbiyolojik eitliliklerinin aratrlma-s, nemli koy ve krfezlerin deniz st aralarta-ma kapasitesinin belirlenmesi, koruma kullanmaesaslarnn belirlenmesi, btnleik kyalanyne-timine ynelik almalarla, bu alanlarn karkar-ya olduu sorunlarasgariye indirmek iin azamilde gayret sarf etmektedir.

Kyve deniz kaynaklarnn korunmasgelien k-resel bir ncelik olmas nedeniyle Deniz KorumaAlanlarkavramda byk lde yaylmakta olupbu kavramn lkemizde neminin farkndalnok-

tasnda nemli almalar yrtlmektedir.

Genel Mdrlmz, 2009-2013 yllar arasndaBirlemi Milletler Kalknma Programnn uygu-layc ortaklnda yrtt Trkiyenin Denizve Ky Koruma Alanlarnn Glendirilmesi b-yk lekli GEF Projesi ile, Trkiye karasularnda-ki denizel biyolojik eitliliin korunmas, ky vedeniz koruma alanlarveri ann yaplandrlmasve ekolojik hizmet fonksiyonlarnn etkin ve srd-rlebilir ynetimle etkin klnmasnda uzun vadelizm iin ilk admatmtr.

Proje kapsamnda hazrlanan deniz ve kykorumaalanlarnda ekonomik analiz, balklk sosyo eko-nomisi de dahil olmak zere sosyo-ekonomik ara-trmalar, hassas alanlarn belirlenmesi, ekonomikprensiplerin planlamaya entegrasyonu, finansalsrdrlebilirlik, deniz aralarndan kaynaklanankirleticilerin azaltlmasile alternatif geim kaynak-larnkapsayan teknik alma raporlarserisinin;

- Mevcut ky ve deniz alanlarnn daha et-kin ynetimi ve ncelikle yeni ky ve deniz

alanlarnn kurulmasiin sorumlu kurumlarnihtiya duyduu i yap ve kapasiteninglendirilmesi,

- Deniz koruma alanlar planlama ve ynetimsisteminin etkin i planlamas, yeterli etkinynetim maliyeti ve gelir retim dzeyine im-kan vermesinin salanmas,

- Ky ve deniz koruma alanlarnn ok amalkullanmiinde ekonomik faaliyetlerin yneti-mi ve dzenlenmesi iin kurumlar araskoor-dinasyon mekanizmasnn salanmas,

konularnda 3 ana sonuca hizmet etmesi hedeflen-mekte olup bu kapsamda bilgilerinize sunulmakta-dr.

Osman YMAYAGenel Mdr V.


6/42iv Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarPlanlama Srecine Entegrasyonu Klavuzu

indekiler

KILAVUZUN AMACI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

GENEL LKELER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

KILAVUZ ESASLARI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.1. Aratrma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

3.1.1. Ekosistem Hizmetleri Yaklamnn Benimsenmesi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3.1.2. Disiplinlerarasyaklam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

3.1.3. Plan uygulama sreci nerilen faaliyetlerin sosyal, evresel veekonomik etkilerini iyi anlamaya dayalolmaldr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

3.1.4. Deniz ve kyekosistemleri zerindeki ana etkiler mmkn olduu takdirdeparasal olarak ifade edilmelidir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3.1.5. Veritabanve veri paylamsistemlerinin gelitirilmesi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3.1.6. Fayda Maliyet Analizi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

3.1.7. Dalmsal Analiz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63.1.8. Finansman mekanizmalarnn belirlenmesi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

3.1.9. Sosyo-ekonomik deerlendirme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3.1.10. Sonularn sunumu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

3.2. Plan tasarm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

3.2.1. Bilgili kararlarn alnmas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

3.2.2. Kurumlar araskoordinasyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.2.3. Danma yaklam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.2.4. Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlardndaki etkiler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.2.5. Mlkiyet ve yasal kstlamalarla ilgili sorunlarn almas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73.3. Uygulama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3.3.1. Uygulamada katlmcbir yaklamn salanmas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

3.4. zleme ve Deerlendirme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

3.4.1. zleme ve deerlendirme erevesinin tasarmve uygulanmas . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

EK 1.Deniz ve KyEkosistem Hizmetleri Tipolojisi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

EK 2.Terimler dizini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

PURPOSE OF GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

GENERAL PRINCIPLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.1. Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.1.1. Adoption of an Ecosystems Services Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.1.2. Interdisciplinary approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.1.3. The planning application process should be based on a good understandingof the social, environmental and economic impacts of the proposed activities . . . . . 18


7/42vTrkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarSisteminin Glendirilmesi

3.1.4. Wherever possible key impacts on marine and ecosystem servicesshould be monetized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.1.5. Development of databases and data sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.1.6. Cost Benefit Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.1.7. Distributional Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.1.8. Identification of financing mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.1.9. Socio-economic assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.1.10. Presentation of the evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.2. Plan design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.1. Making informed decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.2. Ensuring co-ordination between authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.3. Consultative approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.4. Off-site impacts on Marine Protected Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.5. Overcoming the challenges of private property ownership and legal restrictions . . . 21

3.3. Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.3.1. Ensuring a participatory approach to implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.4. Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.4.1. Design and implementation of a monitoring and evaluation framework . . . . . . . . 21

ANNEX 1. Typology of the Marine and Coastal Ecosystem Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

ANNEX 2.Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

EK.KatlmcListesi / APPENDIX.List of Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27


8/42


9/42


10/422 Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarPlanlama Srecine Entegrasyonu Klavuzu

A lnacak kararlarn srdrlebilir, verimli veadil olmasnsalamak iin, denizel ve ky-sal bir alan zerindeki bir geliimin ksa ve uzunvadeli tm sosyal, ekonomik ve evresel etkileri-nin tespit edilmesi, llmesi ve mmkn olduukadar parasal olarak ifade edilmesi vazgeilmez-

dir.Deniz ve kyalanlarok farklekillerde kulla-nlabilir ve ynetilebilir. Olas kullanmlar ara-snda doal kaynak kartma, iskan, endstriyelfaaliyetler, enerji temini (r. rzgar santralleri),denizcilik projeleri, ulatrma tesisleri, rekreasyonve tatil, kyeridinde arazi kazanmve doal a-dan nemli alanlarn korunmas(deniz ve kyko-ruma alanlardahil olmak zere) saylabilir.

Bir kyve deniz alanna ynelik en iyi seenei

belirlemek iin, hangi ekosistem hizmet ve rn-lerinin kysal geliimden etkileneceini ve/veyaalan ynetimindeki deiiklikleri ve bu hizmet vernlerin toplumun farklyeleri iin ne gibi de-erler yarattnbilmek nemlidir.

Eer planlama almalarnn deerlendirilmesin-de deniz ve kyekosistemlerinden kaynaklananhizmet ve rnlerin btn dikkate alnmazsa,ekonomik olarak deerli hizmetleri yitirme riskidoacak, bunlaryerine koymak maliyetli ve baz

durumlarda imkansz olacaktr. Ayrca, karla-lacak fayda ve maliyetleri ve plan kararlarnnyerel geim kaynaklarve kltrel deerler ze-rindeki etkilerini anlamak da nemlidir.

Kilit deniz ve kyekosistem hizmetlerinin parasalolarak ifade edilmesi ve seeneklerin Fayda Mali-yet Analizi yaplarak karlatrlmasdahil olmakzere ekonomik analiz yaplmaldr. Bu srdr-lebilir ekonomik ynetimle ilgili temel sorularyantlamakta yardmcolacaktr:

nsan faaliyetlerindeki ve ekosistem niteliive miktarndaki deiiklikler toplumsal refa-hnasl etkileyecek?

Deitokular nedir? rnein, kyeridi d-zenlenerek yeni kentsel veya turizm alanlarmyaratlmaldr yoksa yaban hayatna yaamalansalamak zere olduu gibi braklmal/ restore edilmeli midir? Kysal bir sulaka-lan tarmsal faaliyetler iin kurutulmal m-dr? yoksa tatl su filtrelemek iin daha fazla

GENEL LKELER

2


11/423Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarSisteminin Glendirilmesi

sulakalan moluturulmaldr? Bir hali kumve taretimi iin tarakla temizlenmeli midiryoksa doal gel git ak salamas iin bra-klmal mdr? Balklk mevcut seviyesindedevam etmeli midir yoksa balkla kapalalanlar oluturularak srdrlebilir balklk

m

salanmal

d

r? K

y

sal bir ekosistem mari-na yapmak zere deitirilmeli midir yoksaeko-turizmi tevik etmek zere doal halindebraklmalmdr?

Sz konusu geliim sonucu kayp ve kazan-lar neler?

Hangi geliim seenekleri veya ynetim eko-nomik olarak deer ve ekonomik olarak enuygun geliim/ynetim seenei nedir?



KILAVUZ ESASLARI

3.1. Aratrma

Kyve deniz alanlarplanlama srecine ekonomikprensiplerin entegrasyonu aratrma gerektirecek-tir. Denizel planlama aratrmalarnda uygulanma-stavsiye edilen ilkeler aada sunulmaktadr.

3.1.1. Ekosistem Hizmetleri YaklamnnBenimsenmesi

Deniz ve ky alanlarnn deerlendirmesi, nce-likle bu kompleks sistemler tarafndan temin edi-len ekosistem hizmet ve rnlerinin zenli bir e-kilde incelenmesiyle balamaldr.

Bunun iin, Ek 1de yer alan, deniz ve kyekosis-temleri tarafndan salanan tmtedarik, dzen-leme ve kltrel hizmetler yelpazesinin ortaya

konulduu Ekosistem HizmetleriYaklamnnbenimsenmesi tavsiye edilir. Eer ky ve denizalanlareitli geliimlere alr veya ynetim bi-imleri deiirse bu hizmetlerin temini bozulabilirveya yok olabilir. Aksine, iyiletirilmibalklkynetiminde olduu gibi, bu hizmetler srdr-lebilir uygulamalarla gelitirilebilir.

Ekosistem Hizmetleri Yaklamnn uygulanmasinsan faaliyetlerindeki deiikliklerin ekosistemhizmetlerinde ve buna balolarak insanlarn fay-

dalandboyutlarda ne gibi deiikliklere nedenolacankapsamlbir ekilde anlamaygerektirir.Dolaysyla geliim ncesi ve sonrasnda ekosis-tem hizmet ve rnlerinin temini saysal olarakllmedilir.

3.1.2. Disiplinlerarasyaklam

Ekosistem Hizmetleri Yaklamnn uygulanmasfarkluzmanlklarn bir araya gelmesini gerektirir:bilimsel, ekonomik, yasal ve planlama. Bu neden-

le, deerlendirmenin yrtlmesi iin, deneyimlibir iktisat tarafndan ynetilecek ok disiplinlibir ekip oluturulmaldr.

3.1.3. Plan uygulama sreci nerilen faaliyetlerinsosyal, evresel ve ekonomik etkilerini iyianlamaya dayalolmaldr

Farkldeniz ve kyynetimi uygulama ve kulla-nmlarnn etkileri tespit edilmelidir. Bu sosyal,evresel ve ekonomik etkileri ierir. Bu bilgiler bir3



evre Etki Deerlendirme (ED) almas tara-fndan salanabilir ve Fayda Maliyet Analizi gibiekonomik deerlendirmeler ise bunun zerineina edilebilir.

3.1.4. Deniz ve kyekosistemleri zerindeki ana

etkiler mmkn olduu takdirde parasal olarakifade edilmelidir

Deniz ve kyekosistemlerine dayalhizmetlerin pa-rasal olarak deerini belirlemek iin bir dizi yntemuygulanabilir. Tedarik hizmetlerine ve kltrelhizmetlerden rekreasyon ve turizme ounluklapazar fiyatlarkullanlarak deer biilebilir. Bilimsel(biyo-fiziksel) veri eksikliinden tr dzenlemehizmetlerinin parasal deerini belirlemek daha zorolabilir; belirli bir alanda bu hizmetlerin temin edil-

me oran

n

lmek ve alan iin nerilen bir kullan

m

veya ynetim deiikliiyle bunun nasl deiecei-ni belirlemek gerekir. Bir alandaki temel dzenlemehizmetlerine deer biilmesi iin genellikle maliyettemelli yaklamlarkullanlr. Ayrca, alana zel d-zenleme hizmetleri verilerinin eksik olduu durum-larda, Fayda Transferiolarak tanmlanan, deerle-

rin benzer al

malardan uyarlanmas

na dayanan,gsterge niteliinde bir deer salama ynteminegidilebilir. Belirtilen tercih yaklamlarve hedonikfiyatlandrma gibi daha gelimi deer belirlemeyntemleri sadece daha basit yaklamlar karar ve-ricileri ikna etmede yeteriz olduu durumlarda vebu yntemi uygulayabilecek uzmanlk, veri ve kay-naklarn mevcut olduu durumlarda denenmelidir.Hem kullanmhem de kullanm ddeerler dik-kate alnmaldr. Foa ve Gkova zel evre Koru-ma Blgelerindeki temel ekosistem hizmet deerleri

Tablo 1de sunulmaktad

r.

Tablo 1. Foa ve Gkova K Blgelerinde deniz ve kyekosistem hizmet deerleri

EkosistemHizmeti

Deer/ ylABD$Foa KBlgesi iin

Deer/ ylABD$Gkova KBlgesi iin

Deerlemeyntemi

Not

Balk 6,207,254 332,854 Piyasadeerleri

Srdrlebilir av miktarna dayanmamaktadr (her iki alan iin debilinmemektedir). Bu deerler rekreasyonel balklkapsamamaktave balk av miktarlarnn eksik beyan edilmesinden tr gerekdeerlerine gre dktr. Brt deerlerdir; masraflar dlmemitir.

Karbon

tutma

408,218 792,064 Piyasa

deerleri(kanlanharcamayaklam)

Posidonia ayrlarnn kapsadalana dayaldr. Orman karbon

piyasasna benzer ekilde Mavi Karbon Kredi piyasasnn gelieceivarsaylmtr. Dolaysyla bu deer henz yakalanmamaktadr.Karbon piyasa deeri 11.2 $/ tCO2 edeeri olarak alnmtr.

Erozyonkontrol

5,263,731 28,492 Faydatransferi

Her kymetresi iin 160,000 avro - Mangos ve arkadalaralmasna dayanarak (2010)2. Foa K Blgesi 45.2 kmPosidoniaayrlarve alann %52si risk altnda. Gkova - 159kmPosidoniaayrlarve alann %8i risk altnda.

Atksuartm

882,000 10,148,400 Faydatransferi

Mangos ve arkadalarna (2010) dayanarak, Trkiye kylariinhesaplanan 229 milyon luk artm hizmeti her iki alandaki kysaleride taksim edilmitir.

Turizm/Rekreasyon

24,305,000 17,051,104 Piyasadeerleri

Her iki blgeye gelen ziyareti saylarna dair muhafazakar tahminlere(Gkova K Blgesinde ylda 30,000 geceleyen ve 100,000

gnbirlik ziyareti; Foa K Blgesine ylda 20,000 geceleyenve 139,750 gnbirlik ziyareti) ve alanlarda yrtlen turizmharcamalaranketine dayanarak.

TOPLAM 37,066,203 28,463,714

Kaynak: Bann ve Baak 201123ve4

2 Mangos, A., Bassino, J-P ve Sauzade, D. 2010. Akdeniz HavzasDenizel Ekosistemleri tarafndan Salanan Srdrlebilir Faydalarn EkonomikDeeri. Plan Bleu, UNEP/MAP Blgesel Faaliyet Merkezi .

3 Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). The economic analysis of Foa Special Environmental Protection Area. Economic Assessment reports for Foa andGkova in the framework of environmental economics principles. Project PIMS 3697: The Strengthening the System of Marine and CoastalProtected Areas of Turkey. Technical Report Series 2: 76 pp.

4 Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). The economic analysis of Gkova Special Environmental Protection Area. Economic Analysis reports for Foa andGkova in the framework of environmental economics principles. Project PIMS 3697: The Strengthening the System of Marine and Coastal

Protected Areas of Turkey. Technical Report Series 3: 80 pp.



3.1.5. Veritabanve veri paylamsistemleriningelitirilmesi

Deniz ve kyekosistem hizmetlerinin ekonomikanalizini yapabilmek salkl bilimsel, sosyal veekonomik veriler gerektirir. Temel veri eksiklikle-ri ele alnmalve planlama srecinde gncel veri-

lerin kullanlmasnsalamak iin veri paylamtevik edilmelidir. Benzer ekilde, deniz ve kyalanlarna istinaden mevcut verilerin farkl ku-rumlarca tekrar retilmemesi iin daha iyi koor-dinasyon mekanizmalar salanmaldr (rnein,Trkiye statistik Kurumu araclile).

3.1.6. Fayda Maliyet Analizi

Fayda Maliyet Analizi farkl seenekleri kar-latrmak ve net bugnk deeri en yksek olanseenee k tutmak iin tavsiye edilen bir ara-tr. Fayda Maliyet Analizi doal kaynan zamanierisinde yarattkazanlarhesaba katar. Dola-ysyla farklseeneklerin srdrlebilirliini in-celeyebilir ve gelirlerin ilk aamada yksek olup,hizmet teminine zemin oluturan doal kaynaktabannn bozulmas/kmesi sonucu orta-uzunvadede dt veya sfra indii vakalartespitedebilir. Buna bir rnek olarak ar avlanma so-nucu biten bir ballk veya doal evrenin bo-zulmassonucu ken bir kysal turizm sektrverilebilir.

Tablo 1deki deerlemede, denizel ekosistemlerinmevcut durum ve kullanmnyanstan deerlerinbir genel taslasunulmaktadr. Bu tr bilgiler biralann saladekosistem hizmetlerinin kapsamve ekonomik nemi hakknda farkndalk yarat-mak asndan nemlidir. Ancak karar vericiler iindaha faydalolan bilgi, alann kullanm ve yneti-mindeki bir deiiklik sonucu bu deerlerin nasldeieceini anlamaktr. Fayda Maliyet Analizi ta-

ban alnan referans deerlere gre farklkullanmve ynetim seeneklerini mukayese edebilir veekonomik adan en uygun seenei belirleyebilir.

3.1.7. Dalmsal Analiz

Geliim etkilerinin grlme sklndikkate almakgerekir. Dalmsal analiz deerlendirilen see-neklerde kimin kazanlve kimin zararlolduunuortaya koymaldr. Bu tr bilgiler uygun tazminatmekanizmalarngelitirmeye aracolabilir.

3.1.8. Finansman mekanizmalarnn belirlenmesi

Deniz ve kykoruma alanlarnn Fayda MaliyetAnalizi ve dalmsal analizi belirli bir alan iin enuygun finansman mekanizmasnbelirlemek iinzemin salar. Planlama srecini bilgilendirmekiin, olasfinansman mekanizmasnn analizi ya-

plmaldr (rnein, turizm harlar, kullanm ver-gisi ve karbon kredileri). Bu analiz deniz ve k ykoruma alanlarnn ynetim ve iplannn geli-tirilmesi ve alanlarn finansal kapasitesini gster-mek asndan esastr.

3.1.9. Sosyo-ekonomik deerlendirme

evresel planlama ve politikalarn sosyo-ekonomiksonular karar verme srecinin temel unsur-larndandr. Dolaysyla, planlama aamasndasosyo-ekonomik veriler rutin olarak toplanmalve sonrasnda dzenli ekilde izlenmelidir. Sosyo-ekonomik veriler deer belirleme almasve ge-nel olarak planlama sreci iin nemli balamsalbilgiler salar. Nfusa dair veriler (byklk, yapve art), hanehalkgeliri, istihdam seviyesi ve fr-satlar, eitim seviyesi, salk durumu, geliimaltyaps, gda gvenlii, krlganlk ve baa k-ma stratejileri, su ve salk hizmetleriyle ilgili ve-rilerin toplanmas nerilir. Bu tr bilgiler denizelve kysal evre zerindeki basklar ve bunlarn

eilimlerini, denizel ve kysal evreyle balantlekonomik frsatlar, ve nitelik veya miktarndakideiiklikten kimlerin olumlu ve olumsuz ekildeetkileneceini anlamaya arac olabilir. rnein,Data-Bozburun zel evre Koruma Blgesindeky ve hane bazl sosyo-ekonomik aratrmalaryaplmve buna gre her yerleime farklilevleryklenmitir (tarm odaklturizm vb).

3.1.10. Sonularn sunumu

Tespit edilen deerlere dair sonularn ilgili kararvericilere ve alandaki paydalara effaf bir ekildesunulmasnemlidir. Parasal olarak ifade edilmiolan ekosistem hizmetlerinde kullanlmolan ve-riler, yntem ve varsaymlar aka belirtilmeli vebelirlenen deerlerin gvenirlii sunulmalve tar-tlmaldr. Veri ve/veya zaman kstlamasndantr parasal olarak ifade edilemeyen ekosistemle-re ynelik olarak mevcut nicel ve nitel veriler pay-lalmal ve her ekosistem hizmetinin muhtemelekonomik ve sosyal arlsunulmaldr.



3.2.4. Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlardndakietkiler

Biyolojik eitlilik ve ekosistem hizmetlerini etki-leyebilecek unsurlarn nlenmesi veya azaltlmasiin planlama srecinde, deniz ve kykoruma alansnrlardnda gerekleen ancak alanetkileyen

faaliyetler ve geliimler de dikkate alnmaldr.

3.2.5. Mlkiyet ve yasal kstlamalarla ilgilisorunlarn almas

Trkiyede kyve deniz planlamasile yetkili kamukurumlarsk sk zel mlkiyet sorunlarndan kay-naklanan atmalarla kar karya kalmaktadr.atmalaren aza indirebilmek iin planlama s-recinin en bandan itibaren ilgili paydalarsre-ce katmak ve belirli bir karardan olumsuz ekilde

etkilenebilecek taraflara tazminat salamak nem-lidir. Ekonomik analiz adil bir tazminatn ne olabi-leceine k tutabilir. Ayrca, planlama ve onayla-nan planlarn uygulanmasnda karlalan mevcutyasal boluklar etkin ve tutarlbir ulusal sistemeulaabilmek iin ele alnmaldr.

3.3. Uygulama

3.3.1. Uygulamada katlmcbir yaklamn

salanmas

lgili kamu kurumlar tarafndan onaylanm olandeniz ve kyplantm uygulaycortaklarn ve ye-rel halkn desteini gerektirir. Bunun iin, ilgili tmpaydalar arasnda uygulama mdahaleleri hakkn-da dzenli bilgilendirme ve effaflk salanmaldr.

3.4. zleme ve Deerlendirme

3.4.1. zleme ve deerlendirme erevesinintasarmve uygulanmas

Planlarn uygulamasndzenli olarak takip etmekiin bir izleme ve deerlendirme srecinin hayatageirilmesi arttr. zleme ve deerlendirme srecievresel, sosyal ve ekonomik gstergeler iermeli-dir. Dzenli izleme, plann uygulamasnda yaa-nan zorluklar hakknda zamanlbilgiler salayacakve bunlar daha sonra ele alnabilir hale gelecektir.

3.2. Plan tasarm

3.2.1. Bilgili kararlarn alnmas

Planlama kararlarderlenen tm bulgularn idrakedilmesine dayal olmaldr- nitel, nicel ve para-sal. Bir alanda yaanabilecek muhtemel ekosis-

tem hizmet kaybnn nemli olacangrlyorancak ilk aamadaki deerlendirmede bu parasalolarak saptanamyorsa, planlama karardaha de-taylbir alma yaplana kadar ertelenebilir.

3.2.2. Kurumlar araskoordinasyon

Tm taraflarn konu hakknda haberdar olmasasndan ve klavuzun 3.1 blmnde yer alanesaslarn da dahil edildii tutarlbir planlama ya-plabilmesi iin, fiziksel deniz ve kyplanlamas

alannda yetkili tm kurumlar arasnda koordi-nasyon gerekmektedir. rnein, Gda, Tarm veHayvanclk Bakanlnn balklkla ilgili ted-birleri Tabiat VarlklarnKoruma Genel Mdr-l dahil olmak zere ilgili kamu kurumlarylaegdm ierisinde yrtlmelidir. Benzer ekil-de, Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl, Enerji ve TabiiKaynaklar Bakanlgibi ilgili kurumlarn yatrmncelikleri ile Tabiat Varlklarn Koruma GenelMdrl ve deniz/ky planlamasnda yetkilidier kamu kurumlarnn amalararasnda eg-

dm salanmaldr.

Dolaysyla planlama sreci, farklseeneklerin ve(olumlu ve olumsuz) etkilerinin kapsamlekildedeerlendirilebilecei, tm ilgili taraflarbir arayagetiren, koordine ve ortak bir sre olmaldr.

3.2.3. Danma yaklam

Planlama deerlendirme sreci, zellikle alannynetimi veya kullanmnda gerekleecek deiik-

likten etkilenebilecek yerel halk olmak zere kilitpaydalarn dahil edildii gralma ve danmayaklamn benimsemelidir. lgili paydalara da-nma ve bunun sonunca oluacak mutabakat her-hangi bir planlama sreci ve/veya ynetim planrejiminin baarlolmasiin elzemdir. Bu, mevcutplanlama yaklamlarnn merkeziyet sistemindenzerkletirilmesini gerektirebilir.



zleme ve deerlendirme erevesi planlarn ha-zrlanma aamasnda gelitirilmelidir ve 3. b-lmde aklanan ekonomik analiz tarafndan bes-lenecektir.

zleme ve deerlendirme alannda becerilerin ge-litirilmesi iin kapasite gelitirme almalarge-rekli olacaktr (rnein, gstergelerin saptanmasve izleme-deerlendirme srecinin uygulamayasokulmas). Bunun iin merkezi bteden gerekli

finansal destek ayrlmaldr. Kapasite gelitirmeve eitim aynzamanda ekonomik analiz iin degereklidir.

Byk lekli evre Dzeni Plan raporlarve k-lavuzlarnda izleme planlarve gstergelere ba-vurmak nispeten basittir, ancak ekosistem hiz-metleri kavramgreceli olarak yeni olduu iinyasalarda tanmlanm deildir, dolaysyla ilkbunun ele alnmasgerekir.



EK I. DENZ VE KIYI EKOSSTEM HZMETLERTPOLOJS

Deniz ve kyekosistem hizmetleri tipolojisi Tablo 2de sunulmutur. Bu tipoloji, bir deniz ve kyala-nnn saladekosistem hizmetlerini tespit etmede ve hizmetleri parasal olarak lmek zere nce-liklendirmede kullanlabilir. Tipoloji Ekosistem Hizmetleri Yaklamn(Ecosystem Service Approach ESA) izlemekte; bu da Milenyum Ekosistem Deerlendirmesinin (2005) aada sunulan drt ekosis-tem hizmetleri snflandrmasna dayanmaktadr:

Tedarik hizmetleri denizel ekosistemlerin saladbalk ve ila gibi somut rnlerle ilgilidir.

Dzenleme hizmetleri denizel evrede atklarn bertarafve karbon gmme/depolama gibi sosyalrefaha katkda bulunan doal srelere bakar.

Kltrel hizmetler hem kullanm hem de kullanm ddeerlerle ilikli olabilir ve rnein denizelevrenin turizm ve eitim amalkullanmgibi, ekosistemlerden elde edilen, maddi olmayan fay-dalarla ilgilidir.

Destek hizmetleri dier tm ekosistem hizmetlerinin retimi iin gereklidir (r. toprak oluumuveya besin dngs). Dier ekosistem hizmetlerinden farkinsanlar zerindeki etkilerinin dolayl(tedarik, dzenleme veya kltrel hizmetler araclyla) veya ok uzun vadede gereklemesidir.

Ekosistem Hizmetleri Yaklamdenizel ortamlardaki ekosistemlerin ve bunlarn barndrdbiyolojikeitliliin bireysel ve sosyal refaha katkda bulunduunu aka tanmaktadr. Yaklam nemle, bukatknn balk gibi dorudan tketilen rnlerin temininin ok daha tesine gittiini, denizel ekosis-temlerin karbon tutma gibi kritik dzenleme fonksiyonlarolduunu takdir etmektedir. Dolaysyla,Ekosistem Hizmetleri Yaklamkarar alma srelerinde ekosistemlerin bir btn olarak ele alnmasnve saladklarhizmetlere deer biilmesini salayan bir ereve sunmaktadr.



Tablo 2. Deniz Ekosistem Hizmetleri Tipolojisi

EkosistemHizmet Tipi

Hizmet Fayda / kt

Tedarikhizmetle

ri

Besin Ticari ve hane geimini salatan balk ve yaban hayat

Hammaddeler Endstriyel kullanmlar r. yosun

Denize bamltrlerden elde edilen doal ilalar

Genetik kaynaklar deniz flora ve faunasndaki gen havuzunda bulunan eitlilik

Dekoratif rnler r. deniz kabuklarnn taklarda kullanm, el ileri

Enerji kayna(yakt vs) Enerji temini r. dalgalarn kuvveti

Ulam Su yollarnn ticari kullanm

Dzenleme

hizmetleri

Sera gazlarnndzenlenmesi

Karbon gmme/depolama

Mikro-klimadengelemesi

Scaklk, ya, rzgar, neme vs olan etki

Doal afetlerindzenlenmesi

Sel ve frtnadan korunma

Erozyon kontrol

Atk artm Kirliliin detoksifikasyonuSu artm

Kltrelhizmetler

Ruhani, dini, kltrelmiras

Arkeolojik kalntlar (rekreasyonel olmayan tarihi deer). Denizel evrenin kitaplar,filmler, resim, folklor, mimari, reklam vbde kullanm

Eitim Denizel sreleri anlamak iin doal laboratuar

Rekreasyon veekoturizm

Rekreasyonal balklk, kugzlem, doa yry, dal, yelkencilik, kano, tatildestination (estetik manzaralar), arkeolojik kalntlar (rekreasyonel olmayan tarihi deer)

Manzara ve letafet Emlak fiyat primleri

Kullanm dbiyolojikeitlilik

rnein, vasiyet veya fedakar gdlerle ilikili gelimirefah

Kaynak: Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). The economic analysis of Gkova Special Environmental Protection Area. Economic Analysis reports forFoa and Gkova in the framework of environmental economics principles. Project PIMS 3697: The Strengthening the System of Marine andCoastal Protected Areas of Turkey. Technical Report Series 3: 80 pp.



EK 2. TERMLER DZN5

Terim ngilizce Aklama

Belirtilen tercihyntemleri

Stated preference methods Piyasasolmayan rn ve hizmetlerin teminindeki deiikliklerdebireylerin tercihlerini ortaya karmak zere anketlerin uygulandekonomik deer belirleme yntemleri (r. deme istei/eilimi veyatazminata razolma/katlanmak iin kabul eilimi).

evresel EtkiDeerlendirmesi

Environmental ImpactAssesment

nerilen bir proje veya politika sonucu meydana gelebilecek evreseletkilerin tespit edilmesi ve deerlendirilmesi.

Deerlendirme Appraisal Bir kararn verilmesinden nce, nerilen politika, program veya projelerinhedeflerini tanmlama, seenekleri inceleme ve maliyet avantajlar,riskleri ve belirsizliklerini incelemeyi kapsayan sre.

Dsallk Externality Toplumu (olumlu veya olumsuz ekilde) etkileyen ancak reticilerinkararlarna yanstlmayan bir durumu ifade eden iktisadi terim.

Dzenleme hizmetleri Regulating services klimin, hava kalitesinin, suyun dzenlenmesi (r, selin nlenmesi), sukalitesinin dzenlenmesi (artm/detoksifikasyon) ve erozyon kontrolgibi ekosistem srelerinin dzenlenmesiyle ilgili ekosistem hizmetlerikategorisi.

Ekonomik deer Economic value Bir mal/rnn temininde yaanan deiiklie balantlparasal refahlsdr. Piyasa rnlerinde genelde piyasa fiyatyla llr; piyasasolmayan rnlerde genelde deme istei/eilimi veya tazminata razolma tutaryla (veya katlanmak iin kabul eilimi) llr.

Ekonomik deerbulgusu (parasaldeer bulgusu)

Economic valuationevidence (monetaryvaluation evidence)

Deer transferi iin kaynak salayan varolan (birincil) almalardan eldeedilen ekonomik deerler, deer fonksiyonlarve dier ampirik bulgular.Daha evvel yaplan deer transferi analizleri de gncel uygulamalar iinbulgu salayabilir.

Ekonomik Etki Analizi Economic ImpactAssessment

Bir deniz veya kyalannn, destekledii istihdam ve gelir asndan,belirli bir blge veya lke ekonomisine olan katksndeerlendirenanaliz. Bir Fayda Maliyet Analizi ve Ekonomik Etki Analizi kaynaklbilgiler

aras

nda rtme vard

r. Fakat Ekonomik Etki Analizi yarat

lan igc,ekonomik gelir (refah deerleri yerine) gibi gstergelere odakldr veideal olarak arpan ve yer deitirme etkilerini5de dikkate alr.

Ekonomik verimlilik Economic efficiency Toplum refahnen st dzeye karmak zere kaynaklarn tahsisiyle ilgilibir kavram.

Ekosistem HizmetleriYaklam

Ecosystem ServicesApproach

nsan poplasyonunun doal evrenin durumuna nasl bamlolduunuincelemekte kullanlan bir ereve. Yaklam, ekosistemlerin ve bunlarnbarndrdbiyolojik eitliliin bireysel ve sosyal refaha katkdabulunduunu aka tanmaktadr.

Fayda Maliyet Analizi Cost Benefit Analysis nerilen politika veya projenin maliyet ve faydalarnparasal olarakkarlatrmaya imkan tanyan bir karar verme arac.

F

rsat maliyeti Opportunity cost ktisadi bir seim yap

l

rken vazgeilmek zorunda kal

nan ikinci en iyialternatiftir.

Hastalk maliyeti Cost of illness Temsili deerin hastalk maliyetlerinden karlmasna dayalbir piyasafiyatlandrma yaklam(r, tbbi tedavi, kaybedilen ignlerindenkaynaklgelir kaybvb)

Hedonik fiyatlandrmayntemi

Hedonic pricing method Piyasasolmayan bir rn veya hizmetin deerini, piyasa fiyattanmltamamlaycbir rne olan taleple olan ilikisini inceleyerek tahminetmeye dayalbir belirtilen tercih yntemidir (r, emlak veya arazifiyatlar).

5 arpan etkileri iveya gelirlerdeki artn zincirleme veya ikincil etkileriyle ilgilidir. Yer deitirme etkileri ise yeni ilerin gerekten yaratldna veyabunlarn dier frsatlarn yerine geip gemediini inceler.



Terim ngilizce Aklama

skonto (yapma) Discounting Gelecekteki deerleri bugnk deeri asndan ifade etme sreci. Bufayda ve maliyet aklarnortaya ktklarzamandan bamsz olarakkarlatrmaysalar.

Kullanm deeri Use value Bir kaynan kullanmveya potansiyel kullanmndan tremiekonomikdeer. Dorudan kullanm deerleri, dolaylkullanm deerleri ve

seenek deerlerinin net toplamdr.Kullanm ddeer(pasif kullanmdeeri)

Non-use value (passive usevalue)

Bir kaynan/varln herhangi bir kullanmyla ilikili olmayan, altruistik,miras ve varoludeerlerinden tremiekonomik deer.

Kltrel hizmetler Cultural services Ekosistemlerden elde edilen, maddi olmayan faydalarla ilgili ekosistemhizmet kategorisi (rnein rekreasyon amalkullanm).

Maliyet etkinlik analizi Cost effectiveness analysis Aynyada benzer sonulara ulamak iin farklseeneklerin maliyetinikarlatrmada kullanlan karar verme arac.

Maliyet fonksiyonyaklam

Cost function approach Belirli bir rnn ktsn(r, tarmsal rnler) retim faktrleri maliyetiyle(r, su miktar ve kalitesi) ilikilendiren bir retim girdisi yntemi.

Marjinal deiiklik Marginal change Bir piyasa veya piyasa dmal/rn veya hizmetin temininde grlenartan deiiklik (genellikle bir birim deiiklii).

Net BugnkKullanm Deeri

Net present value (NPV) Bugnk maliyetlerin deeri ile bugnk faydalarn deeri arasndakifark.

deme istei/eilimi Willingness to pay (WTP) rn veya hizmetin temininde yaanan kazan veya kaybn parasallm.

Parasallatrma Monetisation Piyasasolmayan bir rn veya hizmetin teminindeki deiiklie parasalbir deerin biilmesi.

Piyasa fiyatyntemleri

Market price methods rn ve hizmetlerin temini ile ortaya kan kullanm deerleri iin temsilitahminler sunan (piyasalarda dorudan gzlemlenebilen) ekonomikdeer belirleme yaklamlar.

Piyasa fiyat Market price Piyasalarda dorudan gzlemlenebilen, rn ve hizmetlerin teminindekideer.

Piyasa rnleri Market goods Resmi piyasalarda ticareti yaplan rn ve hizmetler.

Piyayasolmayanrn ve hizmetler

Non-market goods andservices

Piyasalarda alverii yaplmayan ve bunun sonucunda fiyatsz olanrn ve hizmetler (r, evresel rn ve hizmetler).

Seeneklerin maliyeti Cost of alternatives Bir kaynaa benzer ilevi salayabilecek yedein maliyetlerini hesabakatan bir piyasa fiyatlandrma yaklam.

Tedarik hizmetleri Provisioning services Besin, yapmalzemesi, yakt, doal ilalar ve genetik kaynaklar gibiekosistemlerden elde edilen rnlerle ilgili ekosistem hizmetlerikategorisi.

Kaynak: EFTECten uyarlanmtr (2009)6

6 EFTEC (2009). evresel Etkilere Deer Biilmesi: Politika ve Proje Deerlendirmede Fayda Transferinin Kullanmiin Pratik Bilgiler. ngiltereKyileri Bakanlna sunulmutur.


21/42

Guidelines on the Integration ofEconomics into Planning Applicationsin Coastal and Marine Areas in Turkey

Strengthening the System of Marine and Coastal ProtectedAreas of Turkey Project

2011

Prepared byCamille Bann & Esra Baak

T.C.EVRE VE EHRCLKBAKANLII

T.C.EVREVE EH RC L KBAKANLIIEmpowered lives.

Resilient nations.


22/42


23/4215Strengthening the system of the Marine and Coastal Protected Areas of Turkey

PURPOSE OF

GUIDELINES

T his document provides high level guidelinesfor the integration of economic principlesinto planning the use and development of marineand coastal areas, including Marine Protected Ar-eas (MPAs) in Turkey. The application of theseguidelines will result in better investment deci-

sions and more cost-effective management of Tur-keys coastal and marine resources. Turkey hasthe largest marine protected areas in the Mediter-ranean Basin, therefore sustainable managementof Turkeys marine resource is important both forTurkey and for the region.

A workshop was held in Ankara in March 2011to help develop these guidelines. This workshopwas attended by representatives of the state au-thorities, universities and non- governmental or-ganization involved in coastal and marine plan-ning in Turkey.

While the guidelines have been prepared for TheGeneral Directorate of Natural Assets Protection(GDNAP), to be successful they need to be ad-opted by all government departments involvedin the planning process. These planning partnersinclude: the relevant general directorates underthe Ministry of Environment and Urbanization;the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (suchas GDNAP and the General Directorate of Nature

Conservation and National Parks); the Ministry ofFood, Agriculture and Livestock; the Ministry ofCulture and Tourism; the Ministry of Transport,Marine Affairs and Communication; and Ministryof Development7.

Section 2 sets out the general principles underpin-ning the guidelines. Section 3 presents guidelinesfor integrating economics into marine and coastalplanning and on the required institutional ar-rangements to make the integration of economics

into planning successful and efficient. The guide-lines are organized according to the key stagesof the planning process research, plan design,implementation and monitoring and evaluation.Annex 1 provides a typology of marine and coast-al ecosystem services, and Annex 2 provides aglossary of key economic terms.

7 Coastal area planning, including plans for MCPAs is mainly under-taken by the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization and theMinistry of Forest and Water Affairs.

4


24/4216 Guidelines on the Integration of Economics into Planning Applications in Coastal and Marine Areas in Turkey

GENERAL

PRINCIPLES

T o ensure decisions are sustainable, efficientand equitable it is essential that all social, eco-nomic and environmental impacts of a develop-ment on a marine and coastal environment, bothshort and long term, are identified, measured andwhere possible monetised.

Marine and coastal areas can be managed andused in many different ways. Potential uses in-clude extraction, housing, industrial activities, en-ergy conversion (e.g. wind farms), maritime pro-

jects, transport facilities, recreation and leisure,coastal defence and land reclamation and conser-vation of areas of importance to nature (includingdesignated Marine Protection Areas).

In order to identify the best option for a marine andcoastal environment, it is important to know what

ecosystem goods and services will be affected bycoastal development and /or changes in manage-ment of sites and how these goods and services cre-ate value for different members of society.

If the full range of goods and services provided bythe marine and coastal ecosystems are not consid-ered in the assessment of planning applications,there is the risk that economically valuable servi-ces will be lost, which may be costly to replaceand in some cases irreplaceable. It is also impor-

tant to understand the incidence of costs and ben-efits, and the impact of planning decision on locallivelihoods and cultural values.

Economic analysis including the monetization ofkey marine and coastal ecosystem services and thecomparison of options using Cost Benefit Analysis(CBA) is recommended. This can help to answerkey questions related to the sustainable economicmanagement including:

How will changes in human activities andecosystem quality and quantity affect the peo-ples welfare?

What are the trade offs? For example, shoulda shoreline be cleared and stabilized to pro-vide new land for urban or tourism develop-ment, or should it be maintained / restoredto its natural state to serve as wildlife habitat?Should a wetland be drained and convertedto agriculture, or should more wetland areabe created to provide water filtration services?5



Should an inlet be dredged and mined for theproduction of sand and gravel, or should itbe preserved to provide natural tidal flow?Should fishing activities continue at its cur-rent level or should no take zones be declaredto ensure a sustainable fisheries? Should a

coastal ecosystem be converted to a marina orshould it be kept in its natural state in order topromote eco-tourism?

What is gained and lost by a development?

What development options / managementare economically worthwhile and what is theeconomically optimal development / man-agement option?



GUIDELINES

3.1. Research

The integration of economics into marine andcoastal planning will require research. The princi-ples recommended to be adopted by marine plan-ning research studies are presented below.

3.1.1. Adoption of an Ecosystems ServicesApproach

The assessment of marine and coastal areas shouldbegin with a rigorous understanding of the manyecosystem goods and services that could be pro-duced by these complex systems.

An ecosystems services approachis recommend-ed to be adopted, which sets out the full range ofprovisioning, regulating and cultural services

provided by marine and coastal ecosystems, asset out in Annex I. The provision of these ser-vices may be lost or damaged if coastal and ma-rine areas are developed or management practicesare changed. Conversely they can be enhancedthrough sustainable practices, such as improvedfisheries management.

Application of the Ecosystem Approach requiresa comprehensive understanding of how changesin human activities and ecosystem states will re-

sult in changes in ecosystem services and the asso-ciated benefits to people. The provision of goodsand services, before and after the developmentneeds to be quantified.

3.1.2. Interdisciplinary approach

The application of the Ecosystem Services Ap-proach requires a range of expertise including sci-entific, economic, legal and planning. Therefore amulti-disciplinary team should be formed to carry

out the assessment, led by an experienced econo-mist.

3.1.3. The planning application process shouldbe based on a good understanding of the social,environmental and economic impacts of theproposed activities

The impacts of different marine and coastal man-agement practices and uses should be identified.This includes social, environmental and economic6



impacts. This information may be provided by anEnvironmental Impact Assessment (EIA), uponwhich the economic assessment such as Cost Ben-efit Analysis can build.

3.1.4. Wherever possible key impacts on marine

and ecosystem services should be monetizedThere are a range of established techniques thatcan be employed to monetize the value of marineand coastal ecosystem services. Provisioning ser-vicescan often be valued using market prices, ascan the cultural serviceof recreation and tourism.Regulating services can be harder to monetizedue to a lack of scientific (bio-physical data); it isnecessary to quantify their provision at a givensite and how determine how this will change as a

result of a proposed change in management or useof the area. Often cost based approachescan beemployed to estimate the key regulating servicesat a site. Furthermore, where site specific data onregulating services are lacking, values may be ad-opted from similar studies elsewhere to provide

an indicative value, an approach known asVal-

ue Transfer. More sophisticated valuation tech-niques such as stated preferenceapproaches andhedonic pricingshould only be attempted wheremore straightforward approaches are insufficientto convince decision markers and the expertise,data and resources are available to follow a bestpractice approach. Both use values and non-use values should be considered. The valuationevidence for key ecosystem services identified atFoa and Gkova SEPAs are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1. The Value of Marine Ecosystem Services in Foa and Gkova SEPAs

EcosystemService

Value/ yearUS$ forFoa SEPA

Value/ yearUS$ forGkova SEPA

Valuationapproach

Comment

Fish 6,207,254 332,854 Market prices This is not based on a sustainable harvest rate, which isunknown. This estimate does not include recreational fishingand may be based on an under-reporting of fish catch. This is agross value costs have not been deducted

Carbon

sequestration

408,218 792,064 Market prices

(avoided costapproach)

Based on area of Posidoniabeds. Assumes development of

market in blue carbon credits analogous to the forest carbonmarket. This value is therefore not currently captured. Basedon market price of carbon of US$11.2 / tCO

2eq

Erosionprotection

5,263,731 28,492 BenefitsTransfer

Based on 160,000 Euro per meter of coastline Mangos et al(2010)8. Gkova - 159km of Posidoniabeds and 8% of the area atrisk. Foa - 45.2 km of Posidoniabeds and 52% of the area at risk.

Wastetreatment

882,000 10,148,400 Benefitstransfer

Based on Mangos et al(2010) estimate for Turkey of 229 millionEuros apportioned to the study sites based on the length of theircoastlines

Tourism /Recreation

24,305,000 17,051,104 Market prices Based on a conservative estimate of tourist numbers (Gkova30,000 overnight visitors and 100,000 day visitors per year; Foa

20,000 overnight visitors and 139,750 day visitors per year) anda survey of tourist expenditure.

TOTAL 37,066,203 28,463,714

Source: Bann & Baak 201189and 10

8 Mangos, A., Bassino, J-P and Sauzade, D. 2010. The Economic Value of Sustainable Benefits Rendered by the Mediterranean Marine Ecosys-tems. Plan Bleu, UNEP/MAP Regional Activity Center.

9 Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). The economic analysis of Foa Special Environmental Protection Area. Economic Assessment reports for Foa andGkova in the framework of environmental economics principles. Project PIMS 3697: The Strengthening the System of Marine and CoastalProtected Areas of Turkey. Technical Report Series 2: 76 pp.

10 Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). The economic analysis of Gkova Special Environmental Protection Area. Economic Analysis reports for Foa andGkova in the framework of environmental economics principles. Project PIMS 3697: The Strengthening the System of Marine and CoastalProtected Areas of Turkey. Technical Report Series 3: 80 pp.



3.1.5. Development of databases and data sharing

Good scientific, social and economic data are re-quired to undertake economic assessments of ma-rine and coastal ecosystems services. Key datagaps should be addressed and data sharing pro-moted to ensure up to date data are used in the

planning assessment process. Similarly, improvedcoordination mechanisms (i.e. via the Turkish Sta-tistical Institute) are required to ensure that re-search and data collection are not replicated forthe marine and coastal sites.

3.1.6. Cost Benefit Analysis

Cost Benefit Analysis is recommended as a meansof comparing options and providing evidence onthe option with the highest net present value.Importantly CBA considers the returns from theresource overtime. It is therefore able to analyzethe sustainability of different options, and iden-tify cases where revenue may be very high ini-tially but in the medium to long term may declineor even fall to zero due to the degradation / col-lapse of the natural resource base which under-pins provision of the services. An example mightbe a fishery that becomes exhausted due to overexploitation, or a coastal tourism sector which col-lapses due to the degradation of the natural envi-ronment.

The valuation evidence provided in Table 1 pro-vides an overview of the value of the marine eco-system in its current state and use. Such informa-tion is important to build awareness of the rangeof ecosystem services provided by a site and theireconomic significance. However of greater use todecision makers is an understanding of how thisvalue may change as a result of a change in theuse or management of the area. Cost Benefit Anal-

ysis can compare alternative use and managementoptions, relative to the baseline and determinewhich option is economically optimal.

3.1.7. Distributional Analysis

The incidence of the development impacts areimportant to consider. The analysis should drawout who wins and who loses from the options as-sessed. Such information can help develop appro-priate compensation mechanisms.

3.1.8. Identification of financing mechanisms

The Cost Benefit Analysis and distributional anal-ysis of MPAs provides a foundation for identify-ing appropriate financing mechanism at a givensite. An analysis of potential financing mechanismshould be undertaken (e.g. tourism fees, user feesand carbon credits) to inform the planning pro-cess. This analysis is central to the development ofMPA management and business plans, and dem-onstrating the financial viability of sites.

3.1.9. Socio-economic assessment

The socio-economic implications of environmen-tal planning and policies are a key aspect of de-cision making. Therefore, socio-economic data

should be routinely collected at the planningphase and regularly monitored thereafter. Socio-economic data provides important contextual in-formation for the valuation exercise and for theplanning process in general. It is recommendedto collect data on population characteristics (size,composition and growth), household income, em-ployment levels and opportunities, levels of edu-cation, health status, development infrastructure,food security, vulnerability and coping strategies,water and sanitation. This information can be used

to help understand pressures on the marine andcoastal environment and their likely trends, eco-nomic opportunities associated with the marineand coastal environment, and who will be impact-ed (positively and negatively) by a change in itsquality or quantity. As an example, village-basedand household-based socio-economic research hasbeen conducted in Data-Bozburun SEPA. Basedon this research, villages were assigned differentfunctions (such as agriculture-based tourism).

3.1.10. Presentation of the evidence

It is important that the evidence is presented ina transparent way to decision makers and stake-holders. For ecosystem services that have beenmonetized, the data, approach and assumptionsused should be clearly stated, and the confidencearound the values presented discussed. For eco-systems that cannot be monetized due to data re-strictions and/or time constraints, available quan-titative and qualitative data should be presented



along with the likely significance of each servicein economic and social terms.

3.2. Plan design

3.2.1. Making informed decisionsPlanning decisions should be based on an under-standing of all the evidence qualitative, quantita-tive and monetary. Where the loss of an ecosystemservice is thought to be significant but it is not pos-sible within an initial assessment of a site to mon-etize this impact, then a decision may be deferreduntil a more detailed study can be undertaken

3.2.2. Ensuring co-ordination between authorities

Co-ordination across all competent authorities in-volved in marine and coastal spatial planning isrequired so that all parties are fully informed onall issues, and a consistent planning assessmentis undertaken, which incorporates the economicprinciples presented in Part 3.1 of the guidelines.For example, measures by the Ministry of Food,Agriculture and Livestock with regards to fisher-ies should be coordinated with other authoritiesincluding GDNAP. Likewise, investment priorities

of the relevant state authorities such as the Min-istry of Culture and Tourism, Ministry of Energyand Natural Resources among others should beconsistent with the objectives of GDNAP and othermarine and coastal planning authorities.

The planning process should therefore be a coor-dinated and collective process involving all con-cerned parties so that a comprehensive assess-ment of the options and their impacts (positiveand negative) can be undertaken.

3.2.3. Consultative approach

The planning assessment process should adopt aconsultative approach, involving key stakehold-ers, in particular local communities that may beaffected by a change in management or use of thearea. Consultation and resulting consensus build-ing among the relevant stakeholders are essentialin the success of any management planning pro-cess and/or management regime. This may re-

quire the decentralization of the current planningapproaches.

3.2.4. Off-site impacts on Marine Protected Areas

Impacts on protected areas caused by activities /

development outside of the protected area shouldbe taken into consideration in the planning pro-cess, and avoided or mitigated to avoid damage tomarine biodiversity and ecosystem services.

3.2.5. Overcoming the challenges of privateproperty ownership and legal restrictions

Coastal and marine planning authorities in Turkeyare frequently challenged by conflicts arising fromprivate ownership issues. To minimise conflicts it

is important to involve the appropriate stakehold-ers at the beginning of the planning process andto offer proper compensation to those that may benegatively impacted by a decision. The economicanalysis can help determine a fair level of compen-sation. Furthermore, the existing legal gaps in bothplanning and the implementation of approvedplans should be addressed to facilitate an effectiveand consistent national system.

3.3. Implementation

3.3.1. Ensuring a participatory approach toimplementation

The implementation of a coastal and marine planapproved by the relevant public authorities re-quires the support of all implementation partnersand local communities. For this, continuous infor-mation sharing and transparency on implementa-tion interventions must be maintained between all

concerned stakeholders.

3.4. Monitoring and Evaluation

3.4.1. Design and implementation of a monitoringand evaluation framework

It is essential that a monitoring and evaluation pro-cess is put in place to regularly assess the imple-mentation of plans. The monitoring and evaluationprocess should include environmental, social and



economic indicators. Regular monitoring will pro-vide timely information on the difficulties in imple-mentation which can then be addressed.

The monitoring and evaluation framework shouldbe developed during preparation of the plans,

and will be informed by the economic analysisdescribed in section 3.

Capacity building is required to develop skills inmonitoring and evaluation (e.g. setting indicators

and implementing the monitoring and evaluationprocess). This should be supported by funds allo-cated from the central budget. Capacity buildingand training is also required in economic analysis.

It is relatively straightforward to refer to moni-toring schemes and indicators in the reports andguides of large scale Environmental Plans, how-ever terminology on ecosystem services are newand not defined in legislation, so this should beaddressed first.



ANNEX I. TYPOLOGY OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

A typology of marine and coastal ecosystem services is provided in Table 2. This typology can be usedto identify the ecosystem services provided by a marine and coastal site and to prioritise services formonetisation. The typology follows the Ecosystem Service Approach (ESA), which is based on theMillennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) classification of ecosystem services into the following fourcategories:

Provisioning servicesrelate to the tangible products, such as fish and pharmaceuticals, provided bymarine ecosystems

Regulating servicesrefer to the marine environments natural processes such as waste assimilationand carbon sequestration that contribute to social wellbeing.

Cultural servicesmay be associated with both use and non-use values and relate to the non-materialbenefits obtained from ecosystems, for example, through tourism and educational use of the marineenvironments.

Supporting servicesare necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services (e.g. soil for-mation or nutrient cycling). They differ from the other services in that their impacts on people are

either indirect (via provisioning, regulating or cultural services) or occur over a very long time.

The ESA explicitly recognizes that ecosystems such as marine environments and the biological diversitycontained within them contribute to individual and social wellbeing. Importantly it recognizes that thiscontribution extends beyond the provision of goods such as fish to the natural regulating functions ofmarine ecosystems such as carbon sequestration. The ESA therefore provides a framework for consider-ing whole ecosystems in decision making and for valuing the services they provide.



Table 2. Typology of Marine Ecosystem Services

EcosystemService Type

Service Benefit / outcome

ProvisioningServic

es

Food Commercial and subsistence fish and wildlife

Raw materials Industrial purposes - seaweed

Natural medicines obtained from marine dependent species

Genetic resources - variety in gene pool in marine flora and fauna

Ornamental resources e.g., shells used as jewellery, handicrafts

Source of energy (fuel etc) Energy provision e.g., tidal power

Transport Commercial use of waterways

RegulatingServices Regulation of GHGs Carbon sequestration

Micro-climate stabilization Influence on temperature, precipitation, wind, humidity etc

Disturbance regulation Flood and storm protection

Erosion control

Waste assimilation Detoxification of pollutionWater purification

CulturalServices

Spiritual, religious, culturalheritage

Archaeological ruins (historical not recreational value). Use of marineenvironment in books, film, painting, folklore, national symbols, architecture,advertising

Educational A natural field laboratory for understanding marine processes

Recreation andecotourism

Recreational fishing, birdwatching, hiking, diving, sailing, canoeing, Holidaydestination (aesthetic views) , archaeological ruins (historical not recreationalvalue)

Landscape and amenity Property price premiums

Biodiversity non-use Enhanced wellbeing associated for example with bequest or altruistic motivations

Source: Bann, C., Baak, E. (2011). The economic analysis of Gkova Special Environmental Protection Area. Economic Analysis reports forFoa and Gkova in the framework of environmental economics principles. Project PIMS 3697: The Strengthening the System of Marine andCoastal Protected Areas of Turkey. Technical Report Series 3: 80 pp.



ANNEX 2. GLOSSARY11

Appraisal The process of defining objectives, examining options and weighing up the cost benefits, risksand uncertainties of proposed policies, programme or projects before a decision is made

Cost Benefit Analysis A decision making tool that compares costs and benefits of a proposed policy or project inmonetary terms

Cost effectivenessanalysis (CEA)

A decision making tool that compares the cost of different options for achieving the same orsimilar outcomes

Cost function approach A production input method which relates the output of a given good (e.g., agricultural products)to the cost of its factor inputs (e.g., the quantity or quality of water).

Cost of alternatives A market pricing approach that considers the cost of providing a substitute that would provide asimilar function to a resource.

Cost of illness A market pricing approach where a proxy value can be inferred from the cost of illness (e.g.medical treatment, loss of earnings from work days lost, etc.) incurred when it is not available.

Cultural services A category of ecosystem services that relates to the non-material benefits obtained fromecosystems, for example through recreation.

Discounting The process of expressing future values in present value terms. This allows for the comparison offlows of cost and benefit over time regardless of when they occur.

Economic efficiency A concept that relates to allocating resources to maximize wellbeing to society.

Economic ImpactAssessment

Assessment focused on the contribution of a marine or coastal site to the economy of a particularregion or to a country, in terms of incomes and employment supported by a coastal or marinesite. There is an overlap between some of the information sourced for a CBA and EIA. Howeveran EIA is focused on indicators such as the number of jobs created, economic income (ratherthan welfare values) and ideally takes into account multiplier and displacement effects11. AnEconomic Impact Assessment provides insights into the dependence of a region on wetlandservices.

Economic value The monetary measure of the wellbeing associated with the change in the provision of somegood. For market goods this is ordinarily measured by market price; for non-market goods this

ordinarily measured by willingness to pay (WTP) or willingness to accept (WTA).Economic valuationevidence (monetaryvaluation evidence)

Economic values, value functions and other empirical evidence available from existing (primary)studies that provides the source of evidence for value transfer. Previous value transfer analysesmay also provide evidence for current applications.

Ecosystem servicesapproach.

A term that is used to describe a framework for analyzing how human populations are dependentupon the condition of the natural environment. The approach explicitly recognizes thatecosystems and the biological diversity contained within them contribute to individual and socialwellbeing

Environmental impactassessment (EIA)

Identification and assessment of environmental impacts resulting from a proposed policy orproject.

Externality An externality is something (positive or negative) that impacts society, but which is not accounted

for in the decisions of producers,Hedonic pricing method A revealed preference valuation method that estimates the use value of a non-market good or

service by examining the relationship between the non-market good and the demand for somemarket-priced complementary good (e.g. property or land prices).

Marginal change An incremental change (ordinarily a unit change) in the provision of a market or non-marketgood or service.

Market goods Goods and services traded in formal markets.

11 Multiplier effects refer to the knock on or secondary effects of an increase in jobs or income. Displacement effects consider whether new jobsare really being created, or whether they are displacing other opportunities.



Market price The value of the provision of goods and services that may be directly observed from markets.

Market price methods Approaches to economic valuation that provide proxy estimates - which may be observed directlyfrom actual markets - for use values that arise in relation to the provision of goods and services.

Monetisation The assignment of a monetary value to a change in the provision of a non-market good orservice.

Net present value (NPV) The difference between the present value of costs and the present value of benefits.

Non-market goods andservices

Goods and services that are not traded in markets and are consequently un-priced (e.g.environmental goods and services).

Non-use value (passiveuse value)

Economic value not associated with any use of a resource, but derived altruistic, bequest andexistence values.

Opportunity cost The value of the next best alternative use of resource.

Provisioning services A category of ecosystem services which relates to products obtained from ecosystems, such asfood, fiber and fuel, natural medicines and genetic resources.

Regulating services A category of ecosystem services which refers to the regulation of ecosystem processes suchas climate regulation, air quality regulation, water regulation (e.g. flood control), water qualityregulation (purification/detoxification) and erosion control.

Stated preferencemethods

Economic valuation methods that use questionnaire surveys to elicit individuals preferences(i.e. willingness to pay and/or willingness to accept) for changes in the provision on non-marketgoods or services.

Use value The economic value that is derived from using or having potential to use a resource. It is the netsum of direct use values, indirect use values and option values.

Willingness to pay (WTP) The monetary measure of the value of obtaining a gain in the provision of good or service oravoiding a loss

Source: adapted from eftec (2009)12

12 eftec (2009). Valuing Environmental Impacts: Practical Guidelines for the Use of Value Transfer in Policy and Project Appraisal. Submitted tothe Department for Rural Affairs, UK.



EK. KATILIMCI LISTESI / APPENDIX. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarPlanlama Srecine Entegrasyonu Eitimi vealtay23 Mart 2011/ A training workshop on Integrating Economic Principles into Marine LandUse Planning and Decision Making on 23 March 2011

No Ad-Soyad / Name-Lastname Kurum / Institution Grev / Title

1. Ahmet ZYANIK zel evre Koruma Kurumu Bakanl(KKB) Kurum Bakan

2. Mehmet MENENG KKB Daire Bakan

3. Hasan YILMAZ Babakanlk Denizcilik Mstearl/Deniz UlatrmasGenel Mdrl/Denizcilik evresi Dairesi Bakanl

Biyolog

4. Hseyin KILI Devlet Planlama Tekilat Uzman Yardmcs

5. Ahmet KUNDAY Devlet Planlama Tekilat Planlama Uzman

6. Erol ZTRK Tarm ve Kyileri Bakanl/Koruma Kontrol Genel

Mdrl

Su rnleri Mhendisi

7. Hamdi ARPA Tarm ve Kyileri Bakanl/ Koruma Kontrol GenelMdrl

Ziraat Mhendisi

8. Cihan TOSLAK Tarm ve Kyileri Bakanl/ Koruma Kontrol GenelMdrl

Mhendis

9. M. Hakan BAYKAL evre ve Orman BakanlDoa Koruma Milli ParklarGenel Mdrl/Doa Koruma Dairesi Bakanl

Uzman

10. Rana ALTINTA evre ve Orman BakanlDoa Koruma Milli ParklarGenel Mdrl/Milli Parklar Dairesi Bakanl

Uzman Biyolog

11. Kadriye MOLLAMEHMETOLU evre ve Orman BakanlDoa Koruma Milli ParklarGenel Mdrl/Milli Parklar Dairesi Bakanl

Mhendis

12. mer ZTRK evre ve Orman Bakanl/evre Ynetimi GenelMdrl/Deniz ve KyYnetimi Dairesi

Uzman

13. Emine AYDINOLU evre ve Orman Bakanl/evre Ynetimi GenelMdrl/Deniz ve KyYnetimi Dairesi

ube Mdr

14. Bahar SEL FEHM evre ve Orman Bakanl ehir Plancs

15. Ali DN Orman Genel Mdrl/Orman dare ve PlanlamaDaire Bakanl

Orman Mhendisi

16. Mehtap DEMRC Kltr ve Turizm Bakanl/Tevik ve Emlak DairesiBakanl

ehir Plancs

17. Adnan KCE Ulat

rma Bakanl

/DLH naat

Genel Mdrl evre Mhendisi18. Dr. Turgay ALBAYRAK Bayndrlk ve skan Bakanl/Teknik Uygulama

Aratrma Genel Mdrlehir Plancs

19. Mustafa Serta SALI Maliye Bakanl/Milli Emlak Genel Mdrl Devlet MallarUzmanYardmcs

20. Do. Dr. Mehmet AKBULUT anakkale Onsekiz Mart niversitesi/Su rnleri Fak. retim yesi

21. Hlag KAPLAN Gazi niversitesi retim Grevlisi

22. Hayri ULV Gazi niversitesi Aratrma Grevlisi

23. Zeynep ZDEMR Gazi niversitesi Aratrma Grevlisi




24. Gner ERGN KKB ube Mdr

25. Levent KESK N KKB ehir Plancs

26. Glhan BADUR ZDEN KKB Uzman

27. Sibel MER KKB Jeoloji Mhendisi

28. brahim YALAVA KKB Harita Mhendisi

29. Murat KARAHAN KKB Ziraat Mhendisi

30. Serhan GEZMEN KKB ehir Plancs

31. Serhan Murat DORU KKB ehir Plancs

32. Halime Suda EKC KKB Uzman

33. Nisa Nur AKAN KKB Biyolog

34. Nurhan EN KKB evre Mhendisi

35. Melek Derya GLER KKB Proje Uzman

36. Merve YAZAR KKB ehir Plancs

37. Meltem GLCAN KKB ehir Plancs

38. hret KUMCU KKB ehir Plancs

39. Mehmet PEKER KKB Mdr Yardmcs

40. Nesrin REYHAN KKB ehir Plancs

41. Mustafa SNMEZ KKB ube Mdr

42. Yksel ATASOY ZDEMR KKB ehir Plancs

43. Emrah MANAP KKB Biyolog

44. Erdoan AKGL KKB Daire Bakan

45. Umit TURAN KKB ube Mdr

46. Nilfer BAYRAK KKB ube Mdr

47. Reyhan ZDEMR KKB Uzman

48. Leyla AKDA KKB Gda Mhendisi

49. Erhan PALA KKB ehir Plancs

50. Aynur HATPOLU Aksaray K Mdrl Aksaray K Mdr

51. Yusuf DOAN Aksaray K Mdrl Biyolog




52. Gkhan BULUT Aksaray K Mdrl Biyolog

53. Fatma ZDEMR Aksaray K Mdrl Biyolog

54. Onur ELK Aksaray K Mdrl ehir Plancs

55. Gizem ORAKBA Aksaray K Mdrl evre Mhendisi

56. Mihrican KK Aksaray K Mdrl Ziraat Mhendisi

57. Ergin BOZKURT Aksaray K Mdrl ehir Plancs

58. Deniz KUTLUZEN zmir K Mdrl Mimar

59. Fatih ERM Mula K Mdrl ehir Plancs

60. Meltem DORU Antalya K Mdrl ehir Plancs

61. Yasemel ETN Mersin K Mdrl ehir Plancs(Uzman)

62. Uur YOLAK UNDP/GEF Finans Uzman

63. Esra BAAK UNDP/GEF evresel Ekonomi ve

Ynetim Uzman

64. Lee THOMAS UNDP/GEF Finans Uzman

65. Camille BANN UNDP/GEF evresel Ekonomi veYnetim Uzman

66. Aycan ALP UNDP/GEF letiim Uzman

67. Do. Dr. Harun GLSOY UNDP/GEF Proje Yneticisi

68. Glden ATKIN GENOLU UNDP/GEF Proje Asistan

69. Damla AKYILDIZ UNDP Trkiye Proje Asistan

70. Koray ABACI UNDP Trkiye zleme ve Deerlendirme

Uzman

71. Nuri ZBADATLI UNDP Trkiye Proje Yneticisi

72. Ece SARAOLU SAD-SualtAratrmalarDernei Proje Asistan

73. Sezer GKTAN WWF TRK YE ehir Plancs

74. Umut TURAL WWF TRK YE Su rnleri Mhendisi

75. Buket Bahar DIVRAK WWF-TRK YE ehir Plancs

76. Dr. Gven KAYA Anadolu Ormanclk Aratrma Mdrl Orman Yksek Mhendisi



1Projenin Gerekesive Projenin Amac

Trkiyenin sahip olduu 8.500 kmlik kyeridinde yaklak 3 bin bitki ve hayvan tr

ya

yor. Ancak Trkiyenin denizel biyolojikeitlilii ciddi ekilde insan basksaltnda bu-lunuyor. Denizel yaam alanlarnn ve ekosis-temlerinin tahribat, denizel kaynaklarn arkullanmve kyalanlarnn tahribaten temeltehditler arasnda. Bu proje, Trkiyenin ulusaldeniz ve kykoruma alanlarsistemini glen-dirmeyi ve etkin ynetimini kolaylatrmayamalyor.

2009 ylnda balayan projenin Ekim 2013te ta-mamlanmasplanlanyor.

2Projenin UygulamaAlanlar

Proje, Trkiyede alt blgede yrtlyor.

Bunlarn bei zel evre Koruma (K) bl-gesi, biriyse Tabiat Park:

1. Fethiye-Gcek K Blgesi

2. Kyceiz-Dalyan K Blgesi

3. Data-Bozburun K Blgesi

4. Gkova K Blgesi

5. Foa K Blgesi

6. Ayvalk AdalarTabiat Park

3Projenin HedefleriProje ile ana sonuca ulalmashedefleniyor:

Mevcut Deniz ve Ky Koruma Alanlarnndaha etkin ynetimi ve yeni deniz ve ky

koruma alanlar

n

n kurulmas

na ncelikvermek iin sorumlu kurumlarn ihtiyaduyduu kurumsal yapnn ve kapasiteninglendirilmesi,

Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlariin finansalplanlama ve ynetim sistemlerinin geliti-rilmesi ve uygulanmas ile etkin i planla-masnn, yeterli dzeyde gelir retiminin vemaliyet etkin ynetiminin salanmas,

Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlarnn ok ama-lkullanm alanlarnda, ekonomik faaliyet-lerin dzenlenmesi ve ynetimi iin kurum-lar araskoordinasyonun salanmas.

5 BALIKTA

Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlar

Sisteminin Glendirilmesi Projesi

1

23

4

5

6



4ProjeninTrkiyeye Katks

Trkiyenin taraf olduu uluslar arasBiyo-lojik eitlilik Szlemesinin korunan alan-lar i programnn uygulanmasna katkdabulunacak.

Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlarsistemi yaklak olarak 100.000 hektar geni-letilecek; yani balangca gre yzde 44 art-rlacak.

En az iki Deniz ve KyKoruma alannda Ba-lkla KstlAlanlar oluturulacak ve Ba-

lkla KstlAlanlar sisteminin geniletil-mesi ile srdrlebilir bir balklk ynetimisalanacak.

Mevcut Deniz ve Ky Koruma Alanlarnndaha etkin ynetimi hususunda yerel teki-latlarda kapasite artrmsalayacak.

Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlarnn srdr-lebilir finansmaniin gerekli sistemler olu-turulacak.

Kurumlar araskoordinasyon yaplarng-lendirecek.

Kurumlar ve dier ilgi gruplar, denizel bi-yolojik eitlilie ynelik hem karasal hemde deniz kaynakltehditlere etkin mdahaleedebilecek.

Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanlarUlusal Strate-ji ve Eylem Plannerisi hazrlanacak.

Deniz ve Ky Koruma Alanlar sistemininsrdrlebilirlii salanacak, mevcut du-rumdaki deiimlerle beraber uzun vadededenizel biyolojik eitlilik zerindeki olumluetkiler projenin tamamlanmasndan sonra dadevam edecek.

Deniz ve KyKoruma AlanNedir?

Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanlarfarklamalarlatesis edilebilir, farkl tipte, farkl byklkteolabilir ve farkl ekillerde ynetilebilir. Bunedenle, birok farklDKA tanmmevcuttur.

En basit tanmyla, bir Deniz ve KyKorumaAlan; belli bir deniz alannn belirgin bir in-san etkisinden korunmasve doal, tarihi vekltrel zelliklerinin muhafaza edilmesidir.

Bu koruma yasalar ve genellikle de yerelhalkn, kar gruplarnn destek ve katlmylasalanr.

Deniz ve Ky Koruma Alanlar, Trkiyenindenizel alanlarndaki biyolojik eitliliineynelik bu tehditleri ortadan kaldrmada

nemli bir potansiyel role sahiptir.



5Projeyi KimlerYrtyor?

Proje, Kresel evre Fonu (GEF) mali desteiy-le, ehircilik BakanlTabiat Varlklarn Ko-ruma Genel Mdrl (TVKGM) tarafndanOrman ve Su leri BakanlDoa Koruma veMilli Parklar Genel Mdrl, Gda Tarm veHayvanclk Bakanl Balklk ve Su rn-leri Genel Mdrl ortaklnda yrtl-yor. Birlemi Milletler Kalknma Program(UNDP) projede uygulaycortak olarak grevalyor.

Dileri Bakanl, Genelkurmay Bakanl,Kalknma Bakanl, Sahil Gvenlik Komutan-l, Deniz Kuvvetleri Komutanl, UlatrmaDenizcilik ve Haberleme Bakanl, Kltr veTurizm Bakanl, evre ve ehircilik Bakanl-Deniz ve KyDairesi ve AB ve Dlikiler

Dairesi Bakanl, Valilikler, Mahalli dareler,niversiteler, aratrma enstitleri, ulusal veyerel sivil toplum rgtleri ve yerel halk tem-silcileri de projenin dier paydalar arasndayer alyor.

Trkiyenin Deniz ve KyKorumaAlanlar

Trkiye, adalar hari Akdeniz, Ege Denizi,Marmara Denizi ve Karadeniz kylar, olmakzere yaklak 8.500 km ky uzunluunasahiptir. Bylesine uzun deniz ve kyalanlar zengin biyolojik eitlilik deerlerinibarndrmakta ve yaklak 3000 bitki ve hay-van trne ev sahiplii yapmaktadr.

Trkiyedeki mevcut ky ve deniz korumaalanlarnn ou Tabiat Varlklarn Koru-ma Genel Mdrl (TVKGM) tarafndanynetilmektedir. Bu alanlara ek olarak DoaKoruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Mdrl(DKMPGM), Gda Tarm ve HayvanclkBakanlve Kltr ve Turizm Bakanlmevcutdeniz ve ky koruma alanlarndan bazlarnynetmekle ve planlamakla yetkilidir.

Trkiyedeki yaklak 346.138 hektarlk den-izel alan 31 Deniz ve KyKoruma Alanaltndayasal olarak koruma altnda bulunuyor. Trki-ye kara sularnn yaklak %4 korunuyor.

Trkiyenin denizel biyolojik eitlilii ciddiekilde insan basksaltnda bulunuyor. Den-izel yaam alanlarnn ve ekosistemlerinintahribat, denizel kaynaklarn ar kullanmve kyalanlarnn tahribaten temel tehditlerarasndadr.


41/42


42/42

T.C.EVRE VE EHRCLK

BAKANLII

T.C.EVRE VE EH RC L KBAKANLII Gl bireyle

Gl topluml

evre ve ehircilik BakanlTabiat VarlklarnKoruma Genel MdrlAlparslan TrkeCad. 17. Sok. No.10 06510 Betepe/Yenimahalle/AnkaraTel: +90 (312) 222 12 34 Faks: +90 (312) 222 26 61http://www.cevresehircilik.gov.tr/gm/tabiat/www.dka.gov.tr

BirlemiMilletler Kalknma Program(UNDP)Birlik Mahallesi 415. Cadde No. 11 06610 ankaya/AnkaraTel: +90 312 454 1100 Faks: +90 312 496 1463www.undp.org.trGl bireyler. Gl toplumlar.

Documents

Ekonomik Prensiplerin Deniz ve Kıyı Koruma Alanları Planlama Sürecine Entegrasyonu