| | View Thread | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg | |
|---|
Wise Coastal Practices for Sustainable Human Development Forum
Posted By: R. Sudarshana
Date: Monday, 20 December 1999, at 5:58 p.m.
In Response To: "Operationalizing" sustainable coastal development / Alexandria-Egypt. (Samir Riad.)
I tried to understand your article entitled “Operationalizing sustainable coastal development/ Alexandria – Egypt”. It is of interest to me in the context of wise practices since I learn the following.
1. It is wise to protect the underwater antiquities
2. While protecting what is underwater, we could evolve methods and knowledge to protect the existing shoreline property which are threatened by the environmental onslaught such as sea level rise and future inundation
3. Sustainable development of coastal cultural heritage is cross sectoral with the participation of – supreme council of antiquities (for exercising legal claim on the structures), Underwater archaeology department (for technical maintenance of the site and knowledge on its history), Alexandria Government (for administrative and financial sanctions), Alexandria University (for scientific knowledge on the environment), Coast protection authority (to engineer stability of the changing coast), Sewage authority (to ensure underwater hygienic environment), Military authority (for proper coast guard) and UNESCO (for a purposeful coordination)
Turning to the ‘sustainable development’ scenario that you present in the first half of your article and then to the ‘operationalisation’ of the second part, I wonder whether the project is aiming at harmonising environment, resources, human activities and cultural heritage altogether. In this case, it is obvious that the bias is tilted towards the underwater museum. Therefore, to my understanding, it is more of an operational/preventive maintenance of a site rather than sustainable development. But surely, there are several constituent wise practices in the exercise which you could possibly elaborate upon for our enhanced understanding. I list them below and request for elaboration.
1. Role of various technologies and data integration methods that led to evolving the principles of this project
2. Steps of operationalisation OR action plan (I hope the September meeting did bring this out)
3. Perceived threats of present and future for the site and recommended mitigation methods
4. Public participation, use of local knowledge and cultural value of the site
5. Plans for transferability of the project experience
6. Perceived counter effects on environment and society as a result of operationalisation of this project
As you mentioned, it is surely a unique project. If you could describe more, the project could draw more attention.
SEND YOUR REACTION/RESPONSES TO THE .
| | View Thread | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg | |
|---|