Perceptions of the performance of state coastal zone management programs in the United States. II. Regional and state comparisons

Abstract

A mail survey of coastal user groups, academics, and state coastal zone management program managers was conducted to determine the perceptions of the performance of state coastal zone management programs relative to the protection of coastal resources, the management of coastal development, the improvement of public access, and the management of coastal hazards. Information on the perceived importance of the selected issues to each of the 24 states being studied was also solicited. Findings on the perceptions of various categories of interest groups, academics, and program managers with respect to the overall performance of state coastal zone management programs in the four issue areas were presented in an earlier article, “Perceptions of the Performance of State Coastal Zone Management Programs in the United States”; (Knecht et al., 1996). The present article draws on a subset of these data—the responses from the coastal user groups and the academics—and presents the findings at the regional and individual state level. In terms of perceived performance of state coastal zone management programs on a regional basis relative to the selected issue areas, the highest rating went to the Great Lakes region for its management of public access. However, the North Atlantic region received the highest performance rating for the three other issue areas: protection of coastal resources, management of coastal development, and management of coastal hazards. Looking at state performance with regard to the coastal issues judged to be of most importance to the states—the protection of coastal resources and the management of coastal development—respondents indicated that states should improve their performance in both areas, with the greatest need related to the management of coastal development. Overall, the states of the North Atlantic, Great Lakes, and South Atlantic regions were perceived to be performing somewhat better relative to the four issue areas than the states in the Pacific and Gulf of Mexico regions. While the data do not shed light on the reasons for these regional differences, we suggest that, in the case of the Pacific region at least, the differences could be associated with higher expectations among the resident population with regard to environmental quality in general and coastal management in particular.

Keywords:

• coastal management
• program evaluation
• program performance
• public perception
• survey