The document discusses using applied marine geomatics as a management and planning tool for protecting the marine environment, using a case study in Atlantic Canada. It describes MARIN, which studies maritime activities and risks to develop risk analysis methodologies. MARIN has developed a comprehensive maritime traffic database and GIS-based software (MARIS) to simulate traffic. The case study examines using GIS-MCDA to determine where to apply a limited budget for marine research by analyzing factors like marine traffic, cargo types, hydrography, and positioning quality control. The process involves setting goals, criteria, standardizing and weighting factors, aggregating criteria, and validating results.

1. Applied Marine Geomatics as a
management and planning tool for
protection of the marine environment.
Case study: Atlantic Canada
Dr. Hilario C. Lamotte,
Dr. Ronald Pelot
Maritime Activity and Risk Investigation Network. (MARIN)
Department of Industrial Engineering
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia

2. MARIN
Maritime Activity and Risk Investigation Network
 MARIN studies all types of maritime activities
, as well as the risks associated with them, to
develop methodologies
 MARIN has developed a comprehensive
database of many types of maritime traffic
including fishing, shipping, ferries, recreational
boating, and others.
 MARIS, a GIS -based program, was developed
by MARIN to simulate this traffic and assist in
traffic and risk analysis.
http://www.marin-research.ca
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

3. MARIN
Maritime Activity and Risk Investigation Network
Maritime Activity and Risk Investigation Network. (MARIN)
Department of Industrial Engineering
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia
http://www.marin-research.ca
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

4. Marine resources
 Its demand is continuously growing to satisfy
human beings’ basic needs.
 It is needed to select the best use of this
resource to be able to sustain the for the next
generations to come
 However, people have different
knowledge, priorities, goals, interests &
concerns
 Decision-making on how a particular resource
should be utilized is not an easy task.
 The protection of the marine environment is the
responsibility of everyone.
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

5. Maritime Traffic & Risk
 With the growth of the marine transportation
system, safety of navigation is one of the most
important topics and issues at all levels of the
decision making process.
 At the same time we must be conscious of the
pollution threats to our waterways and oceans
and the serious effects that may result.
 As part of this effort a group of techniques has
to be used for managing all types of
risks, including trying to prevent any kind of
maritime accidents in areas where the
volume, complexity and variety of maritime
traffic is increased.
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

6. Marine spatial planning
The Marine spatial planning aims to:
“….create and establish a more rational
organization of the use of marine space and the
interactions between its uses, to balance demands
for development with the need to protect the
environment, and to achieve social and economic
objectives in an open and planned way ….”
Source: IOCAM Dossier, n.4. UNESCO, 2007
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

7. 7 Management and
Planning tools
 How and When use them?
 as individual tools, they provide an organized way of
thinking and making decisions.
 in combination with each other, they provide a
powerful answer to the way in which teams can
respond effectively to issues that can at times seem
confusing and chaotic.
 The problem solving process has 2 parts:
 Problem Analysis:
 Where is identified a list of root causes
 Action Planning :
 Corrective actions and list of risks
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

8. Problem Analysis Tools
(4)
(1) Affinity Diagram (KJ Method.
 Group and classify brainstormed factor affecting the problem
(2) Interrelationship Digraph (ID).
 Analyze cause and effect relationship of the factors, and help
to identify drivers and indicator among the factors
(3) Root Cause Tree Diagram.
 Analyze the root of factors and define possible corrective
actions
(4) Prioritization Matrix.
 Prioritize factors according to criteria
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

9. Action Planning Tools
(3)
(5) Involvement Matrix Diagram.
 Formulate a list of corrective actions, define
participants of each action and distribute them by
involvement level.
(6) Process Decision Program Chart (PDPC).
 Originate actions, place them into a
schedule, visualize logical relationship and
critical path.
(7) Activity Network Diagram.
 Do a risk analysis, prescribe actions to eliminate
obstacles
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

10. Mapematic
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012 Modified from Joseph K. Berry (2004)

11. MCDA based on GIS
MCDA – Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis
Problem
 Spatial decision problems typically involve
a large set of feasible alternatives &
multiple evaluation criteria.
 Alternatives & criteria* are often evaluated
by a number of individuals (decision-
makers, managers, stakeholders, interest
groups).
* often are conflicting
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

12. MCDA based on GIS
Cont...
GIS MCDA
These techniques & procedures are It provides a rich collection of
recognized as a decision support techniques and procedures for:
system involving the integration of  structuring decision problems,
spatially referenced data in a  designing, evaluating and
problem solving environment. prioritizing alternative decisions
GIS-MCDA
Is defined as a process that transforms and
combines geographical data and value
judgments to obtain information for
decision making
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

13. GIS-MCDA
Steps:
1. Set the goal/define the problem.
2. Determine the criteria.
(factors/constraints)
3. Standardize the factors/criterion
scores.
4. Determine the weight of each factor.
5. Aggregate the criteria.
6. Validate/verify the result.
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

14. GIS-MCDA
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

15. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Where to apply the limited budget
for marine research?
GOAL
CRITERIA Factor 1 Factor 2 ......... Factor n Constrains
ATTRIBUTES Attr 1 Attr 2 ......... Attr n Attributes
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

16. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Marine Risk Assessment
FACTOR ATTRIBUTE
WHERE? LOCATION
WHEN? TIME
HOW MUCH? FREQUENCY
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

17. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Long Range Identification and Tracking of ships
(LRIT)
LRIT is operated by the Canadian Coast Guard and it was
spearheaded at the International Maritime Organization as a
means of enhancing maritime security. The intent is to
enhance security by providing SOLAS vessel identity and
current location information in sufficient time for a
Government to evaluate the security risk posed by a ship off
its coast and to respond, if necessary.
An active and accurate LRIT system also has clear safety
benefits for maritime search and rescue, as well as for
environmental response.
Goal of it use is the potential calculations of:
 traffic density
 distance travelled
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012  time on water

18. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Other Data sources:
 ECAREG, NORDREG
 Zonal Interchange Fisheries (ZIF)
 Ferries
 Aquaculture, Mariculture
 Offshore Oil and Gas
 Recreational (commercial, private)
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

19. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Analysis of Marine Traffic. Category of Cargo in the CHS Survey Planning Tool (SPT)
[ MARIN ] [ SPT ]
Category Category Description
Category Category Label
Label
Merchant / Bulk / Cargo M
Fishing F Hazardous Includes all vessels transporting oil, oil
HzC products and Liquefied natural gas
Tanker T Cargo
Cruise Ship / Passenger C (LNG). This includes small tankers serving
Pleasure Craft L coastal communities.
Gov't Non-Military G
Research and R This is restricted to vessels carrying 50
Exploration Human Cargo HmC people or more. This includes ferries and
Tugs and Service S cruise ships. It excludes most recreational
Vessels and excursion (whale watching, harbor
cruises, etc.) vessels.
[ SPT ]
Category Label
HzC HmC Oth NoT All other vessels are considered in this
Other Oth
M category. This includes all remaining
X
F commercial vessels (container, ore, bulk),
X
Category Label
government fleets, fishing and recreational.
T
[ MARIN ]
X
C X
L X
G No Traffic NoT No identifiable traffic and definitely no
X
R X commercial traffic. There may be occasional
S X traffic, usually limited to small, open boats.
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

20. GIS-MCDA Outputs
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

21. . Hazardous Cargo
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

22. Human Cargo
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

23. Other Cargo
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

24. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Set the goal/define the problem
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

25. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Where to apply a limited budget for marine research?
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

26. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Determine the criteria (factors/constraints)
 Marine Traffic
 Type of Cargo
 Hydrography
 Aid to Navigation
 Positioning QC
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

27. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Determine the criteria (factors/constraints)
 Marine Traffic
 Type of Cargo
 Hydrography
 Aid to Navigation
 Positioning QC
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

28. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Standardize the factors/criterion scores.
 Marine Traffic
 Type of Cargo
 Hydrography
 Aid to Navigation
 Positioning QC
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

29. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Determine the weight of each factor.
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

30. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Aggregate the criterion.
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

31. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Validate the result.
 Marine Traffic
 Type of Cargo
 Hydrography
 Aid to Navigation
 Positioning QC
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

32. Case Study:
Atlantic Canada
Verify the result.
 Marine Traffic
 Type of Cargo
 Hydrography
 Aid to Navigation
 Positioning QC
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

33. Remarks
Expected Outcomes after the GIS-MCDA:
 Action plan
 List of Risks
 Preventive actions
 Agreement on way forward.
There is not an unique way to resolve
MCDA, as neither an unique GIS platform
to resolve complex scenarios (ArcGIS,
Mapinfo, IDRISI, GRASS, etc)
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

34. Remarks
Benefits of Using the Seven Management
and Planning tools combined with GIS-
MCDA:
 Provides visual communication tools for every
stage of work
 Consistency, visibility, justification of the
action plan
 Visual reports of problems solving steps taken
for quality improvement
Lamotte-Pelot, 2012

35. Recommended Readings
 Estoque, R C and Murayama, Y (2011). Beekeeping sites suitability
analysis integrating GIS and MCE techniques. In Murayama, Y and Thapa,
R B (Eds), Spatial Analysis and Modeling in Geographical Transformation
Process: GIS-based Applications. Dordrecht: Springer Science +Business
Media B.V., isbn:978-94-007-0670-5
 Haugey, D. “SMART Goals”. Project Smart. Accessed January 11, 2011.
www.projectsmart.co.uk/smart-goals.html
 Malczewski, J (2006). GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey
of the literature. International Journal of Geographical Information Science,
20, 703 – 726.
 Malczewski, J (2004). GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical
overview. Progress in Planning, 62, 3 – 65.
 Saaty, T L (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw
Hill.
 Teknomo, K (2006). Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Tutorial . Accessed
January 11, 2011. http://people.revoledu.com/kardi/tutorial/ahp/
Dr. Lamotte, 2012

36. Applied Marine Geomatics as a
management and planning tool for
protection of the marine environment.
Case study: Atlantic Canada
Dr. Hilario C. Lamotte,
Dr. Ronald Pelot
Maritime Activity and Risk Investigation Network. (MARIN)
Department of Industrial Engineering
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia