Implementing the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: A policy perspective on regulatory,institutional and stakeholder impediments to effective implementation

The implementation of the European Union (EU) Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires EU Member States to draft a program of measures to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES). Central argument of this paper, based on an analysis of the unique, holistic character of the MSFD, is that social and political factors are having a major influence on this MSFD implementation process. More specifically, four potential impediments have been identified that are curtailing the drive towards the effective implementation of the scheme advanced by the Directive. First, scientific uncertainty about aggregated ecological pressure and drivers in relation to the different sectors clouds the definition of national programmes of measures and this in turn may lead to implementation-drift in achieving GES. Second, the scale of the ecosystem is different from the political and socio-economic scales of individual, sectoral decision-making and activities. Third, policy coordination is required on several levels, i.e. at the EU level, within the Regional Sea Conventions, at national level and between these three levels. Finally, the coming together of both stakeholder involvement organized for the MSFD and those of existing, sectoral policy domains makes fair and efficient stakeholder involvement challenging. This paper concludes that more attention should be rendered to establishing appropriate coordination and communication structures, which facilitate greater engagement with the different Directorates-General in the European Commission, the European Council and the Parliament, the Member States, sectoral decision making institutions as well as stakeholder interest groups.     

Governance strengths and weaknesses to implement the marine strategy framework directive in European waters

The ambitious Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) has been the focus of much marine research across Europe in the pursuit of achieving Good Environmental Status in the four European Union marine regions; Baltic Sea, Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and North-east Atlantic. This research addresses the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) of the current European marine governance structures and its relationship to implement the MSFD. Results of the SWOT analysis were acquired through a combination of approaches with MSFD experts and stakeholders including: 30 face-to-face interviews, an online survey with 264 stakeholder respondents and focus groups within each European marine region. The SWOT analysis concurrently identifies common strengths and weakness and key governance issues for implementing the MSFD for European marine regions. This paper forms one assessment within the governance component of the Options for Delivering Ecosystem Based Marine Management (ODEMM) project and presents timely issues that can be of benefit to national and European Union policy makers.     

The science of European marine reserves: Status,efficacy, and future needs

The ecologically and socio-economically important marine ecosystems of Europe are facing severe threats from a variety of human impacts. To mitigate and potentially reverse some of these impacts, the European Union (EU) has mandated the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) in order to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) in EU waters by 2020. The primary initiative for achieving GES is the implementation of coherent networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). Marine reserves are an important type of MPA in which no extraction is allowed, but their usefulness depends upon a number of ecological, management, and political factors. This paper provides a synthesis of the ecological effects of existing European marine reserves and the factors (social and ecological) underlying their effectiveness. Results show that existing European marine reserves foster significant positive increases in key biological variables (density, biomass, body size, and species richness) compared with areas receiving less protection, a pattern mirrored by marine reserves around the globe. For marine reserves to achieve their ecological and social goals, however, they must be designed, managed, and enforced properly. In addition, identifying whether protected areas are ecologically connected as a network, as well as where new MPAs should be established according to the MSFD, requires information on the connectivity of populations across large areas. The adoption of the MSFD demonstrates willingness to achieve the long-term protection of Europe's marine ecosystems, but whether the political will (local, regional, and continent wide) is strong enough to see its mandates through remains to be seen. Although the MSFD does not explicitly require marine reserves, an important step towards the protection of Europe's marine ecosystems is the establishment of marine reserves within wider-use MPAs as connected networks across large spatial scales.     

Fishing for opinions: Stakeholder views on MSFD implementation in European Seas

Stakeholder participation is vital when introducing and implementing ecosystem-based management (EBM) at any scale. This paper presents the results of a survey covering four European Regional Seas (Baltic Sea, Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and North-East Atlantic Ocean) aimed to collect stakeholders׳ perspectives on their Regional Sea governance to implement the European Union (EU) Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). In this survey, drivers of good governance including stakeholder involvement, willingness and capacity to cooperate, efficiency, institutional ambiguity and decision-making were explored. The results indicate a clear gap in perception between the current, the ideal and the foreseen situation regarding the implementation of the MSFD. The preferences for the future governance structures vary between stakeholders and across seas although some similarities can be found. Based on the results of the survey, this paper concludes that tailor-made rather than off-the-shelf solutions will be needed to accommodate regional cooperation in the European marine environment for implementing ecosystem-based management under the MSFD.     

Regional cooperation for European seas: Governance models in support of the implementation of the MSFD

During the implementation process of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), Member States are expected to cooperate and coordinate at the regional sea level as wells as arrange stakeholder involvement. However, the MSFD does not specify any governing structures to do so. The aim of this paper is to address these key challenges of the MSFD by developing four governance models for regional cooperation and assess their impact on governance performance. The four models are based on the building blocks of stakeholder involvement (low or high) and decision-making power (binding or non-binding decisions): (1) Cross-border platforms; (2) Regional Sea Convention-PLUS; (3) Advisory Alliance and (4) Regional Sea Assembly. Secondly, the paper will do an ex ante assessment on how the alternative models will have an impact on governance performance. The assessment criteria for governance performance are: (a) costs to set up and run a model; (b) capacity to cooperate; (c) policy coordination; (d) institutional ambiguity; and (e) implementation drift. In addition to this assessment of the performance based on expert judgement (i.e. scientists of WP7 of the ODEMM project), 4 roundtable discussions have been undertaken in which stakeholders from the four regional seas did an assessment of the four models. The main conclusion is that increasing stakeholder participation, a much desired development in regional organisation of marine management as expressed by the stakeholder community, will increase the costs of the policy making process. If stakeholder participation is not embedded in a wider institutional setting in which the participation of stakeholders is directly related to the policy process and the degree to which decisions taken are binding, the increase of costs does not lead to a more smoothly running model.     

Challenges in cross-sectoral marine protection in Europe

Marine environment protection in Europe faces a number of challenges. One is the coordination of relevant sectoral policies — such as agricultural and fisheries policies — with regard to marine protection objectives. The question in the following is on how marine protection issues can be more closely integrated in sectoral policies under the conditions prevailing at present. In particular the strength and weaknesses of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) as the key instrument for marine environment protection in Europe are analyzed in this context. In particular, the MSFD does not adequately address all sectors and policies which are relevant to marine environment protection. One possible means of giving the MSFD greater influences on other policies of relevance to marine waters is to integrate the objectives established under the MSFD in the European maritime policy. The aim should be to require the further development of sectoral policies to take unrestricted account of the objectives of the MSFD implementation process. But also other instruments of marine policy such as maritime spatial planning and marine protected areas are crucial to advance the protection of European seas.     

The Spanish approach to marine spatial planning. Marine Strategy Framework Directive vs. EU Integrated Maritime Policy

The coming into effect of the Directive 2008/56/EC (Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)) will induce European Union member States to create mechanisms for managing maritime space in order to comply with the goals set out in this binding legislation. This leads one to think that marine spatial planning in various countries in the EU will be directed at complying with the Directive's environmental goals, as is the case in Spain, rather than undertaking proactive planning for developing the maritime sectors. To put the case of Spain into perspective, a review is conducted of the initiatives taken, especially in Europe and the European Union, exploring the correlations between the main focuses of the maritime sectors and the planning systems. The analysis of the Spanish initiative demonstrates how the maritime economy model and geopolitical factors explain the planning options for the marine environment. In other respects, with the coming into effect of the MSFD, a dual institutional course for marine spatial planning seems to be opening up in the EU: Integrated Maritime Policy vs. the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.     

The role of marine spatial planning in sea use management: The Belgian case

The expansion of offshore activities and the increasing need to meet international and national commitments to biodiversity conservation have led to an enhanced interest in marine spatial planning (MSP) as a tool for sea use management. Several European countries, on their own initiative or driven by European legislation and policy, have taken global leadership in implementing MSP. This article will discuss the Belgian experiences with MSP. It will give a short historical overview based on legal developments and review the implementation process of a ‘Master Plan’ as a spatial management policy for the Belgian Part of the North Sea. Additionally, this article will reflect on the research that has been done in Belgium to apply a land-use planning approach to the marine environment. The MSP process in Belgium shows that a spatial approach to sea use management is possible despite the lack of a legal zoning framework. However, it concludes that a legal basis for MSP, in addition to the current permit system, would provide a more strategic and integrated framework for ecosystem-based, sea use management.     

Public willingness to pay for alternative management regimes of remote marine protected areas in the North Sea

Despite increasing attention paid to the value of marine resources, in particular marine protected areas (MPAs), their economic valuation focuses mainly on use values of ecosystem services such as fishery and tourism. Furthermore, most MPA related studies are carried out for coastal ecosystems, especially tropical coral reefs. The valuation of remote marine ecosystems is rare. The main objective of this paper is to estimate public willingness to pay (WTP) for alternative management regimes of a network of offshore MPAs in the North Sea under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). In a baseline valuation study carried out just before the adoption of the MSFD, beach visitors and a random sample of coastal and non-coastal residents were asked for their preferences for two alternative management options of three remote, ecologically sensitive areas with multiple use conflicts. Despite the lack of public awareness and familiarity with the offshore marine areas, a majority of 70% is willing to pay extra tax for their protection. Using a conservative value elicitation procedure, Dutch households are willing to pay on average maximum 0.25% of their annual disposable income to ban access and economic use. This serves as an indicator of what a network of remote MPAs in the MSFD is allowed to cost according to the Dutch tax payer.     

Dialectics of nature: The emergence of policy on the management of commercial fisheries in english European Marine Sites

European Marine Sites (EMS), designated under either the Habitats or Birds Directives, protect the biodiversity of the European Union (EU) and contribute to the implementation of the 1992 UN Convention on Biological Diversity [1]. The introduction of this form of marine protected area (MPA), as a consequence of EU conservation directives, introduced new legal obligations in waters long exploited by inshore fishing communities. Although the Habitats and Birds Directive have been in place since 1992 and 1979 respectively (the 1979 Directive updated in 2009), it has not been until more recently (2014) that ongoing inshore fisheries activities in England, which predate designation of sites, have been systematically assessed and managed, for their impact in protected sites. In practice it was assumed by many MPA practitioners that at the time of designation of EMS, ongoing activities would be compatible with the conservation objectives of these sites. This paper illustrates the introduction of a general and systematic “revised approach” to managing fisheries in all English EMSs, and how this represented a change in government policy which can be traced directly to a legal campaign between 2008 and 2012 by two UK environmental Non-Governmental Organisations (eNGOs). The paper elucidates this iterative marine policy process analysing the dialogue between government bodies and eNGOs and show how the resulting interpretation of conservation law, has sought to resolve the tensions between the precautionary approach as emphasised by the eNGOs and the Government's desire for proportionality of response.     

The European Marine Strategy: Contribution and challenges from a Portuguese perspective

The EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) is considered to be the environmental pillar of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy, establishing a framework within which member states must take the necessary measures to achieve, or maintain, good environmental status in their marine waters. This study presents Portugal's contributions to the Directive development, describes the Portuguese institutional framework within the MSFD and, finally, highlights the opportunities and threats to the success of the MSFD implementation in Portugal. The latter entails an analysis of the Directive's long term adequacy in its link to (1) marine spatial planning, (2) climate change and (3) the economic/financial crisis. With one of Europe's largest exclusive economic zones. Portugal's interest in the MSFD is paramount. Efforts towards the approval of the final document were assured during the Portuguese presidency of the European Council of Ministers, in 2007, while chairing a thorough discussion between the Council and the European Parliament. In the Portuguese context, the Directive implementation will rely on the Water Institute as the authoritative entity, which will be responsible for coordinating all necessary efforts at the national level. The success of such process depends on a close cooperation among the institutions involved as well as on how approved measures account for long term issues. In addition, the MSFD implementation must be built on lessons learned within the Water Framework Directive, in order to be successful. Although it poses a methodological challenge to Portugal, the MSFD implementation is expected to contribute significantly to the improvement of coastal/marine conservation and management at the national level.     

Preparedness of key coastal and marine sectors in Ireland to adapt to climate change

Preparedness to adapt to the impacts of climate change was assessed for three important sectors of activity within the Irish coastal and marine environment, namely tourism, fisheries, and conservation of biodiversity. Information on the current status of each sector is a valuable point of reference in terms of accessing contribution to the implementation of future national adaptation efforts. A modified version of the National Adaptive Capacity (NAC) framework developed by the World Resources Institute was used to assess the three sectors of activity. This framework is structured around five functions: assessment, prioritisation, coordination, information management, and climate risk reduction; results of the assessment suggest that all three sectors are at the nascent stages of the climate change adaptation process. Currently there is no dedicated national policy guidance or legal support mechanism on adaptation in Ireland; hence there is no national financial commitment to support implementation of adaptation actions for any of the sectors assessed. Subjecting these three selected sectors of activity to such an assessment enables identification of existing actions that can potentially support current adaptation, as well as where issues such as knowledge gaps and lack of policy support hinder progress.     

From stormy seas to the doldrums: The challenges of navigating towards an ecologically coherent marine protected area network through England's Marine Conservation Zone process

There is an on-going process to establish Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in England, to form part of a coherent and representative network of marine protected areas under national and EU legislation. From 2009 to 2011, the MCZ process included strong participatory elements. Four regional multi-sector stakeholder groups developed MCZ recommendations collaboratively, in line with ecological guidance provided by the Government's nature conservation advisers. This guidance was based on Government policy principles, including that MCZs should be designated based on ‘best available evidence’. This paper analyses the multi-dimensional conflicts that emerged within the stakeholder group in south-west England, which were magnified by uncertainty about future MCZ management. In September 2011, after working through these conflicts through trade-offs and negotiations, the stakeholder groups jointly recommended 127 MCZs to Government. The process subsequently shifted to a top-down approach, with further stakeholder engagement limited to bilateral consultation. There was a concurrent shift in policy, from a broad-scale network-level focus towards single-feature conservation. A lengthy series of evidence reviews concluded that the existing evidence at the time was insufficient to progress with the designation of most sites, marking a clear departure from the policy principle of proceeding with the designation of a representative network based on ‘best available evidence’, and effectively undermining the work carried out by stakeholder groups. Though MCZ designation was originally timetabled for 2012, in November 2013 just 27 of the recommended 127 MCZs were designated in a first tranche. At the time, no clear timetable was in place for subsequent tranches.     

EU marine strategy framework directive (MSFD) and marine spatial planning (MSP): Which is the more dominant and practicable contributor to maritime policy in the UK?

This paper is a comparative analysis of the contribution to UK marine governance of two recent EU initiatives: the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) and Marine Spatial Planning (MSP). MSFD imposed a duty on Member States to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) in four regional seas, while MSP required Member States to replace their fragmented, sector-based system of maritime decision making with an integrated approach. This paper explains MSFD and MSP, examines their relationship, and compares their practicability, concluding that MSP is both the more dominant and the more practicable instrument, reflecting the UK's preference for sustainable development over conservationism in marine policy. A recent proposal by the European Commission to make MSP and integrated coastal management a Directive reinforces the UK position.     

Developing marine historic environment management policy: The English Heritage experience

This paper provides an opportunity to examine the involvement of English Heritage in the development of policy and practice with particular regard to how archaeology and features of historic interest are addressed under national legislation, international conventions and EU law. In this paper we provide an explanation of action taken to support conservation, understanding and enjoyment of the historic environment, such as those sites that are legally protected as historic shipwreck sites, and other features that comprise the historic environment, but which are recognised and protected through other legal mechanisms e.g., military vessels and aeroplanes. It is apparent to us that when considering the management agenda for the marine environment attention is also given to archaeological material that predates tidal inundation, as well as the subsequent legacy of maritime activities. To support this approach we examine how the historic environment is defined and included in objectives, policy and law, such as the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, as well as other European or international programmes to promote marine policy and spatial planning. In the years since the National Heritage Act 2002, and the empowerment of English Heritage to support marine projects, we assess the production of explanatory statements and guidance to inform protection in recognition of how change may affect historic environment features. In addition, it is apparent that extensive development is now taking place further offshore (e.g., renewable power projects) and we direct attention at how English Heritage's role is affected by legally defined maritime territorial limits that dictate interpretation of what the marine environment comprises and how such limits influence regulatory controls placed on the management of cultural heritage.     

Integrated management of marine biodiversity in Europe: Perspectives from ICZM and the evolving EU Maritime Policy framework

Biological diversity, or biodiversity, is high on the international agenda for nature conservation. Marine and coastal ecosystems account for an important share of the biological diversity on Earth. As a consequence many international conventions, European legislation and national laws refer to marine biodiversity. The protection of marine biodiversity is a complex legal issue as it requires consideration of geographic (between land and sea), political (between conservation and exploitation), and economic (between fisheries, tourism, intellectual property and many other sectors) factors. Like Matryoshka dolls, marine biodiversity is a heterogeneous notion difficult to address as one discrete area in the development of policy agendas or juridical frameworks. In the past decade, the EU has been very active in Promoting Integrated Coastal Zone Management and in developing a framework for an Integrated Maritime Policy. This article reviews the status of marine biodiversity in the policy and legal initiatives of the European Union, a challenging issue to both the objectives of conservation and to the concept of integration.     

Cost-benefit analysis in the context of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive: The case of Germany

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires EU member states (MS) to develop and implement marine strategies containing programs of measures to protect and preserve the marine environment. Prior to their implementation, impact assessments, including Cost-Benefit-Analyses (CBA), need to be carried out. While the costs of introducing such measures are often relatively easy to determine, the economic valuation of the benefits derived from environmental improvements is much more challenging, particularly in the marine context. Still, it remains an important prerequisite for conducting CBA. The aim of this paper is to evaluate to what extent benefits can be quantified for use in CBA focusing on the German marine waters. The results indicate that there are still considerable gaps in the scientific knowledge about many of the pressures mentioned in the MSFD. Moreover, few economic studies exist that evaluate the benefits of marine protection measures, and many of them are not applicable in the German context. In addition, there is the risk that some benefits accruing from marine protection measures are systematically omitted in CBA. This raises the question to what extent comprehensive CBAs as required by the MSFD are possible in Germany, but also in other EU MS.     

Exploring stakeholder perceptions of marine management in Bermuda

Given competing objectives vying for space in the marine environment, the island of Bermuda may be an ideal candidate for comprehensive marine spatial planning (MSP). However, faced with other pressing issues, ocean management reform has not yet received significant traction from the government, a pattern seen in many locations. Spatial planning processes often struggle during the proposal, planning, or implementation phases due to stakeholder opposition and/or government wariness to change. Conflict among stakeholders about management reform has also proven to be a deterrent to MSP application in many locations. With these obstacles in mind, a detailed stakeholder survey was conducted in Bermuda to determine awareness, attitudes and perceptions regarding ocean health, threats to ocean environments, the effectiveness of current ocean management, and possible future changes to management. How perceptions vary for different types of stakeholders and how attitudes about specific concerns relate to attitudes about management changes were examined. Overall, the results indicate a high degree of support for spatial planning and ocean zoning and a high level of concordance even among stakeholder groups that are typically assumed to have conflicting agendas. However, attitudes were not entirely homogeneous, particularly when delving into details about specific management changes. For example, commercial fishers were generally less in favor, relative to other stakeholder groups, of increasing regulations on ocean uses with the notable exception of regulations for recreational fishing. Given the results of this survey, public support is likely to be high for government action focused on ocean management reform in Bermuda.     

The social licence to operate and its role in marine governance: Insights from Australia

Traditionally, the ‘social licence to operate’ (SLO) refers to the societal expectations imposed on corporate and commercial activities, often displayed by the willingness for corporations to go beyond the requirements of formal regulations. Alternatively, this paper investigates the emerging influence of the SLO in shaping government decisions regarding the use and impact of the marine environment and its resources. Using expert interviews, text analysis and case study analysis, this research delineated the contemporary SLO as it has manifested in Australian marine governance, with the results indicating that this is potentially occurring at a pace faster than can be systematically reacted to within the current political decision-making processes. Under these emerging conditions, the risk has been identified that traditional government decision-making and stakeholder consultation processes are lagging in their capacity to adapt to ensure that public policy processes can support and engage in this shifting dialogue and ensure the influence of information is appropriately weighted. This research highlights an emerging adjustment of community presence in marine governance and the immediate complexities and challenges this creates for government decision-making. In particular, it begins to explore the interaction of differing information, how this information is carried through communication channels, stakeholder behaviour, approaches to withholding or granting a SLO and the responsibility this carries.