On the environmental effectiveness of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Marine and coastal ecosystems – and thus the benefits they create for humans – are subject to increasing pressures and competing usages. For this reason, the European Union (EU) adopted the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), which is to guide future maritime policy in the EU and aims at achieving or maintaining a good environmental status (GES) of European seas by 2020. To this end, the MSFD requires the development of improvement measures, which have to be assessed inter alia by examining their cost-effectiveness and by carrying out cost-benefit analysis (CBA) before their implementation. This paper investigates the applicability of environmental CBA in the marine context. It identifies and discusses problems that could hamper the environmental effectiveness of the MSFD. For example, the fact that marine ecosystem services are much less tangible than terrestrial ones implies greater challenges for the quantification of benefits for society in a marine context. One finding is that the limitations of environmental valuation methods regarding their ability to capture the whole total economic value of improvement measures are a potential source of problems, as the MSFD allows countries to disregard measures with disproportionately high costs. The trans-boundary nature of the main European seas adds to the complexity of the valuation task, e.g., due to the danger that benefits that occur outside of national territories are neglected. Moreover, the current state of knowledge on the functioning of complex marine ecosystems and the links to socio-economic impacts and human well-being seem insufficient to meet the MSFD requirements.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Benefits and impediments for the integrated and coordinated management of European seas

New multi-sectoral policies with a regional implementation are developed when maritime states recognise the importance of managing the marine environment under an ecosystem-perspective rather than a use-perspective. In Europe, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) is the first attempt to promote an integrated management of the seas from the coastline to the limit of the Exclusive Economic Zone. This paper shows that, nine years from the MSFD adoption, there remain several ecological, economic, social and governance challenges. Using information gathered in a dedicated survey of the European Union Marine Strategy Coordination Group and in the recent literature the paper identifies the obstacles preventing a successful regional cooperation and policy integration. The survey indicates that the MSFD coordination structures are, in general, well-developed but there is an apparent lack of political will to coordinate actions at the regional level. Member States request greater flexibility to implement the Directive but they put their national interests before the benefit of a coherent and integrated approach for the entire region. Differences in budget, economic sector predominance, lack of staff and the MSFD short time-scale are identified as the factors that can hamper cooperation. These have produced recommendations of possible strategies for optimising regional coordination structures which respect the subsidiarity principle underpinning the MSFD.     

How can marine ecosystem services support the Blue Growth agenda?

The EU Blue Growth Agenda targets maritime economic activities that have the sea and the coasts as drivers. These activities are supported by marine Ecosystem Services (ES) in combination, or not, with abiotic outputs from the marine natural capital. This paper analyses Blue Growth activities with regards to the demand and supply of marine ES and Good Environmental Status (GES). The results show that marine provisioning ES support aquaculture and blue biotechnology, while blue energy is supported by marine provisioning ES and by abiotic provisioning, and abiotic provisioning supports extraction of marine mineral resources. Maritime, coastal and cruise tourism is supported by cultural marine ES and cultural settings dependent on marine abiotic structures. All these multi-sectoral economic activities depend on healthy marine and coastal ecosystems that are provided by regulating and maintenance ES combined with the abiotic regulation and maintenance by natural marine physical structures and processes. In order to balance concurrent sectoral interests and achieve sustainable use of marine resources there is the need to consider indicators for demand for ES, which are social and economically driven, and for the supply, which are dependent on ecosystems capacity to provide the required marine ES. Some of the actions foreseeing GES are already anticipated in legislation that underpin Blue Growth, whilst others could benefit from additional regulation, particularly in what concern the exploration and exploitation of marine mineral and biological resources. Blue Growth options require navigating trade-offs between economic, social and environmental aspects.     

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.     

The value of marine biodiversity to the leisure and recreation industry and its application to marine spatial planning

The incorporation of the ecosystem approach into marine planning requires that all aspects of value associated with marine biodiversity are incorporated into the decision making process. An ecosystem services approach to valuing marine biodiversity is recognised as a framework by which economic, ecological and social values may be incorporated into the decision making process. There are sectors of the marine leisure and recreation industry (sub-aqua diving, sea angling and wildlife watching), which depend on the presence of natural marine resources in order to carry out their activity. Estimating the value of this direct use can provide an evidence base for the sustainable use of marine biodiversity when set against other competing economic interests in marine spatial planning. In the case study area of Lyme Bay, the marine leisure and recreation industry has been valued using both monetary and non-monetary methods. The results show that the leisure and recreation industry is dependent on the diversity of sites (many of which are currently unmanaged) and that the industry is of economic significance and an area which has recently been closed to trawling activity enables the protection of some of the most valuable sites but has limited benefits for protecting the full resource base upon which this local industry depends.     

Is there a need for a new governance model for regionalised Fisheries Management? Implications for science and advice

Over the years, the breadth and depth of EU marine policy has increased with revisions of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and new legislation like the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) and the Framework for Marine Spatial Planning Directive in Europe (FMSP). Not only do these different policies have different remits and hence scope, they also present a multitude of modes of implementation. Although the CFP and MSFD have many common goals when it comes to conservation and sustainable use of living marine resources, they differ substantially in governance set up and implementation modalities, including the underlying scientific advisory processes and structures. Regional cooperation and coordination is foreseen, but there is no governance model in place to coordinate requests for scientific advice, nor institutions coordinating the activities of advice providers, either across policies or across regions. This results in an increase in uncoordinated requests for scientific advice yet the pool of experts fuelling the advisory system is limited. As a result the European marine scientific advisory system is increasingly under pressure. In this paper the consequences of this problem are analysed and a redesign of the institutional governance setting to accommodate these challenges and make the science and advice system ready for the future is explored.     

‘The Hare and the Tortoise’: Lessons from Baltic Sea and Mediterranean Sea governance

Commonly, the Baltic Sea is pictured as a proactive region with a long-standing tradition for cooperation and surrounded by the “greenest” EU countries. In contrast, southern countries often suffer from the “Mediterranean Syndrome” in which the heterogenous socio political situation is given as the “proof” that cooperation would not work. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive adopted by European Union in 2008 is an important step towards ecosystem-based marine management and provides a legal document suggesting marine regions as a scale for cooperation. In this paper, we aim to explore stakeholders׳ perspectives on key factors for good governance at the regional sea level covering the Eastern Baltic States and the south of France. We targeted a broad panel of professionals from different sectors with a political, economic or societal importance in the respective seas. We suggest that Baltic and Mediterranean stakeholders are going through very different stages of governance adjustment fitting the purpose of ecosystem-based marine management. Baltic institutions are well established, which in some way prevents structural analysis of whether the current governance model is the most appropriate reaching GES. In the Mediterranean, the EU strategies faces institutional challenges, which is leading stakeholders to think “out of the box” about what is really needed for implementing ecosystem-based marine management for this sea. It is suggested that a golden opportunity exists at present in the Mediterranean to create a regional platform of cooperation, not only to fit the MSFD implementation, but also to improve governance of the Mediterranean Sea and its environmental status.     

Scalar reorganisation of marine governance in Europe? The implementation of the marine strategy framework directive in Spain,Portugal and Germany

European marine policies have recently been consolidated, and the scalar organisation of marine governance has been questioned. This paper examines this phenomenon in Europe as a result of implementation of the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) and examines changes in the role of the national state vis à vis other levels of jurisdiction in marine policy. The relevance of use pressures differs across European member states, as do national policy styles and institutional configurations. Therefore, a nuanced picture is needed regarding the ways European marine policy is being implemented. To this end, the paper employs a co-evolutionary perspective studying the cases of Germany, Spain and Portugal. European marine policy has become anchored in the most relevant policy fields except agriculture and fisheries, and competency regarding its environmental dimension has been strengthened, formalized and clarified as a result of the MSFD. Its implementation, tied to international marine protection, comes following initiatives to develop maritime economies. In Portugal, implementation of the MSFD did not change the scalar organisation of natural resource governance. In Spain and Germany, the MSFD led to disputes regarding clarification of competencies. In the course of implementing the MSFD in Germany, challenges are tied to the political dimensions of formalizing practices and producing integrated policies. In Spain and Portugal, comprehensive stock-taking is itself a challenging task.     

Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Innovative and participatory decision-making method for the identification of common measures in the Mediterranean

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) is the European Commission's flagship initiative for the protection of the European Seas, and the first holistic approach to ensuring that European Seas reach and are maintained at what is called a ‘Good Environmental Status’ by the year 2020. Regional cooperation, especially between neighbouring countries, and involvement of all interested parties, are horizontal principles of the MSFD, and particularly apply to the definition of programmes of measures, the principal instrument through which each Member State will implement its marine strategy. This paper presents the results from a dedicated, participatory, structured decision-making process that was implemented within the framework of the ActionMed project, which aimed to bring experts and policy/decision-makers from Mediterranean neighbouring countries together, to discuss and agree upon common measures for implementation in their sub-regions. It shows that a participatory approach, supported by customised, case specific intelligent tools, that follows expertly facilitated, structured workshops can be a successful way to enhance sub-regional collaboration. The paper also presents the top ranking measures, selected by experts and decision-makers for common implementation in two Mediterranean sub-regions.     

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.     

Marine strategy framework directive: Defining joint monitoring opportunities for the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea,through dedicated decision making workshops and innovative policy tools

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) is an important milestone for the preservation of the European marine environment. However, Member States can find its monitoring requirements challenging, particularly where it regards the definition and implementation of joint monitoring programmes between neighbouring countries. The challenges are even greater in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, where many countries are not members of the European Union and where Regional Sea Conventions face greater difficulties in coordinating monitoring activities. This paper presents the results from two regional workshops, within the framework of IRIS-SES project, which aimed to inform policy- and decision-makers in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea on what key stakeholders, including scientists, academia and local authorities, consider the main gaps, needs and opportunities for the MSFD joint monitoring regarding eutrophication and contaminants. It shows that a bottom-up approach, guided by structured workshops, can be a successful means of enhancing cooperation.     

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.