DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR MARITIME AFFAIRS AND FISHERIES
Directorate E - Baltic Sea, North Sea and Landlocked Member States
MARE.E.1 - Maritime Policy Baltic and North Sea
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR ENVIRONMENT
Directorate C - Quality of Life, Water & Air
ENV.C.2 - Marine Environment & Water Industry
Member State Expert Group
Maritime Spatial Planning - Integrated Coastal Management
DG ENV, Beaulieu 5
Brussels, 2 July 2013
1. Opening and introduction
Joachim D’Eugenio (DG ENV) and Haitze Siemers (DG MARE) welcomed the participants to the second joint meeting of Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) and Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) experts. Mr D’Eugenio noted that discussion and sharing of best practice of MSP and ICM at expert level has long been an important activity; bringing the ICM and MSP groups together will foster synergies, in particular around issues of land/sea interactions. Mr Siemers added that the meetings provide a valuable exchange of activities on the group and noted that it would be important to consider the direction of future work during the day.
Update on the Commission proposal on MSP/ICM
Mr D’Eugenio made clear that the Expert Group would not be a forum for discussion on the Commission’s proposal for a Directive on MSP and ICM as this was taken up elsewhere, in particular in the European Council. He noted that intensive deliberations had taken place under the Irish Presidency and would continue the following day (3 July 2013) at the first meeting under the Lithuanian Presidency. The European Parliament has taken the necessary administrative steps to debate the proposal: the Committee on Transport and Tourism will lead and aims to vote on it in November.
2. MSP/ICM in Member States
Scotland, UK
Phil Gilmour of Marine Scotland (United Kingdom, UK) spoke on marine planning for offshore renewables around Scotland. The impetus for this work came from the Scottish Government's commitment to generate 100% of Scottish electricity from renewable sources by 2020, prompting applications for the development of offshore wind sites particularly in deeper waters. When work started in 2008, no system for spatial planning of the marine environment yet existed and best use had to be made of the existing planning system, which had been challenging. The Scottish Government will launch a National Marine Plan for public consultation this summer, which will consider spatial allocation for wind, wave and tidal power, and its supporting infrastructure, amongst other uses of marine resources.
The work on marine renewables used a 2007 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for wave and tidal energy as a starting point, and prepared a Wind Sector Marine Plan in 2011. A Strategic Marine Plan for Grid is in preparation for 2015. Work for the Plans needed to address data requirements and evident gaps in available knowledge. Environmental, industrial/economic, socio-cultural aspects, navigation routes, fishing areas, sensitive or protected areas and visual impacts, such as at onshore monuments, all needed to be considered and work is on-going across the whole of the UK to address this. The Offshore Renewables Joint Industry Programme (ORJIP), which is gathering information on several impact issues, such as birds and offshore wind turbines and will be used to inform marine planning in all UK administrations, was referenced. A major goal of the planning process was to provide a base for efficient licensing of wind facilities, under a ‘one-stop shop’ in Marine Scotland for the issuing of environmental licenses. This approach coordinates the different elements of the application process, including the input from relevant Government authorities and agencies, and SEA and Habitats Regulation Appraisal (HRA) where necessary. Marine Scotland is an arm of the Scottish Government, created in 2010 after public consultation, and it brings together previously separate policy, compliance and scientific elements.
Mr Gilmour noted that the planning process has indicated potential areas for wind, wave and tidal energy development. He explained in response to questions that 10 projects had been proposed, of which 6 are going forward after their SEAs had been completed. Marine Scotland believes it is putting in place marine planning mechanisms that will enable development of offshore renewables at a scale that is appropriate to its national interests.
Belgium
Charlotte Herman of the Federal Directorate-General for Environment in Belgium (BE) described the draft National Maritime Spatial Plan, which was approved by the Council of Ministers in May 2013 and is now open for public consultation from July until September 2013. The final version is to be established via a Royal Decree, which makes it binding on government authorities, and would be reviewed every six years.
The plan addresses offshore renewable energy and envisages both a single cable high-voltage station for Belgium’s wind energy site as well as the creation of offshore islands for energy storage. The plan also covers a broad range of other maritime uses, including: cable and pipeline corridors, shipping and port development, fisheries, sand and gravel extraction, military uses, tourism and nature conservation. The coexistence of uses, such as certain types of fishing in protected areas, aquaculture in wind power sites and the opportunities for port development, is contemplated under the plan.
Ms Herman explained that the plan tried to take the land/sea interface into consideration, for example for the landing point for the offshore cable and also for coastal defences, which are the competence of the Flanders Region. However, there is not a strong link to ICM, as a formal procedure for ICM (a competence of the Flanders Region) is not fully in place. When asked about the involvement of stakeholder groups, she noted that fishing interests and sand and gravel extractors had concerns about the MSP proposal: both are wary of proposed restrictions for nature conservation. She also noted that some issues, such as IMO-designated shipping lanes – cannot be changed by national law.
Tour de table
Mr Siemers (DG MARE) invited participants to provide a summary of developments in their Member States. He noted that planning for the coexistence of maritime activities, such as aquaculture and wind power in the draft MSP for Belgium, is particularly interesting and would be valuable to be shared.
Margarida Almodovar of Portugal (PT) reported that current initiatives under development include: a national law for MSP; a national strategy for ICZM; and a new Ocean Strategy, focusing on governance and providing a one-stop shop for planning and licensing.
Athena Mourmouris of Greece (EL) described the development of her country’s spatial plan for aquaculture. The process started in 2010 and was prompted by aquaculture investors, who wanted a clear context for their activities and for this reason funded the process. The plan was approved in late 2011 by a National Council, for consultation with social and economic groups. However, it then encountered difficulties as some local authorities were concerned about the potential impacts of aquaculture on tourism; NGOs have also made a legal appeal that reached the Council of State, the highest court in Greece. A decision is pending. In the coming years, two other activities are expected to play to increase in Greece’s maritime areas: offshore wind power and oil extraction. It was said that a one-stop shop would be a valuable approach, but it is likely to be feasible only for authorisations from the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, not across other Ministries.
Lodewijk Abspoel of the Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, the Netherlands (NL), noted that his country already had a heavily used sea and is also currently trying to insert new functions, such as wind power areas and greater protection for nature conservation, into spaces previously used freely by fishing and recreation interests. He pointed out that new stakeholders, such as wind entrepreneurs, do not know the many other players. Stakeholder involvement is often difficult as established interests such as fishing and recreational fear that they will lose out. An intense preparation phase is, therefore, vital for maritime spatial planning, and for stakeholder involvement it is important to get the right people involved. Furthermore, stakeholders often say that they want to cooperate but reality can be different. A success factor is for the responsible administration to remain neutral to all sectors in the planning process. MSP should be seen as a neutral tool: a perceived bias in favour of a sector could work against a plan in the future.
Daniela Addis of the Ministry of Environment, Land and Sea in Italy (IT) noted that they have similar problems as Greece in terms of managing participation and governance, including between different administrative levels.
Stephen Collins of Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Defra (UK), provided an update on work in England and Wales: here, plans are under preparation for 10 marine areas and the first two draft plans will soon be going for consultation. He underlined that participation of stakeholders is a key part of the process. In preparing the current draft plans, they have met and worked with a range of stakeholders, other departments and local authorities and others, using a Statement of Public Participation to set out precisely what is expected of stakeholders and when they could make their input. A key task has been to ensure compatibility with land use plans, which involves consultation with 25 local authorities’ plans as well as River Basin Management Plans.
Andrezj Cieslak of the Maritime Administration in Poland (PO) explained that a one-stop shop for licensing has been in place in his Member State for over 20 years. This is related to the legal basis, under which the state is responsible for managing the sea, and the existence of a single Maritime Administration (individual licenses, however, are issued by the Minister at national level or the regional authority). The Maritime Administration is responsible for safety from sea-related risks, including coastal protection, thus ensuring a land/sea interface. Land use plans for coastal areas need to be agreed with the Maritime Administration, which works in close cooperation with environmental offices. Spatial plans for the sea do not yet exist; these would have to be agreed with local authorities.
Regarding co-use and its governance in the Baltic, he referred to the on-going PartiSEApate project on multi-level governance, which involves discussions among all types of users and planners. A recent workshop addressed aquaculture and an upcoming workshop will consider shipping and ports.
Sten Jerdenius explained that Sweden (SE) has had MSP for over 30 years, as coastal municipalities have had to address nearby sea areas in their land use plans. Sweden carried out a national report in 2010, and a proposal for a national ordinance on MSP will be finalised this summer and sent for consultation in September. National planning would be guiding, not binding. However permission for any activity always follows the same approach.
At present, the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management is drafting plans for three main marine areas: the Baltic, the western sea area and the Bothnian Sea. A meeting will be organised in September for all Baltic countries to discuss their input to the Swedish plans; for the Bothnian Sea, Sweden and Finland already carried out a common exercise, whose report is available. In other areas of international cooperation, Sweden is involved in Nordic cooperation on ICM and is discussing a workshop with the US on blue growth issues.
3. Developments on MSP/ICM at EU level
Sustainable Coastal Development (SUSCOD) project
Lilian Bernhardi of the Province of Nord Holland (NL) provided an overview of the SUSCOD Project, developed under Interreg IVB for the North Sea Region. The 4 year project, which ends this year, has had partners from Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Its broad objectives include sustainable environmental management, improving living and working conditions in coastal areas and implementing the ICZM principles. Its outputs include case studies and pilot projects and the ICZM assistant web portal, which seeks to improve planning by sharing knowledge. She provided a tour of the ICZM Assistant web portal ( and noted that the project will hold three regional meetings and a final conference on 6 November 2013 in Amsterdam.
Françoise Breton of the PEGASO Project noted that they had similar goals in its work in the Mediterranean. One key task is to consider what happens after these projects end. The PEGASO partners are looking to continue working through a platform. Ms Breton asked about the continuation of SUSCOD after its completion. Ms Bernhardi explained one possibility is integrating the ICZM Assistant into the OURCOAST database; Jeroen Casaer added that DG ENV is looking for ways to do this integration. Zeljka Skaricic of the Priority Actions Programme Regional Activity Centre (PAP/RAC) under UNEP/MAP said that she was pleased to see the ICZM Assistant portal, as there was an idea to prepare something similar in the Mediterranean with the PEGASO project.
MSP workshop on Energy (Dublin, 14 June 2013)
Mr Siemers provided a summary of this workshop, organised jointly with the Irish Presidency. He explained that it was one of a series of workshops on MSP focusing on specific topics and sectors and would be follows by two more events addressing fisheries and shipping as part of the Lithuanian and Greek Presidencies.
The Dublin workshop had good participation from energy sector and those who interact with it, including the fisheries sector and environmental NGOs. The workshop considered many aspects of interactions between offshore energy developments and other marine uses across Europe. In particular, safety issues related to shipping need to be discussed with IMO to establish safe margins of operation for both shipping and energy generation. He added that economic sectors were much less reluctant to share data than assumed although such issues remain sensitive. The workshop also noted that the issue of how to deal with open/unused space is important.
In the discussion, several comments were made on fisheries. It was noted that the workshop had not fully represented the broad range of fisheries interests across Member States, and their participation is important in the planning process. Ms Breton said that in the Mediterranean, fishing interests are also concerned with links to aquaculture and tourism. Mr Jerdenius of Sweden noted several issues are important for fishing, including spawning areas, and managing this situation requires a large amount of data. He also commented that the provisions of the revised Common Fisheries Policy may limit what can be done by MSP in this area. A further concern raised was the issue of fishing in Natura 2000 sites. Mr Siemers of DG MARE commented that the next workshop in Vilnius in November would allow greater consideration of the many issues involved and will put fisheries at the centre of the debate on maritime planning.
Transboundary Planning in the Atlantic Region (TPEA)
Ms Almodovar of Portugal introduced this project, which involves 10 partners in four Member States: Ireland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. It addresses two distinct contexts in its pilot areas: the northern context (Ireland and UK) and southern (Portugal and Spain). The project considers transboundary issues, including those involving blue growth, natural resources and recreational activities. A spatial database is a key element of the work. TPEA will run until June 2014.
4. MSP & ICM as policy tools for adaptation to climate change
Tony Zamparutti of Milieu Ltd. introduced the project on sharing of best practices on integrated coastal management in a context of adaptation to climate change in coastal areas, for the European Commission. He explained that the project is closely related to the work of the expert group and seeks to provide results that are useful for Member States, so input from expert group members is valuable both in shaping these results and also in providing information on Member State activities.
The project tasks are:
- Overview of MS policies and measures: for this, a questionnaire will be sent to the Expert Group members after the summer
- Support for the development of a guidance document, to be prepared with the Expert Group
- Update of the OURCOAST database: Expert Group members are asked to update existing case studies and also propose new ones (including on measures to address erosion)
- Integration of OURCOAST with other EU databases, such as Climate-Adapt, WISE (the water information system for Europe) and the European Atlas of the Sea
- Communication, including a newsletter and revisions to the OURCOAST web pages
In the discussion, there were questions about the inventory of measures to be developed by the project and about potential links between OURCOAST and the SUSCOD ICZM Assistant web portal, especially regarding information on case studies. Kathy Belpaeme (Flanders Region, BE) asked about the possible amalgamation of the OURCOAST and SUSCOD databases and JC noted it was a job for IT specialists to establish if and how this might be done. Alan Pickaver of EUCC noted that databases without dedicated resources for maintenance and updates can easily fall out of date.