共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
《Marine Policy》2013
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. 相似文献
2.
《Marine Policy》2017
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. 相似文献
3.
The Spanish approach to marine spatial planning. Marine Strategy Framework Directive vs. EU Integrated Maritime Policy 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
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. 相似文献
4.
5.
《Marine Policy》2014
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. 相似文献
6.
《Marine Policy》2013
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. 相似文献
7.
《Marine Policy》2014
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. 相似文献
8.
《Marine Policy》2014
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. 相似文献
9.
《Marine Policy》2017
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. 相似文献
10.
Phillip B. Fenberg Jennifer E. Caselle Joachim Claudet Michaela Clemence Steven D. Gaines Jose Antonio García-Charton Emanuel J. Gonçalves Kirsten Grorud-Colvert Paolo Guidetti Stuart R. Jenkins Peter J.S. Jones Sarah E. Lester Rob McAllen Even Moland Serge Planes Thomas K. Sørensen 《Marine Policy》2012
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. 相似文献
11.
In the past decade, the European Commission has developed the Marine Strategy Directive and the Maritime Policy. Both policies aim at governing the marine environment; yet the two policies have a differing signature in policy formulation and implementation. From a fisher's perspective these policies present a change in institutional setting; major policy measures no longer descend from the EU Common Fisheries Policy alone, but increasingly are derived from general environmental policy developments. In this paper, the policy arrangement approach is used to analyse the differences between the two maritime policies, and the way in which they can affect fisheries management. 相似文献
12.
13.
《Marine Policy》2014
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. 相似文献
14.
《Marine Policy》2014
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. 相似文献
15.
Overview of eutrophication indicators to assess environmental status within the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
João G. Ferreira Jesper H. Andersen Angel Borja Suzanne B. Bricker Jordi Camp Margarida Cardoso da Silva Esther Garcés Anna-Stiina Heiskanen Christoph Humborg Lydia Ignatiades Christiane Lancelot Alain Menesguen Paul Tett Nicolas Hoepffner Ulrich Claussen 《Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science》2011
16.
《Marine Policy》2016
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. 相似文献
17.
Being a littoral state, Malaysian maritime sectors provide the basis for the growth and development of marine-related activities. As the country enters the new millennium along with the ‘2020 Vision’ which serves as the basic template against which the economic performance of these sectors should be judged, it poses a new challenge for Malaysia in developing these sectors. This paper attempts to address three basic issues: Firstly, is there any national ocean policy in place? Secondly, are the maritime sectors adequately organized to play an important role in achieving the objectives? Thirdly, what are the opportunities available in developing the ocean?It can be seen that existing policies to develop comprehensive ocean governance have not received the full attention they deserve. Organizational structures governing the ocean for implementing national policies are well in place but in a fragmented and uncoordinated fashion. As a result, sectoral and intersectoral management problems were created such as multiple-use conflicts, overlapping of jurisdiction and duplication of efforts. Environmental problems have also not been properly addressed. A few sectors have been identified as offering opportunities to further develop the Malaysian maritime areas. Among these are marine education and human resources development, marine tourism and the seafood industry. 相似文献
18.
《Marine Policy》2014
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. 相似文献
19.
《Marine Policy》2014
Marine governance in European seas is at a crossroad aiming towards implementation of eco-system based marine management (EBMM) through integration of different EU policies or directives to protect the environment, while at the same time expected to facilitate growth and employment in support of the blue economy. This article shows that the governance landscape at the regional sea level is very complex, fragmented and faced with several dilemmas. It examines the present governance structures in the four European seas (Baltic, Black, and Mediterranean Seas and North East Atlantic Ocean). It is argued that the implementation of EBMM at the regional sea level is characterized by a highly fragmented European governance system where there is lack of coordination between relevant DGs within the European Commission, between EU, International organisations, Regional Sea Conventions and the Member States and between sectoral governance arrangements that should provide sectoral management measures that support EBMM. The article develops suggestions for a nested governance system in which institutions, policies, laws and sectors are nested into a tiered, internally consistent and mutually re-enforcing planning and decision-making system. Developing institutional interaction and soft modes of governance between the EU, the Regional Sea Conventions, Member States and the governance arrangements of the different marine sectors will be crucial in evolving towards such a nested governance system for EBMM. Moreover, there is no one size fits all approach in implementing EBMM, which means that for each European Sea a context-dependent nested governance system should be developed. 相似文献
20.
《Ocean & Coastal Management》2000,43(1):29-50
The Australian Government recently ratified the “Oceans Policy” which provides a policy framework to effectively manage the resources and uses of the Australian Exclusive Economic Zone. The Oceans Policy is to be implemented through Regional Marine Plans that are based on the notion of large marine ecosystems and have the objective to integrate sectoral commercial interests and conservation objectives. This paper makes a theoretical contribution to the development of Regional Marine Plans which will demand the specification of detailed policies for regulating the various marine uses and impacts in the respective marine regions. The paper discusses a wide range of policy instruments and exemplifies their potential role for the management of marine resources and uses. The term incentive instrument includes financial and economic instruments as well as legal and regulatory instruments, education, co-management, voluntary approaches, community-based mechanisms and research. A set of criteria is established for the evaluation of individual incentive instruments. They are further placed in the context of a series of principles for policy design. The paper explores potential management instruments to: improve water quality of streams, estuaries and oceans, create sustainable fisheries, ensure sustainable marine tourism and recreation, manage conflict between user and interest groups, ensure environmentally sound marine transport and petroleum exploration and mining. 相似文献