Tim O'Higgins

Steps toward a shared governance response for achieving Good Environmental Status in the Mediterranean Sea

The Mediterranean region is of fundamental importance to Europe given its strategic position. The responsibility for its overall ecosystem integrity is shared by European Union Member States (EU-MS) and other Mediterranean countries. A juxtaposition of overlapping governance instruments occurred recently in the region, with the implementation of both the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) for EU-MS and the Ecosystem Approach Strategy (ECAP) for all Mediterranean countries, including EU-MS. Both MSFD and ECAP are structured around vision-driven processes to achieve Good Environmental Status and a Healthy Environment, respectively. These processes have clear ecosystem-based, integrated policy objectives to guarantee the preservation and integrity of Mediterranean marine ecosystem goods and services. However, adoption of these instruments, especially those related to the new EUMS directives on marine policy, could result in a governance gap in addition to the well-known economic gap between the EU and the non-EU political blocs. We identify two complementary requirements for effective implementation of both MSFD and ECAP that could work together to reduce this gap, to ensure a better alignment between MSFD and ECAP and better planning for stakeholder engagement. These are key issues for the future success of these instruments in a Mediterranean region where discrepancies between societal and ecological objectives may pose a challenge to these processes.

Temporal constraints on ecosystem management: definitions and examples from Europe’s regional seas

Our ability to meet environmental targets is often constrained by processes and events that occur over long timescales and which may not be considered during the planning process. We illustrate with examples and define three major types of temporal scale phenomena of relevance to marine managers: Memory and Future Effects (jointly called Legacy Effects) and Committed Behaviors. We examine the role of these effects in achieving marine environmental targets in Europe under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the implications for future management, indicating the increased importance that these temporal phenomena give to reducing future pressures.

Sustaining Europe's seas as coupled social-ecological systems

BACKGROUND There is ample evidence for human alteration of Europe’s regional seas, particularly the enclosed or partly enclosed Baltic, Black, Mediterranean, and North Seas. Accounts of habitat and biodiversity loss, pollution, and the decline of fish stocks in these economically, socially, and ecologically important seas demonstrate unsustainable use of the marine environment. At the same time, there is an insufficient quantity and quality of information to enable purely evidence-based management of Europe’s seas despite this being a declared goal of many decisionmakers; for example, less than 10% of the deep sea has been systematically explored (UNEP 2006). Evidence-based management alone is rarely possible in situations with complex value-laden policy options (Greenhalgh and Russell 2009), and unfortunately, many of the most pervasive problems in the marine environment are “wicked” second-order problems (Jentoft and Chuenpagdee 2009): they are complex in nature and their management will often involve both winners and losers. Solutions to these problems involve less politically attractive, valuebased choices and may require long time lags before tangible results are observed. Fisheries management, habitat and species protection, competition for marine space, and invasive species are all examples of “wicked” problems. These are some of the biggest issues facing Europe’s seas and are the major focus of this article and Special Feature. For the first time in European history, most countries have adopted a common maritime policy (the 2007 Integrated Maritime Policy) and a legally binding environmental directive (the 2008 Marine Strategy Framework Directive [MSFD]). These comprehensive policy vehicles encompass, or closely interface with, more specific measures, such as the recently reformed Common Fisheries Policy, the Water Framework Directive, the Habitats and Birds Directive, and a number of targeted policy instruments that deal with aspects of pollution control and coastal zone management. The overall array of measures has the potential to ensure the sustainable use of Europe’s seas and the restoration of marine environments, but the pathway between the current situation and the implementation of an ecosystem approach to management (the aspiration of the European Commission; see Our Approach to Research) is fraught with “wicked” problems. Science can help society resolve these problems, but in many cases this requires the broad and integrative vision of Odum’s (1971) “macroscope” rather than trying to piece together an ill-fitting jigsaw puzzle of discipline-focused information. This paper and the others in this Special Feature employ a systems approach. We describe the approach, how it can be applied practically, and some of the challenges in making it work. Though the work is based on research on Europe’s seas, it has much wider implications for regional seas throughout the world. OUR APPROACH TO RESEARCH ON MARINE SOCIALECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS The research described in this paper (and Special Feature) was conducted in the framework of the EU-FP7 funded project Knowledge-based Sustainable Management of Europe’s Seas (KnowSeas). The interdisciplinary research spanned 4 years and involved 33 institutions from 16 European countries (KnowSeas 2013). Its primary objective was to develop “a comprehensive scientific knowledge base and practical guidance for the application of the ecosystem approach to the sustainable development of Europe’s regional seas.” Given the knowledge gaps and uncertainties in the way Europe’s marine social-ecological systems function (e.g., unresolved causal links, poorly mapped habitats, nonlinear dynamics), an iterative approach to inquiry was adopted, based partly on the reasoning behind soft systems analysis (e.g., Checkland 2000).

A proposed ecosystem-based management system for marine waters: linking the theory of environmental policy to the practice of environmental management

New coastal and marine management strategies have recently been developed in many countries and regions. From an ecosystem approach perspective, the aim of such strategies is the maintenance of ecosystem integrity while enabling the sustainable use of ecosystem goods and services. There is, however, a need for harmonized definitions and standardized processes to deal not only with the interjurisdictional and multidisciplinary complexities that are associated with such strategies but also with the extensive timelines and resources implicated in the planning and implementation of these strategies. The ecosystem-based management system proposed here is based on three pillars that facilitate the integration of an ecosystem approach to coastal and oceans policy development, regardless of the ecosystem or administrative scales. The managerial pillar is based on classical risk-management systems that incorporate environmental considerations and objectives within a continuous improvement cycle of adaptive management. The managerial pillar is supported by governance structures that provide oversight and thereby ensure that planning and implementation activities adhere to modern environmental principles. The information pillar ensures that data and scientific advice are based on current knowledge, and the participation pillar brings together communication and consultation requirements as indicated by the principles of the ecosystem approach.

Rapid Policy Network Mapping: A New Method for Understanding Governance Structures for Implementation of Marine Environmental Policy

Understanding the relationships and dependencies in the development and implementation of environmental policy is essential to the effective management of the marine environment. A new method of policy network analysis called ‘Rapid Policy Network Mapping’ was developed that delivers an insight for both technical and non-technical users into the lifecycle, relationships and dependencies of policy development. The method was applied to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Water Framework Directive in the UK. These case studies highlight the environmental policy challenges to protect the UKs marine coastal environment and they identify differences in the styles of policy implementation between the devolved authorities of the UK. Rapid Policy Network Mapping provides an opportunity to create a collaborative policy data environment with a relatively small investment. As a tool for civil society it should assist in their ability to understand and influence policy making and implementation.

Achieving good environmental status in the Black Sea: scale mismatches in environmental management

The Black Sea has suffered severe environmental degradation. Governance of the Black Sea region is complex and results in a series of scale mismatches which constrain management. This paper develops a simple classification of spatial scale mismatches incorporating the driver, pressure, state, welfare, response (DPSWR) framework. The scale mismatch classification is applied to two major environmental problems of the Black Sea, eutrophication and small pelagic fisheries. A number of scale mismatches are described and classified and potential solutions are identified.

Oceans of opportunity or rough seas? What does the future hold for developments in European marine policy?

The management of European seas is undergoing a process of major reform. In the past, oceans and coastal policy has traditionally evolved in a fragmented and uncoordinated manner, developed by different sector-based agencies and arms of government with competing aims and objectives. Recently, the call for integrated and ecosystem-based approaches has driven the conceptualization of a new approach. At the scale of Europe through the Integrated Maritime Policy and Marine Strategy Framework Directive and in national jurisdictions such as the Marine and Coastal Access Act in the United Kingdom, ecosystem-based planning is becoming the norm. There are major challenges to this process and this paper explores, in particular, the opportunities inherent in building truly integrated approaches that cross different sectors of activity, integrate across scales, incorporate public involvement and build a sense of oceans citizenship.

Challenges of achieving Good Environmental Status in the Northeast Atlantic

The sustainable exploitation of marine ecosystem services is dependent on achieving and maintaining an adequate ecosystem state to prevent undue deterioration. Within the European Union, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires member states to achieve Good Environmental Status (GEnS), specified in terms of 11 descriptors. We analyzed the complexity of social-ecological factors to identify common critical issues that are likely to influence the achievement of GEnS in the Northeast Atlantic (NEA) more broadly, using three case studies. A conceptual model developed using a soft systems approach highlights the complexity of social and ecological phenomena that influence, and are likely to continue to influence, the state of ecosystems in the NEA. The development of the conceptual model raised four issues that complicate the implementation of the MSFD, the majority of which arose in the Pressures and State sections of the model: variability in the system, cumulative effects, ecosystem resilience, and conflicting policy targets. The achievement of GEnS targets for the marine environment requires the recognition and negotiation of trade-offs across a broad policy landscape involving a wide variety of stakeholders in the public and private sectors. Furthermore, potential cumulative effects may introduce uncertainty, particularly in selecting appropriate management measures. There also are endogenous pressures that society cannot control. This uncertainty is even more obvious when variability within the system, e.g., climate change, is accounted for. Also, questions related to the resilience of the affected ecosystem to specific pressures must be raised, despite a lack of current knowledge. Achieving good management and reaching GEnS require multidisciplinary assessments. The soft systems approach provides one mechanism for bringing multidisciplinary information together to look at the problems in a different light.

Detecting critical choke points for achieving Good Environmental Status in European seas

Choke points are social, cultural, political, institutional, or psychological obstructions of social-ecological systems that constrain progress toward an environmental objective. Using a soft systems methodology, different types of chokes points were identified in the Outer Hebrides of Scotland, the Baltic, and the North and Mediterranean seas. The choke points were of differing types: cultural and political choke points were identified in Barra and the Mediterranean, respectively, whereas the choke points in the North Sea and Baltic Sea were dependent on differing values toward the mitigation of eutrophication. We conclude with suggestions to identify and address choke points. INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS A CHOKE POINT? Here, we aim to identify choke points constraining the achievement of Good Environmental Status (GEnS) under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD; Mee et al. 2008, Long 2011) in the seas of the Northeast Atlantic, the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. We examine the properties of choke points and indicate opportunities for decision makers to address choke points to promote the effective management of European seas. In the context of military strategy and global trade, choke points have a specific meaning: they are straits with a narrow width that constrain the number of ships passing (Smith et al. 2011, Emmerson and Stevens 2012, Roger 2012). Choke points are of strategic importance because controling them gives a state the ability to constrain the functioning of maritime transport (Noer and Gregory 1996). We apply the concept of choke points by analogy, not to narrow physical straits, but to properties of social ecological systems. We identify choke points as properties of a social-ecological system that constrain progress toward an environmental objective. Choke points are a complex mix of social, political, or psychological obstructions, congestions, or blockages that decrease the power of society to reach its objectives.

Integrating the Common Fisheries Policy and the Marine Strategy for the Baltic: Discussion of Spatial and Temporal Scales in the Management and Adaptation to Changing Climate

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires the achievement of Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2020 and the adoption of the Ecosystem Approach. The former sectoral approach to management must be transformed to adhere to the requirements of the new directive. Fishery is a particularly important example, because it relies heavily on the ecosystem, sustains many coastal communities and still has large economic impacts at national level. We examine the cod fishery in the Eastern Baltic and the feasibility of integrating the intermediate and final ecosystem services and benefits associated with the fishery into the ‘programmes of measures’. We use Decision Space Analysis to visualize the spatial challenges concerning competing priorities and expectations for uses of the marine area, as well as the temporal challenges of achieving GES under the very short time constraints of the MSFD.