Mapping marine ecosystem services potential across an oceanic archipelago: Applicability and limitations for decision-making

Assessing the viability of Stakeholders’ Engagement in Marine Spatial Planning and its Implications for a Sustainable Blue Economy

“…This could further help in building the social capital of different stakeholders and initiating robust political discussions that entail horizontal and vertical discussions across different hierarchies of power that shape stakeholders' inclusivity in public participation [21]. This implies that the bene ts of MSP are not only localized but also scaled up to areas beyond coastal states' jurisdictions, which could be key in promoting global marine governance [20], [48]. In addition, several studies have reported that MSP processes can potentially enhance the spatial allocation of large societal bene ts across ocean activities that may be at risk [20], [23], which ensures the long-term maintenance of ecosystem service (ES) supplies and offers a starting point for assessing current trade-offs between various ecological, social, and economic goals while gauging their level of achievement [2], [20], [42].…”

“…In other words, MSP is envisioned as a benchmark for the development of the ecosystem-based approach (EBA) in marine space related to, e.g., green and blue infrastructure projects via the effective use of different stages of the MSP process, e.g., the scoping, developing, assessment, implementation, and follow-up stages, in marine space zoning, e.g., within the Baltic Sea zone [24]. The use of EBA could be key to marine conservation efforts, especially in areas with MPAs, since it enables the development and use of the 'Paper Park Indices' to identify potential 'paper parks' or ineffective MPAs [51], the evaluation of regional and global coral bleaching risks [15] and the mapping of critical benthic habitats, e.g., in the Canary Islands [20]. This perspective clearly yields results, e.g., in Taiwan, multipurpose marine protected areas (MPAs) that integrate underwater cultural heritage (UCH) and ecological heritage have been developed as sustainable marine resource management approaches [12], [23]; in Senegal, traditional knowledge and practices have been integrated into formal marine management structures [16].…”

“…In countries such as Greece and Croatia, the MSFD helped in aligning and coordinating actors and marine users with national key policies that were previously hard to achieve [2], [22]. This was accomplished by streamlining the MSFD with the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive (MSPD) [11] and developing policies governing ocean activities spatially and planning [20] to ensure that ocean activities do not create pressure on the ocean environment. The MSP was created in the EU as a strategy for sustainable marine development and as a multidisciplinary and collaborative process that guides decision-making.…”

“…Through the BE, there are high possibilities that can bene t from MSP by promoting sustainable and equitable use of ocean resources, thus enhancing marine space peace and stability, e.g., in the Baltic Sea [64]. For SIDS, e.g., Seychelles, the study could aid in developing a participatory but critical and re exive approach to the blue economy and ocean governance, which takes into account the social, cultural, and political dimensions of these issues [20], [63], [97] via the recognition and management of the ecological complexity of coastal ecosystems that help to mitigate the impacts of climate change, reduce the risk of coastal ooding and pollution and promote sustainability in the management of ocean resources [86], [90] as well as the incorporation of indigenous and local knowledge into the planning process, which can improve the accuracy and relevance of the resulting plans and support the sustainable use of ocean resources [29], [49], [88], [95].…”

“…In worstcase scenarios, few studies clearly show how, when, and which actors need to be involved in the MSP process to ensure sustainable outcomes related to marine space use and governance [17]- [19]. This approach might risk throwing MSP in limbo and render MSP a top-down political tool rather than a sustainable strategy for attaining practical ocean governance and management targets related to marine ecosystem health, social equity, and inclusive economic development [20]- [22]. Given the increasing urgency of addressing marine space ecosystem shocks evidenced by a decline in marine resources and ocean health [23] and the increased proliferation of anthropogenic activities in marine space, e.g., in the Baltic Sea Region [24], translating high-level conceptualizations of MSP and crucial implementing actors to enhance the practical implementation and sustainable operation of MSP for sustainable marine futures need to be prioritized.…”