On unequal footing: Stakeholder perspectives on the marine strategy framework directive as a mechanism of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management

Ounanian, Kristen; Delaney, Alyne; Raakjær, Jesper; Ramirez-Monsalve, Paulina

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2011.10.008

Cited by 58 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding the implementation of EAM within the MSFD, Ounanian et al (2012) identify problems with ecological boundaries, policy and management coordination and conflicts of users and values (Ounanian et al 2012). This is caused, for example, by the mismatch between environmental quality assessments required by the WFD and MSFD because the definition of ecological/environmental status differs between the two directives (Doneliene 2016;interviews 7, 8).…”

Section: Comparison Between the Policy Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ecosystem Approach to Management in Marine Environmental Governance: Institutional interplay in the Baltic Sea Region

Söderström

Kern

2017

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on the use of the ecosystem approach to management (EAM) in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR). Based on selected criteria for EAM, the article traces and compares the impact of EAM on HELCOM's Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) and the EU Maritime Spatial Planning Directive (MSPD). Starting from the assumption that institutional interplay determines the impact of the EAM on marine policies, the article examines how different forms of interplay (interplay through cognition, commitment and compliance) affect the spread of EAM and its implementation in the BSR. The study finds strong interplay between HELCOM's BSAP and the EU's MSFD. Although HELCOM is still an important player in marine governance in the BSR, since it includes Russia, taking over responsibilities for the implementation of EU legislation has repercussions and affects its independence. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

Section: Comparison Between the Policy Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ecosystem Approach to Management in Marine Environmental Governance: Institutional interplay in the Baltic Sea Region

Söderström

Kern

2017

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Marine Spatial Planning Process (Heffernan, 2015) The involvement of institutions is important and includes at all stages (Havard et al, 2015;Veidemane and Nikodemus, 2014;Flannery and Cinneide, 2012;Ounanian, Delaney and Raakjaer, 2012;Gopnik et al, 2012;Backer, 2011 andGilliland andLaffoley, 2008).…”

Section: Marine Spatial Planning Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional Mapping Towards Developing a Framework for Sustainable Marine Spatial Planning

YATIM

Omar

Abdullah

et al. 2016

Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Within few years before, the urge to implement the marine spatial planning is due to increasing numbers of marine activities that will lead into uncertainties of rights, restrictions and responsibilities of the maritime nations. Marine authorities in this situation that deal with national rights and legislations are the government institutions that engage with marine spatial information. There are several elements to be considered when dealing with the marine spatial planning; which is institutional sustainability governance. Providing the importance of marine spatial planning towards sustainable marine spatial governance, the focus should highlight the role marine institutions towards sustainable marine plan. The iterative process of marine spatial planning among marine institutions is important as the spatial information governance is scattered from reflected rights, restrictions and responsibilities of marine government institutions. Malaysia is one of the maritime nations that conjures the initial step towards establishing the sustainable marine spatial planning. In order to have sustainable institutions in marine spatial planning process, it involves four main stages; planning phase, plan evaluation phase, implementation phase and post implementation phase. Current situation has witnessed the unclear direction and role of marine government institutions to manage the marine spatial information. This review paper is focusing on the institutional sustainability upon interaction of marine government institutions in the marine spatial planning process based on Institutional Analysis Framework. The outcome of the integration of institutional sustainability and marine spatial planning process will propose a framework of marine institutional sustainable plan.

show abstract

“…Different European policies dealing with conservation and the use of the sea are not always perfectly coherent. Indeed, the approaches for implementing the legal instruments, including the Habitat Directive, Natura 2000, the Water Framework Directive, the Integrated Maritime Policy, and the Common Fisheries Policy, are still far from being truly integrated among the EU-MS (van Hoof and van Tatenhove 2009, Borja et al 2010, Ounanian et al 2012, van Leewen et al 2012. As recognized by the EC (2014b), "these pieces of legislation, although crucial complementary tools to the protection of marine waters, contribute to the protection of the sea only from specific pressures resulting in a fragmented and sectoral approach.…”

Section: Policy Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Cinnirella¹,

Sardá²,

Vivero³

et al. 2014

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. 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 EU-MS 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.

show abstract

On unequal footing: Stakeholder perspectives on the marine strategy framework directive as a mechanism of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management

Cited by 58 publications

References 9 publications

The Ecosystem Approach to Management in Marine Environmental Governance: Institutional interplay in the Baltic Sea Region

The Ecosystem Approach to Management in Marine Environmental Governance: Institutional interplay in the Baltic Sea Region

Institutional Mapping Towards Developing a Framework for Sustainable Marine Spatial Planning

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About