Realizing the Social Dimension of EU Coastal Water Management

Abstract

In the last 20 years, the EU has adopted some rather ambitious pieces of legislation with the aim to achieve a good environmental status in freshwater and marine ecosystems. Both the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) have a strong focus on the natural environment and biological criteria for assessing the status of the relevant ecosystems. In the same time period, much research on environmental governance has focused on the interconnectedness of social systems and ecosystems, so-called social-ecological systems (SES). While having high aspirations, the legal frameworks underpinning current EU water and marine management do not necessarily reflect the advances of contemporary science relating to SES. Using the geographical intersection of the two directives, i.e., coastal waters as a focal point, the paper explores the inchoate integration of social and ecological perspectives in the EU marine governance. What are the main challenges for the current EU legal regimes for managing coastal waters in a way that builds on the understanding of social and ecological systems as interconnected? Having explored the two directives, the paper introduces the possibility of using marine spatial planning (MSP), and the EU directive establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning (MSPD) as a bridge between the social and ecological dimensions and discusses what implications this would have for the current system for governing coastal waters in Europe.

Legitimacy and EU Marine Governance

“…39 This is in line with the general conclusion that in EU water and marine governance the 'social dimension' is predominantly seen as a matter of consultation and dialogue. 40 Although public participation is not explicitly referred to in the WFD, the Directive requires the Member States to 'encourage the active involvement of all interested parties' in its implementation. 41 Referring to this, the CIS guidance on participation mentions the prospect of making the management of natural resources more sustainable and socially acceptable by involving the people that depend on them for their livelihood.…”

“…However, if MSP is to be ecosystem based and consider land-sea interactions, as required by the MSPD, close coordination between existing town and country planning processes and planning undertaken according to the Directive is evidently needed. 77 While MSP in principle has the potential to help reconcile different spatial demands and democratise marine governance, warnings have increasingly been raised that it can also be used to entrench pre-existing power imbalances, cloak the interests of elite actors in ostensibly democratic processes and potentially even be an instrument for so-called ocean grabbing. 78 Due to the nature of the MSPD, the extent to which such effects will materialise in an EU context depends on the ways in which Member States chose to implement the Directive and the nature of their planning processes and traditions.…”