Comparative analysis of Maritime Spatial Planning ... - Seanergy 2020

procedures, in terms of for example consultation and mechanisms for the development and the adoptionof spatial plans, will usually be well established. Furthermore the extension of spatial planning to the seacan facilitate a clearer, indeed seamless, planning link between land and sea embracing the all-importantcoastal zone. To this end it is to be noted that the national report on Sweden finds that while the physicalplanning system for coastal and territorial waters is well established – and which is undertaken by therelevant municipalities – it is no longer considered as the most suitable basis for MSP.b) A second alternative is to create, as in the UK, a specific legal framework for MSP within an overall legalframework for marine management. An advantage of this approach is that it can take account of thespecific nature of the sea in general and MSP in particular. On the other hand such an approach in manyways may entail starting from scratch and indeed the UK framework is only partially implemented to date.c) A third approach is suggested by the Netherlands whereby MSP is to be implemented through anamendment not to land-use planning legislation but to the Water Act. An advantage of this approach is thatit may be easier to tie the ecological objectives of EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MFSD) 5 , as wellas the EU Water Framework Directive 6 which applies to near-shore waters, into the MSP process. On theother hand, as with the UK approach, new planning procedures would appear to be called. In practice itappears that the previous procedural experience of preparing a chapter on the North Sea within the DutchNational Spatial Strategy in connection with the current draft National Water Plan (Nationaal Waterplan)will act as an overall policy framework for MSP in the North Sea.2.2 RecommendationsAt this stage it is too early to evaluate which is the best approach. Much will depend on the particularrelationship individual Member States have with their marine areas as well as the particular features oftheir respective land-based spatial planning regimes in terms both of the scope and effect of such plansand the impacts they have on decision makers. A discussion of these variations in terms of land-useplanning is clearly beyond the scope of this report.Nevertheless, on the basis of European experience so far as well as a careful consideration of basic legalprinciples the following basic recommendations can be made in terms of the legal and policy framework forMSP.First of all there is a need for the adoption of comprehensive primary legislation, in the form of anact or a law, for MSP. It is difficult to see how an appropriate legal framework for MSP couldordinarily be adopted on the basis of subordinate legislation, given that to be effective it will need5 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework forCommunity action in the field of marine environmental policy OJ L 164 25.6.2008. p 19.6 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a frameworkfor Community action in the field of water policy OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.Deliverable 2.310 | P a g e