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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3.3 Best practice in data and information management for MSPThis summary of best practice in data and information management focuses on the following areas:Availability; Geographic Coverage and Mechanisms for Collection & Dissemination: i)Coordination/Integration; ii) Data format & accessibility; & iii) Ongoing data collection and monitoring.3.3.1 AvailabilityIn terms of data availability there are three key data categories that are needed for MSP (Wagner, 2010).Access to spatial socio-economic data is an essential tool to determine the current use of the maritimespace (e.g. for shipping, pipelines, mariculture, fishing) and potential areas of conflict. This needs to formthe basis of any planning activity or assessments of new developments. Geo-technical data provides dataand information on what resources, e.g. wind speeds and consistency, provide opportunities for new O-REdevelopments. Environmental data enables planners to assess the current state of natural resources, whatareas may need protection and the likely impacts of sector activities.A comparison of all the data and information types collected and disseminated by the different memberstates leads to a list of categories that would ideally be included in a data and information managementsystem (see Table 1). In many countries environmental data is more comprehensive than socio-economicdata, and while this is very important to determine possible environmental impacts long-term maritimeplanning also needs to have a good picture of all the current and possible future activities and uses of themaritime space. For example, as part of the process of developing a maritime spatial plan in Germany anumber of different GIS maps were created to take stock of the currently uses of the German EEZ in theNorth Sea and Baltic Sea. These have been regularly updated (2002, 2004 and 2007) and used as a basisto develop the spatial plan (Plancoast, 2008).Key data types required for MSPAreaKey categoriesBiological/EcologicaldataHabitat mapping/biotopesMarine Protected AreasSea pollution/water qualitySpecies distributions at similar spatial and temporal scales (sea birds,fish, marine mammals, reptiles & benthic species). Listed and threatenedspecies highlighted.Seasonal water column characteristicsMarine substrates/seabed mappingEnvironmental Impact studies (from previous developments)Socio-economic data Present and future uses of marine environment Shipping routes and intensity of use Location of underwater cables & pipelines Sector activities (oil & gas; aggregates, dredging, disposal, tourism,aquaculture, military, large & small-scale fishing) Archaeological data Coastal infrastructure and other built environment including wrecksGeotechnical data Geological mapping (1:50 000)Deliverable 2.314 | P a g e
BathymetryMeteorological conditions including wind speedSalinityTide stress & currentsWind speed dataClimatic scenarios3.3.2 Geographical coverageIt is important for datasets to cover both the territorial waters (generally up to 12nm) and the EEZ. Oftendatasets are more developed within territorial waters and less so in the EEZ, with some countries having nocoverage of the EEZ and others only partial coverage for some data types. However some countries, suchas those in the Mediterranean, do not have any EEZs clearly explaining the reasons for absence of data forthese zones. There is also the difficulty that there may be different institutions responsible for data in thecoastal zone, within territorial seas and the EEZ.3.3.3 Mechanisms for collection & disseminationCoordinationProbably the most important element of data and information management for MSP is the coordinationand integration of data. A large range of data types can be available but if these are managed by a range ofdifferent institutions, and in different formats with limited ability to integrate them on a spatial platform(such as GIS) it severely limits its application to maritime planning purposes.Given the history of data collection in the maritime zone and the different expertise required (i.e. rangingfrom oceanographic research to specific species monitoring and socio-economic data collection) there areoften a large number of institutions responsible for all marine data collection. In this case, it is importantto have clear guidelines on who is responsible for the different data sets that should be collected, andguidelines on data formats and sharing. For example, in the Netherlands there are a number of differentinstitutions involved in data collection and in order to avoid duplication of effort institutions have beendesignated „owners‟ of certain data and others update their data from them. In addition the NationalOceanographic Data Committee (NODC) provides meta-information on datasets and collecting activities.Even where there are a number of sources of information it is still possible and important for the data to bemanaged and integrated into a centralized GIS system. Belgium has achieved this by centralising datarequired for MSP at the Management Unit of the North Sea Mathematical Models (MUMM).The management of data for planning purposes is often far more advanced for terrestrial rather than MSP.For instance in Germany the flow of data required for terrestrial spatial planning system has been legallyformalised through a „cadastre‟. All relevant authorities and companies are obliged by law to providecertain data to a coordinating unit at regular intervals e.g. every six months. The law specifies the format ofDeliverable 2.315 | P a g e
Page 2 and 3: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis study forms p
Page 4 and 5: TASK 2.6: TABLE OF CONTENTSTASK 2.6
Page 6 and 7: 1 INTRODUCTIONThis report responds
Page 8 and 9: Before going any further in terms o
Page 10 and 11: procedures, in terms of for example
Page 12 and 13: 3 DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT3.
Page 16 and 17: the required data. Once the „cada
Page 18 and 19: Encourage the use of legislation to
Page 20 and 21: As the effectiveness and efficiency
Page 22 and 23: seabed without an EEZ claim being m
Page 24 and 25: een granted. A similar indicator wa
Page 26 and 27: The national reports indicate that
Page 28 and 29: The EIAs should be harmonised to en
Page 30 and 31: Levels of public consultation are m
Page 32 and 33: What particularly distinguishes som
Page 34 and 35: All relevant stakeholders are repre
Page 36 and 37: 6.3 Best practice in sector conflic
Page 38 and 39: 6.3.3 Conflict minimisation agreeme
Page 40 and 41: 7 TRANSBOUNDARY COOPERATIONThe aim
Page 42 and 43: Support regional sea-basin cooperat
Page 44 and 45: 6. Stakeholder participation;7. Pre
Page 46 and 47: 2. Specifying criteria for selectin
Page 48 and 49: Optimal spatial use of the maritime
Page 50 and 51: 9 FINAL POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS9.1 O
Page 52 and 53: There should be a central instituti
Page 54 and 55: 9.3.2 Transboundary cooperationUse
Page 56 and 57: Iuga, D (2010) Analysis of MSP in t
Page 58 and 59: Task 2.7: Table of Contents1 ATLANT
Page 60 and 61: 2. ATLANTIC OCEAN AND IRISH SEAThe
Page 62 and 63: • MSP on a sea basin level should
Page 64 and 65:
• Possible impacts of grid expans
Page 66 and 67:
undertaken like the „North Seas C
Page 68 and 69:
3. MEDITERRANEAN SEAThe Mediterrane
Page 70 and 71:
3.1.2 Good practicesGreece has rece
Page 72 and 73:
simplifies the permitting and licen
Page 74 and 75:
) consult all relevant groups and s
Page 76 and 77:
• Explore the role of the existin
Page 78 and 79:
• limited availability of maritim
Page 80 and 81:
In Denmark, the Integrated Marine S
Page 82 and 83:
a) is legally anchored on renewable
Page 84 and 85:
4.5.2 Policy recommendations• The
Page 86 and 87:
development of ORE in the North Sea
Page 88 and 89:
Estonia has established a four stag
Page 90 and 91:
5.5.2 Good practicesPoland and Latv
Page 92:
Poland BaltSeaPlan 0 500 wind YesSw
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?