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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Possible impacts of grid expansion land side should be taken onboard as soon as possible inorder to increase social acceptance for, e.g., new high voltage lines to bring the ORE power fromthe Atlantic Ocean to metropolitan areas.2.4 DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT2.4.1 Barriers and obstaclesThe quality of environmental, socio-economic and other relevant data and information in Spain is notequal and detained by the Spanish Central Administration. This seems an illustration of a closedattitude towards data and information which may hinder an active participation of other than officialstakeholders in the MSP process.2.4.2 Good practicesData and information on offshore energy resources and on the maritime activities are mostly welldeveloped and publicly available. An interesting practice in this domain, in France, is a GIS-toolcreated and used by regions‟ prefects used in the consultation process as a basis to definefavourable areas for offshore wind development.2.4.3 Policy recommendations• Encourage the use of common and web based GIS tools, given the existing high quality of dataand information in the countries of the Atlantic sea basin,• Such a toll should make all relevant data and information available to stakeholders who cancontribute to the quality of the MSP and/or the ORE zoning exercise.2.5 SECTOR CONFLICT MANAGEMENT2.5.1 Barriers and obstaclesWhen some authorities or sectors have the right of veto, MSP is likely to be determined by thedominant sector interests. In the case of the UK, defence and aviation seem to have such a right,which can reduce the spatial possibilities for ORE development.2.5.2 Good practicesThe Portuguese have involved all sectors from the beginning of the MSP process in order to obtainthe widest possible acceptance for the spatial allotment of ORE activities. The French obligation toinclude in the tender procedure information on assessment and proposed mitigation of the possiblenegative impacts of the offshore wind project is a classical measure of sector conflict management.A more sector conflict prevention oriented approach was adopted in the delimitation of the offshorewind zones/sites: the integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) process involved local andregional organisations representing the fishing community. But this sector conflict preventionapproach resulted in no suitable zones for the moment in the French Mediterranean Sea. From theDeliverable D 2.364 | P a g e
investor‟s point of view, this offshore exercise will certainly establish legal certainty: ORE developerswill no longer lose time and money in preparing a project that eventually, in a later stage, would getstranded in the licensing process because of a conflict with one of the other sectors.2.5.3 Policy recommendations• The bottom-up approach, used in France is an interesting experience that could be replicated inother ORE zoning exercises, particularly in territorial seas, where sector conflicts tend to occurmore than in EEZs. The right balance, however, should be maintained between the rights of theexisting and the „new‟ sectors such as ORE,• Decentralising the decision making process in ORE zoning, i.e. letting the local governments ofthe coastal areas propose and regulate offshore energy development (like in France) will mostlikely contribute to increased social acceptance of the new activity and will, to a certain extent,prevent sector conflicts that can lead to legal actions from local communities against OREdevelopment in the territorial seas. This approach has not been used in Spain and Portugal forthe designation of the ORE zones in the territorial sea, but it would be interesting to integrate theactive involvement of local representatives of the maritime sectors in the licensing processes atthe earliest possible stage.A comprehensive and fair MSP exercise becomes difficult if a particular sector benefits of a dominantposition in some maritime areas. This dominant position can be translated into a right of veto againstORE development. This seems to be the case in the UK where defence and aviation are statutoryconsultees with such a right. This can hamper ORE development in areas where all the other limitingconditions are optimal. A comprehensive MSP policy should pursue to balance sector interests andstrive to treat all sector interests in an equal way, which is an important condition for fair sectorconflict management.2.6. CROSSBORDER AND REGIONAL COOPERATION2.6.1 Barriers and obstaclesPortugal has not foreseen direct cooperation with neighbouring countries in the Planning andOrdering of Maritime Space (POEM). The defined areas for offshore wind farm deployment, link in theNorth as in the South with the Spanish borders. The lack of institutionalised cross border cooperationaspect in POEM is a missed opportunity of cooperation. This could lead in the future to borderproblems if/and when offshore renewable energies will be developed in the border zones of Portugal.2.6.2 Good practicesAll countries in this sea basin are signatories of the most important initiatives in regional cooperationrelated to the protection of the marine environment, like the OSPAR convention. Recently, some newcross-border cooperation initiatives related to offshore renewable energy generation have beenDeliverable D 2.365 | 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 14 and 15: 3.3 Best practice in data and infor
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 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?