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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Explore the role of the existing EUROMED - aiming at political and economic cooperation in theMediterranean Sea - as model of an efficient institutional framework, to host a cross-bordersector conflict management body to deal with fishery and navigation sector conflicts in theMediterranean that often touch cross border issues.• Explore - ideally prior to conflicts arising - the opportunity of compensation measures for certainmaritime sectors. If only one EU sea basin should be stimulated to find structural compensationmeasures for the most impacted sectors, it would be the Mediterranean. The followingcompensation measures for, e.g., small scale fishing communities could be explored incollaboration with all relevant sectors:a) sharing the allotted ORE zones for sea farming projects, fish restocking projects, perhapsaround the wind farms,b) low financial participation threshold in ORE projects with fixed return on investment.3.6 CROSSBORDER AND REGIONAL COOPERATION3.6.1 Barriers and obstaclesAny unilateral proclamations of extra-large EEZs (Libya) or supersized fishing zones (Tunisia), crossborder fisheries issues, historic conflicts (Greece/Turkey), and more generally, the sensitivegeopolitical situation, represent particular challenges for cross-border and regional cooperation in theMediterranean Sea basin. Since the impact of MSP and/or ORE zoning in a EU coastal state will notonly have consequences on its lateral neighbouring states, but also on the non-EU states situatedopposite of them, the cross border cooperation cannot be limited to EU coastal states.3.6.2. Good practicesThe EU countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea are all involved in the major Europeaninternational agreements like the Barcelona Convention, the Bonn Convention and the EspooConvention. These conventions concern principally cross-border collaboration in protection of themarine environment.3.6.3 Policy recommendations• Establish new mechanisms to deal with the cross-border socio-economic impacts of MSP relatedto ORE. The existing EU or international mechanisms for joint sea basin planning andcoordination 39 may not be the most appropriate mechanisms to deal with these aspects, as theycover the protection of the marine environment.• Establish new regional cooperation initiatives similar to EUROMED, aiming primarily atcooperation in the socio-economic domains to best deal with appropriate and pacific siting ofORE projects; in fact, the most environmentally friendly offshore activity. EUROMED brings EUand non-EU states together, around a variety of policy priorities, amongst which also energy39 As suggested earlier.Deliverable D 2.376 | P a g e
elated topics such as the Mediterranean solar energy plan that explores opportunities fordeveloping alternative energy sources in the region,• Lay the foundations of a “win-win model”: cross border cooperation within the MediterraneanSea basin related to MSP comes with a possible win-win model for EU and non-EU memberstates alike. A joint initiative defining ORE zones within the Mediterranean and the subsequentdevelopment of innovative ORE technology in this area may create a new sector with economicand employment opportunities and enhance the security of supply of energy.3.7 IMPLEMENTATION OF MSP3.7.1 Barriers and obstaclesAs mentioned above, a series of typical characteristics of the Mediterranean Sea basin has so farbeen standing in the way of a comprehensive maritime spatial planning:• socio-economic importance of maritime activities: tourism, fisheries, ports, navigation,• geopolitical importance - major naval bases,• delimitation issue - only territorial seas, no EEZ, half of the Mediterranean high seas,• not always adequate data and information gathering and management,• no real tradition of comprehensive consultation procedures,• absence of preventive sector conflict management mechanisms.3.7.2 Good practicesSome MSP-like instruments have, nonetheless, been recently developed by Spain, France, andGreece, countries in which a sectoral zoning exercise has led to the delimitation of zones andappropriate sites for ORE development. Given that these ORE zoning exercises are not finalised orimplemented to date, it is too early to assess whether these ORE zoning instruments will generateresults in terms of attracting the development of offshore renewable energy production.3.7.3 Policy recommendations• Set up an ORE zoning approach as recently developed by three out of the four Mediterranean EUstates as the most:a) promising path for the implementation of ORE siting,b) efficient way to obtain within a reasonable time frame, i.e. before 2020 the legal certaintyrequired for the development of ORE in the Mediterranean, given the obstacles and barriershighlighted in this report, and the absence of MSP.3.8. CONCLUSIONAs illustrated in table 2, no offshore renewable energy has been developed in the Mediterranean Seabasin to date, which is related to a series of limiting conditions for ORE development in this area.The main constraints for ORE development in this sea basin are:• geophysical characteristics: narrow continental shelf, very deep sea bed,Deliverable D 2.377 | 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 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 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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?