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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

a) is legally anchored on renewable energy legislation (such as in Denmark, Germany), this willensure that the sense of urgency to develop ORE is the dominant concern and motivationthroughout the licensing process,b) is integrated in a comprehensive MSP legislation (Netherlands),c) is valid indefinitely (United Kingdom),d) gives the permitting and investment responsibility of the grid connection to the grid operatorand not to the project developer (Germany, Denmark).4.3 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONAll North Sea countries consult the relevant maritime and non-maritime sectors as well as the publicstakeholders within the ORE consenting process.4.3.1 Good practicesIn Germany stakeholders were involved extensively during the MSP drafting process (2008), so priorto the consenting process for ORE projects, as well as after the exercise (2009) was finalised.4.3.2 Policy recommendations• Consult stakeholders within the licensing processes and offer to institutional as well as noninstitutionalstakeholders the possibility to participate in the preparatory works of acomprehensive MSP policy.• Take account of relevant comments of the different stakeholders to improve the quality of theMSP and to anticipate and/or prevent recurrent opposition from certain stakeholders in theconsenting processes of ORE projects.4.4 SECTOR CONFLICT MANAGEMENT4.4.1 Barriers and obstaclesIn Belgium, some maritime sectors are subject to regional legislation (e.g. access to ports,maintenance of navigation channels, coastal conservation), however, the principal maritime sectorsare governed by federal laws. This may result in the institutionalisation of conflicts between sectors.In the UK, as mentioned above, some sectors (defence, aviation) have a veto right in the MSP orlicensing process, which may not always lead to a fair and constructive dialogue between sectors.4.4.2 Good practicesIn 2004, Belgium adopted a zonal delimitation for offshore wind, which was the legal outcome of anMSP-like cross sectoral exercise that originated from a sector conflict management. This MSPprocess was driven by the need to manage sector conflicts in a structural way and to put an end toCouncil of State appeals blocking the execution of permits for offshore wind farms. The zoningdelimitation managed to shift established sand extraction zones to another maritime area in order toDeliverable D 2.382 | P a g e
free up space for ORE development. Although not of a comprehensive nature, this MSP like measuremanaged to successfully solve existing sectoral conflicts. Another sector conflict managementmeasure in Belgium is the establishment of an „offshore wind farms‟ workgroup within the CoastGuard Centre (Kustwachtcentrale). It is a public coordination service for conflict management andprevention between all federal and regional authorities acting in the Belgian maritime zones.In Denmark, a hearing process prior to the application of an ORE project gives other authorities theopportunity to express major concerns about public interests that may be impacted by an OREproject. Denmark is one of the only countries where compensation measures for commercial fishingare expected.The UK a working strategy to solve potential conflicts with other sectors (i.e. fishing, navigation,radar) is also interesting as it involves agreement during „pre-screening‟ consultations by liaising withstakeholder groups established to address issues relating to specific projects. The policy strategy, inaccordance with the „criteria based‟ approach previously mentioned, does not rely on „priority zones‟being established, but rather in identifying constraints and having site and project specificdiscussions about how the developments can be fitted around these constraints e.g. avoiding oil andgas installations, dredging sites and major shipping routes.The involvement of the maritime stakeholders in the drafting of the MSP and the designation of OREzones in Germany has mitigated the risk of sector conflicts.4.4.3 Policy recommendations• Actively involve all concerned sectors, public services and private organisations when preparing acomprehensive MSP or an ORE zoning process, in order to integrate at the earliest possible stagethe respective concerns of different sectors. This will enable in a structural way a conflict-freecoexistence of the concerned maritime sectors. If one sector is identified as unjustlydisadvantaged, it is important to explore all reasonable and structural compensation measures,in close collaboration with the afflicted sector. One of these options could be to developinnovative compensation measures such as the establishment of a vocational training centre forORE related professions (construction, operation and maintenance and dismantling services).4.5 DATA AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT4.5.1 Good practicesCountries in the North Sea basin are rather advanced in the field of ocean related data andinformation management. In most North Sea countries, the GIS standard is used and the informationpublically available.Deliverable D 2.383 | 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 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 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?