September 2002

Some 950 million people rely on the sea as a major source of nutrition –

yet around two-thirds of the world’s commercial fisheries are

exploited to the limit or over-exploited. And every year, millions of

tonnes of pollution – toxic chemicals, nutrients, sewage and sediments

– are discharged, directly or via land-runoff and atmospheric

deposition, into the seas. An estimated 50 per cent of the world’s

remaining wetlands will be lost due

to sea level rise and development this

century – the UK has already lost more

than 75 per cent of its intertidal

saltmarsh. One-third of the world’s coral

reefs are already severely degraded.

All this is happening to a natural resource

that is thought to contain as much as

half the world’s biodiversity. The marine

environment also supports many jobs

and industries, is a source of renewable

and non-renewable resources and is a

place of enjoyment and inspiration for

millions of people every year.

Delivering an ecosystem approach–the need for a Marine Act

53updateMarine

Eelgrass meadows provide a vital habitat for species such as seahorses, and arevulnerable to high levels of pollution and to sea level rise.

How can wemanage thedemands placedon our marineenvironment?

F B

UN

KE

R,

MA

RIN

ES

EE

N,

WW

F-U

K

Despite the importance of ours seas and

oceans, the approach to marine nature

conservation has so far been unstructured

and piecemeal: the evidence is in the

continuing declines in a wide variety of

wildlife populations and coastal and

marine habitats. The same could also be

said of the approach to the management

of the resources of our oceans and seas –

the evidence is in fish stocks on the brink

of collapse and coastal communities

facing the loss of their livelihoods, income

and food sources.

Attempts to manage marine resources

and to conserve marine biodiversity have

largely been output-oriented and sectoral

in nature. The UK government’s Interim

Report on a Review of Marine Nature

Conservation, published in 2001, revealed

a considerable agreement about the

problems faced by nature conservation

in the marine environment, and a

widespread view that there was

a need to revise and reform the present

arrangements. The report also recognised

that fundamental to the question of

marine nature conservation is its relation

to the wider issues of “managing” the sea.

One difficulty is where to draw the

boundaries for management. All too

often it is easier to address the practices

of a single sector – shipping, for example

– than it is to begin making strategic

management decisions about the

exploitation of a renewable, living

resource. This is particularly so when the

rate of renewal of the resource is highly

variable; the vulnerability to

environmental change, such as global

warming, is high; and the early life stages

are acutely or chronically sensitive to toxic

chemicals and UV light.

This Marine Update develops the

thinking that an ecosystem approach is

about managing the demands we place

on the environment. Recognising the

need for an “ecosystem approach” is

nothing new – it appears in many global

and regional frameworks. Frequently,

discussions are concerned with “the

management of ecosystems” and are

focused purely on environmental matters.

But an ecosystem approach should be

about integrating environmental, social

and economic objectives so that the

needs of humans and those of wildlife,

fish stocks and even marine processes can

be met both in the short and long term.

This Update makes proposals for

consideration on the delivery of

an ecosystem approach. These include

strategic assessment of the sea area to

be managed, the identification of threats

and root causes, and the setting of

a common vision. It also discusses the

need for strategic decision-making

mechanisms and the development of

the necessary tools to manage activities

and protect biodiversity.

Delivering an ecosystemapproachFundamentally, an ecosystem approach is

about managing the activities and

demands that humans make on the

environment, not about managing

the ecosystems themselves. Six steps

are identified for the delivery of such

an approach:

1. Setting a vision and environmental

goal setting;

2. Developing an integrated marine policy;

3. Assessing the resource and the status

of the resource;

4. Decision-making mechanisms and

a spatial planning system;

5. Identification of delivery tools; and

6. A strategy for delivery

1. Setting a vision andenvironmental goal settingTo deliver an ecosystem approach

successfully, it is essential to have a vision

In the past, attempts to manage marine resources and to conserve marine biodiversity have beenlargely output-oriented and sectoral in nature.

PJ

BA

NK

S,

WW

F-U

K

and to set environmental goals and targets.

The vision should provide a framework

which incorporates overarching principles,

such as:

• the need for wider management of the

marine environment (i.e. spatial

planning, not only conservation);

• ecologically sustainable management;

• the setting of integrated

environmental, social and economic

objectives;

• adoption of the precautionary

principle; and

• introduction of the polluter and user

pays principles.

These principles should remain at the

heart of any approach to the manage-

ment of the oceans, seas and coasts.

The development of a vision should

allow for full stakeholder involvement

leading to greater acceptance of a common

vision. Above all, it should provide an

opportunity for a new ethos to be devel-

oped for marine management – one

which moves away from the current

systems of narrow, exclusive, sectoral

management to a new system of

stewardship, inclusive decision-making,

and integrated management providing

long-term sustainability and a healthy

marine environment.

A vision needs measurable goals and

targets in order to ensure delivery. A goal

could be “a healthy marine environment

supporting a natural diversity of

communities and species, while at the

same time recognising the value of

marine resources to human society”.

These resources, however, have to

be valued and managed sustainably.

A balance is required between the

needs of wildlife and people.

2. Developing an integratedmarine policyAn integrated approach to marine policy

is not a new idea: in 1996, Australia

initiated its Oceans Policy and Canada

passed an Oceans Act, while similar steps

have been taken in New Zealand and the

US. In the UK, a review of marine nature

conservation published an interim report

in March 2001, which stated that “action

is required to address nature conservation

in the marine environment. Retention

of the status quo is not an option”.

In addition, the Prime Minister has

committed himself to publishing a Marine

Stewardship Report in 2002, which will

set out the UK government’s vision and

strategy for the marine environment.

The European Commission started the

process of producing a European Marine

Strategy due to be completed in 2004.

In Australia, one of the reasons for

initiating an Oceans Policy was that an

integrated approach was necessary to

take full advantage of the benefits that

a marine environment offers – be they

economic, environmental, social,

recreational or cultural. Maritime nations

can no longer sustain their use of the

marine environment in the current

sectoral manner, as well as meeting

international obligations and the demands

of their own people and coastal

communities, unless such an approach

is adopted and implemented.

A national oceans policy or integrated

marine policy should be able to harmonise

the many different goals necessary to

ensure sustainable use and protection of

biodiversity within one consistent policy

dealing with an area of sea. A report to

WWF and The Wildlife Trusts, reviewing

the progress in Australia, Canada, and

New Zealand, identified three important

and inter-related aspects that determine

the character of a national oceans policy:

• the perspectives and goals of the

sectors and stakeholders;

• the participatory mechanisms used

for integrating the policy; and

• the integrated marine policy’s

boundaries in both the real and

policy worlds.

3. Assessing the resource and the status of the resource A variety of tools are already available

to manage the use of any environment,

and no doubt these will be developed in

time. Management tools can be broadly

divided into two groups – assessment

tools and delivery tools.

Assessment tools include Strategic

Environmental Assessment (SEA),

which incorporates both socio-economic

and ecological assessment, as well as

threats analysis and root cause analysis.

SEA can involve habitat mapping, risk

analysis, and sensitivity mapping, and

should be used to facilitate decision-

making processes for spatial planning.

Threats analysis is a common tool when

considering the “health” of the marine

environment – but rarely are the drivers

and root causes of a particular threat

fully analysed. Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) should also be

considered an important assessment

tool for specific projects once spatial

planning decisions have been made.

Dedicated marine legislation will

need to back the delivery of tools

assessing the status of the resource

to be managed.

Value of StrategicEnvironmental Assessment(SEA)In 1997, the International Offshore Oil

& Gas Experts meeting in Noordwijk, the

Netherlands, recognised that “Prior

assessment is important and baseline

assessments/studies valuable to predict

impacts. Some parties do not consider

environmental impact assessment(s) to

be sufficient to determine impacts, and

believe that strategic environmental

assessment is necessary to accommodate

cumulative impacts.”

Now the use of SEA as a management

tool is being widely considered.

Perhaps most important to facilitate

spatial planning decisions, SEA helps

determine appropriate sites for

programmes and projects – although in

most cases projects must necessarily be

subject to EIA. SEA encourages

consideration of alternatives not practical

at the project EIA stage and allows

formulation of mitigation measures for

later projects.

Another major benefit of SEA is that it

can allow analysis of the impact of

policies which may not be implemented

through projects. For example, it would

facilitate consideration of continued

exploitation of non-renewable mineral

resources against climatic impacts of

burning fossil fuels and the development

of offshore renewable energy sources

such as wind, wave and tidal power.

Similarly, it could facilitate consideration

of exploitation of severely depleted

renewable resources.

SEA also encourages consideration

of environmental and social objectives

at all levels including policy development,

plans/programmes and specific project

activities. It facilitates consultation

between authorities and enhances public

involvement in evaluation of

environmental aspects of policy, plan

and project formulation. It may also

limit some project EIAs if the impacts

of a sector or new programme are fully

assessed at the SEA stage.

Unlike EIA, SEA allows effective

analysis of cumulative effects and

facilitates consideration of synergistic

effects. It also allows consideration of

long range and delayed impacts. Finally,

it enables more effective consideration

of ancillary and secondary activities.

4. Decision-makingmechanisms and a spatialplanning systemSetting visions, integrating policy and

assessing resources are integral

components of an ecosystem approach,

but the management of any resource

requires appropriate mechanisms to be

developed to facilitate decision-making

and the delivery of the decisions.

Once the resource has been assessed,

the threats identified, and the risks

ascertained, it becomes possible to make

A growing interest is being expressed indeveloping offshore wind farms to provide a renewable energy source in the UK.

Strategic decision-making mechanisms and adequate management tools are needed to protect marine biodiversity.

F B

UN

KE

R,

MA

RIN

ES

EE

N,

WW

F-U

KA

ME

C B

OR

DE

R W

IND

C H

OO

D,

WW

F-U

K

An ecosystem approach is about managing the activities and demands that humans make on the environment, not about managing the ecosystemsthemselves.

spatial planning decisions. Spatial

planning should not only address the

need to locate a variety of maritime

activities but should also be used to

ensure the establishment of a

representative network of marine

protected areas. A planning body needs

to exist to make decisions and to establish

the mechanisms by which decisions will

be made, e.g. majority voting, consensus

and unilateral decision-making.

Stakeholder involvement and

transparency are crucial at this stage.

A wide variety of mechanisms exist for

decision-making, many of which have

cultural aspects that need to be taken into

account. Little attention, however, has

been paid to spatial planning in the

marine environment. Possible options

include establishing a marine department

or maritime planning agency, or

extending the role of local government

offshore. There are already examples in

place and, in most cases, it would make

sense to develop spatial planning

responsibilities by working through these

existing structures. However, the need for

truly innovative spatial planning systems

should not be ruled out. The important

difference to many present structures

would be to ensure that they are truly

holistic and integrated. Dedicated marine

legislation will also be required to put

such structures into place with the

requisite authority.

5. Identification of delivery tools Once spatial planning decisions have

been made about the types of activities

that should be permitted and appropriate

locations identified, tools are required

to deliver ecosystem management.

Delivery tools can be largely grouped

under three headings:

1. Spatial controls – for example,

restrictions on activities within marine

protected areas, consents for

development in specified locations,

permanent or temporary no-go areas,

no exploitation areas, and shipping

designations, such as areas to be avoided;

2. Level controls – for example, conditions

on a consent, or limits on the extraction

of a resource or the volume or

concentration of a polluting discharge;

3. Best practice – including appropriate

technological advances.

Recovery tools may also required to

address the degradation of habitats or

wildlife populations. Recovery tools might

include measures which aim to restore

degraded, damaged or lost habitats

and/or wildlife populations. These might

include, for example, regeneration areas

for fisheries, wetland restoration and

recreation schemes, managed realignment

of flood defences, pollution reduction

programmes and wildlife enhancement

schemes.

The application of these tools requires

flexibility depending on local conditions.

Putting these measures in place requires

not only a decision-making process, but

also a means of monitoring and

evaluating the success of the measures.

Many of these tools already exist.

However, they have been developed

in an ad hoc manner with little or

no integration. A Marine Act could

rationalise the tools available and ensure

that they are complementary.

6. A strategy for deliveryWith regard to delivery, alongside

enforcement of planning decisions and

using the various delivery tools as

appropriate, it is also important to ensure

that appropriate monitoring and

N M

OR

RIS

ON

, W

WF

-UK

WW

F-U

K R

egis

tere

d C

harit

y N

umb

er 1

0812

47 P

rinte

d o

n re

cycl

ed p

aper

mad

e fr

om 1

00 p

er c

ent p

ost c

onsu

mer

was

te

Pan

da

sym

bol

© 1

986

WW

F ®

WW

F R

egis

tere

d T

rad

emar

k 1

557/

Sep

tem

ber

200

2

evaluation procedures are in place, and to

consider new research programmes that

might be required to better inform the

decision-making process. The use of fiscal

measures and financial incentives will also

be important.

It will therefore be necessary to

develop a strategy for delivery, which

would be fundamental at the outset of

any new system for the management

of the marine environment. A strategy

should also include monitoring and

evaluation, to ensure that the approach

works and that the controls placed on

the management of various activities

are indeed sufficient to ensure that

the marine resource is being managed

sustainably and that the ecosystem is

not compromised.

In developing this strategy,

consideration should be given to the

complexity and appropriateness of

existing regulatory systems. In many

countries, the piecemeal approach

adopted to date has resulted in complex

marine regulatory mechanisms that are

confusing to manage and enforce, and

result in loopholes. An approach such as

that outlined here will inevitably require

sound, comprehensive legislation to

ensure implementation and enforcement.

In particular, the assessment phase,

spatial planning mechanisms and delivery

tools need a legal basis. A single piece

of marine environmental management

legislation offers the opportunity to

simplify and update existing regulations

while setting in place a regulatory system

for the delivery of an ecosystem

approach. This would simplify the

regulatory system for managing the

marine environment – it would also

increase transparency and be welcomed

by stakeholders.

The system outlined here should also be

responsive to emerging issues such as

the release of genetically modified

organisms, bioprospecting and seabed

mining. It will also be able to respond

to the anticipated increase in existing

demands – more food (aquaculture,

fishing), more trade (port development,

shipping), climate changes and rising

sea levels (coastal defences) and greater

leisure opportunities (coastal develop-

ment) for example. The assessment

stage should enable assessment of the

risks and the most appropriate spatial

location for an activity to be sited.

If insufficient information exists to

produce a sound decision, a precautionary

approach would be applied – if inform-

ation were sufficient to make sound

decisions, the appropriate delivery tools

would be identified and the evaluation

and monitoring should ensure that the

activities resulted in no significant threat

to ecosystem integrity.

In summary, an ecosystem approach

is about managing the activities and

demands that humans make on the

environment. It is also about integrating

environmental objectives with social

and economic objectives. Through the

delivery of an ecosystem approach,

many of the pressures on the marine

environment, wildlife, habitats

and their resources can begin to be

addressed.

It is anticipated that the demands

made by humans on the marine and

coastal environment will grow in the

coming decades. The sheer importance

of the marine environment, along with

the scale of the problems facing it

and the international commitments

that have already been agreed, warrants

an international vision. But in the end,

the delivery of an ecosystem approach

in UK waters depends on action at a

local, regional and national level.

An ecosystem approach integrates environmental, social and economic objectives for the benefitof humans, wildlife, and marine processes.

WWF-UK

Panda House, Weyside ParkGodalming, Surrey GU7 1XRt: +44 (0)1483 426444f: +44 (0)1483 426409www.wwf.org.uk

Taking action for a living planet

The Wildlife Trusts

The Kiln, Waterside, Mather RoadNewark, Nottinghamshire NG24 1WTt: +44 (0)1636 677711f: +44 (0)1636 670001www.wildlifetrusts.org.uk

F B

UN

KE

R,

MA

RIN

ES

EE

N,

WW

F-U

K