regional workshop on marine spatial planning (msp):...

REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON MARINESPATIAL PLANNING (MSP):

A TECHNICAL LEARNING SESSION

BACKGROUND INFORMATION PAPER

1-2 JUNE 2011, HALIFAX, CANADA

1

Table of Contents1

1 Background ..................................................................................................................................11.1 A Technical Learning Session...............................................................................................11.2 Instruments and Operational Aspects of MSP......................................................................11.3 Limits of the Workshop.........................................................................................................21.4 Anticipated Outcomes...........................................................................................................3

2 Relevant Definitions.....................................................................................................................32.1 Ecosystem-Based Approach..................................................................................................32.2 Integrated Management vs. MSP vs. Ocean Zoning.............................................................3

3 Status of MSP development in Canada, The US and Europe.......................................................53.1 MSP in Canada......................................................................................................................53.2 The US Approach Towards MSP..........................................................................................63.3 Experience with MSP in Europe...........................................................................................7

4 MSP Tools.....................................................................................................................................94.1 Assessment of Human Activities and Mapping....................................................................94.2 Measuring Cumulative Impacts............................................................................................94.3 Risk Analysis.......................................................................................................................104.4 Challenges of Data Collection............................................................................................10

5 Linkages Between MSP and Marine Conservation Planning.....................................................115.1 Marine Protected Areas as Part of MSP..............................................................................11

6 The role of MSP in Planning and Facilitating Sustainable Economic Development.................126.1 MSP Creates a Framework for Sustainable Economic Development.................................12

7 Outlook.......................................................................................................................................13

i

Background Information Paper, 1-2 June 2011, Halifax

1 BACKGROUND As a follow-up to the Ottawa Oceans Summiton marine spatial planning (MSP) in June2010, the main objective of this regionalworkshop is to provide a technical learningsession for government staff, industry andstakeholders about the practical utility of de-veloping and implementing MSP in the Mari-times Region.

1.1 A TECHNICAL LEARNING SESSION

The workshop will largely focus on instru-ments that can be used for MSP implementa-tion. Objectives of the workshop are:

1. To analyze the assessment of the re-gion regarding existing and predictablefuture human activities at sea;2. To learn from “MSP in practice” ex-amples, for instance in Massachusetts andRhode Island;3. To discuss the importance of MSP foreconomic development-related decisionmaking in the region, e.g. with regard torenewable offshore energy, pipelines andcables, and other use interactions;4. To elaborate on the linkages betweenmarine conservation planning and MSP.

The workshop will bring together expertsthat have been involved in marine spatialplanning processes to share their expertiseand knowledge. Additionally, the workshopwill explore the main characteristics neededfor an MSP process from an economic pointof view in order to aid the responsible andsustainable development of marine regions inline with healthy ecosystems.

1.2 INSTRUMENTS AND OPERATIONALASPECTS OF MSP

The workshop offers a learning opportunityfor all stakeholders with regard to the instru-ments that can be used within an MSP pro-cess and its operational aspects. This means that individual workshop ses-sions have been developed that are dedicatedto specific instruments for MSP. The toolsthat will be tackled during the workshop arefurther described in section 4 below. The workshop does not intend to provide“ready to use” solutions, nor does it seek todevelop concrete strategies or measures thatwill be implemented in the Maritimes Re-gion. Rather, the workshop aims at increasing theknowledge level about the process of MSP, itsdifferent stages and tools, and elaboratinghow cross-sectoral decision-making based onsound integrated process can work in prac-tice.Against this background, it is also importantto acknowledge the direct link between thisworkshop and the existing framework ofCanada’s ocean policy.In January 1997, the Government of Canadabrought the Oceans Act into force. The OceansAct calls for the Minister of Fisheries andOceans to “lead and facilitate the develop-ment and implementation of a nationalstrategy for the management of estuarine,coastal and marine ecosystems [...].”1 TheMinister is also called to develop and imple-ment related policies and programs2 and to“encourage activities necessary to foster theunderstanding, management and sustainable

1 Oceans Act, Part II, Oceans Management Strategy,paragraph 292 Cf. Oceans Act, Part II, Oceans Management Strategy,paragraph 32

1

REGIONAL WORKSHOP ON MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING (MSP): A TECHNICAL LEARNING SESSION

development of oceans and marine re-sources.”3 In 2002, the Government of Canada adoptedCanada’s Oceans Strategy which responds tothe Oceans Act requirement to develop a na-tional ocean management strategy. Thestrategy “seeks to implement a program ofIntegrated Management planning to engagepartners in the planning and managing ofocean activities. [...].” Integrated manage-ment establishes decision-making structuresthat consider both the conservation and pro-tection of ecosystems, while at the same timeproviding opportunities for creating wealthin oceans-related economies and communit-ies. While the Act lays the more general founda-tion for integrated policy making across gov-ernment departments, the Strategy providesmore explicit guidance for integrated plan-ning and management of the oceans, theirnatural resources and ecosystems.The Oceans Act and Canada’s Oceans Strategyprovide a framework for the developmentand implementation of MSP in Canadian wa-ters. However, despite the designation of fiveLarge Ocean Management Areas (LOMAs)under the Oceans Act in Canada and the de-velopment of two Integrated ManagementPlans (IMPs) for the Eastern Scotian Shelf(ESSIM) and the Beaufort Sea, a comprehens-ive approach to MSP has not been used inCanada so far.

1.3 LIMITS OF THE WORKSHOP

MSP can be described as a circular process.Figure 1 gives an overview of the differentstages of a comprehensive MSP process.

3 Oceans Act, Part III, Powers, Duties and Functions ofthe Minister, paragraph 40

Figure 1: MSP Cycle

Source: PlanCoast Handbook on IMSP, www.plancoast.eu

In addition to the tools that are used through-out this process – e.g., assessing human activ-ities and the environmental status of a givensea area, measuring cumulative effects of hu-man activities on an ecosystem, or risk ana-lysis of certain developments – other factorsalso exist that determine the design and suc-cess of MSP. Among those factors are: a clear political willand mandate to embark on MSP; an author-ity or government department has beenclearly identified and assigned to take thelead on MSP development and implementa-tion; the issue of accountability for the MSPprocess and resulting consequences has beenclarified; the legal status of the outcomes ofan MSP process has been decided upon (i.e.,legally binding or guidance for governmentdecision-making and policy design); and spe-cific legislation is deemed to be necessary toenforce MSP results.Although the above-mentioned factors areextremely important, this workshop does notaim to cover all of them.

2


Rather than tackling all stages of an MSP pro-cess and thus being only able to scratch thesurface for each of these steps, it has been de-cided to focus on the instruments and tech-nical practicalities of MSP. This is not only to allow for a more in-depthdiscussion, but also to focus on implementa-tion needs for the Maritimes Region whereefforts are now underway to advance spatialand temporal approaches to achieve oceanmanagement objectives. This offers excellent opportunities to buildupon existing data regarding human activit-ies at sea, as well as developed mapping andGIS material. Similarly, coastal planning andrisk analysis work in the NorthumberlandStrait portion of the Gulf of St. Lawrence andmulti-stakeholder resource planning effortsin the Southwest New Brunswick portion ofthe Bay of Fundy have considered MSP aspart of the approach to achieve managementobjectives.

1.4 ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES

As mentioned above, the workshop is notaiming to determine the design and concreteuse of MSP in the Maritimes Region. However, the learning opportunity that theworkshop provides will help to raise aware-ness about MSP, how the process can poten-tially be used in the framework of Canada’soceans policy and how its implementationcould look in practice at a regional level.Additionally, the learning experience mayhave some policy influence at both provincialand national government levels.The workshop could kick-start a series of fur-ther initiatives or workshops that would aimto continue the debate about the differentstages of a comprehensive MSP process andwhat aspects and information have to be con-sidered for practical implementation.

The workshop results will be captured by akey messages report that will be distributedamongst workshop participants.

2 RELEVANT DEFINITIONS

2.1 ECOSYSTEM-BASED APPROACH

Ecosystem-based management is the under-pinning principle of MSP. In other words,ecosystem-based management provides theoverarching framework within which MSPcan be used to influence where and when hu-man activities occur in marine spaces.Thereby, ecosystem-based management is anintegrated approach to management thatconsiders the entire ecosystem, including hu-mans. “The goal of ecosystem-based manage-ment is to maintain an ecosystem in ahealthy, productive and resilient condition sothat it can provide the goods and services hu-mans want and need.”4

Ecosystem-based management considers thecumulative impacts of different sectors andhuman activities on a specific ecosystem andemphasizes the protection of ecosystemstructure, functioning, and key processes.5

2.2 INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT VS.MSP VS. OCEAN ZONING

During the past decade, it has become com-mon knowledge that the goods and servicesprovided by marine ecosystems are seriouslycompromised. This knowledge has led to ashift in marine science towards more solu-tion-driven research. It has also moved mar-ine policy from management of individualsectoral activities to integrated, ecosystem-based management.6

4 Ehler et al. Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-step ap-proach toward ecosystem-based management. page 245 cf. Ehler et al. Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-stepapproach toward ecosystem-based management. page24

3


Integrated management (IM), also referred toas sea use management, is a central principleof Canada’s Oceans Act. It is strategic and for-ward-looking by nature, and a commitmentto planning and managing human activitiesin a comprehensive manner while consider-ing all measures necessary for the conserva-tion, protection and sustainable use of oceanresources and the shared use of ocean areas.7 DFO defines IM as: “A continuous processthrough which decisions are made for thesustainable use, development, and protectionof areas and resources. IM acknowledges theinterrelationships that exist among differentuses and the environments they potentiallyaffect. It is designed to overcome thefragmentation inherent in a sectoral manage-ment approach, analyzes the implications ofdevelopment, conflicting uses and promoteslinkages and harmonization among variousactivities.”8

The IM planning process as described in thePolicy and Operational Framework for IntegratedManagement of Estuarine, Coastal and MarineEnvironments in Canada involves six inter-re-lated stages:

• defining and assessing a managementarea;

• engaging affected interests;• developing an Integrated

Management plan;• endorsement of plan by decision

making authorities;• implementing the plan; and• monitoring and evaluating outcomes.

6 Cf. Crowder, L., Norse, E., Essential ecological insightsfor marine ecosystem-based management and marinespatial planning, page 7727 Cf. http://policyresearch.gc.ca/page.asp?pagenm=2010-0045_06, visited June 30, 20108 http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/publications/cosframework-cadresoc/page07-eng.asp

To date, Canada’s IM policy has mainly de-livered on the first three steps. Five LOMAshave been identified and IM plans have beendeveloped for two of these areas: ESSIM andthe Beaufort Sea. The areas have been intensively assessed, hu-man activities have been mapped and allconcerned stakeholders have been involvedin the process. The vision, goals, guidingprinciples and approaches of these plans,however, remain at a very general, strategiclevel and provide little guidance for concreteimplementation.MSP is “the public process of analyzing andallocating the spatial and temporal distribu-tion of human activities in marine areas toachieve ecological, economic and social ob-jectives that are usually specified through apolitical process.”9 Hence, MSP is not a policy onto itself but apolicy tool that is embedded in IM. Throughthe process of MSP, ocean space can be “ana-lyzed and allocated in a way that minimizesconflicts among human activities, as well asconflicts between human activities andnature, and, where possible, maximizes com-patibilities among sectors.”10

MSP offers the means to advance Canada’sIM policy and program, and deliver on theremaining steps described in the Policy andOperational Framework, namely the imple-mentation of the IM plans and the monitor-ing and evaluation of outcomes. MSP does not require user-user or user-envir-onment conflicts to justify its implementation.Rather, it provides a framework to developappropriate management strategies to pre-vent conflicts both at present and in the fu-ture, and manage the cumulative impacts ofhuman activities on the marine environment.

9 Ehler et al. Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-step ap-proach toward ecosystem-based management. page 1810 Ehler et al. Marine Spatial Planning: a step-by-stepapproach toward ecosystem-based management. page24

4


MSP thus assists in the maintenance and pro-tection of marine ecosystem integrity.The strongest element that distinguishes MSPfrom IM is its spatial dimension in that it util-izes existing knowledge and data (gatheredthrough the IM processes) about the marineecosystem and human activities at sea andapplies it to concrete spatial and temporalmanagement planning for marine space. Ocean zoning “is a set of regulatory measuresused to implement marine spatial plans -akin to land-use plans - that specify allow-able uses in all areas of the targetecosystem(s). Different zones accommodatedifferent uses, or different levels of use. [...]All zoning plans are portrayed on maps,since the regulations are always area-based.”11

It is important to recognize that MSP is notequal to zoning. Zoning is only one tool thatcan be used within the MSP process, besideother regulatory measures, such as criteriasetting, identification of thresholds, and theuse of planning targets and principles.

3 STATUS OF MSP DEVELOP-MENT IN CANADA, THE USAND EUROPEGenerally, two main reasons can be identifiedthat led internationally to the application ofMSP: economic development, particularlywith regard to new marine uses like offshorewind and renewable energy, and marine con-servation and protection, mainly through en-vironmental law or commitments to environ-mental conventions that required establish-ment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs).

3.1 MSP IN CANADA

The Oceans Act, Canada’s Oceans Strategy, andthe Policy and Operational Framework for Integ-

11 Agardy. Ocean Zoning. page 6

rated Management of Estuarine, Coastal andMarine Environments in Canada provide thepolicy framework and guide Canada’s ap-proach to oceans management.As mentioned above, the approach iscentered on the principle of Integrated Man-agement (IM), which seeks to establish de-cision-making structures that consider boththe conservation and protection of ecosys-tems, while at the same time providing op-portunities for creating wealth in oceans-re-lated economies and communities.IM efforts in Canada are being undertakenthrough an area-based approach that sup-ports marine planning, management and de-cision making at appropriate spatial scales,from regional to site-specific. It also promotesan ecosystem approach to management, withconsideration of various interactions amonghuman activities, and between those activit-ies and the marine environment. IM in Canada is implemented through a re-gional approach. Therefore, it is important todetermine the key social, technical, legislat-ive/policy and political challenges to advan-cing spatial and temporal planning at a re-gional level. Additionally, constraints have tobe identified that could affect the modeling offuture scenarios of human use in a given re-gion. Knowledge about these factors wouldaid the development of large-scale marinespatial plans that could include area-basedregulations and zoning. It could also be relevant to analyze spatialproducts and services that have already beenproduced at a regional level in order to learnfrom gained experience and identify room forimprovement. Five priority planning areas, termed LargeOcean Management Areas (LOMAs), havebeen identified for the initial development ofIM plans. The Eastern Scotian Shelf is one ofthe five priority areas.The Eastern Scotian Shelf Integrated Manage-ment (ESSIM) process is an offshore-focused

5


effort to develop and implement an integ-rated ocean management plan for a large por-tion of the Scotian Shelf, off Nova Scotia. Although the longer term aim is to expandthe integrated management process to coverthe full Scotian Shelf, as well as Canadianportions of the Gulf of Maine and Bay ofFundy, the current planning area focuses onthe Eastern Scotian Shelf. Work is also under-way to link with coastal management pro-cesses in Nova Scotia.One of the key aims of the ESSIM plan is toprovide guidance for a sustainable and prac-tical balance of ocean use. To facilitate this,the process brings together ocean users,ocean interests and regulators to work to-ward achieving shared objectives for a largemarine space. A comparison of the objectivesfor the ESSIM plan and the principles andpractices that have emerged from marinespatial planning efforts around the worldsuggests that a significant component of planimplementation can be advanced throughmarine spatial planning. The ESSIM plan recognizes that marine spa-tial planning provides a useful toolkit formanaging the demands on ocean space andmarine ecosystems. It can help improve de-cision making, providing clarity and cer-tainty about what activities are suitable inparticular areas, and what areas need to bemanaged more carefully or protected. Anumber of the management objectives con-tained in the ESSIM plan can be addressedthrough spatial and temporal planning andmanagement approaches, particularly thoserelated to reducing use conflicts and the con-servation of biodiversity or habitat.For a full discussion on the application ofMSP approaches on the Scotian Shelf, seethe background reference document for thisworkshop by T. Hall et al. “Advancing ob-jectives-based, integrated ocean manage-ment through marine spatial planning: cur-rent and future directions on the ScotianShelf off Nova Scotia, Canada.”

3.2 THE US APPROACH TOWARDS MSP

In the United States, coastal and marine spa-tial planning (CMSP) is defined as a “com-prehensive, adaptive, integrated, ecosystem-based, and transparent spatial planning pro-cess, based on sound science, for analyzingcurrent and anticipated uses of ocean,coastal, and Great Lakes areas.”In July 2010, US President Obama signed Ex-ecutive Order 13547, establishing a nationalocean policy using coastal and marine spatialplanning (CMSP) as a tool to achieve ecosys-tem-based management of the United StatesGreat Lakes, coasts, and ocean with the goalsof ecosystem health and sustainable econom-ic development. CMSP identifies areas most suitable for vari-ous types or classes of activities in order toreduce conflicts among uses, reduce environ-mental impacts, facilitate compatible uses,and preserve critical ecosystem services tomeet economic, environmental, security, andsocial objectives. In practical terms, CMSP provides a publicpolicy process for society to better determinehow the ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes aresustainably used and protected - now and forfuture generations.The US is intending to implement CMSPthrough a regional approach in accordancewith the variability of US marine areas. Giv-en the likely involvement of existing regionalgovernance structures in developing CMSPlans, large marine ecosystems (“LMEs”which are similar to the LOMAs in Canada)have been created to provide a consistentplanning scale.The Executive Order also established a Na-tional Ocean Council (NOC) to oversee adop-tion of regional coastal and marine spatialplans. For this purpose, the US will be sub-divided into nine regional planning areasbased on LMEs to ensure enclosure of the en-tire EEZ and continental shelf area, and to al-low incorporation of existing state or regional

6


ocean governance bodies. These nine regionsare: Alaska /Arctic, Caribbean, Great Lakes,Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Pa-cific Islands, South Atlantic, and the WestCoast.The NOC is comprised of federal agencieswith authority over coastal and ocean issues.In November 2010, the NOC met for the firsttime, setting in motion a five-year timelineduring which all nine regions are expected tocomplete CMS plans.The NOC will work together with states andfederally-recognized tribes to create regionalplanning bodies, coinciding with the region-al areas. Each regional planning body is requested toensure representation from all states within aregional area. Due to interrelations betweenactivities taking place outside the planningarea and CMSP decisions inside the area, exofficio membership on regional planning bod-ies can be extended to neighboring states toaid integration and planning consistency.Prior to the signature of the Executive Order,several States took the lead in embarking onintegrated ocean management processes, inparticular Massachusetts and Rhode Island.Both States have developed and adopted in-tegrated ocean management plans: the Mas-sachusetts Ocean Management Plan (Decem-ber 31, 2009) and the Rhode Island OceanSpecial Area Management Plan (OceanSAMP, October 19, 2010). Both plans comprise broad sets of strategicgoals and objectives. The planning for off-shore wind energy development and the des-ignation of appropriate sites for such a devel-opment can be considered as one of the majordrivers for the development of both plans.However, ecosystem-based management isconsidered the overarching guiding objectivefor the development and implementation ofboth ocean management plans.Extensive scientific research was undertakenand data collected to support the develop-

ment of the marine plans in both Massachu-setts and Rhode Island, including bathy-metry, climate related issues such as extremestorms and wave heights, data related tomarine habitats and species, etc.Besides Massachusetts and Rhode Island,Florida established marine zoning for themanagement of the Florida Keys NationalMarine Sanctuary. As the objectives of thismanagement are foremost to protect biologic-al diversity, to reduce user conflicts, and tolessen the concentrated impact to marine or-ganisms in heavily used areas, zoning is usedas a management tool to focus on small por-tions of the Sanctuary. Broader, un-zonedportions are managed by set ecosystem cri-teria addressing topics such as water qualityor habitat degradation.Different zone types have been establishedwhere each is designed to reduce resourcedamage and threats to environmental quality,while allowing uses that are compatible withresource protection. The Sanctuary’s zoningprogram is regularly evaluated by updatingthe management plan on a five-year timeframe. This appraisal process is accompaniedby a variety of research activities and mightlead to modifications or even elimination ofzones.12

3.3 EXPERIENCE WITH MSP IN EUROPE

The driving forces behind recent examples ofMSP implementation in Europe (Belgium,The Netherlands, and Germany) are fore-most the licensing requests for offshore winddevelopment and other marine uses in com-bination with the requirement (in accordancewith European Union Environmental Law) todesignate Marine Protected Areas within theso-called Natura 2000 network. All MSP ap-proaches are relatively young and have beendeveloped between the early 2000s andtoday. 12 For further information please visithttp://floridakeys.noaa.gov/resource_protection/welcome.html#zoning

7


Norway has developed two integrated re-gional management plans thus far: (a) theIntegrated Management Plan for the Barents Seaand the Lofoten Area (2006) and the IntegratedManagement Plan for the Marine Environmentof the Norwegian Sea (2009). These manage-ment plans clarify the overall framework forboth existing and new activities, and seek tofacilitate the co-existence of different indus-tries, particularly the fisheries industry, mari-time transport and the petroleum industry.The triggers behind MSP in Norway were thehigh ecological values in Norwegian watersand the need to secure continued value cre-ation based on the resources of the sea areasin question whilst protecting the marine en-vironment.Portugal is currently developing MSP for allits waters, distinguishing (in relation to dif-ferent challenges, demands and needs)between the sea area off the main coast ofPortugal and the areas around the Azoresand Madeira. The overall objective of Por-tuguese MSP is to manage the present andfuture uses and activities of marine space inclose integration with coastal zone manage-ment. Main triggers for Portugal’s activitiesin MSP were the adoption of the IntegratedEU Maritime Policy, as well as the general in-terest to maintain control over Portugal’smarine and coastal development and thecountry’s proposal for the extension of thecontinental shelf.So far, only German spatial plans have leg-ally binding status, i.e. they are binding foreverybody. All other countries have decidedto use MSP as a guiding tool. The plans havebeen agreed upon and signed by all relevantgovernment departments and are used tosteer government decision- and policy-mak-ing.The UK and Sweden have adopted nationallegislation for the management of marine re-sources. The related acts in both countriesforesee the integrated planning of all waters

under national jurisdiction, but marine spa-tial plans have not yet been established.More concretely the UK Marine and CoastalAccess Act received Royal Assent in November2009. It provides the framework for the develop-ment of a strategic marine planning system thatclarifies marine objectives and priorities for thefuture, and directs decision makers and users to-wards more efficient, sustainable use and protec-tion of resources. It is intended to create a seriesof marine spatial plans. The plans have yet to beestablished. The Act also creates streamlined licensing anddecision-making processes. A new authority – theMarine Management Organization (MMO) hasbeen established that will be responsible for theissuing of the majority of marine licenses. It isintended to simplify the license applicationprocedure for operators.Sweden has adopted the Government Bill2008/09:170 A coherent Swedish MaritimePolicy. The Bill is seen as the starting point forthe Government’s cohesive approach to marineissues. Sweden has also launched an inquiry tocreate a new agency for marine and waterenvironment issues. Responsibilities will beshifted mainly from the Swedish EnvironmentalProtection Agency, the Swedish Board ofFisheries and the five Swedish Water Authorities.It is envisaged to use MSP for the implementationof the Swed i sh mar i t ime po l i cy. Theresponsibility for planning will probably besha red by the Swed i sh s t a t e and themunicipalities. A government agency will begiven responsibility for planning in the EEZ andan inquiry has been appointed to proposelegislation for this planning.

4 MSP TOOLSMSP is a neutral instrument for improved de-cision-making, providing a framework for ar-bitrating between human activities at sea andfor managing their impact on the marine en-

8


vironment. Its objective is to balance sectoralinterests, achieve sustainable use of marineresources and optimize the use of marinespace. In order to do so, the best availableknowledge has to be used to inform the plan-ning process and the subsequent manage-ment decisions. Different tools can be used tosupport the process.

4.1 ASSESSMENT OF HUMAN ACTIVIT-IES AND MAPPING

Maps are a common language: they are un-derstandable for any stakeholder concernedby and involved in ocean management. Theassessment of human activities in a given seaarea and mapping of these are essential toolsto reduce the complexity of marine ecosys-tems by showing interactions, delineatingareas of certain potential or specific charac-teristics, and making complex data easily ac-cessible. The assessment of the status of an ocean areaand mapping play an essential role for stake-holder engagement. International experienceillustrates that it is often not until maps arepresented that industries, local communitiesor fishermen are buying-in and contributingto the MSP process. Maps make informationtangible and provide a platform for peoplewith local knowledge to engage and correctinformation where necessary.There are at least three different types of in-formation that should be mapped by an MSPprocess:

(a) Biophysical conditions. Assessingand mapping these conditions identifiesdistinctive assemblages or communitiesof marine organisms, such as kelp forests,coral reefs, or shellfish beds. (b) Human uses. Mapping socio-econom-ic data and information identifies the spa-tial distribution of marine uses like fish-ing, aquaculture, shipping or oil and gasexploitation, new uses like offshore re-newable energy sites, as well as recre-

ational uses like boating, scuba diving orwhale watching.(c) Political and legal arrangements. Jur-isdictional overlays would help to delin-eate areas covered by existing manage-ment arrangements such as fisheries clos-ures, military zones, national marine re-serves, etc.

Taken together in integrated maps, these bio-physical, socio-economic and jurisdictionaloverlays can produce meaningful operationaluse scenarios of places suitable for certainuses or sensitive to particular activities. Res-ulting maps provide an appropriate tool onwhich decision making and informed plan-ning processes can be based.

4.2 MEASURING CUMULATIVE IM-PACTS

Marine ecologists and oceanographers havebeen actively developing new techniques tounderstand the spatial and temporal dynam-ics and interlinkages of the marine environ-ment. As described above, MSP is embedded in IMand underpinned by the principles of ecosys-tem-based management. This differs fromtraditional approaches that usually focus on asingle species, sector, activity or concern. In-stead, ecosystem-based management con-siders the cumulative impacts of differentsectors and activities. Sound MSP has to be based on cumulativeimpacts and effects of human activities at sea.First attempts notwithstanding, methodolo-gies to measure cumulative effects are not yetin place, both regarding the occurrence of hu-man activities and their differing intensity.Cumulative effects assessment approachesare also lacking in legally required proced-ures such as environmental impact assess-ments.The consideration of cumulative impacts suf-fers from science and knowledge gaps, as

9


well as from lacking institutionalizationwithin the IM process. The impact of any kind of human activity onthe marine ecosystem depends on:

• What it affects (species, communities,habitats);

• Its intensity;• Its spatial and temporal frequency;• The resistance of the ecosystem to the

activity; and• The recovery time of the ecosystem.

Within the ongoing IM process at the PacificNorth Coast LOMA (PNCIMA) first attemptshave been undertaken to map and quantifycumulative impacts on the ecosystem.The methods that are used incorporate:

1. The assembling of spatial informationon use and intensity;2. The identification of key stressors res-ulting from these activities;3. The determination of the distance towhich individual activities have an im-pact from their point of occurrence (zoneof influence);4. The application of a sensitivity scorethat translates the relative impact of dif-ferent activities on different habitats;5. The modeling of a spatially explicitimpact score for each activity-habitatcombination; and6. The calculation of the cumulative im-pact of activities, i.e. the additive impactsof all activities over the different habitats.

Within the Maritimes Region, DFO is em-barking on a similar process to advance spa-tial planning and decision support.

4.3 RISK ANALYSIS

Risk is about understanding the likelihood ofan occurrence and degree of impact. Under-

standing and controlling both these dimen-sions through meaningful risk assessment iscritical. Therefore, risk assessment and ana-lysis can be an important tool in the frame-work of MSP development and implementa-tion.Under DFO’s Policy for Managing the Im-pacts of Fisheries on Sensitive Benthic Areas,DFO will conduct a risk analysis using a pro-posed Ecological Risk Analysis Framework.The analysis will be based on all data collec-ted from fishing activity and relevant dataand information from other sources, on a sci-entific basis. Other sources could includedata from research by other government de-partments, provincial governments, non-gov-ernmental organizations, academics, and Ab-original, local and traditional knowledge. The risk analysis will provide information onthe likelihood of serious or irreversible harmfishing may have on the sensitive benthicarea and key ecosystem components and thelevel of harm and its reversibility, both interms of magnitude and scale, if any. It willpresent and consider the implications ofuncertainties that remain.13

DFO is also developing an ecological risk-based approach to coastal management in theNorthumberland Strait portion of the Gulf ofSt. Lawrence.

4.4 CHALLENGES OF DATA COLLECTION

The above-mentioned tools rely strongly on asound data and information base. Therefore,knowledge about the dissemination of spatialinformation, as well as existing risks or con-cerns regarding sharing spatial informationwithin a region is a prerequisite to embark ona sound marine spatial planning process. MSP is a participatory approach, involvingstakeholders throughout the entire process,13 http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/peches-fisheries/fish-ren-peche/sff-cpd/benthi-eng.htm

10


including monitoring and evaluation. An ap-propriate stakeholder validation processshould be determined early in the MSP pro-cess to verify the accuracy of mapped dataand thus improve public acceptance of theprocess.

5 LINKAGES BETWEEN MSPAND MARINE CONSERVATIONPLANNING

5.1 MARINE PROTECTED AREAS ASPART OF MSP

Canada’s Federal Marine Protected AreasStrategy aims for the “establishment of a net-work of marine protected areas, establishedand managed within an integrated oceansmanagement framework, that contributes tothe health of Canada’s oceans and marineecosystems.”14 The Oceans Act provides DFO with a leadingand facilitating role in this endeavor. Achiev-ing the Federal Marine Protected AreasStrategy’s objectives and the supportingmeasures are a shared responsibility of thefederal departments and agencies with MPAmandates, namely DFO, EnvironmentCanada and the Parks Canada Agency. Since the Strategy’s adoption in 2005 meas-ures have been undertaken to designateMPAs and establish a network in Canadianwaters. Despite the attempts to manageMPAs in an IM framework, the network hasnot yet been established. This is partly due to the fact that the lead de-partments do not have exclusive jurisdiction-al authority and a mandate to deliver MSP,but they do have a strong mandate to planfor and establish a network of MPAs.

14 Canada’s Federal Marine Protected Areas Strategy,page 3

It seems obvious that both MPA planningand MSP are closely linked to each other withMSP being the more comprehensive, integ-rated approach. The designation of MPAswithin an MSP framework could be de-scribed as the “environmental pillar” of theentire MSP process.Both processes require similar data collectionand information gathering. Planning a net-work of MPAs involves mapping of humanactivities, and the characterization of socio-e-conomic values, which is also a critical stepfor MSP. Within the context of the existing multiplemandate-based authorities for establishingzones through IM planning and regulatoryprocesses and the clear political mandate forMPA planning, mapping of human activityand socio-economic values that is needed forMPA network planning in the short-termcould be used to advance more comprehens-ive MSP in the Maritimes Region in the longterm.Some marine stakeholders support this ideaand have highlighted that MSP could be theappropriate approach to “broaden” the as-sessment, incorporating all marine uses andactivities and integrating marine protectioninto a holistic MSP regime.In order to identify synergies and commonal-ities between spatial planning approaches forconservation planning and MSP it is import-ant to further analyze data and informationneeds and management requirements forboth processes.

11


6 THE ROLE OF MSP IN PLAN-NING AND FACILITATINGSUSTAINABLE ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT

6.1 MSP CREATES A FRAMEWORK FORSUSTAINABLE ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT

MSP provides an appropriate framework toassess and explain the role of each marinesector in a given sea area and thus integrateall uses in an entire ecosystem-based man-agement regime. It can aid the enhancementof economic prosperity and promote the ful-filling of sectoral mandates in a more sustain-able and environmentally friendly way.MSP does not aim to hinder use. Rather itaims to create a framework for society to op-erate so that unwanted effects are minimizedand desired effects are maximized.Countries utilizing or preparing MSP believethat it provides significant economic bene-fits.15 The likely effects of MSP implementa-tion include:

• enhanced coordination and simplifieddecision processes;

• enhanced legal certainty for all stakeholders in the marine arena;

• enhanced cross-border cooperation; and

15 The UK for instance carried out a study on economicbenefits of MSP to accompany the development of itsMarine and Coastal Access Act (see Marine and CoastalAccess Act 2009 Impact Assessment,http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/marine/documents/legislation/marine-ia-0410.pdf). Similarly, TheEuropean Commission launched a study on economicbenefits of MSP, based on some specific case studiesthat should soon be available athttp://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/spatial_planning_en.html#3

• enhanced coherence with other planning systems.

Initial studies undertaken by the UnitedKingdom and the European Commissionhave attempted to prove the anticipated eco-nomic benefits with concrete figures. Due tothe specific framework conditions in Cana-dian waters the results of those studies maynot be directly transferable, but the main ar-guments remain valid. The benefits include:

(a) Coordination benefits for govern-ments are likely to be a result of MSP dueto improved cooperation amongst gov-ernment departments and integrated de-cision making;(b) A properly designed MSP approachwill lead to lower transaction costs forcompanies operating in the marine envir-onment. For example, marine activitieslike offshore oil and gas, wind or waveenergy require significant exploratorytime and investigation to identify the op-timal location. MSP would incorporateassessments and analysis of scenarios toidentify appropriate sites for these activit-ies and thus increase planning and invest-ment certainty.(c) Society will benefit from the enhancedcertainty provided by MSP which resultsin a better investment climate. Interna-tional companies invest large amounts ofmoney to identify the most appropriatesites for their marine energy projects.

However, it can turn out that the preferredsite for one sector’s development is also of in-terest for another ocean use - either analready existing, traditional one or one thatcan be predicted for the near future, e.g.,marine energy and aquaculture. Competinginterests over the same space result in costsof non-coordination such as the need to re-solve a conflict between different sectors orsectoral development and the marine envir-onment.

12


MSP not only provides valuable and reliableknowledge to avoid those situations. It alsoprovides a stakeholder involvement platformthat can be used to resolve conflicts betweensectors and balance diverging user interestsin the same marine area. Additionally, marine sectors put significantamounts of money into the collection of datathat is used, for instance, for environmentalimpact assessments (EIA). Currently, EIAsare carried out on a project-by-project basis.Hence, no common data platform exists thatwould allow sectors to share relevant dataamongst them. MSP provides a platform to collect all thedata necessary to manage a given marinearea and thus helps to create synergiesbetween industries operating in the same re-gion instead of asking each sector on a pro-ject basis to collect the same information overand over again. Investors have to apply for numerous li-censes and permits, often with different au-thorities, before they get the green light to de-velop an offshore wind farm or an aquacul-ture site. Usually, these licensing processesare not coordinated and different regulatoryprocedures do not necessarily complementeach other. Marine stakeholders sometimescomplain about contradicting requirementsresulting from different government policiesand administrative bodies that hinder effi-cient and effective economic development. MSP can be used to coordinate and stream-line licensing procedures. Countries such as the UK have, through theirnational Marine and Coastal Access Act, cre-ated a strategic marine planning system thatclarifies marine objectives and priorities forthe future, and directs decision makers andusers towards more efficient, sustainable useand protection of resources. The legislationalso creates streamlined licensing and de-cision-making processes through the estab-

lishment of the UK’s Marine ManagementOrganization (MMO). This organization will be responsible for issu-ing the majority of UK marine licenses in or-der to improve and speed-up the decision-making process for developments in the mar-ine environment. 16

7 OUTLOOKThis workshop seeks to provide a learningexperience about tools that can be used forMSP at a regional level. It does not attempt tobe exhaustive, but aims to foster discussionon MSP in a Canadian regional context andenhance the debate regarding the benefits ofMSP for the management of Canada's oceansin a sustainable and environmentally friendlymanner.

16 For further information please visithttp://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/marine/legislation/mcaa/index.htm

1 3


References

Agardy, Tundi. “Ocean zoning. making marine management more effective.” Earthscan, London, 2010

Crowder, Larry and Norse, Elliot. “Essential ecological insights for marine ecosystem-based management and marinespatial planning.” In: Marine Policy, Special Issue on The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Implementing Ecosys-tem-Based, Sea-Use Management, Volume 32, No. 5, page 772-778, 2008

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Canada in Partnership with Environment Canada and Parks Canada.“Canada’s Federal Marine Protected Areas Strategy.” Ottawa: Communications Branch DFO, 2005

Ehler, Charles and Douvere, Fanny. “Marine Spatial Planning. A Step-by-Step Approach towards Ecosystem-basedManagement.” Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Program. IOC Manualand Guides No. 53, ICAM Dossier No. 6. Paris: UNESCO, 2009 (English)

Government of Canada. “Canada’s Oceans Strategy. Our Oceans, Our Future.” Ottawa: Department of Fisheries andOceans (DFO), 2002

Government of Canada. “Oceans Act.” Ottawa: Canada Communication Group - Publishing, Public Works and Gov-ernment Services Canada, 1996

Marine Policy, Special Issue on The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Implementing Ecosystem-Based, Sea-UseManagement, Volume 32, No. 5, 2008

PlanCoast: “Handbook on Integrated Maritime Spatial Planning”, from the INTERREG IIIB CADSES PlanCoast Pro-ject, available at www.plancoast.eu

14

regional workshop on marine spatial planning (msp):...

Documents