Implementation of the ecosystem approach through Marine Spatial Planning: the Norwegian case
International Marine Spatial Planning Symposium: Sharing Practical Solutions/11th Annual Ronald C.Baird Sea Grant Science Symposium (IMSPS)May 14th 2012 Implementation of the ecosystem approach through Marine Spatial Planning: the Norwegian case
Overview1. Overview of the Norwegian planning process 1. Structure 2. Governance 3. New regulatory tools2. Final product3. What difference did it make?4. Challenges and potential for improvement Photo: T. de Lange Wenneck
Norway; the ”ocean state”• Area – Waters under Norwegian jurisdiction: 2,3 million km2 – Land territory: 385 000 km2• Economic importance – Petroleum, aquaculture and fisheries are the main exports and foundation our welfare
A growing understanding for integrated ocean management• Response to challenges and pressures: – Climate change and pollution Potential Petroleum – Petroleum industry seeking expansion into the Fields north and coastal areas Exp. Value: $100 billion – Increased shipping• External pressure for implementing the Ecosystem Approach: – North Sea ministerial meeting 1997 calling for implementation of the Ecosystem Approach – Johannesburg Declaration 2002 calling for implementation of EA by 2010• The cumulative impacts necessitate integrated and ecosystem‐based approaches to management. – Marine Spatial Planning, Ocean Zoning, ICZM etc
The Norwegian Management plans• Initiated in 2001 to implement integrated and Barents sea ecosystem‐based Norwegian sea management for Nor. EEZs• Barents sea: 2006 (revision in 2011)• Norwegian sea: 2009 (revision due in 2014)• North Sea: under development (expected in 2013) North Sea
OrganizationSimilar process for the Norwegian Sea and North Sea plans
Implementation and review Ministerial steering group Monitoring group Management forum Environmental risk forum Outside events2007 2010 Knowledge Political 2011 2008 New Gov. base for process: 2009 review of White paper. Management New Annual Plan priorities reports Revised plan
Hybrid top‐down approach• Led and initiated by the government (political decision)• Development carried out by government research institutes and directorates• Input from stakeholders at various stages: – Hearings – Public meetings• Important zoning decisions made at political level
Zoning aspects• Identification of valuable areas• Shipping lanes moving ship traffic further off‐shore• Area‐based management framework for petroleum activities
Valuable areas Spawning areas for cod, Larvae areas for cod, herring, herring, capelin, haddock and capelin, haddock and saithe saithe Olsen et al. 2010. ICES JMS
Barents Sea Shipping lanes350 18 16300 14250 12200 10150 8 Antall transitter 6100 4 Antall tonn50 2 0 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Vessle traffic pr year
-75 ° -50 ° -35 ° -25 ° -15 ° -5 ° 0 ° 5 ° 15 ° 25 ° 35 ° 45 ° 55 ° 65 ° 75 ° 85 ° -30 ° -40 ° -65 ° 81 ° 80 °Petroleum management Greenland framework 65 ° Franz Josef Land 2006‐2010 -20 ° 60 ° -15 ° Spitzbergen 55 ° 76 °No Petroleum Activities-Lofoten – Vesterålen 50 ° 76 ° Ice-edge-Eggkanten Polar front -5 °-Bear Island-Polar front Bear Island-Ice-edge 65 km zone-Coastal zone 0 – 35km 71 ° 71 ° 45 ° TromsøflaketNo NEW Petroleum Activities bank area-Coastal zone 35 – 50 km Lofoten - Norway VesterålenNo drilling March - August te n Russia fo Olsen et al. 2007, ICES JMS, Lo-Coastal zone 50 - 65 km 5° 10 ° 15 ° 20 ° 25 ° 30 ° 35 ° 40 °-Tromsøflaket Management plan area High intensity fishing Shipping routes Framework for petroleum industry Ecologically valuable areas No petroleum activity Disputed area No new petroleum activities Oil/gas discoveries No drilling, March - September
Barents Sea 2011 revision• Changes: – Area from 50‐65 km opened with for petroleum with no restrictions – Area between 50 and 35 km offshore opened for petroleum activities (w date restrictions) – Eggakanten valuable area opened for petroleum activities – Discharges of produced water (containing oil residues) allowed – Collection of knowledge – Framework to be revised in 2013 following election
What differences did it make?• No legislation specifically for the plans. Implemented through existing legislation – ‘Marine resources act’ has been designed with this in mind• New meeting places for advisors, managers and stakeholders• Annual reporting of status (ecosystem, human use) and state of knowledge• Development of an indicator‐based reporting system (ecosystem state)• Assessment of environmental risk• Routing system for shipping• Area‐based management framework for petroleum Photo: T. de Lange Wenneck
Key Science Challenges• Effects of climate change and ocean acidification• Assessing vulnerability and ecological risk assessment – Identifying , quantifying and mapping ecological value• Ecosystem goods and services – Mapping and setting value to GS• Mapping all human impacts – Fishing activities and fishing grounds – Effects on benthic habitats• Total and cumulative impacts of human activities Photo: E Olsen
Potential for improvements• STRUCTURAL / ORGANIZATIONAL: – Based on science, but need transparency and peer review – Improve sectoral cooperation, especially at ministerial level – Identifying and clarifying disagreements (between sectors) to improve decision‐making and enhancing the scientific ethos• SCIENTIFIC – Socioeconomic effects are not assessed although they are instrumental in the decision‐making process – Economic impact on communities, region and nation should be better assessed – Ecosystem services should be assessed – Communication of uncertainties! Photo: T. de Lange Wenneck
Concluding remarks• The applicability of the Norwegian management plans to other countries can be questioned. – Norway is a small, homogenous and rich country. – Its central administration is highly concentrated and by international standards well coordinated. – Its research institutions are well funded and have substantial capacity to carry out the research for Integrated oceans management.• Even under these conditions implementing MSP has been challenging!
Thank you for your attention! Photo: T. de Lange Wenneck
A particular slide catching your eye?
Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.