Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
International MSP Symposium             14th -15th May 2012Marine Planning in England  Organising the process   through pr...
Outline•    Why – drivers•    Legislation•    Principles, goals, objectives•    Timing and funding•    Building capacity –...
Why did we want marine planning – 10 years ofadvocacy•   Sustainable use of marine resources•   Greater certainty for inve...
Why do we need marine planning?Overarching driver – Increasing and competing useof marine space and resources, impacting o...
Future needs, e.g. Offshore Wind• Target: renewables = 15% (but  aim for more) of the UK’s total  electricity needs by 202...
Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009• Long lead in time and preparatory work• Supported by main political parties (commitmen...
The legal requirement for marine planning• Marine Policy Statement (MPS): the overarching policy  framework for the UK mar...
Principles and goals – development & consultation   UK vision ‘clean,   healthy, safe,   A long time in the making, much  ...
Goals, Objectives, Policies• 22 Goals (High Level Marine Objectives):   •   Achieving a sustainable marine economy   •   E...
National picture of resources and activities• The ‘big picture’ to set plan area in context• Includes analysis of potentia...
Where and whenOverall timetable• Estimate 2 years for each plan  (2.5 if Independent  Investigation needed)• Assume two at...
East marine plan areas                                                   58,700 km2Timeline (two years)                   ...
“Show me someone that’s never made a mistake and I’llshow you someone that’s never made anything” a difficult message to ...
Resource planning : Costs (and Benefits)• ‘Impact Assessment’ of planning vs ‘do nothing’. Benefits:   • Best estimate: £4...
Capacity building - establishing a planning team• New, from scratch  opportunity to build a ‘team’• Range of capability, ...
MMO – core team and supporting teams                        Marine                                  Regulation            ...
Challenges and lessons (some MMO-specific?)• Recruitment challenges (at difficult time for public sector)   Buy in interi...
Wider capacity – other institutions and stakeholders
Some headline lessons•   Development and ‘buy in’ can take a long time•   Political support essential, as are ‘allies’•   ...
Questions?
Plan-level objectives• Focussed consultation/workshops with selected parties• Conclusions    • Not just about ‘SMART’ obje...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Marine Planning in England Organising the process through pre-planning

1,496 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
  • Be the first to comment

Marine Planning in England Organising the process through pre-planning

  1. 1. International MSP Symposium 14th -15th May 2012Marine Planning in England Organising the process through pre-planning Paul Gilliland Marine Planning Development Manager
  2. 2. Outline• Why – drivers• Legislation• Principles, goals, objectives• Timing and funding• Building capacity – people• Challenges• Lessons• National (England) vs plan area
  3. 3. Why did we want marine planning – 10 years ofadvocacy• Sustainable use of marine resources• Greater certainty for investors/developers• Improved basis for addressing cumulative effects• ‘Regional seas’ governance (ecosystem approach)• Proactive and forward planning• Plan for new activities and changing technologies• Framework for consistent decision making• Cohesion with coastal and terrestrial plans (ICZM)• Early involvement of stakeholders (“democratic deficit”)
  4. 4. Why do we need marine planning?Overarching driver – Increasing and competing useof marine space and resources, impacting on thesustainability of the marine environment
  5. 5. Future needs, e.g. Offshore Wind• Target: renewables = 15% (but aim for more) of the UK’s total electricity needs by 2020• 50,000+ new jobs?• Existing/planned plus ‘Round 3’ wind = total potential capacity of up to 40 GW• 6,000 turbines  footprint• Other renewables, i.e. Wave, tidal
  6. 6. Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009• Long lead in time and preparatory work• Supported by main political parties (commitment)• Complex piece of legislation (delivery!) • Licensing (Consenting) • Nature Conservation • Fisheries • Coastal Access • Marine planning• Marine Management Organisation (MMO) • Planning, licensing, fisheries management, conservation delivery, enforcement functions • Vested April 2010 • Cross-government ‘agency’
  7. 7. The legal requirement for marine planning• Marine Policy Statement (MPS): the overarching policy framework for the UK marine area (UK Govt and Devolved Administrations)• Marine Plans will translate the MPS into detailed policy and spatial guidance for each plan area (MMO, SoS) • All 10 plan ‘areas’ (sub-divisions around the coast) • Guide and direct decision makers, including Licensing • No timetable prescribed but report/review every 3-6 years• Aim: contribute to and help deliver sustainable development • Economic, Environment, and Social • Across all sectors • Potentially changing emphasis (link to terrestrial planning)  stay close to relevant department(s)
  8. 8. Principles and goals – development & consultation UK vision ‘clean, healthy, safe, A long time in the making, much productive and consultation biologically diverse oceans and seas’ •Ecosystem approach •Streamlined, efficient •Take account of other plans2002 2009 2011 etc
  9. 9. Goals, Objectives, Policies• 22 Goals (High Level Marine Objectives): • Achieving a sustainable marine economy • Ensuring a strong, healthy and just society • Living within environmental limits • Promoting good governance • Using sound science responsibly• Policy objectives for key sectors, generally broad • Renewables: only explicit target • Oil & Gas: maximise economic development of resources • Aggregates: as a minimum make provision for a level of marine contribution to adequate and continuing UK supply• No prioritisation
  10. 10. National picture of resources and activities• The ‘big picture’ to set plan area in context• Includes analysis of potential future opportunities• Inform plan-level objectives (targets?) Just undertaken consultation on plan-specific objectives (but planning rather than ‘pre-planning’)
  11. 11. Where and whenOverall timetable• Estimate 2 years for each plan (2.5 if Independent Investigation needed)• Assume two at a time• Complete first cycle by 2021• Evaluate ≤ 3 years  Review?Reassessed recently, enddate unchanged but overlap(lead in time)Revising at same time asdrafting new plans
  12. 12. East marine plan areas 58,700 km2Timeline (two years) Inshore and Offshore• Dec 2010: Announce, prep 2 plans, 1 process (87%)• April 2011: Start• Feb 2012: Evidence & Issues• May: Draft Objectives/Vision• July: Options• Sept: draft plan to government• Jan 2013: consultation• April 2013: revisedRelentless  share ‘lead’ role;more time to pause?Developing whilst doing take longer the first time?
  13. 13. “Show me someone that’s never made a mistake and I’llshow you someone that’s never made anything” a difficult message to get over and work around
  14. 14. Resource planning : Costs (and Benefits)• ‘Impact Assessment’ of planning vs ‘do nothing’. Benefits: • Best estimate: £487 million [$779m] over twenty years • Environmental benefits difficult to quantify • Savings to business sectors, e.g. activity costs• Costs • £2.7 million [$4.3m] per plan (all elements, e.g. Staff > evidence gathering > Sustainability Appraisal > consultation) • £0.54 million [$0.86m] per review (assumes 20% of original costs) every six years• Resources : core funding from UK government• Too early to judge but for now £ seems less limiting than time• Demands may fluctuate over time but ‘same’ resource
  15. 15. Capacity building - establishing a planning team• New, from scratch  opportunity to build a ‘team’• Range of capability, skills and disciplines • Strategic thinkers, communicators, analysers • Marine specialists, terrestrial planners, GIS/IT users • In or outside of core team?• Core ‘planning team’ (partly for longevity)• Other MMO teams and input• New organisation  settle ahead of planning team?
  16. 16. MMO – core team and supporting teams Marine  Regulation  Planning (>18)  & Licensing Development  ‘Future’ plan areas Policy  Plan‐making  Appraisal  in plan areas Team leads 3 ‘Liaison’ officers  in East plan area Data,  Stakeholder and  Evidence and  Communications Knowledge
  17. 17. Challenges and lessons (some MMO-specific?)• Recruitment challenges (at difficult time for public sector)  Buy in interim help, e.g. Cefas (scientific advisory body), economists  Help ‘grow’ inexperienced staff but needs time• Few or no ‘marine planners’ to hand  Deliberately recruit from different backgrounds  Team dynamic - different ‘types’ of people• Very demanding programme = strain, long hours culture  Recruit to planned timetable if possible  ‘Pull together’, galvanise team etc but monitor
  18. 18. Wider capacity – other institutions and stakeholders
  19. 19. Some headline lessons• Development and ‘buy in’ can take a long time• Political support essential, as are ‘allies’• Legislative basis almost certainly essential• A framework of principles, goals/objective and policies is a good start• Establishing more plan-specific objectives is preferable but <100% is OK and even then is potentially difficult• Need allocated resources preferably over a sustained period• Need a timetable but also some flexibility if possible particularly in the early days• (Dedicated planning body) with a dedicated team essential• Do NOT underestimate the challenge
  20. 20. Questions?
  21. 21. Plan-level objectives• Focussed consultation/workshops with selected parties• Conclusions • Not just about ‘SMART’ objectives • Integrated/cross-cutting over topic/sector, e.g. Economic productivity, or ecosystem health rather than fisheries or ports (except renewables) • Result is plan-level set of ‘goals’ with local emphases, e.g. C Change• Wider consultation • 70 responses, > 1000 substantive comments • Broadly agree with above approach • Need more ‘plan-specific’ points (including possible ‘priorities’) not in the Objectives themselves but in detailed ‘plan policies’ (=actions)• Lot of effort at national ‘high level’, also to agree approach at plan-level, not essential to be 100% SMART but still some way to go to be SMARTer

×