Policy aspects of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)

Martin PastoorsHKZ17, 12 September 2012

Marine Strategy Framework Directive is going to come

MSFD is a complex policy

Understanding policy aspects & institutional ambiguity

Three topics

Context of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Marine Policy in Europe

Regional approaches and coordination

Marine Policy in Europa

European Institutions

Council of Ministers

European Commission

European Parliament

Court of Justice

Council of Ministers: (co-) decides on legislation

European parliament (EP): co-legislator, control function

736 members from 27 countries (2014: 751 members)8 political delegations

Court of Justice: Legal ruling over EU laws

European Commission (EC)

• Proposals for legal acts• Implementing EU policy and laws• Representing EU

EC directorates related to the sea

Complex decisionmaking

DGsDGsDGs

Committees

Member States

Regions

European Commission

European Council

Court of Justice

European Parliament

Regional Conventions

Global treaties

NGOs

Sectors (industry)

Research

Marine policy domains

Integrated Maritime Policy

(IMP)

Common Fisheries Policy

(CFP)

Marine Strategy Framework

Directive (MSFD)

Natura2000

Transport Energy Regions Labour conditions

Spatial planning

Water Framework Directive

Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP)

• DG MARE ‘Communication’• Vision, not law• “policy framework that will allow

for the optimal development of all sea-related activities in a sustainable manner”

• Action: marine spatial planning, coordinating research, ...

• No direct effects on Member States

Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)

• DG MARE ‘Regulation’• EU competentence• GVB 1982, 1992, 2002, 2012 (?)• Aim: sustainable fisheries• Member States implement EU

policy• Pillars

– Conservation– Structure– Market– International

‘Regional approach’: Regional Advisory Councils (RACs)

Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)Kaderrichtlijn Mariene Strategie (KRM)

• DG ENV ‘Directive’• Aim for 2020:

– Good Environmental Status (GES)

• Member States need to develop regulations

• Regional coordiantion• 11 descriptors (themes) with

indicators• Measures via other policy

domains (e.g. CFP)

MSFD Marine regions

Natura2000

• DG ENV ‘Directives’– Bird Directive (1979)– Habitat Directive (1992)

• Aim: maintain biodiversity• Member States need to develop

regulations• Regional coordination ?• Method: Marine Protected Areas• Measures via other policy

domains (e.g. CFP)

Overview policy domains

Name Acronym Type DG

Integrated Maritime Policy IMP Communication MARE

Common Fisheries Policy CFP Regulation MARE

Marine Strategy Framework Directive

MSFD Directive ENV

Natura2000 N2000 Directive ENV

Marine Governance:Game, players and rules

Playing on multiple boards...

Integrated Maritime

Policy

Marine Strategy

Framework Directive

Common Fisheries Policy

Natura2000

Institutional ambiguity

MSFD and institutional ambiguity

1. Establishment of marine regions (who has competence and authority)

2. A framework directive vis-a-vis other (common) marine policies and directives (Member States in charge?)

Context of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)Kaderrichtlijn Mariene Strategie (KRM)

• DG ENV ‘Directive’• Aim for 2020:

– Good Environmental Status (GES)

• Regional coordination• 11 descriptors (themes) with

indicators• Member States need to develop

regulations• Measures via other policy

domains (e.g. CFP)

Status of the directives

• MSFD– Commitment for actions

• WFD (Water Framework Directive)– Commitment for results

MSFD Initial Planning Cycle

MSFD ‘speak’

Good Environmental Status Environmental status of marine waters where these provide ecologically diverse and dynamic oceans and seas which are clean, healthy andproductive ....

Descriptor Qualitative descriptors for determining good environmental status; i.e. themes

Indicator Operationalizing descriptors; things you can ‘measure’

Target Target value for an indicator

Measure Means to change the system and achieve targets

MSFD: what came before?

2008MSFD agreed

2008Request for scientific advice to ICES/JRC

2010ICES/JRC specify indicators

and potential targets

July 2010EC: criteria and

standards

2012National Initial Assessments

NL Initial Assessment

Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu. 2012. Ontwerp Mariene Strategie voor het Nederlandse deel van de Noordzee 2012-2020.

Stakeholder involvement

• Varying involvement• Shipping, Oil&gas, Wind energy, NGOs

actively involved• Fisheries and Tourism limited involvement

Ounanian, K., Delaney, A., Raakjær, J., and Ramirez-Monsalve, P. 2012. On unequal footing: Stakeholder perspectives on the marine strategy framework directive as a mechanism of the ecosystem-based approach to

marine management. Marine Policy, 36: 658-666.

Policy involvement

• Common Implementation Strategy (CIS)– Marine Environmental Policy Makers from

Member States.

MSFD = management by indicator

• Science:– Defining good environmental status– Defining indicators

• Policy– Selecting indicators– Getting the indicator at the right level

• Stakeholders– Comment on proposals

Governance aspects of MSFD

• Command-and-control policy• Regional coordination (new!)• Emphasis on ecological targets• Integration limited• Instrumental participation process

(reflecting not shaping)

Regional approaches and coordination of MSFD

Baltic Sea: HELCOM

• Helsinki Convention• 8 EU Member States

+ Russia• Baltic Sea Action Plan

(2007)– Eutrophication– Biodiversity– Maritime activities– Hazardous substances

HELCOM coordination of MSFD

• Strong link between Baltic Sea Action Plan and MSFD

• Low institutional ambiguity

North Sea: OSPAR

• 1992 Oslo Paris convention

• 2010 Northeast Atlantic Environmental Strategy– Biodiversity– Eutrophication– Oil and Gas– Radiation– Integrated management

OSPAR coordination of MSFD?

• OSPAR adapted to MSFD requirements• Different implementation phases in

Member States• Institutional ambiguity

– OSPAR vs. Member States– Who deals with what topics?

Mediterranean Sea: Barcelona convention

• Many non-EU countries• 2008 Mediterranean

Action Plan (MAP)– Ecosystem approach– 7 steps

• No formal link to MSFD

Barcelona Convention and MSFD?

• Substantial Institutional Ambiguity• Many non-EU countries• Will MAP be adapted to MSFD?• Will EU-regional coordination develop?

Black Sea: Bucharest Convention

• 1992 Convention• 1996 Strategic Action

Plan• 2009 new Strategic

Action Plan– Ecosystem approach

• No references to MSFD

Bucharest Convention and MSFD?

• Many non-EU countries• Will the Convention be coordinating?• Role still needs to be decided / developed

Comparing Regional Conventions

EU countries Mismatch with GES objectives

Institutional Ambiguity

HELCOM Majority Low Low

OSPAR Majority Low Low-moderate

Barcelona Minority Moderate High

Bucharest minority High Moderate

Van Leeuwen, J., Van Hoof, L. J. W., and Van Tatenhove, J. 2012. Institutional ambiguity in implementing the European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Marine Policy, 36: 636-643.

Summary

Multi-level decision-making

Marine policy domains

Integrated Maritime Policy

(IMP)

Common Fisheries Policy

(CFP)

Marine Strategy Framework

Directive (MSFD)

Natura2000

Transport Energy Regions Labour conditions

Spatial planning

Water Framework Directive

Regional coordination

Complex?

Contact

phone +31 317 487 849 mobile +31 610 939 549Email martin.pastoors@wur.nl Internet www.cmp.wur.nl Blog www.martinpastoors.nl Twitter @martinpastoorsLinkedIn nl.linkedin.com/in/martinpastoors