Spatial planning is expected to facilitate climate change adaptation by directing future spatial and infrastructure developments away from zones that are exposed to climate-related hazards. This study attempts to confirm this understanding by mapping the effects of the various spatial plans on the northern coast of Java, Indonesia. First, the study maps the extent of coastal hazards for the baseline year of 2010 using a GIS-based inundation model. An overlay in GIS demonstrates the influence of spatial plans for the projection year of 2030. This allows for calculating the economic losses of the planned developments. The case study shows that the current provincial spatial plans direct land use conversions along the northern coast of Java to continue to occur in the future. This could significantly decrease the regional capacity in dealing with the exposure to coastal inundation. The analysis also demonstrates that a total area of 55,220 ha of land prone to inundation, consisting of protected area (1488 ha), fishponds (32,916 ha) and agricultural land (20,814 ha), is planned to be converted into industry (13,399 ha) and settlements (41,821 ha). Thus, these areas will be also prone to inundation in 2030. This change would potentially lead to an economic loss of 246.6 billion USD. The spatial plans issued by the national and provincial governments for regulating the future land use on the northern coast of Java have not integrated measures against hazards related to global sea level rise. Meanwhile, many existing developments have already been affected by coastal inundation. Rather than reducing the exposure towards coastal flood hazards, the case study shows that spatial plans could even increase the risk of climate-related hazards and cause higher economic losses. These findings provide a different perspective on the role of spatial planning for climate change adaptation than what is stated in the literature.
Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP)
The implementation of Directive 2007/2/EC - INSPIRE can improve and actually strengthen the information management and data infrastructures needed for setting up Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) processes. Evidence for this comes from three parallel analyses: links between the MSP Framework Directive and INSPIRE components and implementation; the availability of marine and maritime data through the INSPIRE Geo-Portal; and the adequacy of using an INSPIRE data model for mapping maritime spatial plans. The first item identifies INSPIRE as a relevant instrument not only for data collection, but additionally for increasing transparency of the MSP processes, using already operational national and European data infrastructure. The marine/maritime data availability analysis highlights a significant difference in data sharing within European marine regions. Finally, the INSPIRE data model is adequate for mapping maritime activities and for the integration of sea and land planning in an overview of cross-border planning for a given sea region
Spatial planning has to deal with trade-offs between various stakeholders’ wishes and needs as part of planning and management of landscapes, natural resources and/or biodiversity. To make ecosystem services (ES) trade-off research more relevant for spatial planning, we propose an analytical framework, which puts stakeholders, their land-use/management choices, their impact on ES and responses at the centre. Based on 24 cases from around the world, we used this framing to analyse the appearance and diversity of real-world ES trade-offs. They cover a wide range of trade-offs related to ecosystem use, including: land-use change, management regimes, technical versus nature-based solutions, natural resource use, and management of species. The ES trade-offs studied featured a complexity that was far greater than what is often described in the ES literature. Influential users and context setters are at the core of the trade-off decision-making, but most of the impact is felt by non-influential users. Provisioning and cultural ES were the most targeted in the studied trade-offs, but regulating ES were the most impacted. Stakeholders’ characteristics, such as influence, impact faced, and concerns can partially explain their position and response in relation to trade-offs. Based on the research findings, we formulate recommendations for spatial planning.
Planning frameworks such as Ecosystem-Based Marine Spatial Planning are based on socio-ecological systems and require effective design of management goals and objectives, a task often overlooked in conservation and resource planning. This paper discusses research undertaken in a coastal council of Australia, to assess the significance of well-defined goals and objectives as drivers of management plans. SMART criteria and Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation approaches were integrated into a framework to examine management scope of existing plans; assess the quality of stated goals and objectives; analyse the use of natural and socio-economic targets; and provide recommendations for the development of future plans. Findings provided no indication of organizational learning through revision of previous plans, revealing an ongoing planning cycle with ad-hoc reviews frequently driven by policy changes. Main weaknesses identified included linguistics ambiguity; unclear planning hierarchy; lack of clear time-frames; and adoption of highly ambitious plans. The absence of measurable and time-bounded goals and objectives was noted. Additionally, poor definition of targets resulted in goals not meeting the impact-oriented criteria, and objectives were not outcome-oriented. Recommendations drawn in support of mainstreaming the Ecosystem Based Approach in future coastal and marine plans include: explicit definition of societal values; developing complementary cross-realm management goals and objectives; increasing commitment to produce ‘on-the-ground’ outcomes progressively within each planning period; a greater use of pro-active management measures; and providing an economic context to the plans, fostering alignment of financial resources and future investments with the vision developed by the council.
Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) can offer significant benefits in terms of economic conservation strategies, optimizing spatial planning and minimizing the impact on the environment. In this paper, we focused on the application of multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) technique for co-locating offshore wind farms and open-water mussel cultivation. An index of co-location sustainability (SI) was developed based on the application of MCE technique constructed with physical and biological parameters on the basis of remote sensing data. The relevant physical factors considered were wind velocity, depth range, concerning the site location for energy production, and sea surface temperature anomaly. The biological variables used were Chlorofill-a (as a measurement of the productivity) and Particle Organic Carbon (POC) concentration, in order to assess their influence on the probable benefits and complete the requirements of this management framework. This SI can be easily implemented to do a first order selection of the most promising areas to be more specifically studied in a second order approach based on local field data
From 8-10 November 2006 the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) and the Man and the Biosphere Programme (MAB) of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) held the first international workshop on Marine Spatial Planning. The meeting was held at the UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, France.
We prepared this technical report from expert presentations made at the workshop and subsequent discussions during and following the workshop, supplemented and updated with new information where appropriate. Marine spatial planning is a rapidly developing field, and we wanted to keep this report up to date. We take responsibility for any misinterpretation or misrepresentation of ideas in the original presentations or factual errors in the report.
Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) offers the possibility of democratising management of the seas. MSP is, however, increasingly implemented as a form of post-political planning, dominated by the logic of neoliberalism, and a belief in the capacity of managerial-technological apparatuses to address complex socio-political problems, with little attention paid to issues of power and inequality. There is growing concern that MSP is not facilitating a paradigm shift towards publicly engaged marine management, and that it may simply repackage power dynamics in the rhetoric of participation to legitimise the agendas of dominant actors. This raises questions about the legitimacy and inclusivity of participatory MSP. Research on stakeholder engagement within MSP has predominately focused on assessing experiences of active MSP participants and has not evaluated the democratic or inclusive nature of these processes. Adopting the Northeast Ocean Planning initiative in the US as a case study, this paper provides the first study of exclusion and non-participation of stakeholders in an MSP process. Three major issues are found to have had an impact on exclusion and non-participation: poor communication and a perception that the process was deliberately exclusionary; issues arising from fragmented governance, territorialisation and scale; and lack of specificity regarding benefits or losses that might accrue from the process. To be effective, participatory MSP practice must: develop mechanisms that recognise the complexity of socio-spatial relationships in the marine environment; facilitate participation in meaningful spatial decision-making, rather than in post-ideological, objective-setting processes; and create space for debate about the very purpose of MSP processes.
Access, defined as the ability to use and benefit from available marine resources or areas of the ocean or coast, is important for the well-being and sustainability of coastal communities. In Canada, access to marine resources and ocean spaces is a significant issue for many coastal and Indigenous communities due to intensifying activity and competition in the marine environment. The general trend of loss of access has implications for these communities, and for Canadian society. In this review and policy perspective, we argue that access for coastal and Indigenous communities should be a priority consideration in all policies and decision-making processes related to fisheries and the ocean in Canada. This paper reviews how access affects the well-being of coastal communities, factors that support or undermine access, and research priorities to inform policy. Recommended actions include: ensuring access is transparently considered in all ocean-related decisions; supporting research to fill knowledge gaps on access to enable effective responses; making data accessible and including communities in decision-making that grants or restricts access to adjacent marine resources and spaces; ensuring updated laws, policies and planning processes explicitly incorporate access considerations; and, identifying and prioritizing actions to maintain and increase access. Taking action now could reverse the current trend and ensure that coastal and Indigenous communities thrive in the future. This is not just a Canadian issue. Globally, the ability of coastal and Indigenous communities to access and benefit from the marine environment should be at the forefront in all deliberations related to the oceans.
Increasingly recreational fisheries are being managed as socioecological systems using spatially explicit and participatory place based approaches. Such approaches require considering the spatial dynamics of a resource (fish) as well as its users (anglers). While the former is comparatively well studied, very little empirical information exists regarding the spatial ranges of angler travel to fishing locations. To address this and ultimately inform spatial and place based management approaches, the statistical properties of angler travel were assessed in six popular marine recreational fisheries in Florida, USA. Expected angler travel distances differed among species, regions, and years, with most trips in certain fisheries (e.g., common snook) made by anglers residing in close proximity to the fishing site (< 30 km), while anglers targeting other species (e.g., red snapper) usually traveled more than 200 km from their residence to fish. In concert with literature, these results suggest that some fisheries may be better suited than others for more spatially explicit or place based approaches to management. More broadly, these results can be used to better identify and engage stakeholders in management, anticipate effects of spatially explicit management decisions, and assess relative importance of different fisheries for attracting out-of-region or state trips, which may be important for local economies.