MSPglobal

International Guide on Marine/

Maritime Spatial Planning
Published in 2021 by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the
Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries of the European Commission.

This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) licence ([Link]
by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository
([Link]

Images from Shutterstock do not fall under the CC-BY-SA licence and may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of [Link].

This publication should be cited as follows: UNESCO-IOC/European Commission. 2021. MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning.
Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Manuals and Guides no 89)

Editors: Alejandro Iglesias-Campos, Julia Rubeck, David Sanmiguel-Esteban, Guido Schwarz.

Authors: Joseph Onwona Ansong (Ghana), Ingela Isaksson (Sweden), Michele Quesada-Silva (Brazil), Joanna Smith (Canada), Juan Luis Suárez de Vivero
(Spain), Riku Varjopuro (Finland), Zhiwei Zhang (China).

Contributors and reviewers: Andrej Abramić (Croatia), Karima Khalil (Morocco), Anja Kreiner (Namibia), Ivana Lukić (Serbia), Sarah Mahadeo (Trinidad and
Tobago), Ant Türkmen (Turkey), Vassiliki Celia Vassilopoulou (Greece), Tom Woolley (Ireland), Julian Barbière (IOC-UNESCO), Felix Leinemann (DG MARE).

The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the
part of UNESCO and the European Commission concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the
delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund of the European Union. The ideas and opinions
expressed in this publication are those of the editors, authors and contributors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and the European Commission.

Publication support team: Madina Begmatova, Julie Wickenden, Aya Khalil, Mirian Querol, Martin Wickenden.

Graphic design: Anna Mortreux.

© UNESCO/European Commission 2021

ISBN: 978-84-09-33197-0
(IOC/2021/MG/89)
 MSPglobal
International Guide on Marine/
Maritime Spatial Planning
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
2

Acknowledgements

This guide builds on the inputs, experiences and lessons The guide has benefitted from the support and commitment
learned provided by the MSPglobal community through all of all MSPglobal beneficiary and partner countries in the
activities organised or supported by the Intergovernmental Western Mediterranean: Algeria, France, Italy, Libya, Malta,
Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO and the European Mauritania, Morocco, Portugal, Spain, Tunisia, the Union for
Commission’s Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and the Mediterranean and the PAP/RAC; and in the Southeast
Fisheries between 2017 and 2021, in the context of the Joint Pacific: Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, Peru and the Permanent
Roadmap to accelerate marine/maritime spatial planning Commission for the South Pacific.
processes worldwide.
The support provided by the Government of Sweden to the
The guide has been drafted by members of the MSPglobal Joint Roadmap between 2018 and 2020 was instrumental in
International Expert Group (Joseph Onwona Ansong, Ingela multiplying the number of training courses, institutional and
Isaksson, Michele Quesada-Silva, Joanna Smith, Juan Luis technical workshops dedicated to marine spatial planning,
Suárez de Vivero, Riku Varjopuro, Zhiwei Zhang) and the editors, sustainable blue economy, coastal risk management and
with essential contributions and revisions from members of the ocean literacy, involving national authorities, officials and
MSPglobal Thematic Expert Groups (Andrej Abramić, Karima experts from more than 50 countries in Africa, Latin America
Khalil, Anja Kreiner, Ivana Lukić, Sarah Mahadeo, Ant Türkmen, and the Caribbean and Small Island Developing States. The
Celia Vassilopoulou, Tom Woolley). The guide was coordinated training activities included the board game “MSP Challenge”
by Alejandro Iglesias Campos (IOC-UNESCO) and Julia Rubeck kindly donated by the Government of the Netherlands in
(DG MARE), with the esteemed support of Madina Begmatova support of the Joint Roadmap.
and Aya Khalil (IOC-UNESCO), and the institutional guidance of
Felix Leinemann (DG MARE) and Julian Barbière (IOC-UNESCO). Other regional perspectives enriched the diversity of contri-
butions from other continents through collaboration with the
Valuable experiences and lessons emerged from the interna- following regional organisations: Africa (Abidjan and Nairobi
tional MSPforums organised by DG MARE and IOC-UNESCO Conventions, WIOMSA), Antarctic (Antarctic Treaty, CCAMLR),
with the support of national and regional authorities as well Arctic (PAME), Baltic Sea (HELCOM-VASAB), Caribbean (CEP),
as regional partners in Brussels (2018), La Réunion (2019), Caspian Sea (CEP), Mediterranean (MAP), Northeast Atlantic
Vigo (2019) and Riga (2019). Other international events also (OSPAR), Northwest Pacific (NOWPAP), Pacific (SPREP) and Red
provided input, such as the UN Ocean Conference in New York Sea and Gulf of Aden (PERSGA).
(2017), the GEF International Waters Conference in Marrakech
(2018), the Sustainable Blue Economy Conference in Nairobi The following initiatives and projects have contributed to this
(2018) and the EU-China Summit (2019). Important milestones publication with the identification of experiences and lessons
and discussions also took place in the context of the Our Ocean learned in their beneficiary countries: the European MSP
conferences in Malta (2017) and Oslo (2019) and through Platform, ADRIPLAN, AQUACROSS, Baltic LINes, Baltic Scope,
dedicated workshops at the European Maritime Days in Burgas BlueMED, Blue Solutions Initiative, BRESEP, Strengthening
(2018) and Lisbon (2019). the Management and Protection of Marine Biodiversity,
LME:LEARN, MamiWata, MarSP, MARSPLAN BS, MASPNOSE,
A young generation of planners, Erasmus Mundus alumni, MARISMA, MSP-MED, MULTIFRAME, MUSES, MUSICA, Ocean
provided input and recommendations for the guide and sup- Metiss, PADDLE, Pan Baltic Scope, PANORAMA, PLASMAR+,
ported DG MARE and IOC-UNESCO with the organisation of all SEANSE, SIMAtlantic, SIMCelt, SIMNORAT, SIMWESTMED,
the international events and forums mentioned above. SPINCAM, Strong High Seas, SUPREME, THAL-CHOR, and TPEA.

A very special thanks to all the women and men working in This guide would not have been possible without the
aquaculture, biotechnology, conservation, fisheries, defence, impressive participatory process that has accompanied it. All
energy, insurance, law, research, tourism, transport, police, activities organised by MSPglobal were co-financed by the
ports, security and rescue, public and private companies and European Maritime and Fisheries Fund of the European Union
NGOs for their constant support and diversity of contributions and received the institutional support of the European Climate,
in advancing MSP implementation globally. Environment and Infrastructure Executive Agency (CINEA).
Table of contents
3

Table of contents
Acknowledgements 2
Table of contents 3
List of acronyms and abbreviations 6
Glossary 8
Introduction 14

1. About this guide 17

What is the purpose of the guide? 17

Who is the guide for? 17

Why has the guide been developed? 17

How was the guide developed? 18

How to use the guide 19

Links to other guides 19

2. MSP and ocean governance basics 21

2.1 Key concepts, principles and terminology 21

2.2 Understanding MSP 24

2.3 Using MSP to pave the way towards a sustainable blue economy 32

2.4 Understanding community needs 34

2.5 The transboundary dimension of MSP 38

3. How to set the scene 47

3.1 Creating an MSP working group 47

3.2 Identifying existing national legal and institutional frameworks 47

3.3 Identifying existing international laws, regulations and agreements applicable 49

and/or adopted by the country or countries

3.4 Identifying key stakeholders 52

3.5 Identifying sources of funding for MSP 53

3.6 Identifying existing needs for planning ocean resources at local, subnational, 55
national or regional scale, including transboundary aspects

3.7 Defining how MSP will be established within the existing governance and legal 57
frameworks related to the coasts and ocean
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
4

4. Designing the planning process 63

4.1 The planning team 63

4.2 Defining the work plan for the MSP team 66

4.3 Definition of the planning boundaries and time frame 72

4.4 Defining the principles, initial vision, goals and objectives 74

4.5 Planning the monitoring and evaluation of the plan 79

4.6 Risk assessment and development of contingency plans 81

5. Assessments for planning 83

5.1 Defining the different scales of planning 87

5.2 Identifying existing conditions 87

5.3 Identifying future conditions 97

5.4 Developing a public information system 105

6. The plan 107

6.1 The spatial plan 107

6.2 Management actions, including their economic impact on those measures 108
linked with sustainable blue economy strategies

6.3 Spatial allocation of uses 110

6.4 Developing the spatial plan 111

6.5 Evaluating the draft marine spatial plan and strategic environmental assessment 113

6.6 Endorsing and approving the marine spatial plan 114

6.7 Defining the implementation process 114

6.8 Developing MSP capacity – aspects to be considered following 117

the first marine plan
Table of contents
5

7. Enabling implementation of the marine spatial plan 119

7.1 Establishing regulation to refer to the implementation of the marine spatial plan 120

7.2 Establishing a regular dialogue with sectors and other actors to follow up 121
and support implementation

7.3 Training competent authorities and maritime sectors on the implementation 122
of the plan

7.4 Compliance with the marine spatial plan 123

7.5 Enforcing the marine spatial plan 125

8. Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation 127

8.1 Evaluating the planning process and stakeholder engagement 128

8.2 Evaluating the plan and its relevance 129

8.3 Evaluating implementation 131

8.4 Evaluating the results of MSP – the outcome evaluation 132

8.5 Reporting and using the evaluation and monitoring results 132

8.6 Adaptation: Review and revision of the plan 133

9. What comes after this guide 137

References 140
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
6

List of acronyms and abbreviations

ABNJ Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

AIS Automatic Identification System

BGI Blue Growth Initiative

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CCAMLR Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

DG MARE Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries of the European Commission

DMPA Dynamic Marine Protected Area

EAC Ecosystem Advisory Committee

EBA Ecosystem-Based Approach

EBSA Ecologically or Biologically Significant Area

EC European Commission

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMODnet European Marine Observation and Data Network

EU European Union

EUNIS European Nature Information System

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GIS Geographic Information System

ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management

ILBI International Legally Binding Instrument

IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing

JMA Joint Management Area

IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO

IMO International Maritime Organization

LDC Least Developed Country

LLDC Landlocked Developing Country

MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

MFZ Marine Functional Zoning

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MPA Marine Protected Area

List of acronyms and abbreviations
7

MPS Marine Policy Statement

MSP Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning

MUCH Maritime and Underwater Cultural Heritage

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NM Nautical Mile

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the United States of America

OECM Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measure

PSMA Port State Measures Agreements

PSSA Particularly Sensitive Sea Area

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands

RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organization

SAMP Special Area Management Plan

SCA Seascape Character Assessment

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

SDI Spatial Data Infrastructure

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SIDS Small Island Developing States

SMART Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-Bound

SMARTIE Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-Bound, Inclusive and Equitable

SOLAS International Convention for the Safety of Life At Sea

SPP Statement of Public Participation

SST Sea Surface Temperature

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats

TSP Transformative Scenario Planning

UN United Nations

UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

ZEEC Coastal Ecological Economic Zoning

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
8

Glossary

Access restriction: Areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ):

a management action to conserve biodiversity through those areas of the ocean (water column and seabed) for which
restricting access to geographical areas or to the biological no one nation has sole responsibility for management.
resources themselves. Particularly common in situations
where there is an endangered species or ecosystem requiring Artisanal fishery:
protection for which no level of use is sustainable. a fishery based on traditional or small-scale gear and boats.

Accountability: Automatic identification system (AIS):

the responsibility to provide evidence to stakeholders and a short-range coastal tracking system used on ships and by
sponsors that a programme is effective and in conformance vessel traffic services (VTS) for identifying and locating vessels
with its scope, policy, legal, and fiscal requirements. by electronically exchanging data with other nearby ships and
VTS stations.
Adaptive management:
a systematic approach for improving management through
Baseline data:
learning by monitoring and evaluating management out-
the basic information gathered before a programme or activity
comes. Simply put, it is ‘learning by doing’ and adapting what
begins, to be used later to provide a comparison for assess-
one does based on what is learned.
ing impacts.

Allocation:
Baseline:
the share and delimitation of resources a user group gets from
as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Law of
an established plan.
the Sea, the line along the coast from which the seaward limits
of a country’s territorial sea and certain other maritime zones
Anthropogenic: of jurisdiction are measured, such as a country’s exclusive
human-induced. economic zone. Normally, a maritime baseline follows the
low-water line of a coastal country.
Area-based management:
the regulations of human activity in a specified area to achieve Biological diversity:
conservation or sustainable resource management objectives. the variability among living resources from all sources, includ-
ing, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems
Area closure: and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this
the closure to fishing by particular gear(s) of an entire fishing includes diversity within species and of ecosystems.
ground, or a part of it, for the protection of a section of the
population (e.g. spawners, juveniles), the whole population, or Bioregion:
several populations. The closure is usually seasonal but it could an area constituting a natural ecological community with
be permanent. characteristic flora, fauna and environmental conditions,
and bounded by natural rather than artificial borders.
Area to be avoided (ATBA):
an area within defined limits that should be avoided by all Blue economy:
ships or certain classes of ships, in which navigation is par- the sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth,
ticularly hazardous or in which it is exceptionally important to improved livelihoods and jobs while preserving the health
avoid casualties. of ocean ecosystems.
Glossary
9

Blue/Green infrastructure: Comprehensive plan:

a strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural a strategic document that identifies the principles, goals,
areas with other environmental features designed and man- objectives, guidelines, policies, standards and management
aged to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services. actions for the future growth and development of an area –
either on land or sea.
Bottom-up management:
allows all levels of society to become a part of the process Connectivity:
and helps to create a sense of ownership among stakeholders directness of links and density of connections within and
involved towards the achievement of the goal. amongst ecosystems and uses.

Buffer zone: Cost-benefit analysis:

the region near the border of a defined area; a transition zone a technique designed to determine the feasibility of a project
between areas managed for different objectives. or plan by quantifying its costs and benefits.

Carrying capacity: Cross-border issues:

the level of use, at a given level of management, at which issues which are relevant for two or more neighbouring
a natural or human-made resource can sustain itself over countries only. Also apply within countries between adminis-
a long period of time. trative levels.

Climate change: Cumulative impact:

a change in the state of the climate that can be identified, the impacts (positive or negative, direct and indirect, long-term
using statistical tests, by changes in the mean and/or the and short-term) arising from a range of activities throughout
variability of its properties and that persists for an extended an area or region, where each individual effect may not be
period, typically decades or longer. significant if taken in isolation, but collectively may impact and
damage the environment.
Coastal zone:
the area at the interface between land and sea, where the Danger zone:
sea influences the land and the land influences the sea. a defined permanent or intermittent area used for target prac-
tice, normally for the military.
Coastal zone management:
a resource management system following an integrative, holis- Decision support tool (DST):
tic approach and an interactive planning process in addressing a wide range of computer-based tools, e.g. simulation models
the complex management issues in the coastal area. and/or techniques and methods, developed to support deci-
sion analysis and participatory processes.
Co-management:
a type of management in which responsibility for resource Ecosystem:
management is shared between government and resource a community or group of living organisms that live in and
user groups. interact with each other in a specific environment.

Compliance monitoring: Ecosystem-based approach:

the collection and evaluation of monitoring data, including a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and
self-monitoring reports, and verification to show whether living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable
the performance of an activity is in compliance with the limits use in an equitable way.
and conditions specified in its permit or licence.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
10

Ecosystem-based management: Fragmentation:

an integrated approach to management that considers the the breaking of an area, landscape/seascape or habitat into
entire ecosystem, including humans. The goal of ecosys- discrete and separate pieces often as a result of land use/sea
tem-based management is to maintain an ecosystem in a use change.
healthy, productive and resilient condition so that it can
provide the goods and services humans want and need. Geographic information system (GIS):
a conceptualised framework that provides the ability to cap-
Ecosystem services/indirect use values: ture, manage and analyse spatial and geographic data. It also
the benefits provided by ecosystems that contribute to making connects data to a map, integrating location data (where
human life both possible and worth living, e.g. flood control, things are) with all types of descriptive information (what
water purification. things are like there).

Enforcement: Goal:
the set of management actions that governments take to in MSP, a statement of general direction or intent. Goals are
achieve compliance with regulations involving human activi- high-level statements of desired outcomes that you hope
ties to correct or halt situations that endanger the environment to achieve within the marine planning area.
or the public.
Governance:
Environmental fees/user charges: comprises the traditions, bodies and processes that determine
compulsory, required fees for the use of an environmental how power is exercised, how citizens are given a voice and
good or service. These generate revenue that can be recycled how decisions are made on issues of public concern.
to biodiversity conservation and increase the private cost of
resource use. Indicator:
information based on measured data used to represent a
Equity: particular attribute, characteristic or property of a system.
the condition in which society is characterised by justice, An indicator is a measure, quantitative or qualitative, of how
equality, impartiality and fairness, including fair and equal dis- close we are to achieving what we set out to achieve, i.e. our
tribution of power, economic resources, opportunities, goods objectives or outcomes.
and services for society.
Integrated management:
Eutrophication: an approach by which the many competing environmental
nutrient enrichment, typically in the form of nitrates and and socio-economic issues are considered together, with the
phosphates, and often from human sources such as agricul- aim of achieving an optimal solution from the viewpoint of
ture, sewage and urban runoff. When this happens, usually the whole community and the whole ecosystem, e.g. marine
because of pollution from land, plant life – phytoplankton or spatial planning.
algae – proliferates.
Large marine ecosystem:
Evaluation: regions of the world’s ocean encompassing coastal areas
a management activity that assesses achievement against from river basins and estuaries to the seaward boundaries
some predetermined criteria, usually a set of standards or of continental shelves and the outer margins of the major
management objectives. ocean current systems. They are relatively large regions on
the order of 200,000 km2 or greater, characterised by distinct
Forecast: bathymetry, hydrography, productivity and trophically
a probable future (often used interchangeably with a ‘predic- dependent populations.
tion’); a description of a relatively unsurprising projection of
the present. Forecasts can be either quantitative or qualitative.
Glossary
11

Licence: Natural capital:

also known as permit or consent; a document giving the pro- the stocks of living and non-living resources that provide
ducer the right to operate according to the terms established benefits and services needed by people and all life on Earth.
by a regulating authority.
Normative:
Management action or measure: an analysis leading to a recommendation or prescription that is
a specific action taken to achieve a management objective; based on value judgments or that reflects society’s preferences.
management actions should also identify the incentives (regu-
latory, economic, educational) that will be used to implement Ocean domain:
the management action and the institution or institutional by exclusion and for the purposes of marine spatial planning,
arrangement that has the authority to implement the man- it is the area beyond the coastal zone and, consequently, not
agement action. regulated by integrated coastal zone management or equiv-
alent planning concepts. It is legally divided into areas under
Marine protected area: national jurisdiction and areas beyond national jurisdiction.
a geographically defined marine area that is designated and
managed to achieve specific (long-term biodiversity) conser- Outcome:
vation and sustainable use objectives (and that affords higher an anticipated result of the implementation of a marine spatial
protection than the surrounding areas). management action.

Marine (or maritime) spatial planning: Output:

a public process of analysing and allocating the spatial and a product or service delivered from a process or set of activities.
temporal distribution of human activities in marine areas
to achieve ecological, economic and social objectives that
Performance monitoring:
have been specified through a political process.
the ongoing monitoring and reporting of programme accom-
plishments, particularly progress toward pre-established
Metadata: goals and objectives. Programme measures or indicators may
summary data providing content, quality, types and spatial address the type or level of programme activities conducted
information about a data set; used in GIS mapping and (process), the direct products and services delivered by a
other applications. programme (outputs) and/or the results of those products and
services (outcomes).
Mitigation (or restoration) cost:
the cost of mitigating the effects of the loss of ecosystem Perturbation:
services or the cost of getting those services restored. the disturbance of the quality of natural resources caused by
human activity/use or natural processes.
Modeling:
the construction of physical, conceptual or mathematical Planning:
simulations of the real world. the process of thinking about and organising the activities
required to achieve a desired goal.
Monitoring:
the observation and recording of changes for the purpose Pollution:
of assessment of the progress and success of a plan. the introduction of substances or energy into the environment,
resulting in deleterious effects of such a nature as to endanger
Multi-use: human health, harm living resources and ecosystems, and
the joint use of ocean resources in close geographic proximity impair or interfere with amenities and other legitimate uses of
by either a single user or multiple users. the environment.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
12

Precautionary principle: Restricted area:

applies when there are threats of serious or irreversible a delimited area for the purpose of prohibiting or limiting
environmental damage and provides that a lack of scientific public access.
certainty shall not be a reason to postpone cost effective
measures to prevent environmental degradation. Risk assessment:
the identification of uncertainties and severity of adverse
Primary productivity: effects occurring to humans or the environment following
a measurement of plant production that is the start of the food exposure under defined conditions to a risk source.
chain. Much primary productivity in marine or aquatic systems
is made up of phytoplankton, which are one-celled algae that Risk management:
float freely in the water. the process of weighing management actions in the light of
the result of a risk assessment.
Principle:
in MSP, an essential quality determining the fundamental Safety zone:
nature of the marine spatial planning process, e.g. sustainabil- a defined area extending from a particular maritime infrastruc-
ity, precaution, transparency. ture to protect and secure all operational services.

Provisioning services: Scale:

the products obtained from ecosystems, including, for exam- the spatial extent of a geographic area under study.
ple, genetic resources, food and fiber, and fresh water.

Scenario:
Public good: a plausible and often simplified description of how the future
a good or service in which the benefit received by any one may develop based on a coherent and internally consistent set
party does not diminish the availability of the benefits to of assumptions about key driving forces.
others and where access to the good cannot be restricted.

Sea use regulation:

Qualitative data: the rules enacted for the regulation of any aspect of sea use,
data in non-numerical form dealing with descriptions. including zoning, use permits or area regulation, or any other
regulation that prescribes the appropriate use or the scale,
Quantitative data: location or intensity of human activity.
data in numerical form that can be measured.
Seascape:
Regulating services: a marine area where the interaction of people and nature over
the benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem pro- time has produced a space of distinct character with significant
cesses, including, for example, the regulation of climate, water ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value.
and some human diseases.
Sectoral:
Resilience: pertaining to an economic sector.
the ability of a system, community or society exposed to haz-
ards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the Spatial planning:
effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including a key instrument for establishing long-term, sustainable
through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic frameworks for social, territorial and economic development
structures and functions. both within and between countries.
Glossary
13

Stakeholders: Vision:
the individuals, groups or organisations that are (or will be) a desired or preferred future.
affected, involved or interested (positively or negatively) by
marine spatial planning management actions in various ways. Zoning:
the separation of uses that are thought to be incompatible.
Strategic planning:
a type of planning by organisations or sectors aimed at
improving the long-term effectiveness of operations.

Suitability analysis/maps:
the identification of the best location for a particular use
according to multiple criteria.

Sustainable development:
a development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs.

Sustainable use:
the use of natural resources in a way and at a rate that does not
lead to the long-term decline of biological diversity, thereby
maintaining its potential to meet the needs and aspirations of
present and future generations.

Top-down management:
a process of management in which management information
and decisions are centralised and resource users are kept
outside the decision-making process.

Trade-offs:
management choices that intentionally or otherwise change
the type, magnitude and relative mix of services provided
by ecosystems.

Traditional rights:
the rights of indigenous or traditional people that (to present)
have not been considered in a national and international con-
text or have not (yet) been recorded, and which are based on
the legal system of the individual cultures.

Transboundary:
issues which are cross-border where impacts may extend
across boundaries, not necessarily to immediate neighbouring
countries only.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
14

Introduction

Planning for sustainability and certainty to secure ocean prosperity

Since UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic where marine spatial plans already existed or were being
Commission (IOC-UNESCO) and the European Commission’s prepared, and to promoting planning processes in regions
Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DG where they have not yet been launched.
MARE) launched in 2017 their Joint Roadmap to accelerate
marine/maritime spatial planning (MSP) processes worldwide1, As we enter this new decade, the goal set by the Joint
the number of countries that have initiated, advanced or Roadmap remains today to triple the marine area benefiting
approved their own MSP processes has increased significantly. from MSP, approved and led by governments and their
citizens and effectively implemented in more than 30%
Through the active and effective participation of policy mak- of marine areas under national jurisdiction by 2030. This is
ers, representatives of maritime sectors, academia, citizens in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
and other stakeholders in activities organised in all corners and supported by national and regional initiatives in the
of the ocean, the MSPglobal Initiative has contributed to framework of the United Nations Decades of Ocean Science
improving cross-border and transboundary cooperation for Sustainable Development and on Ecosystem Restoration.

Accelerating global planning processes together

Twenty countries now have plans approved and under imple- It is worth noting that a further eighty-two countries have
mentation for their maritime jurisdiction (covering 22% of the also committed to moving forward with the development of
world’s EEZs). Further twenty-six countries are in the process MSP processes in their maritime jurisdictions (covering 47%
of approving plans for their jurisdictional waters (covering of the world’s EEZs) and where planning is at an early stage. In
25% of the world’s EEZs). This second group includes coun- many cases, these processes are initiated as the natural evo-
tries in the European Union mandated to have MSP plans lution of their coastal management plans or supported in the
by 2021, in Africa such as Kenya, Mauritius, Mozambique design of their national maritime policies or new national or
and Namibia, in America with excellent progress in Mexico, regional sustainable blue economy strategies. In most cases,
Peru and Uruguay, the same in South Korea, Iran and Japan governmental engagement is initiated through pilot projects
in the Asian region, and in Oceania with many examples in at local level or through cross-border intergovernmental
Small Island Developing States such as Kiribati, Palau and the projects with neighbouring countries at regional level.
Solomon Islands.

1 [Link]
Introduction
15

Shaping the future of international MSP and sustainable ocean governance

DG MARE and IOC-UNESCO operate in a spirit of cooperation Both institutions, working together with their Member States
and multilateral action, in which the challenges of ocean and other international agencies, share the hope that the
governance can be addressed with MSP as an important inte- objectives of their Joint Roadmap become a reality in the
grated planning framework to promote sustainable ocean next ten years. Hence, the importance of continued coopera-
governance. Indeed, the MSP process moves away from tion to create more opportunities at local and regional scale,
isolated sectoral management to take into account multiple sharing innovative ways of implementing MSP in diverse con-
economic, ecological and social objectives. This makes it texts and facilitating collaboration between neighbouring
possible to reduce conflicts and to promote coexistence and countries. We must recognise that land and maritime borders
synergies in the maritime domain. are the nexus of union and dialogue between our countries,
and this is a legacy that we have an obligation to leave to
future generations.

Committed to empowering planners in their own countries and regions

This guide complements a wide range of existing or ongoing workers and planners, young or adult women and men, to
initiatives on all continents. It is against this backdrop that lead planning processes in their own countries, because no
it should be viewed, used and interpreted. In this way, each one will do it better than them.
user can determine how they can combine or integrate
the guide with their own needs, using it according to their This is the reason for the emphasis on continuous capacity
objectives and capacities to develop fair, ethical and socially building and capacity enhancement. That will undoubtedly
responsible planning. improve the management of resources, skills and knowledge
of people and institutions to lead, contribute and effectively
It compiles experiences and lessons learned, with examples participate in planning processes. The outcome of this pro-
from all regions of the world. These are intended to contrib- cess will be a reinforced awareness of the role of the ocean
ute to the empowerment of local leaders, national experts, for all of humanity.
 16

©KateChris/[Link]
 17

1 About this guide

THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES

y The purpose of this guide

y The main target audiences
y How the guide was developed
y How to use this guide
y Other existing guides

What is the purpose of the guide? participatory process of analysing and allocating the spatial
and temporal distribution of human activities in marine areas
The MSPglobal Guide is the result of a joint ini-
to achieve ecological, economic and social objectives that
tiative by the European Commission’s Directorate-General
have been specified through a political process (IOC-UNESCO,
for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DG MARE) and the
2009). Marine spatial plans are forward-looking; a clear vision
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of
and purpose are essential for a well-developed long-term plan.
UNESCO, in order to support the development and implemen-
tation of marine/maritime spatial planning (MSP) processes
worldwide.1 The purpose of the guide is to assist governments,
Who is the guide for?
partners and MSP practitioners globally in the development of
This guide is developed to assist governments,
marine spatial plans, and to capture the evolution and lessons
stakeholders, communities and all relevant parties with the
learned globally on MSP since the first guide was published in
practice and design of marine spatial plans. The guide will be
2009 by IOC-UNESCO. The development of MSP as a practice
of interest to those with decision-making roles, including poli-
is evolving to address new and emerging issues related to
cy-makers, planners, local authorities and government officials
ecosystem-based management of the ocean.
at the local, national, regional and global level. It will also be
Practically speaking, the application and implementation of of interest to practitioners and students of MSP. Furthermore,
MSP varies across geographic scales and jurisdictions, from it may be useful for marine sectors, academics, private com-
local to national and transboundary. MSP can take many panies, consultants and civil society organisations to better
different forms, from high-level strategic plans to comprehen- understand the importance of their role, including how and
sive plans with detailed implementation actions. MSP can be when they can contribute to an MSP process.
finalised as a policy document or signed into law and be legally
This guide can be used to develop MSP training courses,
enforceable – this guide is intended to help with the full range
teaching and learning interactions, develop or advance good
of MSP approaches.
practices, and to engage audiences who already have previous
The form of MSP that a particular geography may use relates to knowledge about spatial planning.
the current and future needs that the plan aims to address, and
the scope and scale of the effort.

The best outcomes are reached when marine spatial plans Why has the guide been developed?
involve all key stakeholders and are coordinated and inte- The first IOC-UNESCO guide was published in 2009
grated with sectoral policies and decision-making. In all cases, to advance an ecosystem-based approach to planning and
the defining qualities of MSP indicate that it is a public and managing the ocean. Countries and territories around the

1 Marine and maritime will be used interchangeably.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
18

Figure 1.1
SDGs of the UN 2030 Agenda

world have initiated or implemented their MSP processes, This experience shows that countries can organise MSP in
shaping the meaning of MSP due to new goals and objectives different ways and still be successful. Thus, taking into account
to be addressed, such as renewable energy, the achievement the lessons and challenges of using the 2009 edition, this
of 10% of marine protected areas (MPAs) by 2020 following new guide presents the marine spatial plan as different topics
the Aichi Biodiversity Target2 of the Convention on Biological illustrated by lessons learned and case studies by topic, rather
Diversity (CBD), and a growing need to consider additional than as a clear sequence of steps.
themes such as the blue economy, transboundary MSP, climate
change and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the
United Nations (UN) 2030 Agenda (Figure 1.1).
How was the guide developed?
In this context, the next logical step for DG MARE and IOC- This guide was developed from the expertise and
UNESCO was to encourage and strengthen transboundary experience accumulated during the last decade by profession-
MSP globally as a priority action of the Joint Roadmap to als working on technical, practical and conceptual aspects of
accelerate MSP processes worldwide.3 This is also convergent MSP worldwide. The MSPglobal Initiative invited professionals
with the efforts of the international community to promote from all regions of the world to take part in an international
the development of strategic action plans at transboundary expert group which, over a period of two years, compiled and
scale to achieve long-term sustainable use of ocean resources discussed lessons learned, approaches, challenges and oppor-
(Figure 1.2). tunities for this new guidance, including a series of dedicated
During the past ten years, the MSP process has been applied policy briefs.4
in many different contexts, cultures and languages around the Regional consultations and international MSP forums took
globe, making it possible to bring examples from new regions place between 2018 and 2021 in the Mediterranean, the
and continents, and to draw lessons from the application of Southeast Pacific, the Atlantic, the Caribbean, the Gulf of
the first IOC-UNESCO guide. Guinea, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, the Indian Ocean, the South
China Sea and the Baltic Sea, including experts from Small
Island Developing States (SIDS).

2 [Link]
3 [Link]
4 [Link]
About this guide
19

A series of national workshops on MSP implementation were

jointly held with national authorities of Indonesia, Germany,
Finland, China, the Netherlands and Mozambique to share
their national practices and lessons learned. Other events were Ecosystem-based Marine
organised in collaboration with national authorities identifying management protected areas
the linkages in between MSP and sustainable blue economy in
Africa, Latin America, Eastern Mediterranean and SIDS.

Dedicated thematic workshops and interviews were con-

ducted in 2020 and 2021 in collaboration with the European Renewable 10% by 2020
MSP Platform,5 the UN Global Compact6 and LME:LEARN.7 energy siting CBD Aichi target

A guiding principle in developing the guide was to showcase

inspiring examples of MSP for users to consider and reflect
upon, which they might apply in their own context according
EBM Cumulative
to the resources they have available. fisheries effects

How to use the guide?

This guide is designed to be used at any stage of an Aquaculture Ecosystem services
MSP process, from the initial or pre-planning phase to imple- siting and natural
mentation, so that it can be opened at any chapter and to find capital
information related to MSP topics, activities, case studies and
actions. How the guide is used is up to the user and a structure
has been developed for quick access to key topics that have
10% by 2020 Climate
surfaced in recent years. The content is intended to support change
UN SDG 14
the development of a diversity of MSP processes and plans,
and is not intended to be prescriptive or take a ‘one-size-fits-all’
approach.

Transboundary Blue economy

Links to other guides

The 2021 MSPglobal Guide joins an extensive list of
documents with the aim and purpose of guiding decision-mak-
Debt conversions High seas
ing in the field of ocean governance.8 Following the pioneering
for ocean and ABNJ
initiative of IOC-UNESCO’s ‘step-by-step’ approach, various
conservation
international organisations, both governmental and non-gov-
ernmental, academia and the private sector have produced
documents of different types at the national or subnational
level that directly or indirectly inform the advancement of MSP.
In addition, there are even more documents designed to be Food security 2030 goals
applied at regional and global scales (UNESCO-IOC, 2021a).

Figure 1.2
Evolution of the MSP concept from 2009 to present

Source: Smith, 2021.

5 [Link]
6 [Link]
7 [Link]
8 [Link]
 20

©Zorro Stock Images/[Link]

 21

2 M
 SP and ocean
governance basics
THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES

y Key concepts, main principles and basic

terminology
y Understanding the MSP processes
y Challenges in a changing world
y Transboundary planning perspectives

The integrated nature of MSP means that it is connected Ocean governance

to many other concepts associated with ocean and ocean
Ocean governance can be defined as:
governance. This chapter provides the basic concepts of MSP
and ocean governance as a foundation for getting started on The way in which ocean affairs are governed, not only
the planning process. Additional terminology can be found in by governments, but also by local communities, industries
the glossary. and other stakeholders, which includes national and
international law, public and private law, as well as custom,
tradition and culture, and the institutions and processes
2.1 Key concepts, principles and terminology created by them.1

Coastal zone
Ocean domain
A ‘coastal zone’ refers to a geographical area that connects
terrestrial and marine ecosystems. A coastal zone may or may The ocean domain is that physical space that is defined as
not include freshwater or tidal ecosystems like coastal wet- ‘ocean’ in three dimensions from the sea surface to the sea
lands and saltwater marshes. The precise spatial boundary floor. This is different from legal and authoritative definitions of
of a coastal zone is not universally defined around the world ‘sovereign waters’ (see Maritime boundaries). The emergence
and it can range from a few hundred to thousands of metres of MSP extends planning from the edge of the coastal zone
on either side of the high tide mark. From a public policy to encompass all maritime space – the ocean – where states
perspective, there is no standard definition of a ‘coastal zone’, exercise sovereignty and sovereign or jurisdictional rights.
as it is an area defined in national policy instruments that are
The ocean domain includes shallow and deep waters from
based on the environment and/or the administrative units of
the coast beyond the oceanographic continental shelf and
a country.
into the abyssal sea. Many different habitats, depths, features
The purpose of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) and physical processes occur in the ocean and knowledge
plans is to manage activities and uses that directly or indi- of these is important for planning and understanding bio-
rectly span the space between land and sea. The interactions diversity, existing and future uses, and impacts from climate
are related to environmental (nature) or socio-economic change. During the MSP process, published and unpublished
systems (human activities) that influence both terrestrial and hierarchical classification systems may be consulted in order
maritime territories of a country. to divide the ocean space and assist with plan development.

1 Borgese, 2001.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
22

The outer boundaries of a marine spatial plan can usually be Maritime boundaries
precisely defined from maritime boundaries, yet the inner or
Maritime boundaries in this case are the legal definitions
landward boundaries can be imprecise and subject to variability.
of waters under national and international law. The UN
This is because the discrete physical dimensions of the coastal
Convention on the Law of the Sea stipulates the general
zone are not universally defined (see Coastal zone) – especially
jurisdictional arrangements concerning the right of govern-
those at the margins. For example, mangrove ecosystems
ance and regulation of sea areas. The right to draw up and
occupy freshwater, terrestrial and marine areas and it can be
enforce a marine spatial plan extends to the whole sea area
difficult to spatially locate where the marine boundary starts.
of the acknowledged national jurisdiction in the territorial
In these cases, a discussion during the MSP process would
sea, as well as national sovereign rights and jurisdiction
evaluate the available data and information and decision taken,
over certain matters in the EEZ and the continental shelf
so that the spatial mapping aspects of the MSP can progress.
(Figure 2.1). Currently, no authority has the mandate to
develop and enforce marine spatial plans for areas beyond
The distinction between coast and ocean becomes more
national jurisdiction (ABNJ), which cover almost two-thirds
complex when considering the possibility of including ‘land-
of the ocean.
sea interactions’ in MSP. ICZM is referred to as a parallel and
distinct design process, which should ensure ‘consistency’.
MSP is also contemplated as part of the broader concept of
In addition, MSP should take into account the land-sea
area-based planning defined in the draft text (draft, Art. 1.3) of
interactions, as identified through case-by-case (formal and
the new international legally binding instrument (ILBI) being
informal) procedures (Lainas, 2018).
negotiated under the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea (A/CONF.232/2019/6, 17 May 2019). The understanding
While the definition of planning areas should be guided
and application of maritime boundaries in developing MSP is
by the spatial logic of ecosystems and the principles of the
essential, including awareness of national and international
ecosystem-based approach, legal certainty and the corre-
rights, such as the right of safe innocent passage.
sponding operability of the plan are only possible within the
boundaries of legally regulated areas (Maes, 2008).

National airspace International airspace

Internal waters
12 nm 12 nm

Land Territorial sea Contiguous zone High seas

Exclusive economic zone

200 nm
BASELINE

Continental shelf

Area

nm = nautical mile

Figure 2.1
Legal boundaries of the ocean and airspace

Source: Adapted from International Institute for Law of the Sea Studies.
MSP and ocean governance basics
23

Marine/maritime spatial planning (MSP)

TIP
MSP is a comprehensive and strategic process to analyse and
allocate the use of the sea areas to minimise conflicts between
human activities and maximise benefits, while ensuring the The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC)
resilience of marine ecosystems. It typically addresses many of UNESCO (2009) defines MSP as:
sectors, their interrelationships and cumulative impacts, and A public process of analysing and allocating the spatial
provides for spatial and temporal measures to steer different and temporal distribution of human activities in marine areas
to achieve ecological, economic and social objectives that
uses of the sea areas or resources. Spatial measures can
have been specified through a political process.
be, for instance, allocation of space for particular uses (and
exclusion of uses) or place-specific or general conditions for The National Ocean Council of the United States of America
the use of sea areas or resources. MSP documents may also (2013) defines MSP in its handbook as follows:
Marine planning is a science- and information-based tool
highlight important areas and societal preferences without
that can help advance local and regional interests, such as
explicit spatial dimensions. From a development perspec- management challenges associated with the multiple uses
tive, MSP is an inclusive process trying to address the needs of the ocean, economic and energy development priorities,
of society as a whole within environmental limits. and conservation objectives.

The European Union (EU) Directive 2014/89/EU establishing

In many countries, MSP is intended to be complementary
a framework for MSP (EULEX, 2014) defines MSP as:
to the existing marine management structures. It adds A process by which the relevant Member State’s authorities
important new elements and measures to reach the agreed analyse and organise human activities in marine areas
environmental, social and economic objectives. The MSP to achieve ecological, economic and social objectives.
process takes sectoral management into account and may Through their maritime spatial plans, Member States shall
use it as a basis for planning provisions, but MSP does not aim to contribute to the sustainable development of energy
sectors at sea, of maritime transport, and of the fisheries
replace single-sector management measures.
and aquaculture sectors, and to the preservation, protection
and improvement of the environment, including resilience
In countries where marine management is nascent or does to climate change impacts. In addition, Member States may
not cover all significant sea uses, the MSP process can be used pursue other objectives such as the promotion of sustainable
as an opportunity to improve overall marine management. In tourism and the sustainable extraction of raw materials.
such cases, MSP and the solutions it provides are not limited to
allocation of space or other distinctively spatial measures. The
MSP process can then be an opportunity for the development
Table 2.1
of a comprehensive marine governance system.
Challenges to delivering a blue economy

Australia defined in its Oceans Policy (Commonwealth of Threats to ecosystem services

Australia, 1998) the concept of ecosystem-based oceans plan-
y Pollution
ning and management aiming to ensure the maintenance of y Marine litter
ecological processes in all ocean areas, including, for example, y Climate change
y Eutrophication
water and nutrient flows, community structures and food webs, y Habitat destruction
and ecosystem links; marine biological diversity, including the y Overexploitation of living resources
y Invasive species
capacity for evolutionary change; and viable populations of all
native marine species in functioning biological communities. Governance issues
y Lack of resources
y Lack of governance integration
Blue economy (and related concepts) y Lack of sectoral collaboration
y Lack of transboundary collaboration
‘Ocean’ or ‘maritime’ economy is the sum of ocean-based eco-
nomic activities, assets, goods and services. It covers a wide Sectoral issues
range of established sectors, such as fisheries, maritime trans- y Fisheries: overexploitation of resources and illegal, unreported
port and tourism, as well as emerging sectors, such as offshore and unregulated (IUU) fishing
renewable energy, aquaculture and marine biotechnology. y Offshore renewable energy: environmental impacts, spatial use
conflicts and social acceptance
y Seabed mining: environmental impacts and spatial use conflicts
An ocean economy can be defined as either ‘brown’ or ‘blue’, y Tourism: environmental and social impacts of mass tourism and
non-regulated recreational activities
with ‘blue’ indicating sustainable growth and ‘brown’ indicating y Maritime transport: environmental impacts such as air pollution,
unsustainable growth (Patil et al., 2018). According to the World releases of ballast water containing aquatic invasive species,
historical use of antifouling agents, oil and chemical spills,
Bank (2016), ‘a sustainable ocean economy emerges when
underwater noise pollution and collisions with marine megafauna
economic activity is in balance with the long-term capacity of
Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021b.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
24

y mitigates conflict
Integrated, y promotes multi-use spaces for coexistence and synergies
multi-level y increases investor confidence by introducing transparency
governance
Stakeholder and predictability
partnerships y facilitates filling critical knowledge gaps on the ocean and
Marine
spatial key sectors
planning
y can foster collaboration across borders for regional
Resources development
and
y promotes capacity building through innovative and
Sustainable capacity
blue economy transformative technologies
Adapting
to the effects
of climate
change Science, Ocean multi-use
research and
technology ‘Multi-use’ refers to the intentional joint use of the same ocean
Financing development
and space and/or of resources in close geographic proximity by two
investment or more activities. Indeed, the term covers different situations in
Monitoring,
control and which maritime uses are (or may be) combined in at least one
surveillance
of the following four dimensions: spatial, temporal, provisioning
and functional.
Figure 2.2
Factors promoting a blue economy The application of the ocean multi-use concept can contribute
Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021b. to a more space efficient and sustainable use of the ocean,
bringing in additional environmental and socio-economic ben-
ocean ecosystems to support this activity and remain resilient efits. Multi-use has been considered and used in many of the EU
and healthy’, thus the ‘blue economy concept is a lens by MSP processes, especially for a more sustainable and symbiotic
which to view and develop policy agendas that simultaneously integration of new coming uses in already busy spaces.
enhance ocean health and economic growth, in a manner con- Therefore, depending on the type of interaction between the
sistent with principles of social equity and inclusion’. uses and their physical distance the multi-use can be classified
as: i) multi-purpose/multifunction; ii) symbiotic use; iii) co-exist-
Similarly, but specifically for the fisheries and aquaculture
ence/co-location; or iv) subsequent use/repurposing (Table 2.2)
sectors, the FAO (2018) developed a Blue Growth Initiative
(Schupp et al., 2019). Multi-use includes the combination of
(BGI) that ‘aims at supporting more productive, responsi-
offshore wind farms and fisheries, tourism and aquaculture or
ble and sustainable fisheries and aquaculture sectors by
multi-purpose offshore platforms.
improving the governance and management of the aquatic
ecosystems, by conserving biodiversity and habitats, and by
Marine management
­empowering communities’.
‘Marine management’ refers to sectoral regulation of human
More recently, at regional level, the European Commission activities at seas, e.g. catch quotas or technical regulations for
(2021a) adopted a new approach for a sustainable blue economy fisheries, or safety of navigation regulations for shipping. It also
in order to align the blue economy concept with the European covers marine environmental protection measures, such as
Green Deal and recovery strategy. This approach aims ‘to build limitations on emissions or environmentally harmful practices.
a resilient economic model based on innovation, a circular Sectoral regulations may also include spatial measures but for
economy and a respectful attitude to the ocean’, meaning that the purposes of this guidance document, it is useful to make a
‘businesses that use or generate renewable resources, preserve distinction between ‘marine management’ and ‘spatial planning’.
marine ecosystems, reduce pollution and increase resilience to
climate change will be incentivised, while others will need to
reduce their environmental footprint’. 2.2 Understanding MSP
MSP serves as a decision-making process to determine the 2.2.1 Integrating terrestrial, coastal and marine
organisation of human activities and to facilitate the achieve- planning, including land-sea interactions
ment of or shift towards sustainable paths in meeting the eco-
In many cases, coastal and marine areas have unclear limits,
nomic, environmental and social needs of societies. In practice,
which explains the need for connecting both coastal and
MSP is considered an enabler of the blue economy because it:
maritime planning actions. In this way, ‘planning systems’ can
y identifies sites for new and emerging uses following an
be created with the aim of coordinating policies and providing
ecosystem-based approach
MSP and ocean governance basics
25

Table 2.2
Recommendations from the multi-use action plans

Type 1 Type 3 Type 4

Recommendations Type 2
Multi-purpose/ Co-existence/ Subsequent use/
for Symbiotic use
multi-functional Co-location repurposing

Policy Provide financial Mainstream and Clarify rights and Adopt clear legal frameworks
(macro-regions/nations/ incentives and sureties include multi-use responsibilities of different and clarify liability rules
regions) for development of concept on all relevant users to ocean space (between current and future
new technologies and policy levels platform users), allowing
combinations for better management of
expectations and predictability

Regulation Develop and deploy joint Identify and apply site Ensure that effective Develop general suitability
(nations/regions) licensing procedures for selection criteria to cooperation and mediation criteria as to which sites and
multi-use development establish viable multi- mechanism are in place types of installations are suitable,
throughout entire life use sites in managed between representatives for which type of reuse
cycles waters of all sectors (i.e. working
groups)

Research Identify and address gaps Identify operational Gather and communicate Carry on time series research
(academia/industry) in current knowledge overlaps allowing for data about compatibility about long-term local impacts
about safety, benefits and the sharing of cost for of uses of maritime infrastructure and
drawbacks and create supporting services and installations to ecosystems
decision support systems infrastructure

Industry Develop pilot sites to Formulate exemplary Facilitate industry wide Suggest suitable investment
(corporations/ showcase and advance benefit and cost sharing capacity building regarding mechanisms to facilitate re-
associations) new technology in the agreements between opportunities and use of installations after initial
field involved actors operations lifespan

Source: Schupp et al., 2019.

Table 2.3
Examples of ICZM and marine spatial plans, and their geographical extent

Geographical extent
Name of plan/policy
Landward Coast Inshore Offshore

Belize Integrated Coastal Zone 3 km inland High water to 12 NM Low water; fringing N/A
Management Plan (2016) to high water reef; three defined
atolls to 12 NM or 3 NM

Trinidad and Tobago Draft Integrated 90 m contour 5 m contour Low water 12 NM to 200 NM
Coastal Zone Management Policy to 5 m contour to low water to 12 NM (or international
Framework (2020) border)

MSP for the period 2020 to 2026 N/A N/A Low water 12 NM to international
in the Belgian sea areas (2019) to 12 NM border

Ireland – National Marine Planning N/A High water to baseline Baseline to 12 NM to 200 NM
Framework (2021) 12 NM (or international
border)
JaySi/[Link]

Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021c.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
26

coherence for territorial actions, especially for coastal areas capabilities and political will also need to be further devel-
(themselves composed of land-sea interfaces). oped (Ehler, 2020).

While the integration of marine and coastal planning is a stand-

2.2.3 Multisectoral approaches
ard element in many coastal-marine policies (Table 2.3), their
integration with terrestrial planning, which has a long-stand- Planning the maritime territory was traditionally done through
ing history, is less so. While the coastal-marine articulation sectoral policies that often did not consider the presence
is evident, the construction of systems linking these three and impact of other sectors, resulting in a series of conflicts
domains is less common. This is due to their complexity, the between users. Sectoral policies do not always consider spatial
difficulty of concentrating administrative competencies in a aspects, which can lead to conflicts over the use of the sea
limited number of institutions, and the unprecedented nature areas. On the other hand, MSP emerged as a multisectoral
of marine planning. The standardisation of marine policies with approach with an explicit spatial perspective, aiming to coor-
the corresponding phenomenon of displacement towards the dinate and facilitate negotiation among sectors and societal
regional and local levels of administration seems to be a trend actors in order to solve current conflicts, as well as avoiding
in progress, and in this context, it will be easier for territorial potential future ones (Ehler et al., 2019).
policy wand planning to build complex systems of integrated
Indeed, successful MSP refers to bringing actors from differ-
management of terrestrial and marine spaces.
ent sectors and action arenas to exchange visions, interests,
concerns and work together in an integrated way towards
2.2.2 Ecosystem-based approach developing a holistic and widely acceptable plan. The intro-
MSP is expected to apply an ecosystem-based approach (EBA) duction of an MSP framework rarely replaces existing sectoral
by ensuring that spatial distribution and related decision-mak- policies or plans, but adds a stronger coordinating element
ing considers the principles and elements of EBA. to marine governance (Figure 2.3). This can lead to changes
in sectoral policies when they are later reviewed. In addition,
The CBD (2000) defines the ecosystem approach as a strategy national marine spatial plans can foster other multisectoral
for the integrated management of land, water and living policies, such as blue economy strategies.
resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use
in an equitable way. Application of the ecosystem approach 2.2.4 Participatory approach
will help to reach a balance of the three objectives of the
One of the guiding principles for MSP is the participatory
Convention and it is based on the application of appropriate
approach. An inclusive participatory approach means
scientific methodologies focused on levels of biological
the active engagement of stakeholders in the process of
organisation which encompass the essential processes,
developing and implementing a public policy addressing
functions and interactions among organisms and their
societal needs. It also improves the legitimacy and quality of
environment. It recognises that humans, with their cultural
decision-making processes, builds trust and is widely viewed
diversity, are an integral component of ecosystems.
as leading to decisions that are more durable than those
without participation (Fox et al., 2013; Sayce et al., 2013).
The coupling of MSP and EBA ensures that planning looks
beyond jurisdictional boundaries, cumulative impacts
As integration of concerns and interests is fundamental to
are considered, a precautionary approach is applied, and
MSP, the adoption of efficient and transparent participatory
planning is adaptive (Ansong et al., 2017). Particularly, the
approaches across government bodies (e.g. ministries with
application of EBA in a transboundary context is critical,
different mandates), sectors and action groups (horizontal
as marine ecosystems may span national jurisdictional
integration), as well as between government levels (i.e.
boundaries. In this case, it is useful to consider which EBA
national, regional, local – vertical integration) are of crucial
tools and mechanisms can support its application in national
importance.
and transboundary MSP, while acknowledging the discipli-
nary and jurisdictional realities and differences. Strategic The term ‘stakeholder’ does not have a universal definition
Environmental Assessment, for example, is an important tool or the same meaning in all languages, although it is widely
for implementing EBA in MSP (Eb-MSP). This assessment, accepted to refer to those individuals, groups or representa-
which evaluates the potential impacts of the plan, can tives of specific groups with an interest or direct involvement
run parallel to the MSP process or can be conducted as a in policy development or its direct outcomes.
one-time assessment during a particular planning stage.
Experience gained over the past years, however, has shown In the context of MSP, stakeholders include representatives,
that as both environmental and socio-economic goals are workers or those affected by all maritime sectors, govern-
important to be accomplished under an Eb-MSP approach, mental and non-governmental marine related organisations,
MSP and ocean governance basics
27

NATIONAL STRATEGIC INTEREST OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

National
Natural
sovereignty, Economic Environmental
resources/
defence and growth functions
high
security
technology

Outermost islands Free trade zones National fish stocks Conservation areas
Marine border areas Mega cities Renewable energy Marine biota migration
etc. Urban areas etc. Spawning grounds
etc. Sensitive areas
etc.
Important and strategic values

SPATIAL STRUCTURE PLAN SPATIAL PATTERN PLAN

Multisectoral approaches for economic growth Distribution of spatial allocation of marine areas
and network system of marine infrastructures (based on important and strategic values)

Marine growth centre Public utilisation Conservation

(zones)

Tourism Coastal and small

Marine and fisheries growth center islands conservation
areas
Sea ports and
fishing ports
Maritime
Center of marine industry conservation areas
Energy
Marine conservation
areas
Defence & security

Network system of marine infrastructures Sea lanes Direction for

provincial MSP

Shipping lanes Main activities that

Sea port system (including fishing port) should be detailed
in provincial MSP
Submarine
pipes/cables

Marine biota
migration routes

SPATIAL UTILISATION DIRECTIONS CONTROL OVER SPATIAL UTILISATION

Main programme Priority Zoning Permit

indications programmes regulations system

Figure 2.3
Multisectoral approaches of MSP in Indonesia

Source: Ministry of Marine Resources and Fisheries of Indonesia.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
28

academia, non-profit organisations and civil society, among the mandatory-indicative dilemma, as the decision will
others. Depending on the country and the extent of their depend to a large extent on the planning system in place in
marine spatial plans, the government bodies can also be each country.
considered as public stakeholders.
In the context of the European Union, the provisions of
It is important to define ‘stakeholder’ in the specific context Directive 2014/89/EU on MSP oblige Member States to draw
of your MSP, and to identify and engage with these entities up plans, although this obligation does not affect their power
for the decision-making process. Stakeholder engagement to determine the way in which the objectives are set out in
frameworks will capture the full representation of the values such plans. In fact, the rules of transposition into the respec-
and experiences. tive national legislation may not state whether such plans
are statutory or indicative (e.g. Italy and Spain) or contain an
explicit provision on their binding nature (e.g. Portugal).
2.2.5 Cross-border and transboundary cooperation
Cross-border MSP refers to engagement between two However, a common element in MSP guidance documents
entities that share a common (agreed or disputed) political relates to implementation and enforcement (existing or
border (e.g. neighbouring countries, regions, provinces or potential), including the categorisation of non-compliance
municipalities) on marine planning issues. and corresponding sanctions.

Transboundary MSP refers to the engagement of multiple

entities (e.g. countries, states, provinces) across one sea area,
which do not necessarily share common issues for marine
Further reading source
planning. ‘Transboundary’ expands beyond ‘transnational’,
as it might encompass ‘subnational’ (Figure 2.4) as well as For a detailed treatment of enforcement and compliance
the high seas. Similar to transnational MSP, each entity has in MSP, see: Environmental Law Institute. 2020. Designing
individual jurisdiction over different ocean spaces, different Marine Spatial Planning. Legislation for Implementation.
economic considerations, drivers for MSP, etc. A Guide for Legal Drafters. Blue Prosperity Coalition, p. 46 et
seq. [Link]
[Link]
The aims of transboundary cooperation may also range from
‘trying to avoid obvious mismatches at borders’ to technical
collaboration between countries to ensure coherence of
the plans and to foster cross-border synergies. It can also be
considered in terms of ‘functional coherence’, which focuses
on how the plan steers different human activities in spite of
differences in cartographic presentations.

When developing MSP, it is important to acknowledge exist-

ing transboundary mechanisms for specific ocean matters.
Indeed, there are already examples of such mechanisms
clearly fostering MSP (Box 2.1 and Box 2.2) or aspects related
to maritime activities (Box 2.3).

2.2.6 ‘Binding’ vs ‘guiding’ MSP policy

The legal strength of marine spatial plans varies from advisory
policy to regulatory. In some cases, plans are legally enforcea-
ble and the directions are mandatory (‘binding’); other plans
are designed to be ‘guiding’, incorporating elements that are
stipulated in existing, strongly binding policies.

These terminological nuances lead to a central question

regarding the capacity of these different documents to
ensure a certain degree of compliance and to bind the
different parties involved in the development of regulatory
instruments and processes. It does not seem advisable to
argue that MSPs, in and of themselves, should respond to
MSP and ocean governance basics
29

Global
warming
Pollution
coming from land
and from sea

ECOSYSTEMS STRESSORS

Invasive
species
Overfishing

Cum
ula
ti v e
e ff e c t s
Population
declines

NO3
O2
CO2 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Shifted
ecosystem
functions

Disrupted
food-webs

Public
participation

Network of Marine Risk

Protected Areas management

PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

RECOMMENDATIONS
Climate
refugia
Land-freshwater-sea
planning Inclusion of
transboundary
collaboration

Invasive species
Public control
participation

Figure 2.4
Cross-border and transboundary MSP

Source: Adapted from Katsanevakis et al., 2020.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
30

Box 2.1
Multisectoral and intergovernmental MSP framework for sustainability (Benguela Current Commission
and MSP in South Africa, Namibia, Angola)

The Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME) is richly

endowed with both living and non-living resources – from
large oil and gas reserves to abundant fisheries and unrivalled
natural beauty. The Benguela Current Commission (BCC) is a
multisectoral and intergovernmental initiative established by
Angola, Namibia and South Africa in 2007 to promote the vision
of the BCLME: sustaining human and ecosystem well-being for
generations. The BCC provides the legal and transboundary
marine governance framework with representation from senior
and ministerial levels advised by the permanent expert-led
panels: the Ecosystem Advisory Committee (EAC), Finance and
Administration Committee, and Compliance Committee. Within
the framework of the BCC, a regional working group on MSP was
created in 2016 which comprises five government officials from
each country, including key sector ministries and departments,
relevant officials from the development planning offices, as well
as technical experts and civil society.

The Marine Spatial Management and Governance Programme

(MARISMA) of the BCLME promoted sustainable ocean use in
the Benguela Current, focusing on implementing MSP, therefore
the three countries were the first in Africa to start developing
MSP. MSP was used as an integrative process that engages a
wide range of stakeholders and across borders. Government
departments, industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs)
and communities cooperate in working towards an agreed
marine plan that is supported by stakeholders and implemented
by public authorities. The BCC countries have divided their
marine jurisdictions into subnational planning units in order
to implement MSP in a more manageable and meaningful way Figure 2.5
(Figure 2.5). The BCC framework ensures coherent approaches to
MSP areas in national waters of the BCC Contracting
Parties
MSP between the three countries concerning process design, data
governance and spatial management (e.g. priority areas, zoning). Source: Finke et al., 2020.
MSP and ocean governance basics
31

Box 2.2 Box 2.3

Cross-border development zones in the Gulf of Guinea Transboundary mechanism to deal with maritime
zones and resources shared by Uruguay and
Joint Development Zones (JDZ) have become one of the Argentina
major trends of international law since the 1990s. As part
of the State practice on provisional arrangements, joint In 1973, Argentina and Uruguay signed the Treaty of Limits
development zones are governed under articles 74(3) and of Plata River and its Maritime Front establishing the
83(3) of the 12 December 1982 United Nations Convention on Administrative Commission of the Río de la Plata (CARP)
the Law of the Sea. These provisions advise or oblige States and the Joint Technical Commission of the Maritime Front
to contemplate ‘provisional arrangements’ of ‘a practical (CTMFM). The CTMFM is responsible for conducting studies
nature’ when they face deadlocks in negotiations over and adopting and coordinating plans and measures related to
maritime delimitation. This means that if States cannot agree the conservation and rational exploitation of living resources,
on their maritime boundaries, they can or should instead as well as conservation of the marine environment in a zone of
consider cooperation on the disputed maritime areas, for common interest (Figure 2.7).
a transitional period, while remaining under the duty of
carrying on negotiations. This treaty is considered a pioneer defining spatial zones,
exploitation rights and management measures for transboundary
This is exactly what happened in the Gulf of Guinea in 2000 maritime issues. The treaty focuses on navigation, pollution
between Nigeria and Sao Tome and Principe. While trying sources, fisheries, seabed resources and scientific research.
to achieve the delimitation of their respective economic The treaty established a common fishing zone (or zone of
exclusive zone, they soon faced a deadlock. Ultimately, both common interest) beyond the territorial sea of both countries.
States, explicitly referring to the relevant provisions of the CTMFM is also responsible for promoting and sponsoring joint
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, decided research campaigns in this zone and was already involved in the
to establish a JDZ off their coasts, which covers the whole area evaluation of submarine cables and pipelines that could affect
of their overlapping claims, that is a part of their potential the conservation and exploitation of living resources. Fishing and
respective economic exclusive zone. The Treaty was signed seabed resources extending to both sides of the maritime border
on 21 February 2001 and entered into force in 2003. shall be exploited proportionally and equitably to the amount
present on each side.
The current general concerns over global warming and ocean
governance entails a prospective analysis of the issues at stake
in that treaty, as it deals with potential exploitation of both
hydrocarbons and fishery resources requiring cross-border
planning. The legal principles to be applied in matter of
conservation and management of ocean resources make
planning a necessity for both countries to broaden their views
over cooperation and to consider instead a regional framework,
rather than a bilateral one, in order to efficiently meet the social,
economic and environmental objectives of their agreement in
their transboundary context of the Gulf of Guinea.

Figure 2.7
Treaty of Limits of Plata River and its Maritime Front

© CARP, 2021.
Sources: CARP, 2021; CTMFM, 2021.

Figure 2.6
Joint Development Zone

© Nigeria Sao Tome & Principe Joint Development Authority, 2020.

Source: Adapted from Tanga Biang, J, 2010.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
32

2.2.7 Differences and similarities between MSP Attempting to solve all problems and situations through MSP
and other governance approaches can be a very tedious and cumbersome process. MSP should
be the overarching framework within which all other policies
MSP is a public process that takes a comprehensive, spatial and
are articulated, thereby informing changes or revisions of the
temporal approach, while other protection and management
existing plans.
measures typically focus on one place or activity at a time.

Indeed, MSP can be a process of broader societal discussion 2.3 Using MSP to pave the way towards
beyond the narrow spatial planning perspective. MSP processes a sustainable blue economy
typically analyse the current use of the seas and discuss pre-
ferred future developments. The process is thus an opportunity 2.3.1 Maritime uses
to define the societal objectives for the use and protection of
Planners should consider the different users’ needs (Table 2.4
the seas. These processes should also take into account existing
and Table 2.5) to ensure equity and equality in sector rep-
international and national agreements, and ascertain which
resentation. This includes defining the interests of established
objectives have already been agreed. The MSP process should
and emerging sectors, as well as the implications for a sustain-
then identify which of the objectives can be achieved with the
able blue economy.
means provided by MSP, and which means are provided by
other marine policies, e.g. sectoral or environmental policies.
A particular challenge for MSP is specifying SMART2 objectives
for the implementation of sectoral management plans. Planning
In contexts where existing marine governance structures
scenarios can be developed once specific areas are allocated to
are not well developed, MSP can effectively be a process to
different uses with regard to their potential requirements, using
enhance and introduce the objectives of many international
trade-off analysis. Environmental impact assessments should
conventions and agreements. MSP can – and probably
also be conducted to indicate any possible adverse impacts to
should – include elements of marine management and spa-
the ecosystem. Based on these outcomes, MSP debates refer-
tial planning considering the limited sense of allocation of
ring to the final plan should be focused on the most efficient
space and giving spatially specific instructions/regulation of
solution that has the least environmental impact, while maxim-
the use of sea areas. On the other hand, where marine man-
ising the benefits of the involved sectors/uses.
agement is already well established, the added value of MSP
to broader marine governance is focused on the allocation
Coastal and marine activities normally have terrestrial links and
and integration of maritime uses.
components that need to be considered. Linkages between
terrestrial and marine planning systems are critical in this case.

Table 2.4
Types of established and emerging maritime uses

Uses Mobile Fixed Others

Established y Coastal and maritime tourism y Coastal aquaculture y Coastal communities
and recreation y Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) y Military defence and security
y Fisheries y Oil and gas y Maritime and underwater cultural
y Shipping y Pipelines and cables heritage
y Ports y Scientific research
y Sand and gravel mining

Emerging y Dynamic marine protected y Carbon sequestration through carbon y Marine bioprospecting
areas (DMPAs) capture and storage
y Deep sea mining
y Desalination plants
y Offshore aquaculture
y Offshore renewable energy (wind, tidal,
solar and wave energy)
y Other effective area-based conservation
measures (OECMs)

Sources: Elaborated by MSPglobal with inputs from multiple experts and bibliographic references.

2 Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound

MSP and ocean governance basics
33

Table 2.5
Sector needs and challenges related to MSP

Sector/Interest Sector and area of interest for MSP

Shipping and ports First generation marine plans normally take on existing shipping routes as a ‘given’, since the sector is
internationally regulated via the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which also limits national MSP’s
mandate on planning. MSP is critical here to ensure that important routes are kept free from all fixed installations.
MSP processes need to anticipate future shipping routes and the spatial implications of autonomous vessels.
In doing so, planners must have information about future port and traffic developments. Three dimensions need to
be taken into account for assessing current spatial claims and estimating future ones:
i) the trajectory, i.e. the coordinates of ships’ movements;
ii) width of the space required (depending on traffic density and vessel size); and
iii) water depth in relation to ships’ draught.

Pipelines and cables MSP authorities are normally not in charge of the detailed planning of related routes, but some countries’ marine
spatial plans provide for pipeline and cable corridors. This influences general data availability and access to
pipelines and cables in some cases.
Coordination and cooperation between national authorities is required to improve the harmonisation of
regulations, licensing requirements and data sharing across countries.

Fisheries Most plans do not allocate specific areas for fishing, as everywhere in the seas is a potential fishery area and
intervention anywhere affects fishing activities. Many aspects of fishing are regulated by international agreements
or policies such as the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy or the regional fisheries management organisations.
Fisheries is clearly a sector. However, due to its complexity, there should be provisions referring to the different
subsectors (small-scale fisheries, bottom, trawls, pelagic fisheries).
Areas for fishing should include which subsector (e.g. purse seine fisheries) is operating and for which target
species (e.g. anchovies/sardines), and also provide a temporal reference, as the activity may occur during specific
seasons.
Areas important for different life stages and essential fish habitats (areas where fish spawn, live or grow) should
also be taken into account.
Displacement issues and compensation may be among relevant issues to be discussed with fishers in the frame
of the MSP participatory processes.

Coastal and maritime tourism The diversification of coastal and maritime tourist offers and activities can lead to conflicts among different tourist
and recreation segments. Planning tourism properly may provide opportunities to improve the sustainable development of
coastal communities (e.g. the case of fishing tourism).
The tourism and recreation sector can benefit from diversification prompted by MSP through:
y time (ensuring availability and accessibility of intermodal connections throughout the year)
y space (ensuring a sustainable number of visits and sustainable effects on the ecosystem of new and existing
infrastructure; regulating/disincentivising peak visits) and
y new activities (providing a template for increasing synergies and managing tensions across activities between
tourism and other sectors)

Oil and gas The location of offshore infrastructure, safety and exclusion zones and maintenance/supply vessel activity should
be included in the MSP, these aspects are internationally regulated and shown on nautical charts.
Considering current sites and decommissioned sites for multi-uses and creating synergies with other uses can be
discussed during the MSP process.
When installed, the safety and exclusion zones do not usually require large areas. However, the offshore blocks are
vast areas under concession agreements where temporal exploration activities occur. It is also relevant to consider
oil and gas activities and pressures on ports and harbours, as well as potential impacts on other sectors and
environments.

Sand and gravel mining Marine aggregate resources are area-specific and this makes them sensitive to changes considering their long-term
investments, regulatory permissions and concessions for 30-50 years. An effort should be made to ensure that the
planning cycles of MSP are more aligned with the temporal scope of the sector.
Actual dredging only requires limited areas, but it is important that the seabed at these locations is not negatively
impacted by other sectors (known as mineral safeguarding). Planning has to consider not only the actual locations
but also their surroundings.

Coastal and offshore MSP can stimulate the creation of clusters of farms by allocating aquaculture management zones in specific coastal
aquaculture or offshore areas to avoid competition with other uses.
MSP can support the aquaculture sector by improving its social acceptance and through seascape and landscape
assessment to inform potential areas.

Offshore renewable energy In locating an offshore wind farm, consideration must be given not only to the turbines themselves, but also
(offshore wind, tidal, wave and the connections between turbines, the substation, and efficient connection to the grid on land.
solar energy) For tidal and wave stations, MSP should consider resource mapping, identify interest areas and potential synergies
with other offshore renewable energy uses.
In terms of interaction with other sectors, offshore renewable energy could be planned with recreational activities,
oil and gas, cables, fishing or aquaculture amongst others.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
34

Sector/Interest Sector and area of interest for MSP

Marine biotechnology or Most bioprospecting is currently performed on a small scale by numerous research groups.
bioprospecting MSP could help coordinate resources and engagement with such groups towards finding validated areas for lead
compounds that are likely to be suitable for development into medicines.

Carbon sequestration through Carbon capture and storage has moved up the political agenda and is now regarded as being potentially a major
carbon capture storage component of carbon abatement strategies, as early stage research and demonstration projects suggest that it is
both technically and commercially viable to implement (Sustainable Energy Ireland et al., 2008).
Ervia and Gas Networks of Ireland are assessing the role carbon capture and storage can play in helping Ireland to
meet its ambitious climate action targets. MSP can serve to identify areas for carbon storage in their jurisdictional
waters (Ervia, 2021).

Marine protected areas MSP could enhance the performance of a marine protected area (MPA) network through zoning synergistic
marine-use areas close to MPAs or buffer zones around vulnerable MPAs.
MSP could provide a broader perspective of how MPAs are nested within a marine spatial plan, and increase
ecological representativeness through protection of important areas, including those not selected as sites
for MPAs, where conservation measures could be proposed and implemented.

Maritime and underwater Maritime and underwater cultural heritage (MUCH) includes both tangible and intangible traces of human
cultural heritage existence. Intangible cultural aspects are relevant for social and cultural identity, and are important when engaging
with local actors.
Identification of compatible and non-compatible uses with MUCH is of prime importance when planning and MSP
could ensure better conservation of tangible heritage through the use of buffer zones or specific measures while
encouraging synergies through tourism activities.

Scientific research Research sites can be temporary (e.g. monitoring areas during specific seasons) or permanent (e.g. buoys and
landers).
The sites usually do not require large areas although it is important to consider them in MSP processes to ensure
compatibility and options for multiple uses.

Military defence and security Policy-wise, issues of national defence usually take precedence over all other maritime activities. This does
not mean that compromise is impossible. However, military needs cannot be negotiated to the same degree as
other maritime uses.
Military areas are well defined due to security reasons and restrictions. Ministries of Defence may issue
temporary exclusion areas for military activities, exercises or national emergencies. Many of these areas may
not be public knowledge.
Other maritime activities should be developed so as not to interfere with those related to security and national
defence.

Sources: Elaborated by MSPglobal with inputs from multiple experts and bibliographic references.

2.3.2 Impacts on the local/national economy 2.4 Understanding community needs

and transboundary contexts
2.4.1 Local and regional development
Measuring the direct economic impact of MSP is not an easy
task because each maritime sector is also influenced by other Although the MSP process is usually related to specific national
policies and other external factors, as well as by the market. development targets, it must also consider the subregional
However, a recent assessment analysed the production value, and local coastal contexts, taking into account community
value added and employment of some advanced marine spa- needs and potential. This should be done with the aim of
tial plans, revealing that such policies are able to boost blue gaining a systemic understanding of the integrated social
economic growth, especially for emerging sectors and during and ecological components that interact at subregional/local
the first years of plan implementation (European Commission, scales. Indeed, there is growing evidence that many needs
2020). However, the economic assessments of MSP should also are addressed at local level and through the MSP process;
pay attention to the distribution of benefits. The economic solutions that meet the diverse needs and opportunities of
analyses that aggregate on a national economy level may local territories, and are in line with sustainable development
ignore economic consequences at the level of coastal com- concepts, can also be promoted.
munities. New marine economic activities may contribute to
the gross domestic product (GDP) but they may also preclude Coastal communities may have some conflicts when both
traditional coastal livelihoods. established and new uses compete for the same sea area and
its resources. The impacts of new marine and coastal develop-
ments, such as offshore wind, aquaculture or its related infra-
structures in land, can lead to a conflict of interest between
coastal communities and recreational users.
MSP and ocean governance basics
35

Box 2.4 The analytic framework includes an MSP Scorecard and a

Poverty and gender considerations in MSP: SwAM social component to be used to guide and certify the social
Ocean’s conceptual and analytical framework sustainability of the MSP process (Figure 2.9).

Theoretical and analytical frameworks developed in recent years

stitutional co
show how MSP can contribute to more gender-equal societies
cal & in nte
and to their social and economic development. liti xt
o & W hy
P How
These frameworks can also help planners to ensure that the

Co
MSP process integrates gender when working in a context

nfli
Ho
where access to information and resources, the labour Opportunities Human

E co n

ct/Pe
w&
market and participation in public and political processes are & choice security

Why
gender-segregated.

o m ic & s o cial

aceful contex
How & W
MSP can impact all the dimensions of poverty: Who
y Access to resources: small-scale fisheries and mineral
extraction, aquaculture, participation in tourism industry, Power Resources
& voice

hy
employment in marine sectors, from a gender perspective,

t
co n
especially closer inshore, since women tend to be constrained
by family roles

tex
y Opportunity and choice: access to markets, education and
t
H ow
other tax-funded government services En & W hy
y Power and voice: can be improved by a more inclusive process, viro
nmen t
communication and capacity building t a l co n tex
y Human security: reduced conflict over resources, improved
access to resources and domestic harmony. Violence and Figure 2.8
insecurity tend to have a greater impact on women Poverty Toolbox
Source: Sida, 2017.
The impact of MSP on the above dimensions is dependent
on context (see outer ring in Figure 2.8).

MSP PHASE SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY CHECKLIST

Preparation
 Aspects juridiques et financiers, préplanifica- Recognition
tion, organisation de la participation
des parties prenantes  Baseline mapping and ecosystem services and activities, and potential conflicts, include the participation,
 Collecte et analyse des données existantes, financial and non-financial benefits to marginalised groups and any other criteria of relevance to the
consultations initiales et comblement des analysis of trade-offs
lacunes de données, évaluation préliminaire  Information on baseline, desires and concerns is obtained from/validated by all stakeholder groups
de la situation
 Contributions des parties prenantes sur les  To serve the interests of current and future generations, government sets non-negotiables that adhere to
perspectives souhaitées, les menaces qui Malawi principles, SDG goals and other international obligations
les préoccupent
 Détermination des éléments non négociables  All stakeholders are satisfied with that information, which is provided in terms of all the criteria that they
et des possibilités are concerned with (within feasible limits), and in a manner that they can understand
 Un ensemble de scénarios réalisables, résumés
sous forme de critères pertinents

Scenario analysis Representation

 Analysis of a set of feasible  Stakeholder groups considered include poor communities, women and marginalised ethnic groups
scenarios, with iterations as identified at an appropriate spatial scale
required  Each stakeholder group is represented in the MCA process, with each group participating in the
weighting of and scoring of criteria measured in a clearly understood way at an appropriate spatial scale

Outcome Distribution
 Final plan decided by the leading  Final plans do not breach any of the non-negotiable thresholds
authority, using satisficing subject They do not deepen any of the dimensions of poverty for any stakeholder group
to non-negotiables and other agreed
thresholds They do not compromise the welfare of women
They do not compromise social capital or cultural identity

Figure 2.9
Social sustainability checklist

Source: Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management, 2021a.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
36

Table 2.6 lists the criteria for evaluating impacts on potentially required for scoring the baseline, and related metrics that will
marginalised groups (e.g. a deprived community, or women also be quantified for use in the estimation of impacts.
in a deprived community), the guiding questions and metrics

Table 2.6
Evaluation criteria for impacts on potentially marginalised groups
Metrics required Metrics required Related metrics
Guiding questions
Criteria for scoring for scoring women’s needed to model
for scoring
community wellbeing wellbeing impacts of MSP
Power and voice To what extent are individuals % representation in local % representation of N/A - this metric used
able to articulate their concerns, community organisations women in local community to confirm the potentially
needs and rights in an informed and local government at organisations and local marginalised status of
way and influence decision- decision-making level; government at decision- the stakeholder groups
making affecting these concerns % representation in making level; (rather than increased
without discrimination national organisations % representation in voice as a result of inclusion
and government at national organisations in the MSP process)
decision-making level and government at decision-
making level
Resources To what extent are income and/or Average annual income, Average annual income, The contribution of marine
other benefits sufficient to sustain including the market value including the market value and coastal resources or
a decent living standard, and in of subsistence production, of subsistence production, activities to this income,
this regard, how do we define the welfare payments and welfare payments and by resource/activity
decent living standard/poverty remittances and non- remittances and non-
threshold in terms of $/hh/year monetary benefits monetary benefits
Opportunities To what extent is access Municipal expenditure per Municipal expenditure per The contribution of MSP
and choice to education, health care, capita on services x quality capita on services x quality activities to tax revenue,
infrastructure, energy, markets of financial audit of financial audit and the extent to which
and information sufficient to tax revenues reach this
allow households to move out of community
poverty
Security To what extent are people’s Qualitative scoring based on Qualitative scoring based on The sensitivity of
rights and livelihood potential data/expert opinion data/expert opinion community scores to a
being limited by unrest in the Score from 1 = unrest Score from 1 = household change in marine-related
community severely disrupts livelihoods, members frequently struggle access/income
To what extent are households to 5 = community is to achieve this, to 5 = secure The sensitivity of domestic
able to fulfil their family roles peaceful in this regard security scores to a change
and ensure healthy gender in marine-related access/
relationships income
Source: Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management, 2021a.

With the appropriate participatory activities, sharing of into MSP. The perspectives of social justice and equity should
information and zoning exercises, coastal communities and be addressed during all stages of planning.
residents may better understand the advantages and impacts
of new uses and facilitate the selection of the planning option The key elements of social justice are recognition, representa-
with higher social acceptance. tion and distribution (Bennett et al., 2019; Saunders et al.,
2020):

2.4.2 Social justice y Recognition: The acknowledgement of and respect for

pre-existing governance arrangements and history, as well
The social dimension of sustainability is linked to the eco- as the distinct rights and diversity of needs, worldviews,
nomic and ecological dimensions through peoples’ multiple livelihoods, lifestyles and knowledge.
dependencies on ocean resources and space for their food y Representation: The level of participation and
and livelihoods. The SDG process revitalised the sustainability inclusiveness of decision-making; timing and quality of
debate; sustainability returned as a common framework for inclusion into decision-making.
discussions, and provided the vocabulary to address the per- y Distribution: Fairness in the distribution of benefits, risk
spective of justice in ocean governance (Saunders et al., 2020). and harms of decisions, as well as access to resources, with
a particular emphasis on vulnerable groups.
The decline in ocean health also has serious consequences for
coastal communities and human well-being, which underlines Social inclusion needs to be seen as an inherent part of the MSP
the importance of incorporating social justice considerations sustainability agenda for contributing to the implementation
MSP and ocean governance basics
37

of the SDGs in marine and coastal areas (Gilek et al., 2021); The well-being and sustainable livelihoods of coastal com-
adaptive MSP, able to integrate the dynamic nature of social munities depend on access and related benefits, particularly
concerns promoting social cohesion and justice, may also under changing environmental conditions and levels of
aspire to transformative change towards societal resilience at resource availability (Bennett et al., 2018). Social learning and
the community level, which is crucial to advance sustainable socio-ecological innovation are essential for incorporating
development concepts and goals for 2030 (IPBES, 2019). multiple changes and dynamics in MSP and for moving
towards the sustainable use of marine resources (Gissi et al.,
2019). Indeed, being part of the change and benefits that MSP
2.4.3 Strategies for communities and community
can bring requires knowledge and skills from the community,
capacity
including an overview of the policy. This implies community
As part of the starting discourse for the MSP process, it is capacity building and public awareness raising during the
important to host community-level discussions to describe
MSP and increase understanding following the pre-planning
phase. It will be valuable to discuss how communities can ben- TIP
efit from a marine spatial plan and how they can be involved in
the planning process. Build trust, co-responsibility, ownership and ensure
compliance with provisions of the plan, as the communities
Although the main targets of MSP are set at national scales, will be part of the process.
plans should be developed at subnational/local scales captur-
ing the characteristics of the socio-ecological systems of the
mosaic of coastal communities and ecosystems within each of
the subnational entities (Box 2.5). Box 2.5
A blue economy strategy to lever MSP
It is also important to address and explain the issue of scale, as in Central America
marine spatial plans can extend far beyond coastal waters and
cover large sea areas. The Organization of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector
of the Central American Isthmus (OSPESCA) – with the
From a community perspective (for topics that are local), only support of the European Union, as well as the collaboration
of regional and national authorities, representatives of the
parts of the final plan may be relevant. The planning process
fishing, aquaculture and tourism sectors, academia and civil
needs to be organised on multiple scales, so that local con- society – developed the ‘Regional Strategy for Blue Growth’
cerns can be meaningfully discussed and taken into account, in the Central American Integration System (SICA) (OSPESCA,
at the same time acknowledging the larger scale issues and 2020). The SICA Council of Ministers for Fisheries and
their interplay with more local ones. These strategies can be Aquaculture activities approved this strategy and committed
edited or more can be added, depending on what is important to the sustainable development of the maritime sectors
according to objectives to become green, competitive,
for local community engagement discussion in all stages of
innovative and inclusive.
the planning process, including the review:
y Invite communities to learn about MSP and share their The strategy was developed based on four pillars:
perspectives on why the ocean is important and what they (1) Knowledge-based smart blue region
care about now and in the future in terms of managing (2) Growth supported by integrated governance
and protecting marine resources mechanisms
(3) Investment in the development of a new, competitive
y Present communities with planning scenarios to inspire
and innovative blue economy
interactive and tangible discussions focused on marine
(4) Growth promoted from equal opportunities
planning issues
y Engage community in a participatory mapping exercise The strategy identifies the need to foster the development
and implementation of national marine spatial plans,
y Invite some of the community members and leaders to while regional guidelines will be provided to support
take part in panel and/or round-table discussions the countries. MSP is seen as a necessary instrument to
facilitate the coexistence of different socio-economic
y Present planning documents in abridged versions in
uses. This initiative expects to achieve the development
‘everyday’ language, and include graphics of six national marine spatial plans by 2025. Moreover, these
y Engage community members through social media and four pillars also highlight the need for sectoral adaptation
community groups and mitigation plans in order to strengthen the resilience
of the maritime sectors.
y Ensure that information about the planning process is
disseminated in local newspapers and local radio stations Source: OSPESCA, 2020.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
38

pre-planning and planning phase, as well as the implementa-

Box 2.6 tion phase. As a result, people will be able to pursue proposals
Maritime clusters and partnerships and opportunities (Box 2.6).
in the context of MSP in Tunisia

The Tunisian Strategy for Integrated Coastal Zone 2.5 The transboundary dimension of MSP
Management (Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone
Management in the Mediterranean) was adopted in 2008 2.5.1 Implementing the UN 2030 Agenda
and entered into force in 2011. The development of a
national management plan is ongoing and supported by The United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
various partnerships and initiatives related to MSP. Development and its 17 interconnected Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), adopted in 2015, is a global
One of these initiatives is the Tunisian Maritime Cluster,
framework for international, national and local initiatives
which was created on 25 October 2019 by the President
of Tunisia. It seeks to bring together all the players in that can be led by any group of stakeholders – but especially
the maritime ecosystem, including industry, services through partnerships – towards a more sustainable and just
and maritime activities (public and private sectors), e.g. world. Moreover, it is a long-term roadmap that sets the
aquaculture, renewable energy, scientific research, marine scene for public policies.
biotechnologies, fisheries, maritime safety, oil and gas,
among others.
Therefore, MSP should embrace all SDGs and contribute to
The initiative has led to other regional clusters such as achieving them. As the 2030 Agenda can only be achieved
the Maghrebin Maritime Cluster. To promote synergies by ‘transforming global aspirations to local realities’ MSP
between the cluster and the MSP process, several can become a vehicle contributing to this aim and involving
members of the cluster are involved in the development different spatial scales of intervention. There is, indeed, room
and implementation of the MSP and the ICZM strategy. for such a process to tackle the challenges of the present
The maritime clusters seek to advance the following
decade, as shown in Figure 2.10. It is important to highlight
objectives that are in line with the objectives of MSP1:
that the achievement of a specific SDG should not jeopardise,
y The sharing of experience and good practices to
but foster, the others whenever possible.
support the development of maritime potential through
the development of a sustainable blue economy
y To set up projects in a wide variety of fields: planning 2.5.2 Planning for climate change
and sustainable use of the marine environment,
The ocean absorbs both heat and CO2 , therefore climate
biodiversity conservation, coastal protection, and
technological approaches for a circular economy in
change and increased emissions are making the ocean
fisheries and aquaculture warmer and more acidic. Among the many and varied conse-
quences of this scenario on biodiversity, shifts in geographi-
y To develop synergies between the various sectors of
activity linked to the sea and to promote them in Tunisia cal and seasonal distribution of some mobile marine species
and abroad are expected, while immobile ones will be under greater
pressure. Changes in oceanic circulation and chemistry also
y To support Tunisian innovation, research and training
for the protection of the environment and the affect the delivery of marine ecosystem services, while sea
sustainable exploitation of sea resources level rise and more frequent extreme weather conditions are
making coastal communities, infrastructure and maritime
y To support digital, technological, or environmental
innovations (concerning all maritime sectors and activities more vulnerable (IPCC, 2019).
activities
According to the UN Framework Convention on Climate
y To raise public awareness about the opportunities
Change (UNFCCC), ‘mitigation’ is related to efforts to reduce
offered by the sea and to encourage the involvement
of younger people greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestra-
tion; ‘adaptation’ refers to adjustments in ecological, social
Source: Tunisian Maritime Cluster, 2020. or economic systems in response to actual or expected
climate change impacts. The IPCC Special Report on the Ocean
and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (2019) clearly states
that ‘intensifying cooperation and coordination among
1 International Cooperation in the context of Marine Spatial Planning
governing authorities across scales, jurisdictions, sectors,
and Blue Economy in the Western Mediterranean. policy domains and planning horizons can enable effective
[Link]
responses to [climate change induced] changes in the ocean’.
in-the-context-of-msp-and-blue-economy-in-the-westmed-en/
[Link]
Tunisien-103671181076257/
MSP and ocean governance basics
39

MSP contributes to the sustain- MSP facilitates the sustain-

able development of maritime able management of fisheries
sectors with direct economic and aquaculture, and builds on
benefits for coastal communities, new research and technology
particularly SIDS and LDCs. to improve food security.

Education provides skills

MSP encourages the use of ma- and tools to enhance capacity
rine resources for health research and participation in marine eco-
and development, and includes nomic activities, planning, science
early warning, risk reduction and and technology and, raise aware -
management of health risks. ness about conservation needs.

MSP creates opportunities Synergies between inte-

through science, technology grated coastal management and
and innovation to improve MSP improve access to safe water
gender equality in ocean-related and better sanitation, and reduce
activities and decision-making. pollution caused by solid waste,
wastewater and marine litter.
MSP processes, associated
MSP promotes scientific re-
with Sustainable Blue Economy
search, technology and coopera-
strategies, facilitate oppor-
tion for the development of renew-
tunities for employment and
able energy at sea while preserving growth based on ecological,
marine and coastal ecosystems. economic and social objectives.

MSP encourages the develop- MSP contributes to managing

ment and diversification of mari- access to markets and resources
time industries and infrastructure in a way that benefits all actors,
as well as the transfer of marine and increases their economic pros-
technology to boost innovation. perity, particularly in SIDS and LDCs.

The integration of coastal

MSP aims to establish a Blue
management and MSP promotes
Economy that sustainably uses
a sustainable and climate-resilient
marine resources and ecosystems
transformation of coastal cities that through a circular economy
guarantees citizens a safe access to the and certified production.
sea and its cultural and natural wealth.

MSP integrates adaptation MSP applies integrated

and mitigation measures to build management strategies that
the resilience of marine ecosys - take into account land-sea
tems, and reduce exposure and interactions in the context of an
vulnerability to climate change. ecosystem-based approach.

MSP is a multi-level decision- MSP enhances regional part-

making process whose successful nerships at transboundary level
outcome depends on and for the achievement of the SDGs
strengthens participatory, trans - through cooperation in science,
parent and effective governance. technology and capacity building.

Figure 2.10
Relationship between MSP and the SDGs

Source: IOC-UNESCO, 2020.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
40

Table 2.7
Mainstreaming climate change impacts in MSP: Challenges and opportunities

Challenges Enablers and opportunities

y Variable impacts on sectors, in different geographies and at different y Climate-smart MSP: Planning initiatives that use data and knowledge
scales: The effects of a changing climate are not expected to affect all about climate change impacts on marine ecosystems and human uses
places uniformly, and so differences in socio-ecological vulnerabilities at appropriate spatial scales to develop resilience scenarios
should be spatialised and considered in planning scenarios
y Marine Protected Areas and nature-based solutions: These can be
y Limited knowledge of processes and impacts: There is still limited used to promote adaptation benefits such as towards the conservation
knowledge on the complexity of the processes underlying the impacts of ecosystems that provide services such as coastal protection, climate
of climate change adaptive areas, climate refugia and carbon sequestration
y Variable national responses: There is a tremendous difference in y Stakeholder engagement: Stakeholders may provide valuable
technical, institutional and financial capacities for climate change knowledge about how a system functions overall and how it has
adaptation between developed and developing countries changed over time
y Ocean and climate literacy: Raise awareness on climate change issues
and potential nature-based solutions

Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021d.

Not only environmental components, but also maritime Examples of MSP objectives related to climate change
activities will be affected by changes in the ocean (decrease, responses may include:
increase or relocation). Here, it is important to highlight y promotion of offshore renewable energy
that these consequences will vary according to geograph- y promotion of blue infrastructure and nature-
ical characteristics. Despite uncertainties and resource based solutions for carbon sequestration or coastal
challenges, MSP needs to incorporate climate change in its vulnerability reduction
analysis and proposals, and how it might affect the different y conservation of potential areas for climate refugia
steps of planning, aiming to create a dynamic plan that will
adequately balance and sustain the planning objectives Moreover, a climate-smart MSP could also propose the
supporting oceans’ resilience to climate change impacts (see emerging concept of dynamic marine protected areas
Table 2.8). Up until now, however, most planning initiatives (DMPAs), which means MPAs that are planned to shift across
have still been neglecting the issue (Frazão Santos et al., latitudinal gradients as species distribution are expected to
2020). Hence, it is important to ensure that MSP processes shift according to climate change models.
have the mandate to address climate change, as they may
function as a ‘switchboard’ for mitigation, adaptation and To bring climate change into an ecosystem-based man-
sustainable development objectives, thereby enhancing agement of the sea, the concept of climate refugia was
options in an integrated manner (Biesbrock et al., 2009). developed as a part of the planning evidence in the maritime
Indeed, identification of fit-for-purpose, nature-based spatial planning process in Sweden (Figure 2.11) (Wåhlström
solutions (NbS) that are spatially explicit and operationally et al., 2020). A climate refugium is an area where climate
mature, using ‘climate-smart MSP’ approaches, may signifi- change will not severely affect a species or its habitat. The
cantly promote sustainability and resilience in the different concept was then scaled up to include the whole Baltic Sea
planning areas and effectively contribute to the targets and region (Törnqvist et al., 2019). Six species have been inves-
goals of the 2030 Agenda (V. C. Vassilopoulou, personal tigated (herring, cod, blue mussel, ringed seal, eelgrass and
communication, 2021). bladderwrack). In the Swedish planning process, sea basins
are divided into 114 areas. Out of these, 16 areas have been
Under the UNFCCC, the international Paris Agreement was selected as needing special protection in order for important
adopted in 2015 and entered into force the following year. plants and animals to survive when the climate changes.
It aims to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5–2 °C These areas have been taken into consideration when
above pre-industrial levels; foster climate change adaptation, assigning the most suitable use to a given space.
climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions devel-
opment; and foster finance flows to achieve low greenhouse
gas emissions and climate-resilient development.

Efforts to reduce the impacts of climate change are reported

every five years as nationally determined contributions
(NDCs) to the Paris Agreement.
MSP and ocean governance basics
41

Table 2.8
Pathways to support the inclusion of climate change in MSP

Approaches Actions

Integrating climate change impacts Recognising climate change as a threat or challenge

in MSP policies
Including specific objectives related to climate change responses

Developing climate-related modelling and mapping tools in assessments about future conditions
of ecosystems and biodiversity, as well as maritime activities

Developing climate-related vulnerability and risk analyses

Including climate change in spatial-use scenarios and visioning processes

Promoting adaptation Adopting dynamic ocean management, i.e. defining flexible designated areas with boundaries that change
to climate-related change in space and time in response to climate-related change

Developing anticipatory zoning, e.g. defining a priori designated or exclusion areas in anticipation
of potential climate change impacts

Adopting an adaptive planning approach that includes revision opportunities to incorporate new
climate-related knowledge

Sources: Adapted from Frazão Santos et al., 2020; Cashion et al., 2020.

Figure 2.11
Climate refugia application in MSP

Sources: Törnqvist et al., 2019; Wählström et al., 2020.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
42

Box 2.7
Regional seas conventions

The United Nations, through its Environment Programme, The conventions set the rules for implementing the
provides what is considered the most important multilateral corresponding Action Plans, with most of the conventions
cooperation mechanism (Multilateral Environmental having additional protocols to address specific issues such as
Agreements) for the conservation of the marine and coastal protected areas, land-based pollution, integrated coastal zone
environment: the Regional Seas Programme (1974), a milestone management or offshore industries.
of so-called ‘environmental diplomacy’ (Mead, 2021).
The Regional Seas Programme has an institutional and
The multilateral character of this action-oriented programme organisational dimension (Regional Coordinating Units, Regional
is well reflected in the level of participation: more than one Activity Centres, Conference of Parties, Intergovernmental
third is made up of agreements that bring together more than Meetings, etc.) that reinforces the United Nations’ strategic
15 signatory countries per regional basin (Figure 2.12). presence at regional level, global consensus and policy
coherence in relation to environmental issues of sustainable
There are currently 18 Regional Seas Programmes, 14 of which development.
have adopted a legally binding instrument: the Regional Seas
Conventions. Of these 14 conventions, 11 are linked to the UNEP- Sources: Mead et al., 2021; Ban et al., 2014.
sponsored programmes, the remaining 3 being independent
(Baltic Sea, North East Atlantic and Antarctic).

Figure 2.12
Geographical distribution of regional seas conventions

© Ban et al., 2014.

MSP and ocean governance basics
43

Box 2.8
The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living CCAMLR is an international commission with 26 members, and a
Resources (CAMLR Convention) forms an integral part of the further 10 countries have acceded to the Convention. Based on
Antarctic Treaty System. the best available scientific information, the Commission agrees
on a set of conservation measures that determine the use of
The relationship between the CAMLR Convention, the Antarctic marine living resources in the Antarctic.
Treaty and the Treaty’s Protocol on Environmental Protection, as
well as the conservation principles embedded in the Convention The key institutional components of CCAMLR are:
itself, are among the key features that distinguish CCAMLR from y the CAMLR Convention which entered into force
regional fisheries management organisations. on 7 April 1982
y a decision-making body, the Commission
The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living y a scientific committee which advises the Commission
Resources (CCAMLR) was established by international convention using the best available science
in 1982 with the objective of conserving Antarctic marine life y Conservation measures and resolutions
(Figure 2.13). This was in response to increasing commercial y CCAMLR’s membership and provisions for international
interest in Antarctic krill resources, a keystone component of the cooperation and collaboration
Antarctic ecosystem and a history of over-exploitation of several y a secretariat based in Hobart (Tasmania), in Australia that
other marine resources in the Southern Ocean. supports
the work of the Commission.
Responsible for the conservation of Antarctic marine ecosystems,
CCAMLR practices an ecosystem-based management approach. CCAMLR’s programmes of research, monitoring and the
This does not exclude harvesting, as long as this is carried out in a application of conservation measures in the Convention Area
sustainable manner and takes account of the effects of fishing on make a valuable contribution to Antarctic conservation.
other components of the ecosystem.
Sources: CCAMLR, 2021; European Commission, 2021b.

Figure 2.13
CCAMLR MPA planning domain

Source: CCAMLR, 2021.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
44

2.5.3 Multilateralism: Technical solutions offered Since the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
by international maritime boundary treaties and their (UNCLOS), the geographical and economic characteristics
application to marine spatial plans of countries have been taken into account in various inter-
national treaties in relation to the development of their
During the celebration of the 75th anniversary of the United provisions. These range from the mention of geographically
Nations, heads of state and government stated that strength- disadvantaged States in UNCLOS (Art. 70) to the revised draft
ening international cooperation is in the interest of both text of an agreement under the United Nations Convention
nations and peoples. on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use
of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national juris-
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development represents
diction (Art. 7), where six groups of countries in conditions of
the roadmap to reinvigorate multilateralism, and the agenda’s
vulnerability are identified as developing States. These are:
implementation has become a necessity for survival.
least developed countries (LDCs), landlocked developing
countries (LLDCs), geographically disadvantaged States,
In line with the principles of MSP, this updated multilater-
Small Island Developing States (SIDS) (Figure 2.14), coastal
alism is determined to advance leaving no one behind,
African States and developing middle-income countries.
acting together to protect our planet and, more specifically,
our ocean.
In reality, these categories of countries make up the majority
of the community of nations, with only two categories – LDCs
Multilateralism, in the same way as transboundary agree-
and developing middle-income countries – accounting for
ments, promotes coherence, peace and prevents conflict
77% of UN Member States.
through a long list of mediation actions and preventive
diplomacy, with international law and justice as an indispen-
The challenges of implementing MSP in SIDS imply: i) difficulty
sable foundation for a more prosperous and just world.
and severe limitations in the development and management
of planning instruments, due to their high cost – something
Existing global and regional mechanisms can serve to accom-
which particularly affects the least developed and develop-
plish this mission by boosting partnerships and cooperation
ing middle-income countries; and ii) dependence on MSP
across borders. Global and regional actions will help us to
for the promotion of development in the case of countries
better understand our common and specific challenges to
whose territorial base is predominantly marine – something
shape solutions through inclusive governance, the creation
that is aggravated if their economic level is also low.
of opportunities and prosperity for all (Boxes 2.7 and 2.8).

2.5.4 Vulnerable and disadvantaged States

Most of the issues discussed so far have a direct effect on, or
are closely related to, a significant part of the international
community, without the participation of which it would be
difficult to make progress in the search for solutions to con-
flicts of a global nature. There is certainly full consensus that
climate change is one of the most representative in terms of
its impact on different countries according to their level of
economic and human development. The concept of the blue
economy is especially linked in its origin to the developing
world, and initiatives such as the SDGs are primarily aimed at
this part of the international community.
MSP and ocean governance basics
45

Figure 2.14
Small Island Developing States

Source: R. Zitoun et al., 2020.

 46

©akuditaputri/[Link]
 47

3 How to set the scene

THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES It is important not to assume that high-level officials, academ-
ics and other stakeholders or participants at this stage and
y The creation of the MSP working group beyond know what MSP is about. Knowledge sharing and
y The identification of existing legal and institutional learning takes place throughout the MSP.
frameworks to develop MSP
y The identification of stakeholders and their 3.2 Identifying existing national legal
planning needs
and institutional frameworks
y The budget and funding available for the MSP
process At this stage, the vision, goals and objectives of the MSP have
not been identified (see Chapter 4). However, it is necessary
to have a good understanding of the existing legal and insti-
tutional frameworks on which to anchor the MSP. This task
will also identify where there are weaknesses or gaps in these
3.1 Creating an MSP working group frameworks.
In order to start organising a government-led MSP process,
A useful starting point is to first map maritime and sector laws
the first task is to determine whether there are existing marine
and regulations, then to map plans, priorities, programmes
and coastal planning capabilities, i.e. which institutions or
and strategies.
agencies have the legal authority to manage marine resources
and enforce activities in the maritime area. In most countries, The identification of any established national policies related
multiple institutions have environmental, maritime and/or to MSP and a sustainable blue economy could start by review-
planning authority, and their spatial jurisdiction may overlap,
ing the following sources:
be unconnected or be non-existent.
y National ocean policy/strategy
In the initial stages of launching an MSP process, it is advisable y Blue/ocean/maritime strategy
to create and set up a multi-institutional or multi-agency y Sectoral policies
working group from the competent authorities as a steering y Sectoral management plans
committee. This working group may include key stakeholders, y Integrated coastal zone management (ICZM)
experts – including from academia, and/or members of civil y Renewable energy targets
society – with experience in marine planning. It may also y Regional and/or local development programmes
include members with experience in land use planning if this (especially for coastal regions)
is the first time for MSP. y Climate change adaptation strategies (e.g. if not included
in ICZM)
The purpose of the working group is to begin organising the y Environmental plans and policies
process and bring perspectives and expertise from multiple
sectors to coordinate the launch of MSP. The working group Maritime policies often correspond to the competences of
could also ensure that representatives from sectoral authori- national governments. The vision of ‘maritime affairs’ (uses,
ties and stakeholders are kept aware of the MSP process and activities and utilisation of the maritime space in the strategic
what to expect in terms of timelines and the workstreams. sense) is that of a ‘matter of state’. The ‘oceanic’ vision of states
has evolved over the past decade, giving rise to formal pro-
The working group would develop a Terms of Reference docu- nouncements at different political-institutional and legal levels.
ment, or something similar, outlining its roles and responsibil-
ities, schedule of meetings, timeline, etc. One of the tasks for Integrating different policies and administration levels is
this group can be an assessment of the legal and institutional an important aspect of developing and establishing MSP
framework, among others as listed hereinafter. (Box 3.1).
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
48

Box 3.1
Integrating coastal management, MPAs and MSP in São Paulo, Brazil

Brazil approved its National Coastal Management Plan in 1988. North, Central and South Coast. The Management Plan of the
Its regulations defined the planning boundaries within the 12 MPA of the Central Coast of São Paulo, for example, defined in
NM from the coast and, among other instruments, included more detail the coastal management zones previously established
Coastal Ecological Economic Zoning (ZEEC) – a territorial tool for the ZEEC Baixada Santista, as well as additional zones further
which enables management, licensing and monitoring to be offshore (meaning that the ZEEC and the MPA management
developed in a participatory manner by each coastal State. The plan are complementary). This plan was developed through a
ZEEC aims to establish guidelines about permitted, prohibited participatory process that engaged representatives of the local
and potential uses. The Ministry of Environment is responsible government, sectoral stakeholders, researchers and civil society.
for monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the The categories of MPA zones are the following: i) no-take zone;
national plan, as well as for observing the coherence of the State ii) geobiodiversity protection zone; iii) small-scale use zone; iv)
Coastal Management Plans. extensive use zone; and v) intensive use zone (ALESP, 2021).

The State Coastal Management Plan of São Paulo was Similar to coastal management and MPA processes in other
established in 1998 (before the national regulation) and defined countries, the Brazilian zoning classifies the different zones
the 23.6 m isobath as its planning limits. São Paulo developed four according to the intensity of a group of uses allowed, i.e. not
ZEECs, three of which have a maritime front: North Coast, Baixada a zone for each sectoral use. And this is the added value that
Santista and Cananéia-Iguape Estuarine Complex (SMA, 2013). complementary MSP processes based on a clear long-term
vision, specific objectives and spatial allocation of uses could
Later, three MPAs for both conservation and sustainable use of bring to these countries.
natural resources were created in areas including these sections:

Zoning legend:
green = no-take zone; blue = geobiodiversity protection zone; yellow = small-scale use zone;
orange = extensive use zone; red = intensive use zone.

Figure 3.1
Management Plan of the MPA of the Central Coast of São Paulo

© Secretariat of Infrastructure and Environment of the State of São Paulo, 2021.

How to set the scene
49

3.3 Identifying existing international

Relevant international legal instruments
laws, regulations and agreements
applicable and/or adopted by the country y United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
or countries – Basis for the declaration of the various maritime jurisdictions
– Stipulates international principles of controlling shipping
At the global level, independently of countries’ decisions and right of innocent passage
to sign/ratify UNCLOS, MSP has been adopted as a model – Indicates extent of responsibilities for protection of biological
for an ecosystem-based approach in the planning and marine resources
management of the marine environment, as well as for the – Authority to manage and prohibit extraction activities within
national jurisdiction
public process towards achieving target 2 of Sustainable – Addresses piracy and prosecution of illegal activities within
Development Goal 14 (SDG 14) of the United Nations 2030 national jurisdiction and international/territorial sea cooperation
Agenda – ‘Sustainably manage and protect marine and y United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts, y United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
including by strengthening their resilience, and take action and related agreements and protocols
y United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement
for their restoration in order to achieve a healthy and pro-
y FAO Compliance Agreement
ductive ocean’. y FAO International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate
IUU Fishing
Alongside the blue economy, MSP can thus contribute y International Convention for the Safety of Life At Sea (SOLAS)
to increased economic and social benefits, and examine y Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
possible trade-offs between economic, social and environ- y International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships (MARPOL)
mental objectives in order to find a balance between them.
y Port State Measures Agreements (PSMA)
At the same time, MSP can drive the achievement of many y Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar)
other international agreements, such as the CBD and the
Paris Agreement on climate change.

Initiate and support

Lead by example
innovative governance

R AN OCEAN
FO TH
NG
AT
I
AIM

IS

CLEAN &
HEALTHY PRODUCTIVE
Drive international Strengthen/build
negotiations partnerships & alliances
RESILIENT UNDERSTOOD

Develop capacity Support innovation and

knowledge production

Figure 3.2
Setting the course for Sustainable Blue Planet

Source: International Ocean Governance Forum, 2021.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
50

3.3.1 What are some of the international conventions 3.3.3 What are the regional mechanisms related
and agreements related to MSP? to MSP and a sustainable blue economy?
The protection of coastal and marine areas involves mul- Regional mechanisms and frameworks can support and enhance
tinational jurisdiction and raises the issue of international MSP efforts. These mechanisms can be legal agreements between
cooperation by both governmental and non-governmental states or cooperative agreements and conventions.
organisations. International cooperation is established
through several global and regional conventions, agreements y Regional-level cooperation (legal)
and programmes. – European Union
– African Union
One particular benefit of introducing the MSP framework is
– Federated States of Micronesia
that it adds a comprehensive spatial perspective on marine
governance. MSP is a process that is incorporated into the y Regional-level cooperation (conventions, agreements,
varied and complex structure of maritime governance and policy)
management, without any hierarchical or organised construc-
– Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy
tion of an express or preconceived interrelationship among
the components of that structure. This implies that such com- – EU Integrated Maritime Policy
ponents – principles, codes, guidelines, international treaties, – Eastern Caribbean Regional Ocean Policy
agreements within international bodies, national rules, etc. – Regional Seas Conventions
(Figure 3.2) – coexist without excluding or overriding each
other, and are activated and implemented in accordance y Sectoral-level cooperation
with the legal/political effects inherent in their legal/political – Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMO)
nature. It follows that the numerous governance and manage-
– Renewable energy targets and climate strategy –
ment actions already in place can continue to be generated
Electricity market and grid strategies (Ten-Year Network
within the framework of the instruments available without
Development Plan (TYNDP))
necessarily having to be integrated into MSP (e.g. the creation
of new marine protected areas). As a result, the range of gov- – EU Common Fisheries Policy
ernance and management tools is enriched, and governance – Belt and Road Initiative (transport and infrastructure
becomes more complex. network)
– Transboundary MSP (transboundary marine spatial plan
3.3.2 How can MSP foster international goals and vs transboundary MSP strategy) to ensure coherent
considerations beyond national borders? national plans
– MSP consultations, joint projects and events between
As the uses in the coastal and marine space become more
neighbours as a means to jointly address regional
and more complex, and new or emerging sectors look for
strategies
areas for sustainable economic development, MSP can foster
international goals for regional management and global – Check during follow-up of national MSP
coordination. MSP is a process, and as such can provide a ‘good implementation whether the regional objectives have
practice’ approach to solving multiple objectives beyond been met. The most relevant international objectives
national borders. Frameworks that have been tested and could be used as a basis for formulating indicators
applied within national jurisdictions can be adapted for other – Share information and reflect back at the regional level
applications.

International goals, or cooperative goals, could be developed

for MSP to address goals for those complex issues that are not TIP
defined or restricted by the borders of individual countries, How to integrate and optimise international,
such as climate change (Santos et al., 2019) and IUU fishing. regional and national processes?
MSP could also be used to foster international goals for a sus-
tainable ocean economy, blue economy and other ambitions y During the stocktaking phase, conduct a full analysis of
that involve multiple countries or entire ocean basins. agreements at the different levels

International goals and objectives would then need to have y Share information between levels (reporting; events
to bring together actors from different levels to share
a monitoring and evaluation plan and indicators to track
information and experiences)
progress.
How to set the scene
51

Box 3.2
One community, growing together

The Caribbean region is ranked among one of the most

biodiverse regions of the world. In the Organisation of
Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), increasing awareness is Four broad programmatic areas exist under the Oceans
being placed on marine areas which hold an abundance of Governance and Fisheries Unit:
natural resources including rich biodiversity, living resources 1. Supporting robust institutional frameworks: Enabling
(both marine and terrestrial) and non-living resources in the the OECS Commission to create an institutional framework for
form of mineral and natural products. In comparison to the regional cooperation in transboundary oceans management.
land area, the OECS has many times more marine area than 2. Strengthening capacity: Strengthening national and regional
prescribed under the United Nations Convention on the Law capacities for the development and implementation of ocean law
of the Sea. and policy within the framework sub-regional cooperation.
While the OECS has exercised jurisdiction by legislation 3. Providing technical assistance: Facilitating the provision of
over the water column and the accompanying living and technical services in the area of sustainable ocean resource and
non-living resources, the benefits to be derived are not fully marine environmental management.
maximised but nonetheless many resources are utilised. 4. Promoting awareness: The Ocean Governance and Fisheries
However, many decades of use and exploitation of the Programme is guided by the Eastern Caribbean Regional Ocean
marine environment with inadequate resource management Policy (ECROP) and Strategic Action Plan.
programmes have left growing evidence of degradation of
its critical and vulnerable ecosystems. Some of the drivers of Overall, the Oceans Governance and Fisheries Programme aims to:
this degradation are those activities associated with poorly- y Secure access to resources
planned coastal and urban development, unsustainable y Maintain and improve ecosystem integrity
tourism, land-based and marine sources of pollution, over- y Promote social and economic development
exploitation of living resources, removal of keystone species y Adopt multiple-use ocean planning and integrated
and the proliferation of invasive species. Notwithstanding, management
the economic potential of some marine resources remains y Promote public awareness, participation and accountability
unassessed or underutilised. These latter resources y Support research and capacity building
include, but are not limited to, non-living resources such as y Build resilience and manage for uncertainty
petroleum products, marine renewable energy sources and y Maintain maritime safety and security
mineable resources.

Source: Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), 2021.

©JaySi/[Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
52

3.4 Identifying key stakeholders who may later on be involved as expert advisors and are also
equally respected by governments as well as stakeholders.
A participatory approach requires key stakeholders in both Depending on the specific context, these may encompass
the public and private sectors to be identified and mapped, in scientific organisations, e.g. universities or research institutes;
order to ensure inclusive, transparent and equitable engage- consulting companies or NGOs specialised in process, project,
ment and communication. In some cases, the identification stakeholder and change management processes; or experts in
process will also consider stakeholders who may be out of the geographic information systems (GIS) and applications.
country or reside in other jurisdictions.
One way to organise and manage a list of MSP stakeholders
Identifying key stakeholders should consider privacy laws and is to create a ‘master list’ using spreadsheet or database
other legal or policy considerations nationally and interna- applications. The list could categorise stakeholders by sector,
tionally. Guidebooks for best practice regarding engagement affiliation (e.g. governmental, private sector, academia,
should be consulted at this stage, including how to ensure NGO, etc.), job title and other variables such as gender and
confidentiality when required – for example, when culturally demography.
sensitive information is provided by indigenous peoples or
proprietary information in a new research area. Key stakeholders change over time and the list of members on
committees will change. In order to keep the stakeholder list
In order to build the actual capacities in a given country, it up to date, regular communications with individual stakehold-
is important to involve institutions and sectoral agencies, ers are needed to ensure their participation and inputs.

Box 3.3 and involvement activities – this ensures a better quality of MSP
The Latvian recipe and alignment with the needs and interests of the society. The
strategy comprised three main forms of public participation: i)
The Latvian recipe describes the methodology used to draft a information supply to the public on important aspects of the MSP
maritime spatial plan for the Republic of Latvia. Special efforts and opportunities to participate; ii) consultations with stakeholders
were made to ensure an ecosystem-based approach, stakeholder on different MSP aspects and their perspectives, arrangements for
involvement and transboundary consultation. Regional workshops public information; iii) active involvement of stakeholders in data,
were held during the whole MSP process following established information and knowledge-sharing; involvement in evaluations
governmental regulation, to ensure stakeholder engagement in and assessments of different issues (Veidemane et al., 2017). Public
national spatial development processes. consultations on a draft marine spatial plan and draft strategic
environmental assessment were performed jointly, allowing
A public participation strategy was drawn up in the early stages planners and marine experts to have simultaneous interactions with
to outline communication, including information, consultation stakeholders.

INFORMING CONSULTING INVOLVEMENT

Identification
of stakeholders, Public
analyses of roles
and responsibilities Stakeholders

Media Public hearing MSP WG

Internet Written
comments Stakeholder
Social network individual and
cross-sectoral
Printed Questionnaires events

Figure 3.3
Public participation forms and methods employed in the development of the Latvian MSP

Sources: Veidemane et al., 2017; AC Konsultācijas Ltd, 2017.

How to set the scene
53

Box 3.4
Identifying key stakeholders in St Kitts and Nevis

The Federation of St Kitts and Nevis has a total population of

54,000 (2014) and an EEZ covering 11,234 km2. Nearshore fisheries
are important for the local economy and culture and have
declined in recent years. Threats to the marine ecosystem included
increasing storms, coastal development, unsustainable fishing
practices and land-based pollution sources.
The St Kitts and Nevis planning process included extensive
consultations with stakeholders to develop proposals and
generate a draft zoning design. Identifying key stakeholders
was an important part of the planning process and a number of
activities were carried out to ensure effective engagement of local
partners. Individuals from key government departments such as
Fisheries, Planning, Tourism and Maritime Affairs, local non-profit
organisations and the business sector were integral to the
stakeholder engagement process.
The purpose for engaging stakeholders in this planning process
was clearly articulated by the St Kitts and Nevis government when
they identified and communicated the benefits of the planning,
that is, to more sustainably manage the new and often conflicting
uses of the Territorial Sea waters. Engaging with stakeholders was
essential for this objective and would lay the foundation for a full
zoning plan in the future that supported the development of a
more sustainable approach to managing marine resources.
Source: Agostini et al., 2014. ©evenfh/[Link]

3.5 Identifying sources of funding As with any other new governmental task, MSP is not possi-
ble without adequate financial resources. Although MSP is
for MSP
inherently a governmental responsibility, a common problem
Most governments that undertake MSP rely on direct alloca- occurs when funding, which may be available for MSP pilots, is
tions to their budgets from general revenues. Agencies may not available during the whole planning process (IOC-UNESCO,
be given the responsibility of MSP activities without receiving 2009). MSP cannot be successful unless funds are made
additional funds – sometimes called ‘unfunded mandates’. available. Including financial resources in MSP legislation can
Other times, agencies will receive partial funds and staff ensure that the process is not jeopardised from the beginning
resources to create an MSP team or department but there may because of a lack of funds.
be difficulties in sustaining this for the full planning timeline.
Reprogramming of resources within agencies or cross-govern- The cost of an MSP process depends on many factors, such as:
ment agencies will sometimes be required but this is, at best, y Whether additional human resources are needed to set up
a difficult process. Financing MSP process and implementation a planning team
has been reported in the last decade as one of the top chal- y Whether the required assessments to characterise the
lenges to developing and completing marine spatial plans. planning area can be done internally or whether they need
to be done through external expertise
Public budgets and financing is one option for funding
y Whether it is possible to use existing data and tools, such
an MSP effort. There are also public-private partnerships
as data portals, or if new ones need to be developed
whereby funding is secured from government budgets and
y How many and what type of engagement activities will be
private grants. New options for the financing of MSP and its
carried out
implementation are emerging, and in 2016 the world’s first
debt conversion for oceans was announced by the Republic of In the case of a planning system with different marine spatial
Seychelles (Smith et al., 2019) (Box 3.5). The next decade will plans for each governmental level, the central government
see an increased emphasis on financing a sustainable ocean might pay for the national marine spatial plan, while local gov-
economy (Sumaila et al., 2021). ernments pay for subnational plans. If all plans are connected
through a nested approach, it is important that the central
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
54

Box 3.5
Seychelles debt conversion and marine spatial plan

The Seychelles Marine Spatial Plan (SMSP) Initiative began for managing debt conversion proceeds, including disbursing
in 2014 and is a process focused on planning for and blue grants and investment assets funded by the debt
management of the sustainable and long-term use and conversion deal. Under this deal, private philanthropic funding
health of the Seychelles’ ocean. Seychelles’ marine waters and loan capital were raised, and SeyCCAT then extended
encompass 1,374,000 km2 and 115 islands in 4 archipelagos. loans to GoS to enable the purchase of US$21.6 million of
The SMSP Initiative is a government-led process, with planning sovereign debt at a discount. GoS now repays SeyCCAT on more
and facilitation led by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in favourable terms, allowing SeyCCAT to direct a portion of the
partnership with the GoS-UNDP-GEF Programme Coordinating repayments for financing of marine conservation and climate
Unit (PCU). Funding for the SMSP is provided by TNC through change adaptation projects and, in the long term, for the
private grants and the Government of Seychelles (GoS). implementation of the SMSP. Additional funding is provided
through grants to GoS, an Oceans 5 grant awarded to TNC,
The SMSP Initiative is an integrated, multi-sector approach and some private funders. Approximately US$250,000 is spent
to address climate change adaptation, marine biodiversity to support the SMSP process per year and the SeyCCAT Blue
protection and support the blue economy and other national Grants Fund distributes US$700,000 per year to conservation
strategies. The process has a robust stakeholder engagement and climate change projects.
framework and includes all major sectors of the Seychelles,
including commercial fishing, tourism and marine charters, New MPAs, formally announced in March 2020, are a key
biodiversity conservation, renewable energy, port authority, part of the SMSP that will be completed in 2022. The SMSP
maritime safety and non-renewable resources, in order to will also address the sustainable use of marine resources
develop a comprehensive marine plan with stakeholder input. in the remaining 70% of ocean, support the blue economy
and address climate change adaptation. The SMSP will
The SMSP is a necessary output from the Seychelles debt coordinate appropriate regulatory compliance and
conversion, which created the Seychelles’ Conservation and integrated government oversight of all activities, so that
Climate Adaptation Trust (SeyCCAT), an independent public- there is effective management of the marine zones during
private trust operationalised in 2016. The trust is responsible implementation.

Figure 3.4
Seychelles Marine Spatial Plan

Source: [Link]
How to set the scene
55

government ensures that local, and if relevant also regional,

governments have both financial and capable human
resources to develop the plans.

As MSP is for many countries a subject with a limited experi-

ential basis – knowledge about the costs associated with the
planning process and how to finance marine planning may
be insufficient and, consequently, decisions about the size of
plans and their feasibility are unreliable. Often, the amount of
work and length of the planning process is underestimated.
It may be concluded that the additional costs associated with
greater than estimated workloads and/or overruns in terms of
Ocean Governance and
time can be avoided (or at least the risk reduced) by investing Marine Spatial Planning
in good project planning at the outset and throughout the Policy Brief
MSP process.

It is also important to ensure an equitable distribution of

burdens and benefits, including a system to compensate or
to reconvert those activities that may be affected by new or
emerging users.

A sustainable financing strategy for MSP should be tailored to

the specific financial, legal, administrative, social and political
Co-funded by the

conditions in a particular place or country. Some financing United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union

mechanisms require payment for marine resources, whether MSPglobal Policy Brief: Ocean Governance and Marine Spatial
or not they are consumed. This challenges traditional ideas Planning (2021).
that marine resources are free public commodities and instead
requires users of marine goods and services to pay for those seas, it is possible to make use of existing collaborations to
benefits. In any case, the legal regime of the public maritime ensure that financing remains within the regional budget.
domain usually includes economic-financial regulations for its
use (fees and charges) that can contribute to cover the costs There are also financing mechanisms available to tackle climate
of planning. The CBD (2012a) advises modest, but consistent change that could be accessed to finance some specific tasks
amounts of financial support such as user fees, instead of large of the MSP process or objectives of the marine spatial plan.
grants that can create dependencies and then jeopardise the For example, funds for the conservation of climate refugia or
policy when funds are no longer available. funds for blue carbon initiatives that aim to mitigate climate
change through the conservation and restoration of ecosys-
When government revenues are not sufficient to develop tems that can capture and store carbon, such as mangroves
MSP, there are a number of other ways to attract funding, and seagrasses, when they are present in the planning area.
such as specific taxes, projects, grants or donations (IOC-
UNESCO, 2009). When looking for these kinds of financial opportunities, it is
important to estimate costs related to the potential climate
The sustainability of the plans are ensured in some countries change impacts in the planning area and the climate change
through taxes for those using the sea (e.g. China, Australia). In adaptation and mitigation needs in the planning area.
regional areas shared by several coastal countries with marine
space/use conflicts or problems of a multijurisdictional nature,
the creation of a specific regional fund to finance plans can 3.6 Identifying existing needs for planning
act as an incentive for their development by ensuring that ocean resources at local, subnational, national
transboundary issues can be satisfactorily addressed in an or regional scale, including transboundary
equitable manner. For example, the development of a mem-
aspects
orandum of understanding (MoU) between countries for the
sharing of costs or financial resources. The above assessment of the legal and governance framework
related to coastal and marine issues should clarify whether
Governmental bodies could fund transboundary bodies to an integrated planning process such as MSP is needed from a
undertake MSP-related activities. Within consolidated regional governance perspective (Figure 3.5).
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
56

• Policy and sectors

• Stakeholders • Lack of awareness
• Knowledge • Lack of capacity
• Territorial and
institutional
Capacity
Fragmentation and
awareness

Scale Uncertainty
issues and change

• Spatial
• Temporal • Emerging issues
• Representation • Wicked problems

Figure 3.5
Overview of common challenges for ocean governance

Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021e.

Table 3.1
Regional and national examples of identified needs as drivers for the MSP process

Country/Cases Driver(s) for MSP

Belgium Small sea space, sea-use conflict, emerging offshore wind farms

USA (Rhode Island, Massachusetts) State offshore wind farm targets

China (Xiamen’s marine functional zoning) Sea-use conflicts, marine environmental degradation, lack of institutional coordination

Australia (Great Barrier Reef) Degradation of coral reefs and managing the impact of human activities on the ecosystem

South Africa Need for more integrated approach to marine management, perceived conflict between uses

Grenada Blue growth, coastal, marine tourism and sea-use conflicts

Seychelles National marine biodiversity protection target (30% of the EEZ and Territorial Sea)

EU coastal Member States Legal obligation under the EU MSP Directive

Coral Reef Triangle Initiative on Coral Reef, Reversing degradation of coral reefs, ensuring food security through improved fisheries management,
Fisheries and Food Security (Indonesia, addressing climate change
Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Philippines,
Solomon Islands, Timor Leste)

Sources: European Commission, 2017; 2019.

How to set the scene
57

A second, or parallel, assessment concerns whether MSP

is necessary when the context includes existing, emerging What are the key components
or potential: of MSP legislation?

y use-use and use-nature spatial conflicts

y Introductory elements
y synergies between/among users (multi-uses) – Definitions/Interpretation (e.g. legal, technical and scientific
y strategies to promote specific maritime sectors or terms)
the whole ocean economy (e.g. blue economy strategy) – Geographic/Jurisdictional scope
y strategies to promote area-based conservation – Objectives
(e.g. network of MPAs) – Guiding/Interpretive principles
y Governmental and administrative elements
It is important to define a concrete set of motivations and drivers – Planning authority (existing or new)
for a given MSP process. These should be clear enough, as this – Advisory/Consultative multisectoral body (existing or new)
is part of the MSP process itself. Table 3.1 provides an overview y Planning elements and procedures
and examples of drivers, issues and overarching objectives of – Plan elements (e.g. maps, narrative descriptions)
some of the MSP cases around the world – the identified needs – Criteria (e.g. for conflict resolution)
– Types of zones (if any)
are the drivers and should be at the core of the MSP objectives.
– Plan adoption, adaptation and revocation
These can be identified through analysis of the legal and – Maritime sectors included in the plan
governance framework, although this is more likely to happen – Plan duration and periodic review
through formal and informal consultations with different levels – Binding effect
of public administration within a country, regional bodies, – Relationship of the plan with other laws (including traditional
maritime sectors, interested stakeholders and citizens. It is rights, if any)
important to note that the identification of drivers and need for y Public participation and access to information
MSP should consider the geographical context, existing coastal – Which information will be publicly available, and how
and marine resources and perceived conflicts, political drivers, – How the public can participate and how their input will be
considered (e.g. consultations)
national and international legislation and commitments.
y Sustainable financing
– Funding sources and mechanisms
3.7 Defining how MSP will be established y Enforcement and compliance
within the existing governance and legal – Offences and penalties
frameworks related to the coasts and ocean – Enforcement authority
– Grandfathering provision (i.e. grace period for pre-existing
activities to come into compliance)
3.7.1 What is the legal basis?
y Others
Once it has been agreed that MSP is a necessary policy, – Subsequent regulation (e.g. to detail instruments)
the next step is to define how it will be established within – Monitoring, etc.
the existing legal and governance framework.
Source: Environmental Law Institute, 2020.
One of the first questions is about which type of policy
instrument MSP should be, i.e. legally binding or a voluntary
guiding approach? Best practice (e.g. the EU’s Better Regulation
Toolbox)1 advises following the ‘proportionality principle’ when
deciding on the type of policy instrument. This means that
i) the policy intervention should not go beyond what is neces-
sary to achieve the objective, and ii) the choice of instrument
should be based on experience gained from previous policies.

Point ii) means that it is highly recommended to choose either

a binding or guiding marine spatial plan, according to the context.
Therefore, the diagnosis carried out for this part of the guidelines
should indicate the most suitable type of policy instrument. While
a new norm (or set of norms) might be created, another option
could be a modification of existing ones to accommodate MSP.

1 [Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
58

Box 3.6
South Africa MSP Act and Framework

Operation Phakisa in South Africa represented the major Relationship and precedence
initiative to explore the full potential of the ocean’s wealth to over other legislation
drive economic growth. At the time, the National Environmental The Act established that in
Management of the Ocean White Paper, gazetted in 2014, had the event of any conflict between
spatial planning as one of the strategic objectives. However, it the provisions of this Act and other
was recommended that a new MSP legislation which was not legislation specifically relating
based on a sector specific legislation was needed. to MSP, the provisions of the
Act prevail.
The MSP Act was passed in 2019, which makes MSP binding,
enforceable and endorsed at a national political level in South Established authority for MSP
Africa. It also paved the way for the development of the Marine and National Working Group
Spatial Planning Framework . The Act specifies that the Ministry © South African
Government, 2019.
of Environmental Affairs is
Binding responsible for MSP. It also defines
The Act applies to MSP on or in South African waters and binds the role of the Technical Advisory Group as an intersectoral
all organs of state. Marine Spatial Planning Act, 2018, Act No. 16 working group. Marine Spatial Planning Act, 2018, Act No. 16
of 2018 § 3(1). of 2018 § 13 (South Africa).

Defined objectives and principles for MSP International and Regional Harmonisation
The objects of the Act are to: The principles of South Africa’s international obligations
a. develop and implement a shared MSP system to manage a and cross-border cooperation apply to MSP. Marine Spatial
changing environment that can be accessed by all sectors and Planning Act, 2018, Act No. 16 of 2018 § 5.
users of the ocean;
b. promote sustainable economic opportunities which Iterative
contribute to the development of the South African ocean The marine area plans must be reviewed at least every five
economy through coordinated and integrated planning; years and, if necessary, amended. Marine Spatial Planning Act,
c. conserve the ocean for present and future generations; 2018, Act No. 16 of 2018 § 14.
d. facilitate responsible use of the ocean;
e. provide for the documentation, mapping and understanding Source: South African Government, 2019.
of the physical, chemical and biological ocean processes and
opportunities in, and threats to, the ocean; and
f. give effect to South Africa’s international obligations in South
African waters. Marine Spatial Planning Act, 2018, Act No. 16
of 2018 § 2 (South Africa).

Table 3.2
Advantages and disadvantages of new legislation for MSP

Potential advantages of new legislation for MSP Potential disadvantages of new legislation for MSP

y Clear authority y Time-consuming: Creating new legislation requires specific legal and competency
Drafting new legislation can provide a clear and unconditional for drafting legal text and time for approval at the different levels of government
authority/mandate for MSP to be implemented. This
demonstrates political will and clear leadership towards a y Inflexible: If new legislation is not drafted in a way that promotes a multi-objective
common goal/vision that will produce a multi-objective outcome (whatever that might mean for your area), it can become an inflexible
outcome instrument. In many cases, it will be extremely difficult to renegotiate key elements
of new legislation, particularly if it was only recently developed
y Unconditional application
Enabling a ‘fresh start’ by avoiding getting entangled in existing y Undesired outcomes: Legislation does not necessarily provide the desired
legislation and its accompanying governmental arrangements outcome. Even the best intended legislation can end up being very far from what
that could jeopardise the successful outcome of MSP you originally set out to achieve

y Continuity y Decreased political support: As most initiatives to draft new legislation require
Clear authority and leadership for MSP enables institutions to considerable time, they might not be possible within the timeframe of one
take up appropriate roles and responsibilities, thus ensuring political term or administration (frequently only four or five years). Consequently,
efficient functioning when the support of high-profile advocates most politicians and high-level officials will be reluctant to provide support
becomes less evident later on for MSP without evidence of at least some results during the course of their
political term/administration. The politician, judged by the voter, often feels
the need to compromise long-term vision in favour of more obvious short-term
accomplishments

Sources: IOC-UNESCO, 2009; UNESCO-IOC, 2021e.

How to set the scene
59

Most MSP legislation relies on zoning to implement the

marine spatial plan. Each zone included in the plan is intended Box 3.7
to prioritise a particular ocean use or set of uses. For many Marine governance arrangement in Costa Rica
countries, legislation specific to MSP is the only way to ensure
In 2019, the Government of Costa Rica created the
implementation of and compliance with the marine spatial
Commission for Marine Governance by decree
plan. In this case, many MSP components described in the covering the marine spaces under the jurisdiction of the
following parts of this guide might have some initial definition Costa Rican State (Gobierno Ejecutivo de Costa Rica, 2019).
already established in MSP legislation (law and related regula-
tion), such as the planning authority, the geographic scope of The Commission for Marine Governance is an
the plan and guiding principles. interministerial body which coordinates and articulates
the different governmental institutions related to the
marine environment. The Commission is responsible
The type of planning philosophy (‘meta-governance’) should
for developing marine integrated policies, including
also include definitions relating to other aspects of the plan: the promotion of MSP and the blue economy. The
y multisector or limited to a few sectors coordination of the Commission rotates annually among
y (more) emphasis on economy, social or environment the ministries of Environment and Energy, Agriculture
and Livestock, Public Security, Public Works and
y comprehensive governance or spatial planning
Transports and Tourism.
y one large-scale plan or a nested approach
The decree also defined Marine Governance Units
It is also necessary to clearly define how MSP will be con- for marine planning, management and governance to
nected to other national policies (i.e. horizontal integration, achieve its sustainable use, conservation and restoration
including cross-sectoral integration) and administrative levels through the coordination of all actions carried out by
the government and users. A Marine Committee
(i.e. vertical integration from national to local planning and
composed of governmental, research centres, fisheries
management, such as a nested approach). representatives and NGOs needs to be established in each
Unit to develop and implement a Marine Master Plan,
which is the official planning and management document
3.7.2 Who will be the planning authority?
to be developed based on participatory processes and
With regard to the planning system, i.e. the authority and technical and scientific criteria. Marine master plans must
supporting bodies responsible for planning, there are at be approved by the Commission for Marine Governance.
least four different ways to proceed. First, an existing Ministry
The Executive Secretariat of the Commission for
could be designated or offered to lead an MSP as the MSP Marine Governance also acts as secretary for the
authority (e.g. Ministry of Planning, Ministry of Environment, marine committees, with responsibility for coordinating
Ministry of Fisheries, Ministry of Infrastructure, Ministry the preparation of the marine master plans and the
of Water Management, etc.). A difficulty may arise if the development of capacities for officials in charge of
selected ministry has limits to its marine jurisdiction or no implementing both MSP and blue economy processes.
cross-sectoral competencies or mandate; other ministries
might indicate a concern about bias due to the particular
mandate for the Ministry. For this reason, a second option
that has been used is to establish an interministerial com-
mittee where the MSP is led by committee. Difficulties may
arise in making decisions by committee and thus, in these
cases, a memorandum of understanding may be signed to
clearly identify roles, responsibilities and rules of procedure.
Third, some countries have created a new institution or
agency to develop and implement MSP. A fourth option is
a co-led partnership between two entities, in any case, the
choice between these four options should be based on the
availability of financial and human resources, as well as the
credibility of the chosen authority to lead the process. The
planning authority would usually establish multisectoral
advisory bodies, such as committees and working groups, in
order to structure a participatory governance.
© INCOPESCA
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
60

During the initial stages of MSP, such as the legal and govern- designations into sectoral decision-making and planning, as
ance assessment to build the decision-making frameworks, well as into licensing processes (not sectoral).
the competent authorities are identified, as well as the
administration responsible for sectoral activities. Here, the In addition to governmental authorities, the capacity of
‘competent authority’ refers to the institution, agency or expert organisations and stakeholders also needs to be
department that has the responsibility or authority to lead enhanced (Figure 3.6). Expert organisations, universities and
the MSP process. This may be specified in a policy document, consultants have an important role, e.g. in data provision.
governmental decree or regulations. In some cases, there MSP knowledge needs to be developed through dialogue
may be more than one agency or institution responsible with data providers: planners have to explain what they need
for the management of marine resources and this must be and data providers have to explain what they have or can
addressed in the governance framework. provide. It is important to bridge the science-policy divide.

A preliminary capacity analysis should be carried out in When developing transboundary initiatives to ensure coher-
order to inform the starting set of skills/competencies and ent marine spatial plans between neighbouring countries,
disciplines necessary to undertake MSP effectively and guide it is important to take into account that the countries might
recruitment (UNESCO-IOC, 2021f). be at different stages of the MSP process. Therefore, capacity
development will be necessary to ensure effective engage-
Capacity development opportunities for MSP are not always ment and cooperation and for all stakeholders to understand
available. One option is to train planners with experience in the process and their individual and collective role when
land-based planning in maritime issues. In addition, experts setting the scene for transboundary MSP:
in sectoral maritime issues could be trained in planning. y Planning strategies and principles
y Marine and coastal management governance
The capacity of marine spatial planners is only one part.
arrangements
Sectoral authorities, as well as different administrative levels
within countries, have a big role in implementing marine spa- y Terminology and language
tial plans. Their capacity needs to be enhanced to take MSP y Stakeholder engagement cultures

Societal awareness of MSP

Provision of coverage on ocean literacy issues including MSP through print, online, social and other media

Institutional organisational structures, policies and procedures for MSP

Institutional needs assessment and monitoring, evaluation and adjustment of capacity development strategy

Development Development of Development

Development of Development mechanisms for
of coordinating of mechanisms Continuous of physical Development
Development of new institutions sharing data and technical
or increasing mechanisms for fostering professional of long-term
law and policy collaboration and exchange of development resources for
mandate for among agencies, knowledge and
for MSP institutions and engagement with of staff data collection strategies
existing ones experience across and
sectors stakeholders
borders management

Individual skills and knowledge for MSP

Career training Formal Online Networking

Through fellowships, education self-teaching Through transboundary
internships, Undergraduate and resources projects, regional and
workshops, short graduate diploma and Through conferences, international exchanges
courses and project degree programmes webinars, manuals and and peer forums
participation training guides, videos,
short courses and games

Figure 3.6
Enhancing awareness of MSP

Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021f.

How to set the scene
61

Box 3.8
Using an existing authority and legislation for MSP in Ghana

The legal framework for MSP in Ghana is enforced through an district plans. The development of MSP by land use planning
existing legislation, which is the Land Use and Spatial Planning Act, authorities seeks to enhance land-sea interactions. The hierarchy of
2016 Act 925. Sections 45 and 46 (1) of the Act mandate the Land marine plans are already aligned with the terrestrial spatial planning
Use and Spatial Planning Authority (LUSPA) as the authority hierarchies and framework. The Ecosystem Based Approach to an
responsible for MSP and include the ‘marine space’ in the scope Integrated Marine and Coastal Environment Management in Ghana
of the spatial planning framework in Ghana. under the MAMI WATA project is piloting MSP.

The planning area under the Act is defined as ‘including the land The pilot took a subregional approach to implement MSP for
mass, air space, sub-terrain territory, marine space and reclaimed four coastal districts in the Western Region, including Ellembele,
lands and subject to the planning system provided under this Act Jomoro, Ahanta West and Nzema East Districts.
and other relevant laws’. The hierarchy of marine plans is already
aligned with a three-tier system including national, regional and Source: MAMI WATA Project, 2021.

©Michael Agbenyegah/[Link]

© James Dalrymple/[Link]
 62

©Alexander Ingerman/[Link]
 63

4 D esigning the planning

process
THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES 6. Design a communication and dissemination plan
7. Prepare an initial monitoring, evaluation and
y The planning team adaptation plan, including the selection of initial
y The work plan and time frame for the MSP team key indicators
y Planning boundaries
y The definition of principles, initial (common) vision, The steps presented in this chapter may not proceed sequen-
goals and objectives tially and information gathered in one step may necessitate
y The identification of alternative spatial and revising or adapting previous steps. For example, defining the
temporal management measures, incentives spatial boundary for the plan may occur before or after defin-
and governmental arrangements
ing the vision and goals, and a change in the spatial boundary
y Planning the monitoring and evaluation of the plan may cause a change in the goals and objectives.
y The risk assessment and development of
contingency plans Competent MSP authorities will seek to engage with stake-
holders in the most efficient and effective way possible e.g.
working with stakeholders on engagement, communications,
This chapter outlines the key steps of an MSP process and governance principles, etc. at the same time.
sets out how to design and structure MSP work most effec-
tively, including the planning. MSP may seem disorderly to Creating a monitoring, evaluation and adaptation plan is a
begin with, as there will be many simultaneous questions, difficult and lengthy undertaking, but essential to ensuring that
opportunities and challenges. However, with some careful MSP has achieved the desired goals in support of the vision.
work, including a review of lessons learned and MSP informa- Monitoring and evaluation are also covered in a separate section.
tion gathered from other sources, an MSP planning process
will emerge through a series of well-defined steps. The
steps listed in the 2009 IOC-UNESCO MSP guide have been
4.1 The planning team
tested in many planning processes over the last 12 years 4.1.1 Establishing the competent MSP authority
and remain fundamentally sound, even though MSP has
MSP is a public process that is usually specified by a political
evolved to address many complex issues, including climate
process. The authority responsible for MSP may not be the
change and the blue economy. In all cases, the character of
one to implement the plan. The competent authority ideally
MSP remains the same – MSP is a forward-looking process
has the mandate and jurisdiction for maritime space, and is
and is anticipatory; at its core, it is for the long-term planning
recognised by other authorities and agencies. This enables
and management of human activities, including sustainable the competent authority to lead multi-objective MSP in a
uses of the ocean, resource extraction and conservation. The transparent, inclusive and participatory manner. In some
steps are: cases, MSP may be led by an agency with a specific mandate
1. Establish the planning team and define the work plan for MSP, and in other cases may require multiple authorities,
and time frame or a co-led partnership. A co-leadership model may require
2. Draft vision, goals and objectives for the marine additional considerations and time to develop clear roles and
spatial plan responsibilities. As noted, although MSP involves multi-ob-
jective planning, it does not replace single-sector planning
3. Set geographic boundaries and levels and develop a
or management; other planning may occur simultaneously
data and information strategy to support the planning
alongside and integrated within an MSP process. For exam-
4. Develop a stakeholder engagement strategy to jointly ple, wind energy or aquaculture development plans may be
design the process and its guiding principles based on underway prior to an MSP process starting, and on different
inclusivity, transparency and equity timelines. The planning authority will be responsible for iden-
5. Create governance frameworks for decision-making tifying key points for synergy and integration. A marine spatial
at governmental level plan aims to provide guidance to sector decision-makers so
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
64

that the sum of all decisions is oriented towards integrated, The technical team will gain enormous experience during
ecosystem-based management of the ocean (see Chapter 7). the MSP process and be a source of institutional knowledge
MSP is usually implemented through sector-specific plans and for the completion and implementation of the marine spatial
policies providing permitting procedures. plan. In cases where the technical team is not situated within
the government, it makes good sense to create a clear process
In many countries, MSP implementation involves coordination to transfer knowledge, information and lessons learned to
between different ministries, agencies and sectors, including governmental representatives for them to take on the respon-
in those cases where there is one nominated MSP authority. sibility and ownership once the external support is finished.
The MSP authority does not necessarily have power over other This is especially important in the context of pilot projects and
sectors or the mandate to implement all aspects of the plan for the monitoring of the plan during implementation. For gov-
and must therefore coordinate the implementation with oth- ernmental members of the team, it is important to incorporate
ers. In countries where established sectoral administrations – the MSP work into their job descriptions and/or performance
and sometimes sectoral spatial planning – are already in place, agreements to avoid MSP becoming an additional task only
MSP simply puts the existing decisions into a wider context, attended to ‘when time allows’.
synthesises conflicting interests and establishes how these
will relate to the overall goals.
4.1.3 Governmental support
The governmental support refers to authorities and institutions
4.1.2 The technical planning team
whose decisions and leadership on the development of laws,
A technical planning team generally consists of members of regulations, approval of financial and non-financial help bring
organisations leading the MSP processes who are responsible about changes in the design and implementation of MSP.
for drafting, developing, revising and/or completing the MSP
outputs. Usually, the technical team is formed within or under The essential governmental role is translated into adminis-
the direction of the MSP authority and is sometimes referred trative support for finance and budgets, hiring, managing
to as the ‘core team’. However, there may be instances where it capacity and other roles. If not provided by other entities, the
is not possible for the MSP authority to provide the team. governmental support will also assist with planning stake-
holder consultations, including venue selection, scheduling,
In those cases where the MSP authority is a small departmen- stakeholder invitations and materials for workshops.
tal unit with insufficient capacity to lead a technical team, it Consistent and secured governmental support is key for the
may be an option to explore the possibility of having another efficiency of an MSP process and the interactions between the
authority or governance unit with the technical capacity to government and other key stakeholders.
perform this team-leading role, with the lead reporting to or
directly liaising with the MSP authority. A technical team may It is advisable to set up an interinstitutional working group at
also be formed outside the MSP authority and work under the the national level as a steering group or reference group dur-
authority to develop the MSP outputs. It has not been uncom- ing the MSP process. A steering committee or reference group
mon in the last decade for the MSP expertise to come from brings sectoral perspectives and expertise to the process and
outside the MSP authority. This expertise could be outsourced can help identify additional experts, if needed. Members can
to a university, research institute or external consultancies. be drawn from the same interinstitutional MSP working group
mentioned in Chapter 3 of this guide.
Technical teams are usually organised as an expert group,
working groups, advisory boards, etc., bringing together In a transboundary context, the definition of an international
experts from different agencies as well as universities and partnership within and beyond sea basins (e.g. existing
other institutions. This was the case of the Canadian example regional seas conventions) could also play a similar supporting
in Box 4.2, and similar approaches were used in the Rhode role as in the case of the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) or the
Island Ocean Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) and by Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of
the European Union’s Member States. East Asia (PEMSEA). International and intergovernmental part-
nerships help ensure equitable representation of all Member
A technical team’s capacity would include a range of subject States. In these regional contexts, when advancing with trans-
matter expertise in planning, law and policy, coastal and marine boundary planning, it is important to consider knowledge and
sciences, environmental, economic, social and cultural matters. data sharing, reciprocal capacity building, pooling skills and
The particular suite of skills, experience and knowledge would expertise across borders from the onset to ensure the efficient
generally mirror the goals and objectives of the marine spatial use of resources.
plan and be able to successfully complete the planning tasks,
including interactions with sectors affected by MSP.
Designing the planning process
65

Table 4.1
Skills matrix for MSP – Recommended skills and competences

Step Administrative needs Technical and scientific needs

Pre-planning (how y Legal and policy expertise y Policy analysis

to set the scene and y Fund-raising and budget management y Data collection methods
design the planning y Spatial database management
process) y Existing governance system
y Logical framework analysis
y Stakeholder mapping

Planning y Team leader y Team leader

y Project management skills y Ocean governance and government relations
y Stakeholder engagement (incl. moderation, facilitation, negotiation,
y Fund-raising and budget management conflict resolution, consensus building and communication skills)
y Data management and analysis (incl. modelling and scenarios)
y Socio-economic and financial analysis
y Trade-off analysis
y Analytical and problem-solving skills
y GIS skills
y Coastal and marine ecosystem functioning
y Climate change
y Sectoral operations
y Environmental impacts
y Cumulative impact
y Seascape assessment

Implementation y Project/Organisational management y Knowledge about existing coastal and marine policies and legislation
y Stakeholder engagement (incl. training, facilitation, consensus building
and communication skills)
y Science communication (incl. creating training and references to enable
use of MSP data and evidence in decision making)

Monitoring, y Project/Organisational management y Understanding a logic model, indicators and knowledge of existing
evaluation and monitoring programmes
adaptation y Logical framework model/analysis
y Data management and analysis (incl. modelling and scenarios)
y Systems thinking and analysis
y Change management skills (incl. knowledge about amending marine
planning policies, zones and legislation)

Sources: Adapted from IOC-UNESCO, 2009 and Ansong et al., 2019.

©I. Noyan Yilmaz/[Link]

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
66

Governments are responsible for the transition from planning

to implementation. In particular, during the implementation Planning pilot initiatives
phases, public authorities are in charge of the enforcement of
Pilot initiatives have had an important role
marine zones, coordinating management, and ensuring that
in many countries in scoping initial information and
monitoring of the MSP begins. building capacity. Capitalising on past pilots can provide
a cost-efficient source of data, e.g. considering data and
knowledge of such informal initiatives in the formal MSP
4.2 Defining the work plan for the MSP team can potentially save on some of the data collection costs.
Another step in designing an MSP process is to create a work
plan and establish timelines. The resources for MSP process
management, including people and time, are usually limited, and v) monitoring and evaluating the planning process and
and it is important to prioritise and select key activities to be checking whether the plan is leading to the desired outcomes.
carried out in the process. Therefore, it is essential to develop
a work plan that is practical (enabling prioritisation of work Generally speaking, a work plan contains major headings for MSP
in relation to demands and expectations), flexible, adaptable processes and specifies related tasks, indicating who is responsi-
and that can be maintained over time (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). ble, how long each task will take, the deadline, any associated
costs or resources needed, and how it relates to or depends on
A good work plan will directly tie in with the goals and objec- another task (dependencies or conditionalities) (IOC-UNESCO,
tives of the MSP process, and specifically address elements with 2009). In some cases, the procedures necessary for the devel-
respect to: i) producing the required information and tools for opment of the marine spatial plan are established in national
planning; ii) stakeholder engagement and communications; iii) regulations or policy and can include requirements, such as
developing the spatial plan; iv) implementing the spatial plan; deadlines and legal-administrative actions (see Table 4.2).

Break down each activity Assign lead and supporting

into a limited number of key, responsibilities for tasks and outputs
reasonable tasks, i.e. tasks to members of the MSP team and
that can be managed by an identify where additional assistance
individual or group and are may be needed
easy to visualise, both in terms
of resources required and the Monitor the work
List the main time it will take to complete plan and adapt
outputs of Clarify the sequence
the MSP and relationships
between tasks

Actions to develop an MSP work plan

Discuss and consider a unified reporting

Choose system for all the activities detailed
appropriate and Identify key events in the work plan, as each organisation
realistic time (timelines and milestones) might have a different recording and
periods (including to help monitor progress. tracking process. It is advisable to
List the main activities that will take
start time and These are dates by which assign to a team member the task of
place during the whole planning
duration) for each a task will be completed. ensuring that activities are carried out
cycle. Consider that these activities
task (weekly, This will help everyone in line with the reporting system and
should follow the key stages of the
monthly, quarterly) involved in the process and budgetary limits
MSP process, including preparation,
assessments, planning, evaluation projects to organise their
and implementation (see Table 4.2) schedules accordingly and
manage expectations
Figure 4.1
Actions to develop an MSP work plan

Source: Adapted from IOC-UNESCO, 2009.

Designing the planning process
67

Table 4.2
Sample MSP work plan

Step Milestone Time frame

Pre-planning (how to Establish and resource MSP function by establishing a marine y Immediate
set the scene and design planning authority and team y Notify regional bodies and neighbouring countries
the planning process) about the start of the MSP process

Identify and initiate contact with key stakeholders y End of Year 1

Planning Establish MSP working group y Year 1

Develop initial vision and objectives of the marine y Publish before end of Year 1
spatial plan

Initiate contact with stakeholder groups (e.g. energy industry y In writing before end of Year 1
representatives, fisheries, coastal communities, etc.) y Regional workshop/stakeholder forums Q1 of Year 2

Prepare situational analysis and future scenarios (this phase y Publish end of Year 2
includes collection, mapping and analysis of data on current y Two-month consultation
and future conditions)

Prepare draft marine spatial plan (including environmental y To minister/government Q2 Year 3

assessments) y Three-month consultation

The plan Prepare final marine spatial plan (including environmental y To minister/government Q2 Year 4
assessments) y Publish and notify regional bodies and neighbouring
countries Q3 Year 4

Implementation Implementation y Year 4 onwards

Monitoring, evaluation Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation y Year 4 onwards

and adaptation

Source: Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government of Ireland, 2017.

When defining an MSP work plan, it will be necessary to 4.2.1 Initial considerations about required data
develop an approach to each of the different tasks of the MSP and information
process. The following sections detail approaches to various
MSP is widely understood to be an evidence-based process,
parts of the MSP process, such as those related to data and
meaning that planning decisions are required to be based on
engagement. Whenever possible, the approaches used should
robust evidence (European Commission, 2017). Assessments
be built upon existing frameworks, in order to take advantage
for planning (see Chapter 5) will require specific data and
of current knowledge and to connect MSP to systems already
information relevant for MSP in relation to the current situa-
in place, thereby saving time and resources.
tion, the future we want and the necessary prevision on the
In situations where there is limited capacity on the technical potential spatial impact of planning decisions.
team, it may be necessary to develop high-level work plans
The work plan needs to articulate the approach to be taken to
for each year, identify key dates and balance developing the
facilitate their compilation. This may include:
outputs with monitoring and reporting progress. Depending
y Defining the kind of data and information most needed
on the scope of outputs and timelines, it can almost be a
y Mapping spatial data infrastructures (SDIs) (e.g. existing
full-time position to administer, maintain and track a detailed
atlases) and data providers in your country and region
work plan.
y Defining of data requirements and data quality
y Defining of how to access, store and manage data
y Identifying how to deal with data gaps and uncertainties
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
68

When defining the first steps related to data compilation,

remember that MSP needs reliable and up-to-date data. Key aspects to effectively
Nevertheless, it is important to collate all existing data from communicate MSP
all marine sectors, even if it is outdated, as a basis to start the
Communication strategy/Interaction plan
spatial planning – and not wait because the data feels ‘too old’.
y Ideally developed by a communication expert but
Often, it can be updated fairly easily during the process. The implementation tasks could be shared among the MSP team
datasets will seldom be organised and available in the nec- or carried out in partnership with local authorities, maritime
essary format, therefore protocols and workflows will have to sectors, or NGOs for certain activities. Note: be aware that
while assigning tasks to a non-specialist professional may
be created to access and harmonise the data. Experience has
be more cost-effective, it is also likely to be more time-
shown that a good solution is to develop a tool that works as a consuming
decentralised database connected in real-time to the existing y Needs to include communication actions defined according
SDIs (Baltic LINes, 2017). to the target groups and the communication strategy’s
objectives
y Needs to include communicating frequent updates on
4.2.2 Communication plan progress
y Should set out actions to develop partnerships with:
The MSP communication plan will generally include: i) stakeholders, to contribute to communication
material (e.g. content, photos, videos)
y Communication strategy including identification of MSP ii) researchers, to encourage them to share their findings
milestones and the communications that will happen that are usable for MSP in a format that is publicly
available, jargon-free, includes only key messages
before, during and after each activity and clearly shows the relevance for MSP
iii) traditional media and social media influencers/
y Share of responsibilities bloggers, to disseminate information about the MSP
process, as well as forthcoming activities that are
y Definition of general and specific messages for each open to a wider audience
stakeholder group (products may include frequently
Communication methods
asked questions)
y Dedicated and interactive website that also acts as a repository
y Communication and dissemination channels, including of materials in the language(s) of your planning area
y Social networks. Social media can be an excellent way to
social media
share governmental messages to a wider audience; people
in the planning area may have preferences for a specific
y Press kit with the necessary background information social media – use it. Social networks also work with the
for decision-makers while keeping the MSP core message traditional community ‘face to face’ and should be promoted
as the headline in areas with limited access to the internet. Rhode Island
SAMP, for example, had an ‘open house’, where on certain
y Different types of communication materials for multiple days people could spontaneously come in to ask questions
and learn about the process
audiences
y Networking events for MSP practitioners and/or sectoral
representatives (governmental and/or non-governmental),
y Stakeholder engagement strategy: how stakeholder in order to improve capacity development in MSP
feedback will be gathered and how response to this y Training courses on specific topics (e.g. summer schools
feedback will be communicated for young professionals)
y Short and visually appealing documents (e.g. policy briefs,
y Consideration of monitoring and evaluation, infographics, flyers)
y Short videos, (e.g. key MSP concepts, importance of maritime
including setting out when and how in the MSP
sectors in the planning area or summarising major events)
process communications will be monitored, as well as y Information panels displayed in key places (e.g. city councils,
identification of indicators that will inform monitoring schools, tourist areas, etc.)
of the communication plan y Games designed to engage and inform stakeholders and the
general public (e.g. board games, digital simulations, virtual
reality)
In transboundary areas, a brief overview of the MSP process
represented as a timeline can be very useful, not only for
citizens in general but also to help countries understand
the status of the MSP process in other countries within the
same sea basin.

Source: Adapted from the interactive EU guide Communicating

MSP: An Inspiring Era of Cooperation between Institutions.1

1 
[Link]
era-cooperation-between-institutions
Designing the planning process
69

4.2.3 Develop a strategy for the participatory process

Box 4.1
MSP is defined as a public process for multiple objectives and
Statement of public participation in Scotland
best practice includes participation from stakeholders and a
transparent process. It is essential to engage with stakeholders The requirement to establish a statement of public
and pay attention to the many variables related to stakeholder participation (SPP) for MSP is set out in legislation. The Marine
engagement. Effective and active participation is critical for (Scotland) Act achieved royal assent on 10 March 2010.
the MSP process and outcomes. The Act provides a framework which will help balance
competing demands on Scotland’s seas and introduces a duty
The strategy for participation centres on the desire to to protect and enhance the marine environment and includes
measures to help boost economic investment and growth in
develop a plan for the future which meets the needs of the
areas such as marine renewables. The SPP includes principles
government and stakeholders. Using the tenet that ‘form of engagement, the timeline for marine plan development
follows function’, the function of a participation strategy is to and details of when engagement will happen, as well as how.
capture the information, data, views and recommendations
Participation commitment
of the people involved.
Marine Scotland, and the Scottish Government as a whole,
is committed to ensuring that:
Stakeholders are individuals, groups or organisations who y all relevant stakeholders and members of the public are
are (or will be) affected, involved or interested (positively or involved in the development of policies that will impact
negatively) by the marine spatial plan (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). upon them
A strategy and frameworks are needed to engage with all y arrangements for participation are inclusive, clear and
transparent
relevant stakeholders and best practices should be followed
y communication is provided through a range of formats
for process design and developing outputs using an inclusive and jargon free
and participatory approach. y all representations are fully considered

Developing an MSP participation strategy begins with the Achieving involvement of stakeholders from the beginning
of this process is vital in the creation of a National Marine
following questions:
Plan that will benefit people not only from the individual
sectors concerned with the marine environment but also
y What are the goals, visions and outputs?
people living in as well as visiting Scotland.
y What are the legal obligations to engage with The participation process will involve a wide range of
stakeholders? stakeholders, including key agencies, planning authorities,
private sector including fisheries representatives, tourism
y Who should be involved and/or wants to be involved? and recreation organisations, shipping, ports and harbours,
What are the sectors, associations, local communities or marine renewables sector, voluntary sectors and members
organisations such as government, industry, academia, of the public.
private entities, non-commercial entities and associations,
NGOs, civil society, youth? What are barriers or challenges
for their participation? How to address diversity, equity,
inclusion and justice?

y How will stakeholders be involved in a task or stage of

the planning process?

y Who will be responsible for leading the engagement

activity?

y When will stakeholders be involved?

y What methods will best engage stakeholders?

y How long will stakeholders be involved?

©AlanMorris/[Link]
y How much will it cost? How much funding is available
to support stakeholders? Source: The Scottish Government – Riaghaltas na h-Alba, 2020.
[Link]
y How to maintain a stakeholder database? key-documents/
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
70

Box 4.2
Stakeholder engagement in a co-led partnership, the Marine Plan Partnership (MaPP), Canada

The MaPP initiative is a partnership between the Province of Marine stakeholders representing multiple sectors provided
British Columbia and 17 First Nations member organisations, input and advice to the planning process via advisory
which developed and is implementing marine use plans for committees: four subregional and one regional. In addition,
British Columbia’s North Pacific Coast. a science advisory committee provided expert technical and
scientific knowledge and advice. Stakeholder consultation is
The MaPP region is divided into four subregions: ongoing as the marine plans are implemented.
y Haida Gwaii
y North Coast The MaPP plans provide recommendations for key areas of
y Central Coast marine management, including uses, activities and protection.
y North Vancouver Island The plans inform decisions regarding the sustainable economic
development and stewardship of British Columbia’s coastal
The MaPP initiative was formalised in November 2011 through marine environment. Four marine plans were signed in April
a Letter of Intent between the provincial government and First 2015, a regional action framework was completed in May 2016
Nations organisations. The initiative used the best available and plan implementation agreements were announced in
science and local and traditional knowledge to develop four August 2016.
subregional plans and a regional action framework.

Figure 4.2
Marine Plan Partnership for the North Pacific Coast

Source: [Link]
Designing the planning process
71

It is important to be aware of representation, power and Stakeholders play an essential role in the assessment of distri-
many other social dynamics when designing a stakeholder butional outcomes, as well as the performance of the public
engagement strategy and frameworks. To address issues process per se, including evaluation about how participatory
related to attendance, it might be necessary to meet not only the process was (see Chapter 8). Their engagement is also fun-
the costs of the activity (e.g. meeting room rental), but also damental from a democratic perspective. A broader view of
the expenses for some stakeholders (e.g. transport and accom- stakeholders should be taken, which includes citizens – after
modation), particularly those with low socio-economic status. all, MSP is a public policy. A good participatory process also
Some MSP processes have created stakeholder engagement promotes a feeling of ownership and responsibility.
funding mechanisms to bolster capacity to support consistent
and meaningful participation (Diggon et al., 2020). During the designing of the MSP process, it is important to
discuss with stakeholders what can be achieved by MSP and
A stakeholder engagement strategy will consider the types of the potential role of other marine management tools and
formats and methods to gather information, obtain inputs and processes. It is important that all engaged actors have realistic
discuss MSP outputs. It is essential that different formats are expectations of the possible outcomes of the MSP process.
used, including in-person workshops and meetings, bilateral This is also part of the vision stage of the MSP process.
and one-to-one meetings, remote meetings, etc. to ensure
that stakeholders have a fair opportunity to engage, regard-
Table 4.3
less of distance, internet access, literacy and other factors. The
Checklist for engaging stakeholders
strategy should indicate that stakeholder meeting preparation
includes the necessary documents and when the documents
will be shared in advance of the meeting. y Are/will be affected by MSP decisions
WHO y Are dependent on the resources of the planning
Timing is also very important, as the engagement process area
needs to take place at different administrative levels and y Have/make legal claims or obligations over areas,
or resources within the planning area
between different groups of stakeholders. For instance, stake-
y Conduct activities that impact on areas or
holders such as fishers and their communities might be best resources of the planning area
engaged during hours and days when they are not working, y Have special seasonal or geographic interests
e.g. holding workshops in the evening. in the planning area
y Have a special interest in or connection with
the planning area
Other MSP processes assume that building trust takes time
but it is crucial in order to obtain information, acceptance and y Designing the planning process
buy-in. In this context, thinking things through and getting WHEN y Conducting the assessments for planning
people on board takes time. It is very important to understand (including data collection, which can come from
stakeholders)
stakeholders needs, to ensure transparency from the begin-
y Developing the marine spatial plan
ning with empathy and honesty to realistically manage all
y Implementing the marine spatial plan
expectations and contributions. y Monitoring and evaluating the marine spatial
plan and process
The ‘nested approach’ means that in a wide geographical area
engagement, hot spots are identified where a more intense y Consultations (public hearing and/or written
HOW public comments)
engagement takes place. In those cases where not everyone
y Questionnaires/Interviews
can come to the capital and not everyone is interested in the
y Seminars
whole coast but rather in their own area, you will need to y Meetings
use a nested approach and engage locally by placing smaller y Hands-on workshops (e.g. participatory mapping)
local engagement activities within the overall engagement y Forums
strategy for the plan. The matter of stakeholder engagement y Working/Advisory groups
is fundamental from a social justice perspective. Public par- y Deliberative committees
ticipation is usually regulated within political-administrative y (Regular) E-mails providing feedback on the status
of the MSP progress
plans and initiatives, so the MSP must follow the existing
procedures for each country. Where indigenous peoples are
involved, additional legal and social justice considerations are Sources: Bouamrame, 2006; IOC-UNESCO, 2009; Quesada-Silva et al.,
necessary, including how to develop the MSP using a rights- 2019.

based approach.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
72

Another important perspective is that in the early planning stakeholders should be collected in a deliberative process that
phases of MSP, discussions and debates typically take place acknowledges pluralism. The process should be organised in a
around which coastal or at-sea developments the different systematic and structured way to ensure a broad knowledge
sectors and coastal communities want – and which they want base for monitoring and evaluation.
to avoid. MSP processes can often be the only mechanism
where such broad marine governance discussions take place.
Such discussions may identify several important topics that 4.3 Definition of the planning boundaries
can be better taken care of by policy measures or non-spatial and time frame
solutions other than the spatial plan. It is important that such
topics are recorded and communicated to the respective 4.3.1 Defining the planning boundaries and initial
authorities and forums. The most effective method would considerations about the scale of the plan
be that representatives of these authorities and forums are
For a marine spatial plan to be legally enforceable or an
engaged in the MSP processes, at least as stakeholders.
effective policy document, its boundaries must be in line with
Stakeholders’ experiences of the impacts of the marine spatial the maritime space over which the planning authority has
plan and their understanding of the impact upon their sectors sovereignty or jurisdictional rights in accordance with national
or communities can be a valuable asset in reducing uncertain- and/or international laws. Within that scope, different subna-
ties pertaining to the evaluation of MSP. tional plans based on biogeographical, geomorphological,
functional criteria, etc. can be established.
There are often knowledge gaps in understanding the pos-
sible benefits and impacts of MSP in terms of environment, Ocean life knows no borders. Generally, the boundaries of the
economics and socio-cultural issues. Therefore, before marine planning area will not coincide with the boundaries of
designing methods to measure or verify the effects, you a single ecosystem, because often a number of ecosystems
should ensure that mechanisms are put in place to enhance of varying sizes exist within – and may extend beyond – the
understanding of possible impacts. Inputs from experts and designated area (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).

Participants/interaction among
Influence (characteristics) Authorities
stakeholders

Process responsibility (formal Process leadership partially or entirely Process leadership to some extent
and informal, legally based or as delegated to participants but keeping delegated to (key) stakeholders, within
complement, recurrent). overall responsibility. some type of overall mandate/legislation
(e.g. leadership over a local process,
responsibility within own sector).

Decision-making (formal, legally based Process in hands of authority/political Veto right/right to vote/break-off point
Increasing intensity of communication and learning

or as complement, recurrent or at pre- or decision-making/break-off right. in relation to specific items defined by

defined stages). Decisions have to be followed. authority/legislation.

Collaboration (on planning process, Process and decision-making in principle Collaboration on tasks defined together,
concrete tasks, partially informal, in the hands of authority. Consensus and based on consensus and available
recurrent, depending on activities). needs-based collaboration. resources or voluntary contributions based
on invitation by the authority in charge.
Increasing degree of power sharing
Increasing delegation of functions

Right to contribute to the definition of

activities.

Deliberation: dialogue & learning Mutual exchange and learning, recurrent. Mutual exchange and learning, without
(partially informal, requires openness, Authority keeps power to adapt process formal obligation for neither part to take
recurrent interaction and mutual and content, without formal obligation to in and accommodate lessons learnt.
accommodation). accommodate insights. Right to have a say and be listened to.

Consultation (legally based, two-way). Obligation to listen. Active participation.

Keeps all other rights related to structure Right to provide views and be listened to.
and content of planning process.

Information (legally based, one-way). Obligation to inform. Passive participation.

Keeps all rights related to process and Right to be informed about issues and
content of planning. process and decisions.

Figure 4.3
Incorporating stakeholders in MSP processes

Source: Morf et al., 2019.

Designing the planning process
73

When defining the boundary of the planning area(s), consider- is recommended to consider the boundaries for MSP data
ation might also be given to the following factors: analysis as broader than the boundaries of the planning area,
expanding its limits towards both the terrestrial coastal zone
y National and subnational ministerial/departmental remits and the ocean.
and competences

y Disputed, unsettled or contested areas where the 4.3.2 Defining the time frame for implementing
jurisdictional boundary is yet to be agreed the plan
y Extent and coverage of existing marine and coastal An important component of the work plan is a schedule that
governance initiatives, such as ICZM, river basin defines how much time you want to spend on each step of
management plans, terrestrial plans the MSP process. Experience shows that it is good practice to
have an end date for i) developing a draft plan, ii) adopting a
y Existing licences/activities final marine spatial plan and iii) to achieve the objectives of
the plan, i.e. implement it.
In contested transboundary marine areas, a soft or fuzzy bor-
der approach has been used in transboundary MSP projects to For both developing and implementing the plan, it is essential
explore planning possibilities. This involves defining borders to define a baseline year or period to compile data and to
that are not necessarily based on jurisdictional and agreed evaluate the plan’s efficiency.
limits. The soft or ‘fuzzy’ planning area is for conceptual pur-
poses only, and allows stakeholders to discuss and consider Implementing MSP is an ongoing, iterative effort.
planning options in ‘hotspot areas’ based on the ecosystem Implementation is continuous and it may be the case that
and connectivity across borders. some aspects are applied over time and others in certain
phases, such as an evaluation period. During the MSP process,
In addition, the boundaries are not likely to delimit external plans can be adapted to changing circumstances. The best
influences on the designated area, such as land-sea inter- way to make sure that MSP is adapted over time is to make
actions and oceanographic-related processes. Therefore, it provision for this in the legislation.

Land-sea interactions

While the outer (marine) boundary of the plans environmental, socio-economic and technical, as expressed by
generally corresponds to that of the EEZ or, where appropriate, the European Commission (2018).
continental shelf jurisdictions, presenting no problems other
than those associated with their delimitation, the inner or From the narrower perspective of formal plan development,
terrestrial boundary is subject to greater complexity. an additional dimension is that of institutional interaction:
between administrative hierarchies, competences and types
This is associated with the determination of plans.
of the respective boundaries of coastal (or
terrestrial) planning and the emerging MSP, Both the convergence between marine and
as well as the consideration of land-sea terrestrial planning and the consideration
interactions as part of MSP, and the need to of land-sea interactions in the
integrate terrestrial and coastal planning United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Intergovernmental Sustainable
Oceanographic Development
Co-funded by the
European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund
development of MSP make it advisable to
with MSP. act within the framework of an integrated
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union

LAND-SEA INTERACTION
system of political spatial planning (land
This meeting or convergence of plans and sea), and to facilitate the transfer of
What is Land-Sea Interaction? HOW CAN LAND PROCESSES
AFFECT THE OCEAN AND SEAS?
While there is no unique definition for Land-Sea Interaction
(LSI),¹ a number of interpretations have been put forward:
>
can lead to inconsistency of objectives ↳ All possible interaction in between land and sea.¹

↳ ‘LSI involve intricate and constantly shiſting inter- ↳ Contaminants from agriculture/sewage released in a river
knowledge from the already consolidated
and, consequently, the sea

and goals, as well as to conflicts at the terrestrial planning to maritime planning

connections between socio-economic activities both in the
sea and on land with natural processes that span the land- ↳ River sediment transport
sea interface.’² ↳ Port activities

↳ A four-dimensional definition of LSI covering:

level of rules and institutions during their ‘1) the social-ecological interactions;
2) the relevant governance frameworks;
3) the related governance processes; and
HOW CAN THE OCEAN AND SEAS
AFFECT TERRESTRIAL AREAS? (Kidd and Ellis, 2012).
>
development phase.
4) the necessary knowledge and methods to
address them.’³

Examples of Land-Sea Interactions ↳ Submarine cables connecting a maritime activity to a power

The concept of land-sea interactions,

grid on land
Interactions between land and sea can be broadly grouped ↳ Marine litter/contaminants from maritime activities
into two categories – biogeochemical processes and ↳ Coastal erosion
socio-economic activities – which are closely interrelated.⁴ ↳ Extreme events (storms, heavy tides, tsunamis)

Land-sea interactions can be interpreted when applied to small islands, forces us to

↳ Sea level rise

in both environmental (ecosystems and consider that such interactions occur fully
© nata_rass/iStock/via Getty Images*

natural processes) and economic (uses and completely on the insular territory and
and activities) frameworks, as described that their territorial plans, by their nature,
MSPglobal flyer on land-sea
by UNEP/MAP (2018), or in relation to have a marked maritime dimension.
interaction (2020).
different categories of interactions:
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
74

4.4 Defining the principles, initial vision,

Box 4.3 goals and objectives
Baltic Sea broad-scale MSP principles1
One of the key stages when thinking about how to prepare
1. Sustainable management the plan is the definition of initial overarching visions, princi-
2. Ecosystem approach ples, goals and objectives of the marine spatial plan. It is not
3. Long-term perspective and objectives expected that one iteration of the MSP process will address
4. Precautionary principle
all the marine planning issues and challenges. The definition
5. Participation and transparency
6. High-quality data and information basis of visions, principles, goals and objectives during the MSP
7. Transnational coordination and consultation development sets the trajectory for the plan and agreement
8. Coherent terrestrial and maritime spatial planning about the desired future.
9. Planning adapted to characteristics and special
conditions at different areas
10. Continuous planning 4.4.1 MSP principles
Source: HELCOM-VASAB, 2010. MSP is a public process that has been developed in different
countries according to a number of guiding principles that can
be derived from the MSP legislation (if this exists) or a number
of sources, including international treaties and agreements,
national policy and legislation, or examples of good practice
usually agreed within the team and with stakeholders (IOC-
UNESCO, 2009).

These principles usually reflect basic ideas about:

y How the process needs to be conducted in relation
to stakeholders (participative; inclusive; transparent)
y How the plan needs to be developed (ecosystem-based
approach; precautionary principle; knowledge-based;
adaptative; climate smart)
y What the plan needs to deliver (sustainable development;
©Patryk Kosmider/[Link]
social justice)

1 
[Link] Enforceable principles are critical to a successful MSP process
for a number of reasons. Most importantly, they give deci-
sion-makers a transparent and defensible means of making
difficult decisions. They also provide a concrete notion of
Box 4.4
plan objectives for regulated entities and a basis on which
Six indigenous principles underlying the Haida
interested groups and individuals can engage constructively.
Gwaii Marine Plan, Canada1
Boxes 4.3 and 4.4 provide examples of principles applicable to
1. Yahguudang or Yakguudang – Respect MSP in different contexts.
2. ‘Laa guu ga kanhllns – Responsibility
3. Gina ‘waadluxan gud ad kwaagiida – Interconnectedness: 4.4.2 Initial common vision
Everything depends on everything else
4. Giid tll’juus – Balance: The world is as sharp as the edge As discussed in Chapter 3, one of the first tasks when estab-
of a knife lishing or launching an MSP process is the identification of its
5. Gina k’[Link] gii uu tl’ k’anguudang – Seeking wise key drivers and defining the vision for the plan. The drivers
counsel can be translated into a draft or initial vision to be shared
6. Isda ad diigii isda – Reciprocity with stakeholders in order to guide the process and define
Source: Council of The Haida Nation, 2017. the anticipated future of the planning area. In some cases,
articulating the vision is aided by a scenario-setting exercise
in that multiple scenarios are created for what the future
1 
[Link] might look like (e.g. Haida Gwaii Subregional Marine Plan,
[Link] MaPP). Importantly, no matter how it is established, the vision
needs to be shared among the participants so that everyone is
Designing the planning process
75

Box 4.5
The vision of the Israel Marine Plan

The marine area of Israel will be an integral part of the spatial according to which the plan goals, policy measures and
area of the country and an essential component of its future management policy recommendations were made.
economic well-being, environmental resilience and social and
cultural development for the benefit of its residents and the ‘This will be achieved through the implementation of integrative
future generation. governance that is ecologically balanced and participatory,
the sustainable use of marine resources, the enhancement
This vision has been determined taking into account the unique of the marine landscape and heritage, the promotion of
characteristics of the Israeli marine space and its natural, marine research and knowledge, and through the realization
economic and cultural values, and sets the general framework of international responsibilities and cooperation.’

1 Governance 2 Knowledge and 3 Environmental 4 Energy

information conservation

5 Maritime 6 Fishing and 7 Marine 8 Security

transport mariculture installations

9 Climate change 10 Public benefit 11 Heritage and 12 International

culture cooperation

Figure 4.4
Objectives of the Israel Marine Plan

Source: Planning Administration, State of Israel.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
76

heading in the same direction. The following factors should be

Box 4.6 considered when defining an initial common vision:
Initial vision and objectives for MSP y It should be based on strong agreement among
in Côte d’Ivoire
stakeholders, government departments etc., reflecting
The Integrated Marine and Coastal Area Management shared inspiration and a desirable time-bound future
Project of Abidjan to Assinie (Gestion intégrée de l’aire y The vision should be broad but guided by some realism
marine et côtière d’Abidjan à Assinie (GIAMAA))1 under the in terms of its achievement, thus at the same time
MAMI WATA Project2 is piloting MSP in Côte d’Ivoire. The challenging and not something that can be easily met and
project began in January 2016 and will run until December
discarded
2021. The MSP process is led by the Ivorian Anti-Pollution
Centre (Centre Ivorien Anti-Pollution (CIAPOL)). Grand
y The vision should provide a focus for MSP and clarify
Bassam was selected as a pilot site for the project, as it is a identified goals and objectives
UNESCO World Heritage site and an important economic y The vision could provide a long-term MSP focus that
area for autonomous ports, beach resorts and hotels, fishing, extends beyond political cycles
submarine cables and sand extraction.

A common vision for MSP in Grand Bassam was defined after 4.4.3 Goals and objectives
intersectoral consultation, discussion with stakeholders and
the National MSP Steering Committee. The vision seeks to Specifying MSP goals (or strategic objectives, i.e. broad-scale
ensure ‘a healthy marine and coastal environment in Grand aspirations) and clearly defined objectives is essential to
Bassam as a driving force for sustainable development focus MSP efforts towards achieving the desired results
by 2030’. The initial objectives identified seek to reduce
(IOC-UNESCO, 2009). It is also appropriate to establish the
conflicts between marine and coastal uses around the
Abidjan-Assinie area, including Grand Bassam, by allocating connections or correspondences between principles, general
artisanal and emerging activities to specific marine areas. goals and objectives. While both goals and objectives are
MSP also seeks to safeguard biological diversity and identify expressions of what we want to achieve through MSP, they
ecologically or biologically significant areas (EBSAs), as well should also reflect the reality of current and future conditions
as to ensure the long-term provision of ecosystem services (see Chapter 5) and identify MSP drivers. Discussing the goals
to support economic development and well-being among
and objectives is an important milestone of the political
coastal communities.
process – it is an opportunity to reach a joint understanding
between multiple actors. Therefore, the process of elaborating
goals and objectives must be inclusive and foster equity, while
focusing on social demands; it should not be driven by short-
term interests. Three dimensions of social justice – recognition,
representation and distribution (see Chapter 2) – can inform
both the formulation process and content of the goals and
objectives.

Broad goals are needed to provide overall direction and

purpose for MSP but they may be too general to inform
plan making. It is practical to split the broad goals into more
detailed objectives that can be more easily turned into plan-
ning decisions. Alternatively, broad objectives can be used to
identify distinct sections of the marine plan under which more
detailed policies can be developed; detailed objectives are also
a key to successful monitoring, as they are easier to follow up
than very general goals. Detailed objectives that are realistic,
clearly defined and verifiable can be linked to qualitative and
quantitative indicators. The broader goals are linked to overall
©Boulenger Xavier/[Link] developments in maritime sectors, the marine environment
Source: MAMI WATA Project, 2021. and society.

MSP balances demand for development with the need to pro-

1 GIAMAA project, available online at [Link] See also
tect or conserve the marine environment, while securing social
[Link] sustainability and equity. It is not just about environmental
2 MAMI WATA project available online at [Link] protection or economic development. The essence of MSP is
org/pilot-projects/pilot-projects-cotedivoire-context/
integrating various sectors and concerns.
Designing the planning process
77

Box 4.7
MSP objectives and respective indicators in Ecuador

In 2017, the Ecuadorian Planning Authority published the Coastal y objectives related to both planning and management
and Marine Spatial Plan 2017–2030 including the following measures
elements: y indicators
y definition of the planning boundaries
y an assessment of the marine environment and maritime The plan covers the whole coastal zone and maritime territory
activities of Ecuador and includes goals such as the promotion of conservation
y goals aligned with the objectives of the National Oceanic and of marine ecosystems and cultural heritage, as well as the promotion
Coastal Policies (PNOC) of the sustainable use of living and non-living resources.

Table 4.4
Examples of goals, objectives and indicators

Goals Objectives Indicators

To promote the conservation and To include in the National System of Protected Number and surface of new protected areas
sustainability of coastal marine Areas the priority conservation areas classified Surface of marine and coastal territory under
ecosystems and cultural heritage as ‘high’ and ‘very high’ in the National Biodiversity conservation
through public action Strategy 2015–2030

To promote exploration and To plan the exploration for the characterisation In progress
prospecting in the oceanic and of hydrocarbon and mining resources on the
coastal marine space for the continental shelf and possible areas of extension
sustainable use of living and
non-living resources To carry out national fisheries and aquaculture % of implementation of the National Fisheries
regulations to avoid over-exploitation of the and Aquaculture Control Plan
resource and conflicts with other uses or activities

To promote research on geological, fishing and Number of areas of priority interest established
aquatic resources in order to guarantee productive for the efficient and sustainable use of marine
transformation and food sovereignty species and geological resources
Number of projects or investigations related
to geological and hydrocarbon resources

Source: SENPLADES, 2017.

Box 4.8
Examples of MSP goals in Germany

The legal basis for the establishment of maritime spatial plans

in the German EEZ is the Federal Regional Planning Act, which
was extended to the EEZ in 2004, and last amended in 2017
to implement the EU Directive on Maritime Spatial Planning.
In contrast to the territorial sea, the EEZ does not belong to
the territory of the Federal Republic of Germany. Maritime
spatial planning must therefore respect the freedoms of the
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, such as the freedoms
of navigation, overflight and to lay cables and pipelines.
It is therefore a matter of ‘limited spatial planning’.

The legal regulations for spatial planning in the

German EEZ apply to: Figure 4.5
y economic and scientific usage, Spatial development plans for the German EEZ

y ensuring the safety and ease of maritime navigation, and Source: Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH),
Germany.
y the protection of the marine environment.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
78

SMART objectives and their respective indicators are widely It may take a long time to achieve some of the goals and objec-
accepted as a relevant basis to evaluate the effectiveness of a tives of MSP. In addition to long-term objectives, it is advisable
public policy. However, experience has shown that MSP evalu- to set short- and mid-term objectives which correspond to the
ation is not an easy task, due to the difficulty of knowing and expected, realistic pathways, as these will provide concrete
proving that the observed outcomes were directly associated checkpoints for progress. You should also consider how the
to the marine spatial plan and not to other possible factors (see marine spatial plan and related documents can influence deci-
Chapter 8). One emerging concern is that MSP objectives also sion-making in sectoral or other decision-making processes. It
need to be equitable and inclusive, so here it is proposed to is advisable to plan the evaluation of the MSP while setting the
adopt SMARTIE objectives (Box 4.9). objectives, in order to ascertain how you will know when certain
objectives are met and identify evaluation challenges that will
The primary purpose of objectives is to enable the aspirations need to be addressed (e.g. the need to commissioning research
of the marine plan to be realised. With marine planning being a or data gathering to support monitoring of novel objectives
relatively new process, this can mean objectives are developed where data is not available). This can also be useful during the
that address issues for the first time or in a new way. The novel final formulation of the objectives.
nature of such objectives will likely create challenges in terms of
monitoring and evaluation but such challenges should not be Measurable/verifiable objectives play a critical role in evaluating
used as a reason to limit the scope of objectives. performance, reducing uncertainty and improving MSP over
time (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). Depending on the type of MSP, you
An objective-based approach needs to be attuned to the type should consider how reliably and credibly the objectives can
of MSP that is being developed. If the MSP is going to be stra- be measured. Specifically, in the case of more indicative MSP, it
tegic and more indicative than steering, the objectives, meas- may be very difficult to measure outcomes quantitatively. This
ures and indicators should be appropriate for this approach. is because the outcomes, if understood to mean a preferred
Consideration should be given as to what would be a realistic change of the use of the sea (or lack of change if the objective is
achievement for this kind of MSP, and through which pathways to preserve something), are often influenced by multiple factors,
the objectives could be achieved. such as economic and technological development. Isolating the

Box 4.9
Let’s be SMARTIE defining the objectives

Details are important! Does everyone involved understand your and improving planning and management over time. Because
objectives? Are these objectives free of jargon? Have you defined objectives are used to guide decisions in managing human
your terms? Have you used simple language? activities in marine areas, they should be more specific than ‘broad
brush’ statements or overall management aims. For example,
Objectives should be written in an active tense and use strong generic statements such as ‘maintain marine biodiversity’
verbs like ‘deliver’, ‘conduct’ and ‘produce’, rather than ‘learn’, or ‘improve water quality for local population’ are general
‘understand’ or ‘encourage’. Objectives can help focus the plan statements (goals) about why management has been undertaken,
on what matters – real results or outcomes. not measurable objectives that can help guide decision-making.
Make sure the differences between goals and objectives are sorted Source: Adapted from the EU’s Better Regulation Toolbox.1
out; specify as many objectives as needed to meet each goal.
1 Available at: [Link]
and-proposing-law/better-regulation-why-and-how/better-regulation-
SMARTIE objectives play a critical role in evaluating the guidelines-and-toolbox_en
performance of the management plan, reducing uncertainty

S M A R T I E
SPECIFIC MEASURABLE ACHIEVABLE RELEVANT TIME-BOUND INCLUSIVE EQUITABLE
When the When the When the When the When the When everyone When the
objective is objective allows objective is set objective is objective is is welcomed – elements of
precise and verification of at a level which directly linked related to a fixed particularly those fairness are
concrete enough its achievement is ambitious to the drivers date or precise most impacted included seeking
not to be open through indicators. but at the same and vision. time period – into processes, to address
to varying Such objectives time realistically to allow an activities, systemic injustice
interpretations are either achievable within evaluation of its and decision/ and inequity.
by different quantified or based the context, achievement. policymaking in
people. on a combination knowledge a way that shares
of description and and resources power.
scoring scales. available.
Designing the planning process
79

influences of MSP from other contributing factors can be very In general terms, the evaluation should explain what works, for
difficult. While quantitative measuring might not be possible, a whom and why. Methodological choices for evaluation, as well
qualitative approach may provide some verification. Qualitative as measuring the impacts or use of indicators, should aim to
methods might include asking sectoral decision-makers or answer these questions. General questions can be answered
operators to complete questionnaires about the influence of by applying alternative methods, the selection of which is also
the marine spatial plan on their choices. Constructing clear influenced by the availability of resources. Monitoring and
pathways towards the outcomes can help to identify the means evaluation can be resource-dependent and science-based,
of verification. or they can be more dialogue-based. In fact, a combination
of these is recommended, as both have their strengths. Costly
monitoring and evaluation efforts are best to focus on the
4.5 Planning the monitoring and evaluation
key (i.e. most important) aspects of MSP. Dialogue-based
of the plan monitoring and evaluation can complement the picture by
This section focuses on key aspects of planning the evaluation setting the MSP into a broader societal and economic context.
and monitoring of MSP and on the formulation of indicators. Furthermore, a sustained dialogue around the effects of the
MSP is a great way to support the implementation of the plan,
Chapter 8 describes in more detail the practice of MSP evalua- as the key actors are kept in the loop!
tion, and presents approaches for evaluating the planning pro-
cess and inclusion of stakeholders; the plan and its relevance; Evaluation, supported by information gained from moni-
implementation of MSP; and results and outcomes of MSP. It toring, is an essential part of adaptive MSP. It provides the
also covers the reporting of evaluation and monitoring results, evidence base for reviewing the plan and for assessing the
as well as the ultimate goal of evaluation: the adaptation of the functionality of the planning process. The extent of the eval-
plan and MSP process. uation is limited to the availability of resources. Therefore, it
is advisable to make a distinction between what is necessary
The aim of this chapter is to highlight that monitoring and eval- and what is useful. MSPs typically have several objectives to
uation takes place throughout the planning process (not just be achieved, but they are not necessarily equally important
after the plan is implemented), therefore some initial thought for society. Evaluation and monitoring efforts, respectively,
needs to be given to this task when designing the MSP process. should focus first and foremost on the most important objec-
tives and on the most important aspects of the planning pro-
cess. The scope of evaluation can then be extended as far as
4.5.1 Objectives, scope and purpose of the
the resources allow. The scope of MSP evaluation can be also
monitoring programme for evaluation
extended by organising frequent dialogues with key actors
The purpose of monitoring and evaluating is 1) to hold and stakeholders who can bring in their own perspectives to
authorities accountable and 2) to learn about and improve complement the results of the official MSP evaluation. There
MSP. Knowing the results and side effects of MSP is essential are a number of challenges to determining what effects MSP
for its reviewing and updating. How is the plan making a actually generates, the main one of which is the difficulty of
difference in contributing towards a more sustainable use of isolating the effects from the marine spatial plan from other
our ocean? What does the plan deliver to society? Is it doing factors that may also influence development in the use of sea
so or are amendments needed? It is also important to consider areas. This, in turn, limits our ability to quantitatively measure
contextual factors that influence what it is possible to achieve progress in MSP.
through this particular marine spatial plan. Then it is important
to understand the plan’s mandate and what needs to be taken Quantitative measurement may be easier when your marine
care of in other processes. spatial plan is detailed and strongly steers uses of the seas.
Such planning includes many elements of sectoral manage-
We also need to evaluate the process of plan making, e.g. ment. In these cases, it is feasible to set quantitative targets
in terms of equity and representativeness, to improve the and to measure to what extent they have been reached.
process in future planning rounds. The quality of the process The IOC-UNESCO Guide to Evaluating Marine Spatial Plans
has implications for the quality of the plan and effectiveness of (IOC-UNESCO, 2014) is a useful basis for the monitoring and
implementation. evaluation of such a prescriptive and detailed MSP. However,
when the MSP system is strategic and guiding, rather than
It is preferable to reserve some resources for monitoring and steering, the evaluation and monitoring needs to be designed
evaluation, but experience has shown that considerably more differently. Then an evaluation approach that looks at MSP
resources are set aside – understandably – for plan-making than from different perspectives and in a broader context can
for monitoring and evaluation. produce useful information.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
80

The other key point pertains to the evaluation process and The challenges and complexity of identifying the impact of a
methods. Maritime sectoral experts and other stakeholders specific policy initiative among many others are often familiar
have valuable insights and experiences that can be used to to those working in government. If available, references
assess how a marine spatial plan has influenced/can influ- related to policy evaluation should be used (for example The
ence their field of activity or communities. When conducted Magenta Book published by HM Treasury in the UK)2 and rel-
in a systematic and structured way, the assessment can shed evant experts consulted to help inform evaluation planning.
light on what are likely impacts and through which mecha-
nisms the impacts are generated. Monitoring and evaluation A combination of qualitative and quantitative indicators can
results represent a key piece of evidence underpinning any produce good results. For instance, quantitative process indi-
decision to revise and plan and to help guide the revisions cators can follow the number of stakeholder events and num-
to be made. ber of stakeholders consulted, but more explanatory power
is gained when such information is added with qualitative
feedback from the stakeholders. This provides a robust basis
4.5.2 Identifying key indicators to monitor MSP
for the planning authorities to improve the planning process.
Indicators are useful for monitoring the impacts of MSP or
achievement of its objectives. The information they provide Another example of combining qualitative and quantitative
can also help discussions with experts and stakeholders. indicators is the issue of MSP’s influence on the economic
However, it is important to stress that indicators are a support- development of maritime sectors. Quantitative information
ing tool, not the monitoring and evaluation framework itself, on the status and trends of different sectors (e.g. employment,
and that they should be used in moderation.1 share of GDP) can be used as outcome or context indicators
(see Table 4.5) to provide a basis for discussion with experts
and stakeholders on MSP’s observed or possible future contri-
Table 4.5 butions to the development of the sectors. The latter provides
Types of indicators for monitoring MSP qualitative evidence.

Context y Collect information on general developments Purpose of indicators

indicators in maritime sectors and marine environment
Indicators have numerous uses and potential for improving
y Information helps in assessing the relevance
of the MSP: is it focusing on the most important MSP in terms of simplification, verification and communica-
issues? tion. They can help to monitor and assess conditions, forecast
changes and trends (such as providing early warning infor-
Input y Collect information on actions and resources
indicators to develop plans and responsibilities
mation), as well as evaluate the effectiveness of the planning
y Information helps in assessing preconditions decisions. Ideally, for each type of identified planning decision
for successful planning that will apply to the marine plan, you should have a perfor-
mance indicator. Finally, the indicators collect information
Process y Collect information on the planning process, about the planning process and help to collect feedback from
indicators and from stakeholders
y Information helps in assessing the quality
the stakeholders.
of the planning process, including equity
and representativeness Formulation of indicators
y Set the standard for a good quality process
As shown above, there are a number of useful lists to help with
the formulation of indicators for MSP. Since each planning
Output y Collect information on planning decisions
indicators and studies context is different and marine spatial plans can have different
goals and objectives, it is unlikely that you will find a ready-
Outcome y Collect information on immediate, intermediate made list of MSP indicators that is relevant for your context
indicators and long-term outcomes, such as licence
application procedures and projects resulting and fit for your purpose – you will need to formulate and
from the plan (impact information) fine-tune the indicators. The UN publication An Introduction to
y Information will help in assessing progress Indicators3 gives the following criteria for designing indicators:
in the implementation of the plan (milestones)
and the results of the plan y RELEVANT: to the objective or impacts of the MSP it seeks
y Note: assess what the influence of the plan has to measure
been on the developments at sea

Source: Varjopuro et al., 2019.

1 There are several sources for indicators relevant for MSP, including Botero et al., 2016; Buhl-Mortensen et al., 2016; Böhnke-Henrichs et al., 2013; Carneiro, 2013; Day,
2008; IOC-UNESCO, 2014; European MSP Platform, 2018 and Ferreira et al., 2018.
2 See [Link]
3 [Link]
Designing the planning process
81

y MEASURABLE/VERIFIABLE: observable and readily 4.6 Risk assessment and development

measured with existing tools and programmes in a timely
of contingency plans
fashion
This is an important criterion to consider as collecting data for the indi- When organising the MSP process, it is also necessary to
cator is often expensive. It is better to formulate indicators that can use develop a risk assessment of what could go wrong during the
data that is collected for other purposes such as fisheries management,
process, as well as what respective contingency measures are
environmental monitoring or shipping surveillance.
available to address the identified risks (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).
y SPECIFIC: to the aspects that are to be monitored and
be separated from other factors that influence the use
For example, certain topics may have to be excluded during the
of the sea areas and the state of the marine environment
later stages of the MSP process, due to political (power), legal
This may need expert assessment in cases where the effects of MSP
are difficult to isolate (see Chapter 8).
(mandate) or technical reasons (availability of data/information).
y SCIENTIFIC: based on scientific evidence and not subject If this takes place after the visioning or goal/objective-
to biases setting stages that were conducted together with different
y CLEAR: easily interpreted by the target audience, especially stakeholders, and if those stages achieved joint formulation of
for aspects of importance to the target audience the goals, it would be useful to still report such outcomes, as
This may need expert assessment in cases where the effects of MSP
they can be taken up, e.g. in sectoral policy processes.
are difficult to isolate (see Chapter 8).
y COMPARABLE: over time, i.e. consistently measured under The Cooperative Research Report No. 327 Marine Spatial
the same principles and definition Planning Quality Management System4 of the International
y RESPONSIVE: sensitive to planning decisions and provides Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) includes discussion
timely and reliable feedback on the impacts of technical approaches that can be taken to risk management
This may need expert assessment in cases where the effects of MSP in MSP (Figure 4.6).
are difficult to isolate (see Chapter 8).
y COST EFFECTIVE: monitoring costs of indicator or data
collection should not outweigh the benefits of monitoring

Demand
for maritime
space
Health and safety Policy and Sustainable growth
Safety buffer
hazards of regulatory of maritime
zones around Health, safety
conflicting certainty and economies
activities and environment
activities coherence

Planning of Sustainable
development development
Spatial and activities of marine areas
Apportionment
temporal uses of marine space Maritime
of existing and for specific Spatial Planning:
future activities activities Directive Spatial and Sustainable use
temporal of marine resources
apportionment

Collective Spatial and

Environmental temporal Conservation Good
Pressures protection areas Environmental
measures Status

Figure 4.6
MSP quality management systems

Source: ICES/CIEM, 2015.

4 [Link]
 82

©yusuf madi/[Link]
 83

5 Assessments for planning

THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES Of these factors, the legal regime is key, as it determines the nor-
mative framework and source of legitimacy for decision-making
y The definition of different planning scales in the planning area. In addition to the prevailing legal regime, a
y The identification of existing conditions to map number of the factors set out here can be used in combination
and diagnose environmental, socio-economic and to determine the scale of a plan.
cultural parameters
y The analysis of future conditions and trends as well The plan (or set of plans) of a State should be linked to an area
as assessment of synergies and trade-offs between over which sovereignty or jurisdictional rights are exercised –
human and environmental interests and to which the granted planning mandate applies.
y The development of public information systems
Depending on the physical geography and the political-ad-
ministrative organisation, the legal scope may be divided into
territorial sections, whose constituent factors are one, or a
combination, of:
The aim of this chapter is to analyse the planning area from
environmental, social, cultural and economic perspectives. i) the legal regime itself of its waters, seabed and subsoil;
Knowledge and data about existing activities and conditions ii) the political-administrative organisation (regions,
are mapped, data protocols defined and data gaps identified. provinces, local entities, etc.);
It is also important to address future conditions and trends iii) the ecosystems or parts of ecosystems existing within the
during the assessment process. legal scope.

5.1 Defining the different scales of planning

Depending on whether the approach is ecological, socio-eco-
nomic or governmental, there are important factors to consider
in the definition of ‘scale’ which can subsequently influence the What outputs are expected?
way in which the scale of an MSP will be determined (Figure 5.1).
To take into account all these considerations, we could define a y A (permanent) solution to access the data needed, i.e.
the definition of an agreed routine for long-term data
scale as a jurisdictional, ecological and socio-economic level of
management.
the MSP process and its components (subprocesses, activities y A diagnostic, including inventory and maps, of ecologically
and features), in space and time. or biologically sensitive areas and current human activities
in the planning area.
Before starting any data compilation and further assessments y An assessment of the (relative) importance of different sea
for MSP, the scale of planning needs to be defined because it is uses and ecosystem services in social, cultural and economic
terms, including the spatial dimension (e.g. mapping
an aspect that directly influences the kind of data needed, as
of social, cultural and economic dependency on marine
well as its resolution. resources/space, plus the land-sea interaction perspective).
y An assessment of possible conflicts and compatibilities
There are four factors to consider when determining the scale among existing human uses and between existing human
of a plan: uses and the environment.
y An assessment of natural resources and environmental
i) the international legal regime of marine waters
carrying capacity to ascertain whether the area could be used
ii) marine ecosystems and species distribution and dynamics for development.
iii) range of human activities at sea y An assessment of suitability for marine space development
to explore which kind of activities could be suitable for
iv) the political-administrative organisation of adjacent development.
territories
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
84

A Ecological scales Dimension

(km2)
B B. Scale domains
(Wilbanks, 2006)
C C. Jurisdictional scales
(Cash et al., 2006)
(Hein et al., 2006)

Global >1,000,000 Regional Continental Intercontinental

Sub-continental
Economic/Political unions
Large nations
Biome/landscape 10,000-100,000 National
Large Small nations/states/provinces
area Large basins
5-100 grid
Ecosystems 1-10,000 Provincial
Local Small basins
10 grid
Firms
Plot/Plant <1 Households Local

D Interactions and interrelations among scales

Global Processes International

Biome National
Information

Knowledge
Landscape Socio-ecological State/provincial
boundary objects
Ecosystems Municipal/district

Plot/farm Village

Plant Individual/family
Interactions

Figure 5.1
Hierarchical representations of scale and scale interactions

Source: Minang et al., 2015.

Within the limits of the legal scope, and depending on the of the transboundary approach in marine planning. To explain
geographic and geopolitical configuration, a hierarchy of these tensions: a legal basis for defining a transboundary zone
plans (Table 5.1) and/or typology of plans can be established barely exists, and national and subnational authorities there-
to outline the temporal development, administrative action, fore select the jurisdiction of the MSP over their waters. There
order of priorities or level of detail, ranging from formulating may be procedural obstacles for authorities seeking to work
strategic lines to specific interventions. together across borders, including misaligned administrative
structures and processes, technical difficulties in sharing
The geographical scale of a plan is generally determined by
information, language barriers and other barriers to good
the scope of action. Thus, the cartographic documents of a
communication (Jay et al., 2016).
plan of national scope will have variable scales, adapted to the
extent of the territory:
Depending on the legal regime of the maritime space, dif-
y Local
ferent scales may have international dimensions; in the EEZs,
y Subnational
international issues have greater weight, as a consequence
y National
of the rights enjoyed by third States in relation to plans that
y Cross-border and transboundary (see Section 2.2.5)
focus on maritime spaces whose legal regime is the territorial
y ABNJ
sea. Specifying what type of administration is connected to
MSP is generally being conducted at large geographical the given marine area also provides accuracy on the size of
scales, including consideration of regional and land-sea inter- the space and its political-administrative implications. Thus,
actions. There are difficulties between scientific management a plan managed by a local administration (where the legal
and effective resource management for a transboundary framework of the coastal state permits) will generally address
approach, due to the complexity of demonstrating the interest issues of a more ad hoc dimension.
Assessments for planning
85

Table 5.1
Different factors related to planning geographical scales

Morphology and
Geographical Political Maritime
Description Denomination morphological Ecosystems
scale scale jurisdiction
elements

1:45,000,000 Geographical scope International scale International Ocean basins EEZ / High seas Large marine
of treaties treaties (subglobal) ecosystems

1:35,000,000 Specific International- Regional Ocean basins EEZ / Ecoregions

geographical areas Regional scale Convention High seas
subscribed to (Macroregion) (UNEP /
regional maritime
management Regional
conventions Seas)

1:15,000,000 State’s juris- National scale State Ocean sub-basin EEZ Bio-geographical
dictional waters as (Meso-region) Territorial sea regions
a whole
Internal waters

1:15,000,000 Marine subdivisions National-regional Federal States / Gulfs, estuaries, bays, Territorial sea Continental shelf
1:2,000,000 established for scale Autonomous inlets Internal waters and slope
State’s jurisdictional regions Seamounts
waters as a whole
Submarine
canyons
Marine
phanerogam
prairies

1:900,000 Marine subregions Subregional scale Provinces Gulfs, estuaries, bays, Territorial sea Continental shelf
1:300,000 and subzones Municipalities inlets Internal waters and slope
established in each Seamounts
of the national- Counties
regional scale Submarine
subdivisions canyons
Marine
phanerogam
prairies

1:260,000 Special marine Local scale Municipalities

1:70,000 planning areas and Port authorities -------- -------- --------
scope of port spaces

Source: Suárez de Vivero, 2001.

The situation is complex because there is a wide typology all require international management based on consistent
of contacts between countries, their different jurisdictional cooperation practices.
areas and, in turn, between maritime spaces under national
jurisdiction and beyond national jurisdiction. The diversity of It is also possible for national marine spatial plans to be adjacent
border types requires different legal and political treatments. to International Seabed Authority plans, regional environmen-
However, there is a lack of precision in the normative and tal management plans, or area-based management tools under
technical texts related to MSP, which affects the correct inter- the agreement (under negotiation) on biodiversity in ABNJ.
pretation of cross-border or transboundary cooperation.

Some of the activities within the scope of the plan tend to have
a greater degree of interaction, and take place across jurisdic-
tional limits. These are areas where property rights converge,
resources move with the seas, marine dynamics distribute/
mobilise natural elements or objects, or the environment itself
functions as a circulation space (transport). Fishing, traffic,
pollution, leisure, conservation or environmental protection
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
86

Box 5.1
Establishing cross-border frameworks for maritime spatial planning

Member States of the European Union should consult and to be identified. EU countries therefore need to designate
coordinate their plans with neighbouring countries and should the competent authority or authorities responsible for the
cooperate with third-country authorities in the marine region implementation of this Directive. Given the differences between
concerned in conformity with the rights and obligations of all various marine regions or subregions and coastal zones, it is not
parties involved under the Union and the international law. appropriate to prescribe in detail in this Directive the form those
cooperation mechanisms should take.
Article 1 of the European Directive establishing maritime
spatial planning reads: Cross-border cooperation is intrinsic to the occupation and
use of maritime space, which is why it must be taken into
1. 
This Directive establishes a framework for maritime spatial consideration in a plan, especially when sharing a sea basin,
planning aimed at promoting the sustainable growth of where decisions made on one side of the border might have
maritime economies, the sustainable development of marine consequences on the other side. It can also be a framework
areas and the sustainable use of marine resources. for resolving disputes arising from jurisdictional claims between
states and/or territories.
2. 
Within the Integrated Maritime Policy of the Union, that
framework provides for the establishment and implementation It is advisable to carry out a prior evaluation of geopolitical
by Member States of maritime spatial planning, with the aim risks when promoting a plan with a cross-border focus. Bilateral
of contributing to the objectives specified in Article 5, taking or multilateral cooperation between States is only one of
into account land-sea interactions and enhanced cross-border the possibilities to be taken into account. The cross-border/
cooperation, in accordance with relevant UNCLOS provisions. transboundary dimension requires a highly detailed approach
to planning, in order to design the legal and political mechanisms
Effective cross-border cooperation between Member States that make it viable.
of the European Union and with neighbouring third countries
requires that the competent authorities in each country Interaction with ABNJs (from one or several States) can take
place in scenarios of considerable complexity.

-80° -70° -30° 50° 80° 90° 100°

S e a

60°
t s
n

N
e
r

a
B
o

50°
r
w

n
e g

a
e
a

i a n

c
O
S e

c d
i
S e a

t n
a
n I c e l
a
a

Baltic Se
l

50°
a
t

ga h Se
A

nn nd
t
or
ta

s
t

(incl ater N

el)
s

tte
e
a

ha
. Ka
S

Gre

hC
e

tic

glis

40°
-
h

the En
Cel
t
r
o
N

M 40°
a st
Coa
an S e a
eri c k
Ib
c

l a
e
a

B
th

Ad
ria
nd
r

rranea
dite tic
ya

n
Me
o

30° Se
Bay of Bisca

rn a
Se
n

ste

a
We
e s

M e d i t Ionian
e Se
r
r the a Sea 30°
tine
i a

Cen
a tra A e g e a n - L e v an
an

Me n
d

dit e a n S e a
l

err
an
ean
Sea

20°

0 500 1 -20°
000 1 500 km -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40°

European regional seas

Figure 5.2
European Regional Seas

© European Environment Agency, 2021.

Sources: EULEX, 2014; European Environment Agency, 2015; adapted from UNESCO-IOC, 2021i.
Assessments for planning
87

5.2 Identifying existing conditions

Box 5.2
Identifying existing conditions is the process of understanding Data harmonisation – not always a cross-border
the situation in the marine space being planned. This provides issue
information on the current physical, biological, social, eco-
nomic and governance characteristics of the marine plan area. Project PLASMAR: Benthic habitats harmonisation
Spatial information on marine benthic habitats of depths up
to 50 m in the Canary Islands (Spain) was gathered through
Spatial data and planning evidence is at the core of MSP. The
survey campaigns (Ecocartográficos) from 2000-2008.
subsections below address the kind of data necessary to Unfortunately, as these surveys were delivered by different
assess the current conditions of the planning area in relation consulting companies, the data sets have different structures
to the different aspects that characterise the socio-ecological and 176 different types of habitat classification. The data
system under analysis. analysis showed that the elevated number of habitat
classes was a semantic issue that could be resolved with
As explained earlier, a strategy for data compilation and man- a standardised classification system.
agement is needed during the development of the work plan. In order to analyse, update and reuse benthic habitat spatial
It is necessary to define data categories, and protocols to build information efficiently, a common data structure was
a public information system (or feed, when it already exists) to applied. Data sets on benthic habitats were harmonised
organise the data, which will be used as inputs to run different following INSPIRE Directive principles and applying
standardised classification systems:
analyses. Due to the time-consuming and expensive nature of
data collection, it is important to prioritise and gather relevant 1. European Nature Information System (EUNIS) –
data based on the MSP issues already identified for solving the 26 habitat classifications;
issues. This is especially useful if MSP is being carried out for the 2. Marine Strategy Framework Directive Classification –
first time. Harmonising data makes it compatible, accessible, 12 habitat classifications;
usable and transparent. In conducting a review of available 3. Spanish national standard on marine habitats and
data, you should look for spatial and temporal information that species – 43 classifications.
covers most of the planning area. As surveying and monitoring Applying EUNIS standard makes it possible to harmonise
is also time-consuming and expensive, it is better to start with national mapping with the European Marine Observation
existing government sources, such as data on marine environ- and Data Network (EMODnet) habitat mapping products,
ment, fisheries management or shipping surveillance. Physical as both data sets are using the same classification system.
oceanographical information may also be available.
a b

MSP Input Data

required for analysing initial conditions

Oceanographic spatial information

(ocean temperature, waves, currents…)

Data on marine environment

(eutrophication level, benthic habitat status…) c d

Marine conservation
(extension and objectives of Marine Protected Areas...)

Information on coastal and maritime activities

(aquaculture, ocean energy facilities, coastal tourism, ports and
harbours…)

Socio-economic information
(coastal population, unemployment, income by sector…)
Figure 5.4
a. Gran Canaria (Spain) non-harmonised benthic habitat
Governance information map; b: applied EUNIS classification system; c: applied
(administrative units, prospecting permits…) Spanish national classification system for marine
habitats; d: applied Marine Strategy Framework Directive
Figure 5.3 Classification.
An example of a tailored MSP input data framework for
analysing existing conditions, adapted for the needs of the MSP Source: PLASMAR Consortium, 2020.
project PLASMAR, in the Macaronesian region of the Atlantic

Source: Abramic et al., 2020.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
88

Participatory mapping as a source TIP

of data and information Assessments at transboundary level

Participatory mapping is a map-making process that A good way of improving alignment between neighbouring
attempts to make visible the association between land plans is to strengthen the network and collaboration
or ocean and local communities by using the commonly across both sea basins and administrative borders, and
understood and recognised language of cartography especially between planners and environmentalists with an
(IFAD, 2009). Maps present spatial information at various administrative mandate to plan the area.
scales, using a paper or a digital map, serve as a medium of
empowerment by allowing local communities to represent It is important to consider the existing conditions
themselves spatially. together with neighbours, especially in relation to
cross-border areas (species and habitats, human activities
and environmental pressures can cross borders). Where
possible, countries should apply regional sea collaboration
in marine observation and data collection.

It is key to make a diagnosis of the transboundary aspects

of the area under analysis. Some countries may have
concerns about the influence of other countries on their
territory. A potential way to enable collaborative working
is the establishment of an ecosystem-based approach for
MSP (that will highlight the connectivity and continuity of
ecosystems between countries), as well as a delimitation
© UNESCO-IOC/MSPglobal, 2020. of the topics under discussion, restricting them to what is
really transboundary.
Stakeholders participating in a mapping exercise may
Consider harmonising symbols and legends used in
share valuable details that are often not present in spatial
mapping across the different countries.
databases, such as conflicts and synergies with other users,
personal perspective on the importance of specific areas It might be helpful to show the boundaries of neighbouring
for the sector, as well as the impacts of potential loss of countries, infrastructure projects (existing, proposed
accessibility. or planned) and ecosystems that are close to or across
jurisdictional borders.
Building trust is an essential step to ensuring a successful
participatory mapping, while in the case of traditional It is recommended to strengthen the network between
knowledge, it is also necessary to request prior consent national sector authorities across borders within the sea
from indigenous peoples and local communities before basin. Ideally, this should be delivered under the umbrella
using the data (Ntona and Morgera, 2018). of joint projects.

The required information may be identified by following

have for decision-making. It might also be useful to set up a
already defined frameworks, or a newly developed framework
plan on who, how and when to deal with missing informa-
tailored to the MSP objectivities particular to a given situation.
tion. Compilation of new data requires field measurements,
something that is not always possible within the deadline and
There are also global initiatives led by specialised agencies of
resources available. However, the identified data gaps could
the United Nations (e.g. FAO, IMO, UNEP, UNESCO, UNDP or the
be forwarded to research programmes and then be available
World Bank) or regional organisations (e.g. European Union,
in the next planning cycle.
African Union, Regional Seas Conventions) which are signifi-
cantly improving data collection by setting data protocols,
Compiling data for MSP requires specific technical skills (e.g.
standards and ontologies.
GIS skills) due to the importance of spatial data in the planning
process. The characterisation, i.e. the diagnosis, of the area
Most initial data collection and mapping can be done through
requires knowledge of spatial data compilation, analysis and
specialised inter-agency working groups and by consulting
management. Indeed, nowadays there are many technolog-
experts/stakeholders on various topics. Data can be further
ical tools (or ‘decision support tools’) that can assist with this
identified from scientific literature.
step. It is important to bear in mind that transboundary MSP
During the task of compiling data and information, it is impor- might have different data, harmonisation and interoperability
tant to conduct a data gap analysis, as well as be transparent requirements.
when data is missing and what consequences this might
Assessments for planning
89

Building new marine data systems can be expensive and slow,

but it is possible to develop MSP in data-limited situations Examples of data needs to assess existing
without sophisticated set-ups.1 A practical and less costly environmental conditions
starting point could be participatory mapping of areas of use.
Participatory mapping is usually needed even in situations List of spatial data to characterise the environment:
where a lot of data is available. Participants will not all have y Oceanographic features like currents, convergence zones,
datasets to show their high priority areas, and existing data upwelling
y Bathymetry and depth
may not be representative of future scenarios. Participatory
y Priority areas for conservation (e.g. MPAs, Biosphere
mapping has been a component of MSP since at least 2006 Reserves, EBSAs, etc.)
and there are multiple tools, including online web-mapping or y Benthic geomorphology, shallow and deep
decision-support tools like SeaSketch that supported marine y Deep corals and reefs
planning in Canada (Diggon et al., 2020) and Adobe GeoPDF y Key ecosystems and community-forming species (e.g. coral
reefs, seagrasses, mangroves)
in Seychelles (Smith et al., 2019).
y Distribution and abundance of key species (e.g. cetaceans,
turtles, elasmobranchs, seabirds, fish, invertebrates)
In addition to the mapping, the MSP process should enable y Breeding areas
permanent solutions for storing and archiving the data, mak- y Nursery areas
ing it accessible for future decisions, and for creating proto- y Feeding or foraging areas
cols to maintain the key datasets needed for implementation y Seasonal differences, taking into consideration different life
and monitoring. stages of species
y Sea-surface temperature (SST)

Three general categories of spatial information are relevant List of data to characterise the environmental status,
for MSP: (1) biological and ecological distributions, including including indicators:
areas of known importance for a particular species or biolog- y Water quality (nutrients, dissolved oxygen)
ical community; (2) spatial and temporal information about y Marine litter
human activities; and (3) oceanographic and other physical y Biodiversity loss
y Invasive species
environmental features (bathymetry, currents, sediments)
y Habitat loss
which, in the absence of comprehensive biological data, can
be especially important for identifying different habitats and
important processes, e.g. upwelling areas.
While there is only one ocean, its heterogeneity and connec-
The mapping of jurisdictional and administrative boundaries tivity should be well integrated in MSP processes.
will also be relevant when governmental arrangements are
The use of maritime spaces and resources must be planned
considered. In conducting a review of available data, you
with regard to the environmental carrying capacity and eco-
should look for spatial and temporal information that covers
system resilience, and reflect the regional and local context.
most of the marine management area.
This means that the negative impacts of human activities in
Data can be collected from many sources, including: (1) the environment need to be minimised so that they do not
scientific literature; (2) expert scientific opinion or advice; (3) disrupt ecosystem functions or cause biodiversity loss.
government sources; (4) local knowledge; and (5) direct field
For planning purposes, the environmental characteristics
measurement. Most MSP efforts rely heavily on the first three
can also be used to divide the national territory into different
sources of data, although local knowledge is increasingly
planning regions, particularly in countries with extensive
recognised as a valuable source of information for MSP.
maritime territory. However, this decision should not be
taken without considering the internal administrative
5.2.1 Identifying, understanding and analysing boundaries and planning system of the country.
existing environmental conditions, including
environmental global changes
The marine environment is a 3D ecological system covering
a diversity of ecosystems from coastal to deep-sea, including
their respective pelagic and benthic biodiversity, which are
distributed according to oceanographic characteristics.

1 For an example of designing MSP in data-limited situations, see Flower et al., 2020.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
90

Box 5.3
Identifying and refining EBSAs through MSP: Namibia

Namibian MSP is characterised by its forward-looking approach, MPAs but areas that can be considered for future identification
driven by the anticipation of blue growth and the protection and designation of MPAs. The approach led to the definition of
of marine resources. The Namibian MSP process introduced two MSP zones: one that prioritises biodiversity features and
systematic conservation planning as a subprocess from the another that prioritises the management and minimisation
outset. This included collecting data about environmental of the impact of human activities. It also led to refining the
conditions, existing and projected human activities and boundaries and coverage of existing EBSA based on the analysis
identifying areas of high biodiversity. The process led to of human activities carried out within the MSP process. This
identifying areas of least conflict, based on existing and approach is seen as distinct from the conservation process, as it
projected human uses for conservation. These areas are not considers the human uses and features that need protection.

Figure 5.5
Characterisation of the Namibian jurisdictional marine waters

Sources: Finke et al., 2020; Harris et al., 2019; Holness et al., 2014; Kirkman et al., 2019.

Examples of data needs to assess existing physical conditions

List of spatial data to characterise physical List of spatial data to assess coastal risks
oceanographic conditions: and vulnerabilities:
y Bathymetry y Coastal erosion
y Currents y Flooding areas
y Waves y Sea-level rise
y Temperature y Hurricane winds
y Salinity y Storm surges
Assessments for planning
91

5.2.2 Identifying, understanding and analysing

Box 5.4 existing physical conditions, including coastal risks
Information systems and public data and tectonics
in support of MSP in Pacific SIDS
Physical conditions in the coastal and marine areas relevant
MACBIO (Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Management in for MSP include physical oceanographic variables, as well
Pacific Island Countries) believes that open-source spatial
as events related to coastal risks such as erosion, floods and
planning tools are an essential and sustainable solution
for Pacific island countries and supports its Pacific partners
hurricanes/cyclones. Tectonic activity and its consequences
in using these open source tools in interactive formats. (earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanoes) cannot be neglected
when planning.
With these tools, Pacific Island Countries can plan for
biodiversity conservation and resource management. To this
Physical oceanographic conditions are crucial to define the
end, MACBIO gathers and consolidates spatial data on behalf
of the countries through the development of means for
location of some maritime sectors (e.g. offshore renewables).
designing marine spatial plans that support ecologically On the other hand, coastal risks can have a direct impact on
sustainable use and protection of ecologically representative coastal activities, while also affecting the coastal areas and
examples of marine and coastal systems. infrastructure linked to offshore uses, such as ports (land-
sea interaction).

5.2.3 Identifying, understanding and analysing

existing social conditions, including cultural aspects
and human well-being
The social dimension is normally part of a finely balanced
‘socio-environmental’ or ‘socio-economic’ sphere, which is cru-
cial to our understanding of societal relationships with the sea.
Indeed, these dimensions – social, cultural, environmental and
economic – are like interwoven layers that make up a complex
system that characterises the planning area. As far as the social
The marine atlases compile hundreds of datasets and
for the first time makes this treasure trove of marine and dimension of MSP is concerned, this can be assessed from a
coastal information accessible and usable – as maps with socio-cultural and a human well-being perspective (McKinley
complementing narratives, as data layers and as raw data. et al., 2019).

Socially important areas can be mapped taking into account

different criteria, such as:
y Cultural values (both tangible and intangible)
y Spiritual/religious values
y Aesthetic/seascape values

Examples of data needs to assess

existing socio-cultural conditions

Source: MACBIO, 2021 [Link] y Maritime and underwater cultural heritage

y Coastal features
y Sunken and buried features
y Use of coast and sea
y Past use of coast and sea
y Religious and other socio-cultural areas
y Traditional land tenure
y Cultural ecosystem services
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
92

Box 5.5
Seascape character assessments (socio-cultural aspects)

Seascape character assessment (SCA) is a method for assessing,

characterising, mapping and describing the relationship between
people (culture), place (natural environment) and how that informs
the setting for everyday life. Seascape character assessment has
been used in MSP to inform and tailor policies and decisions about
where certain infrastructural projects can be located, based on
which seascapes are different, special and valued by people.
The SCA is undertaken under the following broad steps:
Step 1: Defining the purpose and scope, how much work is carried
out regarding the underwater and seascape environment, the
resources required, those who should be involved in its preparation
and the types of judgements that are needed to inform decisions.
Step 2: Desk study. This involves the analysis of various sources
and types of data to help identify areas of common character, the
mapping of draft seascape character types and/or areas, along
with the preparation of initial descriptions of natural and cultural
influences.
Step 3: Field survey and stakeholder verification to test and refine
the draft and describe the seascape character types and/or areas Figure 5.7
identified in Step 2 and to capture aesthetic, perceptual and Dover Strait Seascape Assessment
experiential qualities. © LUC, 2015.
Step 4: Classification and description. This final step refines and
finalises the outputs of the character assessment process by Sources: Adapted from Natural England (2012) and
classifying, mapping and describing seascape character types and/ Marine Management Organisation (2018).
or areas.

E
PLAC
RAL
NATU
GEOL
Sea OGY
bed
Water
column

Water
RA

surface
FLO

NA

CULT
FAU

Air &
climate
URAL/SOCIAL

SEASCAPE
ITION

Colour
COND

Texture
ERIC

Pattern
PH
HT

OS
SIG

TM
Form R/A
WEATHE
C
TI

HE
EST
&A L
PERCEPTUA
PEOPL
E

Figure 5.6
A summary of what constitutes seascape
© Natural England, 2011.
Assessments for planning
93

Mapping these areas will probably require investigations not

already carried out in the planning area, because this is still an Examples of data needs to assess existing
emerging research field. Studies on cultural ecosystem services, sectoral conditions
for example, seem to be inspiring this kind of assessment
for MSP. List of spatial data related to maritime uses:
y Fisheries
The key challenge is probably not how to identify the socially – Fishery areas (e.g. commercial, traditional, recreational,
important areas but how to evaluate them and how to take etc.)
them into account during the decision-making process when – Spawning and nursery areas
– Important fishery ports
they are in conflict with other planning priorities, and espe-
– Fish migration
cially when they cannot be given a monetary/market value. – Fishing density
However, given that ocean literacy is an emerging concept – Restrictions
which emphasises the influences and connections between
y Aquaculture
society and the sea, aiming to build public awareness of ocean – Zones
management, if non-monetary values are neglected in MSP – Installed infrastructure
processes, the public buy-in to the final marine spatial plan y Tourism
might be at risk. – Recreation and tourism areas and routes
y Maritime transport
Examples of methods to map and evaluate socially important – Port infrastructures and protection zones
areas through stakeholder participation (adapted from – Anchoring areas
HELCOM/Pan Baltic Scope, 2019) include: – Dredging and dumping areas
– Maritime routes (IMO, ferry lines, etc.)
y Participatory mapping of socially important areas (drawing
– Maritime traffic (e.g. automatic identification systems, AIS)
on a printed or digital map) – Restricted areas reserved for shipping
y Observation approaches to ascertain people’s reactions and
y Installations and infrastructures
behaviour in socially important mapped areas – Exploration and exploitation areas
y Ask individuals to rank a list of socio-cultural values – Installed infrastructure (e.g. platforms, farms, stations,
y Ask individuals to rank seascape features by photo tunnels, bridges, buoys, etc.)
– Safety zones and construction fields
In some places, it will also be important to identify and engage y Submarine cable and pipeline routes
with indigenous coastal communities. They might already have – Telecommunication/Data cables
delimited territories and a specific world view that accords a – High voltage cables
– Pipelines
cultural meaning to the sea (Grimmel et al., 2019).
y Maritime and underwater cultural heritage
Another kind of social information aims to ensure that – Exact or approximate location
– Areas of protection with restrictions for other uses
different social groups are properly recognised for the MSP
(Saunders et al., 2020). Such information includes rights y Raw material extraction areas
– Mineral resources
(including traditional tenure systems), dependencies on and
– Natural gas
interests in coastal and marine resources, belief systems and – Oil
knowledge. Recognition is an important dimension of social – CO2 storage
justice in itself, but it also helps to ensure that all the relevant – Fracking
stakeholder groups are represented (see Chapter 2). It is also – Safety perimeter of an extraction area
important to apply a rights-based approach and to address – Areas where the extraction of raw materials is restricted
gender equality perspectives early in the MSP process. This y Defence
basic information is useful for anticipating and verifying – Military exercise areas
– Radar areas/military observation areas
the distribution of benefits and harms generated by the
– Restricted areas
MSP decisions.
y Scientific research
– Research areas
– Measuring stations and networks
y Areas for conservation
– Coastal and marine protected areas
– Biosphere reserves
– Bird migration routes
– Other protection measures
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
94

Box 5.6 The PADDLE project mapped out the areas of competence of
Mapping marine activities and their legislative the stakeholders and the implication of the different coastal
implication in Senegal, Cabo Verde and Brazil and marine legislation in the marine jurisdiction. This was a first
step towards analysing existing conditions and spatial trends for
The PADDLE project was implemented from 2017 to 2021 to fragmented sectors in the region to understand their stakes at sea.
support knowledge exchange on MSP between academic and
consultancies from Europe and partners in Senegal, Cabo Verde Reports and meeting outputs are available in English and French
and Brazil. on the project’s website: [Link]

Source: Le Tixerant et al., 2020.

Box 5.7 1. List data to be compiled

Transboundary assessment in the Gulf of Guayaquil 2. Map potential data sources and providers
(MSPglobal pilot in the South-East Pacific) 3. Compile data (download original datasets whenever
possible or request to key stakeholders)
The MSPglobal Initiative developed a pilot project in the South- 4. Analyse data quality
East Pacific region, with a specific cross-border cartographic 5. Build geodatabase with metadata
exercise in the Gulf of Guayaquil, a historical bay shared by 6. Develop maps
Ecuador and Peru. In partnership with several governmental 7. Stakeholders’ consultations to review the maps
bodies and stakeholders, the spatial data was compiled to map
the current and future conditions of the maritime uses of the gulf. After mapping the existing conditions, an analysis of (in)
compatibilities was conducted through the identification
In the absence of centralised national and binational spatial of high value areas for conservation; cumulative uses of the
data infrastructures (SDIs) to access updated ecological, physical, main maritime sectors and use-use and use-nature conflicts
socio-economical and other types of data needed, the following and synergies (paired analysis).
steps were agreed (UNESCO-IOC, 2021g):

82° W 81° W 80° W

Legend
2° S

p
[ Desalination plant
Telecomm. cables
##
00 00Guayaquil

0 #
0 Surfing
Anconcito .
!
0
# 00 #
0 Snorkeling / Diving
#
0 Animal watching (board.)
Engabao #
0 Swimming with turtle
0
# !
. Platform
0
#
0 0Posorja
!
.
Isla Punáp
[ !
. Decommissioned platform
0 .
! . Well
!
Pipeline
!
. Commercial port
3° S

0 .
! Dredged deposit
Isla Santa Clara
0
#
0 0 Puerto Bolivar 0 Anchoring

!
. !
.
0
# Navigation channel
Navigation route
!
.
!
!
.
.
!
.!
.
!
. Puerto Pizarro
Shrimp
!
.
!
.! Artisanal zone
. .!.!
.
!
. !
.!!
.
.!.! Zorritos Shrimp zone

!
.#
0
#.!
!!
!
.
.
.
Shrimp zone (extens.)
0
.!
!
!
.. Reproduction zone
Cancas Mangrove concession
##
00 Protected Area
4° S

Máncora EC-PE border

0
# 0 10 20 NM
.# Pilot area
.0
!!!
.
.
.!
0
#
!
.
!.#
!
.
!
.!
.0
!
Cabo Blanco

MSPglobal, IOC-UNESCO

© UNESCO-IOC, 2021.
Assessments for planning
95

5.2.4 Identifying, understanding and analysing and responsibilities. However, there are some differences
existing economic conditions from a multisectoral between land and marine cadastres, such as the third
approach dimension of the marine environment and the legal regime
of rights of use. Beyond the legal dimension, the marine
Another important task is compiling information and mapping cadastre provides essential information for planning, as well
the spatial and temporal distribution and density of important as having an governmental role as a tool for public consulta-
human activities in the marine management area. Important tion (UNESCO-IOC, 2021c).
human uses include both commercial and recreational fishing;
marine transportation; renewable and non-renewable energy Beyond spatial data, the different sectors need to be analysed
production; and sand and gravel mining, among others. with the aim of establishing a starting point for the plan.
Examples of human activities in marine areas are listed in However, the statistical databases are not generally in the
Table 2.4. formats required by the analysis. National administrations are
required to redesign their statistical bases to facilitate their
When applying monetary valuation methods, some areas may application for the specific purposes of the marine spatial
prove to be economically more valuable than others, e.g. sand plans, taking into account the scale and the environment in
and gravel deposits; oil and gas deposits; areas of high-sus- which the activities take place and with an overall view of the
tained winds; fishing grounds; and marine transport routes. maritime economy.
These areas are important to identify and map and compare
with the area’s ecological and socio-cultural values.
Box 5.8
The different coastal and maritime activities that make up the
Symphony – a tool for ecosystem-based MSP
current ocean economy of a planning area have heteroge-
neous horizontal and vertical distribution influenced by the Symphony is a tool and software with a scenario function
different variables described above (environmental, physical to evaluate the expected performance of different planning
and social), as well as by other sectors. They can be mobile or alternatives (Hammar et al., 2020). The method provides
fixed (see Chapter 2), but in both cases their footprints extend a spatial overview and highlights the impact of major
challenges in any given area, and supports the evaluation
beyond the key area where the activity happens, since they
of alternatives.
are connected to the land (land-sea interaction).
Such a model allows a combined assessment of various
The compilation of spatial data related to coastal and mar- management scenarios and their environmental impacts across
the planning area. Outcomes of the model make it possible to
itime uses is the cornerstone of MSP, the main feature that
work towards sustainable solutions to maximise the economic
distinguishes this multisectoral approach from others dealing benefit gained from the use of marine resources with minimum
mainly with management measures. Therefore, data and damage to the environment. The aim of the economy model is
information about each use (even those that are not within to increase the capacity for knowledge-based management of
the scope of MSP according to national legislation) need marine resources and to account for their potential economic
to be compiled and analysed in order to provide a basis for benefits. The aim of the cumulative impact model is to identify
various human pressures and account for their cumulative
developing an integrated economic assessment to support
effects on the natural environment, while considering regional
negotiations towards a final marine spatial plan. In some coun- differences of nature.
tries, for example, fisheries or defence are not under the MSP
The cumulative impact is calculated with a spatial resolution
scope, but the understanding of the spatial and management of 1 km2 for every area of the sea by summing up all the
implications of these activities is crucial to plan the other uses. impacts of all environmental pressures on all ecosystem
Here, it is also important to highlight that those areas with a components.
primary focus on conservation are also connected with local The results are interpreted through heat maps, showing
economic conditions as an important way to ensure sustain- the cumulative environmental impact and by calculating
able development. the contribution of individual sectors or activities in any
area. The results are used in planning and stakeholder
Trend analysis can also be a basis for identifying key drivers of engagement, and the calculations are made to compare
future developments. The same drivers can inform the design different planning alternatives and to find solutions with
minimal environmental impact.
of alternative future developments.
Source: Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management,
Inspired by the existing land cadastres, MSP has placed 2021b.1
increased focus on the development of marine cadastres
as decision-support tools where sectoral information can 1 
[Link]
spatial-planning/symphony---a-tool-for-ecosystem-based-marine-
be found. Cadastres have the purposes of legally defining [Link]
the space, the associated rights, interests, restrictions
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
96

In order to analyse the current status of the marine sectors, and 5.2.5 Identifying current and potential conflicts
the extent to which the plans should contribute to building a and compatibilities among maritime uses,
new foundation for the maritime economy, the initial diagno- including cumulative impact assessment
sis should include the level of technology and innovation, and
its role in the plan design. After assessing the different aspects of the socio-ecological
system, potential conflict areas in relation to competition for
In addition, blue economy analyses should pay attention to space (both use-use and use-nature) can be easily identified
current distributional aspects: distribution of the benefits and by overlapping spatial data. However, it is important to
harms, and dependence of communities/groups on marine consider that if the current conditions are not completely
resources/space. mapped – and by paying attention to multiple criteria (e.g.
ecological, economic and socio-cultural) – some conflict
zones might be not identified.

Box 5.9
3D Planning through space-use profiles in the USA

A recent study published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric use (e.g. people; vessels; anchors; moving gears; installed
Administration (NOAA) of USA (Wahle et al., 2020), based on infrastructure) at horizontal and vertical dimensions.
the experiences of the Pacific Regional Ocean Uses Atlas Project
IV. Importance of the use’s functional components:
(PROUA), described a tool to address the three-dimensional
The relevance of each component to perform the activities
footprint of maritime activities though space-use profiles
of the maritime use, i.e. division into most likely and rarely
formulated by different stakeholders familiar with each specific
employed components.
use, such as scientists and engineers working in the industry.
V. Operational characteristics of the use:
The space-use profiles are categorised as follows: I–IV relating
How a use’s operational characteristics can create conflicts
to operational characteristics and V–VI relating to spatial
through either exclusion zones (permanent or temporary;
constraints in interactions with other uses.
including buffer zones), or interference with the success
I. General description: (including safety) of another use.
Type of activities performed; ocean and coastal realm
VI. Spatial constraints:
typically used, including temporary transit track of boats or
The degree of flexibility to select operating areas, i.e. site-
planes; fixed and mobile functional components; and any
dependence, in order to avoid conflict with other uses, as well
other aspects related to the scope of the use.
as the degree to which the use’s operating area is regulated by
II. Three-dimensional space use: a governmental institution that determines where, how and
Footprint at horizontal (shoreline; intertidal; nearshore; when it may operate.
coastal; oceanic) and vertical dimensions (air; sea surface;
The study emphasised that despite the replicability of the
water column; seafloor; seabed).
framework, the inputs are context-specific because operational
III. Space occupied by the use’s functional components: characteristics of maritime uses can diverge across geographies,
Location of the different components of the maritime seasons and cultures.

© NOAA, 2020.
Assessments for planning
97

To overcome this challenge in places with limited data, a develop for the selected time frame. There are various ways
potential solution is to ask stakeholders to identify areas with in which spatial sea-use scenarios can be developed.
spatial conflicts directly on a map. To introduce the discussion,
before proposing a participatory mapping, an exercise to MSP is a future-oriented activity that develops a plan for a
identify paired interactions (both conflict and synergies) might future vision. An MSP process will engage with stakeholders
be useful. However, for MSP, it will be important to distinguish to envision, define and create a desirable future scenario and
spatial from management conflicts, which would probably be enable proactive decision-making in the short run to move
tackled by other policies. towards what is desired. Consequently, planning should
not be limited to defining and analysing existing conditions
Awareness about the need to use cumulative impact tools and and maintaining the status quo, but should reveal possible
assessments in MSP is growing, for instance in some national alternative future scenarios for the area in another 5, 10, 15
and pilot MSP projects. or even 20 years.

In general, these methods identify the pressures caused by The purpose of this assessment is therefore to examine
the activities, linking them to specific ecosystem components, different potential future conditions of the marine area by
such as benthic habitats and marine species (SIMNORAT, 2019). answering a simple question: ‘Where do we want to be?’ The
Furthermore, some threats have direct effects on ecosystem answer to this question involves a number of tasks, including
components, e.g. with fishing over-harvest or damage to estimating the demand for future and new marine uses,
habitat caused by bottom trawling or anchors from recreational
defining alternative future spatial scenarios and selecting a
boats, while others have more indirect consequences, e.g.
preferred spatial scenario (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). A scenario is a
introduced species that compete with or prey on native species.
coherent, internally consistent and plausible description of a
These indirect effects in particular make the detection and
possible future state of the world (IPCC, 2001). It is not a fore-
assessment of interactions more complex than simple cause-
cast or a plan; rather, each scenario is one alternative image
and-effect mechanisms.
of how the future can unfold (McGowan et al., 2019). The key
Moreover, MSP has the challenge of dealing with a complex, task here is to focus on how to translate the information on
boundless and fluid 3D environment. While some uses cover future demands and options into spatial visions and trends.
the whole water column and sea surface (e.g. fixed oil and gas
Any analysis of future conditions should also take into con-
platforms), others mainly occupy the sea surface (e.g. nautical
sideration possible effects of climate change. The challenge
tourism) or the seafloor (e.g. shipwrecks). Here, it must not be
here is that even the longest reasonable planning horizons
forgotten that most of the floating activities are moored, such
used in MSP scenario work are 5 to 10 years, while climate
as aquaculture cages. Indeed, some uses occupy a limited small
scenarios are typically 50 to 100 years. That is far too long as
space while their zone of influence can be much wider (e.g.
underwater noise from boats or seascape modification from a planning horizon, therefore the engagement and discus-
offshore wind parks). sion with stakeholders about future trends should be used
to raise awareness about climate change.
Taking into account the third dimension (i.e. depth) is especially
relevant in deep areas; however, 3D multisectoral planning is 5.3.1 Estimating new demands of ocean space from
not a reality for most marine spatial plans yet. Considering that established, new and emerging maritime sectors
MSP is an adaptive process with increased inclusion of new
knowledge, it is expected that the second or third generations Evidence and data gathering related to MSP and the identifi-
of plans will be able to address three-dimensional aspects in cation of issues emerging from that evidence is an important
complementary analyses of spatial uses and conflicts, as well step that can include research and consultation to ensure
as in zoning schemes. the marine spatial plan is addressing the most appropriate
matters.

5.3 Identifying future conditions In this context, the first stage in analysing future conditions
For any marine management area, there will always be var- is estimating and anticipating new spatial demands within
ious possible alternative futures. Depending on the impor- the planning area and selected time frame. In most cases,
tance you give to certain goals and objectives, each of these information about future proposals is indicated in sectoral
alternatives will have human uses distributed differently in policies and reports, although there are cases where sectoral
space and time. Developing alternative spatial scenarios is plans are not available. Experience has shown that there are
a crucial step in the MSP process because it sets the stage usually various gaps relating to future demands. In these
for choosing the direction in which you want your area to cases, MSP can play the role of stimulating some sectors.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
98

Box 5.10
Developing future scenarios in Belize for integrated
coastal zone management

In Central America, the Belize Integrated Coastal Zone

Management Plan (CZMAI)1 and the Natural Capital Project 2
gathered existing data about biodiversity, habitats and
marine and coastal uses that was comprehensively mapped
and shared with the public for review and feedback.

CZMAI grouped marine and coastal uses into useful zoning

categories and developed three possible zoning schemes at
the local and countrywide scales. The three zoning schemes
emphasise different priorities of stakeholders: conservation,
development and informed management. In order to
understand the implications of each zoning scenario, CZMAI
used InVEST to model several ecosystem services and to
create final zoning schemes.

InVEST results indicated for Belize that in a ‘development’

future, the risk of habitat degradation would increase,
and the delivery of ecosystem services would decrease.
A ‘conservation’ future would improve the health of ecosystems
but would reduce human use of the coastal zone. An ‘informed
management’ future embraces a combination of development
and conservation priorities, and would minimise impacts
on coastal and marine ecosystems. CZMAI has endorsed the
‘informed management’ scenario, as it represents the most
sustainable future for Belize’s coastal zone.

An extensive engagement process was used to design the

national spatial plan and develop scenarios. The preferred
scenario increased coastal protection by at least 25% and
‘more than doubled the revenue from fisheries’.

An ecosystem services approach directly informs the final

zoning design and demonstrates that incorporating these
services into MSP is possible.

© [Link]
© BICZMP
Source: Coastal Zone Management Authority and Institute, 2021.

1 
[Link]
program-unit/
2 [Link]
Assessments for planning
99

Box 5.11
Analysing future conditions at the transboundary level

In the analysis of future conditions – and depending on the An integrated scenario assumes that recommendations from the Blue
relative location of each State – it may be necessary to incorporate Economy policy paper from Plan Bleu11 on sustainability, exploitation
prospective considerations of adjacent and/or opposing States of synergies between sectors and cooperation are followed, allowing
as well as the maritime activities carried out by third States and a regional development of a sustainable blue economy.
corporations in other EEZs, the high seas and the area.
Therefore, the main objective of this scenario is to reduce conflicts
According to IOC-UNESCO (2009): ‘A spatial sea use scenario between uses on the one hand and between uses and the
provides a vision that projects the future use of marine space environment on the other, and to promote synergies allowing
based on a core set of goals, objectives, and assumptions about co-location, for instance between aquaculture and wind energy.
the future’. Therefore, for the construction of the three scenarios
for the MSPglobal pilot project in the Western Mediterranean, This scenario represents the development of the region if marine
specific assumptions, goals and objectives were identified for integrated management was set at transboundary level considering
each scenario regarding maritime sectors, maritime policies that MSP is developed in each country and that it is coherent along
and environmental values. These ‘key drivers’ characterise each the sea basin, following sustainable goals. For this reason, its key
scenario and are presented in the following table, along with their drivers are sustainable tourism, sustainable maritime transport,
proposed visions. co-location of activities and the precautionary principle.

Table 5.2
Proposed visions of each scenario for the Western Mediterranean

Scenarios to 2030 Key drivers

Trend

Assuming that no integrated maritime policy was in place, sectors y Mass tourism
grew based on their past trends and future projections. Conflicts are y Cargo and cruises
expected to arise in the busiest areas y Intensification of fishing

Conservationist

Conservation is the priority, ecological and biological areas are y Eco-tourism

effectively protected, most impacting activities are reduced until the y ‘Green shipping’
maximum possible extent and new activities development is based on y Sustainable fisheries and aquaculture
ecological sustainability factors y Effective protection of key environmental values
y Promotion of renewable energy

Integrated

Integrated planning and management have led to the application y Sustainable tourism
of sustainable Blue Economy strategies at regional level where y Sustainable maritime shipping
co-location of activities is a priority led by social and sustainability y Co-location of activities
objectives y Precautionary principle for emerging sectors

Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021h.

Table 5.3
Sectors assumptions in the integrated scenario

Status of the sectors in the integrated scenario

Fisheries Most studies show that fisheries production is decreasing or stagnant in the Western Mediterranean due to overexploitation
of stocks. In an integrated scenario, fisheries are sustainable and synergies with tourism are exploited. High impacting
fisheries would be gradually removed, maintaining only sustainable fisheries.

Aquaculture Many studies agree on the growth of aquaculture in the coming years. In an integrated scenario, aquaculture will be
developed in suitable places regarding technical and ecological limitations as well as far from touristic areas in order to
avoid landscape disturbance. Co-location will be a priority when possible.

1 [Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
100

Status of the sectors in the integrated scenario

Oil and gas Development of oil and gas activities would be mostly influenced by prices. In an integrated scenario, this development
will be moderated, focused mostly in the existing Italian exploitation in the Adriatic and the exploration areas of non-EU
countries. For EU countries, European and national policies regarding decarbonisation (i.e. European Green Deal) justify
the lack of development of new activities in this sector.

Maritime Maritime transport is very important in the region. In an integrated scenario, maritime transport will be managed to reduce
transport its impacts to the minimum. In this scenario, the IMO concept of Sustainable Maritime Shipping is promoted and Motorways
and ports of the Sea (MoS) are rerouted in order to avoid areas of high concentration of cetaceans.

Wind Wind energy has experienced very limited development in the Western Mediterranean to date mostly due to technical
energy limitations. In an integrated scenario, floating wind turbines will be established in suitable places regarding ecological
limitations and taking into account co-location priorities. They will also be located far from touristic coastal areas in order
to avoid landscape disturbance.

Cruises The Mediterranean is critical at the global level for cruises. In an integrated scenario, this activity will be managed and
limited according to sustainability criteria.

Coastal The Mediterranean is the world’s leading tourist destination, as such it is considered an essential activity in the region.
tourism In an integrated scenario, this activity will be managed and limited according to sustainability criteria (promotion of
sustainable tourism).

Conservation The Western Mediterranean is home to important habitats and species which also suffer from high pressures. In an
integrated scenario, sustainability is a horizontal topic for all sectors, established MPAs are effectively implemented and
particular areas with environmental values threatened by maritime transport are also protected by Particularly Sensitive
Sea Areas (PSSAs).

Deep-sea Deep-sea mining is in its infancy but there is potential in the Mediterranean with some deposits already identified.
mining In an integrated scenario, this activity is developed following a strict precautionary principle.

Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021h.

Figure 5.8
Integrated scenario for the Western Mediterranean
Source: UNESCO-IOC, 2021h.
Assessments for planning
101

Box 5.12
Mapping suitable areas for spatial development

In the diagnosis phase of Mexican MSP processes, suitability

maps are developed to identify areas with the best conditions
for each sector (including conservation).
A multi-criteria modelling analysis is carried out according
to the steps below (LANCIS-UNAM, 2020):
(1) Identify the objective of the sector regarding the use
of the territory
(2) Identify the attributes that the sector requires to develop
its activities
(3) Identify the relative importance of the attributes
(4) Transform attributes to an equivalent scale
(5) Integrate the suitability map into the geographic information
system
(6) Validate the suitability map
The results mean that areas of higher value have the best
conditions for the development of the activity, while areas of less
value will require some kind of technology to compensate for
the lack of ideal conditions, which will create additional costs
for the sector.

The North Pacific planning process developed suitability maps

for aquaculture, fisheries, maritime transport and infrastructures,
tourism and conservation. The combination of these sectoral
suitability maps resulted in a first draft zoning for the region. The
different zones identified are units with specific characteristics
© SEMARNAT & LANCIS-UNAM, 2019.
that are suitable for a group of sectors (SEMARNAT, 2019).

In addition, new spatial demands, especially for emerging

Table 5.4
sectors, depend on the availability of investment, while new
Examples of potential multi-uses and promotional action
technologies might extend the suitable areas for a certain
activity (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). Type Description

Something that has become a ‘trend’ in most projects and Tourism and Tourism service provided by small-scale
fisheries fishers on a working vessel to discover
national plans is developing sectoral notes, fiches or chapters. fishing traditions
These kinds of documents give an overview of future uses of
the sea and the evolution of different maritime sectors, cur- Tourism and Tourism service to visit aquaculture
rent spatial needs and the anticipated future developments aquaculture facilities (may include snorkelling in
proximity or even within the installation)
of the sectors, and – most importantly – key issues for MSP.
Offshore wind farm Tourism service to visit offshore wind
In addition to the existing development proposals, analyses and tourism farms
are relevant to identify where the suitable areas to develop
each sector are located. After identifying these areas, an Offshore wind farm Co-location of aquaculture installations
and aquaculture directly attached to the offshore wind
engagement activity could be organised to prioritise them. infrastructure or within the security zone
of the offshore wind farm
This step is critical to analyse and map how future uses and
interests can conflict, be in competition or in synergy with Offshore wind farm Fisheries allowed within the offshore
and fisheries wind farm
other uses. At this stage, it is important to consider multi-use
of the sea space (see Chapter 2) to minimise conflicts and Offshore wind farm Nature-inclusive design for offshore
promote common opportunities for multiple sectors. Indeed, and conservation wind infrastructure
a series of actions are still required to advance potential mul-
ti-uses (Table 5.4) around the world, such as the development Sources: MUSES Project, 2018; W+B and WMR, 2020.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
102

of regulations and guidelines, as well as more pilot projects a transparent, participatory approach for conservation
to analyse multi-use feasibility and to better understand the and other objectives, including meeting conservation or
economic, social and environmental benefits and impacts environmental goals or targets associated with interna-
(MUSES Project, 2018). tional conventions and agreements like the Convention on
Biological Diversity. If marine protections are not one of the
objectives for the plan, areas with a high-nature value should
5.3.2 Identifying potential areas for biodiversity
be identified and considered during scenario development
conservation
for uses and activities in order to avoid incompatible activ-
MSP processes might include the design of MPA networks or ities in these areas, as well as to indicate potential areas for
the establishment of new marine protections. MSP provides future conservation.

Criteria to help define ‘decision rules’ Physical and environmental conditions: Decision rules can also
for the development of spatial scenarios be derived from physical and environmental conditions. Most
extracting activities are dependent on the availability and quality
International and national regulations: Decision rules can be of the resources (e.g. functioning of certain infrastructure could be
derived from reviewing international and national regulations and impaired by physical conditions, such as bathymetry, sediment type
policies that influence space allocation in the area and which are and currents).
not readily changeable (e.g. changes in shipping routes and traffic Social considerations: Decision rules can also be derived from
separation schemes need to be approved by the International social preferences for the allocation of space to certain human uses
Maritime Organization). (e.g. prohibiting the installation of certain infrastructure close to
Economic and technical considerations: Decision rules can also be the shoreline in order to preserve the seascape).
derived from economic or technical requirements to make a particular Conservation considerations: Decision rules can also be derived from
activity operational (e.g. offshore wind energy and aquaculture are conservation requests (e.g. not allowing certain activities within areas
likely to be more economically viable when placed closer to shore of cetacean reproduction during certain times of the year).
and/or in shallow waters).
Source: Adapted from IOC-UNESCO, 2009.

Box 5.13
Defining possible multiple uses for the ocean

In the realm of marine resource utilisation, ‘multi-use’ should between freedom of activity, the safety of each individual, and
be understood as the intentional joint resource use by two civil and environmental liability.
or more users. It is an umbrella term that covers a multitude
In Denmark, passive fishing is allowed in the Horn Rev 1 and 2 wind
of combinations wherein different users operate side by side
farms and troll fishing is allowed within a 200 m buffer zone of the
and share the same resource.
connection cables.
The definition of multi-activity lays down rules which make it
The Horn Rev 3 wind farm has been defined with fishers to try
difficult to support multi-activity: it involves finding a balance
to limit the impact of the infrastructure on the different fisheries.

Figure 5.9 Figure 5.10

Geographical location of Horn Rev 1 and 2 Location of Horn Rev 3
© Bilfinger Berger Magazine, 2014. © [Link], 2014.
Sources: EU MSP Platform, 2021a; Ruyssen, 2020; [Link], 2014.
Assessments for planning
103

5.3.3 Defining possible alternative scenarios Scenarios can be exploratory (‘what can be done?’), norma-
for the planning area tive (‘what must be done to achieve a desired future?’) or
predictive (‘what is the most likely situation?’) (Frazão Santos
After analysing the current and potential future conditions of
et al., 2020). Usually, they are a combination of reality, trends
the different uses, it is time to develop alternative scenarios
and expectations.
for the planning area. Each scenario is built according to
different visions and priority objectives, which will result in Although the pioneering plans have aimed to introduce
maritime activities and conservation areas distributed dif- maritime activities based on innovation and knowledge,
ferently in space and time in relation to location, connection disregarding the more established uses, these activities
and size of the designated areas (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). still need to be regulated in many States and ordered as

Box 5.14
Transformative scenario planning (TSP)/SDG scenarios in the Western Indian Ocean

investment in a country (high vs low, from international and

domestic sources). They also identified drivers and key theme
areas that will be affected and woven into the narratives, including
climate change, governance, ecosystems, social and welfare,
SDG future and other factors. The main output of the approach is
identifying the key forces around which to construct three to four
plausible stories about the future of countries in the WIO. In this
case, the stories use the metaphor of countries as ships and their
related conditions on the sea. This includes the following scenarios:

Slow but sure: In this country, there is little investment but a good
governance framework. There is little wind and the progress of
the ship is slow but the crew are good and able to make the most
of the situation.

Riding the wave: This country is blessed with rich resources

and a governance framework to deal with challenges. The wind
is strong and steady, powering the ship forward while the skilled
captain and crew expertly steer them through the challenges.

Pirate ship: In this country, there is abundant wealth but a poor

governance framework. The turbulent wind and waves makes
the captain act like a pirate, caring little for the passengers.

All pain, no gain: This country is poor and poorly governed.

With no resources and leadership, it wallows without progressing
and all on board are dispirited. This approach has some relevance
for transboundary MSP by:
Transformative scenario planning (TSP) is an approach that
y Developing visions for managing shared ocean resources
brings concerned stakeholders from different, often competing,
by identifying the plausible future of the countries
perspectives together around pressing sets of problems to build
narratives that illustrate a range of potential futures. What makes y Kick-starting discussions about MSP. The scenarios will be used
TSP different from other scenario approaches is discussion about to start bilateral discussions and dialogues between countries
on cross-border MSP.
how to create and deliver the desired future outcome by involving
diverse actors. y Obtaining commitments for achieving high-level goals and
SDGs at national and regional level.
The TSP method applied in the Western Indian Ocean (WIO) y Building trust among cross-border stakeholders to support
is based on bringing influential and thought leaders together and guide decision-making, and reaching a consensus on a
through multiple facilitated discussions. Stakeholders then desired future, especially when there are competing national
identified uncertainties that will define the future outcomes and regional interests and sectors.
of ocean governance: quality of governance (good vs poor,
integration vs fragmentation), and wealth and degree of Source: Obura et al., 2018.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
104

essential activities. It is important to avoid identifying the climate change consequences, MSP processes need to have
plan mainly with innovative activities, encouraging the the flexibility to introduce the necessary adaptations to tackle
dismantling of traditional structures when these support this global issue according to its evolution (see Chapter 8).
a considerable section of the local communities: the plan
should not be an instrument of ‘ocean grabbing’ (Bennett
5.3.4 Selecting the preferred spatial scenario
et al., 2015).
Scenarios are not future predictions, but part of a forward-looking
On the other hand, marine spatial plans are sometimes approach involving differing levels of uncertainty, which increases
criticised for only presenting the status quo, i.e. the existing when related to the longer-term future (European Environmental
sectoral interests are protected so strongly that the transform- Agency, 2007). Uncertainties and associated risks need to be
ative potential of MSP is not realised. Scenarios to support the addressed and clearly communicated to stakeholders.
MSP process are very much about sectors. Some examples of
scenarios are rather broad or start from broad scenarios and
analyse how maritime sectors would evolve in the future.
Scenario analysis can and should be broader than the focus
Examples of questions to analyse
of the actual plan, with possible future developments being
the alternative scenarios
included in the planning context.
y What are the consequences of each alternative scenario
When developing the scenarios, the following can also be for the different maritime sectors?
taken into consideration: y Which steps would lead to each alternative scenario?
y Climate change scenarios y Which are the most intensive and potential areas of future
development?
y Global maritime trends y What kind of spatial impact would the alternative scenarios
y Other social, economic and political scenarios developed have?
for the planning area and region (described in other y What are the possibilities and potential areas for multi-use
platforms and synergies?
policies that are not necessarily connected to maritime
y How may a sustainable future be reached?
activities) y What is the preferred scenario?
y What is the worst-case scenario? What leads to the worst-
Specific scientific knowledge about climate change scenar- case scenario?
ios for the planning area is needed, although it is not always Source: Adapted from Plan4Blue, 2018.
available. Since there are still uncertainties about detailed

Future Future Future

Present Present Present

NORMATIVE PREDICTIVE EXPLORATORY

How can a specific target What will happen ? What can happen ?
be reached ?

Figure 5.11
Types of scenarios

Source: Zurek and Henrichs, 2007.

Assessments for planning
105

There is an increasing need for using scenarios to i) understand analyses and the establishment of communication channels,
the aspirations of different stakeholders towards integration they can also provide inputs to improve the process. Table 5.5
within the MSP process and the realities of encouraging co-lo- shows different formats of public information systems that
cation between sea uses and ii) highlight important issues can be developed to support the MSP process.
where further transboundary cooperation on MSP may be
required (McGowan et al., 2019).

Table 5.5
Any scenario will represent gains and losses for specific
Types of public information system
stakeholders. When selecting the preferred scenario, a SWOT
analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) Type Description
and trade-off analysis can support the decision. When evalu-
ating the alternative scenarios with the actors, the key drivers Data catalogue A data list, its availability
and the ‘big picture’ for each scenario need to be at the core of and how to source

the dialogue.
Database or data portal Online direct access to datasets

5.4 Developing a public information system Data viewer or GIS

mapping tool
Service to display spatial data

The amount of data and information necessary for devel-

oping a knowledge-based marine spatial plan can be sub- Knowledge platform Service which aggregates data into
or information service information product (e.g. factsheets)
stantial. Therefore, it is advisable to organise and document
everything in an information system that is also available for Decision support tool Method or specialised tool to support
public engagement. Through such a tool, stakeholders and or assessment tool further analysis and interpretation
citizens can consult general information and products of the
MSP process. In the case of an interactive tool that allows Source: Adapted from European Commission, 2017.

©OPIS Zagreb/[Link]
 106

©JeanLucIchard/[Link]
 107

6 The plan
areas or regions (e.g. Norway, Israel) and, depending on the
THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES
institutional organisation of a country and the distribution of
y The marine spatial plan and related documents competences amongst regions or entities, a specific marine
spatial plan could be developed for each national entity (e.g.
y Management actions and spatial allocation of uses
Germany, Indonesia, USA).
y The development of all stages of the spatial plan
y Capacity development in MSP In all cases, the planning area will be considered as the report-
ing area for the marine plans, monitoring and evaluation. The
plan will be clearly integrated into the national planning legal
framework, which will facilitate the sharing of responsibilities
This chapter is about the production or development of the among national institutions, institutions with administrative
marine spatial plan. This is an iterative process consisting of competence for planning from local to national scale, and those
impact assessment of the draft plans and consultations with in charge of interaction with all sectors and citizens affected.
sectoral administrations and affected parties – and with neigh-
bouring countries when relevant. The documents supporting the marine planning process
should include the stages of preparation, including the consul-
tations that will help the production and later implementation
6.1 The marine spatial plan of the plan. They should also cover how the stakeholders’ and
The marine spatial plan is a policy instrument that represents citizens’ views and comments will be used to review and revise
the agreed objectives and preferred scenario for future sec- the plan. These stakeholders should also be informed about all
toral developments and priority areas for conservation in the the implications of the approved plan in relation to consents,
planning area. permissions, licences and enforcement.

In terms of principles of engagement and description of how to

get involved, these would normally be published at the start of
the MSP process in a document such as a statement of public
MARINE SPATIAL PLAN
participation. The planning background is also relevant in order
to understand the role of MSP for a country or territory, what it
will entail, and the benefits of marine planning for society.

The final plan may describe the engagement during the pro- Strategic Allocation of Management
Environmental marine uses actions
cess and how stakeholders might be engaged in implementa- Assessment
tion, monitoring and review.

As already stated in previous chapters, MSP will enable the

competent authorities to set a clear framework to manage the
ocean with regard to national objectives and priorities, and will Permits and licenses
to achieve the objectives
support a more efficient and strategic decision-making with
respect to the availability and use of marine resources.

The area to be covered by the marine spatial plan should be

specified; the extension of this area may vary depending on Development of MSP capacities for all
the planning needs, the terms of actions to be considered and
the issues to be addressed (see Chapter 5).

In some countries, the planning area may cover a defined Figure 6.1
Implications of a marine spatial plan
national maritime jurisdiction (e.g. Ireland, Seychelles); in
other countries, the marine spatial plan may affect only certain © UNESCO-IOC, 2021.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
108

Box 6.1
Benefits for marine users in Ireland

Marine users, including regulators, applicants for consent and challenge, provided they are made in accordance with the policy
interested persons, should find that the system will reduce framework set out in the marine spatial plan.
the regulatory burden on them by giving them more certainty
regarding where activities could best take place and thereby This is because the plan will be based on the best available
speed up the licensing process. technical and scientific evidence, including early and consistent
engagement with stakeholders together with a sustainability
Marine users should also feel more confident that decisions appraisal.1
made on applications for projects will be robust in the face of

Project Ireland 2040

Journey to the National
Marine Planning Framework Post Apr 2020
Review of
Apr 2021
submissions Joint Oireachtas
2014 and further Committee hearing
Nov 2019 amendments
Seanad Approval
EU Directive 2014/89/EU SEA, Natura Impact
established a framework for MSP Government approves final amendments
Marine Planning Policy
Statement and draft NMPF
Mar 2021
2016
2019 Cabinet approval
The European Union (Framework for
May 2021
of final text
Nov
Maritime Spatial Planning) Regulations 2016 Review of Submissions
2019 Joint Oireachtas Dáil approval
were signed into law on 29th June 2016 and further amendments
Committee
NMPF established
Issues and Choices paper
Jun 2019 presentation and
hearing
2018 Public Consultation on
Marine Planning Policy
Part 5 of the Planning and Development
Statement launched at
(Amendment) Act 2018 replaces the 2016
Seafest, Cork Feb
Regulations with new primary legislation to give
effect to the requirements of the MSP Directive May Sep 2021
Feb 2020
2019 2020
Sep Apr
2018 2019
Jun
2018 Jun
Mar 2019
2018 Jul
2019

Nov 2019 – Apr 2020

Apr 2020
Public Consultation on Draft
Sep–Dec 2018 Jun–Aug 2019 NMPF, SEA/AA/Natura Public consultation moves
Impact, Baseline Report Public online in reaction to Public
Consultation on Public Consultation on Consultation Process, published Health Guidelines. Marine
Baseline Report Marine Planning Policy Marine Planning Policy Statement Planning Team host first-
Dec 2017 Statement ever Civil Service-led
Public Engagement and Public Engagement and
consultation events
Jan–May 2019 Consultation Events
online Public Consultation
Publication of NMPF Roadmap
• Waterford National Green • Limerick
• Galway Schools Poster • Mayo
• Sligo Competition in • Galway
partnership with An
• Cork • Kerry
Taisce (EEU)
• Dublin • Wicklow
• Dublin
• Donegal

Participation/presentations/speeches at approx. 200 events such as public

MSP Advisory Group Meetings
sector/industry/Environmental pillar conferences, workshops and seminars

Source: Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage of Ireland, 2021.

1 [Link]

6.2 Management actions, including their i) actions specifying inputs to human activities, ii) actions
specifying the nature of the production process or output
economic impact on those measures linked
of human activities in a planning area or iii) spatio-temporal
with sustainable blue economy strategies actions determining where and when activities may occur.
Management actions are related to specific objectives in
any given marine spatial plan. A spatial (and temporal) man- In France, the expansion of Port-La-Nouvelle to accommodate
agement action is a means of delivering desired goods and larger vessels required very specific actions. The port is located
services – specified through goals and objectives – from a opposite a macro-zone with commercial offshore wind poten-
marine management area. It specifies how, where and when tial and this new development has required the port to adapt
human activities should occur (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). Spatial to the wind sector.
management actions only influence the spatial (and/or tem-
poral) distribution of human activities. The extension of the south breakwater by 600 m, the creation
of a 2,430 m breakwater and dredging of 3.5 ha could poten-
Other types of management actions should also be used in tially disturb the bentho-demersal community, with nearby
the management of human activities, for example: spawning and nursery areas, and damage the nacre (mother
of pearl population) (Sangare et al., 2020).
The plan
109

The extension was accepted with the proviso that other It also promotes energy transition at sea by stimulating the
actions were implemented, such as the transplantation of the market for tidal and wave energy dedicated to generating
great nacre populations in the Ayrolle pond, the creation of a energy from low current speeds and limited wave heights
research programme on large nacres and strengthening of the and tidal range, or by the creation of working islands for
protection zone on sandy beds with monitoring and dedicated wind energy and opportunities for deep geothermal energy,
management actions (Ministère de la Mer de la France, 2020). including decommissioning, enhanced oil recovery and
CO2 storage.
The first spatial agenda for the North Sea in the Netherlands1
led to a specific list of recommendations and actions for It is also worth mentioning, among many other recommen-
exploration, research and transboundary cooperation. The dations and proposed actions, those related to the multiple
agenda does not provide for how recommendations and use of space at sea, in which combined functions can offer
actions should be implemented, since that will depend on added value, e.g. by assigning space to safe and smooth ship-
opportunities that may arise until 2050. ping, fishing and leisure with a view to giving the ecosystem
space for recovery in the most important ecological areas.
There is a general and strong commitment to integrated area
development at sea and along the coast, stating opportuni- The National Water Plan 2016-20212 includes the Policy
ties for multiple use in advance and stimulating parties to Document on the North Sea 2016-2021 that specifies the
develop the joint use of the development space. This is a rec- general frameworks for (spatial) harmonisation between the
ommendation that could be translated into specific policy or users of the sea and also in relation to the marine ecosystem.
regulations to be developed in cooperation with the private These instruments help to improve the engagement of
sector, and could be based on the spatial agenda. coastal regions and towns, the promotion of international
consultations in the Netherlands and the North Sea countries
The agenda aims to encourage sea uses in ways that make it and addresses the question of financing possibilities and
cleaner and more healthy (for example by cultivating seaweed) the division of roles between public authorities, the private
or that help it to spring back more rapidly after use (for exam- sector and knowledge and research institutions.
ple, the way in which sand extraction areas are left) (Ministry
of Infrastructure and Environment of the Netherlands, 2014).

Figure 6.2
Expansion of the port Port-La-Nouvelle

© Ministry of the Sea of France, 2020.

1 [Link]
2 [Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
110

Box 6.2
Fisheries management measures in Peru

Peru’s National Fisheries Society (SNP) discussed with local

fishers various management measures, which are now part
of the participatory actions linked with the National Maritime
Strategy (2019).

A first measure was to ensure consistency between fishing

effort (the number of vessels and their capacity) and the
amount of fishing that can be undertaken in relation to a
given species. When full exploitation is reached in a certain
region of Peru, regulators may stop issuing permits, so as
not to increase fishing effort beyond a reasonable level.

A second measure was to set national fishing quotas.

While closing fisheries is a good measure, it is often not
enough to ensure that only enough is fished to allow for
adequate renewal of the resource. Thus, regulators chose
to establish how much the Peruvian fleet can fish during
a certain period in a specific location.

The third measure was to set individual quotas per vessel

by establishing a proportion of fishing for each of the vessels
that have a permit, and to determine what fraction of the
overall quota they may fish during a given period in a specific Figure 6.3
location. Integrated Maritime Policy Map
Finally, regulations and enforcement measures were put in © Government of the Netherlands, 2014.
place to ensure that only those with permits (or licences)
fish up to their quota in the specific fishing area.

6.3 Spatial allocation of uses

Sector perspective is at the core of the zoning approach,
where decisions are made on priority, reserved use, allowed
use, restricted or forbidden areas per sector (Box 6.3). There
are cases in which ‘zoning’ means to define more general
zoning categories, instead of defining the specific develop-
ment areas for each use, according to the preferred scenario
(Box 6.4).

Alternatively, some plan documents may set general condi-

tions for specific sectors on the use of the sea area without
area designations. In these cases, the plan defines policy
guidance and consideration for approving the location of
new uses and activities.

Although missing from many marine spatial plans, zoning

and its regulations are often the principal instrument needed
for comprehensive implementation (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).

Zoning is a spatial planning tool used to allocate rights and

responsibilities for use of space. Different zones in the marine
space may allow different uses, or different levels of use,
based on a determination of an area’s suitability for those
uses (Day et al., 2019).
©JeremyRichards/[Link]
The plan
111

6.4 Developing the spatial plan The plan includes 16 chapters, 3 annexes and a glossary. The
first 5 chapters cover the introduction, the marine planning
The Welsh Government, in its 2004 plan, defined spatial plan- context, the vision, objectives and the policy approach to
ning as ‘the consideration of what can and should happen achieving a sustainable economy, promoting good govern-
where’. During the MSPforums in La Reunion and Vigo, spatial ance and using sound science responsibly, all of which are
planning was also defined as ‘the where of decisions’ or ‘the essential to the creation and maintenance of a strong, healthy
mapping out of all the assets contained within a given area’, and just society capable of living within environmental limits.
the ocean.
The other 11 chapters are dedicated to single sectors: sea fisher-
These simple definitions require additional literature and ies, aquaculture, wild salmon and diadromous fish, oil and gas,
examples to explain how a spatial plan reflects something carbon capture and storage, offshore wind and marine renew-
more aspirational about MSP. able energy, recreation and tourism, shipping, ports, harbours
and ferries, submarine cables, defence and aggregates.
Scotland’s National Marine Plan (The Scottish Government
- Riaghaltas na h-Alba, 2015) covers both Scottish inshore The structure of each chapter first links the objectives and
waters (out to 12 nautical miles) and offshore waters (12 to policies of each sector to those included in Scotland’s general
200 nautical miles). It also applies to the exercise of both policies and assumes that not all the sectoral objectives
reserved and devolved functions. can necessarily be achieved directly through the marine
planning system, although they are considered important in
the context of planning and decision-making.

Box 6.3
Spatial dimensions of ports

A port is a location that has convenient physical features and management, the operational efficiency of a port can
(such as a sheltered bay or estuary) and therefore allows for always be improved.
a more effective interface between the maritime and land
domains than other locations. Although the location of a port A port is a well-defined administrative unit comprising land
does not change, the site can be improved through dredging ownership and a jurisdiction. The port authority is a common
and land reclamation and can also be adapted in relation to administrative framework for a port and they often have the
large production and consumption areas. right to spearhead port development projects.

Spatially, four main dimensions help define the role and function The port, as indicated above, adds value to transport and supply
of a port: place, operations, administrative unit and value chain. chains. Historically, industrial activities tended to be located
within or close to ports, a process which still continues and
A port has operational characteristics in terms of the type of which is complemented by a wide range of cargo distribution
traffic it can handle and the associated volumes. This depends activities.
on the infrastructure linking the inland port and the port
hinterland (its hinterland market area). With capital investment Source: Rodrigue, 2020.

Place Operations Administrative Unit Value Chain

Foreland Hinterland

Site and Operational capacity Governance and Added economic

situation and efficiency management value

© Rodrigue, 2020.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
112

Box 6.4
Examples of zoning categories

A marine functional zone is an area with a ‘best use’ designation, The plans, which were presented by the interior ministry, identify parts
assigned considering natural resources, environmental conditions, of the Dogger Bank, a transnational sandbank in the middle of the
geographical location, state of development, use of the sea area and North Sea, as an additional priority area for wind power development.
islands, as well as national or regional demands for development.
It is a science-based decision-making process to prevent unplanned One area each in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea will be redesignated
human activities in the marine space through specifying basic uses as a priority area for wind energy from 2030, unless the Federal
and environmental protection requirements for designated sea areas. Ministry of Transport can prove by the end of 2025 that these areas
are needed for shipping for compelling reasons.
The marine functional zoning (MFZ) applied in China adopts a
two-level classification system, which is divided into 8 zones and Sources: Clean Energy Wire, 2021; UNESCO-IOC, 2021c.
22 subzones. The first level zones are: 1. Agriculture and fishery;
2. Port and navigation; 3. Industrial and urban construction; 118°15'E 118°45'E 119°15'E

±
4. Mineral and energy; 5. Tourism and recreation; 6. Marine .Tangshan
!

Tang Qin Huang Dao

protection; 7. Special uses; and 8. Reserved. .Fengnan
!
.Luannan

39°30'N
!

39°30'N
The system includes methods for evaluating existing uses and the .Laoting
!

MFZ to inform future planning and analyse future sea-use demand. Shan
.Tanghai
!

Tianjin City
In Germany, priority areas have been designated for shipping and

39°10'N
wind energy development; other uses are prohibited in such areas
39°10'N

.Caofeidian
!

unless they are compatible with the priority uses. The designation
of areas for shipping takes into account the principle of international
law, attributing priority to this use. Recognised shipping routes that
are indispensable for international shipping constitute the framework

38°50'N
38°50'N

Bohai Sea
of the overall planning concept.
Bohai Bay
Legend
Reservation areas have been designated for shipping, pipeline !
. County Mariculture zone Urban construction zone
Province boundaries Capture zone
and research uses that are considered particularly important when City boundaries Conservation zone of
Solid mineral zone
Tourism zone
key fishery species
balancing with spatially significant competing uses. Further wind

38°30'N
County boundaries
Fishery infrastructure zone Recreation zone
38°30'N

Port zone Marine protected area

power areas are to be developed by allowing co-use – for example, Waterway zone Special marine protected area
it should be possible to fish passively in the outer areas of wind farms, Scale: 1:800,000 Anchorage zone Reservation zone

i.e. with fish traps and baskets.

118°15'E 118°45'E 119°15'E

© Dr Xin Teng, 2021.

© Stiftung Offshore-Windenergie, 2021.

The plan
113

6.5 Evaluating the draft marine spatial plan

Purposes of a zoning plan
and strategic environmental assessment
y To provide protection for biologically and ecologically It is useful to scrutinise a draft plan from an evaluative perspec-
important habitats, ecosystems and ecological processes tive. This will reveal whether it is likely that the plan will lead to
y To separate conflicting human activities or combine the preferred outcomes, and also any potential impacts. If this
compatible human activities
is undertaken during the plan development stage, the plan
y To protect the natural values of the marine management
area while allowing reasonable human uses of the area can still be modified to ensure it will match expectations and
y To develop certain activities, providing a sound basis to mitigate possible negative outcomes.
for long term investment
y To allocate areas for reasonable human uses while Section 8.2 presents approaches for a prior evaluation of the
minimising the effects of these human uses on each other plan. Two different instruments are used in environmental
and nature
assessment: the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and
y To preserve some areas of the marine managed area in their
natural state, undisturbed by humans except for scientific the environmental impact assessment (EIA). Here, the focus
or educational purposes is on strategic environmental assessment (SEA). There is no
Source: Adapted from IOC-UNESCO, 2009. single definition of SEA, but it can be generally understood as
a sustainability-based assessment that needs to consider the
environmental, economic, social, cultural and intergenerational
Each chapter includes a background and context per sector, consequences (and positive impacts) of a plan. SEA aims to
key issues for marine planning, interactions with other users, ensure that the consequences are appropriately addressed at
status of the sector and management measures, effects the earliest possible stage of decision-making (CBD, 2012b).3
of climate change, and marine planning policies affecting
the sector and future perspectives. The annexes cover the SEA identifies, describes and evaluates the environmental
key findings of the national ecosystem assessment, goods impacts of regional planning and sectoral plans as well as
and services, the strategic objectives and a specific annex planning alternatives. Environmental concerns are thus taken
dedicated to Scotland’s Marine Atlas and the information into account at an early stage in planning decisions.
required for the National Marine Plan.

Box 6.5
Ensuring a strategic environmental assessment

Strategic environmental assessments and environmental impact assessments inform decision-making and these assessments are
mandatory in many countries and regions, including for marine spatial plans that may have significant effects on the environment.

Table 6.1
Aspects related to strategic and impact assessments

Aspect SEA EIA

SEA is an overarching framework to enable comprehensive EIA represents a definitive approach to assessing the
Planning level and forward-looking assessment of potential environmental specific environmental impacts of a specific proposed
implications at the policy, planning and programme level. development.

SEA is undertaken at a larger spatial scale, such as an Small spatial scale focusing on the maximum extent
Spatial scale MSP region or sector-wide at a national level. of the project boundary impacts (e.g. of a windfarm or
aquaculture facility).

At the strategic scale, the complexity of plans means that At the small scale of EIA, sufficient detail of project design
Level of detail assessment of effects can only be articulated in general is required to enable quantification of impacts, and
terms such as direction of travel (positive or negative). judgement on the significance of these.

Iterative and adaptive, informing changes to the plan based Mitigation measures can be proposed to address negative
Flexibility on assessment including review of alternative options to effects but there is limited flexibility to adapt the proposal.
the plan.

Responsibility Responsibility of planning authority. Responsibility of proponent (e.g. industry).

Source: European MSP Platform, 2021b.

3 [Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
114

It is also advisable to include in the SEA an analysis of alter- essential tool at this stage and should have been specified
native planning options. One option would be that there is when the plan was drawn up.
no plan at all; another option might be about how to achieve
Transboundary coordination of planning is realised during this
the same societal needs and objectives through other kinds of
stage, where the plans are the outputs. Discussions and consul-
policies (Gjerde et al., 2021).
tations with neighbours are essential during plan development,
but the exchange has to be deeper than information sharing.
Assessment methods for different types of impacts, including
The planners also need to understand how the neighbours’
the very relevant consideration of cumulative impacts, are
planning systems (including map practices), as well as the
presented in Section 5.2.5. When evaluating a plan it is also
systems of licensing and sectoral decision-making, take place.
necessary to assess the environmental impact of certain activ-
ities on neighbouring countries.
6.7 Defining the implementation process
Therefore, at an early stage of planning, countries should
notify and consult each other on all major projects under To ensure successful implementation, the marine spatial
consideration that are likely to have a significant adverse envi- plan needs to be clearly included within the institutional
ronmental impact across boundaries (Espoo Convention).4 framework and working routine of the competent authorities,
The National Marine Planning Framework of Ireland - Strategic and the objectives assigned to the relevant parties. Similar
Environmental Assessment Statement5 provides a good step- approaches are followed by regional organisations to align
by-step record of how the SEA process influenced the national objectives and the coordination mechanisms to overcome
marine plan of Ireland as well as providing a useful example of multi-jurisdictional challenges.
how to report on an SEA process for MSP.
The drafting and implementation of planning needs to have
a ‘system’ of plans, as is typical of terrestrial planning. Land-
6.6 Endorsing and approving the marine based planning is structured around a sequence of plans,
spatial plan policies and strategies that usually transpire from documents
from a generic level to others that are more specific and
Following the principle of participation, the draft marine spatial detailed. This sequence or structure implies a hierarchical
plan should be published for public consultation, including at arrangement in which more detailed and specific plans are
transboundary level where necessary. The MSP team will need the instruments that execute and realise policies and strate-
to define how to address responses from stakeholders after gies. Marine spatial plans require procedures and structures
consultation before approving the plan (e.g. creating a response that allow them to descend to levels of greater operability
template, coding, identifying themes, transboundary issues to with the appropriate organisation of maritime space and
check in a neighbouring country’s plan). Such an approach articulation with existing sectoral plans and procedures.
should address the concerns of stakeholders in order not to
delay endorsement and approval of the plan. In order to facili-
tate the endorsement and approval process, the plan document
should be kept as objective, simple and practical as possible.

In cases where the MSP process is funded through project initi-

atives or donors, the formal adoption process may fall outside
the duration of the project. In this case, further engagement
with the relevant national ministries and legislative body
could help secure agreement for a roadmap for endorsement
for easy transposition and approval in national legislation
before or after the end of the project.

Different situations can be considered depending on whether

there is one plan or several plans for different countries.
The same applies if the region is shared by several Member
States of the same alliance/association (e.g. the EU) or a plan
involving third countries. Coordination mechanisms are an

4 Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (1991) [Link]

5 [Link]/en/publication/60e57-national-marine-planning-framework/
The plan
115

Box 6.6
Spain’s public consultation on its maritime spatial plans

In 2017, Spain adopted the Royal Decree 363/2017 of 8 April including the cartographic representation of the scope of
establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning, which application and zoning (all geographic information contained
transposes into the Spanish legislation Directive 2014/89/EC in the plans is accessible at the appropriate scale and level
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014, of detail in the INFOMAR information system: [Link]
establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning. [Link])

Spain’s five marine spatial plans, one for each of the five marine y Annex II: Maritime spatial plans: Specific part for each marine
subdivisions, followed the legal basis for public consultation subdivision, corresponding to Block III - Diagnosis: North
processes, which states that ‘without prejudice to the consultation Atlantic, South Atlantic, Strait of Gibraltar and Alboran Sea,
prior to the drafting of the text of the initiative, when the Levantine-Balearic, Canary Islands
regulation affects the legitimate rights and interests of individuals,
the competent management centre shall publish the text on the All this documentation, together with the Strategic Environmental
corresponding web portal, with the aim of hearing the citizens Study of the plans, was also subject to public scrutiny and
affected and obtaining any additional contributions that may be consultations with the affected public administrations and
made by other persons or entities’. interested parties, in accordance with the provisions of the National
Law on environmental assessment.
The Directorate General for the Coast and the Sea of the Ministry
for Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge is the Any comments could be sent by any person or entity, public
authority responsible for drawing up these maritime spatial or private, Spanish or foreign, through the means provided
plans in Spain. for in law, to the Directorate General for the Coast and the Sea,
which was obliged to publish each and every input prior to
The documentation submitted for public hearing and the adoption of the Royal Decree. The decree will be approved by
information included:1 the Council of Ministers and will enter into force after signature
by the King and publication in the Official State Gazette.
y Draft Royal Decree X / 2021 approving the maritime spatial
plans for the five Spanish marine subdivisions Source: Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic
Challenge of Spain, 2021.
y Annex I: Maritime spatial plans: Part common to the five
marine subdivisions, corresponding to blocks I, II, IV and V,

ISSION FOR M RINE STRATEGIES W

COMM ARI F MA
RIAL NE O ITH
STE ST E ES CO
INI RA
TE IT T AS
TA
RM G M
E M L
O
T

IE

AU
5C
IN

TO

Agriculture, Transports, Industry,

N

Fisheries Mobility and Commerce

OM

and Food Urban Agenda and Tourism D.G. for

OU S

the Coast
and the Sea
COMMU IES

Culture Foreign
Health Affairs, EU and
and Sports
Cooperation
NIT

Science and
Defence Interior
Innovation

Ecological
Transition and
Demographic Presidency
Challenge

© Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge of Spain, 2021.

1 [Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
116

Box 6.7
Transboundary consultations

Planners from national authorities responsible for MSP in the y Mutual learning in relation to countries’ different planning
Baltic met several times during the course of the BalticScope systems, legal frameworks and existing/future marine spatial
project, and adopted a geographic approach to seek solutions plans
for transboundary focus areas: southern Middle Bank, Kriegers y The identification of key transboundary conflict areas in
Flak, Adlergrund, Öresund strait and the Pomeranian Bay the Southwest Baltic
(encompassing Odra Bank and the approach fairway to
y Increased stakeholder involvement, particularly of national
the ports of Świnoujście and Szczecin).
level authorities and relevant agencies
Methods included: y Identification of key sectoral synergies and conflicts
y Partner/planners meetings to facilitate interaction and y The development of a number of planning suggestions
discussion outlining potential planning solutions for transboundary
y Stakeholder involvement through national meetings and MSP issues within focused geographic areas
a stakeholder conference y The development of common data sources, including
y Topic papers outlining latest developments and trends for maps visualising shipping and socio-economic evidence,
4 key sectors with transboundary impacts: shipping, energy, as well as other ‘working maps’ on overlapping interests in
fisheries and environment/nature protection transboundary focus areas
y Matrix of interests to map both present and potential future y The development of a strategy to enable and facilitate the
national sectoral interests within the focus areas use of the ecosystem-based approach as the basis for MSP,
including three checklists to be utilised by planners during
y Bilateral and trilateral meetings with smaller groups of
different phases of the planning process: i) the general
relevant planners to share relevant national knowledge
ecosystem approach in the MSP checklist; ii) a planning
and project ideas or plans, as well as common data and maps
support checklist; and iii) the SEA in the MSP checklist
The transboundary group was responsible for: y The development of a number of key general and sectoral
y The exchange of key information and data between policy and planning recommendations
the planning authorities in relation to the main interests
of the four key sectors: shipping, energy, fisheries and Source: BalticScope Project, 2017.
environment

© BalticScope, 2017.
The plan
117

6.7.1 Organisational framework and channels 6.8 Developing MSP capacity – aspects
for implementation control – how will the marine to be considered following the first marine
spatial plan be realised?
spatial plan
A roadmap should be drawn up for the adoption of the plan,
This phase of the planning process is typically under the
defining procedures and which institutions are responsible,
responsibility of the administrative bodies in charge of
assuming that there is provision for this in the regulations
developing the plan and the regulations that guarantee the
governing a plan. This should be supplemented with imple-
transposition of measures to enable progress towards the
mentation information identifying which sector institutions
vision and objectives formulated in the plan. Capacity devel-
are responsible for plan implementation and the steps that
opment plays a fundamental role here, since the individuals
they need to take to ensure use of the plan, since the manage-
ment and application of the plan are normally undertaken at responsible for this work are probably different from those
a sectoral level. Organisational changes within these sectoral who drew up the plan. Capacity development must ensure the
institutions, including some adjusted competences and new correct application of the measures, bearing in mind that the
staffing, might be necessary (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). plan integrates different activities that must now be managed
in an interrelated manner.
It is advisable to establish an interagency coordinating body
to follow up the implementation (IOC-UNESCO, 2009), led by Here, a lot can be learned from spatial planning on land. In some
the MSP authority. This group could be an existing MSP work- countries, MSP is actually an extension of land planning and
ing group formed at the beginning of the planning process to stipulated as amendments to planning law. Capacity building
inform plan development. is rather similar to land planning, with necessary additions to fit
the peculiarities of planning and decision-making at sea.
6.7.2 Budget and financial allocation prior
MSP should be considered in the wider context of spatial
to approval
planning, considering the interaction between land-based
Together with finalisation of the plan, it is necessary to define and marine planning, including river basin management and
the budget allocation of new funds to implement, monitor and integrated coastal area management.
evaluate the marine spatial plan (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). Some
processes have focused on resources to develop the plan Examples of capacity development needs:
without properly defining the funds for its implementation,
y How to establish and conduct a genuine and transparent
which might result in it being ineffective.
stakeholder consultation that justifies which suggestions
Administrative capacity building involves costs that are dif- were accepted and rejected
ferentiated from drafting costs. Maintaining implementation y How to develop zoning (if it is decided to include this kind
over time requires specific, financed resources, so it is essential of method in the plan)
to incorporate and guarantee costs for continuous and per- y How to develop a strategic environmental assessment
manent operation of the technical-administrative structures y How to use the plan in consenting and licensing decisions
in charge of marine plan execution and the design of the y How to place the marine spatial plan within the
implementation tools. governance and legal framework
 118

©Yevhenii Kravchuk/[Link]
 119

7 Enabling implementation
of the marine spatial plan
THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES between scientists, industry and the government could facili-
tate the planning, follow-up and dealing with the changes. With
y How to establish MSP regulations all historical and current data about the ocean, which could be
y The dialogues with maritime sectors and actors uploaded, accessed and updated in real-time, the Digital Twin
and their role during the implementation of the Ocean and similar technologies can provide advanced
solutions to all phases of MSP, especially in regard to the ecosys-
y Capacity development for competent authorities
and maritime sectors on the implementation tem-based approach (European Marine Board, 2019).
of the plan
The authorities that led the planning process may play a key role
y Compliance and enforcement of the marine
in implementation, have a role in supervising implementation,
spatial plan
or work with other authorities or entities to transition the
leadership from planning to implementation. In many cases
over the last decade, implementation has been led by one or
This chapter focuses on factors that support the implementa- more sectoral authorities, regulators and/or companies who
tion of the marine spatial plan. The level of implementation will be the end-users of the marine spatial plan. Based on the
determines the extent to which the objectives will be met. plan, sectoral authorities and companies can choose where to
Implementation needs to be followed up regularly and is best develop a project, whereas regulators consult the plan to evalu-
organised through dialogue with the key actors. ate if the proposals are aligned to it. In cases where sectoral and
terrestrial planning authorities may lead on the implementation
Implementation of the marine spatial plan is the longest phase and use of the plan, supplementary documents are needed,
in the planning cycle. A recent review of 11 MSP practices found with a specific description of how to use the plan and who
that review periods for established marine spatial plans range will be responsible for what is advisable. The role of MSP is to
from 5 to 12 years, depending on the country (Stelzenmüller overcome the logic of ‘first come, first served’ towards a more
et al., 2021). At worst, rapid changes can make some of the plan-led approach.
assumptions behind the established marine spatial plan out-
dated. This is why it is important to invest in an analysis of future It is important to clarify that a marine spatial plan does not
conditions and to conduct scenario processes as proposed in replace or act as a substitute for other processes that lead to
Section 5.2; anticipating plausible future developments can authorisation and permits, licences or other credentials that
help to avoid surprises, or at least allow for adaptation. permit activities. For example, if a proposed project is located
inside or within the boundary of a zone area identified by the
Even if rapid changes are possible, many processes are slow and plan, the proponent (e.g. a company) will be required to follow
gradual. Some natural processes can be slow, but economic all necessary steps according to the applicable regulations or
development projects can also take a long time. For instance, policy, including possibly environmental impact assessments
once a marine spatial plan indicates an area for offshore wind and public review or consultations. Proponents need to go
energy production, the technical planning, permissions and through the licensing process in order to provide a more
implementation of the project typically takes between 7 and detailed project plan and an environmental impact analysis.
11 years, and sometimes longer (Hundleby et al., 2017).
Indeed, the potential development areas identified by a plan
The fact that both rapid and slow processes coexist should are suggestions based on the agreed vision for the planning
be taken into account when organising implementation of territory as a whole. In addition, these areas should indicate
the marine spatial plan. It is better to design it as a process the places where such activities can be developed without
that expands over planning cycles, with frequent follow-up negatively impacting other sectors and/or areas with a high
measures to deal with any potential rapid changes. The whole ecological value. For these reasons, MSP is viewed as an
process should benefit from innovative technologies. Better approach that increases legal security for enterprises and
integration of ocean big data and improved data sharing de-risks investments, which are great benefits for investors.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
120

7.1 Establishing regulation for the implementation of the marine spatial plan
MSP regulation is the basis for the implementation of the For transboundary coherent marine spatial plans, the related
marine spatial plan, which is often based on relevant laws. It conventions and agreements are the basis for planning
usually includes the necessity of MSP implementation, the main implementation, often requiring efficient communication
bodies concerned with the implementation, the methods of between two or more countries. It is important that countries
implementation, and the interrelationship between MSP and discuss and harmonise how and when they will implement the
sea use approval and the acquisition of sea area use rights. common regional objectives within each national planning
process. Usually, the countries have different time frames, so
An implementation plan or roadmap could be developed to this kind of coordination could be a mechanism to overcome
clarify tasks and procedures, although it is still quite rare to this challenge.
find this type of document for existing MSP processes.

Decide to Initiate
produce/amend plan stakeholder engagement

Plan Gather
adopted Ident evidence
ify
lan iss
ntp ue
e s
m
an
e
pl

do
ent

Im

pp
eholder engagem

ortu
nities

Independent
investigation EVIDENCE Plan scope,
(if appropriate) vision and
objectives
Stak

Sus al
tainability apprais
Consult Options
on draft plan analysis

Policy development

Figure 7.1
The MSP process

Source: Welsh Government, 2017.

Enabling implementation of the marine spatial plan
121

7.2 Establishing a regular dialogue with sectors and other actors

to follow up and support implementation
Having a sound evidence base will improve our knowledge of committees could facilitate the implementation of the plan
our seas, inform their sustainable use and management and and consider other ongoing initiatives and synergies that can
enable effective marine planning. impact the planning outcomes.

The collection of evidence is a complex process which needs In the case of a transboundary marine spatial plan, communica-
to be organised. Continuous engagement, education and tion between planning authorities from the different countries
awareness raising for sectoral decision-makers and regulatory must be structured to allow for greater fluidity than is usual
bodies is important, especially in the case of non-binding through diplomatic channels. Following activities in neighbour-
marine spatial plans. It is also necessary to build the capacity of ing countries and informing them of your country’s progress
non-state actors, or at least awareness of the plan’s objectives is especially important for cross-border activities and possible
and new regulations. These working groups and interagency cross-border impacts.

Box 7.1
Implementation guidance for the Welsh National Marine Plan

The Welsh National Marine Plan (WNMP) sets out the Welsh Marine Policy Statement 2011 (MPS) and relevant marine plans,
Government’s vision and objectives for the Welsh marine plan area unless relevant considerations indicate otherwise (s. 58(1))
and policies to support their achievement, helping marine users y State their reasons where authorisation or enforcement decisions
and those undertaking land-based activities (with the potential to are not taken in accordance with the MPS and relevant marine
affect the plan area) to support the sustainable development of our plans
seas. The WNMP supports sustainable development by guiding and
y Have regard to the MPS and relevant marine plans when taking
supporting effective, proportionate and consistent decision-making.
decisions that affect or might affect the UK marine area which are
A supplementary implementation guidance (IG) supports the WNMP not authorisation or enforcement decisions (s. 58(3))
and is a consideration for public authorities in taking decisions which
Another useful source of information for applicants and decision-
may affect the plan area. It provides further detail on WNMP policies
makers is the Wales Marine Planning Portal, which contains relevant
to help ensure they are implemented effectively and consistently; it
spatial data and maps. The portal is helpful for understanding existing
does not introduce new planning policy. This IG sits alongside other
and future potential use; determining whether areas of relevance to
non-statutory plan-related policy, guidance and evidence to support
their proposals are already subject to pre-existing licences, option and
marine planning for Wales, and will be updated periodically.
exploration agreements or applications; identifying potential conflicts
Section 58 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (MCAA) and opportunities; identifying opportunities to avoid, minimise and/
requires all public bodies to: or mitigate adverse impacts to achieve compatibility with other users;
and considering whether proposals can coexist with other, existing
y Take authorisation or enforcement decisions (s. 58(4)) that affect
sector developments or activities.
or might affect the UK marine area in accordance with the UK

Source: Llywodraeth Cymru/Welsh Government, 2021.

© Llywodraeth Cymru/Welsh Government, 2020.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
122

7.3 Training competent authorities by the planning authority. In cross-border MSP projects,
multi-country, multi-department and multi-stakeholder
and maritime sectors on the implementation
cooperation is particularly significant.
of the plan
The implementation or action plan is a key component of the 7.3.4 Coordination
MSP process. To guarantee the effective development of the
plan on the ground, competent authorities require capacity The coordination role of the MSP authority is essential to
building in new procedures. This needs to be considered at an ensure the marine spatial plan is implemented on time. In
early stage of the planning process, taking into consideration general, to carry out the implementation, ad hoc committees
how and by whom the plan is going to be used. This will ensure and groups should be set up to lead the communication and
that a plan is useful, usable, understood and used. implementation of relevant regulations, the participation
of stakeholders and the cumulative impact assessment, etc.
Government bodies’ knowledge and acceptance of the marine Through collaboration mechanisms of multiple departments,
spatial plan will determine the effectiveness of its implemen- the overall planning can be carried out smoothly according to
tation. In addition, capacity development should focus on the original work plan.
how MSP could be useful for promoting the blue economy
and sustainable development.

An implementation plan and a planning implementation

system (usually based on GIS and management rules, for
example) could improve the efficiency of implementation.

7.3.1 Share of responsibilities

The implementation of the plan is linked to investment
programmes, which in many cases do not depend on the
planning institutions but on the private sector. In addition,
government incentives might foster investment in the priority
maritime sectors of a plan.

The marine spatial plan does not only guide maritime sectors.
It has become apparent that the manner in which sectoral
plans are implemented has a direct effect on how the marine
plan is implemented. It is a two-way process.

In light of the above, there is a need to develop maritime sec-

tors’ MSP capacity in such a way that they realise the benefits
of such a process.

7.3.2 Conciliation
Conciliation refers to making different positions or approach-
es compatible or bringing them into agreement. When there
are conflicts among different sea-use activities or between
human economic activities and environmental protection
objectives, relevant departments need to follow certain laws
and regulations to reconcile the conflicts or, if this is not pos-
sible, to ensure that they remain manageable.

7.3.3 Cooperation
Cooperation can be understood as the act of working
together. The implementation of MSP involves manage-
©UNESCO

ment departments, law enforcement departments and var-

ious stakeholders. Therefore, sound implementation must
be through the joint efforts of multiple parties, ensured
Enabling implementation of the marine spatial plan
123

7.4 Compliance with the marine spatial

Compliance and enforcement are essential
plan elements to ensure the implementation of the
marine spatial plan. General requirements for compliance
The compliance of sectoral authorities and regulatory
and enforcement – such as zoning regulations, permits and
bodies is key to MSP. Compliance occurs when the plan- licences – will be most effective when they:
ning requirements are clearly defined and met, thus the
desired objectives can be achieved. It occurs, for example, y Are clear and understandable
when human activities are developed within the respec- y Define which human activities are subject to the
requirements
tive designated zones (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).
y Define the requirements and any exceptions or variances
y Clearly address how compliance is to be determined by
The degree of compliance may vary according to the specifying procedures
nature of the plan, i.e. if it is binding or guiding. A binding y Are flexible enough to be constructively adapted according
plan is simpler when it comes to implementation, as it to transparent and acceptable justifications
has strong legal support. Implementation of non-binding
Compliance can be promoted by:
plans require frequent collaboration and supervision.
y Educating the public and other stakeholders about plans,
rules and regulations, and the implications for each
stakeholder group
y Developing ‘codes of conduct’ through agreements with
various stakeholders
y Technical assistance through which governmental agencies
provide information on the feasibility of sectoral plans and
projects
y Installing physical markers, such as buoys, around important
habitats or security zones

The idea is that the marine spatial plan gives guidance

and conditions for the use of sea areas, and these are
then translated into more detailed decisions in approval
procedures. In some countries, the zoning regulations are
more indicative than direct requirements.

Source: IOC-UNESCO, 2009.

The implementation is in the hands of sectoral authorities,

approving authorities, the private sector and local commu-
nities, organised or not. Permits and licences, for example,
are indeed granted by sectors or special regulatory author-
ities. To ensure compliance with the marine spatial plan,
adaptations to sectoral plans and regulations should be
coordinated whenever necessary. Procedures should also
define what to do in cases of non-compliance. Moreover,
stakeholders will need to be well informed about the final
plan and its implications.

It may happen that a specific sector was not contemplated

by the plan or a project is proposed for an area not des-
ignated to any activity. In these cases, additional negotia-
tions with stakeholders could be undertaken to adapt the
plan or develop complementary plans (depending on if
and how the regulation allows these changes).
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
124

Box 7.2
Ensuring compliance with the marine spatial plan: The case of Mozambique and Portugal

In order to foster legal certainty and transparency between Space’. The Minister of the Sea, Inland Waters and Fisheries is
stakeholders, the consenting and licensing process should be the competent authority to approve licences, authorisations and
‘plan-led’. The MSP legislation and process in Mozambique concessions for sea areas of up to 100 km2. However, concessions
and Portugal promotes the right to private use of the national for areas over 100 km2 shall be approved by the Council
maritime space which is granted by concession, licence or of Ministers.
authorisation for a certain period, based on the national marine
spatial plan. These permits are called ‘Titles for Private Use of Whenever there is a conflict or overlap between the uses of
Maritime Space’, and allow developers and users in Mozambique existing or potential activities in the same sea area, priority
and Portugal to use the marine space by means of a concession, and preference shall be given to the activity or use that has
licence or authorisation, depending on the nature of the activity, (i) greater social and economic advantage for the country and
which may be either of commercial, or scientific research nature. (ii) maximum coexistence of uses or activities. The costs for the
reallocation of the existing project shall be incurred by the party
In cases where a particular marine use is not covered by the interested in the development of the new project. Whenever
marine spatial plan, the legal framework establishes that specific such reallocation is not possible due to the particularities of the
adaptations and improvements should be made through activity or the lack of similar areas suitable for developing the
complementary plans. existing activities, the interested party shall compensate the title
holder for his investment and possible loss of profit.
In Mozambique, through Decree no. 21/2017, of 24 May, the
Government of Mozambique approved the ‘Regulations which Sources: Government of Mozambique, 2021; DGRM, 2021.
Establishes the Legal Regime for Use of the National Maritime

© Sopotnicki/[Link]
Enabling implementation of the marine spatial plan
125

7.5 Enforcing the marine spatial plan

Enforcement is the set of actions that governments take Stakeholders such as NGOs and market institutions can
in relation to regulating human activities to achieve com- also support enforcement by detecting and reporting
pliance with the marine spatial plan (IOC-UNESCO, 2009). non-compliant actions. NGOs may take legal action
Enforcing a large-scale spatial plan that is often light on against a company for non-compliance or against the
detail is a complicated matter, especially in cases where government for lack of enforcement. On the other hand,
the plan is not legally binding. Where it is legally binding, banks and insurance companies may require the assur-
then sector authorities or approving bodies are obliged to ance of compliance with the marine spatial plan before
follow what is stipulated in the plan. issuing a loan or insurance to an offshore development
(IOC-UNESCO, 2009).
An important task in relation to enforcement is to ensure
that the rules are clearly communicated to all stakehold-
ers, and consistently applied on the basis of transparent
policies and procedures (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).

Typically, the idea is that the plan gives general level Implementation in different countries
guidance or conditions, which are then given more
detailed content in sectoral decision-making or Latvia
approval procedures:
Altogether, 16 specific measures were agreed during
y Delegation of enforcement to appropriate authorities
negotiations with several relevant ministries and
y Inspections to determine the compliance status of the
authorities (on multiple levels) for the implementation
regulated human activities and to detect violations
of the Latvian marine spatial plan, according to the general
y Negotiations with individuals or managers of activities that
and strategic objectives.
are not compliant to develop mutually agreeable schedules
and approaches for achieving compliance Once a year, for the purpose of monitoring the
y Legal action, where necessary, to compel compliance and to implementation of the marine spatial plan, the Latvian
impose sanctions for violating the law, or posing a threat to Ministry for Environmental Protection and Regional
public health or environmental quality, including financial Development reviews the actual use of the sea and updates
penalties or withdrawal of a permit the geospatial data and maps of the plan as required.
Source: Adapted from IOC-UNESCO, 2009. In addition, the Ministry established the Maritime Planning
Working Group, which consists of 24 representatives
from different ministries, agencies, planning regions
and associations. A similar working group was already
in place during the preparation of the marine spatial plan.
The working group will meet face-to-face at least once
a year, and is expected to ensure exchange of the most
up-to-date information and data for the purposes of the
implementation of the maritime plan. To support the
follow-up, surveys will be conducted to collect input from
a larger group of experts and stakeholders.

Belgium
The official advisory committee oversaw the
implementation of the 2014–2020 plan on an annual basis.
The framework document consisted of distinctive tasks,
with a responsible authority, objective, completion year
and relevant indicator for each task. Most indicators were
qualitative, such as specifying whether a certain type
of study was conducted, or a guideline published. The
committee specified the level of completion towards the
objective each year on a three-level scale: ‘no progress’,
‘some progress’ and ‘completed’.
 126

©Fred Marie/[Link]
 127

8 Monitoring, evaluation
and adaptation
THIS CHAPTER DESCRIBES The IOC-UNESCO Guide to Evaluating Marine Spatial Plans
(2014) underlines the importance of evaluation, especially in
y How to evaluate the planning process terms of measuring whether marine spatial plans achieve their
and stakeholder engagement stated objectives, which in turn correspond with societal goals
y The relevance of evaluating the plan in relation to sea areas. The approach presented in that guid-
and its implementation ance works well if your MSP is detailed and binding. Then you
y The evaluation of the MSP results and how can justifiably link future developments at sea to the planning
to report it provisions given in the MSP. When the MSP system is more
y Options for adaptation (review and revision strategic and guiding, rather than steering, the evaluation and
of the plan) monitoring process needs to be designed differently. Here, an
evaluation approach that looks at MSP from different perspec-
tives and in a broader context can produce useful information
This chapter describes approaches to evaluation in different that helps to partially meet the challenge of knowing the
phases of the planning cycle. effects of MSP (Box 8.2).

Planning is cyclical and iterative. The information gained from Learning from and improving MSP processes and plans are
monitoring and evaluation is valuable in order to improve among the key purposes of monitoring and evaluation. In
the planning process and to make well-informed adaptations addition, the monitoring and evaluation produce information
where necessary. that can be used for ensuring broader societal transparency
and for holding the responsible authorities accountable. The
Adaptive MSP is based on a circular or iterative planning
monitoring, evaluation and adaptation are all interlinked.
process, which periodically feeds back information from the
Monitoring of the implementation of the plan and its out-
past to enhance and improve the next planning cycle. Indeed,
comes is a continuous process that generates information
evaluation is the stage of MSP where the greatest amount of
needed for the evaluation which, in its turn, provides necessary
learning should take place. Faced with the daily demands of
information for adapting the plan when it is reviewed. As the
their jobs, planning authorities and managers are often unable
MSP processes and planning cycles are typically several years
to systematically monitor and review the implementation and
long, it is useful to evaluate and monitor in several steps during
results of the marine spatial plan. However, the risk of not doing
the planning cycle. Evaluation – and consequently monitoring
so is that money and other resources can be wasted on plans
– can target different stages and aspects on MSP:
that are not achieving their objectives (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).
y the MSP processes
In general terms, the evaluation should explain what works, y the plan and its relevance
for whom and why. Methodological choices for evaluation, as y implementation of the plan
well as measuring the impacts or use of indicators, should aim y outcomes of the plan
to answer these questions. These questions can be answered
by applying alternative methods. Science-based monitoring Indicators are needed to follow up and evaluate the plan-mak-
and evaluation may require considerably more resources ing process, implementation and outcomes. Section 4.5 pre-
than a dialogue-based approach. Both approaches have their sents the types of indicators, the key criteria for crafting good
strengths and the recommendation is to find combinations of indicators, and offers some useful sources for their design.
these approaches.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
128

8.1 Evaluating the planning process and Table 8.2

stakeholder engagement Evaluating the participatory process

Evaluation of the process and how stakeholder engagement Phase I: Why, who, when and how; costs of participation
was conducted can make MSP processes more cost-effective,
Why? Reasons to adopt stakeholder participation
inclusive and improve the knowledge base for planning.
Who? Stakeholder analyses

8.1.1 Process evaluation Sectors and categories involved

Sampling strategy adopted

The process evaluation scrutinises how data and methods
were used in the organisation process. Table 8.1 summarises Any prioritisation of stakeholders/representatives
the main criteria for evaluating the MSP process. When? Stakeholder engagement during normative planning phase

Stakeholder engagement during strategic planning phase

Table 8.1
Stakeholder engagement during operational planning
Main criteria for evaluating the MSP process phase

Topic Criteria How? Responsibility for stakeholder engagement

Validity of data Incorporation of best available information Participation strategies

and analyses
Use of suitable methods and technologies Methods of engagement

Robustness, clarity and reproducibility of Cost How long was the process of stakeholder participation?
analyses
What were the expenses related to the participatory
Consideration of Methods for scenario-building process?
alternatives
Comprehensiveness and adequacy/justification How much did the participatory process cost?
of scenarios
Who paid for the participatory process?
Procedures and methods for scenario assessment
Evaluating the participatory process
Prospective Comprehensiveness and robustness of impact Phase II: Consequences and social acceptance
impact assessment methods
assessment Did the participatory process increase social capital among
Incorporation of assessment results in draft and stakeholders?
final plan
Did the participatory process increase understanding and support of
Adequacy of Evolution of resources over the plan-making MSP; was it considered to be a good process of ocean governance?
resources process, including sources of funding
(for plan-making) Did the pool of engaged stakeholders/representatives reflect accurately
Ratio between available and necessary resources the diversity of actors in the region?
Source: Carneiro, 2013.
Did the participatory process ensure a balance of power among
stakeholders?

8.1.2 Evaluating stakeholder engagement Did stakeholders believe they were able to influence the process,
thereby supporting the final marine spatial plan and remaining willing
An important element in the evaluation of planning processes to engage?
is the involvement of stakeholders. Table 8.2 presents a com- Did stakeholders define and shape the drivers of the MSP process?
prehensive set of evaluation criteria for both the participatory
process and its outcomes. The questions can be adapted to Did the participatory process balance both top-down and bottom-up
approaches, resulting in shared decision-making?
the planning context.
Was the information about the MSP process open to stakeholders?
Evaluation of stakeholder engagement is a means to address
What were the barriers to collaboration among different sectors and
the overall consideration of social justice within MSP. As categories of stakeholders?
described in Chapter 2, the key elements of social justice are
Were stakeholders able to negotiate their interests and ensure that at
representation, recognition and distribution. Representation least some of the benefits of the marine spatial plan applied to them?
is, obviously, one of the key areas for evaluation of stakeholder
engagement in MSP. The second element, recognition, can Did powerful stakeholders finance and influence the participatory
process?
be one aspect of ex ante (anticipatory) evaluation of MSP.
This type of evaluation is discussed next. The distributional Were the time and cost allocated to stakeholder participation reflected
in wider support for the final marine spatial plan?
effects of MSP are then an important aspect of the outcome
evaluation of MSP. Source: Quesada-Silva et al., 2019.
Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation
129

8.2 Evaluating the plan and its relevance

Box 8.1
Another example of a useful method that focuses on the plan- Examples of criteria and questions for evaluating
ning phase is the assessment of the plan’s relevance, which the relevance of the marine spatial plan
concentrates on the draft marine spatial plan by assessing
which outcomes are realistic and whether they correspond Relevance:
with the goals set for the plan. During this stage, it is also Does the marine spatial plan address the right
important to pay attention to possible side-effects. This type questions?
of evaluation is sometimes called ex ante evaluation. Strategic y Have the existing and future conditions been diagnosed
environmental assessment is another example of an anticipa- correctly? (see Sections 5.2 and 5.3, respectively)
tory evaluation (see Section 6.5).
y Conduct a SWOT analysis and identify in particular
which of the opportunities and strengths can be
This process should enable successive drafts to be refined and influenced by MSP
improved, so that the plan is more likely to achieve its objec-
tives in a cost-effective manner. This will also give information y Examine the analysis of future trends and scenarios
that can help in fine tuning the planned monitoring and y Engage stakeholders and sectoral experts who have
evaluation activities, ensuring that all necessary information valuable information on the sectors’ current and
is available. future conditions

y Do the contents of the agreed MSP objectives and draft

An anticipatory evaluation is typically conducted by external planning decisions correspond with the results of the
consultants, but the MSP authority may also be required to pro- SWOT and trends analyses? Do they cover the major
vide information and answer questions (see Box 8.1). Since MSP issues?
addresses multiple sectors and topics, it is essential to engage
a broad range of people with relevant expertise and under- Consistency:
Is the marine spatial plan aligned with the pre-existing
standing of the factors that influence developments at sea, and
commitments?
how impacts and possible side-effects of MSP are generated.
These people can be from sectoral or regional administration, y Do the MSP documents identify all the relevant regional,
national and international commitments that cover
the private sector, NGOs, communities or academia.
the topics addressed in the marine spatial plan? (see
Sections 3.2 and 3.3 on pre-existing national and
Formulating plausible steps from the plan to expected effects international political commitments)
can be a useful method to identify the effects of the plan.
In doing this, it is valuable to pay attention also to side-effects y Are MSP objectives in line with the pre-existing regional,
national and international commitments?
and possible bottlenecks.
(Anticipated) effectiveness:
The following scheme (Figure 8.1) describes the basic concept What are the expected outcomes (and side-effects)
where the ‘Intervention’ is the marine spatial plan and planning of the MSP?
provisions given in it (allocation of space and conditions for y Are there clear objectives for the MSP to guide the
the use of the space). The initial and intermediate outcomes planning?
can help in identification of necessary steps towards the y Can the objectives be realistically achieved through the
objective – the long-term outcomes. Questions in the scheme marine spatial plan (within the constraints of the budget)?
help in formulation of the plausible steps.
y Together with stakeholders and sectoral experts, develop
descriptions of plausible steps (intervention logic) from
It is advisable to describe the expected environmental, eco-
the draft plan to the preferred outcomes (objectives)
nomic and social impacts, as well as the side-effects, and to
systematically map who the affected parties are and how they y Identify possible side-effects and distribution of positive
are affected. The identification of factors that influence the and detrimental impacts across the sectors and groups
development, impacts and side-effects can help to establish of people (including regional differences). This will
contribute to fostering social justice
quantitative or qualitative indicators for monitoring the marine
spatial plan. Finally, constructing descriptions of plausible steps
Sources: Varjopuro, 2019; Varjopuro et al., 2019.
together with experts and stakeholders increases their knowl-
edge of the plan and expected actions. At best, it can create a
sense of shared ownership of the marine spatial plan.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
130

INTERVENTION IMPACTS

Activities Outputs Initial Intermediate Long-term

Inputs
outcomes outcomes outcomes

Assumptions Assumptions
How do the outputs result in outcomes? How do the initial outcomes result in intermediate outcomes and then
What has to happen? in long-term outcomes? What has to happen? How do contextual
How do contextual factors influence? factors influence?
Risks
Risks
Risks that the link is weak or non-existent.
Risks that the link is weak or non-existent
Side-effects
What are the intervention’s effects in a broader context?

Figure 8.1
Formulating plausible steps

Source: Varjopuro, 2019.

Table 8.3
Plausible steps to reach a wind energy target, and respective evaluative questions

Objective Increase production of renewable energy Examples of evaluative questions

at sea by 5 GW by 2030

Planning decision Areas designated for wind energy production at sea y Is the area sufficient to reach the target?
(output) Cable routings defined in the plan y Are the areas for wind energy or cable routings feasible?
Requirements and conditions for wind energy in y What are the conceivable impacts on marine environment,
designated areas are given in the planning documents species and habitats – as well as to other sea uses?

Immediate Knowledge among the renewable energy operators y Is the information reaching the target groups and all anticipated
outcomes (and other actors) increases on the availability of space, affected parties?
conditions set for the development of the areas, target y Are companies and other actors (including authorities) showing
values interest or concern?
Interest to build more wind energy capacity at sea y Which other factors may support or hinder the preferred
increases development?

Intermediate Permit applications are submitted to the authorities y Are permit applications submitted?
outcomes Permits are issued y Are stakeholder groups mobilised to support or to oppose the
development?
Note: there is likely to be a considerable time-lag between y What sort of permits are issued? Do they match with the target
these two intermediate outcomes and the planning provisions?
y Which other factors may support or hinder the development?
y Are there side-effects or unintended consequences?
y Who is affected and how?

Long-term The turbines are ready and produce renewable energy y How much electricity is produced? Does it meet the target?
outcomes y What are the environmental, economic and social impacts?
y Which other factors supported or hindered the development?
y Are there side-effects or unintended consequences?
y Who is affected and how? (distributional effects)

Note: The evaluative questions relate to evaluation of the plan (output) as well as to the evaluation of implementation (Section 8.3)
and evaluation of outcomes (Section 8.4).
Source: Varjopuro et al., 2019.
Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation
131

Experts and stakeholders involved in formulation of the plau- Some countries, such as Belgium and Latvia, have ensured
sible steps may have justifiably different views of how MSP will that an inter-agency working group or committee meets
influence sectors or the marine environment and what impacts annually to check how the implementation is progressing. To
can be generated. In such cases, it is advisable to produce a facilitate the process, they have developed tables that have
limited number of alternative descriptions of the steps towards the following similar elements:
the objectives. Having alternative plausible descriptions can y measures to be taken or results to be achieved
help to deal with uncertainties when the implementation of y relevant indicator(s)
MSP is followed up. When available, the expert assessments y a responsible authority
should be scrutinised for plausibility against statistical infor- y a year of completion
mation, scientific knowledge and proven theories, and should
be as robust as possible. Furthermore, Belgium has organised stakeholder events to
collect feedback from a broad range of actors on the imple-
The plausible steps from the plan to outcomes can be drawn up mentation and effects of the marine spatial plan. This was in
in various ways or combinations of them: addition to the formal inter-agency follow-up.
y Narrative: A storyline that describes the plausible steps
y Graph: The plausible steps can be visualised with a It is advisable that countries hold regular conferences for
cognitive map authorities and stakeholders to discuss the implementation
and effects of the marine spatial plans. This would provide
When presenting the plausible steps, it is important to justify an opportunity for a two-way exchange of information and
them and explain key assumptions as to why the plan is expected would also keep the relevant actors informed of the plan and
to produce the outcomes, and the factors and relationships that its implementation. Such conferences on implementation and
generate or hinder the achievement of those outcomes. follow-up could also be organised on a regional sea level.

Table 8.3 shows a simplified scheme of plausible steps from Finally, it is important that the mid-term evaluation or fol-
a planning decision to preferred outcomes (for wind energy low-up activities look beyond the marine spatial plan itself:
production), with examples of evaluative questions to be dis- How are the maritime sectors and the state of the marine envi-
cussed with experts and stakeholders. Similar questions can be ronment evolving? Is the plan still relevant after a few years? If
rephrased in the past tense for an outcome evaluation. the review cycle is several years, significant changes may take
place. Information about the development of the sectors and
the state of the marine environment can be obtained from
8.3 Evaluating implementation
respective authorities and experts. The purpose of context
Implementation is a long process (see Chapter 7), where indicators is to follow these developments and to add trans-
actions are often taken by sector authorities and private parency and robustness to the evaluation process.
actors, while the roles of the MSP authorities are limited to
coordination and follow up. MSP authorities can also invest in
outreach activities to keep the relevant actors informed about
the marine spatial plan. Box 8.2
The challenge of isolating the effects of MSP
Review cycles of marine spatial plans can be relatively long –
To reach its objectives, MSP aims to generate preferred
from 5 to 10 years, or even more. It is therefore advisable to
changes in the use of sea areas. In order to draw conclusions
follow up the implementation of the plan as it advances, and about the effectiveness of MSP, the competent authority or
not just the achievement of the preferred outcomes. A mid- the evaluator needs to know and prove that MSP is causing,
term evaluation is needed, especially if the review cycle is very or at least contributing to, the observed changes in the
long. It is an opportunity to check that the steps towards the use of a sea area. The challenge here is that MSP operates
final outcomes are being taken, and to report back. Here, the in a societal and natural environment that is affected by
various anthropogenic and natural processes. For instance,
plausible steps and pathways towards the outcomes, as well
development of economic activities at sea is influenced by a
as the indicators formulated earlier, provide the checkpoints number of factors, including economic drivers (demand and
(see Table 8.3). Predefined indicators for immediate and supply and their alternatives), technological development,
intermediate outcomes will help the mid-term evaluation sectoral policies, societal preferences, and by MSP itself.
significantly, making it more transparent and robust. How, then, can we distinguish the effects of MSP from other
factors?

Source: Carneiro, 2013.

 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
132

8.4 Evaluating the results of MSP – cover multiple sectors and large areas, and when the plan is
not very detailed.
the outcome evaluation
MSP aims to achieve certain objectives set in advance – the Regularly consulting the sectoral administration and experts
focus of the outcome evaluation is to check to which extent can help in reducing the uncertainty of knowing how much the
the objectives were met. In addition, the outcome evalua- marine spatial plan itself influenced the observed outcomes in
tion could identify side-effects and analyse how the positive relation to other contributing factors. The ‘plausible steps from
and negative outcomes are distributed among the actors. the plan to preferred outcomes’, proposed in Table 8.3, can
The latter is important from the social justice perspective. help in this. The outcome evaluation is an opportunity to col-
lect evidence to test whether the implementation of the plan
In order to evaluate the achievement of stated objectives, it evolved as anticipated (and why), and whether the anticipated
is vital that clear objectives are formulated at the beginning. results were achieved. Input from experts and stakeholders
The objectives should be realistic, clearly defined and verifia- can also be collected in stakeholder events.
ble, as discussed in Section 4.4. Qualitative and quantitative
indicators, when clearly linked to the objectives, are helpful A planning process can be considered successful or effective
in the outcome evaluation. when the marine spatial plan is frequently used or consulted
in the decision-making process of sectors. This can be
As the implementation phase of MSP is usually several years anticipated and described as ‘intermediate outcome’ in the
long and many developments at sea take a long time to descriptions of the steps. And the outcomes may in fact be
realise, it is useful to think of the outcome evaluation as steps different from the stated objectives, if potential deviations
towards the final outcomes. Evaluation of the outcomes can can be justified in relation to the broad principles and goals
be sequenced to immediate, intermediate and long-term of the plan.
outcomes as shown in Table 8.3. This way, you can check that
your MSP implementation is on the right track towards the 8.5 Reporting and using the evaluation
objectives (i.e. the long-term outcomes).
and monitoring results
Even when the plan has clear and verifiable objectives and This guidance suggests that monitoring and evaluation should
suitable indicators are established, you should pay attention address different phases of the planning process and be active
to the challenge of knowing the exact outcome of the MSP. throughout the planning process. The results will therefore be
The challenge applies especially to marine spatial plans that reported in various phases as illustrated in Figure 8.2.

Caio Pederneiras/[Link]
Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation
133

Communication of the evaluation results works best when the time changes in the environment, governance, technology,
messages are limited to a few key ones and they are commu- society and economy will inevitably take place. Furthermore,
nicated at a language level to suit the audience. Reporting the the marine spatial plan itself aims to enact changes in the
results in different phases, rather than as one final evaluation use of the sea areas. It is therefore wise to conceive of MSP
report, helps in the targeting of the messages. taking place in a dynamic world, where the context of MSP
is in constant flux.
Using multiple channels for communicating the evaluation
is a way to ensure a good outreach. Summary papers online Marine spatial plans must be modified to respond to these
and given directly to decision-makers is an effective way of changes or they quickly become ineffective, uneconomic,
doing this. Stakeholder events are another means of reaching infeasible and – ultimately – irrelevant (IOC-UNESCO, 2009).
a number of key actors at the same time, and also demonstrate This is what the review and revision of the plan tries to avoid,
how MSP has affected all actors and sectors. but lessons learned from building and implementing the
plan also give valuable information on how to improve the
It should be noted that there may be legal requirements for practices and processes of plan design. Finally, new societal
communicating evaluation results, for instance the maximum needs and aspirations may emerge and adaptive MSP can be a
time for delivering the evaluation may be stipulated. process to respond to some of them.

Figure 8.2 gives an overview of monitoring, evaluation and

8.6 Adaptation: Review and revision
adaptation activities in relation to each stage of planning.
of the plan Monitoring is a continuous process, and evaluation should
MSP is a continual process, not a one-off ‘master plan’. An not be a one-off activity at the end of the planning cycle. In
adaptive approach is indispensable in order to deal with the review period, many of the planning stages need to be
existing and future uncertainties, and to incorporate var- revisited, including updates on the diagnoses of existing and
ious types of change, including climate change. Planning future conditions, in order to ensure the relevance of the new,
cycles typically stretch over several years, during which updated marine spatial plan.

Table 8.4
Checklist for reviewing and revision

Collect results y Monitoring and evaluation of results. Check status of the key indicators to see if the plan is on the right
of the existing plan track. If not, why?
y How has MSP influenced maritime sectors and decision-making?
y How was the plan used to inform decision-making about development proposals?
y How did proposals show compliance with the plan?
y Are we on the right track in relation to the objectives?
y Equity and adequacy of the process
y What is the perception of different stakeholders about the existing process?
y Was the budget sufficient?

Revisit the existing y How have the maritime sectors, communities and the environment changed?
conditions y Have there been major policy reviews (e.g. in sectors) or new commitments, including international?
y What is the general context of the planning area (e.g. in environment, governance, technology, economy)?
y Improve database and analytical methods

Revisit the future conditions y What are the new and emerging needs?
and objectives y Update the vision and specific objectives

Revisit the scope y Update the vision and specific objectives

of pre-planning y New time frame
y Do the boundaries need to be rethought?
y Adequacy of the team
y Reorganise the planning process

Update the marine spatial y Indicate clearly which spatial policies / requirements / zones are obsolete or are no longer considered.
plan Likewise, clearly indicate new zones or spatial policies
y Update the marine spatial plan to respond to both new needs and lessons from the implementation
Note: This is the final part of the review of the previous plan(s)
– all other parts should feed into this y Improve plan-making practices
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
134

Monitoring & evaluation Review: results of the existing plan

Implementation
y Indicators for immediate, intermediate, y Monitoring and evaluation results
y Monitoring committee
and final outcomes y How did MSP influence maritime sectors
y Regular follow up and outreach
y Interim evaluation (ca. 3 yrs) and decision-making?
y Ex post evaluation (ca. 6 yrs) y Are we on the right track in relation
to the objectives?
y Equity and adequacy of the process

Monitoring & evaluation Review: update the MSP plan (This is the
Approval of the plan
y Process indicators last part of the review, other parts feed
into this one)
y Output indicators Final draft
y Update of the MSP plan to respond
y Process evaluation (equity y Spatial allocations
to new needs and lessons from the
and inclusiveness) y Conditions and principles
implementation of the previous plan(s)
y Ex ante evaluation of the new plan of the sea use
y Improve plan-making practices
Alternatives, intervention logic and process
& assessments

Draft plans & consultations

Monitoring & evaluation Review: revisit the existing and future

Future vision and objectives
y Context indicators to follow existing conditions; objectives
conditions and trends Future conditions y What are the new and emerging needs?
y Input for an ex ante evaluation y Update the vision and specific objectives
of the new plan (relevance)
y Process evaluation (equity
and inclusiveness)
y How have the maritime sectors,
Existing commitments and strategies
communities and environment changed?
Existing conditions y Have there been major policy reviews
(e.g. in sectors) or new commitments,
y Ecological, social, cultural
incl. international?
& economic
y Improve database and analytical methods
y Conflicts analysis

Review: revisit the pre-planning

Boundaries & timeframes
y New timeframe
y Need to rethink the boundaries?
Establish the team & work plan
y Adequacy of the team
y Reorganisation of the planning process

THE FOUNDATION
Establish the MSP regime (law and authority); funding; planning principles and overall goals

Figure 8.2
Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation overview

© Varjopuro, 2021.
 Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation
135

©ChristianRogersPhotograph/[Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
136

©ChristianRogersPhotograph/[Link]
 137

9 Next steps

A decade for optimism

1st January 2031 will be a time to look back and remember with its pros and cons, and with it, the global effects of each
what the international community have experienced during and every one of our decisions, including those adopted in the
the previous decade. The decade 2021-2030 began with a context of MSP processes.
confined world in which all citizens of the world learned to
live differently. During a couple of months, the ocean pollu- With an agenda to fill this decade with optimism, govern-
tion decreased, many forests and mangroves recovered and ments, researchers, students, the private sectors and citizens
atmospheric CO2 was reduced to unexpected levels, at least from all countries of the world are invited to implement
for a short period. the different Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030
Agenda and their corresponding targets. Their contributions
Today, it is not possible to predict what will happen in ten years’ will be reinforced for the common good by all the actions
time, but what has changed in the last years will undoubtedly contemplated at the international level by the United Nations
help to rethink how the future is to be designed. The concept Decades of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development and
of globalisation is now better understood around the world, on Ecosystem Restoration.

Developing and implementing marine spatial plans

MSP is designed in all regions across the world as a practical Roadmap to accelerate MSP processes worldwide will be met,
tool to promote a more inclusive and rational use of the ocean. and hopefully beyond. By then, 30% of the world’s exclusive
It also plays an important role in facilitating the rapid and envi- economic zones will be covered with a plan approved by
ronmentally sound development of ocean-based activities their governments and under implementation. Furthermore,
and the sustainable development of the blue economy. recent commitments made by governments on sustainable
ocean planning in the context of the High Level Panel for a
In the context of increasingly crowded ocean spaces, MSP is Sustainable Ocean Economy confirms the interest of countries
currently encouraging multiple uses. The marine spatial plans, to initiate or strengthen MSP processes worldwide.
with their goal of integration and legal certainty, allow to
identify sites for new and emerging uses, thereby increasing The implementation of MSP plans will be key to the efficient
investor confidence and promoting investment in science, development of sustainable blue economy strategies; it will
innovation and technologies. deepen the understanding of the current state, trends and
future prospects of the marine environment, and strengthen
In the coming years, more than fifty countries will have the integration of sectoral policies.
approved marine spatial plans covering their respective
maritime jurisdictions. If countries’ commitment remains Many of the countries that have approved or are currently in
intact, the number of countries with an MSP plan by 2030 the process of approving their plans will, over the next ten
is expected to be close to one hundred, thus a sign that the years, consider the need to review, update or adapt their plan
target of the European Commission and IOC-UNESCO’s Joint to meet changing needs and priorities. The role of marine
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
138

regions and regional seas conventions will be crucial in transboundary cooperation amongst countries and considers
ensuring that each of these changes also serves to strengthen those measures that impact the marine environment.

The exponential evolution of MSP

Looking back, it all started at the turn of the millennium, in a the importance of working with competent national author-
decade (2001-2010) in which only a few countries had started ities and having full institutional support in order to achieve
their journey with their first MSP plans. Countries such as impactful MSP implementation.
Australia, Belgium, China and the Netherlands or cases like
Rhode Island in the United States undoubtedly were precur- The reference to the support of national authorities is empha-
sors and helped ensure that two decades later, these are still sised because capacities in each country have been increasing
a reference today because of the challenges and experiences steadily. At national and regional level, universities and
they accumulated, shared and from which the global MSP research centres designed opportunities for inter-university
community of practice has learned from. collaboration to promote more efficient ocean governance
through MSP. Their contribution to our understanding of MSP
It is worth highlighting the milestone of UNESCO-IOC’s MSP inspired many generations of students choosing to specialise
guide with its step-by-step methodology in 2009, which today, in MSP. Among many other university courses, the Erasmus
available in a multilingual version, continues to be a source of Mundus programmes and the World Maritime University
inspiration for many countries and territories around the world. have trained hundreds of students from Africa, Asia, America,
Europe and the wider Pacific. Their alumni are now leading
The following decade (2011-2020) would intensify MSP imple- professionals working for national planning authorities,
mentation in all regions of the world, methodological guides regional conventions, the European Commission or the United
would multiply and exploratory and pilot projects would be Nations, or in key maritime sectors in their respective coun-
implemented in the most remote places of the ocean. In these tries and regions. This training and knowledge generated at
last ten years, the vast majority of the world’s countries organ- the individual and institutional level is there to be used.
ised at least one technical meeting, or participated in activities
related to MSP in an intergovernmental context. This new guide has benefitted from the contribution of thou-
sands of people from more than 140 countries. For the first
This evolution generated massive actions worldwide and the time ever, MSP experiences and lessons learned from “as many
development of projects related to MSP from different sectoral countries as possible” allowed us to access the most extensive
perspectives. At the same time, this gave the MSP community variety of inputs and to have a more holistic vision on the sta-
many lessons, for the countries and all the actors involved. tus of MSP worldwide. As such, this is a valuable contribution
Indeed, one clear lesson from these experiences highlights to the objectives of the Joint roadmap.

Towards a sustainable and responsible planning

MSP, like any other discipline, requires real and effective actions. commitment, political will and leadership. This requires
It means sharing knowledge globally without excluding anyone, national empowerment in the design of their own future
sharing efforts at national and regional level, sharing data and and the conviction that the process is public, participatory
information amongst countries, sharing experiences of those and socially just for their citizens, all of whom are consumers,
who are not only engaged in designing the theory of planning, workers or representatives of every maritime sector whose
but who are involved in the daily action of how planning pro- uses are to be planned for the benefit of all.
cesses are implemented in a country, how long it takes or how
much money it costs to realise all its objectives. Looking to the future, many countries and regions adopted
sustainability-based policies long before the 2030 Agenda was
Countries intending to initiate an MSP process during this
launched, although there is no doubt that the 17 Sustainable
next decade should be aware that the human potential and
Development Goals provide a much-welcomed global frame-
resources a government needs to implement MSP processes
are already available in their own countries, universities, pri- work for all nations. In effect, the contribution of MSP goes
vate companies or amongst their citizens. well beyond the scope of SDG 14 on the ocean, as its benefits
address food security, resilience, biodiversity, economic
As with everything in life, it is not a question of quantity. What growth, gender issues amongst a few. Articulating these
showed to be relevant in all MSP processes is perseverance, contributions to other SDG dimensions remains work ahead.
Next steps
139

The United Nations Decades of Ocean Science for Sustainable In the case of the European Union, 2050 represents the year
Development and on Ecosystem Restoration will be the in which the goal of a climate-neutral economy must be met,
framework in which many solutions and new actions will be by implementing the European Green Deal, which aims to
designed and implemented this decade or in the post-2030 decouple economic growth from resource use and to ensure
period. To guide and inform MSP implementation, priority that no one is left behind. The ocean-related priorities and the
knowledge gaps of marine ecosystems, and their reactions to development of sustainable blue sectors will benefit from all
multiple stressors, will need to be filled. This is particularly true European maritime spatial plans and their own adaptations
where multiple human stressors interact with climate change, to protect biodiversity and ecosystems; enabling sustainable
including acidification and temperature increase. Such knowl- maritime activities (e.g. offshore renewable energy, aquacul-
edge will be critical to develop MSP tools that build resilience, ture, clean shipping, ports, fisheries, etc.) while improving
recognise thresholds and avoid ecological tipping points, and water management and moving towards a circular economy.
thus, ensure ecosystem functioning and continued delivery of
Pacific leaders also recognise, in the context of the 2050
ecosystem services for the health and wellbeing of society and
Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent, that building a strong
the planet as a whole.
and resilient Pacific requires careful planning, including
marine planning, to ensure social, cultural, environmental
A further milestone for many regional policies and agendas
and economic integrity. This Strategy 2050 is envisioned
will be the year 2050. The African Union adopted in 2012
as the workspace for working together as one Blue Pacific
the “2050 Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy” as a major
Continent, and only then will it come to fruition. The first
milestone in the continent’s maritime history. Its strategic
steps taken are already providing greater knowledge about
objectives are fully in line with those shared by MSP, and
the vast ocean in each of their national jurisdictions and
sectoral integration is extended to all sectors of society. MSP is
Small Island Developing States in the region are collectively
presented as a policy process to ensure that marine space and
deciding on actions to be taken over the next 30 years to
resources are used efficiently and sustainably; MSP requires a protect and secure the people, place and prospects of the
framework where decisions can be taken, based on sound data Pacific in which they live.
and in-depth knowledge of the sea and inland water ways. The
Strategy incorporates MSP for investors to have greater legal These are just a few examples that demonstrate the existing
certainty, encouraging Africa’s blue economic development. individual and collective ambition and leadership towards
This, in turn, will contribute to the achievement of Agenda sustainability. All kinds of actions that are now being imple-
2063, which defines Africa’s blueprint and master plan for mented in all countries will serve to accomplish the common
transforming the continent into the global powerhouse of goals and thus be able to celebrate in 2031, the results of a
the future. decade full of successful decisions.
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
140

References
Abramic, A., Shinoda, D., Magalhães, M., García Mendoza, A. and Haroun, R. 2020. Pilot Zoning - Developed Methodology.
PLASMAR Project. [Link]
AC Konsultācijas Ltd. 2017. Stakeholder Involvement in Long-term Maritime Spatial Planning: Latvian Case. BalticLINes Project.
[Link]
Agostini, V. N., Margles, S. W., Knowles, J. K., Schill, S. R., Bovino, R. J. and Blyther, R. J. 2014. Marine zoning in St. Kitts and Nevis:
a design for sustainable management in the Caribbean. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 104, pp. 1-10.
[Link]
ALESP. 2021. Decreto 65544/2021. Aprova o plano de manejo da Área de Proteção Ambiental Marinha do Litoral Centro.
[Link]
Ansong, J., Gissi, E., Calado, H. 2017. An approach to ecosystem-based management in maritime spatial planning process. Ocean
& Coastal Management, Vol. 141, pp. 65-81. [Link]
Ansong, J., Calado, H., Gilliland. P. M. 2019. A multifaceted approach to building capacity for marine/maritime spatial planning
based on European experience. Marine Policy, 103422. [Link]
Baltic LINes. 2017. Data Exchange and Dissemination. BalticLINes Project.
[Link]
BalticScope Project. 2017. Coherent Cross-border Maritime Spatial Planning for the Southwest Baltic Sea. BalticScope Project.
[Link]
Ban, N. C., Bax, N. J., Gjerde, K. M., Devillers, R., Dunn, D. C., Dunstan, P. K., Hobday, A. J., Maxwell, S. M., Kaplan, D. M., Pressey, R. L.,
Ardron, J. A., Game, E. T. and Halpin, P. N. 2014. Systematic Conservation Planning: A Better Recipe for Managing the High
Seas for Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use. Conservation Letters, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 41-54.
[Link]
Bennett, N. J., Govan, H. and Satterfield, T. 2015 Ocean grabbing. Marine Policy, Vol. 57, pp. 61-68.
[Link]
Bennett, N. J., Whitty, T. S., Finkbeiner, E., Pittman, J., Bassett, H., Gelcich, S. and Allison, E. H. 2018. Environmental Stewardship:
A Conceptual Review and Analytical Framework. Environmental Management, Vol. 61, pp. 597-614.
[Link]
Bennett, N. J., Cisneros-Montemayor, A. M., Blythe, J., Silver, J. J., Singh, G., Andrews, N., Calò, A., Christie, P., Di Franco, A.,
Finkbeiner, E. M., Gelcich, S., Guidetti, P., Harper, S., Hotte, N., Kittinger, J. N., Le Billon, P., Lister, J., de la Lama, R. L.,
McKinley, E., Scholtens, J., Solås, A. M., Sowman, M., Talloni-Álvarez, N., Teh, L. C. L., Voyer, M. and Sumaila, U. R. 2019.
Towards a sustainable and equitable blue economy. Nature Sustainability, Vol. 2, pp. 991-993.
[Link]
Biesbroek, G. R., Swart, R. J. and van der Kanapp, W. G. M. 2009. The mitigation-adaptation dichotomy and the role of spatial
planning. Habitat International, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 230-237. [Link]
Böhnke-Henrichs, A., Baulcomb, C., Koss, R., Hussain, S. S. and de Groot, R. S. 2013. Typology and indicators of ecosystem services
for marine spatial planning and management. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 130, pp. 135-45.
[Link]
Borgese, E. M. 2001. Ocean Governance. Halifax (Canada), International Ocean Institute.
Botero, C. M., Fanning, L. M., Milanes, C. and Planas, J. A. 2016. An indicator framework for assessing progress in land and marine
planning in Colombia and Cuba. Ecological Indicators, Vol. 64, pp. 181-193. [Link]
Bouamrame, M. 2006. Biodiversity and stakeholders: concertation itineraries. Biosphere reserves – Technical Notes 1. Paris, UNESCO.
(SC.2006/WS/16) [Link]
Buhl-Mortensen, L., Ellingsen, K. E., Buhl-Mortensen, P., Skaar, K. L. and Gonzalez-Mirelis, G. 2016. Trawling disturbance on
megabenthos and sediment in the Barents Sea: chronic effects on density, diversity, and composition. ICES Journal
of Marine Science, Vol. 73, No. suppl_1, pp. i98-i114. [Link]
References
141

Carneiro, G. 2013. Evaluation of marine spatial planning. Marine Policy, Vol. 37, pp. 214-229.
[Link]
CARP. 2021. Comisión Administradora del Río de la Plata. [Link]
Cashion, T., Nguyen, T., ten Brink, T., Mook, A., Palacios-Abrantes, J. and Roberts, S. M. 2020. Shifting seas, shifting boundaries:
Dynamic marine protected area designs for a changing climate. PLoS ONE, Vol. 15. No. 11, e0241771.
[Link]
CBD. 2000. Ecosystem approach. Nairobi, CBD. (COP 5 Decision V/6). [Link]
______. 2012a. Marine and Coastal Biodiversity: Marine Spatial Planning and Voluntary Guidelines for the Consideration of
Biodiversity in Environmental Impact Assessments and Strategic Environmental Assessments in Marine and Coastal Areas.
Montreal, CBD. (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/16/7)
[Link]
______. 2012b. Marine and Coastal Biodiversity: Revised Voluntary Guidelines for the Consideration of Biodiversity in Environmental
Impact Assessments and Strategic Environmental Assessments in Marine and Coastal Areas. Hyderabad, CBD. (UNEP/CBD/
COP/11/23) [Link]
CCAMLR. 2021. Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. [Link]
Clean Energy Wire. 2021. Clean Energy Wire: Journalism for the Energy Transition. [Link]
Coastal Zone Management Authority and Institute. 2021. Belize Coastal Zone Management Authority and Institute.
[Link]
Commonwealth of Australia. 1998. Australia’s Oceans Policy: caring, understanding and using wisely.
[Link]
Council of The Haida Nation. 2017. Submission to the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans regarding Bill C-55, An Act to
amend the Oceans Act and the Canada Petroleum Resources Act.
[Link]
[Link]
CTMFM. 2021. Tratado del Río de la Plata y su Frente Marítimo.
[Link]
Day, J. 2008. The need and practice of monitoring, evaluating and adapting marine planning and management—lessons from
the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Policy, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 823-831. [Link]
Day, J. C., Kenchington, R. A., Tanzer, J. M., Cameron, D. S. 2019. Marine zoning revisited: How decades of zoning the Great
Barrier Reef has evolved as an effective spatial planning approach for marine ecosystem based management. Aquatic
Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, Vol. 29, No. S2, pp. 9-32. [Link]
Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government of Ireland. 2017. Towards a Marine Spatial Plan for Ireland: A Roadmap for
the delivery of the national Marine Spatial Plan. Dublin, Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government.
[Link]
Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage of Ireland. 2021. Journey to the National Marine Planning Framework.
[Link]
DGRM. 2021. Plano de Situação do Ordenamento do Espaço Marítimo Nacional correspondente à subdivisão do Continente,
à subdivisão da Madeira e à subdivisão da Plataforma Continental Estendida. [Link]
Diggon, S., Bones, J., Short, C. J., Smith, J. L., Dickinson, M., Wozniak, K., Topelko, K. and Pawluk, K. A. 2020. The Marine Plan
Partnership for the North Pacific Coast – MaPP: a collaborative and co-led marine planning process in British Columbia.
Marine Policy, 104065. [Link]
Ehler, C. 2020. Two decades of progress in Marine Spatial Planning. Marine Policy, 104134.
[Link]
Ehler, C., Zaucha, J. and Gee, K. 2019. Maritime/Marine Spatial Planning at the Interface of Research and Practice. J. Zaucha and K.
Gee (eds.), Maritime Spatial Planning: Past, Present and Future. Cham, Springer, pp. 1-21.
[Link]
Environmental Law Institute. 2020. Designing Marine Spatial Planning Legislation for Implementation: A Guide for Legal Drafters.
Blue Prosperity Coalition.
[Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
142

[Link]. 2014. Annual report 2014: Ready energy – now and into the future. Fredericia, [Link].
[Link]
Ervia. 2021. Carbon Capture and Storage. [Link]
EULEX. 2014. Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 establishing a framework for
maritime spatial planning. (EUR-Lex 32014L0089)
[Link]
European Commission. 2017. MSP Data Study: Evaluation of data and knowledge gaps to implement MSP. Luxembourg,
Publications Office of the European Union. (DOI 10.2826/25289)
[Link]
______. 2018. Land Sea Interactions in Maritime Spatial Planning.
[Link]
______. 2019. Cross-border Consultation on Maritime Spatial Plans. Final Technical Study. Luxembourg, Publications Office
of the European Union. (DOI 10.2826/099004)
[Link]
format-PDF/source-98581956
______. 2020. Study on the Economic Impact of Maritime Spatial Planning. Luxembourg, Publications office of the European Union.
(DOI 10.2826/892087)
[Link]
______. 2021a. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Empty on a new approach for a sustainable blue economy in the EU
Transforming the EU’s Blue Economy for a Sustainable Future. (EUR-Lex 52021DC0240)
[Link]
______. 2021b. Ministerial Joint Declaration on the designation of Marine Protected Areas in the Southern Ocean.
[Link]
protected-areas-southern-ocean_en.pdf
European Environment Agency. 2007. The pan-European environment: glimpses into an uncertain future. Copenhagen, EEA.
(EEA Report No 4/2007). [Link]
______. 2015. State of Europe’s Seas. Copenhagen, EEA. (EEA Report No 2/2015).
[Link]
______. 2021. Regional seas surrounding Europe. [Link]
regional-ses-surrounding-europe-1
European Marine Board. 2019. Navigating the Future V: Marine Science for a Sustainable Future. Ostend, European Marine Board.
(Position Paper 24 of the European Marine Board). [Link]
European MSP Platform. 2018. Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) for Blue Growth. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European
Union. [Link]
______. 2021a. Multi-Use in European Seas. [Link]
______. 2021b. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA).
[Link]
FAO. 2018. The FAO Blue Growth Initiative: Strategy for the Development of Fisheries and Aquaculture in Eastern Africa. Rome, FAO.
(FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1161). [Link]
Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency (BSH). 2021. Maritime spatial planning.
[Link]
Ferreira, M. A., Johnson, D., da Silva, C. P. and Ramos, T. B. 2018. Developing a performance evaluation mechanism for Portuguese
Marine Spatial Planning using a participatory approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 180, pp. 913-923.
[Link]
Finke, G., Gee, K., Gxaba, T., Sorgenfrei, R., Russo,V., Pinto, D., Nsiangango, S. E., Sousa, L. N., Braby, R., Alves, F. L., Heinrichs, B.,
Kreiner, A., Amunyela, M., Popose, G., Ramakulukusha, M., Naidoo, A., Mausolf, E. and Nsingi, K. K. 2020. Marine spatial
planning in the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem. Environmental Development, Vol. 36, 100569.
[Link]
References
143

Flower, J., Ramdeen, R., Estep, A., Thomas, L. R., Francis, S., Goldberg, G., Johnson, A. E., McClintock, W., Mendes, S. R., Mengerink,
K., O’Garro, M., Rogers, L., Zischka, U. and Lester, S. E. 2020. Marine spatial planning on the Caribbean island of Montserrat:
Lessons for data-limited small islands. Conservation Science and Practice, Vol. 2, No. 4, e158.
[Link]
Fox, E., Hastings, S., Miller-Henson, M., Monie, D., Ugoretz, J., Frimodig, A., Shuman, C., Owens, B., Garwood, R., Connor, D, Serpa, P.
and Gleason, M. 2013. Addressing policy issues in a stakeholder-based and science-driven marine protected area network
planning process. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 74, pp. 34-44.
[Link]
Frazão Santos, C., Agardy, T., Andrade, F., Calado, H., Crowder, L. B., Ehler, C. M., García-Morales, S., Gissi, E., Halpern, B. S., Orbach,
M. K., Pörtner, H. O. and Rosa, R. 2020. Integrating climate change in ocean planning. Nature Sustainability, Vol. 3, pp. 505-
516. [Link]
Gilek, M., Armoskaite, A., Gee, K., Saunders, F., Tafon, R. and Zaucha, J., 2021. In search of social sustainability in marine spatial
planning: A review of scientific literature published 2005–2020. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 208, 105618.
[Link]
Gissi, E., Fraschetti, S. and Micheli, F. 2019. Incorporating change in marine spatial planning: A review. Environmental Science
& Policy, Vol. 92, pp. 191-200. [Link]
Gjerde, K. M., Wright, G. and Durussel, C. 2021. Strengthening High Seas Governance through Enhanced Environmental Assessment
Processes: A Case Study of Mesopelagic Fisheries and Options for a Future BBNJ Treaty. STRONG High Seas Project. Potsdam,
IASS. [Link]
Gobierno Ejecutivo de Costa Rica. 2019. Decreto Ejecutivo Nº 41775- MP-MSP-MAG-MINAE-MOPT-TUR: Creación del mecanismo
de gobernanza de los espacios marinos sometidos a la Jurisdicción del Estado Costarricense.
[Link]
Government of Mozambique. 2021. Maritime Space Ordenance Plan (POEM). MSPglobal Seminar on Sharing National MSP
Practices Worldwide: Mozambique.
[Link]
Grimmel, H., Calado, H., Fonseca, C., Suarez-de Vivero, J. L. 2019. Integration of the social dimension into marine spatial planning –
Theoretical aspects and recommendations. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 173, pp. 139-147.
[Link]
Hammar, L., Molander, S., Pålsson, J., Crona, J. S., Carneiro, G., Johansson, T., Hume, D., Kågesten, G., Mattsson, D., Törnqvist, O.,
Zillén, L., Mattsson, M., Bergström, U., Perry, D., Caldow, C. and Andersen, J. H. 2020. Cumulative impact assessment for
ecosystem-based marine spatial planning. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 734, 139024.
[Link]
Harris, L. R., Holness, S., Finke, G., Kirkman, S. and Sink, K. 2019. Systematic Conservation Planning as a Tool to Advance
Ecologically or Biologically Significant Area and Marine Spatial Planning Processes. J. Zaucha and K. Gee (eds.), Maritime
Spatial Planning: Past, Present and Future. Cham, Springer, pp. 71-96. [Link]
HELCOM/Pan Baltic Scope. 2019. Assessing economic, social, cultural and ecosystem services impacts in maritime spatial planning
(MSP) in the Baltic Sea region. Helsinki, Helsinki Commission.
[Link]
HELCOM-VASAB. 2010. Baltic Sea Broad-Scale Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) Principles.
[Link]
Holness, S., Kirkman, S., Samaai, T., Wolf, T., Sink, K., Majiedt, P., Nsiangango, S., Kainge, P., Kilongo, K., Kathena, J., Harris, L.,
Lagabrielle, E., Kirchner, C., Chalmers, R. and Lombard M. 2014. Spatial Biodiversity Assessment and Spatial Management,
including Marine Protected Areas. Benguela Current Commission project BEH.
[Link]
Management_including_Marine_Protected_Areas_BEH_09-01_Conservation_Assessment_Technical_Report
Hundleby, G., Freeman, K., Logan, A. and Frost, C. 2017. Floating Offshore: 55 Technology Innovations That Will Have Greater Impact
on Reducing the Cost of Electricity from European Floating Offshore Wind Farms. KiC InnoEnergy and BVG Associates.
ICES/CIEM. 2015. Marine Spatial Planning Quality Management System. Copenhagen, ICES/CIEM. (ICES Cooperative Research
Report No. 327). [Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
144

IFAD. 2009. Good practices in participatory mapping: A review prepared for the International Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD). Rome, IFAD. [Link]
pdf/7c1eda69-8205-4c31-8912-3c25d6f90055
International Ocean Governance Forum. 2021. EU International Ocean Governance Forum 2021 - Setting the Course for a Sustainable
Blue Planet: Recommendations for Enhancing EU Action.
[Link]
IOC-UNESCO. 2009. Marine Spatial Planning: A Step-by-Step Approach toward Ecosystem-Based Management. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC
Manuals and Guides No. 53). [Link]
______. 2014. Guide to Evaluating Marine Spatial Plans. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Manuals and Guides No. 70).
[Link]
______. 2020. Sustainable Development Goals. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Brochure No. 2020-10).
[Link]
IPBES. 2019. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn, IPBES secretariat.
[Link]
IPCC. 2001. Developing and Applying Scenarios. J. McCarthy, O. F. Canziani, N. A. Leary, D. J. Dokken and K. S. White (eds.),
Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. pp. 145-190.
[Link]
______. 2019. IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate. IPCC. [Link]
Jay, S., Alves, F. L., O’Mahony, C., Gomez, M., Rooney, A., Almodovar, M., Gee, K., Suárez-de Vivero, J., Gonçalves, J. S. S., Fernandes, M. L.,
Tello, O., Twomey, S., Prado, I., Fonseca, C., Bentes, L., Henriques, G. and Campos, A. 2016. Transboundary dimensions of marine
spatial planning: Fostering inter-jurisdictional relations and governance. Marine Policy, Vol. 65, pp. 85-96.
[Link]
Katsanevaki, S., Coll, M., Fraschetti, S., Giakoumi, S., Goldsboroug, D., Mačić, V., Mackelworth, P., Rilov, G., Stelzenmüller, V., Albano,
P. G., Bates, A. E., Bevilacqua, S., Gissi, E., Hermoso, V., Mazaris, A. D., Pita, C., Rossi, V., Teff-Seker, Y., Yates, K. 2020. Twelve
Recommendations for Advancing Marine Conservation in European and Contiguous Seas. Frontiers in Marine Science,
Vol. 7, 565968. [Link]
Kidd, S. and Ellis, G. 2012. From the land to sea and back again? Using terrestrial planning to understand the process of marine
spatial planning. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 49-66.
[Link]
Kirkman, S. P., Holness, S., Harris, L. R., Sink, K. J., Lombard, A. T., Kainge, P., Majiedt, P., Nsiangango, S. E., Nsingi, K. K. and Samaai, T.
2019. Using systematic conservation planning to support marine spatial planning and achieve marine protection targets
in the transboundary Benguela ecosystem. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 168, pp. 117-129.
[Link]
Lainas, I. 2018. Land-sea interactions and maritime spatial planning guidelines in the context of European Union. The case of
Greece. International Journal of Real Estate and Land Planning, Vol. 1. [Link]
LANCIS-UNAM. 2020. Etapa de Diagnóstico. Seminario MSProadmap sobre Planeación Espacial Marina en México (Antecedentes,
Procesos y Perspectivas Futuras).
[Link]
Le Tixerant, M., Bonnin, M., Gourmelon, F., Ragueneau, O., Rouan, M., Ly, I., Zein, A. O., Ndiaye, F., Diedhiou, M., Ndao, S. and Ndiaye,
M. B. 2020. Cartographic atlas of marine environmental law in Africa. Methodology and use for spatial planning. Cybergeo:
European Journal of Geography. [Link]
Llywodraeth Cymru/Welsh Government. 2021. Marine planning. [Link]
MACBIO. 2021. Marine and Coastal Biodiversity Management in Pacific Island Countries. [Link]
Maes, F. 2008. The international legal framework for marine spatial planning. Marine Policy, Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 797-810.
[Link]
MAMI WATA Project. 2021. The Mami Wata Project: Enhancing Marine Management Capacity in West, Central and Southern Africa.
[Link]
References
145

Marine Management Organisation. 2018. Seascape Character Assessment for the South East Inshore marine plan area. A report
produced for the Marine Management Organisation, MMO Project No: MMO1134.
[Link]
McGowan L., Jay S. and Kidd S. 2019. Scenario-Building for Marine Spatial Planning. J. Zaucha and K. Gee (eds.), Maritime Spatial
Planning: Past, Present and Future. Cham, Springer, pp. 327-351.
[Link]
McKinley, E., Acott, T. and Stojanovic, T. 2019. Socio-cultural Dimensions of Marine Spatial Planning. J. Zaucha and K. Gee (eds.),
Maritime Spatial Planning: Past, Present and Future. Cham, Springer, pp. 151-174.
[Link]
Mead, L. 2021. The ‘Crown Jewels’ of Environmental Diplomacy: Assessing the UNEP Regional Seas Programme. IISD. (BRIEF #17).
[Link]
Minang, P. A., Duguma, L. A., Alemagi, D. and Van Noordwijk, M. 2015. Scale considerations in landscape approaches.
P. A. Minang, M. van Noordwijk, O. E. Freeman, C. Mbow, J. de Leeuw and D. Catacutan (eds.) Climate-Smart Landscapes:
Multifunctionality in Practice. Nairobi, World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), pp. 121-133.
[Link]
Ministère de la Mer de la France. 2020. Place et rôle des infrastructures portuaires dans la planification maritime intégrée. Séminaire
en ligne MSPglobal sur la dimension spatiale des infrastructures portuaires dans le contexte de la PEM en OuestMED.
[Link]
Ministerio para la Transición Ecológica y el Reto Demográfico de España. 2021. Planes de Ordenación del Espacio Marítimo:
Estudio Ambiental Estratégico. Madrid, Government of Spain.
[Link]
(Annexes: [Link]
Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment. 2014. North Sea 2050 Spatial Agenda: The report of joint research into the long-term
potential of sea and coastal areas, translated into a vision, series of ambitions, opportunities, points of action and maps.
The Hague, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment. (enM/BSK-2014/75484).
[Link]
[Link]
Ministry of Marine Resources and Fisheries of Indonesia. 2021. The Policy of Marine Spatial Planning in Indonesia. MSPglobal
Seminar on Sharing National MSP Practices Worldwide: Indonesia.
[Link]
Morf, A., Kull, M., Piwowarczyk, J. and Gee, K. 2019. Towards a Ladder of Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning Participation. J. Zaucha
and K. Gee (eds.), Maritime Spatial Planning: Past, Present and Future. Cham, Springer, pp. 219-243.
[Link]
MUSES Project. 2018. Ocean Multi-Use Action Plan of the Netherlands. Edinburgh, MUSES project.
[Link]
[Link]
National Ocean Council of the United States of America. 2013. Marine Planning Handbook.
[Link]
Natural England. 2012. An Approach to Seascape Character Assessment. Natural England. (Natural England Commissioned Report
NECR105). [Link]
[Link]
Ntona, M. and Morgera, E. 2018. Connecting SDG 14 with the Other Sustainable Development Goals through Marine Spatial
Planning. Marine Policy, Vol. 93, pp. 214-222. [Link]
Obura, D., Magner, C., Chrysostomidis, Y., Mpofu, L., Owen, S., Bourquin, V., Dresy, L., Scheren, P. and Ralison, H. 2018. East and
Southern Africa - coastal and ocean futures - future scenarios for countries of the Western Indian Ocean and the Northern
Mozambique Channel. Northern Mozambique Channel initiative. WWF/CORDIO East Africa.
[Link]
Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States. 2021. Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States. [Link]
OSPESCA. 2020. Estrategia Regional para el Crecimiento Azul en los países del SICA. El Salvador, OSPESCA.
[Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
146

Patil, P. G., Virdin, J., Colgan, C. S., Hussain, M. G., Failler, P. and Vegh, T. 2018. Toward a Blue Economy: for Bangladesh’s Sustainable
Growth. Washington, The World Bank Group. [Link]
Planning Administration, State of Israel. 2020. Maritime Policy for Israel’s Mediterranean Waters.
[Link]
document_translated_24.[Link]
Plan4Blue. 2018. Blue Growth - Drivers and Alternative Scenarios for the Gulf of Finland and the Archipelago Sea: Qualitative analysis
based on expert opinions. Turku, Brahea Centre at the University of Turku.
[Link]
PLASMAR Consortium. 2020. Activity 2.3.1. Marine monitoring methods needed to apply MSP ecosystem approach. Technical report.
PLASMAR Project.
[Link]
monitoring%20methods%20needed%20to%20apply%20MSP%20ecosystem%[Link]
Quesada-Silva, M., Iglesias-Campos, A., Turra, A., Suárez-de Vivero, J. L. 2019. Stakeholder participation assessment framework
(SPAF): A theory-based strategy to plan and evaluate marine spatial planning participatory processes. Marine Policy,
Vol. 108, 103619.
[Link]
Rodrigue, J. P. 2020. The Geography of Transport Systems, 5th edn. New York, Routledge. (ISBN 978-0-367-36463-2)
Ruyssen, M. 2020. Gérer la multi-activité dans les eaux marines. Séminaire en ligne MSPglobal sur les options pour le multi-usage
de l’espace océanique en Méditerranée.
[Link]
Sangare, N., Lo-Yat, A., Le Moullac, G., Pecquerie, L., Thomas, Y., Lefebvre, S., Le Gendre, R., Beliaeff, B. and Andréfouët, S. 2020.
Impact of environmental variability on Pinctada margaritifera life-history traits: A full life cycle deb modeling approach.
Ecological Modelling, Vol. 423, 109006. [Link]
Santos, C. F., Ehler, C. N., Agardy, T., Andrade, F., Orbach, M. K. and Crowder, L. B. 2019. Chapter 30 - Marine Spatial Planning.
C. Sheppard (ed.), World Seas: An environmental evaluation, 2nd edn, Vol. 3. Elsevier Ltd. pp. 571-592.
[Link]
Saunders, F., Gilek, M., Ikauniece, A., Tafon, R. M., Gee, K. and Zaucha, J. 2020. Theorizing Social Sustainability and Justice in Marine
Spatial Planning: Democracy, Diversity, and Equity. Sustainability, Vol. 12, No. 6, 2560.
[Link]
Sayce, K., Shuman, C., Connor, D., Reisewitz, A., Pope, E., Miller-Henson, M., Poncelet, E., Monié, D. and Owens, B. 2013. Beyond
traditional stakeholder engagement: Public participation roles in California’s statewide marine protected area planning
process. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 74, pp. 57-66. [Link]
Schupp, M. F., Bocci, M., Depellegrin, D., Kafas, A., Kyriazi, Z., Lukic, I., Schultz-Zehden, A., Krause, G., Onyango, V. and Buck, B. H.
2019. Toward a Common Understanding of Ocean Multi-Use. Frontiers in Marine Science, Vol. 6:165.
[Link]
The Scottish Government - Riaghaltas na h-Alba. 2015. Scotland’s National Marine Plan: A Single Framework for Managing Our Seas.
Edinburgh, The Scottish Government. [Link]
______. 2020. National Marine Plan: key documents. [Link]
SEMARNAT. 2019. Bitácora de Ordenamiento Ecológico Marino y Regional del Pacífico Norte. Diagnóstico: Análisis de Aptitud.
[Link]
pacifico-norte
SENPLADES. 2017. Plan de Ordenamiento del Espacio Marino Costero. SENPLADES.
[Link]
[Link]
SIMNORAT. 2019. Interactions between uses and between uses and environment, including cumulative impacts - Review of evaluation
methods carried out in France, Spain and Portugal. SIMNORAT Project. Agence Française pour la Biodiversité.
[Link]
Sida. 2017. Dimensions of Poverty: Sida’s Conceptual Framework. Sida. (ISBN: 978-91-586-4259-1)
[Link]
References
147

SMA. 2013. ZEE Baixada Santista: zoneamento ecológico-econômico – setor costeiro da Baixada Santista. São Paulo, SMA.
[Link]
Smith, J. L., Sims, H. E., Cosgrow, W., de Comarmond, A., Agricole, W. and Tingey, R. 2019. Seychelles Marine Spatial Plan Initiative –
an update on milestones and implementation planning. Seychelles Research Journal, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 157-161.
[Link]
sims-w.-cosgrow-a.-de-comarmond-w.-agricole-r.-[Link]
Smith, J. L. 2021. Evolution of the MSP concept from 2009 to present. The Nature Conservancy. Unpublished.
South African Government. 2019. Act No. 16 of 2018: Marine Spatial Planning Act, 2018.
[Link]
Stelzenmüller, V., Cormier, R., Gee, K., Shucksmith, R., Gubbins, M., Yates, K. L., Morf, A., Nic Aonghusa, C., Mikkelsen, E.,
Tweddle, J. F., Pecceu, E., Kannen, A. and Clarke, S. A. 2021. Evaluation of marine spatial planning requires fit for purpose
monitoring strategies. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 278, No. 2, 111545.
[Link]
Suárez-de Vivero, J. L. (ed.). 2001. An Atlas of Maritime Spatial Planning. Seville, University of Seville.
Sumaila, U. R., Walsh, M., Hoareau, K., Cox, A., Teh, L., Abdallah, P., Akpalu, W., Anna, Z., Benzaken, D., Crona, B., Fitzgerald, T., Heaps,
L., Issifu, I., Karousakis, K., Lange, G. M., Leland, A., Miller, D., Sack, K., Shahnaz, D., Thiele, T., Vestergaard, N., Yagi N. and
Zhang, J. 2021 Financing a sustainable ocean economy. Nature Communications, Vol. 12, 3259.
[Link]
Sustainable Energy Ireland et al. 2008. Assessment of the Potential for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide for the Island of Ireland.
National Development Plan 2007-2013.
[Link]
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management. 2021a. Poverty and gender considerations in Marine Spatial Planning:
Conceptual and analytical framework.
[Link]
[Link]
______. 2021b. Symphony – a tool for ecosystem-based marine spatial planning.
[Link]
[Link]
Tanga Biang, J. 2010. The Joint Development Zone Between Nigeria and Sao Tome and Principe: A Case of Provisional Arrangement
in the Gulf of Guinea International Law, State Practice and Prospects for Regional Integration. New York, Division for Ocean
Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Office of Legal Affairs, United Nations.
[Link]
Törnqvist, O., Jonsson, P. R. and Hume, D. 2019. Climate refugia in the Baltic Sea: Modelling future important habitats by using climate
projections. Pan Baltic Scope Project.
[Link]
Tunisian Maritime Cluster. 2020. Tunisian Maritime Cluster. MSPglobal Seminar on International Cooperation in the Context of MSP
and Blue Economy in the Western Mediterranean.
[Link]
UNEP/MAP. 2018. How to Perform Analysis of Land-Sea Interactions, Combining MSP and ICZM in the Considered Project Area.
SUPREME Project. Split, PAP/RAC.
[Link]
UNESCO-IOC. 2021a. MSPglobal - Compendium of existing and emerging cross-border and transboundary MSP practices. (IOC/INF-1395).
[Link]
______. 2021b. MSPglobal Policy Brief: Marine Spatial Planning and the Sustainable Blue Economy. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Policy Brief No. 2).
[Link]
______. 2021c. MSPglobal Policy Brief: Identifying Existing and Future Conditions in Marine Spatial Planning. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC
Policy Brief No. 1). [Link]
______.2021d. MSPglobal Policy Brief: Climate Change and Marine Spatial Planning. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Policy Brief No. 3).
[Link]
 MSPglobal International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning
148

______. 2021e. MSPglobal Policy Brief: Ocean Governance and Marine Spatial Planning. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Policy Brief No. 5).
[Link]
______. 2021f. MSPglobal Policy Brief: Capacity Development in Marine Spatial Planning. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Policy Brief No. 4).
[Link]
______. 2021g. Technical Report on Current Conditions and Compatibility of Maritime Uses in the Gulf of Guayaquil. Paris, UNESCO.
(IOC Technical Series No. 161). [Link]
______. 2021h. Technical Report on Future Conditions and Scenarios for Marine Spatial Planning and Sustainable Blue Economy
Opportunities in the Western Mediterranean. Paris, UNESCO. (IOC Technical Series No. 162).
[Link]
______. 2021i. Recommendations to promote knowledge exchange and transfer on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning. Paris, UNESCO.
(IOC Technical Series No. 167). [Link]
Varjopuro, R. 2019. Evaluation of Marine Spatial Planning: Valuing the Process, Knowing the Impacts. J. Zaucha and K. Gee (eds.),
Maritime Spatial Planning: Past, Present and Future. Cham, Springer, pp. 417-440.
[Link]
Varjopuro, R., Konik, M., Cehak, M., Matczak, M., Zaucha, J., Rybka, K., Urtāne, I., Kedo, K. and Vološina, M. 2019. Monitoring and
Evaluation of Maritime Spatial Planning: Cases of Latvia and Poland as examples. Pan Baltic Scope Project.
[Link]
Veidemane, K., Ruskule, A. and Sprukta, S. 2017. Development of a Maritime Spatial Plan: The Latvian recipe. Baltic SCOPE Project.
[Link]
W+B and WMR. 2020. Nature-Inclusive Design: a catalogue for offshore wind infrastructure. Deventer, Witteveen+Bos.
[Link]
Wahle, C. M., D’Iorio, M. and Townsend, J. 2020. Visualizing the three-dimensional footprint of ocean uses: A Guide to Building and
Applying Space Use Profiles for Ocean Management. Marine Protected Areas of The United States.
[Link]
[Link]
Wåhlström, I., Pålsson, J., Törnqvist, O., Jonsson, P., Gröger, M. and Almroth-Rosell, E. 2020. Bringing climate change into ecosystem
based management of the sea: Data and methods for the Symphony framework Symphony - a cumulative assessment tool
developed for Swedish Marine Spatial Planning. Norrköping, SMHI. (Report Oceanography No. 68).
[Link]
Welsh Government. 2017. Draft Welsh National Marine Plan. Welsh Government. (WG31640).
[Link]
World Bank. 2016. Toward A Blue Economy: A Promise for Sustainable Growth in the Caribbean. Washington, World Bank.
[Link]
Zitoun, R., Sander, S. G., Masqué, P., Pijuan, S. P., Swarzenski, P. W. 2020. Review of the Scientific and Institutional Capacity of Small
Island Developing States in Support of a Bottom-up Approach to Achieve Sustainable Development Goal 14 Targets.
Oceans, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 109-132.
[Link]
Zurek, M. B. and Henrichs, T. 2007. Linking scenarios across geographical scales in international environmental assessments.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 74, No. 8, pp. 1282-1295.
[Link]
Complementary resources
Technical Report Technical report
Current Conditions and Future Conditions and Scenarios
Compatibility of Maritime for Marine Spatial Planning
and Sustainable Blue Economy
Uses in the Gulf of Guayaquil
Communicating MSP
Communicating MSP Opportunities in the Gulf of Guayaquil
inspiringera
An inspiring eraofofcooperation
cooperation
institutions
between institutions Study on integrating
an ecosystem-based
G E T STA RT E D
approach into maritime
spatial planning

Maritime affairs
and fisheries

Communicating MSP: Co-funded by the

An inspiring era of
United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and Co-funded by the
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund European Maritime and
of the European Union United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable
Cultural Organization Commission Goals Development Fisheries Fund
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union

Study on the economic Study on integrating an Technical report on current Technical report on future
cooperation
impact of maritime ecosystem-based approach conditions and compatibility conditions and scenarios
between institutions
spatial planning into maritime spatial of maritime uses in the Gulf for MSP and sustainable
planning of Guayaquil blue economy opportunities
in the Gulf of Guayaquil

Technical report
Technical Report
Future Conditions and Scenarios for Uma Economia Azul Sustentável A Sustainable
Current Conditions and
Compatibility of Maritime Uses
Marine Spatial Planning and Sustainable
Blue Economy Opportunities
para Cabo Verde
Blue Economy
A Sustainable Blue Economy Trinidad and Tobago
in the Western Mediterranean in the Western Mediterranean for Cabo Verde

Co-funded by the Co-funded by the Co-financiado pelo Co-financiado pelo

United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and Organização Comissão Objetivos de
Organização Comissão Objetivos de Fundo Europeu Marítimo Fundo Europeu Marítimo
Fisheries Fund Fisheries Fund United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development das Nações Unidas Desenvolvimento
Oceanográfica das Nações Unidas Oceanográfica Desenvolvimento e das Pescas da e das Pescas da
of the European Union of the European Union para a Educação, Intergovernamentalpara Sustentável
a Educação, Intergovernamental Sustentável União Europeia União Europeia
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development
Cultural Organization Commission Goals Cultural Organization Commission Goals Cultural Organization Commission Goals
a Ciência e a Cultura a Ciência e a Cultura

Technical report on Technical report on future La contribución de los A Sustainable blue A Sustainable blue
current conditions and conditions and scenarios sectores marítimos a una economy for Cabo Verde economy for Trinidad
compatibility of maritime for MSP and sustainable economía azul sostenible and Tobago
uses in the Western blue economy opportunities para el Pacífico Sudeste
Mediterranean in the Western Mediterranean

Technical Report
Lessons learnt and
best practices of managing #NLODMCHTL Recommendations
OFďEXISTINGďANDďEMERGINGďCROSS BORDER to promote knowledge exchange
coastal risk from local ANDďTRANSBOUNDARYď-30ďPRACTICES and transfer on MSP
communities’ perspectives

Identifying Existing and

Future Conditions in
Marine Spatial Planning
Policy Brief

UNESCO-IOC Volúmen Especial 2, 2021

7, Place de Fontenoy Planificación Espacial Marina
75352 PARIS 07 SP Planejamento Espacial Marinho
MSPglobal@[Link]
[Link]
฀฀ @MSPglobal2030
#OceanAction15346 &RIXQGHGE\WKH
8QLWHG1DWLRQV ,QWHUJRYHUQPHQWDO 6XVWDLQDEOH (XURSHDQ0DULWLPHDQG Co-funded by the
(GXFDWLRQDO6FLHQWL¿FDQG 2FHDQRJUDSKLF 'HYHORSPHQW )LVKHULHV)XQG
United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and Co-funded by the
&XOWXUDO2UJDQL]DWLRQ &RPPLVVLRQ *RDOV RIWKH(XURSHDQ8QLRQ
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund
Co-funded by the
European Maritime and Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union
United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union

Technical report on lessons Compendium of existing Recommendations Special volume of revista Identifying existing and
learnt and best practices of and emerging cross-border to promote knowledge costas on marine spatial future conditions in
managing coastal risk from and transboundary exchange and transfer planning in Iberoamerica marine spatial planning
local communities’ perspectives MSP practices on MSP

Climate Change and Public Participation in

Marine Spatial Planning Marine Spatial Planning Capacity Development in Ocean Governance and Marine Policy Development
and the Sustainable Policy Brief
Marine Spatial Planning Marine Spatial Planning Policy Brief
Blue Economy Policy Brief Policy Brief
Policy Brief

Co-funded by the
United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union Co-funded by the
Co-funded by the European Maritime and Co-funded by the Co-funded by the
European Maritime and United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and
United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable Fisheries Fund United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable United Nations Intergovernmental Sustainable European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund
Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Educational, Scientific and Oceanographic Development Fisheries Fund
Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union Cultural Organization Commission Goals of the European Union of the European Union
Cultural Organization Commission Goals

Marine spatial planning Climate change and Capacity development Ocean governance Public participation
and the sustainable marine spatial planning in marine spatial planning and marine spatial in marine policy
blue economy planning development

Find all
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Intergovernmental Sustainable
Oceanographic
Commission
Development
Goals
Co-funded by the
European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund
of the European Union
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Intergovernmental Sustainable
Oceanographic
Commission
Development
Goals
Co-funded by the
European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund
of the European Union
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Intergovernmental Sustainable
Oceanographic
Commission
Development
Goals
Co-funded by the
European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund
of the European Union
United Nations
Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization
Intergovernmental Sustainable
Oceanographic
Commission
Development
Goals
Co-funded by the
European Maritime and
Fisheries Fund
of the European Union
publications on:
MSPglobal INITIATIVE SUSTAINABLE BLUE ECONOMY LAND-SEA INTERACTION SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS
Context About MSPglobal What is the difference between What is Land-Sea Interaction? HOW CAN LAND PROCESSES What are the 2030 Agenda and This voluntary commitment aims to triple the marine area
mspglobal2030.
THE PRINCIPLES OF benefiting from MSP effectively implemented by 2030,

org/resources/
Ocean Economy and AFFECT THE OCEAN AND SEAS? Sustainable Development Goals?
focusing on the following SDG 14 targets:
Human wellbeing and prosperity are inextricably linked to the MSPglobal is a three-year initiative launched in November 2018
Sustainable Blue Economy? BLUE ECONOMY While there is no unique definition for Land-Sea Interaction

>
good health of the ocean, seas, coasts and related resources by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of (LSI),¹ a number of interpretations have been put forward: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – which 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect
through their conservation and sustainable use. Unfortunately, UNESCO and the European Commission’s Directorate-General came into force on 1 January 2016 – is composed of 17 marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant
‘A Sustainable Ocean Economy emerges when economic adverse impacts by strengthening resilience and
marine ecosystems are facing increasingly significant stress for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries to develop international ↳ All possible interaction in between land and sea.¹ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved by
activity is in balance with the long-term capacity of ocean

msp-global-documents/
2030. The goals are universal to all countries and aim to end all taking action for their restoration in order to achieve
from climate change, habitat destruction and overexploitation, guidelines on MSP in support of the Sustainable Blue ecosystems to support this activity and remain resilient and ↳ Contaminants from agriculture/sewage released in a river a healthy and productive ocean.
↳ ‘LSI involve intricate and constantly shiſting inter- forms of poverty, fight inequalities and tackle climate change,
threatening the economic activities that rely upon these Economy. healthy. and, consequently, the sea
connections between socio-economic activities both in the
resources. ENVIRONMENTAL sea and on land with natural processes that span the land- ↳ River sediment transport
while ensuring that no one is leſt behind.1
14.5: By 2020, conserve at least 10% of coastal and
Through the active and effective participation of policy-makers, marine areas, consistent with national and interna-
At the same time, intensified human activities in coastal and scientists, citizens and other stakeholders in activities that
Essentially, the Blue Economy concept is a lens by which to
view and develop policy agendas that simultaneously
HEALTH sea interface.’² ↳ Port activities
tional law and based on the best available scientific
marine waters lack the required integrated planning and balance both bottom-up and top-down approaches, MSPglobal enhance ocean health and economic growth, in a manner ↳ A four-dimensional definition of LSI covering:
MSProadmap, MSPglobal and SDG 14 information.
decision-making to achieve sustainability, including at will contribute to improving cross-border and transboundary consistent with principles of social equity and inclusion.’¹ ‘1) the social-ecological interactions; HOW CAN THE OCEAN AND SEAS 14.7: By 2030, increase the economic benefits to
The MSPglobal Initiative is part of the Joint
transboundary level. This has resulted in an expansion of cooperation where it already exists and promoting MSP 2) the relevant governance frameworks; AFFECT TERRESTRIAL AREAS? small island developing States (SIDS) and coastal
conflicts – amongst uses but also in between uses and nature processes in areas where it is yet to be put in place. The BLUE ECONOMY 3) the related governance processes; and
Roadmap to accelerate Maritime/Marine
Spatial Planning processes worldwide
countries from the sustainable use of marine
– which calls for specific plans to regulate and reduce human
impacts.
project’s objective is to triple the marine area benefiting
from MSP effectively implemented by 2030 and cover
30% of maritime areas under national jurisdictions.
What is the link between MSP
and Sustainable Blue Economy?
4) the necessary knowledge and methods to
address them.’³ > (MSProadmap), which was presented as a
voluntary commitment (#OceanAction15346)
resources through the sustainable management of
fisheries, aquaculture and tourism.

by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of

By fostering integrated management practices to protect
and restore marine and coastal ecosystems, strengthen It is designed to support the implementation of the institutions’
To promote a Blue Economy, that is to say the sustainable ECONOMIC Examples of Land-Sea Interactions ↳ Submarine cables connecting a maritime activity to a power UNESCO and the European Commission's Directorate-General
14.a: Increase scientific knowledge, develop research
capacity and transfer marine technology, taking into
resilience and promote a healthy and productive ocean, Joint Roadmap to accelerate MSP processes worldwide,
development of the maritime activities, there is a need to
adopt Ecosystem-Based Management (EBM) strategies
BENEFITS Interactions between land and sea can be broadly grouped
grid on land
↳ Marine litter/contaminants from maritime activities
for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries during the 2017 United account IOC-UNESCO’s Criteria and Guidelines on the
Transfer of Marine Technology,² to improve ocean
Maritime/Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) proves to be an adopted in March 2017. Nations Ocean Conference to support the implementation
such as Marine Spatial Planning (MSP), which support the into two categories – biogeochemical processes and ↳ Coastal erosion health and enhance the contribution of marine
important means to achieve global ocean governance goals and of SDG 14 “Life Below Water”. biodiversity to sustainable development, in particular
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of management by socio-economic activities – which are closely interrelated.⁴ ↳ Extreme events (storms, heavy tides, tsunamis)
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. ↳ Sea level rise in SIDS and less economically developed countries.
developing indicators for ecological, economic and social
objectives. Source: Patil et al., 2016

MSPglobal contributions to support a Sustainable Blue Economy

• We promote MSP as the pathway towards a Sustainable Blue • We deliver training courses on MSP and Sustainable Blue
© Zamir Popat/iStock/via Getty images*
© Travel Wild/iStock/via Getty Images*

© nata_rass/iStock/via Getty Images*

Economy Economy

• We develop guidelines to support international MSP for the • We support the development of roadmaps for transboundary
sustainable development of the Blue Economy MSP and Sustainable Blue Economy in the West Mediterranean and
Southeast Pacific

MSPglobal Initiative Sustainable blue economy Land-sea interaction Sustainable development goals
MSPglobal
International Guide on Marine/
Maritime Spatial Planning

More and more countries worldwide

are moving away from isolated
sectoral management to an integrated
planning framework for their maritime
jurisdiction, aiming to reduce conflicts
and encourage coexistence and
synergies among different stakeholders.
In that respect, marine/maritime spatial
planning (MSP) has emerged as an
essential tool for promoting a more
inclusive, rational and sustainable
use of the ocean, shaping the future
of international ocean governance.

This new international guide, produced

jointly by the Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO
and the Directorate-General for
Maritime Affairs and Fisheries of the
European Commission, draws on the
expertise and experience accumulated
in the last decade on technical, practical
and conceptual aspects of MSP to
assist governments, partners and
practitioners in their MSP processes.
A wide diversity of topics, case studies
and actions are presented for users to
reflect upon, adapt to their own context
and put into practice.