delivering an ecosystem approach – the need for a marine act · and to conserve marine...
TRANSCRIPT
September 2002
Some 950 million people rely on the sea as a major source of nutrition –
yet around two-thirds of the world’s commercial fisheries are
exploited to the limit or over-exploited. And every year, millions of
tonnes of pollution – toxic chemicals, nutrients, sewage and sediments
– are discharged, directly or via land-runoff and atmospheric
deposition, into the seas. An estimated 50 per cent of the world’s
remaining wetlands will be lost due
to sea level rise and development this
century – the UK has already lost more
than 75 per cent of its intertidal
saltmarsh. One-third of the world’s coral
reefs are already severely degraded.
All this is happening to a natural resource
that is thought to contain as much as
half the world’s biodiversity. The marine
environment also supports many jobs
and industries, is a source of renewable
and non-renewable resources and is a
place of enjoyment and inspiration for
millions of people every year.
Delivering an ecosystem approach–the need for a Marine Act
53updateMarine
Eelgrass meadows provide a vital habitat for species such as seahorses, and arevulnerable to high levels of pollution and to sea level rise.
How can wemanage thedemands placedon our marineenvironment?
F B
UN
KE
R,
MA
RIN
ES
EE
N,
WW
F-U
K
Despite the importance of ours seas and
oceans, the approach to marine nature
conservation has so far been unstructured
and piecemeal: the evidence is in the
continuing declines in a wide variety of
wildlife populations and coastal and
marine habitats. The same could also be
said of the approach to the management
of the resources of our oceans and seas –
the evidence is in fish stocks on the brink
of collapse and coastal communities
facing the loss of their livelihoods, income
and food sources.
Attempts to manage marine resources
and to conserve marine biodiversity have
largely been output-oriented and sectoral
in nature. The UK government’s Interim
Report on a Review of Marine Nature
Conservation, published in 2001, revealed
a considerable agreement about the
problems faced by nature conservation
in the marine environment, and a
widespread view that there was
a need to revise and reform the present
arrangements. The report also recognised
that fundamental to the question of
marine nature conservation is its relation
to the wider issues of “managing” the sea.
One difficulty is where to draw the
boundaries for management. All too
often it is easier to address the practices
of a single sector – shipping, for example
– than it is to begin making strategic
management decisions about the
exploitation of a renewable, living
resource. This is particularly so when the
rate of renewal of the resource is highly
variable; the vulnerability to
environmental change, such as global
warming, is high; and the early life stages
are acutely or chronically sensitive to toxic
chemicals and UV light.
This Marine Update develops the
thinking that an ecosystem approach is
about managing the demands we place
on the environment. Recognising the
need for an “ecosystem approach” is
nothing new – it appears in many global
and regional frameworks. Frequently,
discussions are concerned with “the
management of ecosystems” and are
focused purely on environmental matters.
But an ecosystem approach should be
about integrating environmental, social
and economic objectives so that the
needs of humans and those of wildlife,
fish stocks and even marine processes can
be met both in the short and long term.
This Update makes proposals for
consideration on the delivery of
an ecosystem approach. These include
strategic assessment of the sea area to
be managed, the identification of threats
and root causes, and the setting of
a common vision. It also discusses the
need for strategic decision-making
mechanisms and the development of
the necessary tools to manage activities
and protect biodiversity.
Delivering an ecosystemapproachFundamentally, an ecosystem approach is
about managing the activities and
demands that humans make on the
environment, not about managing
the ecosystems themselves. Six steps
are identified for the delivery of such
an approach:
1. Setting a vision and environmental
goal setting;
2. Developing an integrated marine policy;
3. Assessing the resource and the status
of the resource;
4. Decision-making mechanisms and
a spatial planning system;
5. Identification of delivery tools; and
6. A strategy for delivery
1. Setting a vision andenvironmental goal settingTo deliver an ecosystem approach
successfully, it is essential to have a vision
In the past, attempts to manage marine resources and to conserve marine biodiversity have beenlargely output-oriented and sectoral in nature.
PJ
BA
NK
S,
WW
F-U
K
and to set environmental goals and targets.
The vision should provide a framework
which incorporates overarching principles,
such as:
• the need for wider management of the
marine environment (i.e. spatial
planning, not only conservation);
• ecologically sustainable management;
• the setting of integrated
environmental, social and economic
objectives;
• adoption of the precautionary
principle; and
• introduction of the polluter and user
pays principles.
These principles should remain at the
heart of any approach to the manage-
ment of the oceans, seas and coasts.
The development of a vision should
allow for full stakeholder involvement
leading to greater acceptance of a common
vision. Above all, it should provide an
opportunity for a new ethos to be devel-
oped for marine management – one
which moves away from the current
systems of narrow, exclusive, sectoral
management to a new system of
stewardship, inclusive decision-making,
and integrated management providing
long-term sustainability and a healthy
marine environment.
A vision needs measurable goals and
targets in order to ensure delivery. A goal
could be “a healthy marine environment
supporting a natural diversity of
communities and species, while at the
same time recognising the value of
marine resources to human society”.
These resources, however, have to
be valued and managed sustainably.
A balance is required between the
needs of wildlife and people.
2. Developing an integratedmarine policyAn integrated approach to marine policy
is not a new idea: in 1996, Australia
initiated its Oceans Policy and Canada
passed an Oceans Act, while similar steps
have been taken in New Zealand and the
US. In the UK, a review of marine nature
conservation published an interim report
in March 2001, which stated that “action
is required to address nature conservation
in the marine environment. Retention
of the status quo is not an option”.
In addition, the Prime Minister has
committed himself to publishing a Marine
Stewardship Report in 2002, which will
set out the UK government’s vision and
strategy for the marine environment.
The European Commission started the
process of producing a European Marine
Strategy due to be completed in 2004.
In Australia, one of the reasons for
initiating an Oceans Policy was that an
integrated approach was necessary to
take full advantage of the benefits that
a marine environment offers – be they
economic, environmental, social,
recreational or cultural. Maritime nations
can no longer sustain their use of the
marine environment in the current
sectoral manner, as well as meeting
international obligations and the demands
of their own people and coastal
communities, unless such an approach
is adopted and implemented.
A national oceans policy or integrated
marine policy should be able to harmonise
the many different goals necessary to
ensure sustainable use and protection of
biodiversity within one consistent policy
dealing with an area of sea. A report to
WWF and The Wildlife Trusts, reviewing
the progress in Australia, Canada, and
New Zealand, identified three important
and inter-related aspects that determine
the character of a national oceans policy:
• the perspectives and goals of the
sectors and stakeholders;
• the participatory mechanisms used
for integrating the policy; and
• the integrated marine policy’s
boundaries in both the real and
policy worlds.
3. Assessing the resource and the status of the resource A variety of tools are already available
to manage the use of any environment,
and no doubt these will be developed in
time. Management tools can be broadly
divided into two groups – assessment
tools and delivery tools.
Assessment tools include Strategic
Environmental Assessment (SEA),
which incorporates both socio-economic
and ecological assessment, as well as
threats analysis and root cause analysis.
SEA can involve habitat mapping, risk
analysis, and sensitivity mapping, and
should be used to facilitate decision-
making processes for spatial planning.
Threats analysis is a common tool when
considering the “health” of the marine
environment – but rarely are the drivers
and root causes of a particular threat
fully analysed. Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) should also be
considered an important assessment
tool for specific projects once spatial
planning decisions have been made.
Dedicated marine legislation will
need to back the delivery of tools
assessing the status of the resource
to be managed.
Value of StrategicEnvironmental Assessment(SEA)In 1997, the International Offshore Oil
& Gas Experts meeting in Noordwijk, the
Netherlands, recognised that “Prior
assessment is important and baseline
assessments/studies valuable to predict
impacts. Some parties do not consider
environmental impact assessment(s) to
be sufficient to determine impacts, and
believe that strategic environmental
assessment is necessary to accommodate
cumulative impacts.”
Now the use of SEA as a management
tool is being widely considered.
Perhaps most important to facilitate
spatial planning decisions, SEA helps
determine appropriate sites for
programmes and projects – although in
most cases projects must necessarily be
subject to EIA. SEA encourages
consideration of alternatives not practical
at the project EIA stage and allows
formulation of mitigation measures for
later projects.
Another major benefit of SEA is that it
can allow analysis of the impact of
policies which may not be implemented
through projects. For example, it would
facilitate consideration of continued
exploitation of non-renewable mineral
resources against climatic impacts of
burning fossil fuels and the development
of offshore renewable energy sources
such as wind, wave and tidal power.
Similarly, it could facilitate consideration
of exploitation of severely depleted
renewable resources.
SEA also encourages consideration
of environmental and social objectives
at all levels including policy development,
plans/programmes and specific project
activities. It facilitates consultation
between authorities and enhances public
involvement in evaluation of
environmental aspects of policy, plan
and project formulation. It may also
limit some project EIAs if the impacts
of a sector or new programme are fully
assessed at the SEA stage.
Unlike EIA, SEA allows effective
analysis of cumulative effects and
facilitates consideration of synergistic
effects. It also allows consideration of
long range and delayed impacts. Finally,
it enables more effective consideration
of ancillary and secondary activities.
4. Decision-makingmechanisms and a spatialplanning systemSetting visions, integrating policy and
assessing resources are integral
components of an ecosystem approach,
but the management of any resource
requires appropriate mechanisms to be
developed to facilitate decision-making
and the delivery of the decisions.
Once the resource has been assessed,
the threats identified, and the risks
ascertained, it becomes possible to make
A growing interest is being expressed indeveloping offshore wind farms to provide a renewable energy source in the UK.
Strategic decision-making mechanisms and adequate management tools are needed to protect marine biodiversity.
F B
UN
KE
R,
MA
RIN
ES
EE
N,
WW
F-U
KA
ME
C B
OR
DE
R W
IND
C H
OO
D,
WW
F-U
K
An ecosystem approach is about managing the activities and demands that humans make on the environment, not about managing the ecosystemsthemselves.
spatial planning decisions. Spatial
planning should not only address the
need to locate a variety of maritime
activities but should also be used to
ensure the establishment of a
representative network of marine
protected areas. A planning body needs
to exist to make decisions and to establish
the mechanisms by which decisions will
be made, e.g. majority voting, consensus
and unilateral decision-making.
Stakeholder involvement and
transparency are crucial at this stage.
A wide variety of mechanisms exist for
decision-making, many of which have
cultural aspects that need to be taken into
account. Little attention, however, has
been paid to spatial planning in the
marine environment. Possible options
include establishing a marine department
or maritime planning agency, or
extending the role of local government
offshore. There are already examples in
place and, in most cases, it would make
sense to develop spatial planning
responsibilities by working through these
existing structures. However, the need for
truly innovative spatial planning systems
should not be ruled out. The important
difference to many present structures
would be to ensure that they are truly
holistic and integrated. Dedicated marine
legislation will also be required to put
such structures into place with the
requisite authority.
5. Identification of delivery tools Once spatial planning decisions have
been made about the types of activities
that should be permitted and appropriate
locations identified, tools are required
to deliver ecosystem management.
Delivery tools can be largely grouped
under three headings:
1. Spatial controls – for example,
restrictions on activities within marine
protected areas, consents for
development in specified locations,
permanent or temporary no-go areas,
no exploitation areas, and shipping
designations, such as areas to be avoided;
2. Level controls – for example, conditions
on a consent, or limits on the extraction
of a resource or the volume or
concentration of a polluting discharge;
3. Best practice – including appropriate
technological advances.
Recovery tools may also required to
address the degradation of habitats or
wildlife populations. Recovery tools might
include measures which aim to restore
degraded, damaged or lost habitats
and/or wildlife populations. These might
include, for example, regeneration areas
for fisheries, wetland restoration and
recreation schemes, managed realignment
of flood defences, pollution reduction
programmes and wildlife enhancement
schemes.
The application of these tools requires
flexibility depending on local conditions.
Putting these measures in place requires
not only a decision-making process, but
also a means of monitoring and
evaluating the success of the measures.
Many of these tools already exist.
However, they have been developed
in an ad hoc manner with little or
no integration. A Marine Act could
rationalise the tools available and ensure
that they are complementary.
6. A strategy for deliveryWith regard to delivery, alongside
enforcement of planning decisions and
using the various delivery tools as
appropriate, it is also important to ensure
that appropriate monitoring and
N M
OR
RIS
ON
, W
WF
-UK
WW
F-U
K R
egis
tere
d C
harit
y N
umb
er 1
0812
47 P
rinte
d o
n re
cycl
ed p
aper
mad
e fr
om 1
00 p
er c
ent p
ost c
onsu
mer
was
te
Pan
da
sym
bol
© 1
986
WW
F ®
WW
F R
egis
tere
d T
rad
emar
k 1
557/
Sep
tem
ber
200
2
evaluation procedures are in place, and to
consider new research programmes that
might be required to better inform the
decision-making process. The use of fiscal
measures and financial incentives will also
be important.
It will therefore be necessary to
develop a strategy for delivery, which
would be fundamental at the outset of
any new system for the management
of the marine environment. A strategy
should also include monitoring and
evaluation, to ensure that the approach
works and that the controls placed on
the management of various activities
are indeed sufficient to ensure that
the marine resource is being managed
sustainably and that the ecosystem is
not compromised.
In developing this strategy,
consideration should be given to the
complexity and appropriateness of
existing regulatory systems. In many
countries, the piecemeal approach
adopted to date has resulted in complex
marine regulatory mechanisms that are
confusing to manage and enforce, and
result in loopholes. An approach such as
that outlined here will inevitably require
sound, comprehensive legislation to
ensure implementation and enforcement.
In particular, the assessment phase,
spatial planning mechanisms and delivery
tools need a legal basis. A single piece
of marine environmental management
legislation offers the opportunity to
simplify and update existing regulations
while setting in place a regulatory system
for the delivery of an ecosystem
approach. This would simplify the
regulatory system for managing the
marine environment – it would also
increase transparency and be welcomed
by stakeholders.
The system outlined here should also be
responsive to emerging issues such as
the release of genetically modified
organisms, bioprospecting and seabed
mining. It will also be able to respond
to the anticipated increase in existing
demands – more food (aquaculture,
fishing), more trade (port development,
shipping), climate changes and rising
sea levels (coastal defences) and greater
leisure opportunities (coastal develop-
ment) for example. The assessment
stage should enable assessment of the
risks and the most appropriate spatial
location for an activity to be sited.
If insufficient information exists to
produce a sound decision, a precautionary
approach would be applied – if inform-
ation were sufficient to make sound
decisions, the appropriate delivery tools
would be identified and the evaluation
and monitoring should ensure that the
activities resulted in no significant threat
to ecosystem integrity.
In summary, an ecosystem approach
is about managing the activities and
demands that humans make on the
environment. It is also about integrating
environmental objectives with social
and economic objectives. Through the
delivery of an ecosystem approach,
many of the pressures on the marine
environment, wildlife, habitats
and their resources can begin to be
addressed.
It is anticipated that the demands
made by humans on the marine and
coastal environment will grow in the
coming decades. The sheer importance
of the marine environment, along with
the scale of the problems facing it
and the international commitments
that have already been agreed, warrants
an international vision. But in the end,
the delivery of an ecosystem approach
in UK waters depends on action at a
local, regional and national level.
An ecosystem approach integrates environmental, social and economic objectives for the benefitof humans, wildlife, and marine processes.
WWF-UK
Panda House, Weyside ParkGodalming, Surrey GU7 1XRt: +44 (0)1483 426444f: +44 (0)1483 426409www.wwf.org.uk
Taking action for a living planet
The Wildlife Trusts
The Kiln, Waterside, Mather RoadNewark, Nottinghamshire NG24 1WTt: +44 (0)1636 677711f: +44 (0)1636 670001www.wildlifetrusts.org.uk
F B
UN
KE
R,
MA
RIN
ES
EE
N,
WW
F-U
K