Knowledge-based Sustainable
Management for Europe’s Seas
Big picture science for
the Ecosystem Approach
Overall objective
A comprehensive
scientific knowledge base
and practical guidance for
the application of the
Ecosystem Approach to
the sustainable
development of Europe’s
regional seas.
Image from: www.gstaadlife.com/
Organisation
Now
End of project
Legacy
2004 - 2007
• 33 partners from 16
European countries
• €5.71 M
• 2008 -2013
Prof Laurence Mee - Coordinator
2008 - 2013
Overall project design
The Ecosystem Approach
A resource planning and management
approach that integrates the
connections between land, air and
water and all living things, including
people, their activities and
institutions.
Definition adapted by KnowSeas
Adapted from the Ministry of Natural Resources, Canada www.mnr.gov.on.ca/
Systems science
COMPLEXITY
“Wicked” and “Tame” Problems
“Tame” problem can
be solved by careful
rules-based or
consensus
management
First order
“fixes”
“Wicked” problem
involves moral
judgements and valuebased decisions:
governance.
Hard
choices
Clear
solutions
no clear
solution;
there will be
winners and
losers
Jentoft and Chuenpagdee (2009) Fisheries and
coastal governance as a wicked problem
Systems thinking: A method of rational
inquiry
Leads to
improvements
in
Sensitivity of system
to proposed policy
options and socioeconomic changes
Validation
Understanding of
how human activities
can impact marine
environment
Helps devise
Metadata
Information
about relevant
attributes of
the system
Conceptual models
describing pathways
of socio-economic
drivers and pressures
Requirements
Data and narrative
Models for systems
analysis
DPSWR (DPSIR revisited)
Socioeconomic
DRIVERS
Social
system
Ecological
system
Policy
RESPONSE
options
Environmental
PRESSURES
Human
WELFARE
change
Environmental
STATE
changes
DPSWR - Where are the impacts?
Socioeconomic
DRIVERS
Social
system
Ecological
system
Policy
RESPONSE
options
Environmental
PRESSURES
Environmental
STATE
changes
Human
WELFARE
change
IMPACTS
DPSWR - External factors
External factors
Socioeconomic
DRIVERS
Policy
RESPONSE
options
Human
climate
change
Natural
system
variability
Environmental
PRESSURES
Human
WELFARE
change
Environmental
STATE
changes
DPSWR and the MSFD indicators
Socioeconomic
DRIVERS
7: Alteration of hydrographical conditions
8: Contaminants
9: Contaminants in fish and seafood for human
consumption
10: Marine litter
11: Introduction of energy, including underwater noise
2: Non-indigenous species
5: Eutrophication
Environmental
PRESSURES
Human
WELFARE
change
Environmental
STATE
changes
1: Biological diversity
3: Population of commercial
fish / shell fish
4: Elements of marine food
webs
6: Sea floor integrity
Science for policy
MISMATCHING SCALES AND
UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS
Decision space analysis
By 2050
Global
Before 2020
(Target for
GEnS)
MSFD
EU Wide
WFD
EEZ
Within 1
political term
(5 yrs)
Regional
Seas
Transboundary
National
EEZ
Local
inshore
Terrestrial
Within one year
Implementation cycles and policies
MSFD
Within 1
political term
(5 yrs)
Before 2020
(Target for
GEnS)
By 2050
CAP
CFP
Global
EU Wide
WFD
Regional
Seas
Transboundary
National
EEZ
Local
inshore
Terrestrial
Within one year
Tim O’Higgins - SAMS
Tim O’Higgins - SAMS
Tim O’Higgins - SAMS
Seagrass as an indicator of GES – spatial variability in response
Linking measures under WFD with achieving GES under MSFD using models
12.5
55.0
Latitude (°N)
54.5
54.0
5.9
5.4
Summer-Chlorophyll a (µg/l)
Wadden Sea
(Mean 2002-2006)
53.5
11.5
9.8
19.9
12.1
9.7
Elbe
Weser
Ems
53.0
52.5
52.0
160
400
Seagrass area (km²)
Rhine NO3(Dutch-German border)
120
300
80
200
40
100
Rhine / Maas
0
51.5
3.5
Rhine NO3- (µM)
North Sea
55.5
Seagrass
recovery
linked to
nitrate
reductions
Seagrass area (>20% coverage, km²)
56.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5 10.0
Longitude (°E)
No recovery of Seagrass in the lower
saxonian Wadden Sea (from 35km²
in 1960s to 8 km² at present).
Further reductions in
nitrate loads required in
Dutch & German rivers
Van Beusekom & Troost
0
1920
1940
1960
1980
2000
2020
Year Dolch, Buschbaum, Reise,
v. Beusekom (AWI), unpub. results
Delft 3D
model
Cold-water reefs & fisheries interactions
Implications for achieving GES
UK Fishing value
‘The importance of coral reefs in supporting
diverse fish communities has been highlighted
in a recent study. However, the effects of
damaging fishing techniques were also
observed in video footage of the reefs studied,
located off the coast of Ireland.’
27th January 2012
Coral distribution
OSPAR
Damage to threatened species and associated
biodiversity due to fisheries and seabed litter
‘Ghost net’ entangled in Lophelia
pertusa coral at 1000m in EU waters
Jason Hall-Spencer & Soffker
Science for policy 2
THRESHOLDS, SURPRISES
AND NON-LINEAR SCIENCE
Regime
shifts in all
systems
Thorsten Blenckner, Andrew Kenny, Peter Kershaw, Alberto Barausse,
Georgi Daskalov, Maciej Tomczak, Alison Gilbert
Results- Drivers of regime shifts
System
Drivers
% explained
Number of
years
North Sea
AMO***
66%
27
Baltic Sea
Temperature *
Fishing***
75 %
32
P load***
Fishing***
80 %
32
Adriatic Sea
Methods:
•Regression Analysis on de-trended time-series of abiotic drivers vs.
PC1s: Generalized Additive Model (GAM)
•The most parsimonious model was identified using the Akaike
Information Criterion (AIC)
Results- Drivers of regime shifts
System
Drivers
% explained
Number of
years
North Sea
AMO***
66%
27
Baltic Sea
Temperature *
Fishing***
75 %
32
P load***
Fishing***
80 %
32
Adriatic Sea
MSFD
Non-MSFD
Ecological economics
TRADE OFFS
Trade-offs
Socioeconomic
DRIVERS
Social
system
Ecological
system
Policy
RESPONSE
options
Environmental
PRESSURES
Human
WELFARE
change
Environmental
STATE
changes
Potential policy conflicts – renewable energy and MSFD
Costs and benefits of offshore-wind development
Internal
External
Net carbon
saving
Benefits
emissions
avoided
compared to
baseline
generation mix
Marine
ecosystem
impacts
welfarenegative
changes, e.g.
threats to bird
and cetacean
populations
Costs
Producer
surplus
welfarepositive
changes, e.g.
effective
MCZs
protecting
biodiversity
increment
compared to
baseline
generation
mix
Congestion
competition
for use of
marine space,
e.g. fisheries,
maritime
traffic
Other policy
outcomes
Loss of
consumer
surplus
terrestrial
impacts (e.g. grid
connection
infrastructure);
loss of social
capital from net
job loss
from increased
prices (lost
demand +
excess cost of
consumption)
Dogger
Bank
Priorities
Relevant
Policy
Renewable
energy
Philip Cooper et al.
MSFD
MSP
IMP
CFP
security of
supply;
development of
exportable knowhow; social
capital from net
job creation
Round 3 OWF
cSAC
Innovative policy tools
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
ASSESSMENT
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
Methods
SETTING THE VISION
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
A measureable
aspirational goal for
the future
Methods
Emerging
Issues
SETTING THE VISION
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Methods
Emerging
Issues
DEFINING THE FIRST STEP
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Regional/National Policy
Environmental targets
Spatial planning
Methods
Emerging
Issues
NECESSARY INDICATORS
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
Methods
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Regional/National Policy
Environmental targets
Spatial planning
Emerging
Issues
Robust quantitative
system state indicators
to measure impact
Operational indicators:
process, pressures,
societal & governance
NECESSARY INDICATORS
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
Methods
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Regional/National Policy
Environmental targets
Spatial planning
Emerging
Issues
Robust quantitative
system state indicators
to measure impact
MODELS to
test
Operational indicators:
process, pressures,
societal & governance
MONITORING IS ESSENTIAL
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
Methods
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Regional/National Policy
Environmental targets
Spatial planning
Regular monitoring (all indicators)
Emerging
Issues
Robust quantitative
system state indicators
to measure impact
Operational indicators:
process, pressures,
societal & governance
COMPLIANCE AND FEEDBACK
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
Methods
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Regional/National Policy
Environmental targets
Spatial planning
Emerging
Issues
Robust quantitative
system state indicators
to measure impact
Operational indicators:
process, pressures,
societal & governance
Regular monitoring (all indicators)
Regulations and compliance
Fast feedback
loop
PROGRESS TOWARDS THE VISION
Statutory Periodic Assessment
Baseline
studies
Methods
•State of the marine environment
• Pressures and their human causes
• Institutions, laws, policies, economic
instruments
EU Marine Strategy
Directive
Good Environmental
Status (2020)
Slow
feedback
loop
Regional/National Policy
Environmental targets
Spatial planning
Emerging
Issues
Robust quantitative
system state indicators
to measure impact
Operational indicators:
process, pressures,
societal & governance
Regular monitoring (all indicators)
Status and trends
Regulations and compliance
Fast feedback
loop
KnowSeas Information System
SUPPORT FOR DECISION
MAKERS
Data Storage Layer
Application Layer
Business Logic Layer
Service broker
Geodatabase
Map server
Interfaces
WFS
Desktop GIS
WMS
Catalog server
Thesaurus
File system
GeoInt
Userinterface
Map of the DPSWR framework
to represent indicators related
with the ecotoxicological
pollution from organochlorines
in the trophic web
Sarda et al - CSIC
WCS
CSW
WebGis
The Spatial Data Infrastrucutre
architecture with the Data Storage
Layer (left), the Business Logic
Layer (centre left) and the
Application Layer (right).
Testing policy choices – the case of Baltic Cod
COUPLED SOCIAL
ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
System components
Cod
Reduction of loads
Certainly
Uncertain
Certainly
Reduction of loads
Uncertain
Certainly
Conceptual model
Policies
50% reduction in
N and P
Benefit
s
Costs
Fish
CBA
Health
effects
Clear
water
KnowSeas Social Science
THE PUBLIC VIEW
The communications gap
Industrial Pollution as a Major Threat
Fisheries as a Major Environmental Threat
100%
100%
90%
90%
80%
80%
France
70%
Italy
France
70%
Italy
Germany
60%
Spain
Germany
60%
Spain
Poland
UK
50%
Poland
UK
50%
Portugal
Portugal
40%
40%
30%
30%
20%
20%
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
Age group
45 to 54
55 to 64
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
Age group
45 to 54
55 to 64
1. Building trust in institutions (1)
National governments are competent to manage
and protect the ocean environment
The EU is competent to manage and protect the
ocean environment
90%
90%
80%
80%
70%
70%
France
60%
France
60%
Italy
Germany
50%
Italy
Germany
50%
Spain
40%
Poland
Spain
40%
Poland
UK
30%
Portugal
UK
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
Portugal
0%
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
Age group
45 to 54
55 to 64
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
Age group
45 to 54
55 to 64
CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions (1)
• Recognition of the sea as a complex coupled
social ecological system requiring an
ecosystem approach to management is an
important policy development
• Our perceptions of the environment and
human values are critically important for its
management
• Complexity is difficult to grasp, whether a
scientist or a decision maker
Conclusions (2)
• Adaptive management is one towards an ecosystem
approach but there are pitfalls and risks.
• We should be planning for the next adaptive cycle
of the MSFD
• Serious mismatches of temporal and spatial policy
and legislation reflect sectoral silo thinking; big
picture science helps to maintain an overall vision
and context for the MSFD and GES
Conclusions so far
• Severe non-linear changes ”regimes are detected” in the
three regional seas
•Potential drivers of such changes are:
•Climate (North Sea, Baltic Sea)
•Fishing pressure (Baltic Sea, Adriatic Sea)
•Nutrient loading (Adriatic Sea)