Download - Knowledge-based Sustainable Management for Europe’s Seas Big picture science for the Ecosystem Approach.

Knowledge-based Sustainable Management for Europe’s Seas

Big picture science for Big picture science for the Ecosystem Approachthe Ecosystem Approach

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/

Overall objective

Organisation

• 33 partners from 16 European countries

• €5.71 M• 2008 -2013

2004 - 2007 2008 - 2013

Now End of project

Legacy

Prof Laurence Mee - Coordinator

Overall project designOverall project design

The Ecosystem ApproachThe 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 KnowSeasAdapted from the Ministry of Natural Resources, Canada www.mnr.gov.on.ca/

COMPLEXITYSystems science

““Wicked” and “Tame” ProblemsWicked” and “Tame” Problems

“Tame” problem can be solved by careful rules-based or consensus management

“Wicked” problem involves moral judgements and value-based decisions: governance.

Clear solutions

no clear solution; there will be winners and losers

First order “fixes”

Hard choices

Jentoft and Chuenpagdee (2009) Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem

Systems thinking: A method of rational Systems thinking: A method of rational inquiryinquiry

Understanding of how human activities

can impact marine environment

Models for systems analysis

Conceptual models describing pathways of socio-economic

drivers and pressures

Sensitivity of system to proposed policy options and socio-economic changes

Information about relevant attributes of the system

Metadata

Requirements

Data and narrativeValidation

Leads to improvements in

Scenarios

Helps devise

Policy RESPONSE

optionsEnviron-mental STATEchanges

Human WELFAREchange

Socio-economic DRIVERS

Environ-mental

PRESSURES

Social system

Ecological system

DPSWR (DPSIR revisited)

Policy RESPONSE


Human WELFAREchange


Environ-mental

PRESSURES

Social system

Ecological system

DPSWR - Where are the impacts?

IMPACTS

Policy RESPONSE


Human WELFAREchange


Environ-mental

PRESSURES

Human climate change

Natural system

variability

External factors

DPSWR - External factors

Environ-mental STATEchanges

Human WELFAREchange


Environ-mental

PRESSURES

DPSWR and the MSFD indicators

1: Biological diversity3: Population of commercial fish / shell fish4: Elements of marine food webs6: Sea floor integrity

7: Alteration of hydrographical conditions8: Contaminants9: Contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumption10: Marine litter11: Introduction of energy, including underwater noise

2: Non-indigenous species5: Eutrophication

MISMATCHING SCALES AND UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS

Science for policy

Decision space analysis

Terrestrial

Local inshore

National EEZ

Trans-boundary

Regional Seas

EU W

ide

Global

Within one year

Within 1 political term (5 yrs)

Before 2020 (Target for GEnS)

By 2050

MSFDEEZWFD

Implementation cycles and policies

Terrestrial

Local inshore

National EEZ

Trans-boundary

Regional Seas

EU W

ide

Global

Within one year

Within 1 political term (5 yrs)

Before 2020 (Target for GEnS)

By 2050

MSFDWFD

CAP CFP

Tim O’Higgins - SAMS



Seagrass as an indicator of GES – spatial variability in responseLinking measures under WFD with achieving GES under MSFD using models

1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020Year

0

40

80

120

160

Sea

gras

s ar

ea (

>20

% c

over

age,

km

²)

0

100

200

300

400

Rhi

ne N

O3

- (µ

M)

Seagrass area (km ²)Rhine N O 3

-

(D utch-G erm an border)

3.5 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)

51.5

52.0

52.5

53.0

53.5

54.0

54.5

55.0

55.5

56.0

Latit

ude

(°N

)

North Sea

Ems

W eser

Elbe

Rhine / Maas

Sum m er-C hlorophyll a (µg/l)W adden Sea

(M ean 2002-2006)

9.719.9

11.5

12.5

5.9

5.4

12.1

9.8

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

Seagrass recovery linked to nitrate reductions

Delft 3Dmodel

Van Beusekom & Troost

Dolch, Buschbaum, Reise, v. Beusekom (AWI), unpub. results

Cold-water reefs & fisheries interactions Implications for achieving GES

‘Ghost net’ entangled in Lophelia pertusa coral at 1000m in EU waters

Jason Hall-Spencer & Soffker

‘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

Damage to threatened species and associated biodiversity due to fisheries and seabed litter

OSPAR

UK Fishing value

Coral distribution

THRESHOLDS, SURPRISES AND NON-LINEAR SCIENCE

Science for policy 2

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

Adriatic Sea P load***Fishing***

80 % 32

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

Adriatic Sea P load***Fishing***

80 % 32

MSFDNon-MSFD

TRADE OFFSEcological economics

Policy RESPONSE


Human WELFAREchange


Environ-mental

PRESSURES

Social system

Ecological system

Trade-offs

Benefits

Costs

Net carbon saving

Marine ecosystem

impacts

External

emissions avoided

compared to baseline

generation mix

welfare-positive

changes, e.g. effective MCZs

protecting biodiversity

welfare-negative

changes, e.g. threats to bird and cetacean populations

Loss of consumer

surplus

Producer surplus

from increased prices (lost demand +

excess cost of consumption)

Congestion

competition for use of

marine space, e.g. fisheries,

maritime traffic

increment compared to

baseline generation

mix

Other policy outcomes

Internal

Priorities

security of supply;

development of exportable know-

how; social capital from net

job creation

terrestrial impacts (e.g. grid

connection infrastructure);

loss of social capital from net

job loss

Costs and benefits of offshore-wind development

Potential policy conflicts – renewable energy and MSFD

Philip Cooper et al.

Renewable energy

MSFD MSPIMPCFP

Relevant Policy

Dogger Bank

Round 3 OWF

cSAC

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENTInnovative policy tools

Statutory Periodic Assessment•State of the marine environment• Pressures and their human causes• Institutions, laws, policies, economic instruments

Baseline studies

Methods

ASSESSMENT


A measureable aspirational goal for

the future

Baseline studies

Methods

Emerging Issues

SETTING THE VISION


EU Marine Strategy Directive

Good Environmental Status (2020)

Baseline studies

Methods

Emerging Issues

SETTING THE VISION




Baseline studies

Regional/National PolicyEnvironmental targets

Spatial planning

Methods

Emerging Issues

DEFINING THE FIRST STEP




Baseline studies


Spatial planning

Robust quantitative system state indicators

to measure impact

Operational indicators: process, pressures,

societal & governance

Methods

Emerging Issues

NECESSARY INDICATORS




Baseline studies


Spatial planning


to measure impact



Methods

Emerging Issues

NECESSARY INDICATORS

MODELS to test




Regular monitoring (all indicators)

Baseline studies


to measure impact



Methods

Emerging Issues


Spatial planning

MONITORING IS ESSENTIAL





Baseline studies

Regulations and compliance

Fast feedback loop


to measure impact



Methods

Emerging Issues


Spatial planning

COMPLIANCE AND FEEDBACK





Baseline studies

Regulations and compliance

Slow feedback loop

Status and trends

Fast feedback loop


to measure impact



Methods

Emerging Issues


Spatial planning

PROGRESS TOWARDS THE VISION

SUPPORT FOR DECISION MAKERS

KnowSeas Information System

The Spatial Data Infrastrucutre architecture with the Data Storage Layer (left), the Business Logic Layer (centre left) and the Application Layer (right).

Application Layer

WebGis

Desktop GIS

Data Storage Layer

GeoInt

Geo-database

File system

Business Logic Layer

Map server

Catalog server

Thesaurus

Interfaces

WFS

WMS

WCS

CSWUser-interface

Service broker

Map of the DPSWR framework to represent indicators related with the ecotoxicological pollution from organochlorines in the trophic web

Sarda et al - CSIC

COUPLED SOCIAL ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS

Testing policy choices – the case of Baltic Cod

Reduction of loads

�� ݐݐ ݐ �� ݐݐ ݎ� ݏ� ݏ

ݏ� ݏ

ܥ�Ȁܤ ଷǣ� Certainlyܮ ൏Ͳ ܮଶǣ� Uncertain ܤȀܥ�

ܥ�Ȁܤ ଵǣ� Certainlyܮ Ͳ

Reduction of loads

�� ݏ��

�� ݎ� ݏ� ݏ

ݏ� ݏ

ܥ�Ȁܤ ଷǣ� Certainlyܮ ൏Ͳ ܮଶǣ� Uncertain ܤȀܥ�

Cod

System components

Policies 50% reduction in N and P

CostsBenefit

s

CBA

Clear water

Health effectsFish

Conceptual modelConceptual model

THE PUBLIC VIEWKnowSeas Social Science

The communications gapThe communications gap

Industrial Pollution as a Major Threat

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64

Age group

France

Italy

Germany

Spain

Poland

UK

Portugal

Fisheries as a Major Environmental Threat

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64

Age group

France

Italy

Germany

Spain

Poland

UK

Portugal

1. Building trust in institutions (1)1. Building trust in institutions (1)

The EU is competent to manage and protect the ocean environment

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64

Age group

France

Italy

Germany

Spain

Poland

UK

Portugal

National governments are competent to manage and protect the ocean environment

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64

Age group

France

Italy

Germany

Spain

Poland

UK

Portugal

CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions (1)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)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

Beautif

Beautif

ulul

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)