Observations from the MSP process in Germany's EEZ: gaps & challenges in applying the ecosystem approach to marine spatial planning - Dr. Aline ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
© Symphony/Sweden
Observations from the MSP process in Germany’s EEZ:
gaps & challenges in applying the ecosystem approach to marine spatial planning
Dr. Aline Kühl-Stenzel, Dr. Anne Böhnke-Henrichs & Dr. Kim Detloff (NABU, 20.1.2021)
Overview
1) MSP in Germany
1) 1st MSP: 2009
2) 2nd MSP: in development (2021)
2) Application of ecosystem approach
3) Three examples of shortcomings
4) Core positions
2
North and Baltic Seas: far from „Good Environmental Status“
• IPCC ocean report (2019): acceleration of changes
throughout marine ecosystem, poor prognosis (e.g.
ocean warming)
• IPBES report (2019): global biodiversity crisis
• EU Commission report on the state of nature
(October 2020): not a single marine habitat in German
EEZ in GES
• 30% species on red list (n=1700) Nachtsheim et al. (2021)
• Harbour porpoise: significant decline in German North
Sea from 2002-2019 (Nachtsheim et al. 2021)
„Highly endangered“ (German Red List 2020)
3
First MSP 2009: Where do we come from?
4
Key issue: MPAs only feature FYI – no priority/reservation status
Regulation
Shipping
Priority area
Reservation area
Pipelines
Priority area
Reservation area
Cables
Research
Reservation area
Energy
Priority area
Illustration of additional
information
…
5
Second MSP: the latest draft (Sept 2020)
6
Selected priority/reservation areas in Germany‘s
Exclusive Economic Zone (North Sea)
Marine Protected Area
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel extraction
Offshore wind
7
How to apply the ecosystem-based approach (EBA) in MSP?
8
Which parts of the EBA is Germany applying?*
Selected categories Done
Participation & communication
***
Strategic Environmental Assessment
***
Best available knowledge & practice (e.g. no sensitivity analysis)
***
Precaution / adaptation /alternative scenarios Partly
***
Mitigation/offsetting X ***
Identification of environmental services X ***
Cumulative pressure /carrying capacity X
*
Risk assessment (e.g. accidents, climate change) X
*
* In line with the HELCOM-VASAB Guidelines for the implementation of the ecosystem-based approach in MSP in the Baltic Sea
9
Why should we apply the EBA?
The Maritime Spatial Planning Directive requires Member States to develop maritime spatial plans with the aim of promoting the coexistence
and sustainability of relevant activities and uses. It makes explicit reference to the MSFD within its legal text, stipulating that maritime spatial
planning should apply an ecosystem-based approach and help to achieve the aims of good environmental status and coordinate timelines
with the MSFD to the extent possible. [ ] Since the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive process integrates all the blue economy sectors and
activities, it should enforce management measures that help to achieve good environmental status. (EU Commission Report, June 2020,
COM/2020/259 final)
Germany: confirmed that MSP will contribute to reaching GES (https://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/226/1922698.pdf; Sept 2020)
10Example 1: Ecosystem services - identification & quantification
Stressors
Ecosystem
services
P. Noges et al. (2015)
11Example 2: we have learnt about impacts – let‘s apply precaution…
Mendel et al. (2019)
12Example 2 continued: Is precaution being applied? Best knowledge?
• Example: common
guillemot
• Avoidance radius: >9 km
• Autumn: 74,000 (84%
total North Sea
population)
• Loss of
41% of habitatExample 2 continued: Is precaution being applied? Best knowledge?
• Special Area of
Conservation (SAC)
• Critical birth habitat
• Decline at Sylt Outer
Reef: - 3.79% p.a. 2002 –
2019 (Nachtsheim et al.
2021)Example 2 continued: consider spatial impact of wind energy in MSP!
Red areas:
•Borkum Reef: 67%
•Doggerbank: 33%
•Sylt Outer Reef: 39%
(without Butendiek: 28%)
56% of EEZ North Sea is
being lost for individual
species
15…effect continues into coastal waters and internationally.
We need to have buffer
zones between OWPs
and sensitive habitats.
Starting point: 10 km
1617
Example 3: Free use areas? Adaptation?
MPA
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel extraction
Offshore wind
181. Priority for nature conservation
MPA
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel extraction
Offshore wind
192. 50% of MPA areas free from industrial use
MPA
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel
extraction
Offshore wind
203. Maintain migratory corridors
MPA
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel extraction
Offshore wind
214. Windenergy: avoid conflict
MPA
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel extraction
Offshore wind
22www.NABU.de/MRO
www.NABU.de/MRO-Kampagne
MPA
Fishing
Shipping
Sand/gravel extraction
Offshore wind
23Conclusions
• Failure to reach GES in 2020 across German EEZ
• EBA toolbox well-established
• Major shortcomings in applying EBA in German MSP for EEZ, e.g.:
• Identification & quantification of ecosystem services
• Application of precautionary principle?
• Free spaces? Adaptive management?
• Current express MSP process requires strategic and transparent
debate, including parliament, and establishment of adaptive
management
www.NABU.de/MRO
www.NABU.de/MRO-Kampagne
24Schlusspunkt
Dr. Aline Kühl-Stenzel
c/o Regional Office Hamburg
Klaus-Groth-Str. 21
20535 Hamburg
Germany
Questions?
Tel. +49 (0)174.1818477
Fax +49 (0)30.28 49 84-20 00
aline.kuehl-stenzel@NABU.de
www.NABU.de
25You can also read
