Communication from the Commission - Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving Common Principles in the EU
Date: 2008-11-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aquaculture, degradation of the environment, maritime area, renewable energy, research and development, sectoral planning, shipping policy

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 25.11.2008 
COM(2008) 791 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving Common Principles in the EU 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

Roadmap for Maritime Spatial Planning: Achieving Common Principles in the EU 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

On  10  October  2007,  the  European  Commission  adopted  the  Blue  Paper  proposing 
an Integrated  Maritime Policy (IMP) for the EU,1 and a detailed Action Plan.2 The 
European Council endorsed the IMP and the Action Plan on 14 December 2007. 

Maritime  Spatial  Planning  (MSP)3  is  a  key  instrument  for  the  IMP.  It  helps  public 
authorities  and  stakeholders  to  coordinate  their  action  and  optimises  the  use  of 
marine  space  to  benefit  economic  development  and  the  marine  environment.  This 
Communication  aims  to  facilitate  the  development  of  MSP  by  Member  States  and 
encourage its implementation at national and EU level.4 It sets out key principles for 
MSP  and  seeks,  by  way  of  debate,  to  encourage  the  development  of  a  common 
approach among Member States. 

2. 

RATIONALE 

2.1.  Why maritime spatial planning? 

Increased  activity  on  Europe's  seas  leads  to  competition  between  sectoral  interests, 
such  as  shipping  and  maritime  transport,  offshore  energy,  ports  development, 
fisheries and aquaculture and environmental concerns. 

Climate  change,  in  particular  the  rise  of  sea  levels,  acidification,  increasing  water 
temperatures,  and  frequency  of  extreme  weather  events  is  likely  to  cause  a  shift  in 
economic activities in maritime areas and to alter marine ecosystems. MSP can play 
an important role in mitigation, by promoting the efficient use of maritime space and 
renewable energy, and in cost-efficient adaptation to the impact of climate change in 
maritime areas and coastal waters. 

MSP is a tool for improved decision-making. It provides a framework for arbitrating 
between  competing  human  activities  and  managing  their  impact  on  the  marine 
environment. Its objective is to balance sectoral interests and achieve sustainable use 
of marine resources in line with the EU Sustainable Development Strategy.5  

1 
2 
3 

4 
5 

COM(2007) 575. 
SEC(2007) 1278. 
The term maritime spatial planning will be used throughout the document even though different terms 
tend  to  be  used  synonymously,  e.g. by  Member  States,  in  current practice.  The  term  maritime  spatial 
planning  is  favoured  over  marine  spatial  planning  to  underline  the  holistic  cross-sectoral  approach  of 
the process. 
The Communication is in accordance with Section 3.2 of the Blue Paper.  
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/ 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
MSP should be based on the specificities of individual marine regions or sub-regions. 
It  is  a  process  that  consists  of  data  collection,  stakeholder  consultation  and  the 
participatory  development  of  a  plan,  the  subsequent  stages  of  implementation, 
enforcement, evaluation and revision. 

2.2. 

Benefits of a European approach 

Implementation of MSP is the responsibility of the Member States. The subsidiarity 
principle applies, but action at EU level can provide significant added value. 

The  use  of  MSP  will  enhance  the  competitiveness  of  the  EU’s  maritime  economy, 
promoting growth and jobs in line with the Lisbon agenda. The maritime economy is 
important  for  Europe,  representing  some  five  million  jobs.6  Between  3  and  5%  of 
Europe’s  Gross  Domestic  Product  (GDP)  is  estimated  to  be  generated  by  maritime 
industries  and  services,7  some  with  high  growth  potential.  A  stable  planning 
framework  providing  legal  certainty  and  predictability  will  promote  investment  in 
such  sectors,  which  include  offshore  energy  development,  shipping  and  maritime 
transport,  ports  development,  oil  and  gas  exploitation  and  aquaculture,  boosting 
Europe’s capacity to attract foreign investment.  

Sectoral  approaches  to  the  use  of  maritime  resources  lead  to  fragmented  policy-
making.  This  places  constraints  on  maritime  activities,  reducing  their  potential  for 
growth  and  impairing  the  capacity  of  public  bodies  to  protect  the  marine 
environment.  Joint  work  on  MSP  provides  a  framework  for  coordinating  sectoral 
approaches. It increases the effectiveness and coherence of EU and national policies, 
reducing economic costs of non-coordination.8 

Maritime  activities  have  a  cross-border  dimension.  National  decisions  have  an 
impact  on  adjacent  countries.  Member  States  sharing  a  common  approach  to  the 
management of marine space in the same sea basin will find it easier to meet these 
challenges.  The  role  of  the  EU  is  to  promote  a  common  approach  among  Member 
States that takes account of cross-border impacts.  

For  the  Internal  Market,  MSP  provides  a  basis  for  simplified  permit  systems  and 
for  reducing  the  costs  of  regulatory  and  administrative  procedures,  providing  a 
transparent and reliable planning framework. 

The  sea  is  a  complex  ecosystem  that  cuts  across  administrative  borders.  For 
balanced  long-term  management,  the  whole  ecosystem  and  its  determining  factors 
must  be  taken  into  account.  Planning  must  seek  to  protect  and  enhance  the  marine 
environment. Work on MSP at EU level provides an appropriate forum for Member 
States  to  discuss  and  develop  a  holistic  approach  to  the  management  of  maritime 
activities in line with ecosystem requirements.  

6 
7 

8 

EN 

http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/study_employment_en.html 
This  does  not 
http://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/pdf/com_2006_0275_en_part2.pdf. 
Here probably reference to the guidelines on port development currently prepared by DG ENV and DG 
TREN 

as  oil,  gas  or 

the  value  of 

raw  materials 

include 

such 

fish. 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.3. 

How will this aim be achieved? 

This  Communication  sets  out  the  main  issues  for  a  debate  on  MSP  at  EU  level.  It 
provides information on: 

•  existing  approaches  to  MSP  in  the  Member  States  and  other  international 
examples,  including  lessons  learned  from  EU  projects,  in  particular  INTERREG 
and Research Framework Programmes (chapter 3); 

•  international and EU instruments that have an impact on MSP (chapter 4). 

Based  on  these  examples,  the  Communication  identifies  key  principles  for  MSP 
(chapter 5) as a basis for a broad debate on a common approach to MSP in the EU. 

3. 

GENERAL PLANNING APPROACHES AND PROJECTS 

MSP is a fairly new process. An increasing number of Member States are using or 
preparing  to  use  it,  and  EU  projects  have  started  to  develop  a  range  of  tools  and 
criteria for MSP.  

3.1. 

Existing approaches to maritime spatial planning 

The UK has prepared a Marine Bill as an overarching legislative policy framework, 
which sets up a maritime planning system for all UK waters.9 Scotland has drafted a 
Marine  Bill  for  the  management  of  its  seas.10  Both  Bills  provide  for  a  new 
administrative  structure  (the  Marine  Management  Organisation)  to  simplify  permit 
and licensing procedures. In Sweden the adoption of a Marine Bill is scheduled for 
early  2009.  What  these  bills  have  in  common  is  an  integrated  approach  to  national 
maritime policy, including the use of MSP.  

In  Portugal,  the  National  Strategy  for  the  Seas  (2006)  seeks  to  integrate  sectoral 
policies and to define principles for MSP and Integrated Coastal Zone Management 
(ICZM). An Inter-ministerial Committee for Sea Affairs was created in 2007. 

Germany has extended its terrestrial planning law and thus federal powers for MSP 
to the EEZ. This extension was prompted by the development of the offshore wind 
energy  sector.  The  recently  developed  maritime  spatial  plan  covers  all  three 
dimensions  of  MSP  (surface,  water  column  and  sea  bed),  and  identifies  zones  for 
specific  maritime  activities.  The  plans  will  enter  into  force  with  the  adoption  of  a 
legal ordinance. Currently, no evaluation process is planned.11 

Belgium  uses  zoning  in  a  ‘Master  Plan’  to  allocate  marine  space  for  specific 
maritime uses. The driving forces are sand and gravel extraction and offshore wind 
energy.  A  second  planning  phase  will  determine  sites  for  marine  protected  areas 
(NATURA 2000 network). The plan allows permits and licences for a given type of 

9 
10 
11 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/marine/legislation/index.htm. 
www.scotland.gov.uk/marinebill. 
http://www.bsh.de/en/The_BSH/Notifications/Spatial_Planning_in_the_German_EEZ.jsp. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
activity  to  be  granted  only  within  the  identified  zones  and  is  subject  to  regular 
monitoring and evaluation.12 

Poland  regulates  spatial  planning  in  marine  areas  through  the  Marine  Areas  of  the 
Republic  of  Poland  and  Maritime  Administration  Act.  Under  Interreg  IIIB  a  pilot 
project  on  MSP  in  Puck  Bay  was  recently  finalised  including  a  study  on  spatial 
development on adjacent land. Poland intends to change its national planning law to 
give  maritime  spatial  plans  legal  status  and  develop  such  plans  for  all  Polish 
waters.13  The  results  of  the  project  are  being  used  to  guide  the  government  in  this 
process.  

Some  Member  States  and  other  European  countries  have  developed  integrated 
maritime  management  plans,  which  provide  guidance  for  decisions  relating  to  the 
concerned marine area. The Netherlands have developed an Integrated Management 
Plan for the North Sea 2015. The main motivation is the need to plan offshore wind 
energy.  The  plan  introduces  an  integrated  assessment  framework  for  all  activities 
requiring  a  permit.  Opportunity  maps  have  been  created  for  maritime  uses  that  are 
bound to fixed locations and expected to show the strongest growth.14  

Norway has developed an Integrated Management Plan for the Barents Sea and the 
sea area off the Lofoten Islands. It provides a framework for sustainable resource use 
and  for  existing  and  new  activities.  It  takes  into  account  that  marine  environment 
vulnerability  varies  over  time  and  emphasises  the  importance  of  scientific 
knowledge.  Norway  intends  to  develop  integrated  management  plans  for  the 
Norwegian Sea and the Norwegian part of the North Sea.15  

France  introduced  the  schéma  de  mise  en  valeur  de  la  mer16  for  Lake  Thau  in  the 
Mediterranean  and  the  Arcachon  Basin  in  the  Atlantic.  The  scheme  focuses  on 
coastal  zone  development,  includes  measures  such  as  zoning  of  activities,  and 
identifies  areas  for  particular  maritime  uses  France  is  currently  developing  a 
framework  law  for  the  environment  that  will  include  specific  provisions  for  the 
management of maritime activities. 

Several Member States and regions have started to implement ICZM strategies that 
could be of relevance for MSP. Among these is the region Emilia-Romagna in Italy, 
which under an INTERREG IIIB project has developed an implementation strategy 
for  ICZM  principles.17  Slovenia  is  also  participating  in  this  project  and  has  shown 
interest in cooperating with Italy and Croatia on MSP.  

Spain  adopted  a  Strategy  for  the  Sustainability  of  the  Coast  in  2007.  The  Spanish 
regions  of  Asturias,  Cantabria  and  Andalucia  have  developed  integrated  plans  to 

12 
13 
14 
15 

16 
17 

http://www.mumm.ac.be/EN/Management/Sea-based/index.php. 
http://www.plancoast.eu/. 
http://www.noordzee.org/nz/index.jsp. 
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/md/Selected-topics/Svalbard_og_polaromradene/Integrated-
Management-of-the-Barents-Sea.html?id=87148. 
Sea Enhancement Scheme (SES) 
http://www.plancoast.eu/. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
manage their costal zones. Spain has also launched a study on zoning of its territorial 
waters for the use of offshore wind energy.18 

Canada  has  adopted  an  objective-based  approach  to  the  management  of  maritime 
activities,  which  provides  guidance  for  solving  cross-sectoral  conflicts.  Australia  is 
advanced in the use of three-dimensional maritime zoning and involves a wide array 
of stakeholders in this process. 

3.2. 

Projects funded by European means 

Through  the  European  Territorial  Cooperation  objective,  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund  (ERDF)  can  support  spatial  development  projects  several  of 
which are of relevance for MSP.19 They cover mapping, common criteria for MSP, 
and transnational approaches to sea use management.  

EU  Research  Programmes  have  supported  multidisciplinary  research  in  coastal  and 
marine  sciences  since  the  1980s.  Research  on  coastal  erosion  and  flooding,  ICZM 
and  marine  ecosystem  thresholds  is  particularly  relevant.  MESMA  is  focusing  on 
monitoring  and  evaluation  of  spatially  managed  areas,  and  will  develop  innovative 
methods  and  integrated  planning  strategies.  HERMES  aims  to  gain  insights  into 
ecosystems along Europe's deep-ocean margin.20 

Within  the  TEN-T  programme,  priority  projects  and  preparatory  studies  for 
“Motorways of the Seas” can be supported through MARCO POLO II, regional and 
R&D  funds.  Currently,  projects  for  “Motorways  of  the  Sea”  cover  the  Baltic  Sea, 
Western  Europe,  Western  and  Eastern  Mediterranean,  and  the  Black  Sea.  The 
European  Neighbourhood  and  Partnership 
(ENPI)  Cross-Border 
Cooperation programmes for the period 2007-2013 will be able to support projects in 
eligible regions in the Baltic, Mediterranean and Black Seas.21 

Initiative 

4. 

INTERNATIONAL AND EU INSTRUMENTS  WITH AN IMPACT ON MARITIME SPATIAL 
PLANNING 

4.1. 

International instruments  

The  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Law  of  the  Sea  (UNCLOS)22  balances  the 
rights  and  interests  of,  for  instance,  flag  states,  coastal  states  and  port  states.  The 
division of seas and oceans into maritime zones, some of which must be claimed by 
coastal states in order to have legal effect, is particularly relevant.  

Also  of  importance  is  the  principle  of  freedom  of  navigation  guaranteed  under 
UNCLOS,  which  is  conditional  upon  rules  and  standards  on  maritime  safety  and 
protection of the marine environment being met. 

18 
19 

20 
21 
22 

http://www.mityc.es/Electricidad/Seccion/InstalacionesEolicas/EstudioEstrategico/. 
For example, projects funded by the transnational programmes for the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the 
Central, Adriatic, Danubian and South-Eastern Sea (CADSES) areas. 
www.eu-hermes.net 
http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/funding_en.htm 
Adopted in 1982, entered into force in 1994. The European Community and all EU Member States are 
party to UNCLOS. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
International  Maritime  Organisation 

The 
internationally 
recognised  rules  and  standards  for  shipping  and  maritime  transport  such  as  traffic 
separation  schemes.  The  London  Convention  Protocol  (2006)  introduces  the 
precautionary  principle  which  constitutes  a  major  change  of  approach  to  the 
regulation of depositing waste materials in the sea.23 

(IMO)  establishes 

4.2. 

EU instruments  

4.2.1.  Environmental legislation 

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)24 is  the environmental pillar of 
the IMP.25 It requires Member States to achieve good marine environmental status by 
2020,  to  apply  an  ecosystem  approach,  and  to  ensure  that  pressure  from  human 
activities is compatible with good environmental status. Member States are required 
to  cooperate  where  they  share  a  marine  region  or  sub-region  and  use  existing 
regional structures for coordination proposes, including with third countries. 

The  MSFD  does  not  directly  regulate  maritime  activities,  but  their  impact  must  be 
taken into account for the determination of good environmental status. Annex VI lists 
examples  of  possible  measures,  including  spatial  and  temporal  distribution  controls 
and tools for coordinated management. Some Member States have declared that they 
will use MSP to implement the MSFD (e.g. UK). 

The Water Framework Directive (WFD)26, with provisions applicable to the coastal 
and transitional waters, requires Member States to publish River Basin Management 
Plans  (RBMP)  by  December  2009.  As  a  consequence,  Member  States  have 
established water bodies that must cooperate to ensure WFD compliance with regard 
to transboundary river basin districts. 

The Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive (NATURA 2000)27 require Member 
States  to  identify  and  protect  areas  for  the  conservation  of  species  or  habitats  they 
host.  The  designation  of  coastal  and  marine  areas  is  ongoing  and  appropriate 
management measures are required. The Habitats Directive requires an assessment of 
plans or projects that may significantly impact a NATURA 2000 site.  

The Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) Directive28 requires an environmental 
assessment  of  certain  plans  and  programmes,  consultation  provisions  (including 
cross-border),  assessment  of  alternatives,  and  measures  to  prevent  and/or  mitigate 
adverse effects. The Environmental Impact Assessment Directive establishes similar 
requirements for projects.29  

23 
24 
25 
26 
27 

28 
29 

http://www.imo.org/Conventions/contents.asp?topic_id=258&doc_id=681 
2008/56/EC 
Recital 3 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. 
2000/60 EC 
79/409/EEC, OJ L 103, 25.04.1979 (Birds Directive) and 92/43/EEC, OJ L 206, 22.07.1992 (Habitats 
Directive). 
2001/42/EC, OJ L 197 
97/11/EC, OJ L 073, 14.03.1997 (amending 85/337/EEC). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
4.2.2.  The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) 

The CFP is exclusive EU competence. A good example of integrated management of 
marine space across sectoral policies is the decision (based on Article 9 of the Basic 
Regulation  of  the  CFP)30  adopted  by  the  Commission  at  the  request  of  the  Dutch 
government  to  protect  a  habitat  on  the  Dutch  North  Sea  Coast  (Voordelta  area).31 
Given the interaction of fisheries with the ecosystem and the mobility of fish stocks, 
sustainable management of fisheries in EU waters would benefit from coherent MSP. 

The Commission has announced a Communication on a strategy for the sustainable 
development of European aquaculture. Increasing competition for marine and coastal 
space,  and  quality  of  water  are  the  main  challenges  for  the  development  of 
aquaculture.  MSP  can  provide  guidance  and  reliable  data  for  the  location  of 
activities. 

4.2.3.  Other instruments 

The EU ICZM Recommendation32 sets out common principles (including coherence 
of  spatial  planning  across  the  land-sea  boundary)  and  calls  on  Member  States  to 
develop  ICZM  strategies.  It  encourages  Member  States  to  cooperate  with 
neighbouring third countries. 

The Commission has adopted a Communication on offshore wind energy.33 MSP can 
assist the development of renewable sources of offshore energy through the provision 
of a stable regulatory framework. 

4.3. 

Regional Conventions  

Work under the OSPAR convention of 1992 is based on an ecosystem approach and 
is organised around six strategies. OSPAR has served as a platform for exchange of 
information on MSP following the Fifth North Sea Conference34, and has taken this 
further in the context of its Biological Diversity and Ecosystem Strategy.  

The Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) is working to protect the marine environment 
in  the  Baltic  Sea  since  1974.  Of  particular  relevance  is  the  HELCOM  Baltic  Sea 
Action  Plan  adopted  in  2007  with  Recommendation  28E/9  on  the  development  of 
MSP principles for the Baltic Sea region. 

The  Mediterranean  became  the  first  region  to  adopt  a  Management  Plan 
(Mediterranean  Action  Plan  —  MAP)  in  1975,  under  the  UN  Environment 
Programme. The MAP is to be implemented through the Barcelona Convention. The 
Convention’s  recently  adopted  ICZM  Protocol35  requires  contracting  parties  to 

30 
31 

32 
33 
34 

35 

Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. 
http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/management_resources/environment/natura_2000_en.htm:  DG  MARE 
and DG ENV guidelines for fisheries measures for marine Natura 2000 sites.  
2002/413/EC, OJ L148 
COM(2008)736 
Ministerial Declaration on the Protection of the North Sea. March 2002, Chapter XI. Cooperation in the 
Process of Spatial Planning in the North Sea. 
Signed in Madrid on 21.01.2008.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
establish  a  common  framework  for  integrated  management  of  the  Mediterranean 
coastal zones.  

The  Bucharest  Convention  of  1992  sets  out  to  protect  the  Black  Sea  marine 
environment. Work is ongoing on a Protocol and strategic Action Plan for ICZM. 

5. 

KEY PRINCIPLES EMERGING FROM MARITIME SPATIAL PLANNING PRACTICE 

The preceding chapters allow identifying the following set of common principles of 
relevance to MSP in the EU.  

Sustainable  management  of  marine  regions  depends  on  the  condition  of  the 
respective  ecosystem.  In  line  with  the  IMP,  the  ecosystem  approach  is  an 
overarching principle for MSP. Although activities on land may have a direct impact 
on  sea  regions,  MSP  manages  only  maritime  activities  and  activities  in  coastal 
waters. The scope of MSP in terms of geographic coverage will differ according to 
regional  conditions.  Development  of  MSP  must  take  into  consideration,  and  where 
appropriate  contribute  to,  the  implementation  of  several  international  and  EU 
instruments  having  direct  relevance,  notably  in  the  field  of  the  environment. 
Implementation of the MSFD will be particularly relevant in this context. 

5.1. 

Using MSP according to area and type of activity 

Management  of  maritime  spaces  through  MSP  should  be  based  on  the  type  of 
planned or existing activities and their impact on the environment. A maritime spatial 
plan may not need to cover a whole area (e.g. EEZ of a Member State). 

For  densely  used  or  particularly  vulnerable  areas,  a  more  prescriptive  maritime 
spatial plan might be needed, whereas general management principles might suffice 
for areas with lower density of use. The decision to opt for a stricter or more flexible 
approach should be subject to an evaluation process.  

MSP operates within three dimensions, addressing activities (a) on the sea bed; (b) in 
the water column; and (c) on the surface. This allows the same space to be used by 
different purposes. Time should also be taken into account as a fourth dimension, as 
the compatibility of uses and the “management need” of a particular maritime region 
might vary over time. 

5.2. 

Defining objectives to guide MSP 

MSP should be used to manage ongoing activities and guide future development in a 
sea  area.  A  strategic  plan  for  the  overall  management  of  a  given  sea  area  should 
include detailed objectives. These objectives should allow arbitration in the case of 
conflicting sectoral interests. 

5.3. 

Developing MSP in a transparent manner 

Transparency  is  needed  for  all  documents  and  procedures  related  to  MSP.  Its 
different steps need to be easily understandable to the general public. This will allow 
full  information  to  all  parties  concerned  and  therefore  improve  predictability  and 
increase acceptance. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
5.4. 

Stakeholder participation  

In order to achieve broad acceptance, ownership and support for implementation, it is 
equally important to involve all stakeholders, including coastal regions, at the earliest 
possible stage in the planning process. Stakeholder participation is also a source of 
knowledge that can significantly raise the quality of MSP.  

5.5. 

Coordination within Member States — Simplifying decision processes 

MSP simplifies decision making and speeds up licensing and permit procedures, for 
the benefit of maritime users and maritime investment alike. Coordinated and cross-
cutting plans need a single or streamlined application process and cumulative effects 
should  be  taken  into  account.  The  internal  coordination  of  maritime  affairs  within 
Member  States proposed  in  the Guidelines for  an  Integrated  Approach  to  Maritime 
Policy36  should  also  benefit  the  implementation  of  MSP.  Developments  in  the 
Member  States  (e.g.  UK  and  Scottish  Marine  Bill)  demonstrate  that  national 
authorities are keen to reap these benefits through the establishment of a coordinating 
administrative body. 

5.6. 

Ensuring the legal effect of national MSP 

MSP does not replicate terrestrial planning at sea, given its tri-dimensionality and the 
fact  that  the  same  sea  area  can  host  several  uses  provided  they  are  compatible. 
However,  in  the  same  way  that  terrestrial  planning  set  up  a  legally  binding 
framework for the management of land, MSP should be legally binding if it is to be 
effective. This might also raise the issue of the appropriate administrative framework 
for MSP. 

5.7. 

Cross-border cooperation and consultation 

Cooperation  across  borders  is  necessary  to  ensure  coherence  of  plans  across  eco-
systems.  It  will  lead  to  the  development  of  common  standards  and  processes  and 
raise the overall quality of MSP. Some organisations such as HELCOM have already 
started this work. 

5.8. 

Incorporating monitoring and evaluation in the planning process 

MSP operates in an environment exposed to constant change. It is based on data and 
information likely to vary over time. The planning process must be flexible enough 
to react to such changes and allow plans to be revised in due course. To meet these 
two requirements, a transparent regular monitoring and evaluation mechanism should 
be part of MSP. 

5.9. 

Achieving  coherence  between  terrestrial  and  maritime  spatial  planning  — 
relation with ICZM 

Achieving  consistency  between  terrestrial  planning  (including  coastal  zones)  and 
maritime  planning  systems  is  a  challenge.  Coastal  zones  are  the  “hinge”  between 
maritime  and  terrestrial  development.  Drainage  areas  or  land-based  impacts  from 

36 

COM(2008)395 final 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
activities  such  as  agriculture  and  urban  growth  are  relevant  in  the  context  of  MSP. 
This  is  why  terrestrial  spatial  planning  should  be  coordinated  with  MSP.  The 
respective  services  should  cooperate  and  involve  stakeholders  so  as  to  ensure 
coherence. 

5.10.  A strong data and knowledge base 

MSP has to be based on sound information and scientific knowledge. Planning needs 
to  evolve  with  knowledge  (adaptive  management).  The  Commission  has  started 
several scientific and data gathering tools that will assist MSP in this process. These 
include  a  European  Marine  Observation  and  Data  Network  (EMODNET),  an 
integrated  database  for  maritime  socio-economic  statistics  (currently  under 
development by ESTAT), the European Atlas of the Seas (to be delivered in 2009) 
and the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (Kopernikus). 

6. 

CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK 

MSP  is  an  important  tool  for  the  development  of  an  Integrated  Maritime  Policy  in 
Europe.  This  Communication  aims  to  sketch  the  first  steps  towards  a  common 
approach  on  MSP.  In  identifying  key  principles  both  from  ongoing  practice  and 
existing regulations, it seeks to encourage a debate to help guide the development of 
MSP in the EU.  

To  facilitate  this  debate,  the  European  Commission  will,  in  early  2009,  launch  a 
work programme, which will consist of the following steps: 

•  the organisation of a series of 4 workshops in 2009. These workshops will bring 
together  representative  stakeholders  from  all  relevant  areas.  Their  objective  will 
be to discuss the principles suggested in this Communication; 

•  the  organisation,  in  2009,  of  pilot  projects  aiming  at  developing  cross-border 

cooperation aspects of MSP; 

•  the  production  of  a  report  drawing  conclusions  based  on  the  results  of  the 

workshops, and proposing further steps and action to follow-up on it. 

The Integrated EU Maritime Policy takes an innovative approach to policy-making. 
MSP is one of the tools that can be used to take this approach forward. 

EN 

11 

   EN