Survey - National and Regional implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning

Survey on National and Regional implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning
The REGINA-MSP project aims at improving the participation of the Regions, local authorities and stakeholders in the development and implementation of national Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP).

The questions included in the attached survey seek to the current status of Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) or its equivalent in the REGINA-MSP partner countries and their regions, using the six geographical commissions of the CPMR.

Should you choose to participate, you are asked to complete this online form. We would like to have wide geographic representation across the six geographical commissions of the CPMR including Atlantic, North Sea, Baltic Sea, Balkan and Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea basins and EU Islands. Participation is, however, voluntary. There is no obligation to participate, and should you choose to do so you can refuse to answer specific questions or decide to withdraw from the study.

You maintain the right to withdraw from the study at any stage up to the point of data submission. It should be noted that the responses you provide will be attributed to your country/organisation, not to you as an individual. The data collected will be used for the purpose of the project only.

The data will be stored on the University College Cork OneDrive system and subsequently on the UCC server and no private information will be disseminated. The data will be stored for a minimum of ten years. As stated above, the information you provide will contribute to the work of the REGINA-MSP project as well as for research publications and/or conference presentations. As a final outcome, MaREI and CPMR (supported by THETIS), will release a compendium of regional best experiences related to the implementation of the MSP Directive.

This study has obtained ethical approval from the UCC Social Research Ethics Committee. If you have any queries about this research, the process or the questions posed you can contact Dr Anne Marie O’Hagan at a.ohagan@ucc.ie and for any enquiries related to the CPMR, please contact Lise Guennal, Senior Project and Policy Officer, lise.guennal@crpm.org.
Do you consent to participate in this study?*

YesNo
GENERAL INFORMATION
Full Name*

First NameLast Name
Position*
Organisation*
Postal Address

Street Address

Street Address Line 2

CityState / Province

Postal / Zip Code
Region/county*
Country*
Email*
example@example.com
Phone Number

Area CodePhone Number
SECTION 1: Overview of the current MSP implementation level
Question 1: What is the current status of national MSP in your country?

AdoptedAdopted (first version) and in the process of revisionPrepared but not still officially adopted (consultation/strategic environmental assessment ongoing)In preparationOther (please specify)
If available, please provide any relevant information on your national MSP or any policy documents (links to online version etc.):
Cancelof
Question 2: Were authorities officially identified at the regional level with role/competence in MSP in your country?

YesNo
Specify which regional authority was designated and if a new dedicated governance structure has been established. Add any details you consider relevant to the main regional structures with MSP competency:
Question 3: From your perspective, how were regional authorities involved in the design/revision/implementation of the national MSP?

Fully involved (Regional authorities actively participated in the design of the Plan)Partially involved (Regional authorities were consulted after the plan design, with limited decision-making authority)Not involved/poorly involved (Regional authorities were not involved at all or simply informed at the final stages of the plan preparation)Other (please specify)
Please briefly describe what kind of activities were organised to facilitate regional engagement in the MSP process (e.g., regular meetings with regional authorities, workshops, consultation process):
Question 4: Since the MSP process started in your country, has the role of regional authorities evolved?

YesNo
Please provide more details on how the role of your region has evolved in the national MSP process:
Question 5: Which economic, environmental and social stakeholders/actors have been involved in the design and implementation of the national MSP and how (e.g., regular meetings with stakeholders, authorities, workshops, consultation process)?
Question 6: From your perspective, how are regional or local spatial plans (e.g., Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plans, sectoral plans for maritime activities, economic development plans) incorporated with national MSP plans?

Regional plans are fully consistent and embedded in national MSPRegional plans are poorly integrated in the national MSPRegional plans show some conflicts with the national MSPOther (please specify)
Is your region developing local/sectoral strategies or plans at sea which is relevant for MSP? Please, specify which ones and describe their legal status and implementation below:
Question 7: In your opinion, what gaps exist between national Maritime Spatial Plans and regional priorities (existing strategies/plans if any)?

Policy areas (please specify which ones)Availability of resourcesDifferent prioritiesData availabilityOther (please specify)
Add your considerations here:
Question 8: How can links between national Maritime Spatial Plans and regional priorities (existing strategies/plans) be strengthened or improved, if necessary? Do you have any suggestions on how to foster MSP through improved governance between national and regional scales?
Question 9: In your experience, have regions provided any data relevant to national MSP implementation? Tick all that apply.

Presence of conflicts between different maritime usesEnvironmental impacts and pressures of certain maritime activitiesEnvironmental (habitats/species/ marine biodiversity) dataPhysical and chemical dataHydrodynamical and hydrographic dataZonal assessment and/or marine protected area/ spatial conservation areasInternational and cross-border issuesMaritime boundariesMaritime transport and traffic flowsPorts and infrastructuresSubmarine cable and pipeline routesSurveillance and securityFishing and aquacultureSpatial policyMilitaryRisksRenewable energiesScientific researchTourism and recreationUnderwater cultural heritageCoastal land uses/activitiesSocio economic dataOther (please specify)No data were provided
Please add your considerations here about the process of data provision:
Please add your views in terms of data access and data gaps, limitations, overlapping, or specific needs in terms of data and geoportal:
Question 10: According to your experience, have regional authorities benefitted from any specific training on MSP or related fields (e.g. blue economy)?

YesNo
Please provide information on who provided the training (e.g. national government initiative, external provider sought specifically) and what topics were addressed:
Question 11: Have your national or regional authorities carried out any public awareness events on MSP?

YesNo
In cases where such campaigns on Ocean Literacy have taken place, please provide some information on these events such as where (school, museum, public square, etc..), on which topic (education, sustainable food, diving expedition, fishing-tourism, etc..), and to whom (students, general public, etc..) and/or associated contact persons:
SECTION 2: Opportunities from MSP for regional policy objectives

Question 1: How do you think MSP can help support climate action at the regional level? Score each option between 0 (=not relevant/unfeasible) and 3 (=high relevant/completely feasible)

	0	1	2	3
Avoiding new emerging use conflicts due to new challenges posed by climate change, by designing a future-looking plan
Safeguarding biodiversity from the impacts of climate change, by assessing the impacts of maritime activities
Increasing the resilience of vulnerable habitats and species through the safeguard of protected marine areas
Minimising the economic losses for certain maritime activities that could derive from “short-sighted” choices that do not properly consider risks associated to climate change
Promoting the use of marine renewable energy sources, by defining dedicated spatial measures
Preserving blue-carbon ecosystems, as important carbon sink areas
Promoting spatial measures for coastal defence and for mitigating coastal erosion due to sea level rise

How could it be progressed at regional level? Add other possible elements here:
Cancelof

Question 2: How do you think MSP can help support environmental protection and restoration at the regional level? Score each option between 0 (=not relevant/unfeasible) and 3 (=high relevant/completely feasible)

	0	1	2	3
Including objectives of nature conservation and restoration for the long-term planning of the marine areas
Ensuring coherence between MSP goals and regional goals of environmental protection
Improving the identification and mapping of seabed habitats
Improving the identification and mapping of ecosystem services
Improving the identification and mapping of environmental impacts of maritime activities
Promoting the development of maritime activities sustainable for the environment
Identifying areas for the definition of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) or Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECMS)

How do you think that MSP process can contribute to the protection, conservation and restoration of marine and coastal environment of your region? Please explain how could it be progressed at regional level? Add other possible elements here:

Question 3: How do you think MSP can support ICZM (integrated coastal zone management) at the regional level? Score each option between 0 (=not relevant/unfeasible) and 3 (=high relevant/completely feasible)

	0	1	2	3
Incorporating the analysis of Land-Sea Interactions in national MSP
Recognising the role of ICZM plans already issued by regional authorities
Promoting the preparation of new ICZM strategies and plans by regional authorities
Involving stakeholders with a key role for coastal issues (e.g. tourism)
Promoting spatial measures for coastal defence
Promoting spatial measures to avoid the impacts of sea-based or land-based activities on the coastal area
Mitigating conflicts between different coastal economic sectors at the regional level
Solving cross-border issues relating to the management of coastal and marine areas

Please specify how ICZM could be progressed at regional level? Add other possible elements here:
Question 4
Which other topics can benefit from MSP implementation at regional level?
What could be shared between regional authorities and national authorities to facilitate implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning?
Question 5: Considering stakeholders' engagement and the participation of sectors in MSP processes, which stakeholders/sectors are less structured and/or less represented in decision-making processes and set aside from MSP processes?
Further comments and information
Should you wish to add any supplementary information or comments on Maritime Spatial Planning in your country or Region, please add them below: (if some relevant topics have not been addressed or if some regional specificities were not captured in the questionnaire, e.g. those that apply in the Outermost Regions)
Are you available for a follow-up interview to share further information on your experience in MSP process?

YesNo
Thank you sincerely for taking the time to complete this survey and contributing to the REGINA-MSP project.
Should be Empty:

Survey on National and Regional implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning

GENERAL INFORMATION

SECTION 1: Overview of the current MSP implementation level

SECTION 2: Opportunities from MSP for regional policy objectives

Further comments and information