IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v97y2016icp391-399.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coexistence dilemmas in European marine spatial planning practices. The case of marine renewables and marine protected areas

Author

Listed:
  • Kyriazi, Zacharoula
  • Maes, Frank
  • Degraer, Steven

Abstract

The question whether coexistence of marine renewable energy (MRE) projects and marine protected areas (MPAs) is a common spatial policy in Europe and how a number of factors can affect it, has been addressed by empirical research undertaken in eleven European marine areas. Policy drivers and objectives that are assumed to affect coexistence, such as the fulfillment of conservation objectives and the prioritization of other competing marine uses, were scored by experts and predictions were crosschecked with state practice. While in most areas MRE-MPA coexistence is not prohibited by law, practice indicates resistance towards it. Furthermore expert judgment demonstrated that a number of additional factors, such as the lack of suitable space for MRE projects and the uncertainty about the extent of damage by MRE to the MPA, might influence the intentions of the two major parties involved (i.e. the MRE developer and the MPA authority) to pursue or avoid coexistence. Based on these findings, the interactions of these two players are further interpreted, their policy implications are discussed, while the need towards efficient, fair and acceptable MRE-MPA coexistence is highlighted.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyriazi, Zacharoula & Maes, Frank & Degraer, Steven, 2016. "Coexistence dilemmas in European marine spatial planning practices. The case of marine renewables and marine protected areas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 391-399.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:97:y:2016:i:c:p:391-399
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516303706
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kyriazi, Zacharoula & Lejano, Raul & Maes, Frank & Degraer, Steven, 2015. "Bargaining a net gain compensation agreement between a marine renewable energy developer and a marine protected area manager," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 40-48.
    2. Christie, N. & Smyth, K. & Barnes, R. & Elliott, M., 2014. "Co-location of activities and designations: A means of solving or creating problems in marine spatial planning?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 254-261.
    3. Qiu, Wanfei & Jones, Peter J.S., 2013. "The emerging policy landscape for marine spatial planning in Europe," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 182-190.
    4. Clément, Alain & McCullen, Pat & Falcão, António & Fiorentino, Antonio & Gardner, Fred & Hammarlund, Karin & Lemonis, George & Lewis, Tony & Nielsen, Kim & Petroncini, Simona & Pontes, M. -Teresa & Sc, 2002. "Wave energy in Europe: current status and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 6(5), pages 405-431, October.
    5. Stelzenmüller, Vanessa & Breen, Patricia & Stamford, Tammy & Thomsen, Frank & Badalamenti, Fabio & Borja, Ángel & Buhl-Mortensen, Lene & Carlstöm, Julia & D’Anna, Giovanni & Dankers, Norbert & Degraer, 2013. "Monitoring and evaluation of spatially managed areas: A generic framework for implementation of ecosystem based marine management and its application," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 149-164.
    6. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Levrel, Harold & Pioch, Sylvain & Carlier, Antoine, 2014. "Biodiversity offsets for offshore wind farm projects: The current situation in Europe," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 172-183.
    7. Houdet, Joël & Trommetter, Michel & Weber, Jacques, 2012. "Understanding changes in business strategies regarding biodiversity and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 37-46.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:gam:jeners:v:10:y:2017:i:10:p:1512-:d:113660 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:97:y:2016:i:c:p:391-399. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.