IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p5813-d1686209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Sustainable Maritime Spatial Planning: A Stakeholder-Driven Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Vasiliki-Maria Perra

    (Department of Maritime Studies, University of Piraeus, 18534 Piraeus, Greece)

  • Maria Boile

    (Department of Maritime Studies, University of Piraeus, 18534 Piraeus, Greece)

Abstract

Effective monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are essential for ensuring that Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) contributes to the sustainable development of the blue economy while maintaining alignment with institutional frameworks. The study presented in this paper develops a stakeholder-driven M&E framework for sustainable MSP, emphasizing a participatory methodology to enhance the relevance and applicability of performance assessment. Using a structured mutual learning approach, the research engaged stakeholders in two iterative rounds: the first identified key strategic objectives for a sustainable blue economy through dialogue and a complementary questionnaire survey, while the second refined these into corresponding specific objectives. This process was applied in the context of a case study in Greece, where MSP implementation is shaped by national and EU regulatory frameworks and the socio-economic dynamics of the coastal and maritime sectors. The case study provided a practical testing ground for the proposed methodology, involving stakeholders from government, industry, and civil society to ensure a comprehensive perspective. The insights gained informed the design of a key performance indicator (KPI) framework, integrating qualitative and quantitative metrics tailored to the regional maritime governance landscape. These metrics were selected based on the SMARTIE (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-Bound, Inclusive, Equitable) criteria and were clearly aligned with the established objectives. The frequency of measurements, appropriate data collection methods, and indicative data sources were also defined to provide a complete KPIs framework. This stakeholder-driven methodology strengthens the adaptive capacity of MSP by ensuring continuous assessment and revision aligned with sustainability objectives and facilitating ex ante, intermediate, and ex post evaluations. The proposed framework is scalable and transferable, offering a systematic approach to improving policy coherence and decision-making across different geographic, administrative, and sectoral contexts, enabling sustainable governance and maritime governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Vasiliki-Maria Perra & Maria Boile, 2025. "Developing a Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Sustainable Maritime Spatial Planning: A Stakeholder-Driven Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-48, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5813-:d:1686209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5813/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5813/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Kelly, Christina & Gray, Lorraine & Shucksmith, Rachel & Tweddle, Jacqueline F., 2014. "Review and evaluation of marine spatial planning in the Shetland Islands," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 152-160.
    3. Tom Waas & Jean Hugé & Thomas Block & Tarah Wright & Francisco Benitez-Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability Assessment and Indicators: Tools in a Decision-Making Strategy for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-23, August.
    4. Pomeroy, Robert & Douvere, Fanny, 2008. "The engagement of stakeholders in the marine spatial planning process," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 816-822, September.
    5. Tom Waas & Jean Huge & Thomas BLOCK & Tarah Wright & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189410, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Day, Jon, 2008. "The need and practice of monitoring, evaluating and adapting marine planning and management--lessons from the Great Barrier Reef," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 823-831, September.
    7. Umberto Janin Rivolin & Andreas Faludi, 2005. "The hidden face of European spatial planning: innovations in governance," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 195-215, January.
    8. Ida Maria Bonnevie & Henning Sten Hansen & Lise Schrøder & Aurelija Armoškaitė, 2022. "Utilising MYTILUS for Active Learning to Compare Cumulative Impacts on the Marine Environment in Different Planning Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-15, October.
    9. Christian Nolf & Yuting Xie & Florence Vannoorbeeck & Bing Chen, 2021. "Delta management in evolution: a comparative review of the Yangtze River Delta and Rhine-Meuse-Scheldt Delta," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 597-624, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Justyna Patalas-Maliszewska & Hanna Łosyk, 2020. "An Approach to Assessing Sustainability in the Development of a Manufacturing Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    3. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    4. Weiwei Li & Pingtao Yi & Danning Zhang, 2018. "Sustainability Evaluation of Cities in Northeastern China Using Dynamic TOPSIS-Entropy Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Svatava Janoušková & Tomáš Hák & Bedřich Moldan, 2018. "Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    6. Jean Hugé & Nibedita Mukherjee & Camille Fertel & Jean-Philippe Waaub & Thomas Block & Tom Waas & Nico Koedam & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2015. "Conceptualizing the Effectiveness of Sustainability Assessment in Development Cooperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-17, May.
    7. Kajsa Borgnäs, 2017. "Indicators as ‘circular argumentation constructs’? An input–output analysis of the variable structure of five environmental sustainability country rankings," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 769-790, June.
    8. Catherine Dezio & Davide Marino, 2018. "Towards an Impact Evaluation Framework to Measure Urban Resilience in Food Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    9. Marcellinus Essah, 2022. "Gold mining in Ghana and the UN Sustainable Development Goals: Exploring community perspectives on social and environmental injustices," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 127-138, February.
    10. Vicent Penadés-Plà & José V. Martí & Tatiana García-Segura & Víctor Yepes, 2017. "Life-Cycle Assessment: A Comparison between Two Optimal Post-Tensioned Concrete Box-Girder Road Bridges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-21, October.
    11. Jha, Priyanka & Schmidt, Stefan, 2021. "State of biofuel development in sub-Saharan Africa: How far sustainable?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    12. Guangdong Wu & Guofeng Qiang & Jian Zuo & Xianbo Zhao & Ruidong Chang, 2018. "What are the Key Indicators of Mega Sustainable Construction Projects? —A Stakeholder-Network Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    13. Małgorzata Ćwikła & Anna Góral & Ewa Bogacz-Wojtanowska & Magdalena Dudkiewicz, 2020. "Project-Based Work and Sustainable Development—A Comparative Case Study of Cultural Animation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-24, August.
    14. Tobias Engelmann & Daniel Fischer & Marianne Lörchner & Jaya Bowry & Holger Rohn, 2019. "“Doing” Sustainability Assessment in Different Consumption and Production Contexts—Lessons from Case Study Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-25, December.
    15. Nomeda Dobrovolskienė & Anastasija Pozniak & Manuela Tvaronavičienė, 2021. "Assessment of the Sustainability of a Real Estate Project Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Pedro Mauricio Acosta Castellanos & Araceli Queiruga-Dios & Ascensión Hernández Encinas & Libia Cristina Acosta, 2020. "Environmental Education in Environmental Engineering: Analysis of the Situation in Colombia and Latin America," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-14, September.
    17. Junze Zhang & Keith R. Skene & Saige Wang & Qiulei Ji & Heran Zheng & Chaowei Zhou & Kailan Tian & Prajal Pradhan & Michael E. Meadows & Bojie Fu, 2025. "Beyond borders: Assessing global sustainability through interconnected systems," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(2), pages 1909-1920, April.
    18. Khalid Butti Al Shamsi & Paolo Guarnaccia & Salvatore Luciano Cosentino & Cherubino Leonardi & Paolo Caruso & Giuseppe Stella & Giuseppe Timpanaro, 2019. "Analysis of Relationships and Sustainability Performance in Organic Agriculture in the United Arab Emirates and Sicily (Italy)," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-25, February.
    19. Giovanni Ferri & Habib Sedehi, 2018. "The System view of the Sustainable Development Goals," CERBE Working Papers wpC28, CERBE Center for Relationship Banking and Economics.
    20. Zouhair Rached & Ali Chebil & Chokri Thabet, 2022. "Effect of Farm Size on Sustainability Dimensions: Case of Durum Wheat in Northern Tunisia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5813-:d:1686209. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.