1. INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE AGREEMENTS & BALTIC SEA MANAGEMENT
20/07/2009
INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE AGREEMENTS & BALTIC SEA MANAGEMENT
Chris Hopkins
AquaMarine Advisers®, Åstorp, Sweden
Presentation on 26 July 2009 at
Nordic Marine Academy Ph.D. Course, Bornholm: ‘Climate Impacts on the Baltic Sea – from Science to Policy’
35 mins presentation (incl. ca. slide 13).
10 mins break.
35 mins presentation (ca. slide 13 to end).
Q&A, literature & ‘exercise topic’ for ca. 10 min.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

2. What is this presentation about?
20/07/2009
What is this presentation about?
Examine the development of the ‘ecosystem approach to the management of human activities’ (EAM) as the overarching policy & management concept for conserving healthy & sustainable marine ecosystems, & the goods & services they provide for humanity in European Regional Seas.
Follow the joint origin of the EAM & the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change from 1992 UN Conference on Environment & Development (‘Rio Earth Summit’), & their underpinning by Precautionary Principle & Polluter Pays Principle. With reference to European Regional Seas, & especially Baltic Sea, the international ‘instruments’ (e.g. conventions, agreements, guidelines) concerning management of the coastal & offshore marine environment & its living resources are summarily reviewed, & attention drawn to increasing emphasis being placed on the EAM as the guiding concept for their application.
The 2002 North Sea Ministerial Declaration (5th International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea) adopted & outlined, for the first time in the European Regional Seas, the general framework necessary for developing & implementing the EAM. The EAM framework was subsequently incorporated for application in all the European Regional Seas, including the Baltic Sea, & is central in elaborating & implementing the European Union’s (EU) primary marine management & policy instruments, i.e. the Water Framework Directive, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive & the integrated Maritime Policy.
The main components of the EAM framework for conserving ecosystem health are examined: the role of an overarching ‘vision’, setting of a suite of ecological quality objectives with targets & limits, monitoring & integrated assessment of indicators of change, & management/regulation of human activities causing detrimental effects. The main international management forums for the Baltic Sea are outlined, i.e. HELCOM for ‘environmental’ management, & the EU (Common Fisheries Policy) & Russia for bilateral management of fisheries. Finally, simple, generic ways in which climate change may be addressed across all relevant marine-related sectors by mitigation & adaptation are noted, & the importance of ‘linking science & policy’ is emphasized for enhancing Baltic Sea management in a strategic, longer term perspective.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

3. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
Introductory facts
Climate change, from greenhouse gas emissions due to human activities, is most significant threat to natural environment/biodiversity & to sustainable use of biodiversity by humans at global and regional scales (IPCC 2002; CBD 2003).
Impacts of climate change on marine ecosystems, biodiversity & living resources, has major socio-economic consequences on humans (IPCC 2002; Frid et al. 2003).
Environmental assessments of most regional seas generally have not given major focus on climate variability & climate change effects (HELCOM 2003; Hopkins 2004). Impression that ‘other pressures’ are more important than climate change impacts.
Few major marine environmental policy & management ‘instruments’ (conventions, agreements, etc.) emphasize need to address climate change. But, increasing appreciation that climate change must be practically integrated into workplans & operations in a cross-sectoral way (e.g. across industries & sectorized institutions).
Regionalization of climate variability & climate change is major goal of research & management in shelf seas (e.g. Baltic Sea).
Climate change impacts are overlaid on those of other environmental stressors (e.g. overfishing, pollution including eutrophication, land & resource use, & invasive species), and often has synergistic interactions with multiple stressors.
Climate change is not a separate phenomenon: It’s part of a series of impacts caused by unsustainable practices, with linkages to several other environmental challenges.
Management & scientific knowledge must adopt a system-level perspective that considers climate patterns, trends/events in the context of multiple stressors.
Good environmental status of Europe’s marine environment would create a ‘buffer’ to cope with the impact of climate change.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

4. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
1992 ‘RIO EARTH SUMMIT’: Parent of ‘ecosystem approach’ & climate change mitigation
Brundtland Commission (UN) report ‘Our Common Future’: Urgency - achieve sustainable economic development without depleting natural resources or harming environment.
Brundtland defined concept of environmentally sustainable development: ‘development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’
1992 UN Conference on Environment & Development (UNCED, Rio ‘Earth Summit’) - economic foundation for human wealth & health must be carefully integrated within a framework of ecological conservation & protection.
UNCED adopted three ground-breaking international conventions:
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): UNFCCC has goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations ‘at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human induced) interference with the climate system.’ This level ‘should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened, and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.’ UNFCCC recognizes sustainable, ecosystem-based management. Kyoto Protocol (1997, into force ) implements UNFCCC by mitigation. (NB: Adaptation is also necessary!)
UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD): Promotes 1) conservation of biological diversity, 2) sustainable use of its components, & 3) fair & equitable sharing of benefits from use of genetic resources.
[UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)]
Promoted application of ‘ecosystem approach’: humans are part of ecosystems & human activities, including production of pollutants (also climate change gases) & unsustainable utilization & degradation of ecosystem resources, need to be managed/regulated so as to achieve sustainable development. Linked to ‘precautionary principle’ &‘polluter pays principle’ in UNCED & UN Agenda 21 (21st century) programme promoting sustainable development.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

5. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
Transboundary & international policy ‘instruments’ for environmental management of coastal & offshore areas
Include various international conventions, agreements & other ‘instruments’, as well as European Community (EC) ‘Directives’.
Bind States across boundaries in acting together. Collectively have potential to combat causes of overexploitation, pollution (including climate change gases), habitat degradation & human encroachment.
In 2004, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, & Poland acceded to EU, joining Denmark, Finland, Germany & Sweden. So, many EC Directives (implanted into national law) apply to marine environment & living marine resources including fisheries & biodiversity.
Policy & management instruments may appear fragmented or disjointed, but are in process of being subsumed by application of Ecosystem approach to the management of human activities (EAM) across diverse policy areas & EC Directives.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

6. Some key international policy ‘instruments’ applicable in Baltic Sea
20/07/2009
Some key international policy ‘instruments’ applicable in Baltic Sea
1971 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, also Waterfowl Habitat
1972 Convention on Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes & Other Matter
1973 MARPOL – IMO Convention on Marine Pollution from Ships
1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna & Flora (CITES)
1974/92 Convention for Protection of Marine Environment of Baltic Sea Area established Helsinki Commission (HELCOM - Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission)
1979 Bonn Convention on Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals including 1991 ASCOBANS to conserve & protect small cetaceans in BS & North Sea
1979 Bern Convention for Conservation of European Wildlife (fauna & flora) particularly endangered/vulnerable including migratory species
1982 UN Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) including resource management & marine environmental protection
1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
1992 UN Framework on Climate Change (Kyoto Protocol 1997, into force 2005 – 2012)
1995 FAO Code of Conduct on Responsible Fisheries
1995 UN Convention on Straddling Fish Stocks & Highly Migratory Fish Stocks –regime of conservation & management of such stocks
2004 IMO International Convention for Control & Management of Ships’ Ballast Water & Sediments – prevent spread of harmful aquatic organisms (pathogens, diseases, aliens)
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

7. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
Some key European Community ‘instruments’ applicable in Baltic Sea [8 of 9 BS countries in EU]
1979 Directive on Conservation of Wild Birds – special measures to protect habitats of rare & vulnerable species including migrants.
1970(83) – ongoing Common Fisheries Policy (CFP, for fisheries & aquaculture). Exploitation of resources providing sustainable economic, environmental & social conditions. Including recently incorporation of ‘ecosystem approach to management’ (EAM).
1991 Directive on Aquaculture Animals & Products – productivity, health rules, limit spread of infections & diseases.
1991 Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive – point sources of municipal waste water discharges, sets minimum standards for collection, treatment & disposal
1991 Nitrates Directive – protection of surface & ground waters from pollution of inorganic fertilizers & manure from diffuse agriculture sources.
1992 Directive on Conservation of Natural Habitats & Wild Fauna & Flora – ‘Habitats Directive’ designates & implements conservation measures for Special Areas of Conservation
2000 Water Framework Directive – WFD promotes integrated management of all water-related operations in fresh & marine waters (< 1 nm from ‘baseline’). Applies EAM.
2006 – ongoing Integrated Marine Policy to achieve full economic potential of oceans/seas in harmony with marine environment. Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008) is environmental pillar (applies EAM) & extends beyond WFD seawards.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

8. Baltic Sea management: HELCOM, EC & Russia
20/07/2009
Baltic Sea management: HELCOM, EC & Russia
Fisheries management between EC & Russia via a bilateral agreement. In ‘environmental’ management excluding fisheries management, all 9 BS countries collaborate via HELCOM.
Fisheries management – Bilateral Agreement between European Community & Russia
Bilateral agreement – in force 29 April 2009 for initial 6 years: Provisions on joint management measures for Baltic Sea fisheries. Bilateral framework needed as, following 2004 EU enlargement, membership of International Baltic Sea Fisheries Commission (IBSFC, Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources in Baltic Sea and Belts of 1973, ‘Gdansk Convention’) consisted of only two Parties, i.e. EU & Russia. On 1 January 2007 IBSFC ceased following withdrawal of EU.
Baltic Sea Regional Advisory Council (BS RAC): Creation of RACs - pillar of 2002 CFP reform. Response to fisheries stakeholders wanting to be more involved in how fisheries are managed in EU. BS RAC provides advice to European Commission & Member States concerning Baltic Sea fisheries management in order to achieve successful running of CFP.
‘Environmental’ management: HELCOM & the BSAP – Forum for all Baltic Sea countries
Convention for Protection of Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area (1974): Helsinki Commission (Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, HELCOM) to protect the marine environment of the Baltic Sea area from all sources of pollution & to restore & safeguard ‘ecological balance’.
‘New’ 1992 Convention: Greater focus on nature conservation & protection of biological diversity including conserving natural habitats & protecting ecological processes to ensure sustainable use of natural resources.
Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP): Adopted 2007: - Programme to address all major environmental problems affecting Baltic marine environment & restore ‘good ecological status’ by 2021.
ICES - Providing independent scientific advice for management
International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES, established 1902): Network of >1600 scientists (ca. 200 institutes in 20 countries) linked by ICES Convention, adding value to national research efforts. Prime source of independent, politically objective scientific advice on marine ecosystem to governments & international regulatory bodies that manage the North Atlantic & adjacent seas. In Baltic Sea, ICES provides scientific advice to all 9 coastal countries, European Commission & HELCOM.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

9. EC Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008)
20/07/2009
EC Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, 2008)
Aim: Achieve ‘Good Environmental Status’ (GEnS) in European Regional Seas by 2020.
Member States develop & implement Marine Strategies in order to:
“protect and preserve the marine environment, prevent its deterioration or, where practicable, restore marine ecosystems in areas where they have been adversely affected”; [Art1(2)(a)]
“prevent and reduce inputs in the marine environment, …..phasing out pollution as defined in Article 3(8), so as to ensure that there are no significant impacts on or risks to marine biodiversity, marine ecosystems, human health or legitimate uses of the sea”; [Art1(2)(b)]
Apply EAM “ensuring that collective pressure of such activities is kept within levels compatible with the achievement of good environmental status and that the capacity of marine ecosystems to respond to human-induced changes is not compromised, while enabling the sustainable use of marine goods and services by present and future generations”. [Art1(3)]
Establishes ‘marine regions/sub-regions’ (e.g. Baltic Sea) as management units. Has EU ‘generic’ aims (common model) across regions but recognizes each region has its own specific characteristics (ecosystem & human activities/pressures).
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

10. EC MSFD - Member States must:
20/07/2009
EC MSFD - Member States must:
Provide an assessment of current status of their seas (July 2012)
Provide detailed description of what GEnS means for their waters, and targets & indicators (July 2012)
Establish monitoring programme to measure progress towards GEnS (July 2014)
Establish programme of measures for achieving GEnS (July 2016)
States determine how MSFD will be implemented by national agencies & in close cooperation with other States in regional forums (e.g. OSPAR, HELCOM). Regional assessments delivered by regional forums.
Initial assessment - a) physical & biological status, b) predominant pressures & impacts adversely affecting environment, c) socio-economic analysis: use & cost of degradation.
Analysis of current status - list of characteristics & pressures (Directive’s Annex III)
11 high-level descriptors of GEnS set out in Directive, e.g.
‘Concentration of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects’
‘Populations of all commercially exploited fish & shellfish are within safe biological limits’
EU standardized monitoring & assessment methods developed
European Commission (with help of ICES) develops common criteria & standards for defining GEnS
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

11. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
DEVELOP ‘VISION’ & OPERATIONAL STRATEGY FOR MAINTAINING ECOSYSTEM HEALTH
EU generic Vision. Each Regional Seas Commission (e.g. HELCOM)
& EU State develops its own
Generic for all seas
E.g. phase out pollution to ensure no significant impacts/risk to human and/or ecosystem health and/or uses of the sea
Reduce impact of contaminants
Reduce contaminant levels in fish species x
Concentration of contaminant y in fish species x
For specific regionalsea
Concentration of contaminant = a (target) or < b (limit)
Actions / measures
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

12. WHAT IS (ECOSYSTEM) HEALTH?
20/07/2009
WHAT IS (ECOSYSTEM) HEALTH?
Health: BBC English Dictionary (1993) ‘a state in which you are fit & well’.
Regarding an organization/system: ‘working well’ (i.e. sum of the parts)
Healthy: extent a person/something is in ‘good condition’ as a whole (some organs/systems may be healthy & others not).
Good health & its deviation are measured against various ‘reference levels’ (e.g. normal temperature & blood pressure).
When condition deviates substantially from desired target level of good health it is implicit one has crossed a limit level - serious/irreversible harm results.
To avoid serious/irreversible harm/damage, take precautions & establish precautionary levels beyond which we should not transgress (c.f. Body Mass Index as a precautionary indicator).
Keeping within the precautionary levels is wise: avoids major socioeconomic costs that arise from ill-health & its treatment (recovery).
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

13. CHALLENGES: DECLINING & VULNERABLE SPECIES, HABITATS & ECOSYSTEMS
20/07/2009
CHALLENGES: DECLINING & VULNERABLE SPECIES, HABITATS & ECOSYSTEMS
Human ‘pressures’ have resulted in:
Marked declines & local extinctions of many vulnerable species
Degradation of habitats that provide essential living areas (e.g. feeding, breeding, nursery, refuges) for species & communities
Distortions in characteristic structure, function & integrity of ecosystems – which traditionally made them valuable - thereby affecting their ability to provide important ‘goods & services’.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

14. 20/07/2009
THE SHIFTING BASELINE (DEPLETE, SUSTAIN OR REBUILD?) (Figure after Pitcher T.J. & P.J.B. Hart (1998): Rebuilding ecosystems, not sustainability, as the proper goal of fishery management. Pp , In Pitcher T.J., Hart P.J.B. & Pauly D. (Eds) Reinventing Fisheries Management, Chapman & Hall, London.
Fewer, smaller, less valuable & lower in the food chain
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

15. THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE (PP)
20/07/2009
THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE (PP)
PP from UNCED 1992 [‘where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation’]
Changes in exploited systems are slowly reversible, difficult to control, & not well understood. PP calls for early action in uncertainty & ignorance in order to prevent potential harm.
Underlines need for sustainable use of ecosystems & their biodiversity rather than over-exploitation, pollution & habitat degradation.
Applied where an activity is or likely to cause damage & where uncertainty about the risks & the degree of damage (‘burden of proof’ & its reversal).
Emphasizes knowledge is limited & calls for action with incomplete knowledge! Potentially high socioeconomic costs of impacts of depletion & degradation & so for restoration/recovery. Thus, closely related to polluter pays principle.
Scientific advice & management should have safe margins of error & avoid risk.
Reference points needed to implement management & regulatory measures. Example, ‘target’ , ‘limit’, ‘precautionary’ reference points for fish spawning stock biomass & fishing mortality. Risk for exceeding limits must be very low.
‘Recovery plans’ must be developed & implemented.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

16. THE POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE (PPP, 1970s)
20/07/2009
THE POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE (PPP, 1970s)
PPP requires producers/resource users to meet the cost of implementing environmental standards or technical regulations, or by introducing liability regimes making producers liable for causing environmental damage.
Embedded in 1987 European Community (EC) Treaty, & Commissions such as OSPAR, HELCOM.
PPP provides framework based on environmental liability covering damage to biodiversity protected at European Community & EU national levels, to waters regulated by 2000 WFD & 2008 MSFD, & air & land contamination which cause serious harm to human & ecosystem health.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

17. ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT (1)
20/07/2009
ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT (1)
Ecosystem approach to management of human activities (EAM) defined as:
‘the comprehensive integrated management of human activities based on the best available scientific knowledge about the ecosystem and its dynamics, in order to identify and take action on influences which are critical to the health of marine ecosystems, thereby achieving sustainable use of ecosystem goods and services and maintenance of ecosystem integrity’ (2003, First Joint Meeting of HELCOM & OSPAR Commissions).
Does not imply managing ecosystems by humans, but is managing human activities & their impacts on ecosystems. Humans are an integral part of ecosystems & human socioeconomics interact with physical, chemical & biological parts of the system.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

18. ECOSYSTEM HEALTH: SUSTAINING ECOLOGICAL ‘GOODS & SERVICES’
20/07/2009
ECOSYSTEM HEALTH: SUSTAINING ECOLOGICAL ‘GOODS & SERVICES’
EAM is a paradigm shift from focus on ‘goods’ (traditional industries/commodities). We must also focus on sustaining production potential for important ecosystem ‘services’ that have consistently been overlooked & under-valued. Services can be ruined: catastrophic effects on ‘natural capital’ & human socioeconomics.
EAM aims to conserve and rebuild when depleted & degraded, the full ecological & socioeconomic value of natural ‘goods & services’.
Goods: food (fisheries, aquaculture); raw materials (minerals, oil, gas); medicinal materials, wild genes.
Services: cleansing water & air; maintaining atmosphere/ regulating climate; storing/recycling essential nutrients; absorbing/detoxifying pollutants; food webs & habitats; generating/maintaining sediments & reefs; providing sites for tourism, recreation & research.
Value of global marine industries (i.e. providing goods) is US$ 1 trillion, but marine ecosystem services is US$ 21 trillion. Sea provides 60% of world’s ecosystem services, but 40% from land-based systems (Costanza et al. 1997). Must better monitor & manage ‘health’ of marine ecosystems & progress to area-based ecosystem management with clear objectives.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

19. ECOSYSTEM BASED MANAGEMENT (2)
20/07/2009
ECOSYSTEM BASED MANAGEMENT (2)
Needs integrated, cross-sectoral marine management plans (e.g. ‘tool-box’ of measures, a system of marine protected areas covering representative habitats) for offshore & coastal areas & develop long-term policies for ecosystem-based management. What is the Vision & Perspectives: what do we want to achieve?
OSPAR, for example, (primed by 2002 Bergen Ministerial Declaration of 5th International Conference on Protection of the North Sea) is developing & applying holistic ecological quality objectives to maintain ecosystem quality (‘goods & services’):
Ecological quality (EcoQ) expresses ecosystem’s status (‘well-being’) & includes biological, physical & chemical measures & inter-relationships , including the results of human impacts.
Ecological quality objectives (EcoQOs) define a desired status for components in the system relative to a reference value (e.g. reference value in an equivalent ‘undisturbed’ system). What is the status today (where are we now??), from what status has the system progressed (where have we come from??), & what is the desired ‘target’ status (where do we wish to go??)?
To deliver an EAM: must develop a coherent & integrated, & easy to understand suite of EcoQOs covering a key set of EcoQ components.
Implementing regional ecosystem-based management is a major challenge & opportunity for cross-sectoral stakeholder collaboration (e.g. natural, social & political sciences, regulatory agencies, & involved industries & wider-society).
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

20. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
CAUSE-&-EFFECT: IDENTIFY & RANK THE (ROOT) CAUSES OF PROBLEMS ON ECOSYSTEMS & APPLY PRIORITIZED, TARGETED REMEDIAL ACTIONS
NB!
Many industries benefit from & also impact on ecosystems
EcoQ
issues/elements from 2002 Bergen North Sea Ministerial Declaration
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

21. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
DEVELOP ‘VISION’ & OPERATIONAL STRATEGY FOR ECOSYSTEM HEALTH: TACKLE ‘SHIFTING BASELINE SYNDROME’
Need a Vision, Policy, & Strategy to achieve Objectives, supported by Actions to Redress (Root) Causes at relevant spatial scales involving longer term perspectives with EAM.
What do we want to achieve & why? Unless we have a clear Vision for the Mission we will not be able to agree on the specific details (e.g. EcoQOs)
Convincing & coherent policy to set general ’desire’ (e.g. European Marine Strategy Directive) incorporating a clear overarching vision [’we & future generations can enjoy & benefit from biologically diverse & dynamic oceans & seas that are safe, clean, healthy & productive’];
Elaborate in meaningful terms what it is we want to achieve & why (i.e. justification) [Determined by Societal choice];
Translatable into tangible objectives (goals) supported by agreed actions/measures (e.g. workplan comprising a ’tool-box’ of activities & regulatory measures) for implementation.
Where are we, where have we come from & where do we wish to go?
For this we must develop effective & relevant targets & limits for environmental/ecological quality, including development of an integrated & cohesive system of ’indicators’ that allow us to measure/track progress with respect to reference points (i.e. producing a map & knowing where we are on it & how we are moving towards our destination).
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

22. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
A HEALTHY ECOSYSTEM: GOOD ACCORDANCE WITH TARGET LEVELS ACROSS THE SUITE OF ECOLOGICAL QUALITY INDICATORS
20/07/2009
Here
now
‘Traffic lights’ system
Gross categories
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

23. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
2002 Bergen Ministerial Declaration on Protection of North Sea set Conceptual Framework for an Ecosystem Approach to Management of Human Activities
The framework starts with the need to generate information about the ecosystem and interacting human activities. This is done by monitoring to assess the status and trends of the system and through research, giving insight into relationships, interactions, and processes affecting the ecosystem. Together this information feeds the central dominating part of the framework, the integrated assessment or evaluation. The integrated assessment is subject to the objectives that are established for the particular marine ecosystem. Comparison of the outcome of the integrated assessment with the objectives will result in scientific advice to the management regarding what actions should be taken to achieve the objectives set. This advice is used by managers and policymakers to set up a management regime for the coming period. The effect of this new management regime is measured through monitoring. And the process is repeated over again. In the real world there are many interactions between the parties involved and this communication forms an important aspect of the ecosystem approach.
There is a need to move towards integrated monitoring in an ecosystem context. The integrated assessment is a major factor that forces other elements of the framework to deal with integrated issues, and is an important element of an ecosystem approach. Defining operationally specific objectives for the management of marine ecosystems is a major challenge before an ecosystem approach can come into action. This developing process involves the interaction between scientific knowledge, socioeconomic forces, and national and international agreements (policy) ending up in a political decision-making process.
Ecosystem management is a process that concerns the relevant stakeholders. The attention to socio-economics and the need to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process reflects the fact ecosystem management can only be done by the regulation of human activities. This is a good good reason to include the users in the ecosystem management concept. So, communication and cooperation is essential to reach any new objective.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

24. Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management
20/07/2009
DPSIR risk-based scheme: Framework & policy tool to identify management options for environmental issues
Drivers: The human caused driving forces leading to environmental pressures. Examples are socioeconomic sectoral/industry demands or trends (agriculture, fishing, energy production/utilization, etc.).
Pressures: Examples are emissions/discharges of pollutants, excessive exploitation of resources (land, water, minerals, fish) affecting the state of the environment.
State: Refers to the quality and quantity of environmental media and living resources (air, water, sediments, biota and their habitats) and their consequent ability to provide benefits arising from ecosystem goods and services. The current state = natural state as modified by human pressures.
Impacts: The environmental State (good/poor) may have an impact (beneficial/detrimental) on human health, and the structure, function and integrity of ecosystems which provide amenities and commodities on which human communities depend.
Responses: Are the efforts by human society (e.g. politicians decision-makers, managers/regulators) to mitigate, adapt to or solve the problems identified by the assessed impacts. Responses include development and application of appropriate environmental policies, management and regulatory measures, including BAT/BEP, to prevent or eliminate pollution and restore/rehabilitate adversely impacted environmental media/components.
RESPONSES
DRIVERS
IMPACT
PRESSURES
STATE
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

25. MANAGEMENT OF HABITATS, SPATIAL PLANNING & MPAs
20/07/2009
Habitat: place where plant/animal lives, characterized by physical & chemical features (e.g. substrate, temperature, salinity, currents).
Conservation of habitats = precondition for conserving species & communities depending on habitat characteristics/ ecological quality criteria for viability. Habitat degradation, fragmentation & loss due to human pressures are serious threats to biodiversity.
Mapping & inventories of marine areas provide an assessment of habitat type distributions & their associated communities. CBD, Habitats Directive (Natura 2000), & MSFD require States to identify, classify & map threatened/declining species & habitats needing special conservation measures (e.g. Biodiversity Action Plans/Recovery Plans).
Cross-sectoral, holistic spatial planning important delivery tool of an ecosystem-based management (c.f. Maritime Policy, MSFD) to reconcile multiple, cumulative & potentially conflicting uses of sea. Use of zoning as spatial planning tool (c.f. ’town planning scheme’) allows approved activities in specified areas (excludes incompatible ones).
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs): Important areas - certain uses/zones actively managed regarding human activities (use/access/purpose) to conserve natural resources (e.g. HELCOM, OSPAR & Natura 2000).
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

26. HOW DOES CLIMATE CHANGE GET INTEGRATED? (1)
20/07/2009
HOW DOES CLIMATE CHANGE GET INTEGRATED? (1)
Two main ways to tackle climate change regarding management :
1) Mitigation: (Definition) - Taking actions to slow the speed & amount of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) & increasing their absorption by enhancing absorbents (‘sinks’) (Barents Euro-Arctic Council 2004).
Mitigation involves each marine industry finding ways to reduce their GHG emissions. Involves application & further development of best available practices (BAT) & best environmental technologies (BET).
The marine industries can contribute by:
1) Increasing their energy efficiency
2) Using renewable energy sources such as solar power, wind power, geothermal and water power & even nuclear energy.
Fishing industry, mitigation as an example:
More use of passive, more target-specific fishing gears increasingly desirable, in response to cost of wild-fish capture escalating through rising fuel prices.
Enhanced ship hull & propulsion to lower emissions footprint of current fleets & making optimal use of environmentally friendly energy sources.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

27. HOW DOES CLIMATE CHANGE GET INTEGRATED? (2)
20/07/2009
HOW DOES CLIMATE CHANGE GET INTEGRATED? (2)
2) Adaptation: (Definition) - Taking actions concerning ‘adjustment’ of natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities (IPCC 2007). Adaptation covers actions to attempt to limit adverse impacts by becoming more resilient to the climate changes that will occur while mankind pursues mitigation.
Fishing industry, adaptation as an example:
Tackle excessive exploitation of many living marine resources & ecosystem effects of fishing. Besides increasing their resilience to climate change & decreasing their variability, this facilitates achieving two other desirable goals, viz. achieving longer term sustainable yields from such resources & reducing ‘greenhouse’ gas emissions in their harvesting.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

28. General guidelines regarding management for adapting to climate change
20/07/2009
General guidelines regarding management for adapting to climate change
Follow EAM & other good practices, keep well within precautionary limits, thus enhancing ecosystem resilience. Management framework must ensure adequate measures will be taken as changes appear: be responsive & adaptive.
Reduce anthropogenic stressors on marine ecosystems. Climate change depends on extent to which other pressures (e.g. excessive ‘extractive’ harvesting, pollution including eutrophication, human encroachment) also cause stress.
Protect key ecosystem features/resilience & implement appropriate & timely restoration/recovery plans.
Incorporate climate change adaptation (& mitigation) into sectoral planning including risk assessment.
Facilitate knowledge/understanding/capacity building about climate change as an integral part of marine environmental management in a cross-sectoral way.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

29. LINKING SCIENCE & POLICY (1)
20/07/2009
LINKING SCIENCE & POLICY (1)
SCIENTISTS
Hopkins C.C.E., J. Thulin, J.G. Sutinen, K. Kononen, P. Snoeijs, S. Johansson & H.-O. Nalbach BONUS-169 Baltic Sea Science Plan and Implementation Strategy. BONUS Publication No. 5. Academy of Finland.
SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS
SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH
MODELLING &
SYNTHESIS
PREDICTIVE
CAPACITY
BONUS-169 Programme: Collaboration of national Baltic Sea funding agencies & EC to create a cooperative, interdisciplinary, well integrated and focused transnational research programme in support of the Baltic Sea region’s sustainable development, by providing scientific outputs that facilitate the implementation of ecosystem-based management of the Baltic Sea environmental issues.
POLICY,
REGULATION &
MANAGEMENT
SCIENCE-BASED
ADVICE
ADVISORY BODIES
EXECUTIVE AUTHORITIES
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

30. LINKING SCIENCE & POLICY (2)
20/07/2009
LINKING SCIENCE & POLICY (2)
Vital importance of scientific support for policy provided by research in advancing knowledge base needed to:
Provide the best available scientific advice for implementing ecosystem-based management.
Elaborate & evaluate new, prudent policies, including performance & impact of policies & management/ regulatory measures.
Must communicate outcomes & address uncertainty & risk inherent in such developments/approaches/models in a clearly understandable manner for diverse stakeholders (e.g. fishers, environmental NGOs, sector ministries & commissions).
Meaningful dialogue & confidence-building between stakeholders as ‘partners’ is vital.
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

31. SCENARIOS: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OPTIONS [DPSIR]
20/07/2009
SCENARIOS: STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OPTIONS [DPSIR]
‘Futures’ and scenarios: consider how recent past, current (today) & emerging ecosystem changes may become tomorrow’s reality.
Analyze sources, patterns, causes (e.g. DPSIR) of change & map futures/‘outlooks’ (what if?).
‘Scenarios’ - narratives (stories) establishing alternative possible futures, as an important tool for management. They are imagine futures, providing an account or synopsis of various projected trajectories, from today’s baseline (status quo) status for the system (e.g. fisheries & subsystems).
Consider a range of plausible but potentially equally relevant development alternatives/options: optimistic/desirable & problematic/undesirable futures.
NB: Scenarios should not come singly as a forecast would, but in sets of alternatives/options.
Scenarios draw on qualitative & quantitative knowledge about main driving forces (i.e. drivers) & pressures acting on various component subsystems making up the overall system. Main purpose of scenario building: to support strategic planning & enable decision-makers to explore major, alternative futures, thus clarifying intervention options (responses) & consequences.
Example of Baltic Sea scenario examination: Under anticipated climate warming of Baltic Sea & its affects on water exchange/flushing of the system with consequences for temperature, salinity & oxygen changes, plus management measures to reduce the eutrophication of the sea, what may happen to recruitment, growth & productivity of cod, herring & brisling stocks, & what are the prudent longer term options/strategies for sustainable fisheries management?
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

32. Thank you for your attention!
Food for thought?
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management

33. Discussion/Clarification
Questions & answers:
Related to presentation (ca. 5 minutes)
Literature:
Bergen Ministerial Declaration th International Conference on Protection of the North Sea. Norwegian Ministry of the Environment, Oslo, Norway.
C.C.E. Hopkins The concept of Ecosystem Health & association with the Ecosystem Approach to Management and related initiatives. ICES BSRP/HELCOM/UNEP Regional Sea Workshop on Baltic Sea Ecosystem Health Indicators. 30 March – 1 April Sopot, Poland.
Hopkins C.C.E Biodiversity Assessment and Threats Analysis for the WWF Global 200 EcoRegion ‘North-East Atlantic Shelf’. WWF Germany, Frankfurt am Main.
Exercise: ‘How should Baltic Sea management (e.g. HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan) aim to fully manifest & integrate the 'climate change dimension' into its operations? [Precise wording from Brian MacKenzie]
NB: You are the future – we need your ‘new ideas’ (no old baggage!) [Integrate knowledge]
26 July 2009
Chris Hopkins - Climate Change & Baltic Sea Management