https://www.marinespecies.org/i/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Jackgeerlings&feedformat=atomMarineSpecies Introduced Traits Wiki - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T17:41:57ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.31.7https://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Use_of_aerial_photographs_for_shoreline_position_and_mapping_applications&diff=26483Use of aerial photographs for shoreline position and mapping applications2008-12-29T22:41:58Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{references}}<br />
This article still misses a list of cited references. <br />
<br />
This article gives an introduction of monitoring by taking aerial photographs. This observation technique is an example of [[remote sensing]] and can be used to monitor the coastal zone. <br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Aerial photographs still supply inexhaustible information on details of the Earth surface. Although high resolution satellite images begin to be regarded as a competitive alternative, both their scale and operational conditions have yet to meet the standards of aerial photographs. In addition, traditions of aerial photography dates back to the World War I, and the archived collections of aerial photographs from that time provide excellent, high resolution information on the coastal zone. Historical aerial photographs make it possible to analyse past phenomena and processes, thereby greatly extending the capabilities of present day’s coastal monitoring (see e.g. [[Geomorphological time scales and processes]]).<br />
<br />
==Application of aerial photographs for coastal monitoring purposes==<br />
<br />
===Conditions for use===<br />
To be used in coastal zone monitoring, vertical aerial photographs have to be taken so that the principal point of an image be located within the beach or in the water area (Fig.1a). It is only then that the details of the seaward slope of a dune or a cliff will be sufficiently well resolved. Photographs with the principal points situated landwards beyond the top range of the cliff or the crest line of the dune (Fig.1b) should not be interpreted as the details of the cliff or dune seaward slope may not be discernible. <br />
<br />
The highest accuracy of identification is ensured by photogrammetrically processed pictures.The processing requires knowledge on elements of the interior orientation of the camera used to take the pictures (photograph coordinates of the principal point and the principal distance); elements of the exterior orientation of each picture (location of the objective and of the camera’s principal axis on exposure) have to be known as well.<br />
<br />
[[image:furmanczyk_01a.jpg|thumb|left|350px|Fig. 1a. Principal point above the water]] [[image:furmanczyk_01b.jpg|thumb|none|350px|Fig. 1b. Principal point above the land]]<br />
<br />
===Identification of morphological components===<br />
[[image:furmanczyk_02.jpg|thumb|right|320px|Fig. 2. Scheme illustrating the morphological components water line, dune base line, and dune crest line]]<br />
To monitor coastal changes, identification – on an aerial photograph - of the following morphological components of the shore may prove helpful or important (Fig. 2): <br />
<br />
*water line (a momentary border between the land and the sea); it varies rapidly, depends on the sea level and wave parameter, and is visible on the photograph as a distinct boundary between the light tone of the beach and the dark tone of the water; <br />
*dune base line/cliff food line; it changes after every major storm and is an indicator of annual changes; it is visible on the photograph as a boundary of vegetation cover; <br />
*cliff range line/dune crest line; an indicator of multiyear changes. <br />
<br />
Due to poor legibility of the terrain, the location of the dune base line may be identified in the field to about 1 m. This is the accuracy with which the dune base line can be determined in 1:10 000 – 1:20 000 aerial photographs if these have been taken as described above.<br />
<br />
===Aerial photograph processing and rectification===<br />
Depending on source [[data]] and information on elements of interior and exterior orientation of the aerial photographs at hand, different rectification techniques can be used: <br />
<br />
*3D spatial digitising, involving the use of stereoscopic effect and an image station; the most accurate technique making it possible to produce a 3D map of the area monitored; <br />
<br />
*ortho-rectification, followed by 3D spatial digitising of morphological elements; the technique is somewhat less accurate than 3D spatial digitising; morphological components are identifiable with the assumed accuracy of 1 m; <br />
<br />
*rectification methods using control points (without prior knowledge on elements of interior and exterior orientation); a simplified, least accurate technique, used to process historical photographs; the accuracy depends on the height of dunes or a cliff; the location error does not exceed 2 m if the cliff height is on the order of 10 m. <br />
<br />
===Monitoring the coast===<br />
Short-term coastal changes are reflected in morphological shore components within the beach, while long-term changes can be deciphered from elements of the fore dune and the main dune or cliff. As shown by studies involving aerial photograph interpretation [Stafford et al. 1971, El-Ashry 1977, Leatherman 1983, 1993, Musielak et al. 1985, 1991, Furmańczyk 1994], the dune/cliff base line is the best indicator of coastal dynamics in non-tidal seas, similarly to the high tide line in tidal seas.<br />
<br />
To monitor coastal changes, it is recommended that multi-temporal aerial photographs be taken at few years intervals; it is only then that the magnitude of changes may be higher than the accuracy of morphological component identification. Historical aerial photographs are a valuable aid and source of information for studies on coastal dynamics. Despite the lack of knowledge on elements of internal and external orientation (which significantly affects the rectification accuracy), historical photographs substantially extend the temporal axis of observations and make it possible to carry out long-term analyses. <br />
<br />
===Identification of coastal dynamics===<br />
Identification of the position of dune/cliff base line, carried out periodically, every few years, allows to determine the following coastal dynamics parameters:<br />
<br />
*net movement, i.e., the distance between points on the dune/cliff base line between the first and the most recent record (the oldest and the youngest series of photographs), as measured perpendicularly with respect to the shore;<br />
<br />
*total movement, i.e., the total distance between the points on the dune/cliff base line on the first and the most recent photographs, the intermittent records being factored in;<br />
<br />
The indicators can be used to extract patterns of coastal development and to produce a dynamics classification of the coast. The two parameters can be presented in the form of a plot of their along-shore variability (Fig. 3).<br />
<br />
[[image:furmanczyk_03.jpg|thumb|centre|500px|Fig. 3. Schematic of net movement and total movement measurements]]<br />
<br />
==A case study==<br />
Coastal changes in the Pomeranian Bay (Baltic Sea) were analysed based on 4 series of aerial photographs: the recent (1996) series of 1:26000 photographs and 3 historical series of 1938, 1951, and 1973, taken at 1:25000, 1:22000, and 1:28000, respectively. The 1996 series pictures were orthorectified and used as a reference to calibrate the historical photographs. At each photograph, the dune base line was interpreted and the magnitude of coastal changes was calculated for the periods of 1938-96, 1938-51, 1951-73, and 1973-96. The changes in 1938-96 represent the net-movement values, the total-movement values being calculated from changes in 1938-51, 1951-73, and 1973-96. The results, in the form of net-movement and total-movement plots, are shown in Fig. 4. <br />
[[image:furmanczyk_04.jpg|thumb|centre|550px|Fig.4. Plot of net-movement and total-movement of the coastal changes.]]<br />
There are visible some sections of the coast with various combination of the net and total movement values. For example section from 353 to 354,5km have the same value of the total and net movement which means that there are permanent accumulation process. On the section from 360,5 to 361,5km total movement have the same value as net movement but with opposite sign which means that there are permanent erosion process. Very interesting section there is from 357,5 to 358,5km because value of the net movement is around zero, but total movement has a pretty big value, which means that in this section coast is oscillating (erosion and accumulation processes are observed here). The most stable points of the coast there are in places where net movement is around zero and total movement has minimum value like in 363,5; 362,0; 359,2; 358,5; 357,8 and 353,0km.<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
===Internal links===<br />
* [[Argus video monitoring system]]<br />
* [[Hyperspectral seafloor mapping and direct bathymetry calculation in littoral zones]]<br />
<br />
===External links===<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
El-Ashry M.T. 1977. Air photography and coastal problems. Benchmark Papers in Geology. No.38. 427.<br />
<br />
Furmańczyk K. 1994. Współczesny rozwój strefy brzegowej morza bezpływowego w świetle badań teledetekcyjnych południowych wybrzeży Bałtyku. Uniwersytet Szczeciński. Rozprawy i Studia. Tom 161.<br />
<br />
Leatherman S.P. 1983. Shoreline mapping: A comparison of techniques. Shore and Beach. Vol.51. 28-33. <br />
<br />
Leatherman S.P. 1993. Remote sensing applied to coastal change analysis. Gurney. Foster. Parkinson [ed]. Global Change Atlas. <br />
<br />
Musielak i in. 1985. Fotointerpretacyjna Mapa Strefy Brzegowej. Praca zbiorowa. Odcinek Świnoujście-Dźwirzyno. Stan z lipca 1983. Skala 1:5000. 23 sekcje. OPGK. Szczecin. <br />
<br />
Musielak S. Furmańczyk K. Osadczuk K. Prajs J. 1991. Fotointerpretacyjny Atlas Dynamiki Strefy Brzegu Morskiego. Lata 1958-1989. Odcinek Świnoujście-Pogorzelica. Skala 1:5000. 21 sekcji. Instytut Nauk o Morzu US, OPGK Szczecin, pod red Musielaka. Wyd. Urząd Morski Szczecin.<br />
<br />
Stafford D.B. Langfelder J. 1971. Air photo survey for coastal erosion. Photogrametric Engineering. No.6. 556-575.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
{{authors<br />
|AuthorID1=13628<br />
|AuthorFullName1=Kazimierz Furmanczyk<br />
|AuthorName1=Kazimierz Furmanczyk<br />
|AuthorFullName2=Joanna Dudzinska-Nowak<br />
|AuthorName2=Joanna Dudzinska-Nowak}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Articles by Joanna Dudzinska-Nowak]]<br />
[[Category:Theme_9]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Shoreline management]]<br />
[[Category:Sediment shorelines]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal erosion]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal erosion management]]<br />
[[Category:Practice, projects and case studies in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Baltic]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Why_is_Marine_biodiversity_important&diff=26219Why is Marine biodiversity important2008-12-17T13:42:07Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>[[Image:marine biodiversity_ICRI.jpg|thumb|right|Figure 1:Coral Reef (copyright The International Coral Reef Initiative)]]The seas provide a unique set of goods and services to society, including moderation of climate, processing of waste and toxicants, provision of vital food, medicines and employment for significant numbers of people. Our coasts provide space to live and directly and indirectly create wealth, including millions of jobs in industries such as fishing, aquaculture and tourism. <ref> Holmlund C. M. and Hammer, M (1999) Ecosystem services generated by fish populations Ecological Economics 29: 253-268 </ref>.<ref>Beaumont, N.J. and Tinch, R. (2003) Goods and services related to the marine benthic environment. CSERG working Paper ECM 03-14</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at ecosystems in terms of the goods and services they provide allows us to realise their full value and our dependence on those systems in the broadest sense. Exploitation of the environment for one purpose can alter the environment's ability to provide other goods and services, so this knowledge is also a way of understanding what we stand to gain and lose by exploitation of certain aspects of the environment <ref>De Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A. and Boumans, R. M. J. (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and systems Ecological Economics 41 (3): 393-408 </ref>. The main goods and services provided by marine ecosystems are:<br />
<br />
*Resilience and resistance <br />
*Disturbance prevention <br />
*Nutrient cycling <br />
*Gas and climate regulation <br />
*Bioremediation of waste <br />
*Biologically mediated habitat <br />
*Food provision <br />
*Raw materials, including ornamental resources <br />
*Leisure <br />
*Cultural values <br />
*Information service <br />
*Non-use value: bequest value and existence value <br />
*Option use value<br />
<br />
<br />
== Other types of biodiversity ==<br />
<br />
Biodiversity encompasses many levels of organisation including genes, species, habitats, communities and ecosystems. Although species diversity is the most commonly used measure of taxonomic diversity (or diversity between types of organisms), other measures of taxonomic diversity exist, the most common of which is phyletic diversity. Phyletic diversity is the variation in the working body plans (phyla) of organisms. An example of a phylum is the Arthropoda, which includes the class Decapoda. Phyletic diversity can be a useful measure of diversity, particularly where diversity is comparably higher at the level of phylum than at the level of species. For example, the marine environment has high phyletic diversity because 32 out of the 33 described animal phyla are represented in the oceans.<br />
<br />
It is also possible and very useful to measure diversity as the variation in the functional roles of species (rather than the number of species or gene types), within a community or ecosystem. An example of functional diversity is the number of filter feeders in an ecosystem compared to number of grazers. Functional diversity is thought to be one of the main factors determining the long-term stability of an ecosystem and its ability to recover from major disturbances.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/></div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Why_public_participation_is_needed_in_ICZM&diff=26218Why public participation is needed in ICZM2008-12-17T13:38:20Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
===Full participation of all stakeholders, including the general public, is considered to be a cornerstone of ICZM===<br />
<br />
One of the most successful measures to include a broad [[stakeholder]] involvement is the establishment of fora or partnerships. For most of the large [[estuaries]] in the UK -- the Thames, Severn, and Mersey -- as well as Morecambe Bay and the Dorset Coast, partnerships have been set up which are largely responsible, despite being non-statutory, for [[ICZM]] measures. These partnerships act by providing a neutral forum for local authorities, national agencies, industry, voluntary bodies and local communities to work together for the good of the [[coastline]]. In general, these partnerships provide a framework for the management of the [[estuary]] by co-ordinating a programme of projects and facilitating new projects. They provide the means for joint working, organisation of regular events and workshops and seeking to further the interests of local communities, local economies and the environment.<br />
When local communities are faced with national government decisions in which they have had no say, lack of understanding can quickly lead to distrust and feelings of resentment. A successful ICZM programme need not necessarily have the best technical content, but it does require public approval whilst meeting the needs of a large number of stakeholders. Those who depend upon the [[coastal zone]] are often the ones most aware of its value although they may still prefer short-term exploitation.<br />
<br />
Ultimately it is the public’s attitude that determines society’s response to management decisions. Efforts to protect and develop an area in a [[sustainable]] way can only succeed if all those who work and live in the area are committed to this objective. When it does not ‘’buy into’’ the decisions taken by being actively engaged in the decision-making process, the public can often substantially delay, or even prevent, [[ICZM]] initiatives. Creating public awareness and fostering public participation may mean that more time is required for decisions to be taken, but experience shows that such an approach is ultimately more cost-effective. The absence of public awareness and the loss of confidence in management decisions and the regulatory process can create enormous constraints to ICZM implementation. Spatial development planning without the support of the local community may be a doomed exercise, yet there is still a widespread lack of public participation in coastal management worldwide.<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Some definitions of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)]]<br />
*[[The Integrated approach to Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)]]<br />
*[[Introduction of public participation]]<br />
*[[Public participation]]<br />
<br />
{{Author<br />
|AuthorID=14358 <br />
|AuthorFullName=Kreiken, Wouter<br />
|AuthorName=Wouter Kreiken}}<br />
<br />
[[Category: Participation and governance in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category: Theme 2]]<br />
[[category: Integrated coastal zone management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Travel_cost_method&diff=26217Travel cost method2008-12-17T13:38:00Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{featured}}<br />
This article deals with the Travel Cost Method, which is often used in evaluating the [[economic value]] of recreational sites. This is particularly important in the [[coastal zone]] because of the level of use and the potential values that can be attached to the [[Theme 7 Biodiversity of coastal and marine habitats and ecosystems|natural coastal and marine environment]].<br />
<br />
The Travel Cost Method (TCM) is one of the most frequently used approaches to estimating the use values of recreational sites. The TCM was initially suggested by Hotelling<ref name="Hotelling (1949) ">Hotelling, H. (1949), Letter, In: ''An Economic Study of the Monetary Evaluation of Recreation in the National Parks'', Washington, DC: National Park Service.</ref> and subsequently developed by Clawson <ref name="Clawson (1959)">Clawson, M. (1959), ''Method for Measuring the Demand for, and Value of, Outdoor Recreation''. Resources for the Future, 10, Washington, DC.</ref> in order to estimate the benefits from [[leisure and recreation|recreation]] at natural sites. The method is based on the premise that the recreational benefits at a specific site can be derived from the demand function that relates observed users’ behaviour (i.e., the number of trips to the site) to the cost of a visit.<br />
One of the most important issues in the TCM is the choice of the costs to be taken into account. The literature usually suggests considering direct variable costs and the opportunity cost of time spent travelling to and at the site.<br />
The classical model derived from the economic theory of consumer behaviour postulates that a consumer’s choice is based on all the sacrifices made to obtain the benefits generated by a good or service. If the price (''p'') is the only sacrifice made by a consumer, the demand function for a good with no substitutes is ''x=f(p)'', given income and preferences.<br />
However, the consumer often incurs other costs ''(c)'', in addition to the out-of-pocket price, such as travel expenses, and loss of time and stress from congestion. In this case, the demand function is expressed as ''x = f(p, c)''. In other words, the price is an imperfect measure of the full cost incurred by the purchaser. <br />
Under these conditions, the utility maximising consumer’s behaviour should be reformulated in order to take such costs into account. Given two goods or services ''(x<sub>1</sub>, x<sub>2</sub>)'', their prices ''(p<sub>1</sub>, p<sub>2</sub>)'', the access costs ''(c<sub>1</sub>, c<sub>2</sub>)'' and income ''(R)'', the utility maximising choice of the consumer is:<br><br />
<br />
::::<math>maxU=u(x_1,x_2)</math><br><br />
::::''subject to:'' [1] <br><br />
::::<math>(p_1+c_1)x_1+(p_2+c_2)x_2=R</math><br> <br />
<br />
Now, let 'x<sub>1</sub>' denote the aggregate of priced goods and services, x2 the number of annual visits to a recreational site, and assume for the sake of simplicity that the cost of access to the market goods is negligible '(c<sub>1</sub>=0)' and that the recreational site is free (p<sub>2</sub>=0). Under these assumptions, equation [1] can be written as:<br><br />
<br />
::::<math>maxU=u(x_1,x_2))</math><br><br />
::::''subject to:''' [2] <br><br />
::::<math>p_1x_1+c_2x_2=R</math><br><br />
<br />
Under these conditions, the utility maximising behaviour of the consumer depends on: <br />
: a) his preferences [''u(x<sub>1</sub>, x<sub>2</sub>)''], <br />
: b) his budget (''R''), <br />
: c) the prices of the private goods and services ''(p<sub>1</sub>)'' and <br />
: d) the access cost to the recreational site ''(c<sub>2</sub>)''.<br />
The TCM is based on the assumption that changes in the costs of access to the recreational site (''c<sub>2</sub>'') have the same effect as a change in price: the number of visits to a site decreases as the cost per visit increases. Under this assumption, the demand function for visits to the recreational site is ''x<sub>2</sub>=f(c<sub>2</sub>)'' and can be estimated using the number of annual visits as long as it is possible to observe different costs per visit. The basic TCM model is completed by the weak complementarity assumption, which states that trips are a non-decreasing function of the quality of the site, and that the individual forgoes trips to the recreational site when the quality is the lowest possible<ref name= "Freeman, 1993">Freeman, A.M. III. (1993). ''The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Method'', Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.</ref>,<ref name="Herriges, 2004">Herriges, J.A., C. Kling and D.J. Phaneuf (2004), 'What’s the Use? Welfare Estimates from Revealed Preference Models when Weak Complementarity Does Not Hold', ''Journal of Environmental Economics and Management'', 47 (1), pp. 53-68.</ref>.<br />
There are two basic approaches to the TCM: the Zonal approach (ZTCM) and the Individual approach (ITCM). The two approaches share the same theoretical premises, but differ from the operational point of view. The original ZTCM takes into account the visitation rate of users coming from different zones with increasing travel costs. By contrast, ITCM, developed by Brown and Nawas<ref>Brown, W.G. and F. Nawas (1973), 'Impact of Aggregation on the Estimation of Outdoor Recreation Demand Functions', ''American Journal of Agricultural Economics'', 55, 246-249.</ref> and Gum and Martin<ref>Gum, R.L. and W.E.Martin (1974), 'Problems and Solutions in Estimating the Demand for and Value of Rural Outdoor Recreation', ''American Journal of Agricultural Economics'', 56, 558-566.</ref>, estimates the consumer surplus by analysing the individual visitors’ behaviour and the cost sustained for the recreational activity. These are used to estimate the relationship between the number of individual visits in a given time period, usually a year, the cost per visit and other relevant socio-economic variables. The ITCM approach can be considered a refinement or a generalisation of ZTCM<ref>Ward, F.A. and D. Beal (2000), ''Valuing Nature with Travel Cost Method: A Manual'', Northampton: Edward Elgar.</ref>.<br />
[[Image:demand_function.jpg|right]]The Figure depicts the expected relationship between the number of visits and cost per visit, given other variables, showing that the number of visits decreases as the cost per visit increases. If we assume that all users have the same preferences and the same income, the number of visits is a function of the cost per visit:<br><br />
<br />
::::<math>x_2 = g(c_2)</math> [3]<br><br />
<br />
The demand function can also be estimated for non-homogeneous sub-samples introducing among the independent variables income and socio-economic variables representing individual characteristics<ref>Hanley, N. and C.L. Spash (1993), ''Cost Benefit Analysis and the Environment'', Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar.</ref>.<br />
Therefore, if an individual incurs ''c<sub>2</sub><sup>e</sup>'' per visit, he chooses to do ''x<sub>2</sub><sup>e</sup>'' visits a year, while if the cost per visit increases to ''c<sub>2</sub><sup>p</sup>'' the number of visits will decrease to ''x<sub>2</sub><sup>p</sup>''. The cost ''cp'' is the choke price, that is the cost per visit that results in zero visits. The annual user surplus (the use value of the recreational site) is easily obtained by integrating the demand function from zero to the current number of annual visits, and subtracting the total expenditures on visits.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Economic Value]]<br />
* [[Impacts originating from the tourism sector]]<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=13623<br />
|AuthorName=Paolo Rosato<br />
|AuthorFullName=Paolo Rosato}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme_1]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:Policy and decision making in coastal management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Total_Economic_Value&diff=26216Total Economic Value2008-12-17T13:37:38Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Introduction: from Ecosystem Assessment to Economic Valuation ==<br />
<br />
The valuation of an [[ecosystem]] poses several difficulties. When the notion of value refers to the integrity of the [[ecosystem]] it is basically related to the well functioning of the system, i.e. its components are working properly and playing the appropriate role and dynamics.<br />
<br />
Coastal areas and wetlands represent very complex [[ecosystems]]. Environmental and [[anthropogenic]] systems reciprocal interrelations induce a variety of processes that require management and governance capacities: pressures on the system need to be identified and their impact evaluated together with the effects of the management policies in place or planned. Valuation of the multiple functions of these mixed, complex systems assumes a vital role in understanding processes and steering actions, contributing to their [[sustainable]] future.<br />
<br />
In the [[Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2001 to 2005)|Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: Wetlands and Water synthesis, World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.]] economic valuation is stated as a powerful tool for placing [[ecosystems]] on the agenda of [[conservation]] and development decision-makers. In fact the three main domains are recognized as critical to choose and implement successful policies: the biophysical information about the ecosystem status and process, the socioeconomic information about the context in which and for which the decision will be made and the information about the values, norms and interests of key [[stakeholders]] shaping and affected by decisions. Within the [[Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2001 to 2005)|MEA]] the Total Economic Value (TEV)is confirmed as the most widely used framework to identify and quantify the contribution of [[ecosystem]] services to human well being.<br />
<br />
When the notion of value is connected to the notion of TEV it refers to the social context overlapping the [[ecosystem]], taking into account the relations between the socio-economic system and the natural systems, with all the involved complex dynamics and feedbacks. Assessing the TEV could be a useful tool for policymakers: determining the total flux of benefits that ecosystems generate and assessing the effects of specific projects or policies, can support a better management of the territory.<br />
<br />
== Total Economic Value: an assessment procedure proposal ==<br />
<br />
<br />
TEV is composed by use values, option values and non-use components. There is not in the literature a single standard categorization nor terminology. Often Total Value is reported as the sum of use value and non-use values or passive values<ref>Perman R.,Common M.,Mcgilvray J.,Ma Y.(2003) Natural Resource and Environmental Economics, Pearson Education Limited</ref> <ref>Tietemberg T., (1996) Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, Harper Collins College Publishers</ref>. <br />
<br />
Use values can be direct when goods and services are exchanged on the market that thus reveals their value. Use values are indirect refer to the life support services role of the natural environment, which are ‘indirectly used’.<br />
In the [[Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2001 to 2005)|MEA]] report specifically compiled for [[wetlands]], direct use values correspond to the MEA’s definition of provisioning and cultural services. Indirect use values correspond to MEA’s notion of regulating and supporting services. Provisioning, regulating and cultural services may all form part of the option values.<br />
<br />
Option values reflect the value people place on a future ability to use the environment and thus the potential future benefits of goods and services. <br />
Quasi-option value reflect the willingness to avoid irreversible commitment to development now, given the expectation of future growth in knowledge relevant to the implications of development.There is no full agreement about considering option and quasi-option values among use or non-use values. <br />
<br />
Non-use values include: [[Non-use value|existence values]], where the benefit results from knowledge that goods and service exist and will continue to exist, independently of any actual or prospective use by the individual; and bequest value, where the benefit is in ensuring that future generations will be able to inherit the same goods and services of the present generation.<br />
<br />
The MEA lists as commonly used valuation tools: replacement costs, effects on production, damage cost avoided, mitigative or avertive expenditures, [[Hedonic Evaluation Approach|hedonic pricing]], [[Travel cost method|travel costs]], [[Contingent Valuation Method|contingent valuation]].<br />
<br />
One of the possible procedures that could be used to assess TEV imply few simple steps as reported in Figure 1. The procedure has been though for georefereced enviornmental accounts<ref>La Notte A., Turvani M. (2007) ‘Geo-referenced Environmental Accounting for Multi-functionality.Valuation and Land Accounting: the case of S.Erasmo island in the Lagoon of Venice’ in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference ‘Environmental Accounting –Sustainable Development Indicators’ 23-25 May 2007, Prague Czech Republic.J.E.Purkyně in Ǔstì nad Labem</ref> <ref>La Notte A., (2006) ‘The role of Geographic Information Systems in physical and monetary valuation procedures. The Total Economic Value of forests in Cansiglio (Italy) by using georeferenced environmental accounts’, in Proceedings de: The Ninth Biennial Conference of the International Society for Ecological Economics on “Ecological sustainability and human well-being”, (CD-rom)</ref> : environmental accounts represent an intermediate tool that could be used for multiple purposes and georefereced data allow to value the spatial biophysical characteristics of local contexts.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Figure 1 [[Image:General_procedure.jpg]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
When the purpose of valuation is clearly set, the first step of the procedure require the choice of the appropriate analysis tool.<br />
The choice of functions <ref>De Groot R.S., Wilson M.A., Boumans R.M.J. (2002) ‘A typology for the classification, description, and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods, and services’ in Ecological Economics , n.41.</ref> varies according to the kind of resources and land cover that has to be assessed. Of the same resource/land, functions range and distribution can also vary over time.<br />
The second step of the procedure allows the choice of functions. <br />
Each function has to be assessed first in physical and then in monetary terms. Valuation in physical terms may require quantification per ton of selected resources or zoning per hectare of certain areas: this approach may vary according to functions. Valuation in monetary terms might involve the application of different valuation methods: from the easiest market price value to a complex stated preferences approach. The choice of methods depends on the resource/land and on the functions themselves. Both valuation steps must be very flexible in order to allow the most appropriate choice for each specific case.<br />
<br />
We also need to consider that over time more sources may become available and better estimates could be calculated because improved valuation methods are developed and implemented. This implies that the same function calculated with the same general action can produce different results. Identifying the specific step where enhancements occur can facilitate calculation and do not compromise the complete procedure.<br />
The extreme flexibility of the adopted procedure will not create confusion because through meta-data analysis it is possible to track the processing behind each step and correctly interpret data and compare results over time.<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 1]]<br />
[[Category:Policy and decision making in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Economic Value]]<br />
* [[Value Transfer]]<br />
* [[Hedonic Evaluation Approach]]<br />
* [[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Sand_dune_-_Country_Report,_Latvia&diff=26215Sand dune - Country Report, Latvia2008-12-17T13:37:16Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>This article on the sand dunes of Latvia, is an additional country report added to the 'Sand Dune Inventory of Europe' (Doody ed. 1991) <ref>Doody, J.P., ed., 1991. ''Sand Dune Inventory of Europe''. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee/European Union for Coastal Conservation.</ref>. The 1991 inventory was prepared under the umbrella of the European Union for Dune Conservation [EUDC]. The original inventory was presented to the European Coastal Conservation Conference, held in the Netherlands in November 1991. It attempted to provide a description of the [[sand dunes|sand dune vegetation]], sites and [[conservation]] issues throughout Europe including Scandinavia, the Atlantic coast and in the Mediterranean.<br />
<br />
An overview article [[European Sand Dune Distribution|on European sand dunes]] provides links to the other European country reports. These represent chapters from updated individual country reports included in the revised, 2nd Edition of the 'Sand Dune Inventory of Europe' prepared for the International Sand Dune Conference “Changing Perspectives in Coastal Dune Management”, held from the 31st March - 3rd April 2008, in Liverpool, UK (Doody ed. 2008)<ref>Doody, J.P., ed. 2008. ''Sand Dune Inventory of Europe, 2nd Edition''. National Coastal Consultants and EUCC - The Coastal Union, in association with the IGU Coastal Commission.</ref>.<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Status''', new 2007; author Dr J Patrick Doody, with additional information Bird ([http://www.springerlink.com/content/h34l58/ The World’s Coasts: Online])<br />
<br />
=Introduction=<br />
<br />
Extensive [[sand dunes]] occur along the coast of Latvia in the southern Baltic. Typically, they are up to 2.5m high, but where sand [[accretion]] is rapid, as on the southern [[shore]] of the Gulf of Riga, they may attain a height of 6m. Here, along a 56km stretch of [[coastline]], about 50,000 cu. m/year of [[sand]] is transported by onshore winds from the beach to the foredune (Ulsts 1998).<ref>Ulsts, V., 1998. ''Latvian coastal zone of the Baltic Sea, Riga'', 96.</ref> These have developed since the middle of the Holocene and have been extensively modified by man over the last 2,000 years. <br />
<br />
=Distribution and type of dune=<br />
<br />
The Litorina transgression influenced coastal evolution in the eastern Baltic area and the ensuing regression (7,000-2,800 years ago). During the regression sand, gravel and boulders on the emerging sea floor were shaped into [[beach]]es, beach ridges and dunes by wave and wind action Gudelis (1967),<ref>Gudelis, V., 1967. Morphogenetic types of the [[Baltic Sea]] coasts. ''Baltica'', '''3''', 123-145.</ref><br />
forming a modern depositional terrace up to 10km wide. Behind the [[sandy beaches]], there are often older parallel foredunes and newer parabolic and active dunes (Eberhards 1998)<ref>Eberhards, G., 1998. Coastal dunes in Latvia. Environmental perspectives of Southeast Baltic coastal areas through time, Riga 18-25.</ref>, the older ridges to landward having been raised by postglacial isostatic movements.<br />
<br />
The south coast, from the River Gauja to the River Lielupe, is a sandy depositional coast with beaches 30-50m wide and foredunes up to 6m high, behind which are dune ridges up to 20-30m high, some bearing pine forest while others have drifted inland during recent centuries. The dune sand partly derives by [[longshore drift|longshore drifting]] from the eastern and western [[shore]]s of the Gulf of Riga and partly from the Rivers Daugava and Gauja. Between the seaside resorts of Jurmala and Engure coastal dunes have been eroded, mainly during the severe storm of 1969. <br />
The dunes along the Latvian coast stretch inland initially as low embryonic dunes with scattered vegetation. Higher foredunes and then grey dunes typically come next. ‘Black dunes’ covered by forest represent the final stage of stabilisation. Not all stages of dune development occur at all sites especially where abrasion causes erosion of the foredunes.<br />
<br />
In Latvia, the total length of primary dunes reaches about 240km along the coast.<br />
<br />
=Vegetation=<br />
<br />
The following EU Habitat Directive communities occur in Latvia:<br />
<br />
===Strandline===<br />
2110 Embryonic shifting [[dunes]]. Embryonic [[dunes]] are the first stage of dune development. They are small, about 10-50cm high sandy bars with sparse vegetation of halophylous plant species such as ''Leymus arenarius''‚ ''Honckenya peploides''‚ ''Calammophila baltica''‚ ''Elytrigia littorea''. Rare plant species in embryonic dunes include ''Elytrigia junceiformis''‚ ''Linaria loeselii'' and ''Crambe maritima''.<br />
<br />
===Foredune===<br />
2120 Shifting dunes along the shoreline with ''Ammophila arenaria'' (‘white dunes’). Foredunes develop behind embryonic dunes. As with embryonic dunes, the [[habitat]] is dynamic and can include areas of bare sand. The vegetation is sparse or scattered, with species of sandy [[habitats]]. Typical plant species of foredunes are: ''Ammophila arenaria''‚ ''Calamagrostis epigejos''‚ ''Leymus arenarius''‚ ''Festuca arenaria''‚ ''Hieracium umbellate'' and ''Artemisia campestris''. Rare plant species include ''Eryngium maritimum''‚ ''Lathyrus maritimus''‚ ''Linaria loeselii'' and ''Tragopogon heterospermus''. Shrub species may also be found growing in foredunes. These are mostly planted to aid stabilisation and include ''Salix daphnoides''‚ ''S. viminalii'' and ''S. rosmarinifolia''. Rare plant species such as native ''Salix repens'' and ''Lonicera caerulea'' var. ''pallasii'' also occur. <br />
<br />
===Acid dune grassland===<br />
2130* Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation (‘grey dunes’). Grey dunes represent the next stage of development. Grey dunes are relatively stable. There are two types of grey dunes in Latvia – grey dunes with low vascular plant vegetation and grey dunes with shrubs and trees. The former consist mainly of bryophytes, lichens and low perennial plants. Typical plant species are ''Koeleria glauca''‚ ''Carex arenaria''‚ ''Thymus serpyllum'' and ''Pulsatilla pratensis'', as well as bryophytes, such as ''Racomitrium canescens'' and ''Tortula ruralis''. Rare plant species ''Alyssum gmelinii''‚ ''Dianthus arenarius'' and ''Silene borysthenica'' are also present. The latter include individual or groups of trees‚ shrubs or their groups. In some places, groups of dwarf shrubs develop. Typical scrub species are ''Juniperus communis''‚ ''Pinus sylvestris''‚ ''Salix daphnoides'' and rare species include ''Lonicera caerulea'' var. ''pallasii'' and ''Salix repens''. <br />
<br />
===Dune slack===<br />
2190 Humid dune slacks 2170 Dunes with ''Salix repens'' ssp. ''argentea'' (Salicion arenariae). Between dunes, dune slacks (starpkāpu ieplakas in Latvian) can be located. Dune slacks are characteristic of depressions between lines of dunes lying parallel to the [[coast]]. They are usually narrow and can change rapidly as they become invaded by shrubs and trees. There are several types of dune slacks:<br />
Dune slacks with pioneer vegetation are located in periodically moist depressions with scarce or continuous plant cover formed by pioneer species. Typical plant species are ''Sagina nodosa''‚ ''Equisetum variegatum''‚ ''Carex flacca'' and rare species such as ''Centaurium littorale'' and ''Juncus balticus''. <br />
<br />
Dune slacks with grassland vegetation occur in depressions in a transition zone between foredunes, grey dunes and shrub zone or forest. In the plant cover, grassland species dominate typically with species including ''Rhinanthus vernalis''‚ ''Poa pratensis''‚ ''Anthoxanthum odoratum''‚ ''Ranunculus acris'' and rare plants such as ''Dactylorhiza incarnata''‚ ''D. baltica'' and ''Epipactis palustris''. <br />
<br />
In very wet sites, dune slacks with calcareous fen vegetation occur. These are depressions where calcareous fen species are characteristic. There is little or no peat and typical plant species include ''Carex flacca''‚ ''Potentilla erecta''‚ ''Molinia caerulea''‚ ''Galium boreale'' and rare plants such as ''Schoenus ferrugineus''‚ ''Cladium mariscus'' and ''Primula farinosa''. <br />
<br />
===Dune heath===<br />
2140* Decalcified fixed dunes with ''Empetrum nigrum''.<br />
<br />
===Woodland===<br />
2180 Wooded dunes of the Atlantic, Continental and Boreal region.<br />
<br />
===Inland dunes===<br />
2320 Dry sand heaths with ''Calluna'' and ''Empetrum nigrum''.<br />
2330 Inland dunes with open ''Corynephorus'' and ''Agrostis grasslands''.<br />
<br />
=Important sites=<br />
<br />
The west coast of the Gulf of Riga has sandy beaches 20-50m wide and parallel dune ridges (Eberhards 1998).<br />
<br />
The sandy coast curves out at the northern end to Cape Kolka, a large sandy foreland with about 200 parallel dune ridges, formed as a result of accretion of sand delivered by longshore drift from the south. Some of the ridges have been disrupted by blowouts, and there are complex parabolic dunes. Towards the Lithuanian border is a major complex dune ridge up to 34m high, formed during the Litorina Sea stage. Near Cape Bernati and Cape Mietrags there has been increased erosion of the beach and dune coast during the last few decades. <br />
<br />
=Conservation=<br />
<br />
The sand dunes are affected by a variety of human activities. These include the following threats:<br />
<br />
Threat 1: Deterioration of coastal [[ecosystem]] by motorised vehicles;<br />
<br />
Threat 2: degradation of coastal natural [[habitats]] by [[leisure and recreation|recreation]] and activities of [[tourism]];<br />
<br />
Threat 3: Destroying of indigenous flora and vegetation by aggressive alien species;<br />
<br />
Threat 4: The reduction of area of grey dunes;<br />
<br />
Threat 5: Decreasing area of [[seagrass meadows|meadows]];<br />
<br />
Threat 6: The decrease of forest biological diversity resulting from inappropriate management;<br />
<br />
Threat 7: Decrease in area of endangered [[habitats]] due to building and due to inappropriate [[coastal management]];<br />
<br />
Threat 8: Deterioration of endangered [[habitats]] in protected nature areas due to lack of management plans;<br />
<br />
Threat 9: The deterioration of natural [[habitats]] due to low public awareness.<br />
<br />
Information derived from a web site developed from a Life Nature Project - ‘Protection and Management of Coastal Habitats in Latvia.<br />
<br />
During the last century breakwaters at Ventspils harbour, where the River Venta flows into the sea, have interrupted the [[longshore drift|longshore sediment drift]] from the south and there is a broad [[accretion]] zone (300-700m in width) with foredune ridges on the southern side. Similar [[accretion]] has occurred alongside breakwaters at the port of Liepaja, forming a beach of fine sand with foredunes. To the south, the coast has fine [[sandy beaches]] 30-80 m wide with foredune ridges.<br />
<br />
=References=<br />
<br />
<references/><br />
[[Image:Latvia_banner.jpg]] The link to the web site resulting from the [http://piekraste.daba.lv/EN/ LIFE Project "Protection and Management of Coastal Habitats in Latvia"] includes a variety of pictures showing stages in dune development and some of the key species.<br />
<br />
=See also=<br />
*[[Sand dune types - Europe]]<br />
*[[Sand Dunes in Europe]]<br />
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_dune Articles on sand dunes on Wikpedia]<br />
*[[European Sand Dune Distribution]]<br />
*[[Conservation and restoration of coastal and estuarine habitats]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Sand Dune Inventory of Europe (Doody ed. 1991 & 2008)]]<br />
[[Category:Sand dunes]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal and marine areas and locations]]<br />
[[Category:Natural coastal areas]]<br />
[[Category:Baltic]]<br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=7574<br />
|AuthorFullName=Doody, Pat<br />
|AuthorName=Pat Doody}}</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Sand_dune_-_Country_Report,_Sweden&diff=26214Sand dune - Country Report, Sweden2008-12-17T13:36:51Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Status''': Original text with minor revisions 2007; Authors: J Patrick Doody & Eddy van der Maarel <br />
<br />
This article on the [[sand dunes]] of Sweden, is a revised country report from the 'Sand Dune Inventory of Europe' (Doody ed. 1991) <ref>Doody, J.P., ed., 1991. ''Sand Dune Inventory of Europe''. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee/European Union for Coastal Conservation.</ref>. The 1991 inventory was prepared under the umbrella of the European Union for Dune Conservation [EUDC]. The original inventory was presented to the European Coastal Conservation Conference, held in the Netherlands in November 1991. It attempted to provide a description of the [[sand dunes|sand dune vegetation]], sites and [[conservation]] issues throughout Europe including Scandinavia, the Atlantic coast and in the Mediterranean.<br />
<br />
An overview article [[European Sand Dune Distribution|on the distribution of European sand dunes]] provides links to the other European country reports. These represent chapters from updated individual country reports included in the revised, 2nd Edition of the 'Sand Dune Inventory of Europe' prepared for the International Sand Dune Conference “Changing Perspectives in Coastal Dune Management”, held from the 31st March - 3rd April 2008, in Liverpool, UK (Doody ed. 2008)<ref>Doody, J.P., ed. 2008. ''Sand Dune Inventory of Europe, 2nd Edition''. National Coastal Consultants and EUCC - The Coastal Union, in association with the IGU Coastal Commission.</ref>.<br />
<br />
=Introduction=<br />
<br />
The coast of Sweden has an uneven distribution of [[sand dunes]] around the coast. Although glaciofluvial deposits occur, as in Finland these are much less extensive than there. The basis of this chapter is a Ph.D. Thesis (Olsson 1974)<ref>Olsson, H., 1974. Studies in south Swedish sand vegetation. ''Acta Phytogeogr''. Suec. '''60'''. </ref>. Some of the data are in their turn derived from older publications. There is no overall estimate of the total area of dune in Sweden, though the Council of Europe report 1974 gives a figure of 2,000ha. This is a major underestimate, if the figures given in Olsson’s paper for the sites investigated are correct.<br />
<br />
=Distribution and type of dune=<br />
<br />
Raised beaches and [[sand dunes]] occur along the shore of Haparanda Sandskär, 20km west of the Finnish border on the north coast of the Bothnian Bay (Ericson and Wallentinus 1965)<ref>Ericson, L. & Wallentinus, H. G., 1979. Sea-shore vegetation around the Gulf of Bothnia. Guide for the International Society for Vegetation Science. July-August 1977. ''Wahlenbergia'', Vol. '''5''', 142 pages.</ref>. These are scattered (see Figure) and in many ways similar to those on the coast of Finland which have developed on a [[coastline]], which is rising relative to sea level. By contrast, the southern provinces of Halland and Scania are rich in [[dunes]] (Olsson 1974) and based on the information available, larger. Coastal dunes can extend up to 4km inland and stretch from 15 to 40km in length (Olson 1993) <ref>Olsson, H., 1993. Dry coastal [[ecosystems]] of southern Sweden. In: ''Dry Coastal Ecosystems. 2A. Polar Regions and Europe'', ed., E. Van der Maarel, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 131-143.</ref>. <br />
The large open sandy bays have a broad dune belt behind with active [[backshore]] dunes and an inner zone stabilised by pines, mainly planted during the nineteenth century. Erosion began with the start of agricultural activity as early as the 16th century. During the last 50 years, the attraction of [[sandy beaches]] for [[leisure and recreation|recreational activities]] has rapidly increased and caused environmental problems, notably destruction of dune grasses, which initiates wind erosion (Norrman et al. 1974)<ref>Norrman, J.O. et al., 1974. ''Investigations of dune morphology in southern Halland'', (in Swedish). Statens Naturvårdsverk PM 500, Stockholm.<br />
</ref>. There are no dunes in the North West (Hallberg and Ivarsson 1965)<ref>Hallberg, H. P. & Ivarsson, R., 1965. Vegetation of coastal Bohuslan. ''Acta Phytogeogr''. Suec. '''50''', 112-122.</ref>. Several physical types of dune occur, including those with a sequence of ridges lying parallel to the coast (hindshore), barrier islands and spits. They can reach a maximum height of 10-15m and are usually composed of non-calcareous sand. On the Falsterbo peninsula in southwest Sweden there are sub-parallel dune ridges that formed by accretion of wind-blown sand on successive longshore spits.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Sweden.jpg|thumb|left|250px|'''Figure''': Map of sand dune distribution and important sites in Sweden. Copyright: J Pat Doody]]<br />
<br />
<br />
=Vegetation=<br />
<br />
As with Finland, the natural vegetation at the back dunes is woodland. In the south, oak and beech dominate, although the destruction of most examples probably took place in historic times. Burning and grazing by domestic stock appear to have been the principle agents and records suggest that major sand instability began around the 16th Century. As with elsewhere in Europe, systematic planting with pine forests has had a major influence on the present day vegetation. Grazing has also been an important component in the development of rich open grassland or heath. A summary of the types of plant communities follows. See also “Dry coastal ecosystems of southern Sweden” (Olsson 1993, pages 133-136). Click on the following link for a [[Sand Dunes in Europe|general description of sand dune vegetation in Europe.]]<br />
<br />
===Strandline===<br />
Annual and perennial drift vegetation with ''Cakile maritima'', ''Atriplex littoralis'' and ''Honckenya peploides''.<br />
===Foredune===<br />
Various combinations of ''Ammophila arenaria'' and sandy grassland, which in the north is usually replaced by ''Ammocalamagrostis baltica''* and ''Leymus arenarius''.<br />
===Dune grassland===<br />
Short dry acid dune vegetation occurs in several forms but with ''Corynephorus canescens'' a frequent component. Calcareous grassland is rare. At least one site, Vittemölla, has calcareous dunes.<br />
===Dune slack===<br />
Several wetland communities occur including ''Carex nigra'' in a low vegetation, ''Phragmites australis'' marsh and aquatic vegetation.<br />
<br />
===Dune heath===<br />
''Calluna vulgaris'' is important, though in some wetter forms of the vegetation ''Salix arenaria'' may be dominant. In other areas, ''Empetrum nigrum'' may be present.<br />
===Woodland===<br />
A variety of forest and shrubby wood vegetation occurs with ''Pinus sylvestris'', ''Quercus robur'' or ''Betula pendula'' dominant.<br />
<br />
* It is suggested that a more frequently used name for ''Ammocalamagrostis baltica'' is ''Calamophila baltica''. <br />
<br />
==Important sites==<br />
<br />
The sites listed below are from the original inventory see Olsson (1974), except for Site 10, Rullsand (Ericson and Wallentinus 1979) and Gotska Sandön and Haparanda Skärgård (information from the Internet).<br />
<br />
[[Image:Sweden Table.jpg|thumb|left|350px|'''Figure''': List of important sand dunes sites in Sweden.]]<br />
<br />
<br />
NR, Nature Reserve; NP, National Park; SNINC, Site of National Importance for Nature Conservation.<br />
<br />
=Conservation=<br />
<br />
As with elsewhere in Northern Europe afforestation, to prevent sand blow, has had a major impact on the natural vegetation particularly in the older [[dunes]]. Information on other [[conservation]] problems is not available though sand stabilisation remains a important preoccupation in the face of increasing recreational pressure. ''Rosa rugosa'' is present in some dune areas and may be a long-term management problem. <br />
<br />
'''Original contact''': Prof. E. van der Maarel, Uppsala University, Dept. of Ecological Botany, Box 559, S-75122 UPPSALA, SWEDEN. At present at: Dept. of Plant Ecology, Uppsala University, Community and Conservation Ecology Group, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 14, 9750 AA Haren, The Netherlands<br />
<br />
=Additional information=<br />
<br />
Olsson, H., 1993. Dry coastal ecosystems of southern Sweden. In: ''Ecosystems of the World 2A Dry Coastal Ecosystems, Polar regions and Europe'', ed., van der Maarel, Elsivier, 133-138.<br />
<br />
Cramer, W., 1993. Dry coastal ecosystems of the Northern Baltic. In: ''Ecosystems of the World 2A Dry Coastal Ecosystems, Polar regions and Europe'', ed., van der Maarel, Elsivier, 98-100.<br />
<br />
For information on spiders see, Almquist (1973)<ref>Almquist, S., 1973. Spider associations in coastal sand dunes. Oikos, 24, 444-457.</ref><br />
=References=<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
=See also=<br />
* [[Sand Dunes in Europe]]<br />
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_dune Articles on sand dunes on Wikpedia]<br />
* [[European Sand Dune Distribution]]<br />
* [[Sand dune types - Europe]]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Sand Dune Inventory of Europe (Doody ed. 1991 & 2008)]]<br />
[[Category:Sand dunes]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal and marine areas and locations]]<br />
[[Category:Natural coastal areas]]<br />
[[Category:Baltic]]<br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=7574<br />
|AuthorFullName=Doody, Pat<br />
|AuthorName=Pat Doody}}</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Marine_Spatial_Planning_-_the_need_for_a_common_language&diff=26212Marine Spatial Planning - the need for a common language2008-12-17T13:35:48Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{revision}}<br />
<br />
During the past decade, the evolution of marine [[spatial planning]] and ocean zoning has become increasingly important in implementing [[ecosystem]]-based marine management. Originally, marine [[spatial planning]] was used to improve the management of [[Biodiversity and conservation, and role of marine protected areas|marine protected areas]]. One of the best-known examples is Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Australia’s approach permits multiple human activities, e.g., fisheries and [[tourism]], while simultaneously providing a high level of protection for specific areas. However, more recent attention has been placed on managing the multiple use of marine space, especially in areas where conflicts among users and the environment are already clear as, for example, in the North Sea. Despite academic discussions and the fact that some countries already have started implementation, the scope of marine [[spatial planning]] has not been clearly defined. One of the main conclusions of UNESCO’s first international workshop on marine spatial planning highlighted the need for some form of common understanding of the scope of marine spatial planning and what added value it can provide in moving toward ecosystem-based management in the marine environment. This article aims to clarify why we need marine [[spatial planning]], how it can be defined appropriately, and what benefits it can offer. It also briefly discusses some international examples of marine spatial planning today.<br />
<br />
==Why do we need Marine Spatial Planning?==<br />
<br />
[[Biodiversity]] in the marine environment continues to decline and human activities are at the centre of this destructive evolution. Ongoing population growth, technological change and shifting consumer demands, especially in richer countries, all have considerably increased the need for more food, more energy, and more trade. An increasingly larger share of goods comes from marine resources. Especially after World War II, existing activities such as fisheries, shipping, dredging and oil exploitation expanded rapidly while new uses including recreation, mineral extraction, and more recently wind energy and offshore marine aquaculture, have started to claim their own spaces in the marine environment. A study done for the Belgian part of the North Sea revealed that the total claim for ocean space was almost three times the available amount (Figure 1)<ref>F Maes, et al. A Flood of Space. Towards a Spatial Structure Plan for Sustainable Management of the North Sea. Belgian Science Policy, 2005, pp. 14-15</ref>. Similar experiences in other countries confirm this trend.<br />
<br />
[[image:encora_figure1.jpg|thumb|Figure 1: Total claims for ocean space exceeding almost three times the available amount in the Belgian Part of the North Sea]]<br />
<br />
With resources being limited both in space and amount, these developments have proven to be devastating for many places and resources, elevating competition among users and interest groups, and resulting in increasingly undesirable effects, loss of marine biodiversity and threats to the health of the oceans as a whole. <br />
<br />
Essentially, increased pressure on the marine environment has led to two important types of conflict. First, not all uses are compatible with one another and are competing for ocean space or have adverse effects on each other (use-use conflicts, e.g., offshore oil exploitation and fisheries). But a much bigger concern, however, is the cumulative effects of these activities on the marine environment, or in other words the conflicts between users and the environment (use-environment conflicts, e.g., fisheries and habitat loss).<br />
Traditional concerns about nature included direct impacts such as declining water quality, pollution or [[habitat]] loss. More recently, environmental concerns shifted to the marine life support system or ‘[[ecosystem]]’ that nurtures and sustains important resources that are in our prior interest for economic reasons (for example, high-value fish). This shift has drawn the attention to the need to approach environmental problems from an [[ecosystem]] perspective. One way to restore or protect marine [[biodiversity]], is through the delineation of protected areas in which human pressure is reduced or excluded. Today not only economic and social incentives, but also ecological objectives (e.g., finding space for nature), are driving and increasing the demand for use (or non-use) of space in the marine environment.<br />
<br />
With human activities and resource use continually developing and nature itself changing in space and time, it is obvious that conflicts are increasingly likely. The only solution to resolve these conflicts is through management of human activities (sea use management) that addresses their impact in space and time. There is an urgent need to organize human activities in certain places, and with certain time constraints that minimizes negative impacts on ecologically valuable areas of the marine ecosystem and among other anthropogenic activities. A comprehensive way to achieve this, is through the use of marine [[spatial planning]].<br />
<br />
==What is Marine Spatial Planning?==<br />
<br />
===A Spatial Vision for the Marine Environment===<br />
<br />
[[Spatial planning]] is an essential tool for managing the development and use of land in many parts of the world. In North America and Europe it is commonly used as a central component of economic development and [[environmental planning]]. The principal purpose of a planning system on land is to regulate the development and use of land in the public interest <ref>Spatial Planning in the Coastal and Marine Environment: Next Steps to Action. Report of a CoastNET Conference, Post-Conference Briefing, University of London, United Kingdom, 1 October 2003, pp 9</ref>. The traditional approach of making permit decisions of a project-by-project, case-by-case basis has been replaced by a planning process that lays out a vision to be developed for the use of certain areas. This approach has become the standard for terrestrial land-use planning and decision-making.<br />
<br />
With only a few exceptions, there is no clearly articulated spatial vision for the use of marine areas, no plan-based approach to management <ref>F., Douvere and C., Ehler. The International Perspective: Lessons from recent European Experience with Marine Spatial Planning. Paper presented at the Symposium on Management for Spatial and Temporal Complexity in Ocean Ecosystems in the 21st Century at the 20th Annual Meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology, San Jose, California, 24-28 June 2006</ref>. This does not mean that activities taking place in our seas are unregulated. On the contrary, there are a number of spatial measures already taken to allocate space to different uses.<br />
<br />
At a global scale, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), that came into effect in 1994, provides an over-arching framework for the allocation of marine space to national states, through the codification of concepts such as the Territorial Sea (TS) of 12 nautical miles, Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of 200 nautical miles, Contiguous Zone, and the [[Continental Shelf]]. Most coastal countries already allocate ocean space. Among the most obvious are concession zones for resource exploitation, designations of dumping sites, and shipping routes or traffic separation scheme (see Table 1)<ref>C., Ehler and F., Douvere. Visions for a Sea Change. Report of the First International workshop on Marine Spatial Planning. IOC-IMCAM Dossier 3, UNESCO, Paris, 2007, pp. 26</ref>.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[image:MSP_Common_Language_Table.jpg|thumb|Table 1: Examples of Existing Ocean Space Designations]]<br />
<br />
The problem, however, is that most of these initiatives to allocate space occur on a single-sector basis without any planning that looks at the area as a whole. Despite numerous efforts toward nature conservation, the currently existing laissez-faire- aissezaller approach to the way ocean space is allocated has, for example, resulted in very little and, most often, no space for nature. The private sector is left to maximize its own interests. Although this might seem a logical consequence, the [[open oceans|oceans]] are a common property resource, and therefore some kind of public process that allocates space in a more efficient, effective and equitable manner is needed. That process is marine spatial planning. <br />
<br />
Currently, there is no framework that facilitates integrated strategic and holistic planning in relation to all activities within most marine areas <ref>Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), 'A Marine Bill. A Consultation Document', March 2006, pp 18</ref>. The lack of such a framework, often translates into: <ref>Adapted from: Spatial Planning in the Coastal and Marine Environment: Next Steps to Action. Report of a CoastNET Conference, Post-Conference Briefing, University of London, United Kingdom, 1 October 2003, pp 19</ref><br />
<br />
* Developments and uses that are considered through different policies and regimes, resulting in single-sector responsibilities for determining development and uses in the marine environment in most countries;<br />
* Lack of connection between the various authorities responsible for individual activities or the protection and management of the environment as a whole; <br />
* Lack of certainty for marine developers and users as well as for environmental managers; and<br />
* Lack of protection and conservation of marine areas with high levels of [[biodiversity]].<br />
<br />
Recent advances in science and technology however are changing the way we view life in the [[open oceans|oceans]]<ref>K Gjerde, Ecosystems and Biodiversity in Deep Waters and High Seas. UNEP Regional Seas Report and Studies, n 178, 2006, pp 58</ref>. Geo-technologies are revolutionizing marine resource management. Through remote sensing, tracking, and global positioning technologies science is making visible what had previously been hidden or inaccessible. Living and mineral resources, marine habitats, environmental conditions, sea bottom [[coastal morphology|morphology]], and [[Species diversity|species ranges]] and interactions are become increasingly documented and mapped <ref>K., St. Martin, The Missing Layer: Geo-technologies, Communities, and the Uneven impacts of Marine Spatial Planning. Proceedings for the UNESCO Workshop on Marine Spatial Planning, 8-10 November 2006, Paris. Available at http://ioc3.unesco.org/marinesp (last visited 10 December 2006)</ref>. In addition, new technologies are being used to add the “human dimension” to marine areas <ref>K., St. Martin and M., Hall-Arber. The Missing Layer: Geo-technologies, Communities, and Implications for Marine Spatial Planning. In: F., Douvere and C., Ehler (eds.) The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Implementing Ecosystem-based, Sea Use Management. Special Issue Marine Policy (submitted)</ref>. As a result, spatial planning of human activities in the marine environment has become possible and increasingly more attractive. In many respects, planning in the marine environment today resembles terrestrial planning in the 1960s. Where land use planning is the spatial planning component of land use management, marine spatial planning is the [[spatial planning]] component of sea use management.<br />
<br />
===Defining Marine Spatial Planning===<br />
<br />
Despite the existence of academic discussions and the fact that some countries already have started to apply the concepts of marine spatial planning in their management practices, no commonly approved operational definition for marine spatial planning has been developed. Descriptions can be found throughout the spatial planning literature, but the terms, e.g., ocean zoning or marine spatial management, maritime spatial planning, are not applied consistently.<br />
<br />
One of the key conclusions of the First International workshop on marine [[spatial planning]], held at UNESCO from 8-10 November 2007 <ref>C., Ehler and F., Douvere. Visions for a Sea Change. Report of the First International Workshop on Marine Spatial Planning. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Programme. IOC Manual and Guides, n.48, IOCAM Dossier, n.4, Paris, UNESCO, 2007, 83 p. See also: F., Douvere and C., Ehler. Conference report. Marine Policy, 31, 2007, pp. 582-583</ref>, referred to the need to develop a common vocabulary for marine spatial planning. The workshop highlighted the challenge in doing so through several examples, including the Polish language that does not have a word for zoning and the lack of the word governance in the Chinese language <ref>First International Expert Workshop on Marine Spatial Planning and Sea Use Management. UNESCO, 8-10 November 2006, Paris, France. Available at: http://ioc3.unesco.org/marinesp (last visited 10 October 2007)</ref>. Some form of common language becomes even more important in areas where national boundaries do not coincide with boundaries meaningful from a ecological standpoint and where cooperation between neighboring nations will be a fundamental requirement for the establishment of an integrated management at [[ecosystem]] level.<br />
<br />
The UNESCO marine [[spatial planning]] workshop mentioned above attempted to define<br />
marine spatial planning. Marine [spatial planning] in its broadest sense was defined as <ref>C., Ehler and F., Douvere. Visions for a Sea Change. Report of the First International Workshop on Marine Spatial Planning. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Programme. IOC Manual and Guides, n.48, IOCAM Dossier, n.4, Paris, UNESCO, 2007, pp. 13</ref>:<br />
<br />
‘A process of analyzing and allocating parts of three-dimensional marine spaces to specific uses, to achieve ecological, economic, and social objectives that are usually specified through the political process.’<br />
<br />
Marine [[spatial planning]] aims to <ref>Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), 'A Marine Bill. A Consultation Document', March 2006, pp 19</ref>:<br />
<br />
‘(…) create and establish a more rational organization of the use of marine space and the interactions between its uses, to balance demands for development with the need to protect the environment, and to achieve social and economic objectives in an open and planned way (…). An agreed plan should provide a firm basis for rational and consistent decisions on license applications, and allow users of the sea to make future decisions with greater knowledge and confidence’.<br />
<br />
Marine [[spatial planning]] has the overall goal of providing a mechanism for a strategic and integrated plan-based approach for marine management that makes it possible to look at the wider picture and to manage (potential and existing) conflicting uses, the cumulative effects of human activities and marine protection. A spatial planning system for the marine environment provides decision makers with a spatial and temporal context for the implementation of policies, developed at the regional, national and international level. It gives an opportunity not only to better manage and understand the marine environment but also allows a long-term planning in a way that processes become more transparent with a greater certainty in permitting, planning and resource allocation for both developers and environmental managers <ref>Spatial Planning in the Coastal and Marine Environment: Next Steps to Action. Report of a CoastNET Conference, Post-Conference Briefing, University of London, United Kingdom, 1 October 2003, pp 13-14</ref>. In doing so, it can replace the current piecemeal view resulting from single-sector based allocation of ocean space, and make sure that commitments made in a number of important international and national marine policy commitments can be fulfilled <ref>F., Douvere and C., Ehler. The International Perspective: Lessons from recent European Experience with Marine Spatial Planning. Paper presented at the Symposium on Management for Spatial and Temporal Complexity in Ocean Ecosystems in the 21st century at the 20th Annual Meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology, San Jose, California, 24-28 June 2006</ref>. Concretely, marine spatial planning has the objective to achieve <ref>Modified from: European Conference of Ministers Responsible for Regional Planning. Development and planning prospects in European Maritime Regions. The European Regional/Spatial Planning Charter. 6th Session, Torremolinos (Spain), 19-20 May 1983. Available at: http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Cooperation/Environment/CEMAT/ (last visited 29 November 2006)</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Responsible management of natural resources and protection of the environment<br />
By promoting strategies to minimize conflicts between the growing demand for natural resources and the need to conserve them, it seeks to ensure responsible management of the environment, the resources of marine areas, with special attention to areas of natural beauty and to the cultural and natural heritage;<br />
* Rational use of space in the marine environment by being concerned in particular with the location, organization and future development of large complexes, major infrastructures, and the protection of the marine environment;<br />
* Coordination between the various sectors by coordinating concerns on the distribution of population, economic activities, [[habitat]], public facilities and energy supplies, transport, supply of resources, water quality, prevention of noise and waste disposal, protection of the marine environment and of natural, historical, cultural assets and resources;<br />
* Facilitation of the coordination and cooperation between the various levels of decision-making (international, national, regional and local);<br />
* Balanced socio-economic development in maritime regions by allocating certain spaces for certain uses through a comprehensive analysis, greater security for business operations in the marine environment can be established. Serious business investments, for example, offshore wind energy, would not risk the failure of their initiatives because of a failure to obtain a permit.<br />
<br />
It is important to keep in mind, however, that marine [[spatial planning]] is not the only instrument with which to manage the [[open oceans|oceans]]. A marine spatial planning process provides measures that influence the spatial and temporal components of human activities and ecological aspects of the marine environment. Other measures and tools will be needed that influence the performance of human activities and ecological processes of the marine environment, e.g., measures that influence the input and output of human activity in the marine environment such as total allowable catches, limits on infrastructure, landing quotas, etc <ref>F., Douvere. The Importance of Marine Spatial Planning in Advancing Ecosystem-based, Sea Use Management. In: F., Douvere and C., Ehler (eds.) The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Implementing Ecosystem-based, Sea Use Management. Special Issue Marine Policy (submitted)</ref>.<br />
<br />
A key problem with various existing definitions on marine [[spatial planning]] is that they refer to planning and management of human activities and protection of the marine environment as if they were synonymous. They are not, however, and the lack of consistency in the use and application of both terms is one of the main reasons why fruitful discussions and interactions on the need of marine spatial planning regularly fail to reach a resolution. In general, management refers to the effective and efficient uses of resources to achieve a specified outcome and has two phases (a) planning and (b) implementation. Due to a rapidly changing world, marine spatial planning, to be effective, needs to be conducted as an adaptive, iterative and continuous process. Finally, the involvement of [[stakeholders]] and continuous financing are essential elements to make the process of marine spatial planning sustainable over time <ref>F., Douvere. The Importance of Marine Spatial Planning in Advancing Ecosystem-based, Sea Use Management. In: F., Douvere and C., Ehler (eds.) The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Implementing Ecosystem-based, Sea Use Management. Special Issue Marine Policy (submitted)</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Marine Spatial Planning: Key process towards integrated maritime policy==<br />
<br />
Various countries around the world have started to implement, or at least experiment with, marine spatial planning. At first, marine spatial planning was primarily used for the management of marine protected areas. Some of the best-known examples are Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMPA)<ref>J., Day. Zoning: Lessons from the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Ocean and Coastal Zone Management, 45, 2002, pp. 139-156</ref>, the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary <ref>Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Draft Revised Management Plan. United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, and National Marine Sanctuary Program, February 2005, 164 p</ref> and the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation Area <ref>Personal communication with Jens Enemark, Secretary of the Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, February 2007. See also: www.waddensea-secretariat.org (last visited 9 September 2007)</ref>. In all three of these initiatives, marine spatial planning is applied with the principal objective of nature conservation and in all three cases, marine spatial planning is either a key instrument or seen as a critical requirement to achieve management objectives.<br />
<br />
Recently, however, marine spatial planning has become increasingly more important for the management of entire marine areas where the principal objective is to balance ecological, economic and social interests. This new direction is gaining particular importance in Europe. The European Union (EU) Green paper ‘Toward a Future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European Vision for the Oceans and Seas’ sees marine spatial planning as a key instrument for the management of a growing and increasingly competing maritime economy, while at the same time safeguarding marine biodiversity <ref>Green Paper: Towards a Future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas. Commission of the European Communities. COM(2006)275final, Brussels, 7 June 2006</ref>. The EU Marine Strategy <ref>Thematic Strategy on the Protection and Conservation of the Marine Environment. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament. COM(2005)504 final, Brussels, 24 October 2005</ref>, the environmental pillar of the EU Maritime Policy, introduced the principle of ecosystem-based marine spatial planning <ref>Green Paper: Towards a Future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas. Commission of the European Communities. COM(2006)275final, Brussels, 7 June 2006, p. 12</ref> and provides a supportive framework for national initiatives toward spatial planning, designed for achieving a good status for the environment. The latest communication from the European Commission confirms that integrated marine spatial planning is a fundamental requirement for sustainable development and for achieving an integrated approach to marine management. Building further on existing EU initiatives with a strong marine spatial planning dimension, the EU Commission plans the development of a road map and a system for the exchange of best practice to facilitate and encourage the further development of marine spatial planning in the member states <ref>Commission Staff Working Document. Accompanying document to the communication from the commission. An integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union. Commission of the European Communities. Brussels, 10 October 2007, SEC(2007)1278/2 provisional version</ref>.<br />
<br />
Various European countries have started to develop marine spatial planning initiatives. Germany has developed marine spatial plans for the [[Territorial sea|territorial waters]] in the [[Baltic Sea]] <ref>Landesraumentwicklungsprogramm Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Minister für Arbeit, Bau und Landesentwicklung des Landes Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, 2005, pp. 67-71</ref> that are currently been implemented, while a draft marine spatial plan for the entire German EEZ is underway. The latter has been made possible through an amendment of the Federal Spatial Planning Act that extends the spatial planning system to the marine environment <ref>Raumordnungsgesetz (ROG) vom 18 August 1997 (BGB1. IS. 2081, 2102), zuletzt geändert durch Artikel 10 des Gesetzes vom 9 Dezember 2006 (BGB1. IS 2833)</ref>. In Germany, marine spatial planning initiatives are to a large extent embedded in concurrent efforts toward [[# the integrated approach to coastal zone management (ICZM)|integrated coastal and ocean management (ICZM)]] <ref>K., Gee, et al. National ICZM Strategies in Germany: A Spatial Planning Approach. In: G., Scherewski, N., Löser (eds.). Managing the Baltic Sea, Coastline Reports, n2, 2004, pp. 23-33</ref>. Belgium is one of the first countries that actually implemented a multiple objective marine spatial plan covering its TS and EEZ. A multiple-objective ‘Master Plan’ for the Belgian part of the North Sea has been implemented incrementally since 2003, and includes the spatial demarcation for the extraction of sand and gravel, zones for offshore wind energy and delimitation of marine protected areas <ref>F., Douvere, et al. The Role of Spatial Planning in Sea Use Management: The Belgian Case. Marine Policy, 31, 2007, pp. 182-191</ref>. In 2005, the Netherlands developed an overarching spatial planning framework for the Dutch part of the North Sea with the primary objective to establish a healthy, safe and profitable sea <ref>Integrated Management Plan for the North Sea 2015. Management Summary. Rijkswaterstaat Noordzee, 2005, 129 p + annexes</ref>. In March 2007, the United Kingdom released its Marine Bill White Paper in which a new system is introduced for marine spatial planning that will allow a strategic, plan-led approach to the use of marine space and the interactions between its uses for the entire UK waters <ref>A Sea Change. A Marine Bill White Paper. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), March 2007, 168 p</ref>. Other countries, including Nordic countries <ref>See for examples: Nordic Workshop on Marine Spatial Planning. 6-8 June 2007, Copenhagen. Available at: http://www.nordicmpaforum.org (last visited 13 October 2007)</ref>, Poland, and various Adriatic countries <ref>Current Policy and Practice of Coastal and Marine Planning in the Adriatic Region. Synthesis. Draft prepared in the context of PlanCoast project. September2007</ref> are also moving in the direction of marine spatial planning <ref> </ref>.<br />
<br />
Outside the EU, marine spatial planning initiatives are also moving ahead, in particular in Canada, Australia (beyond the Great Barrier Reef), China, and at a slower pace, the United States.<br />
<br />
==Benefits of marine spatial planning==<br />
<br />
Most evidence of the benefits of marine spatial planning is qualitative rather than quantitative. More quantitative (and measurable) evidence of benefits is likely to appear in the next few years as [[spatial planning]] schemes are further developed, and the consequences currently underway are more systematically documented. Potential benefits of marine spatial planning with regard to economic activity include <ref>Potential Benefits of Marine Spatial Planning to Economic Activity in the UK. Final Report to the RSPB, UK, 2004, pp. 68-69</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Facilitating sector growth: marine spatial planning can provide a framework that facilitates the [[sustainable development]] of different economic activities, therefore helping to enhance income and employment;<br />
* Optimizing the use of the sea: marine spatial planning can help to ensure that maximum benefits are derived from the use of the sea by encouraging activities to take place where they bring most value and do not devalue other activities; and<br />
* Reducing costs: marine spatial planning can reduce costs of information, regulation, planning and decision-making.<br />
<br />
These benefits arise through:<br />
* Strategic planning: marine spatial planning provides a strategic planning framework that helps to facilitate sectoral development by guiding investment decisions. Oil and gas have benefited from strategic planning approaches at a sectoral level. There is reason to believe that other sectors such as ports and fisheries would also benefit from strategic planning. An integrated and cross sectoral approach to marine spatial planning could provide significant further economic benefits by considering the different needs and opportunities of different users of marine areas and helping to resolve potential conflicts;<br />
<br />
* Conflict resolution: The potential for conflicts between different marine sectors is increasing over time, particularly as developing sectors such as aquaculture and renewable energy grow in significance. Marine spatial planning provides a means of avoiding and managing potential conflicts, and ensuring that the needs of different sectors are addressed in a coordinated way;<br />
<br />
* Sustainable resource use: marine spatial planning should facilitate the sustainable exploitation of natural resources, such as fisheries and aggregates, and thereby secure the longterm future of the industries that depend on them; <br />
<br />
* Provision of development of space: marine spatial planning helps to ensure that all marine activities, including developing sectors such as renewable energy and aquaculture as well as more established ones, are fairly allocated space to develop;<br />
<br />
* Promoting appropriate uses: By considering the variety of uses appropriate to the area in question, the value of different activities, the potential conflicts of use, and the suitability of different areas for different uses, marine spatial planning should help to promote a mix of uses that are compatible with each other and the environment, and help to optimize the use of the maritime area;<br />
<br />
* Supporting the environmental economy: By improving the conservation and management of the marine environment, marine spatial planning helps to promote activities that depend on environmental quality, such as [[leisure and recreation|recreation]] and fishing. This is particularly true in areas of high conservation value where activities such as diving and wildlife tourism are significant;<br />
<br />
* Improving stakeholder involvement: marine spatial planning can provide a transparent and structured mechanism in which the interests of different sectors can be represented and reconciled;<br />
<br />
* Information efficiency: By developing common approaches to the acquisition and dissemination of information, marine spatial planning can help to improve information provision and reduce duplication of effort, therefore bringing cost efficiency; and<br />
<br />
* Regulatory efficiency: By improving information exchange and providing a more certain environment in which regulatory decisions are made, marine spatial planning can be expected to reduce regulatory and compliance costs.<br />
<br />
Other benefits of marine spatial planning include:<br />
* Finding space for nature: Marine spatial planning is a practical tool to make marine conservation a reality. In many countries, specific nature conservation legislation that affects the marine area is currently made of regimes that are primarily terrestrial in focus but which have been extended to the marine realm. Marine spatial planning that is coordinated among all sectors and users of the marine area can help achieve marine nature conservation goals and objectives without limiting future economic growth;<br />
<br />
* Transparency in human and environmental impacts: The use of marine spatial planning allows for early identification of potential conflicts, and therefore a chance to resolve them, between industries and between development and important wildlife areas. Marine spatial planning can offer transparency in both human and environmental impacts and enable potential conflicts to be identified and resolved at the planning stage, rather than at a later stage when considerable investment has been made for individual proposals or damage to the environment is irreversible; and <br />
<br />
* Improved understanding: A marine spatial planning system allows a more strategic approach to management that can substantially improve our understanding and consideration of the cumulative and combined effects between different activities and the environment itself. This understanding allows planning pro-actively, rather than just reacting to applications, changes and situations.<br />
<br />
==Conclusion==<br />
<br />
During the past 10 years, marine [[spatial planning]] has become increasingly recognized as a crucial process in making integrated management in the marine environment a reality, either in the form of integrated coastal and ocean management or more recently ecosystem-based, sea use management. Marine spatial planning is a process that allows the allocation of space in a more effective, efficient and equitable manner.<br />
<br />
The problem with the current practice of allocating space in the marine environment is that it is done on a single-sector basis, mainly without a plan-based approach and with little or no consideration of objectives from other uses or conservation requirements that may be conflicting or compatible. The huge demand for space together with the lack of an integrated approach that pays attention to the heterogenic characteristics of ocean space, leads to conflicts among uses, and between human use and the natural environment.<br />
<br />
As countries are moving ahead with the development and application of [[spatial planning]] systems in the marine environment, there is a need for at least some form of common understanding of the scope, objectives, and added value of marine spatial planning. In particular in marine regions where neighboring, national states are required to cooperate to achieve an integrated management at a broader ecosystem level (e.g. the [[Baltic Sea]], [[Mediterranean Sea and Region, including Adriatic Sea|Adriatic Sea]], [[North Sea]], etc.), a common language – and to some extent also a set of principles that underpin the application of marine spatial planning – is necessary to make marine spatial planning effective and sustainable over time.<br />
<br />
The activities in the framework of UNESCO’s Marine Spatial Planning Initiative are an attempt to deal with these needs. The action program for this Initiative includes the development of a web-based network for the exchange of good practices on marine spatial planning, and more importantly, the development of a manual with guidelines and principles providing a step-by-step approach for the implementation of ecosystem based marine spatial management. The publication of this manual is planned for April 2009.<br />
<br />
==Further Reading==<br />
<br />
F., Douvere & C., Ehler (eds.) The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Implementing Ecosystem-based, Sea Use Management. Special Issue Marine Policy (submitted September 2007)<br />
<br />
C., Ehler & F., Douvere. Visions for a Sea Change. Report of the First International Workshop on Marine Spatial Planning. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Programme. IOC Manual and Guides, n48, IOCAM Dossier n4, Paris, UNESCO, 2007, 83 p.<br />
<br />
O., Young, G., Oshrenko, J., Ekstrom, L., Crowder, J., Ogden, J., Wilson, J., Day, F., Douvere, C., Ehler, K., McLeod, B., Halpern, and R., Peach. Solving the Crisis in Ocean Governance. Place-based Management of Marine Ecosystems. Environment. May 2007, 49, 4, pp. 21-30. <br />
<br />
L., Crowder, G., Oshrenko, O., Young, S., Airame, E., Norse, N., Baron, J., Day, F., Douvere, C., Ehler, B., Halpern, S., Langdon, K., McLeod, J., Ogden, R., Peach, A., Rosenberg, J., Wilson. Resolving Mismatches in U.S. Ocean Governance, Science, vol., 313, 4 August 2006, pp. 617-618.<br />
<br />
F., Douvere, F., Maes, A., Vanhulle, J., Schrijvers. The Role of Marine Spatial Planning in Sea Use Management: The Belgian Case. Marine Policy, vol., 31, March 31, 2007, pp. 182-191.<br />
<br />
F., Douvere & C., Ehler. New Perspectives on Ecosystem-based Management: Lessons from European Experience with Marine Spatial Planning. Journal for Environmental Management (submitted)<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Impact of fisheries on coastal systems]]<br />
* [[Conservation and restoration of coastal and estuarine habitats]]<br />
* [[Coastal pollution and impacts]]<br />
* [[Spatial Planning and Integrated Coastal Zone Management]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Spatial planning in coastal and marine zones]]<br />
[[Category:Sectoral management in coastal zones]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal and marine human activities]]<br />
<br />
<br />
{{authors<br />
|AuthorID1=3184<br />
|AuthorFullName1=Douvere, Fanny<br />
|AuthorName1=Douvere, Fanny<br />
|AuthorID2=15114<br />
|AuthorFullName2=Ehler, Charles<br />
|AuthorName2=Ehler, Charles}}<br />
<br />
[[Category: Articles by Ehler, Charles]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 3]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Impacts_from_maritime_transport&diff=26211Impacts from maritime transport2008-12-17T13:35:22Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>Impacts from from [[oil spills]] on [[coastal zone]]s often regard losses of [[biodiversity]], of environmental quality or of other non-use or passive-use values, which are difficult to estimate with traditional techniques and concepts of evaluation, as no market values are directly involved. In the case of the Prestige Oil Spill, passive-use values of the environmental assetts destroyed by the impacts on the [[coastal zone]] have been estimated.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== The Prestige incident ==<br />
<br />
On November 13, 2002, the single-hull 26 year-old oil tanker, Prestige, suffered a serious accident just 46 kilometers away from the Finisterra Cape, in the Northwest of Galicia (Spain). The Prestige had a complicated parentage. It was owned by a Liberian company, registered in the Bahamas, and was operated by a Greek captain with a Filipino and Greek crew. It carried about 77,000 metric tons (MT) of heavy low-quality oil. Six days after the accident, and after traveling without a clear direction outside the Atlantic coast of Galicia, the Prestige sank 222 Kilometers away from the Cies Islands on November 19, 2002, after splitting in two during a storm. <br />
<br />
<br />
== Impacts from the incident ==<br />
<br />
On its way to the bottom of the sea it spilled more than 60,000 MT of oil, polluting more than 1,300 kilometers of [[coastline]]. Its spill was the most serious environmental accident ever suffered in Spanish waters. It began in November 2002 and lasted for about 4 months, affecting the coasts of Northern Portugal, Northern Spain and Southern France. <br />
The spill from the Prestige arrived at the Spanish coast in three large “black waves,” contributing to the extended agony of all affected individuals. The first large wave arrived at the Galician coast on November 16, 2002, and at the time the regional authorities of Galicia issued a prohibition for inshore fishing as well as shellfish extraction (fishing and shellfish ban) in the affected area. The lack of cleaning equipment and qualified personnel made it difficult to articulate a quick and proper response to clean such large affected area. While the oil was piling up on seashores and [[beach|beaches]], the second wave of oil arrived on November 20, 2002, being the worst in magnitude (with 30 kilometers in length according to satellite images). Almost the entire Galician littoral was closed for fishing and shellfish extraction, and in most cases, the affected areas would not be re-opened until a few months later. When the Prestige sank, it was estimated that it took around 50,000 MT of its cargo of heavy oil down to the sea bed. However, posterior estimations showed that only 11,000 MT were kept inside, spilling the rest into the waters. The third oil wave arrived at the coasts on December 19, 2002, after the tanker sank. However, until February 1, 2003, the Prestige kept leaking oil from its tanks while on the sea bed, creating multiple smaller spills arrived at the seashores. <br />
<br />
The cleaning operations continued for many months, although by summer time 2003 most of the affected [[beach]]es were cleaned. In December 2004, and after all cleaning operations were completed on the coast, a total of 97,000 MT of waste coming from the Prestige had been collected along the coast of Galicia only.<br />
<br />
== Valuation of environmental damages ==<br />
<br />
The environmental damage caused by the Prestige oil spill was very severe, seriously affecting commercial fisheries, recreational activities, and other marine mammals and birds<ref>Loureiro, M. L., A. Ribas, E. López, E. Ojea. 2006. Estimated costs and admissible claims linked to the Prestige oil spill. Ecological Economics, 59(1):48-63</ref>. On August 31, 2003, a total of 13,221 birds were collected along the Galician coast, from which 2,466 (20%) were still alive and 9,242 (69.90%) were dead. From the birds alive, about 629 were cleaned and sent back to their natural habitats. This represents a recovery rate of about 10%. Three bird species were heavily affected by the [[oil spills|oil spill]]: razorbill (''Alca torda''), common mure (''Uria aalge''), and Atlantic puffin (''Fratercula arctica''), which jointly account for 80.5% of the total birds soiled. Among all, the common murre was the most affected specie with 4,492 oiled birds (36.8% of the total collected in Galicia). In total, about 23,181 birds were collected in all the affected Spanish regions, while the total amount of birds killed was about 15,610, including those also collected in the French and Portuguese coasts. However, previous estimations consider that the number of killed birds could be even much larger. In January 2003, the Spanish Society of Ornithology and Birdlife estimated that the number of birds killed by this oil spill was between 65,000-130,000, which would make the Prestige the second worst oil spill in history with respect to the number of killed birds. Other international studies conducted after the Erika, Braer, and Exxon Valdez [[oil spills]] present even a more negative outlook, showing that the percentage of collected birds is usually between 15-50% of the total affected. Consequently, we could expect that the number of killed birds may add to 115,000-230,000. <br />
<br />
Valuation of all environmental damages is a complex task. In this empirical exercise we focus on the so-called passive use values of [[ecosystem]] services. We use the [[Contingent Valuation Method|contingent valuation (CV)]] method as Carson et al.<ref>Carson, R. T., R. C. Mitchell, W. M. Hanemann, R.J. Koop, S. Presser, P.A. Ruud, 1992. A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. A Report to the Attorney General of the State of Alaska.</ref> in the valuation of the environmental damage caused by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. The survey employed in the environmental damage assessment followed the guidelines suggested by Carson et al.<ref>Carson, R. T., R. C. Mitchell, W. M. Hanemann, R.J. Koop, S. Presser, P.A. Ruud, 1992. A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. A Report to the Attorney General of the State of Alaska.</ref>, although incorporated important changes in order to deal with socio-economic and cultural differences of the targeted samples. In addition, other methodological refinements were included.<br />
<br />
The contingent valuation survey was carried out in a representative sample of the Spanish population during the spring and early summer 2006. In total, about 1110 completed surveys were collected. The main objectives of the present survey were: a) to assess the total lost passive value in this environmental accident, as it has been done in previous [[oil spills]], such as in the Exxon Valdez oil spill; and b) to assess the sensitivity of WTP estimates under different scenarios. <br />
<br />
The survey had different sections: in the first section, the environmental consequences of the Prestige oil spill were described in great detail; the second section presented a program designed to prevent future oil spills. Photographs and graphics were used to facilitate the participants´ understanding. The third section contained information about the expected effects of a prevention program specifically designed to reduce the magnitude and frequency of oil spills in the Northwest coast of Spain. The fourth section included the WTP question for the described prevention program. Right after the WTP question, a follow-up certainty scale was presented. Finally, the last section contained the socio-economic questions and other attitudinal questions. Surveys were administered at private homes at different hours during the week days and weekends. The response rate was 44%, which is fairly high for CV studies conducted in Europe. <br />
<br />
Results from this survey show interesting outomes. About 67% of the respondents consider than the environmental losses were far more important than any other economic or related losses. Survey participants were also worried about the health effects caused by the Prestige oil spill, and about 26,84% of them declared to have reduced fish consumption in the months after the Prestige oil spill, and 15,18% of them did not still recover their full trust in the fish quality. Mean willingness to pay for a program to avoid a similar oil spill as the Prestige was estimated with a logit model, and it amounts to about 35 € per Spanish household. This implies that total passive use losses caused by the Prestige are at least equal to the amount individuals wish to pay to avoid future spills. These estimates reflect significant societal losses, which are equivalent to 9,800,000 €. In future analysis we will analyze the sensitivity of our results. This study reflects the importance of considering the environmental damages that go beyond the traditional market or commercial losses into the total damage assessment valuation.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Environmental risk assessment of marine activities]]<br />
*[[North Sea pollution from shipping: legal framework]]<br />
*[[Overview of oil spills events from 1970 to 2000]]<br />
<br />
{{Author<br />
<br />
|AuthorID=15631<br />
|AuthorFullName=Maria L. Loureiro<br />
|AuthorName=MariaLoureiro}}<br />
<br />
{{Author<br />
|AuthorFullName=John B. Loomis<br />
|AuthorName=John B. Loomis}}, <br />
<br />
{{Author<br />
|AuthorFullName=Maria Xosé Vázquez <br />
|AuthorName=Maria Xosé Vázquez}}<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Maritime transportation]]<br />
[[Category:Practice, projects and case studies in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 1]]<br />
[[Category:Case studies]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal and marine pollution]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal risk management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Economic_Value&diff=26209Economic Value2008-12-17T13:34:15Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
==Introduction==<br />
Giving a price to the environment has always been problematic. Until a few years ago there were only two values the environment could take: nil or infinite. Either environmental resources were exploited and entered the economy free of charge, or they were protected as heritage sites and were consequently considered priceless. Trying to evaluate environmental values from an economic perspective was then the equivalent of trying to value something priceless. A number of economic techniques have been developed to try and achieve this goal. <br />
The concept of [[Total Economic Value|''Total Economic Value'' (TEV)]] constitutes a watershed in the importance given to the environment within the decision theory.<br />
Before explaining the concept of [[Total Economic Value|TEV]], it’s important to ask ourselves “what do we mean by the ''value'' of nature?” There are several possible meanings.<br />
If we define ''value'' as “the contribution of something to a condition of state of the system” then structures and functions of natural systems, by definition, have value. For instance the value of a tree to a forest is its role in perpetuating forest conditions, including nutrient and hydrological cycling functions.<br />
If we define ''value'' as a “contribution to a goal”, which is a purposeful condition, natural systems have value insofar as they contribute to that goal <ref>Costanza,R. (2000)Social goals and the valuation of [[ecosystem]] services. ''Ecosystems:'' 3, p4-p10.</ref> and the major goal of human interaction with natural ecosystems is the support of human welfare. This goal is the criteria against which human activities and the conditions of natural systems are often measured.<br />
Ecologists use the term ''value'' to mean “that which is desirable or worthy of esteem for its own sake; something or some quality having intrinsic worth”.<br />
Economists use the same term to describe “a fair or proper equivalent in money, commodities, etc” where equivalent in money represents that sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on welfare or utilities of individuals.<br />
<br />
=='''Total Economic Value'''==<br />
<br />
In order to determine the value of the environment, the unpaid prices of the environment must first be revealed. <br />
[[Total Economic Value|Total economic value (TEV)]], an emerging concept of the 90’s proposed by the London School, provides a synthetic view of the efforts of the Environmental Economics to establish the different values associated to the environment.<br />
It distinguishes use values and [[non-use value]]s, but these values are finally incorporated in a single utility approach and are defined in monetary terms, leading to include the environment in an enlarged cost-benefits analysis, the decision support method advocated by the neo-classical economic approach. <br />
In fact, there are three main categories of values used to determine the TEV:<br />
<br />
*''use values'' <br />
*''non use values''<br />
*''option values'' <br />
<br />
''Use values'' reflect the satisfaction that the individual derives from using the resources directly or indirectly. The individual has to arbitrate between variation of the quality of the environmental element and a variation of income in a given set of options according to the maximization criterion of utility – well being – ad rationality criterion. An arbitration between alternative uses of environmental resource can in this way be realized on the base of classical rationality criteria of economic efficiency. <br />
<br />
[[''Non-use values'']] are used to estimate the patrimonial dimensions of environmental assets where the patrimony is defined as an identity and a choice sets for future decisions. My patrimony determines who I am and who I can become. Three kinds of non-use values are defined because they are associated with benefits and satisfactions that individuals derive from the knowledge of the existence of environmental assets per se (''Existence value''), for the pleasure of others (''Altruistic value'') or for the future generations (''[[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value|Bequest value]]''). <br />
<br />
Finally, two more category that contribute to the measurement of the TEV, are the ''Option Value'' and the ''Quasi Option Value''. <br />
The first one was introduced by Weisbrod <ref>Weisbrod, B. (1964) Collective-consumption services of individual-consumption goods. ''Quarterly Journal of Economics 78''.</ref> and is defined as the price that individuals are willing to pay for conversation of an element in view of its possible use in the future. ''Option value'' is not related to current use and is typically used to measure the value attached to future use opportunities.<br />
Instead, ''Quasi-option value'' is a term used to describe the welfare gain associated with delaying a decision when there is uncertainty about the payoffs of alternative choices, and when at least one of the choices involves an irreversible commitment of resources. Quasi-option value stems from the value of information gained by delaying an irreversible decision to develop a natural environment; it is not a value that individuals attach to changes in the natural resource<ref>Freeman, M. (1993). The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: theory and methods. ''Resources for the future'', Washington, DC.</ref><br />
<br />
The last two types of values alongside the traditional use values are extremely important for the measurement of a resource especially from the sustainability point of view because they contain the notion of preserving the freedom of choice for the future generation as the Bruntland definition said “a development that meets the needs of present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. <br />
<br />
Each value has a varying level of concreteness (“tangibility”). In other words, the values on the left hand side of the diagram are more easily assessed and allocating monetary values to these options is quite straightforward. The further right you go on the diagram the more difficult it is to assess the importance of the values (Fig. 1).<br />
<br />
[[Image:TEV.jpg|thumb|right|Total Economic Value]]<br />
<br />
So, given the real difficulty of measuring all costs as the result of ecological degradation, a range of authors have embraced the concepts of resilience<ref>Barbier E.B., Burgess, J.C., Folke, C., (1994) Paradise lost? The ecological economics of biodiversity. ''Earthscan, London''</ref> and strong sustainability<ref>Howarth, R.B.(1997) Sustainability as opportunity. ''Land Economics 73'': p569-p579.</ref> as guides to resource management. These concepts involve maintaining the structure and functioning of ecosystems to provide sustained benefits for future generations, even when such benefits cannot be quantified in economic terms. Keep in mind these two concepts in resource management it’s absolutely necessary because we are trying to value complex systems that are metastable and can undergo rapid transitions to a new equilibrium state and all changes that happen may not be reversible such as, for example, many of the different effects of climate change (sea level rise, pressure on freshwater resources, water supply and quality, loss of productivity and [[biodiversity]], and the increased likelihood of [[Drought, desertification and flooding|drought]], [[flood|flooding]], storm and extreme events). <br />
An important function of understanding complex systems should be to inform decision-makers about when, or under what circumstances, and undesirable substantive state change is likely to occur, one that will diminish or enhance the value of ecosystem services.<br />
<br />
=='''References'''==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Total Economic Value]]<br />
*[[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value]]<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=16772<br />
|AuthorFullName=Ciampalini, Francesca<br />
|AuthorName=Francesca C.}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 1]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Category:Articles_by_Ciampalini,_Francesca&diff=26208Category:Articles by Ciampalini, Francesca2008-12-17T13:33:41Z<p>Jackgeerlings: New page: This is an overview of all articles of Ciampalini, Francesca</p>
<hr />
<div>This is an overview of all articles of Ciampalini, Francesca</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Economic_Value&diff=26207Economic Value2008-12-17T13:32:17Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Giving a price to the environment has always been problematic. Until a few years ago there were only two values the environment could take: nil or infinite. Either environmental resources were exploited and entered the economy free of charge, or they were protected as heritage sites and were consequently considered priceless. Trying to evaluate environmental values from an economic perspective was then the equivalent of trying to value something priceless. A number of economic techniques have been developed to try and achieve this goal. <br />
The concept of [[Total Economic Value|''Total Economic Value'' (TEV)]] constitutes a watershed in the importance given to the environment within the decision theory.<br />
Before explaining the concept of [[Total Economic Value|TEV]], it’s important to ask ourselves “what do we mean by the ''value'' of nature?” There are several possible meanings.<br />
If we define ''value'' as “the contribution of something to a condition of state of the system” then structures and functions of natural systems, by definition, have value. For instance the value of a tree to a forest is its role in perpetuating forest conditions, including nutrient and hydrological cycling functions.<br />
If we define ''value'' as a “contribution to a goal”, which is a purposeful condition, natural systems have value insofar as they contribute to that goal <ref>Costanza,R. (2000)Social goals and the valuation of [[ecosystem]] services. ''Ecosystems:'' 3, p4-p10.</ref> and the major goal of human interaction with natural ecosystems is the support of human welfare. This goal is the criteria against which human activities and the conditions of natural systems are often measured.<br />
Ecologists use the term ''value'' to mean “that which is desirable or worthy of esteem for its own sake; something or some quality having intrinsic worth”.<br />
Economists use the same term to describe “a fair or proper equivalent in money, commodities, etc” where equivalent in money represents that sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on welfare or utilities of individuals.<br />
<br />
=='''Total Economic Value'''==<br />
<br />
In order to determine the value of the environment, the unpaid prices of the environment must first be revealed. <br />
[[Total Economic Value|Total economic value (TEV)]], an emerging concept of the 90’s proposed by the London School, provides a synthetic view of the efforts of the Environmental Economics to establish the different values associated to the environment.<br />
It distinguishes use values and [[non-use value]]s, but these values are finally incorporated in a single utility approach and are defined in monetary terms, leading to include the environment in an enlarged cost-benefits analysis, the decision support method advocated by the neo-classical economic approach. <br />
In fact, there are three main categories of values used to determine the TEV:<br />
<br />
*''use values'' <br />
*''non use values''<br />
*''option values'' <br />
<br />
''Use values'' reflect the satisfaction that the individual derives from using the resources directly or indirectly. The individual has to arbitrate between variation of the quality of the environmental element and a variation of income in a given set of options according to the maximization criterion of utility – well being – ad rationality criterion. An arbitration between alternative uses of environmental resource can in this way be realized on the base of classical rationality criteria of economic efficiency. <br />
<br />
[[''Non-use values'']] are used to estimate the patrimonial dimensions of environmental assets where the patrimony is defined as an identity and a choice sets for future decisions. My patrimony determines who I am and who I can become. Three kinds of non-use values are defined because they are associated with benefits and satisfactions that individuals derive from the knowledge of the existence of environmental assets per se (''Existence value''), for the pleasure of others (''Altruistic value'') or for the future generations (''[[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value|Bequest value]]''). <br />
<br />
Finally, two more category that contribute to the measurement of the TEV, are the ''Option Value'' and the ''Quasi Option Value''. <br />
The first one was introduced by Weisbrod <ref>Weisbrod, B. (1964) Collective-consumption services of individual-consumption goods. ''Quarterly Journal of Economics 78''.</ref> and is defined as the price that individuals are willing to pay for conversation of an element in view of its possible use in the future. ''Option value'' is not related to current use and is typically used to measure the value attached to future use opportunities.<br />
Instead, ''Quasi-option value'' is a term used to describe the welfare gain associated with delaying a decision when there is uncertainty about the payoffs of alternative choices, and when at least one of the choices involves an irreversible commitment of resources. Quasi-option value stems from the value of information gained by delaying an irreversible decision to develop a natural environment; it is not a value that individuals attach to changes in the natural resource<ref>Freeman, M. (1993). The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: theory and methods. ''Resources for the future'', Washington, DC.</ref><br />
<br />
The last two types of values alongside the traditional use values are extremely important for the measurement of a resource especially from the sustainability point of view because they contain the notion of preserving the freedom of choice for the future generation as the Bruntland definition said “a development that meets the needs of present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. <br />
<br />
Each value has a varying level of concreteness (“tangibility”). In other words, the values on the left hand side of the diagram are more easily assessed and allocating monetary values to these options is quite straightforward. The further right you go on the diagram the more difficult it is to assess the importance of the values (Fig. 1).<br />
<br />
[[Image:TEV.jpg|thumb|right|Total Economic Value]]<br />
<br />
So, given the real difficulty of measuring all costs as the result of ecological degradation, a range of authors have embraced the concepts of resilience<ref>Barbier E.B., Burgess, J.C., Folke, C., (1994) Paradise lost? The ecological economics of biodiversity. ''Earthscan, London''</ref> and strong sustainability<ref>Howarth, R.B.(1997) Sustainability as opportunity. ''Land Economics 73'': p569-p579.</ref> as guides to resource management. These concepts involve maintaining the structure and functioning of ecosystems to provide sustained benefits for future generations, even when such benefits cannot be quantified in economic terms. Keep in mind these two concepts in resource management it’s absolutely necessary because we are trying to value complex systems that are metastable and can undergo rapid transitions to a new equilibrium state and all changes that happen may not be reversible such as, for example, many of the different effects of climate change (sea level rise, pressure on freshwater resources, water supply and quality, loss of productivity and [[biodiversity]], and the increased likelihood of [[Drought, desertification and flooding|drought]], [[flood|flooding]], storm and extreme events). <br />
An important function of understanding complex systems should be to inform decision-makers about when, or under what circumstances, and undesirable substantive state change is likely to occur, one that will diminish or enhance the value of ecosystem services.<br />
<br />
=='''References'''==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Total Economic Value]]<br />
*[[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value]]<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=16772<br />
|AuthorFullName=Ciampalini, Francesca<br />
|AuthorName=Francesca C.}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 1]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Economic_Value&diff=26206Economic Value2008-12-17T13:31:16Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Giving a price to the environment has always been problematic. Until a few years ago there were only two values the environment could take: nil or infinite. Either environmental resources were exploited and entered the economy free of charge, or they were protected as heritage sites and were consequently considered priceless. Trying to evaluate environmental values from an economic perspective was then the equivalent of trying to value something priceless. A number of economic techniques have been developed to try and achieve this goal. <br />
The concept of [[Total Economic Value|''Total Economic Value'' (TEV)]] constitutes a watershed in the importance given to the environment within the decision theory.<br />
Before explaining the concept of [[Total Economic Value|TEV]], it’s important to ask ourselves “what do we mean by the ''value'' of nature?” There are several possible meanings.<br />
If we define ''value'' as “the contribution of something to a condition of state of the system” then structures and functions of natural systems, by definition, have value. For instance the value of a tree to a forest is its role in perpetuating forest conditions, including nutrient and hydrological cycling functions.<br />
If we define ''value'' as a “contribution to a goal”, which is a purposeful condition, natural systems have value insofar as they contribute to that goal <ref>Costanza,R. (2000)Social goals and the valuation of [[ecosystem]] services. ''Ecosystems:'' 3, p4-p10.</ref> and the major goal of human interaction with natural ecosystems is the support of human welfare. This goal is the criteria against which human activities and the conditions of natural systems are often measured.<br />
Ecologists use the term ''value'' to mean “that which is desirable or worthy of esteem for its own sake; something or some quality having intrinsic worth”.<br />
Economists use the same term to describe “a fair or proper equivalent in money, commodities, etc” where equivalent in money represents that sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on welfare or utilities of individuals.<br />
<br />
=='''Total Economic Value'''==<br />
<br />
In order to determine the value of the environment, the unpaid prices of the environment must first be revealed. <br />
[[Total Economic Value|Total economic value (TEV)]], an emerging concept of the 90’s proposed by the London School, provides a synthetic view of the efforts of the Environmental Economics to establish the different values associated to the environment.<br />
It distinguishes use values and [[non-use value]]s, but these values are finally incorporated in a single utility approach and are defined in monetary terms, leading to include the environment in an enlarged cost-benefits analysis, the decision support method advocated by the neo-classical economic approach. <br />
In fact, there are three main categories of values used to determine the TEV:<br />
<br />
*''use values'' <br />
*''non use values''<br />
*''option values'' <br />
<br />
''Use values'' reflect the satisfaction that the individual derives from using the resources directly or indirectly. The individual has to arbitrate between variation of the quality of the environmental element and a variation of income in a given set of options according to the maximization criterion of utility – well being – ad rationality criterion. An arbitration between alternative uses of environmental resource can in this way be realized on the base of classical rationality criteria of economic efficiency. <br />
<br />
[[''Non-use values'']] are used to estimate the patrimonial dimensions of environmental assets where the patrimony is defined as an identity and a choice sets for future decisions. My patrimony determines who I am and who I can become. Three kinds of non-use values are defined because they are associated with benefits and satisfactions that individuals derive from the knowledge of the existence of environmental assets per se (''Existence value''), for the pleasure of others (''Altruistic value'') or for the future generations (''[[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value|Bequest value]]''). <br />
<br />
Finally, two more category that contribute to the measurement of the TEV, are the ''Option Value'' and the ''Quasi Option Value''. <br />
The first one was introduced by Weisbrod <ref>Weisbrod, B. (1964) Collective-consumption services of individual-consumption goods. ''Quarterly Journal of Economics 78''.</ref> and is defined as the price that individuals are willing to pay for conversation of an element in view of its possible use in the future. ''Option value'' is not related to current use and is typically used to measure the value attached to future use opportunities.<br />
Instead, ''Quasi-option value'' is a term used to describe the welfare gain associated with delaying a decision when there is uncertainty about the payoffs of alternative choices, and when at least one of the choices involves an irreversible commitment of resources. Quasi-option value stems from the value of information gained by delaying an irreversible decision to develop a natural environment; it is not a value that individuals attach to changes in the natural resource<ref>Freeman, M. (1993). The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: theory and methods. ''Resources for the future'', Washington, DC.</ref><br />
<br />
The last two types of values alongside the traditional use values are extremely important for the measurement of a resource especially from the sustainability point of view because they contain the notion of preserving the freedom of choice for the future generation as the Bruntland definition said “a development that meets the needs of present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. <br />
<br />
Each value has a varying level of concreteness (“tangibility”). In other words, the values on the left hand side of the diagram are more easily assessed and allocating monetary values to these options is quite straightforward. The further right you go on the diagram the more difficult it is to assess the importance of the values (Fig. 1).<br />
<br />
[[Image:TEV.jpg|thumb|right|Total Economic Value]]<br />
<br />
So, given the real difficulty of measuring all costs as the result of ecological degradation, a range of authors have embraced the concepts of resilience<ref>Barbier E.B., Burgess, J.C., Folke, C., (1994) Paradise lost? The ecological economics of biodiversity. ''Earthscan, London''</ref> and strong sustainability<ref>Howarth, R.B.(1997) Sustainability as opportunity. ''Land Economics 73'': p569-p579.</ref> as guides to resource management. These concepts involve maintaining the structure and functioning of ecosystems to provide sustained benefits for future generations, even when such benefits cannot be quantified in economic terms. Keep in mind these two concepts in resource management it’s absolutely necessary because we are trying to value complex systems that are metastable and can undergo rapid transitions to a new equilibrium state and all changes that happen may not be reversible such as, for example, many of the different effects of climate change (sea level rise, pressure on freshwater resources, water supply and quality, loss of productivity and [[biodiversity]], and the increased likelihood of [[Drought, desertification and flooding|drought]], [[flood|flooding]], storm and extreme events). <br />
An important function of understanding complex systems should be to inform decision-makers about when, or under what circumstances, and undesirable substantive state change is likely to occur, one that will diminish or enhance the value of ecosystem services.<br />
<br />
=='''References'''==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Total Economic Value]]<br />
*[[Non-use value: bequest value and existence value]]<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=16772<br />
|AuthorFullName=Ciampalini, Francesca<br />
|AuthorName=}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 1]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Accretion_and_erosion_for_different_coastal_types&diff=26201Accretion and erosion for different coastal types2008-12-17T13:25:25Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>This article describes the [[accretion]] and [[erosion]] for different coastal types resulting from a coastal structure. The coastal structure in this example is a large port with an extension greater than the width of the [[surf zone]], but the structure could also be a set of tidal inlet jetties or a long [[groyne]]. The coastal erosion for three different types of ports is also described in the article [[Port breakwaters and coastal erosion]]. <br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
The [[accretion]] and [[erosion]] of a sedimentary coasts relates to the [[angle of incidence]] of prevailing waves. Based on this angle, it is possible to distinguish between 5 main types of coasts (for a more detailed description, see the article [[Classification of coastlines]]). <br />
# Type 1: ''Perpendicular wave approach'', angle of incidence close to zero<br />
# Type 2: ''Nearly perpendicular wave approach'', angle of incidence 1<sup>o</sup> - 10<sup>o</sup>, net transport small to moderate<br />
# Type 3:''Moderate oblique wave approach'', angle of incidence 10<sup>o</sup> - 50<sup>o</sup>, large net transport<br />
# Type 4:''Very oblique wave approach'', angle of incidence 50<sup>o</sup> - 85<sup>o</sup>, large net transport<br />
# Type 5:''Nearly coast-parallel wave approach'', angle of incidence >85<sup>o</sup>, net transport near zero<br />
<br />
This classification has been subdivided according to the wave exposure as follows:<br />
*P: ''Protected'', the “once per year event” having H<sub>s,12h/y</sub> < 1 m<br />
*M: ''Moderately exposed'', the “once per year event” having 1 m < H<sub>s,12h/y</sub> <3m<br />
*E: ''Exposed'', the “once per year event” having H<sub>s,12h/y</sub> > 3 m <br />
<br />
The next sections describe the [[accretion]] and erosion due to the construction of a port for type 2-4 M/E coasts.<br />
<br />
==Accretion and erosion for 2-3M/E coasts==<br />
We consider an E-W directed [[shoreline]], with a net eastward [[littoral drift]] rate (LDR) of 5, which is composed by an eastward LDR of 10 and a westward LDR of 5 (the LDR is presented here without any unit, specific numbers are used to illustrate the principles only). Prevailing [[waves]] from the NW and secondary [[waves]] from NE, as shown in Fig. 1. below:<br />
<br />
[[Image:Shoreline development schematic_new2.jpg|450px|thumb|Fig. 1. Schematic shoreline development, morphological development and net littoral drift budgets for a port at a coast with a slightly oblique resulting wave attack.]]<br />
<br />
===Initial situation===<br />
Initially, there will be an eastward LDR of 10 close to the port on the upstream west side of the port, as this area is sheltered from the easterly [[waves]] by the structure. There will be no westward LDR-component in this sheltered area. Outside the lee zone westward of the structure, there will be a net eastward LDR of 5. This means that the transition section between these two areas will receive 5, but 10 will leave this section, which means a deficit of 5 in supply to this local area. The transition area will therefore initially be exposed to a [[sediment]] deficit of 5, whereas the area close to the structure will receive 10. This will cause initial erosion as well as sand accumulation on the upstream side of the structure. However, considering the entire upstream side as one unit, this unit will receive a surplus of 5 until [[bypassing]] of [[sediment]] starts.<br />
<br />
Close to the structure on the lee east side, there will be a westward LDR of 5, as this area is sheltered from the westerly [[waves]] by the structure. This will result in a short accumulation of sand immediately east of the port. Outside the lee zone east of the port, there will be a net eastward LDR of 5. Initially no [[sediment]] will bypass the port. The area east of the port will consequently, considered as one unit, have a deficit of 5. This is the so-called lee side [[erosion]]. However, there will be an area in the transition zone close to the port which will have a deficit of 10, but this is only temporary, as the local reversed transport towards the structure will cease when the local [[coastline]] has adjusted to the conditions.<br />
<br />
===Development of erosion and accretion===<br />
The above sediment budget is applicable for the “initial” situation immediately after the construction of the port. Initial is a relative concept. The duration of the initial period depends on the magnitude of the port and on the area and volume of the sheltered areas compared to the [[littoral drift]] rates. The sediment budgets for the initial situation, as well as for a situation when the bypass of [[sediments]] has started, are both presented in the same figure. <br />
<br />
The development of [[accretion]] and [[erosion]] on the upstream and downstream sides of the port is sketched in the figure. As long as the transport is completely blocked by the port, the accumulation will take place as an seaward movement of the [[coastline]] adjacent to the breakwater parallel with the direction of the [[coastline]]of zero transport, i.e. perpendicular to the direction of the resulting [[waves]]. <br />
<br />
====Bypass development====<br />
When the bypass starts, a bar will build up in front of the entrance, and the [[accretion|accreting]] [[coastline]]will gradually turn towards the original direction concurrently with a gradual increase in the bypass. This bypass causes a gradual increase in the sedimentation of the port entrance and/or the navigation channel. The part of the [[bypassing]] material, which is not trapped in the entrance, will be transported past the port, building a shoal at the lee side of the port. The [[downdrift]] [[shoreline]] will suffer from [[erosion]] until this shoal reaches the shore. Even then, the [[downdrift]] shore will not receive the same amount of material as it originally received from the updrift shore, as this would require that the [[accretion|accreting]] [[coastline]] attained an orientation parallel with the original [[coastline]]. This would require a sand filet of infinite length, which is not possible. Furthermore, it would require that there was no loss of sand in connection with the bypass of the port, which is also unrealistic. This explains why the [[downdrift]] shoreline will forever suffer from erosion as a result of the port construction, or another similar coastal structure, unless [[artificial nourishment]]/bypass is introduced. <br />
<br />
This situation is thus characterised by a long slowly developing sand filet at the upstream side of the port and the formation of a fairly short narrow shoal [[downdrift]] of the port, as well as shoreline erosion relatively close to the port along the [[downdrift]] shoreline. However, there will, in most cases, also be a very short [[accretion]] zone immediately leeward of the port. Sedimentation in the entrance will develop slowly. It is worth noting that as soon as a coastal structure of an extension comparable to the width of the [[surf zone]] has been built along such a [[shoreline]], the downstream shoreline will forever suffer from erosion.<br />
<br />
====Importance of layout====<br />
In addition to the phenomena described above, a non-optimal layout of the protective structures can result in additional trapping of sand. This typically happens in the sheltered area generated by port layouts, which consist of a main breakwater overlapping a secondary breakwater. This kind of layout will act as a sediment trap which is filled concurrently with the maintenance dredging. This will cause additional lee side erosion depending on where the sand is deposited.<br />
<br />
==Accretion and erosion for 4M/E coasts==<br />
When the angle of incidence of the resulting waves is larger than 50º, the shoreline development and corresponding morphological changes are quite different from the situation described above, see Fig. 2. below.<br />
<br />
[[Image:relation transport angle_new2.jpg|600px|centre|thumb|Fig. 2. Upper: Relation between transport and angle of incidence. Lower: schematic shoreline development and morphological development for a port at a [[coastline]]with very oblique wave attack.]]<br />
<br />
===Description of this situation===<br />
The [[angle of incidence]] of the [[waves]] with the original [[shoreline]] is denoted as &alpha;<sub>2</sub>, which corresponds to the transport Q<sub>2</sub>, see figure above, upper part. There is, however, another smaller [[angle of incidence]] &alpha;<sub>1</sub> which gives the same transport, Q<sub>2</sub> = Q<sub>1</sub>. This means that the [[shoreline]] in the accumulation area upstream of the port will immediately switch to the position corresponding to the [[angle of incidence]] &alpha;<sub>1</sub>. This provides a very minor accretion, which will very quickly develop into a situation with full bypass equal to Q<sub>2</sub>, and the corresponding build-up of a bar past the entrance.<br />
<br />
The [[bypassing]] sand will, due to the very oblique wave attack, develop into a bypass shoal nearly parallel with the [[coastline]], i.e. a very long shoal. <br />
<br />
This situation is thus characterised by a short and quickly developing accretion zone and a fairly long, slowly developing bypass shoal downdrift of the port. Another effect is a gentle shoreline erosion over a fairly long distance from the port along the downdrift shoreline. Sedimentation in the entrance will develop quickly.<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
For more information on coastal erosion, see also:<br />
* [[Types and background of coastal erosion]], which describes two types of erosion: [[dune erosion]] and [[structural erosion]].<br />
Articles about structural erosion and the presence of structures: <br />
* [[Typical examples of structural erosion]]<br />
* [[Hard structures and structural erosion]]<br />
* [[Port breakwaters and coastal erosion]]. <br />
For more information on different types of coastlines, see:<br />
* [[Coastal zone characteristics]]<br />
* [[Classification of coastlines]]<br />
* [[Classification of coastal profiles]] <br />
<br />
==References==<br />
Mangor, Karsten. 2004. “Shoreline Management Guidelines”. DHI Water and Environment, 294pg.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=13331<br />
|AuthorFullName=Mangor, Karsten<br />
|AuthorName=Karsten}}<br />
[[Category:Theme 5]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal processes, interactions and resources]]<br />
[[Category:Hydrodynamics]]<br />
[[category:Coastal erosion]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal erosion management]]<br />
[[Category:Protection of coastal and marine zones]]<br />
[[Category:Geological processes, soil and minerals]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Thermohaline_circulation_of_the_oceans&diff=26181Thermohaline circulation of the oceans2008-12-17T10:39:15Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
<br />
The Thermohaline Circulation (THC) also referred to as the “Great Ocean Conveyor” or the Meridional Overturning Circulation (MOC), can be defined as the density-impelled circulation of the oceans. Thermohaline is derived from the Greek: thermo- for heat and -haline for salt, which constitute the density of water. The water masses transport both energy (heat) and matter (solids, dissolved substances and gasses) around the globe. Changes in the Thermohaline Circulation alter the global ocean heat transport and affect the global climate.(Broecker, W., 1991<ref>Broecker, W., 1991. The great ocean conveyor. Oceanography 1, 79–89.</ref>)<br />
<br />
==Functioning of the Thermahaline Circulation (THC)==<br />
<br />
The conveyor belt (Fig.1) has its start near Greenland and Iceland in the North Atlantic, where seawater at the surface of the ocean is intensively cooled by means of a wind-driven process called evaporative cooling. Only the pure water molecules are removed during evaporation, resulting in an increase in the salinity of the seawater and therefore an increase in the density of the water mass. Evaporative cooling is predominant in the vicinity of the Norwegian Sea, and the sinking water mass known as the North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW), fills the basin and moves southwards through the crevasses in the submarine sills that connect Greenland, Iceland and Great Britain. From there, it flows very slowly into the deep abyssal plains of the Atlantic toward Antarctica where the water mass joins the Antarctic Circumpolar Current. Flow from the Arctic Ocean Basin into the Pacific is blocked by the narrow shallows of the Bering Strait.<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Image:Thermohaline.jpg|thumb|center|400px|Fig.1. The Thermohaline Circulation. Source: IPPC 2001.]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
In the Weddell Sea (Antarctica), the combined effect of evaporative cooling and brine exclusion cause the density of the Antarctic Bottom Water (AABW) to be so high, that it in fact underflows the NADW in the Atlantic Basin. Flow of the AABW into the Pacific is blocked by the Drake Passage between the Antarctic Peninsula and the southernmost tip of South America. Within the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, the AABW and NADW are mixed to create the so-called “Common Water” which flows northward, around Southern Africa where it is split into two routes: one into the Indian Ocean and the other past Australia into the Pacific. In the Indian Ocean, some of the cold and salty water from the Atlantic are refreshed, by means of vertical exchange, with the warmer upper ocean water from the tropical Pacific. Within the Pacific Ocean, the remaining cold water undergoes Haline forcing (net high latitude freshwater gain and low latitude evaporation) and slowly becomes warmer and fresher. The outflow of bottom water makes the sea level of the Atlantic slightly lower than the Pacific. Combined with the difference in salinity, this generates a large flow of warmer upper ocean water from the tropical Pacific to the Indian Ocean through the Indonesian Archipelago to replace the AABW. From there, the water flows up through the South Atlantic towards the tropics. The heated tropical waters of the Atlantic proceed until Greenland, where it once more undergoes evaporative cooling, thereby creating a continuous global thermohaline circulation.<br />
<br />
==Bi-polar characteristic of the Thermahaline Circulation==<br />
<br />
Traditionally, research has been almost exclusively devoted to understanding the sensitivity of the high-latitudinal oceans (especially in the Northern Hemisphere) to freshwater fluxes. These studies have advanced considerably the comprehension of the dynamics and functioning of the North Atlantic Bottom Water (NABW) circulation. In comparison therewith, little is known about the southern sources of deepwater (AABW). It is important to bear in mind that the thermohaline circulation is operated by both deepwater sources, and therefore, the deficit of scientific knowledge limits the complete understanding of decadal to millennial time-scale climate change (Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov">Seidov, D., Barron, E., Haupt, B. J., 2000. Meltwater and the global ocean conveyor: northern versus southern connections. Global and Planetary Change 30, 257-270.</ref>). An example of such a deficit is whether the NADW is the ultimate driver of the conveyor, and if additional variability is generated by freshwater impacts in the Southern Ocean (Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>). A significant influence of the Southern Ocean is supported by several scientific lines of evidence. First, many examples of climate intermittency during the glacial cycles of the Pleistocene remain poorly understood, even though they seem to correlate with major deglaciations(Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>). Second, recent studies (Blunier, T. et al. 1998<ref>, 1998. Asynchrony of Antarctic and Greenland climate change during the last glacial period. Nature 394, 739–743.</ref>, Broecker, W.S., 1994<ref>Broecker, W.S., 1994. Massive iceberg discharges as triggers for global climate change. Nature 372, 421–424.</ref>, Stocker, T.F., 1998 <ref>Stocker, T.F., 1998. The seesaw effect. Science 282, 61–62.</ref>) reveal a bi-polar nature of the glacial cycles of the Pleistocene, e.g. the southern Atlantic leads in the occurrence of several Heinrich Events (Vidal, L. et al., 1999<ref>Vidal, L. et al., 1999. Link between the North and South Atlantic during the Heinrich events of the last glacial period. Clim. Dyn. 15, 909–919.</ref>). Another study (Birchfield, G.E., Broekcer, W.S., 1990<ref name="birchfield">Birchfield, G.E., Broecker, W.S., 1990. A salt oscillator in the glacial Atlantic? 2. A scale analysis model. Paleoceanography 5, 835–843.</ref>) argues that the Little Ice Age (circa 500 years ago) was caused by far stronger deep ocean ventilation in the Southern Ocean. One reason put forward for enhanced southern ocean ventilation is an increase in Atlantic Ocean salinity. Conversely, a slowdown in ventilation could be caused by reduced surface salinity, associated warming, and sea ice or ice sheet melting in the Southern Ocean after the Little Ice Age(Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>, Broecker, W.S., 2000<ref>Broecker, W.S., 2000. Was a change in thermohaline circulation responsible for the Little Ice Age? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 97 (4), 1339–1342.</ref>). The potential importance of feedbacks between the northern and southern sources of deepwater is still largely unknown.<br />
<br />
==Freshwater sources in the Southern Ocean==<br />
<br />
The source and the character of the freshwater sources in the Southern Hemisphere are different from the Northern Hemisphere. Sea surface salinity (SSS) controls both the Antarctic Bottom Water and Antarctic Intermediate Water northward incursions. The SSS can either be increased due to brine exclusion (during the formation of sea ice) or decreased due to sea ice melting. Sea ice formation and brine exclusion rates therefore play a vital role in the southern circulation regime. Additionally, the Antarctic ice sheet has an important function in governing freshwater fluxes into the Southern Ocean. Concern however has been raised about the stability of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS). The Antarctic ice sheet mass balance and its possible contribution to global [[sea level rise]] is a major issue of debate, since the potential for changes in freshwater fluxes or salinity variations to influence the Southern Ocean is clearly evident. It has been indicated (Birchfield, G.E., Broekcer, W.S., 1990<ref name="birchfield"/>) that even a relatively small freshwater influx converted to a low-[[salinity]] signal will hamper the effectiveness of the conveyor operation. These factors have initiated a growing modelling effort designed to investigate the climatic role of the Southern Hemisphere (Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>) .<br />
<br />
==The role of global climate change==<br />
<br />
The ocean, including its abyss, is warming at a rate of 0.5˚C or more per century (Levitus, S., 2000<ref>Levitus, S., Antonov, J.I., Boyer, T.P., Stephens, C., 2000. Warming of the world ocean. Science 287, 2225–2229.</ref>). Although historical observations and paleoclimatic data reveal significant climate variability on decadal to millennial time scales, this ocean warming during the last several decades is linked to global climate change. Changes in the atmospheric abundance of greenhouse gases and aerosols, in solar radiation and land surface properties have altered the energy balance of the climate system. <br />
<br />
The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from a pre-industrial level of 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005(Geo Year Book, 2004/2005<ref name="year">Geo Year Book 2004/2005: An overview of our changing environment. United Nations Environment Program. 80-84.</ref>). This atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide exceeds by far the natural range over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm)(Geo Year Book, 2004/2005<ref name="year"/>) as determined from ice cores. Consequently, the change of the global energy balance has seen a decrease in sea ice (Fig. 2) as well as rapid ice sheet and permafrost melting. This excess of high latitudinal freshwater influx can substantially modify the deep ocean circulation. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Melting ice sea.jpg|thumb|center|400px|Fig. 2. Melting sea ice]]<br />
<br />
The sinking that drives the thermohaline circulation depends critically on the water being sufficiently cold and salty. Therefore, any factor that changes the state of the conditions for circulation, can result in a slow-down of the thermohaline, and thereby dramatically influence the climatic state and driving further climate change. Observations over recent decades suggest that changes in the factors governing circulation are already occurring (Geo Year Book, 2004/2005<ref name="year"/>). This raises concerns about potential abrupt climate changes in the future. Is a complete shutdown of the thermohaline possible?<br />
<br />
===High Latitudinal Freshwater Influx===<br />
In light of the deficit of the scientific understanding of the thermohaline circulation and the feedback potentials between the two deepwater sources, it is difficult to predict the influence of global climate change on the dynamics of the thermohaline. Even within the scientific realm there is disagreement on the possibility of a complete shutdown of the thermohaline circulation. Given this discrepancy, a simulation experiment was conducted (Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>) to analyse the sensitivity of thermohaline circulation to low-salinity perturbations. In this simulation, the authors set out to demonstrate the degree to which the thermohaline circulation is driven by both the NADW and the AABW, by means of a designed series of simplified freshwater influx events, in which all ocean model parameters are held constant except salinity. The results of the experiments were described for: a North Atlantic freshwater influx, a Southern Ocean freshwater influx, and a combined influx for the North Atlantic and Southern Ocean. <br />
<br />
* The North Atlantic Freshwater Influx<br />
The results of the experiment simulating a low-salinity impact (-2 psu than present) on the North-Atlantic conform to what is already known from previous work, namely that the conveyor is weaker and shallower. Temperature differences between the current conditions and this low-salinity scenario indicate cooling in high latitudes of the Atlantic Ocean. This occurs because the reduced NADW production led to a shallow conveyor and cooler and fresher water than today in these latitudes characterises the deep ocean water. In addition to this, the surface ocean has more time to lose heat to the atmosphere because the overturning slowed. The reduced NADW outflow has an evident imprint in the oceanic heat transport. Northward cross-equatorial heat transport is dramatically reduced in the scenario with a strong freshwater impact, which indicates the possibility of a cold episode following a freshwater influx event. If the present-day global warming was potent enough to induce a low-salinity episode in the North Atlantic, caused by iceberg and Arctic sea ice melting, the result could be a tendency towards colder temperature conditions in the Northern Hemisphere. It is important though to note that even with an excessive northern low-salinity signal of -2 psu during the simulation, no complete termination of the conveyor occurred.<br />
<br />
* The Southern Ocean Freshwater Influx<br />
In contrast to the predictable results of the northern low-salinity impact, the results of the Southern Ocean surface freshening are less intuitive. Two aspects are noteworthy: first the circulation changes driven by the low-salinity signal were much stronger, and second, they led to a very strong warming of the deep ocean. Warming takes place over the entire deep ocean and its maximum shifts to the southern edges. This deep-sea warming is caused not only by a substantial increase (by 40-60%) in NADW production, but also because the meridional overturning takes over the entire deep ocean, pushing away the lessened AABW. In the North Atlantic scenario, the freshwater influx impact on the conveyor caused thermal effects only in the deep Atlantic Ocean, whereas in the Southern Ocean, the freshwater scenarios impact is global. The increased NADW outflow in the deep layers leads to increased compensating northward surface water flow. This flow carries more warm and salty subtropical water to convection sites, which might further increase NADW production until the atmosphere warms up to reduce the cooling of the sea surface and subsequently reduce the deep convection. The positive feedback of NADW production and northward heat transport can be viewed as a first link toward high-latitudinal warming in the Northern Hemisphere caused by freshwater influx events in the Southern Ocean.<br />
<br />
* Combined Influx for the North Atlantic and Southern Ocean<br />
The results of a combined low-salinity event of the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean, display a deepwater regime that is qualitatively similar to a Southern-Ocean-only experiment. Less Deep Ocean warming is observed, however the impact still remains global and substantial. Results of the runs with perturbations to two sources, demonstrates a more powerful response to a freshwater influx event in the Southern Ocean than for those in the North Atlantic. However, much of this power stems from increased NADW production.<br />
<br />
===Sea-Level Change===<br />
Sea-level change can be caused by either melting of major ice sheets (Fig. 3), or as an indirect effect by freshwater influx events caused by thermal restructuring of the world ocean. As the deep ocean warms up, the sea elevation will change as a result of the thermal expansion of sea water. Historic hydrographic data suggest that thermal expansion of the ocean can contribute tens of cm to the observed sea-level rise over the last century (Godfrey, J.S., Love, G., 1992<ref>Godfrey, J.S., Love, G., 1992. Assessment of sealevel rise, specific to the South Asian and Australian situations. Seal Level Changes: Determination and Effects. Geophys. Monogr., vol. 69. AGU, Washington, DC, pp. 87–94. </ref>). Some simulations (Church, J.A., Godfrey, J.S., Jacket, D.R., McDougall, T.R., 1991<ref>Church, J.A., Godfrey, J.S., Jacket, D.R., McDougall, T.R., 1991. A model of sealevel rise caused by ocean thermal expansion. J. Clim. 4, 438–456.</ref> indicate that the thermal expansion of the ocean associated with a global warming of 3˚C temperature rise by the year 2050 results in up to 30cm sea-level rise. In the simulation experiment conducted, (Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>) a significant sea-level rise of approximately 2-3m may occur during a Southern Ocean event (Fig. 4). In many sensitive coastal areas the sea-level rise could be over 1m. It is important to note that this sea-level rise could occur without significant melting of the ice sheets, including WAIS, which is considered the most vulnerable to climate change(Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>).<br />
<br />
[[Image:Figure_3.jpg|thumb|center|400px|Fig.3. IPCC summary of the observed variations in the cryosphere for the years 1993-2003 <ref>Lemke, P., J. Ren, R.B. Alley, I. Allison, J. Carrasco, G. Flato, Y. Fujii, G. Kaser, P. Mote, R.H. Thomas and T. Zhang, 2007: Observations: Changes in Snow, Ice and Frozen Ground. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, US, Pp. 375 </ref>]]<br />
<br />
[[Image:Differences.jpg|thumb|center|400px|Fig. 4: Differences of the sea-level elevations in cm relative to the current situation and a freshwater influx event in the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean(Seidov, D., 2000<ref name="seidov"/>)]]<br />
<br />
===Indirect Impacts Resulting from Changes in the Thermohaline Circulation===<br />
The changing climatic conditions and the increased freshwater influx in the Polar Regions have seen sea ice retreats from the coastline of Arctic countries by between 150km and 200km. According to the IPCC, by 2050 the sea ice might retreat up to 800km as a result of global warming. The loss of ice in the Polar Regions could lead to a sudden acceleration of global warming, as ice reflects radiation or heat from the sun back into space. The absence of sea ice combined with deep ocean warming will see more evaporation and rainfall occurring in these sensitive regions, which in turn will speed up sea ice loss.<br />
<br />
The retreat and loss of sea ice in the Polar Regions will also have a harmful impact on the many species living in the regions. Polar bears, for example, need ice so that they can hunt for seals. A loss of sea ice could make it harder for these animals to acquire enough food. Pregnant females and those with cubs may be particularly at risk. The species of seal that need ice for resting or pup rearing will also be at risk.<br />
<br />
As mentioned above, the change of the thermohaline circulation is expected to alter the speed and patterns of ocean currents, which in turn will impact fish stocks. According to the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC: “Arctic fisheries are among the most productive in the world. Changes in the velocity and direction of ocean currents affect the availability of nutrients and the disposition of larval and juvenile organisms, thereby influencing recruitment, growth and mortality.” Changes in the fish stocks are already taking place, with the result that some stocks are boosting while others are damaged. For example, Groundfish stocks have shown a positive response to recent climate change, while the thermally sensitive Greenland turbot and King crab stocks in the eastern Bering Sea and Kodiak are declining. The IPCC anticipate that harvests might halve or double depending on the stocks concerned; meanwhile some fisheries might die out altogether while new ones develop. This could increase or decrease local economies by hundreds of millions of dollars annually (IPCC). These projected changes in the abundance and distribution of fish stocks and wildlife are just one of the issues facing fishermen, Arctic communities and the indigenous people. <br />
<br />
The Polar Regions annually accumulates pollution, including Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), which have been discharged from industry and agriculture around the globe. Melting of the sea ice could trigger the release of these pollutants which could cause them to re-enter the food chain. This would pose a health threat to top predators, e.g. polar bears and humans in these regions.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the melting of sea ice could have one economic benefit, namely in the area of shipping. The northwards retreat of sea ice opens up the Northern Sea Route, which would allow vessels to sail from Europe to the Far East by going north of Russia rather than using the existing route, i.e. the Suez Canal. Although this should reduce sailing times, cutting the costs of goods and air pollution, the risk of accidents leading to oil spills still remains.<br />
<br />
==Overview of impacts for coastal regions==<br />
<br />
The major impact for coastal regions caused by a change in the thermohaline circulation will be rising sea levels. There are many coastal sensitive regions around the globe which will be affected by even a small change in the sea level. As indicated above, the changing circulation can rise sea levels by either: melting of sea ice and ice sheets in the Polar Regions or via thermal expansion of the sea water. In 2007 approximately 634 million people lived in coastal areas within 9.1m of the sea level. Two thirds of the world’s cities with more than five million people are located in these low-lying coastal areas. <br />
<br />
The IPCC Working Group II report indicates that current and future climate change would be expected to have a number of impacts, especially on coastal systems. Potential impacts may include: increased coastal erosion, higher storm-surge flooding, inhibition of primary production processes, more extensive coastal inundation, changes in surface water quality and groundwater characteristics, increased loss of property and coastal habitats, increased flood risk and potential loss of life, loss of non-monetary cultural resources and values, impacts on agriculture and aquaculture via a decline in soil and water quality, and loss of tourism, recreation and transportation functions. Furthermore the IPCC report concludes that due to the great diversity of coastal environments; regional and local differences in projected relative sea level and climate changes; and differences in the resilience and adaptive capacity of ecosystems, sectors and countries, the impacts will be highly variable in time and space and will not necessarily be negative in all situations.<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
===Internal Links===<br />
*[[Ocean circulation]]<br />
<br />
===External Links===<br />
* Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermohaline_circulation<br />
* Ocean Motion and Surface Currents: http://oceanmotion.org/index.htm<br />
* IPPC: http://www.ipcc.ch/<br />
* UNEP: http://unep.org<br />
* GEO Year Book: http://www.unep.org/geo/yearbook<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=16609<br />
|AuthorFullName=Tange, Hannli<br />
|AuthorName=Tange, Hannli}}<br />
[[Category: Theme 5]]<br />
[[Category: Coastal processes, interactions and resources]]<br />
[[Category: Hydrodynamics]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=United_Nations_Framework_Convention_on_Climate_Change&diff=26179United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change2008-12-17T10:24:58Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>The '''[http://unfccc.int/2860.php United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]''' (UNFCCC) considers what can be done to reduce global warming and to cope with inevitable temperature increases. A number of nations have approved an addition to the treaty: the Kyoto Protocol, which has more powerful and legally binding measures. The UNFCCC Secretariat supports the institutions involved in the climate change process, particularly the Convention of the Parties (COP), the subsidiary bodies and their Bureau. <br />
<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
The Convention on Climate Change sets an framework for intergovernmental efforts to respond to [[climate change]]. It recognizes that the climate system is a shared resource whose stability can be affected by industrial and other emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. 189 countries have ratified the Convention, which entered into force on 21 March 1994.<br />
<br />
Under the Convention, governments, collect and share information on greenhouse gas emissions, national policies and best practices; launch national strategies for addressing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to developing countries; and cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of [[climate change]].<br />
<br />
==Kyoto Protocol==<br />
<br />
The 1997 [Kyoto Protocol|Kyoto Protocol] shares the Convention’s objective, principles and institutions, but strengthens the Convention by committing Annex I Parties to individual, legally-binding targets to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, and provides economic and market mechanisms to assist in those reductions. Only Parties to the Convention that have also become Parties to the Protocol (i.e by ratifying, accepting, approving, or acceding to it) are bound by the Protocol’s commitments. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at COP 3 in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 , 171 countries have ratified it, and it entered into force on 16 February 2005. <br />
<br />
35 countries and the European Economic Community (EEC) are required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions below levels specified for each of them in the treaty. The individual targets for Annex I Parties are listed in the Kyoto Protocol’s Annex B. These add up to a total cut in greenhouse-gas emissions of at least 5% from 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008-2012. <br />
<br />
The complexity of the negotiations meant there was unfinished matters even after the Kyoto Protocol itself was adopted. The Protocol provided the basic structures of its mechanisms and compliance system, but did not explain how the rules would operate. Although 84 countries signed the Protocol, indicating that they intended to ratify, many were reluctant to ratify and bring the Protocol into force before having a clearer picture of the treaty’s rulebook. <br />
<br />
A new round of negotiations occurred for the Kyoto Protocol’s rulebook, in parallel with negotiations on ongoing issues under the Convention. This round finally culminated at COP 7 with the adoption of the [[Marrakesh Accords]], which set out detailed rules for the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol up to 2012.<br />
<br />
==Further Negotiations for the post-2012 period==<br />
<br />
The third session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG) will be held from 14-18 May. The third workshop under the Dialogue on long-term cooperative action to address [[climate change]] by enhancing implementation of the Convention took place from 16-17 May 2007, and deals with the period after 2012.<br />
<br />
==Bali Conference==<br />
<br />
United Nations Climate Change Conference - Bali, 3 - 14 December 2007 hosted by the Government of Indonesia, brings together representatives of over 180 countries together with observers from intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, and the media. The two week period includes the sessions of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, its subsidiary bodies as well as the Meeting of the Parties of the Kyoto Protocol. A ministerial segment in the second week will conclude the Conference.<br />
<br />
At the thirteenth Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC and the third Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in Bali, the focus needs to be on reaching international agreement on concrete steps to be taken in view of a framework to follow the end of the Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period in 2012. <br />
<br />
It is hoped that the Bali conference will be the culmination of a momentous twelve months in the climate debate and a breakthrough in the form of a roadmap for a future [[climate change]] deal. Early in the year, scientific evidence of global warming, as set out in the fourth assessment of the [http://www.ipcc.ch/ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] (IPCC), indicated that need to address an environmental problem, with much wider implications for economic growth, water and food security, and for people's survival - especially those living in the poorest communities in developing countries. <br />
<br />
An international agreement needs to be found to follow the end of the Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period, which ends in 2012. In order to avoid a gap between then and the entry into force of a new framework, the aim is to conclude a new deal by 2009 to allow enough time for ratification. The “Bali roadmap” could establish the process to work on the key building blocks of a future [[climate change]] regime, including adaptation, mitigation, technology cooperation and financing the response to [[climate change]]. But it would also need to set out the methodology and detailed calendar of work for this process.<br />
<br />
According to the UNFCC, there is some reason for optimism. A major step forward was taken at the [[G8 summit]] in Heiligendamm in June, where the G8 leaders agreed to negotiate a post-2012 deal within the United Nations framework, with the goal to have an agreement in place by 2009. Significantly, this was supported by the Group of 5 countries with emerging economies: China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa. [[Climate change]] has been discussed at many other high-level meetings around the world this year, including the United Nations Security Council, the UN Economic and Social Council, the General Assembly Special Thematic Debate and the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting.<br />
<br />
In September, the United Nations Secretary-General hosted an unprecedented High-Level Event on Climate Change in New York, attended by over 80 heads of state or government. This was an expression of the political will of world leaders at the highest level to tackle [[climate change]] through concerted action, and they gave a clear call for a breakthrough at the conference in Bali. It was followed by the [http://www.state.gov/g/oes/climate/mem/ Major Economies Meeting on Climate Change and Energy Security] in Washington on 27 and 28 September, where the United States government clearly voiced its desire to contribute to the UNFCCC process. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
:Website for the [http://unfccc.int/2860.php UNFCC] <br />
<br />
:Website for the Bali Conference [http://unfccc.int/meetings/cop_13/items/4049.php]<br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=12992<br />
|AuthorFullName=Magdalena Muir<br />
|AuthorName=MagdalenaMuir}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme 6]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 5]]<br />
[[Category:Atmospheric processes, air and climate]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change and global warming]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Mediterranean_Sea_and_Region,_including_Adriatic_Sea&diff=26176Mediterranean Sea and Region, including Adriatic Sea2008-12-17T10:12:14Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>The Mediterranean Sea is a largely enclosed sea, with high temperature and salinity, and decreasing freshwater due to dams and river diversions. Under the changing climate regime, sea surface temperatures and salinity will increase. [[Biodiversity]], conservation, water quality, quantity and seasonal flows are significantly affected. The negative impacts of [[pollution]] and nutrients may increase. Depending on the local characteristics, [[erosion]], sediment deposition, drought, [[desertification]] and flooding may intensify or shift. Coastal and beach tourism is also an important source of income in the Mediterranean and south Atlantic regions, and the ongoing economic viability of these regions and local communities may depend on the maintenance of the coastal and marine [[ecosystem]]s that tourism activity and other activities such as fisheries depend upon. <br />
<br />
==Mediterranean Sea and Region==<br />
All these uses must be consider in the context of [[climate change]]. For examples, for the Mediterranean, complex interactions between overfishing and [[climate change]] could facilitate [[ecosystem]] shifts. An example is the presence of [[algal bloom]]s and jellyfish in Mediterranean due to combination of higher water temperatures, overfishing and nutrient influxes. [[Algal bloom]]s are boosted by nitrate and phosphate influxes from farming and human wastes, and jellyfish benefit from the reduction of natural predators such as loggerhead turtles and the bluefin tuna, which have been drastically reduced by overfishing. Once jellyfish are predominant, it can difficult for juvenile fish populations to re-establish the prior predator-prey relationship. Reduced river flows during hotter summers might also lead to increased numbers of jellyfish near the shore, as freshwater currents no longer keep the jellyfish offshore. The predominance of jellyfish and [[algal bloom]]s in coastal waters and adjacent to beaches also reduces the attractiveness of tourism for those beaches. <br />
<br />
Enclosed shallow seas like the Mediterranean Sea, as well as the Baltic Sea and Black Sea are vulnerable to warming and other [[climate change|climate changes]]. On a longer term basis, [[ecosystem]]s shifts such as jellyfish and algae could also be perceived as an indication that the Mediterranean Sea and region is under stress, and that the sea is becoming "tropicalised". The Mediterranean climate, typified by cool wet winters and dry hot summers, may be shifting with related impacts on terrestrial, coastal and marine [[ecosystem]]s and [[biodiversity]], and the economies and communities they support. <br />
<br />
In complex ways, [[climate change]] affects the ecological or carrying capacity of these natural [[ecosystem]]s. In order to allow these coastal and marine [[ecosystem]]s to adapt to the [[climate change]]s that will occur, human stresses, including those caused by all these developments, may need to be reduced. Among other matters, this requires an integrative and ongoing ecosystem based approach to the planning of these developments. Separate from these economic and conservation needs, coastal and marine [[ecosystem]]s meet many needs for local communities such as food, transport, recreation, as well as providing cultural and historical links.<br />
<br />
==Water uses and alterations in quality and quantity==<br />
<br />
Water uses, and alterations in water quality and quantity, may be complemented and aggravated by seasonal shifts and changes in temperature and precipitation due to [[climate change]]. Many water uses in coastal communities in the Mediterranean are unsustainable. These water uses may reduce river flows and drain existing ground water aquifers. [[Climate change]] may further reduce these river flows, and impede the replenishment of these aquifers, even if more sustainable withdrawals are attempted. Additionally, saltwater intrusion of these aquifers and [[estuary|estuaries]] will become an increasing risk as the [[sea level rise]]s. This risk of saltwater intrusion is particularly great for [[groundwater]] aquifers on islands and coasts where aquifers are already depleted.<br />
<br />
Availability of water is already an issue in some destinations in the Mediterranean. Water is already imported to some islands, while desalination is a water source for some of the Canaries Islands, located in the south Atlantic off the coast of western Africa. In parts of the Algarve region of Portugal, unsustainable water uses and varying seasonal and annual precipitation are combined with extensive coastal developments and roads, which vary the drainage and water retention patterns. In the future, [[climate change]] may result in higher summer temperatures and less and changing precipitation patterns, so existing water shortages may increase.<br />
<br />
Alterations in water quality due to [[pollution]], nutrient flows, and the disposal of storm water and sewage and other urban wastes (particularly in [[estuary|estuaries]], bays and shallow enclosed seas) may be increased by [[climate change]] and changing sea surface temperature, stratification, precipitation, and circulatory patterns. For example, much of the sewage and storm water from the larger settlements located on the Mediterranean Sea flow untreated or minimally treated into the sea. Additionally, nutrients and chemicals from agricultural production also enter rivers that enter the sea. For Adriatic Sea, this combination of inputs results in a eutrophic sea during parts of the year. [[Climate change]], including increasing sea temperatures and stratification may increase the impact and extent of this [[eutrophication]] in the Adriatic and Mediterranean Seas, as well as other enclosed seas like the Baltic and Black Seas.<br />
<br />
==Drought, desertification and flooding==<br />
[[Image:Dangerous heat index.jpg|thumb|300px|Fig. 1 This image represents intensification of dangerous heat stress in the 21st century. The colour contours show the expected intensification of dangerous heat index days given accelerating increases in greenhouse gas concentrations. (Purdue University image/Diffenbaugh Laboratory)]]<br />
[[Climate change]] has resulted in increased forecasts of higher temperatures, as well as drought and [[desertification]] in the Mediterranean and south Atlantic regions. In the future, this could discourage tourism in the summer months, moving tourism more to other seasons or adjacent months. These regions are also vulnerable to changing seasonal and annual precipitation patterns, including more intense rainfall events and increased flooding. The projected temperature increases resulting from [[climate change]] are quite striking, and could be disproportionately felt in the summer season.<br />
<br />
Sustainable water uses will be relevant as temperatures increase. Greater temperatures, as well as greater energy efficiencies and carbon reductions, will need to be considered for the future design of the built environment (see Fig. 1). Energy uses may have to increase in the future in order to provide cooling during the hotter summer period. Unless this energy is locally sourced or inexpensive, the economic viability of these developments and communities could be affected. Sustainable developments could include energy efficiency and to generate and use renewable or low carbon energy sources.<br />
<br />
==Sea level rise, storm events and erosion==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Extreme hot events.jpg|thumb|300px|Fig. 2 This image illustrates heat stress in the 21st century for two greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. The top panel shows the expected intensification of the severity of extreme hot days given accelerating increases in greenhouse gas concentrations. The bottom panel shows the expected decrease in intensification associated with decelerated increases in greenhouse gas concentrations. (Purdue University image/Diffenbaugh Laboratory)]]<br />
Coasts, deltas, [[estuary|estuaries]], lagoons, enclosed seas, and arctic coasts are vulnerable coastal systems that are affected by [[sea level rise]], storm events and [[erosion]]. Some European examples are the enclosed seas of the Adriatic, Mediterranean, Baltic and Black Seas. These vulnerable coastal [[ecosystem]]s can be used as indicators of [[climate change]], and to further understand approaches to and effectiveness of adaptation and mitigation strategies for [[climate change]]. For the coasts, infrastructure and development, [[sea level rise]] will continue as an issue well into the future. It is interesting to note the shared and high vulnerability of lagoons, [[estuary|estuaries]], deltas and arctic coasts to [[sea level rise]], as well as storm surges and other extreme weather events. <br />
<br />
Two other examples are the Venice lagoon and the central coastal region of Portugal. The Venice lagoon, the infrastructure and the communities are very vulnerable to [[sea level rise]] and storm events, with natural and human-induced vulnerability increased by [[climate change]]s. Venice is not only threatened by high tides, but is sinking through [[subsidence]], at the same time as the Adriatic Sea is rising. The surrounding marshes, which used to break the waves coming into the city, have gradually disappeared, and industrial development on the mainland has added to the increased [[subsidence]] and [[pollution]]. <br />
<br />
Venice and the Venetian lagoon, of which the city is one integral part, are vulnerable to both extreme weather events and "normal" flooding, which now occurs up to 10 times in one year. Due to the [[subsidence]] of the lagoon (human induced and geological), as well as overall [[subsidence]] in the Adriatic Sea, Venice and the Venetian lagoon are also vulnerable to even a 10 centimetre increase in sea level, and will be dramatically affected by a large increase in sea level. The Moses project, which is comprised of 9 barriers, was approved in 2003, is now estimated to cost more than 5 billion euros, and is designed to rise from the seabed to block the inlets of the Venice lagoon from the Adriatic Sea when high tides are forecast. Given the sensitivity of Venice and the overall lagoon to [[climate change]], it could also be considered as a model and indicator for global impacts of [[climate change]] for lagoons and coasts. <br />
<br />
Coastal [[erosion]] is affected by extreme weather events, which can have major and catastrophic events on certain coasts. Some changes in sediment deposit may be amplified by [[climate change]], such as a loss of sediment in storm events. In addition to extreme weather events, coasts may be eroded due to changes in sediment deposit, removal due to the construction of offshore structures and alterations of rivers through dams and diversions, resulting in changes in water flows and sediment deposition. Changes in sediment deposits results from changes in water flow due to a number a reasons. These include: the construction of dams on upstream rivers and watersheds, the removal of natural coastal habitats (i.e. wetlands), the construction of coastal structures and defences and the construction of offshore structures.<br />
<br />
The Atlantic coast of central Portugal and settlements such as Aveiro and Figueira da Foz are very vulnerable to combination of [[climate change]]s and coastal [[erosion]], storm events, and changes in sediment deposit due to coastal dikes, groynes and upstream dams. Due to its depth, and absence of replenishing sediment deposits, the Venice lagoon can be impacted by shallow wave actions.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
:Case Study: [http://copranet.projects.eucc-d.de/files/000168_EUROSION_Climate_Change_and_Coastal_and_Beach_Management_in_Europe.pdf Climate Change and European Coast and Beach Management], 2006, Completed by M.A.K.Muir for EU-funded Coastal Practise Network ([http://www.coastalpractice.net CoPraNet])<br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=12992<br />
|AuthorFullName=Magdalena Muir<br />
|AuthorName=MagdalenaMuir}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme 6]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 5]]<br />
[[Category:Atmospheric processes, air and climate]]<br />
[[Category:Baltic]]<br />
[[Category:Black sea]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change and global warming]]<br />
[[Category:Lagoons]]<br />
[[Category:Land and ocean interactions]]<br />
[[Category:Sediment shorelines]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Global_Forum_of_Oceans,_Coasts_and_Islands&diff=26174Global Forum of Oceans, Coasts and Islands2008-12-17T10:04:54Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Global Forum of Oceans, Coasts and Islands''' was created at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South Africa in September 2002. The Global Forum is intended to advance the interests of oceans,coasts, and islands including small island developing States (SIDS), which are especially dependent on the oceans. The Global Forum brings together ocean leaders from governments, intergovernmental and international organizations, non-governmental organizations, the private sector, ocean donors, and scientific institutions, to achieve the sustainable development of oceans, coasts, and islands.<br />
<br />
<br />
==Third Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts and Islands==<br />
<br />
With the Third Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts and Islands in Paris in January 2006 the issue of climate and the oceans was considered. The goal was to explore the effects climate change may have on the world’s oceans, coasts, and islands, with an emphasis on [[ocean acidification]], carbon sequestration, Arctic change, and sea level change. An Oceans and Climate panel was chaired by Robert Corell, Chair, Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Panel participants included: Ambassador Gunnar Pálsson, Director, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Iceland; Halldór Thorgeirsson, Deputy Executive Secretary, UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); Ambassador Enele Sopoaga, Tuvalu, Vice-Chair, AOSIS, and Permanent Representative of the Mission of Tuvalu to the UN; John Shepherd, Tyndall Centre Regional Associate Director, Southampton Oceanography Centre; Ellina Levina, Climate Change Analyst, Environment Directorate, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); and Magdalena Muir, Research Associate, Arctic Institute of North America. <br />
<br />
The panel summary indicated that the most vulnerable populations and some of the key vulnerabilities are oceans, coasts, and islands. [[Sea level rise]] is a significant threat for small islands, coasts, and low-lying lands. [[Ocean acidification]] is a new and looming threat that could undermine the marine food web and preclude coral development. [[Sea level rise]] and [[acidification of the oceans|acidification]] will remain for the next few thousand years. Another emerging threat is the impact of high sea surface temperatures on the intensity of tropical cyclones and hurricanes. Other climate impacts include arctic sea ice reduction, cyclonic storms, changes in ocean circulation, and changes in [[biodiversity, conservation and fisheries|biodiversity and fisheries]]. <br />
<br />
In 2005, the Intergovernmental Panel on [[climate change|Climate Change]] presented a special report on carbon dioxide sequestration. It found that storing captured carbon dioxide in geological formations is a mature technology. Ocean storage, or the direct release into the ocean water column or onto the deep seafloor, has been researched less. This storage option is less permanent than geological storage and significant uncertainty remains on [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] impacts. Oceans have slowed the build up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by acting as a sink for carbon dioxide. Recent evidence suggests that this carbon absorption has its limits and is resulting in [[acidification of the oceans]].<br />
<br />
==Areas affected by climate change==<br />
<br />
===Circumpolar Arctic===<br />
The [[Arctic Climate Impact Assessment Scientific Report (2004)|Arctic Climate Impact Assessment Scientific Report]] documents [[climate change|climatic changes]] in the circumpolar Arctic. One of the key findings suggests that the Arctic has been warming rapidly with much larger changes projected for the future. Increasing temperatures, melting glaciers, reductions in the extent and thickness of sea ice, thawing [[permafrost]], and rising sea level illustrate this warming trend. In the Arctic, changes in sea ice are a key indicator and agent of [[climate change]], affecting surface reflectivity, cloudiness, humidity, exchanges of heat and moisture at the ocean surface, and ocean currents. <br />
<br />
The changes in sea ice have enormous economic, environmental, and social implications. There are negative impacts on ice-dependent wildlife and northern peoples, like the Inuit, with a traditional subsistence lifestyle based on hunting mammals on or adjacent to sea ice. Changes may also have positive economic effects, as they may facilitate increased marine transportation, economic development, and immigration into the region.<br />
<br />
===Small Islands===<br />
Small islands are vulnerable to the impacts of [[climate change]], [[sea level rise]], and extreme events because of their size and exposure to natural hazards and their limited adaptive capacity. Islands represent early indicators of [[climate change]] for the rest of the world. As islands often depend on rainwater they are vulnerable to changes rainfall as well as its distribution. <br />
<br />
Like many parts of the equatorial and tropical world, human health is impacted by [[climate change]]. Subsistence and commercial agriculture on small islands will be impacted by [[sea level rise]] due to flooding, salt water intrusion in fresh water, salination of the soils and decline in water quality and quantity. Infrastructure and development are affected by [[sea level rise]] and extreme events, which affect tourism, agriculture, and the delivery of health, fresh water, food, and other essential services. Coral reefs, marine fisheries, and marine resources will also be affected by [[climate change]] and climate variability. Small islands with a large Exclusive Economic Zone already have limited capacity to manage those zones, and these management issues will only be compounded by [[climate change]].<br />
<br />
===Africa===<br />
Africa is also very vulnerable to [[climate change]], with negative impacts expected for watersheds, coasts, and seas of Africa, worsening desertification in northern and southern Africa, and reductions in the development of the continent overall. The [http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/tar.htm Third Assessment Report] predicted that the effects of [[climate change]] would be greatest in developing countries in terms of loss of life and relative effects on the investment and economy. Africa was described as the world’s poorest region and the continent most vulnerable to the impacts of projected change, because widespread poverty limits adaptation capabilities. There has been limited scientific research on [[climate change]] in Africa, but local scientific networks for [[climate change]] are developing.<br />
<br />
==Maintaining the worlds ecosystems==<br />
<br />
Maintaining the [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] services of the oceans is instrumental in achieving the United Nations Millennium Development Goals, as at least four of the eight goals are closely linked to the conservation and use of natural resources, including living marine resources. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, relying on the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, identifies fishing as the most important driver of change in the marine [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] for the past fifty years. It is now apparent that, aside from pollution and over fishing, climate variability and change, including [[acidification of the oceans|acidification]], may threaten the productivity of oceans. <br />
<br />
The challenge for governments is to understand the complex processes for oceans and [[climate change]], and to have adequate policies. On a global and regional level, [[climate change]] science and policy needs to be added to the oceans agenda, and ocean science and policy needs to be inserted in the climate agenda. Information on [[climate change]] and related policy issues for oceans needs to be included in the annual United Nations Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and Law of the Sea, as well as in the global marine assessment agreed to at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, which is now in the start-up phase of an assessment. Additionally, information on ocean and climate sciences and related policy measures should be included in meetings of the [[Kyoto Protocol]] Parties and the Convention Dialogue, beginning in May 2006. <br />
<br />
===Mitigation===<br />
Adaptation is not enough; mitigation is also required through the reduction of greenhouse gases and the shift to renewable energy and energy efficiencies. It is necessary to think globally, plan regionally, and act locally. Due to their complexity, climate issues require input from many disciplines and the integration of ecosystem-based and other integrated approaches. There is a need for a constant dialogue between scientists and decision-makers. Scientific data and analysis, from accurate and timely predictions of hurricanes, to improved global and regional forecasts of future [[sea level rise]], and the impacts of [[ocean acidification]], lay the foundation for adaptation policy discussions and the development of climate strategies. In order to be effective, this data and analysis need to be communicated to decision-makers on a timely basis and in an appropriate language. <br />
<br />
The timing of policy development and science must be synchronized, so that the long and short-term windows for science and decision-making can be synchronized accordingly. Short-term windows for decision-making may be advantageous as they allow the inclusion of new and more detailed information and predictions. In the future, data may make it possible for scientists to accurately predict climate variability and change. The challenge will then be how to convert these predictions into adaptation policies for fisheries management, harbour development, or civil emergency planning. Global [[climate change]] scenarios need to be checked against more specific studies at regional and sub-regional levels. As policies adapt to [[climate change]] and variability, it is important to consider opportunities as well as risks. With accelerating [[climate change]] and variability, reliable scientific information becomes crucial for formulating policy on a wide variety of issues, including fisheries, marine infrastructure, and transportation. Therefore, more resources need to be devoted to ocean climate research, paying attention to the short and medium term, to the regional impacts as well as the global impacts, to monitoring and management approaches across vulnerable coastal and marine [[ecosystems]], and to the benefits as well as the risks of [[climate change]].<br />
<br />
==Problems==<br />
<br />
There will be common problems in adapting to [[climate change]] by Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and less developed regions and countries within Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Central and South America, and the Pacific. For SIDS, there is a need to enhance economic, ecological, and social resilience in an integrated manner. Effective implementation of adaptation measures is critical to ensure sustainable development, and SIDS governments are already incorporating adaptation measures into national sustainable development strategies for infrastructure, economic development, disaster management, environment, [[biodiversity and conservation|conservation and biodiversity]]. <br />
<br />
SIDS urgently need financial resources and technical support, as recognized and committed under the UNFCCC process, including funding arrangements for the development and transfer of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies as a way of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The integration of the Mauritius Strategy for the sustainable development of SIDS in the work programme of the UNFCCC is crucial to address SIDS concerns on [[climate change]]. The appeal of the SIDS through the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) for discussion of implementation of the Mauritius Strategy should be considered. The SIDS strongly oppose carbon dioxide sequestration and nuclear power as options to address [[climate change]].<br />
<br />
==Fourth Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts and Islands==<br />
<br />
The 4th Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands will mobilize high-level policy and decision makers, topical working groups, analytical papers, and other contributions to provide a review of progress achieved in advancing [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] management and integrated coastal and ocean management by 2010 at national and regional, transboundary levels. It will focus on the 64% of the ocean beyond national jurisdiction, and on the goals of reducing marine [[biodiversity]] loss by 2010 and establishing networks of marine protected areas by 2012. These goals are considered in the context of [[climate change]], which, as indicated in the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), will have profound effects on [[ecosystems]] and coastal populations around the world. <br />
<br />
The conference will be held in Hanoi, Vietnam. Vietnam has made significant strides in coastal and marine management in recent years through the development of integrated coastal management, marine protected areas, and a national ocean strategy, and was chosen as the first "pilot" country in the UN's effort to unify the work of its agencies at the national level through its "One UN" pilot program. <br />
<br />
The Global Conference is organized by the Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, and by the Government of Vietnam, with the leadership of the Ministry of Fisheries, and with leadership roles by the Global Environment Facility, the GEF IW: LEARN Program, the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, UNESCO, and the UN Environment Programme's Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities. Key ocean-oriented governments, nongovernmental organizations, and industry will play a pivotal role in the organization of the Conference and the dissemination of its outputs. <br />
<br />
==Conference themes==<br />
<br />
The Conference will focus on three major themes related to achieving [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] management and integrated coastal and ocean management at national and regional levels, and in areas beyond national jurisdiction, as follows: <br />
<br />
'''Theme 1. Achieving Ecosystem management and integrated coastal and ocean management by 2010''' <br />
<br />
Cross-cutting issues: <br />
Large Marine [[Ecosystems]] <br />
Marine [[Biodiversity]] and Networks of Marine Protected Areas <br />
Linking the Management of Freshwater, Oceans, and Coasts <br />
Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Implementation of the Mauritius International Strategy <br />
Fisheries and Aquaculture-Sustainability and Governance <br />
Enhancing Ocean Use Access Agreements in the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of Developing Nations <br />
Tourism <br />
Maritime Transportation <br />
<br />
'''Theme 2. Climate, Oceans, and Security: Addressing Impacts in Vulnerable [[Ecosystems]] and in Vulnerable Coastal Communities''' <br />
<br />
Cross-cutting Issues: <br />
# Vulnerable Communities (Adaptation, Environmental Refugees, Public Health); <br />
# Vulnerable [[Ecosystems]] (Natural Disasters, Sea Level Rise, Ocean [[acidification of the oceans|Acidification]], Ocean Warming) <br />
#Small Island Developing States and the Mauritius Strategy <br />
<br />
A Working Group on Climate, Oceans and Security is being formed to provide information and recommendations to the Fourth Global Conference.<br />
<br />
'''Theme 3. Addressing the Governance of Marine [[Ecosystems]] and Uses in Areas Beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction''' <br />
<br />
Cross-cutting issues:<br />
# Overall Governance Issues; <br />
# [[Ecosystems]] and Uses (Marine [[Biodiversity]], Fisheries, Bioprospecting, Deep Seabed Mining, Tourism, Maritime Transportation) <br />
<br />
The Conference also identifies cverarching, cross-cutting issues accross all themes: <br />
Poverty Reduction, <br />
Capacity Development, <br />
Marine [[ecosystems|Ecosystem]] Productivity/Services, <br />
Indicators for Progress, <br />
Compliance and Enforcement, and<br />
Public Education/OUtreach/Media<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
:[http://www.globaloceans.org/ Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts and Islands] <br />
:[http://www.globaloceans.org/globalconferences/2006/pdf/OutcomesClimate.pdf Summary of Oceans and Climate Panel, Third Global Conference for Oceans, Coasts and Islands]<br />
:Sustainable Development Law and Policy: Oceans and Fisheries Law Issue (Volume VII, Issue 1, Fall 2007)- Oceans and Climate Change: Global and Arctic Perspectives by M.A.K. Muir [http://www.globaloceans.org/globalconferences/2008/index.html]<br />
<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=12992<br />
|AuthorFullName=Magdalena Muir<br />
|AuthorName=MagdalenaMuir}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme 6]]<br />
[[Category:Arctic]]<br />
[[Category:Atmospheric processes, air and climate]]<br />
[[Category:Climate change and global warming]]<br />
[[Category:Coral reefs/tropical oceans]]<br />
[[Category:Ecological processes and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Ecosystem-based management in coastal and marine zones]]<br />
[[Category:Land and ocean interactions]]<br />
[[Category:Sea ice ecosystems]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Why_is_Marine_biodiversity_important&diff=26102Why is Marine biodiversity important2008-12-16T09:08:03Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
[[Image:marine biodiversity_ICRI.jpg|thumb|right|Figure 1:Coral Reef (copyright The International Coral Reef Initiative)]]The seas provide a unique set of goods and services to society, including moderation of climate, processing of waste and toxicants, provision of vital food, medicines and employment for significant numbers of people. Our coasts provide space to live and directly and indirectly create wealth, including millions of jobs in industries such as fishing, aquaculture and tourism. <ref> Holmlund C. M. and Hammer, M (1999) Ecosystem services generated by fish populations Ecological Economics 29: 253-268 </ref>.<ref>Beaumont, N.J. and Tinch, R. (2003) Goods and services related to the marine benthic environment. CSERG working Paper ECM 03-14</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
Looking at ecosystems in terms of the goods and services they provide allows us to realise their full value and our dependence on those systems in the broadest sense. Exploitation of the environment for one purpose can alter the environment's ability to provide other goods and services, so this knowledge is also a way of understanding what we stand to gain and lose by exploitation of certain aspects of the environment <ref>De Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A. and Boumans, R. M. J. (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and systems Ecological Economics 41 (3): 393-408 </ref>. The main goods and services provided by marine ecosystems are:<br />
<br />
*Resilience and resistance <br />
*Disturbance prevention <br />
*Nutrient cycling <br />
*Gas and climate regulation <br />
*Bioremediation of waste <br />
*Biologically mediated habitat <br />
*Food provision <br />
*Raw materials, including ornamental resources <br />
*Leisure <br />
*Cultural values <br />
*Information service <br />
*Non-use value: bequest value and existence value <br />
*Option use value<br />
<br />
<br />
== Other types of biodiversity ==<br />
<br />
Biodiversity encompasses many levels of organisation including genes, species, habitats, communities and ecosystems. Although species diversity is the most commonly used measure of taxonomic diversity (or diversity between types of organisms), other measures of taxonomic diversity exist, the most common of which is phyletic diversity. Phyletic diversity is the variation in the working body plans (phyla) of organisms. An example of a phylum is the Arthropoda, which includes the class Decapoda. Phyletic diversity can be a useful measure of diversity, particularly where diversity is comparably higher at the level of phylum than at the level of species. For example, the marine environment has high phyletic diversity because 32 out of the 33 described animal phyla are represented in the oceans.<br />
<br />
It is also possible and very useful to measure diversity as the variation in the functional roles of species (rather than the number of species or gene types), within a community or ecosystem. An example of functional diversity is the number of filter feeders in an ecosystem compared to number of grazers. Functional diversity is thought to be one of the main factors determining the long-term stability of an ecosystem and its ability to recover from major disturbances.<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Marine habitats and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 7]]<br />
[[Category:Marine Biodiversity]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Threats_to_Marine_Biodiversity&diff=26098Threats to Marine Biodiversity2008-12-16T09:05:16Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
Biodiversity loss has become one of the greatest environmental concerns of the last century, owing to increasing pressure on the environment by humans combined with the realisation that our activities can seriously threaten the future sustainability of marine species and ecosystems. Marine biodiversity in Europe is threatened by the fact that many of the goods and services provided by marine ecosystems are exploited in a non-sustainable way. In some cases, marine ecosystems are threatened to the extent that their structure and function is being jeopardised.<br />
<br />
The most serious threats to marine biodiversity are:<br />
<br />
*Over exploitation - recreational and commercial <br />
*Pollution <br />
*Habitat destruction and fragmentation <br />
*Non-native species invasions <br />
*Effects of global climate change <br />
<br />
Threats to marine biodiversity have widespread social, economic, and biological consequences, the combination of which could threaten our own existence, including:<br />
<br />
*Economic losses through unemployment and reduced productivity <br />
*Dramatic reductions in the numbers of many popular edible fish and shellfish <br />
*Extinction of species that might be useful in developing new medicines <br />
*Reduced ability of ecosystems to respond to disaster, both natural (floods) and man-made (pollution) <br />
*Accelerated global climate change <br />
*Social and political instability<br />
<br />
[[Category:Marine habitats and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 7]]<br />
[[Category:Marine Biodiversity]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=References_for_environmental_risk_assessment&diff=26093References for environmental risk assessment2008-12-16T08:47:13Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems - CETS (1998). Review of the Prince William Sound, Alaska, Risk Assessment Study. National Academy Press, http://www.nap.edu ISBN 0-309-06078-8, Washington, USA<br />
<br />
Convention on biological Diversity (1992).<br />
<br />
Cooper, J.A.G. & McLaughlin, S. (1998). Contemporary multidisciplinary approaches to coastal classification and environmental risk analysis. Journal of Coastal Research, 14(2), 512-524.<br />
<br />
Covello, V.T. & Merkhofer, M.W. (1993). Risk Assessment Methods Approaches for Assessing Health and Environmental Risks. Plenum, New York<br />
<br />
DEFRA (2000). Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management. Department of Environmental Food and Rural Affairs, UK. Available [http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/risk/eramguide/02.htm here]<br />
<br />
Degraer, S., Van Lancker, V., Moerkerke, G., Van Hoey, G., Vanstaen, K., Vincx, M. & Henriet, J.-P. (2003). Evaluation of the ecological value of the foreshore: habitatmodel and macrobenthic side-scan sonar interpretation: extension along the Belgian Coastal Zone. Final report. Ministry of the Flemish Community, Environment and Infrastructure Department. Waterways and Marine Affairs Administration, Coastal Waterways, 63 p.<br />
<br />
Degraer, S., Van Lancker, V., Moerkerke, G., Vincx, M., Jacobs, P. & Henriet, J.-P. (2002). Intensive evaluation of the evolution of a protected benthic habitat: HABITAT. Final report. Federal Office for Scientific, Technical and Cultural Affairs (OSTC), Ministry of the Flemish Community (WWK). Universiteit Gent, Gent, 124 p. <br />
<br />
EC DG TREN (2000a). Concerted Action on Formal Safety and Environmental Assessment of Ship Operations – Final Summary Report. Main project contractor: Germanischer Lloyd on behalf of EEIG Unitas. Project in the EU 4th Framework Programme, Waterborne Transport. [http://www.cordis.lu/transport/src/fsearep.htm Website]<br />
<br />
EC DG TREN (2000b). SAFECO II – Safety of Shipping in Coastal Waters: Demonstration of risk assessment techniques for communication and information exchange. Final Report for publication. Main project contractor : Det Norske Veritas Project in the EU 4th Framework Programme, Waterborne Transport. [http://www.cordis.lu/transport/src/safecoii.htm Website]<br />
<br />
ECB (2003). Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment. European Chemicals Bureau – Institute for Health and Consumer Protection. European Commission Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy. Available [http://ecb.jrc.it/tgdoc/ here]<br />
<br />
ECOTOC (2001). Risk Assessment in Marine Environments. Technical Report No. 82. ISSN -0773- 8072-82. European Centre For Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals, Brussels.<br />
<br />
EPA (1998). Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment (EPA/630/R-95/002F) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.<br />
<br />
European Centre For Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals - ECOTOC (2001). Risk Assessment in Marine Environments. Technical Report No. 82. ISSN -0773- 8072-82. Brussels<br />
European Commission (2000). Opinion on the available scientific approaches to assess the potential effects and risk of chemicals on terrestrial ecosystems. Scientific committee on toxicity, ecotoxicity and the environment (cstee). Available [http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/sct/documents/out83_en.pdf here]<br />
<br />
European Commission (2002). Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals Under Council Directive 91/414/EEC (working document). <br />
<br />
Fairman R., Mead C. D. & Williams W. P. (1999). Environmental Risk Assessment – Approaches, Experiences and Information Sources. Monitoring and Assessment Research centre, King’s College, London. Published by European Environment Agency – EEA Environmental issue report No 4. [http://reports.eea.eu.int/GH-07-97-595-EN-C2/en/riskindex.html http://reports.eea.eu.int/GH-07-97-595-EN-C2/en/riskindex.html] <br />
<br />
Falco, J.W. and Moraski, R.V. (1989). Assessment of ecological risks related to chemical exposure: methods and strategies used in the US. In: Risk Management of Chemicals in Environment, H.M. Seip and A.B. Heiberg (Eds). NATO Chalelnges of Modern Society Series Vol. 12, Plenum Press, New York Fifth International Conference on the protection of the North Sea. Webpage available 19/08/2005. [http://www.dep.no/md/html/conf/ecosyst/ecosystem_approach.html http://www.dep.no/md/html/conf/ecosyst/ecosystem_approach.html]<br />
<br />
Gilbert, T. (2002). Geographic information systems based tools for marine pollution response. Port Technology International, 13, 25-27.<br />
<br />
International Maritime Organization – IMO (2002). Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. MSC/Circ. 1023- MEPC/Circ.392, 5 April 2002<br />
Le Roy, D., Volckaert, A, Vermoote, S., De Wachter, B., Maes, F., Coene, J. and Calewaert, JB. (2006). Risk analysis of marine activities in the Belgian Part of the North Sea (RAMA). Research in the framework of the BELSPO Global change, ecosystems and biodiversity – SPSDII, April 2006, 107 pp + Annexes.<br />
<br />
Lenting, V. & Pratt, C. (2000). The New Zealand marine oil spill risk assessment 1998. New Zealand Petroleum Conference Proceedings, Auckland, New Zealand.<br />
<br />
MacDonald, A., McGeehan, C., Cain, M., Beattie, J., Holt, H., Zhou, R. & Farquhar, D. (1999). Identification of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRA's) in the UK. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, ST-87639-MI-1-Rev 01, London, UK.<br />
<br />
Maes, F., Douvere, F. & Schrijvers, J. (2002). Marine Resources Damage Assessment and Sustainable Management of the North Sea (MARE DASM), Research project commissioned by DWTC, 694 pp.<br />
<br />
Maes, F., Schrijvers, J., Van Lancker, V., Verfaillie, E., Degraer, S., Derous, S., De Wachter, B., Volckaert, A., Vanhulle, A., Vandenabeele, P., Cliquet, A., Douvere, F., Lambrecht, J. and Makgill, R. (2005). Towards a spatial structure plan for sustainable management of the sea. Research in the framework of the BSP programme "Sustainable Management of the Sea" – PODO II, June 2005, pp. 539.<br />
Maritime and Coastguard Agency – MCA (2003). Formal Safety Assessment – Risk Methodology, FSA methodology and representation of uncertainty in Step 2 Methodology. [http://www.mcga.gov.uk/fsa/risk.htm http://www.mcga.gov.uk/fsa/risk.htm]<br />
<br />
Morris and& R. Therivel (ed.). Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment. UCL Press, London.<br />
National Academy Press. ISBN 0-309-05396-X. Washington, D.C. 1996. Stienen, E.W.M. & Kuijken, E. (2003). Het belang van de Belgische zeegebieden voor zeevogels. Rapport Instituut voor Natuurbehoud, 2003.208. Instituut voor Natuurbehoud: Brussel, België, 33 pp.<br />
<br />
NOAA (2002). Environmental Sensitivity Index Mapping. Available [http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/esi/pdfs/esi.pdf here] (accessed 26-08-2005)<br />
Rempec (Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre for the Mediterranean Sea) (2000). IMO/UNEP: Regional Information System, Part D, Operational Guides and Technical Documents, Section 1, Guide for Combating Adccidental Marine Pollution in the Mediterranean, 137 pp.<br />
<br />
Seys, J. (2001). Sea-and Coastal bird data as tools in the policy and management of Belgian marine waters. Proefschrift Universiteit Gent, Gent, 130 pp.<br />
<br />
Stern P. C. & Fineberg H. V. (eds.) (1996). Understanding Risk – Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Committee on Risk Characterization, Commission on Behavioural and Social Sciences and Education – National Research Council.<br />
<br />
Strange, E., Lipton, J, Beltman D., and Snyder B. (2002). Scientific and Societal Considerations in Selecting Assessment Endpoints for Environmental Decision Making. Defining and Assessing Adverse Environmental Impact Symposium 2001, TheScientificWorldJOURNAL 2(S1), 12-20. <br />
<br />
Suter, G.W. (1993) Ecological Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI. 2. U.S. EPA (1998) Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. <br />
<br />
Tortell, P. (1992). Coastal zone sensitivity mapping and its role in marine environmental management. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 25(1-4), 88-93.<br />
<br />
Villa, F. & McLeod, H. (2002). Environmental vulnerability indicators for environmental planning and decision-making: guidelines and applications. Environmental Management, 29(3), 335-348.<br />
<br />
Wilcox R. LT., Burrows M. CDR., Ghosh S., Ayyub B. M. (2000). Risk-based Technology for the Safety Assessment of Marine Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Systems. International Cooperation on Marine Engineering Systems/The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. Paper presented at the 8th ICMES/SNAME New York Metropolitan Section Symposium in New York, May 22-23, 2000.<br />
<br />
[[Category: Theme 4]]<br />
[[Category: Coastal and marine pollution]]<br />
[[Category: Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
<br />
====These references are used in the following articles====<br />
*[[Environmental risk assessment of marine activities]]<br />
*[[Case study risk analysis of marine activities in the Belgian part of the North Sea]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=References_for_environmental_risk_assessment&diff=26092References for environmental risk assessment2008-12-16T08:46:13Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems - CETS (1998). Review of the Prince William Sound, Alaska, Risk Assessment Study. National Academy Press, www.nap.edu. ISBN 0-309-06078-8, Washington, USA<br />
<br />
Convention on biological Diversity (1992).<br />
<br />
Cooper, J.A.G. & McLaughlin, S. (1998). Contemporary multidisciplinary approaches to coastal classification and environmental risk analysis. Journal of Coastal Research, 14(2), 512-524.<br />
<br />
Covello, V.T. & Merkhofer, M.W. (1993). Risk Assessment Methods Approaches for Assessing Health and Environmental Risks. Plenum, New York<br />
<br />
DEFRA (2000). Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management. Department of Environmental Food and Rural Affairs, UK. Available [http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/risk/eramguide/02.htm here]<br />
<br />
Degraer, S., Van Lancker, V., Moerkerke, G., Van Hoey, G., Vanstaen, K., Vincx, M. & Henriet, J.-P. (2003). Evaluation of the ecological value of the foreshore: habitatmodel and macrobenthic side-scan sonar interpretation: extension along the Belgian Coastal Zone. Final report. Ministry of the Flemish Community, Environment and Infrastructure Department. Waterways and Marine Affairs Administration, Coastal Waterways, 63 p.<br />
<br />
Degraer, S., Van Lancker, V., Moerkerke, G., Vincx, M., Jacobs, P. & Henriet, J.-P. (2002). Intensive evaluation of the evolution of a protected benthic habitat: HABITAT. Final report. Federal Office for Scientific, Technical and Cultural Affairs (OSTC), Ministry of the Flemish Community (WWK). Universiteit Gent, Gent, 124 p. <br />
<br />
EC DG TREN (2000a). Concerted Action on Formal Safety and Environmental Assessment of Ship Operations – Final Summary Report. Main project contractor: Germanischer Lloyd on behalf of EEIG Unitas. Project in the EU 4th Framework Programme, Waterborne Transport. [http://www.cordis.lu/transport/src/fsearep.htm Website]<br />
<br />
EC DG TREN (2000b). SAFECO II – Safety of Shipping in Coastal Waters: Demonstration of risk assessment techniques for communication and information exchange. Final Report for publication. Main project contractor : Det Norske Veritas Project in the EU 4th Framework Programme, Waterborne Transport. [http://www.cordis.lu/transport/src/safecoii.htm Website]<br />
<br />
ECB (2003). Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment. European Chemicals Bureau – Institute for Health and Consumer Protection. European Commission Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy. Available [http://ecb.jrc.it/tgdoc/ here]<br />
<br />
ECOTOC (2001). Risk Assessment in Marine Environments. Technical Report No. 82. ISSN -0773- 8072-82. European Centre For Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals, Brussels.<br />
<br />
EPA (1998). Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment (EPA/630/R-95/002F) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.<br />
<br />
European Centre For Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals - ECOTOC (2001). Risk Assessment in Marine Environments. Technical Report No. 82. ISSN -0773- 8072-82. Brussels<br />
European Commission (2000). Opinion on the available scientific approaches to assess the potential effects and risk of chemicals on terrestrial ecosystems. Scientific committee on toxicity, ecotoxicity and the environment (cstee). Available [http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/committees/sct/documents/out83_en.pdf here]<br />
<br />
European Commission (2002). Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals Under Council Directive 91/414/EEC (working document). <br />
<br />
Fairman R., Mead C. D. & Williams W. P. (1999). Environmental Risk Assessment – Approaches, Experiences and Information Sources. Monitoring and Assessment Research centre, King’s College, London. Published by European Environment Agency – EEA Environmental issue report No 4. [http://reports.eea.eu.int/GH-07-97-595-EN-C2/en/riskindex.html http://reports.eea.eu.int/GH-07-97-595-EN-C2/en/riskindex.html] <br />
<br />
Falco, J.W. and Moraski, R.V. (1989). Assessment of ecological risks related to chemical exposure: methods and strategies used in the US. In: Risk Management of Chemicals in Environment, H.M. Seip and A.B. Heiberg (Eds). NATO Chalelnges of Modern Society Series Vol. 12, Plenum Press, New York Fifth International Conference on the protection of the North Sea. Webpage available 19/08/2005. [http://www.dep.no/md/html/conf/ecosyst/ecosystem_approach.html http://www.dep.no/md/html/conf/ecosyst/ecosystem_approach.html]<br />
<br />
Gilbert, T. (2002). Geographic information systems based tools for marine pollution response. Port Technology International, 13, 25-27.<br />
<br />
International Maritime Organization – IMO (2002). Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process. MSC/Circ. 1023- MEPC/Circ.392, 5 April 2002<br />
Le Roy, D., Volckaert, A, Vermoote, S., De Wachter, B., Maes, F., Coene, J. and Calewaert, JB. (2006). Risk analysis of marine activities in the Belgian Part of the North Sea (RAMA). Research in the framework of the BELSPO Global change, ecosystems and biodiversity – SPSDII, April 2006, 107 pp + Annexes.<br />
<br />
Lenting, V. & Pratt, C. (2000). The New Zealand marine oil spill risk assessment 1998. New Zealand Petroleum Conference Proceedings, Auckland, New Zealand.<br />
<br />
MacDonald, A., McGeehan, C., Cain, M., Beattie, J., Holt, H., Zhou, R. & Farquhar, D. (1999). Identification of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRA's) in the UK. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, ST-87639-MI-1-Rev 01, London, UK.<br />
<br />
Maes, F., Douvere, F. & Schrijvers, J. (2002). Marine Resources Damage Assessment and Sustainable Management of the North Sea (MARE DASM), Research project commissioned by DWTC, 694 pp.<br />
<br />
Maes, F., Schrijvers, J., Van Lancker, V., Verfaillie, E., Degraer, S., Derous, S., De Wachter, B., Volckaert, A., Vanhulle, A., Vandenabeele, P., Cliquet, A., Douvere, F., Lambrecht, J. and Makgill, R. (2005). Towards a spatial structure plan for sustainable management of the sea. Research in the framework of the BSP programme "Sustainable Management of the Sea" – PODO II, June 2005, pp. 539.<br />
Maritime and Coastguard Agency – MCA (2003). Formal Safety Assessment – Risk Methodology, FSA methodology and representation of uncertainty in Step 2 Methodology. [http://www.mcga.gov.uk/fsa/risk.htm http://www.mcga.gov.uk/fsa/risk.htm]<br />
<br />
Morris and& R. Therivel (ed.). Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment. UCL Press, London.<br />
National Academy Press. ISBN 0-309-05396-X. Washington, D.C. 1996. Stienen, E.W.M. & Kuijken, E. (2003). Het belang van de Belgische zeegebieden voor zeevogels. Rapport Instituut voor Natuurbehoud, 2003.208. Instituut voor Natuurbehoud: Brussel, België, 33 pp.<br />
<br />
NOAA (2002). Environmental Sensitivity Index Mapping. Available [http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/esi/pdfs/esi.pdf here] (accessed 26-08-2005)<br />
Rempec (Regional Marine Pollution Emergency Response Centre for the Mediterranean Sea) (2000). IMO/UNEP: Regional Information System, Part D, Operational Guides and Technical Documents, Section 1, Guide for Combating Adccidental Marine Pollution in the Mediterranean, 137 pp.<br />
<br />
Seys, J. (2001). Sea-and Coastal bird data as tools in the policy and management of Belgian marine waters. Proefschrift Universiteit Gent, Gent, 130 pp.<br />
<br />
Stern P. C. & Fineberg H. V. (eds.) (1996). Understanding Risk – Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Committee on Risk Characterization, Commission on Behavioural and Social Sciences and Education – National Research Council.<br />
<br />
Strange, E., Lipton, J, Beltman D., and Snyder B. (2002). Scientific and Societal Considerations in Selecting Assessment Endpoints for Environmental Decision Making. Defining and Assessing Adverse Environmental Impact Symposium 2001, TheScientificWorldJOURNAL 2(S1), 12-20. <br />
<br />
Suter, G.W. (1993) Ecological Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI. 2. U.S. EPA (1998) Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. <br />
<br />
Tortell, P. (1992). Coastal zone sensitivity mapping and its role in marine environmental management. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 25(1-4), 88-93.<br />
<br />
Villa, F. & McLeod, H. (2002). Environmental vulnerability indicators for environmental planning and decision-making: guidelines and applications. Environmental Management, 29(3), 335-348.<br />
<br />
Wilcox R. LT., Burrows M. CDR., Ghosh S., Ayyub B. M. (2000). Risk-based Technology for the Safety Assessment of Marine Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Systems. International Cooperation on Marine Engineering Systems/The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. Paper presented at the 8th ICMES/SNAME New York Metropolitan Section Symposium in New York, May 22-23, 2000.<br />
<br />
[[Category: Theme 4]]<br />
[[Category: Coastal and marine pollution]]<br />
[[Category: Evaluation and assessment in coastal management]]<br />
<br />
These references are used in the following articles<br />
*[[Environmental risk assessment of marine activities]]<br />
*[[Case study risk analysis of marine activities in the Belgian part of the North Sea]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Public&diff=26088Public2008-12-16T08:41:18Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{<br />
Definition|title=Public<br />
|definition=“the public means one or more natural or legal persons, in accordance with national legislation or practice, their associations, organizations or groups.” <br />
}}<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Notes'''<br />
<br />
According to [[the Århus Convention]] on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (1998) “the public means one or more natural or legal persons, in accordance with national legislation or practice, their associations, organizations or groups.” The Århus Convention differentiates between “the public” and the “concerned public”, the latter basically meaning that part of the public which will probably be affected by, or which has a “special interest” in environmental decision-making. So the public does not include decision-making bodies or “bodies or institutions acting in a judicial or legislative capacity” like the European Court of Human Rights or the International Court of Human Rights. As this terminology is specifically derived from the Århus Convention, which will be further explained later in the chapter about legislation, it is important to also consider yet another definition. <br />
<br />
A very simple definition is presented by the Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern Europe (REC): the public are “people or organizations who do not represent the government” (pp. 36). The REC definition basically supports the Århus definition, even though it was publicized some years before in 1994. <br />
<br />
The Århus Convention, on the other hand, claims that the public consists of just about anyone who wants to be involved and/or has an interest in the matter. <br />
<br />
In this Wiki, the Århus Convention definition will be used. This is mainly because it is much easier in this case to use a broader definition: when a narrower definition is used it might call for unnecessary exceptions that can complicate matters. Also, the Convention is one of the most important international pieces of legislation concerning public participation in environmental issues.</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Policy_and_management_responses_to_biodiversity_shifts&diff=26085Policy and management responses to biodiversity shifts2008-12-16T08:37:13Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Revision}}<br />
{{Links}}<br />
Concern over the interaction between biodiversity and climate change has been reflected in the recommendations of the European Platform for Biodiversity Research Strategy, which were introduced to a meeting of EU Nature Ministers in October 2005 (Recommendations on Climate Change and Biodiversity Conservation: Knowledge Needed to Support Development of Integrated Adaptation Strategies, www.epbrs.org). Ongoing work is now underway through an e-conference “Life on a Blue Planet”, which has developed a draft list of research priorities, which will be presented at the EPBRS meeting in Porto on November 7 to 9, 2007. Results there will be presented to the EU (www.cimar.org/epbrs). <br />
<br />
The overarching theme throughout the “Life on a Blue Planet” e-conference was that integrated monitoring, with a long-term perspective operating on a European scale, would lead to a better understanding of the effects of climate change on marine biodiversity. Though the focus at the meeting was on marine biodiversity, many of the research priorities are equally relevant for terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity. They are summarized below to provide a comprehensive overview of biodiversity issues. <br />
<br />
Taxonomy: -Compile comprehensive catalogues of faunas and floras - Analyse the genetic and morphological diversity in multiple marine communities and combine these with the analysis of long-term data to assess global change phenomena <br />
<br />
Baselines, monitoring and indicator species - Explore understudied marine geographical regions - Determine baselines in order to better understand the impacts of ongoing and future changes - Long-term monitoring of intra-specific genetic biodiversity and genetic expression to improve the knowledge base of studies on the impacts of global change and human activity - Carry out quantitative monitoring to record the effects of acute and chronic disturbances to intertidal ecosystems - Increase funding to long-term monitoring networks (to derive ‘evidence-based’ policies) <br />
<br />
Mechanisms by which species respond to climate change - Determine the thermal and pH tolerances of marine organisms - Better understand sensitivities and adaptation capabilities of key species in the marine environment - Determine the effects of climate on recruitment pathways and phenology of coastal habitat biodiversity - Understand the mechanisms by which a warming climate affects marine organisms - Understand the mechanisms by which ocean acidification affects marine organisms - Understand the ecological mechanisms by which climate change alters the marine environment <br />
<br />
Variability in climatic and biodiversity responses - Better understand the interactions between natural climate variability and anthropogenically driven change Ecosystems consequences - Understand the effects of climate change on ecosystem functioning in benthic communities - Understand and assess pelagic diversity and heterogeneity - Determine the effects of “low-dissolved-oxygen” events such as hypoxia and anoxia on function and status of the marine environments Validation and prediction - Develop systems that can track, forecast and control uncertainties regarding biodiversity loss - Develop tools to validate predictions <br />
<br />
Restoration and mitigation - Assess the responses of different biodiversity indicators to restoration measures - Determine the impact of global change on plankton communities and the sequestering of carbon in ocean sediments. <br />
<br />
Policy relevant priorities - Develop guidelines to summarize and effectively disseminate scientific results to end-users - Develop mechanisms by which science could inform policy and practice more rapidly - Promote the training of intermediaries between scientists and policy-makers, who could interpret the scientific data, and put an “economical” value on or identify the “risk” factors - Develop better communication systems between scientists, policy and stakeholders - Promote the development of multidisciplinary studies in marine resource management - Create representative marine protected areas which factor climate change into their design <br />
<br />
Effectiveness of mitigation and adaptation measures, and role of marine and coastal ecosystems in the mitigation of climate change effects - Determine the consequences of coastal defences on ecosystem function and services - Conduct sound monitoring before and after construction of coastal defences in order to assess their effectiveness at meeting management goals. - Determine the effects of coastal defences on non-target systems and species, including promotion of range extensions on non-natural habitat - Establish the environmental benefits and costs of wind farms, especially the long-term effects on ecosystem processes and function - Determine the impacts of tidal and wave projects on marine biodiversity - Determine the effectiveness of iron fertilization and the long-term impacts of such fertilisation - Carry out molecular and biochemical research to enhance the physiological properties of algal strains, as well as optimisation of algal production and harvesting systems. <br />
<br />
Current status and trends: - Map, list and rank coastal habitats types in terms of vulnerability to human impact, species richness, relevance for ecosystem functioning and uniqueness - Understand relationships between impacts and biotic response in estuarine habitats - Develop knowledge of deep-sea specific diversity and distribution of main macro-habitats - Develop current knowledge on the ecology and functioning of biodiversity in the high seas <br />
<br />
Drivers of biodiversity change in marine environments: - Assess the main drivers of change by addressing impact and environmental quality at the relevant scale - Develop consistent methods for monitoring environmental parameters (e.g. water and sediment nutrient concentrations, light attenuation) to better interpret community variability - Determine the impact of new chemicals and synthetic materials and compounds on the structure and functioning of marine ecosystems - Understand the links between increased marine traffic and the spread of alien species - Determine the impacts of industry, commercial fishing, and pollution on deep-sea environments - Develop new functional indicators (rather than species) as a more predictive approach to detecting ecosystem changes <br />
<br />
Biodiversity management: - Develop a framework that allows marine protected areas (MPAs) to be treated as designed experiments at the appropriate spatial and temporal scales, allowing for the re-design of MPAs following proper assessment and critique. - Analyse fine scale spatio-temporal data and information (i.e., fisheries) in the creation of MPAs - Determine current and predicted future state of benthic communities in Natura 2000 areas and how fishing activities could impact on these communities - Determine the actual effects of marine reserves on the genetic structure of populations, the spatial scales involved, and the suitability of islands as reserves in terms of connectivity - Promote the creation of large deep-sea and high sea MPAs to protect habitats such as deep corals and other natural reefs, seamounts, cold-seep and hydrothermal vent communities. - Promote the development of an EU sustainable fishery certification mechanism Linking research with policy: - Develop a balanced dialogue between scientists and policy makers to ensure that research priorities are correctly identified and supported - Develop mechanisms to better incorporate key actors and publics in the discussions about marine biodiversity conservation to gain their active support for conservation measures - Develop mechanisms to integrate effective, detailed and long-term knowledge with precautionary policy-making flexible enough to be able to incorporate new knowledge - Carry out research on the adaptation of existing legislative instruments - Carry out research on integration within nature conservation instruments and integration with other sector<br />
[[Category:climate change and global warming]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Climate change]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=North_Sea&diff=26053North Sea2008-12-15T17:24:03Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Local environment ==<br />
<br />
The North [[Sea]] is a shallow, relatively young [[ecosystem]] formed by the [[flood]]ing of a landmass approximately 20 000 years ago. It is still being colonised by new species from the Atlantic. The North Sea is a rich source of marine resources including fisheries, aggregates ([[sand]] and [[gravel]]), oil and gas. The region is surrounded by the [[coastline]]s of England, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France, which benefit from its resources.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Specific biodiversity issues ==<br />
<br />
The North Sea is one of the most productive seas in the world, with a vast array of plankton, fish, seabirds and benthic communities.The area contains some of the world's most important fishing grounds. The deeper northern regions of the North Sea have higher diversity and lower biomass than more shallow southern regions. <br />
<br />
<br />
== Threats ==<br />
<br />
The primary threats to [[biodiversity]] in the North Sea are overexploitation of fisheries, resource exploitation (oil, gas and aggregate extraction), [[nutrients|nutrient]] input from the heavily populated coastal regions, recreational use and [[habitat]] loss.<br />
<br />
<br />
== MarBEF newsletter articles ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
*Biodiversity in European Seas [http://www.encora.eu/coastalwiki/Biodiversity_in_the_European_Seas#_note-North_Sea]<br />
*Northsea Foundation[http://www.noordzee.nl/404.php]<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Marine habitats and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Typology of coastal and marine areas]]<br />
[[Category:Location of coastal and marine areas]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Mesozooplankton&diff=26047Mesozooplankton2008-12-15T17:08:20Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Definition|title=Mesozooplankton<br />
|definition= Mesozooplankton: Planktonic animals in the size range 0.2-20 mm. Examples: the copepod ''Calanus finmarchicus'', ''Rhincalanus gigas''}<ref>University of Southern maine web site (http://www.usm.maine.edu/gulfofmaine-census/Docs/Reference/organism_mesozooplankton.htm)</ref>}}<br />
<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/></div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Mesozooplankton&diff=26046Mesozooplankton2008-12-15T17:08:06Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Definition|title=Mesozooplankton<br />
|definition= Mesozooplankton: Planktonic animals in the size range 0.2-20 mm. Examples: the copepod ''Calanus finmarchicus'', ''Rhincalanus gigas''}<ref>University of Southern maine web site (http://www.usm.maine.edu/gulfofmaine-census/Docs/Reference/organism_mesozooplankton.htm)</ref>}}</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Lisbon_Strategy&diff=26045Lisbon Strategy2008-12-15T16:56:38Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>At the Lisbon summit in March 2000, European Union leaders set out a new strategy, based on a consensus among Member States, to modernize Europe. This became known as the '''Lisbon Strategy'''. <br />
<br />
After initially moderate results, the Lisbon Strategy was simplified and relaunched in 2005. It is now making a strong contribution to Europe's current economic upturn <ref>European Commission 2008</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Aim ==<br />
<br />
The '''Lisbon Strategy''' aimed at making the European Union (EU) the most competitive economy in the world and achieving full employment by 2010. This strategy, developed at subsequent meetings of the European Council, rests on three pillars:<br />
<br />
* An economic pillar preparing the ground for the transition to a competitive, dynamic, knowledge-based economy. Emphasis is placed on the need to adapt constantly to changes in the information society and to boost research and development. <br />
* A social pillar designed to modernise the European social model by investing in human resources and combating social exclusion. The Member States are expected to invest in education and training, and to conduct an active policy for employment, making it easier to move to a knowledge economy. <br />
* An environmental pillar, which was added at the Göteborg European Council meeting in June 2001, draws attention to the fact that economic growth must be decoupled from the use of natural resources. <br />
<br />
<br />
== External links ==<br />
<br />
[http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/lisbon_strategy_en.htm Lisbon Strategy -Europa Glosary]<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisbon_Strategy Lisbon Strategy Wikipedia]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
[http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm Treaty of Lisbon]<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
[[Category:Policy and decision making in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:International coastal organisation]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Lisbon_Strategy&diff=26044Lisbon Strategy2008-12-15T16:56:18Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* External links */</p>
<hr />
<div>At the Lisbon summit in March 2000, European Union leaders set out a new strategy, based on a consensus among Member States, to modernize Europe. This became known as the '''Lisbon Strategy'''. <br />
<br />
After initially moderate results, the Lisbon Strategy was simplified and relaunched in 2005. It is now making a strong contribution to Europe's current economic upturn <ref>European Commission 2008</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
== Aim ==<br />
<br />
The '''Lisbon Strategy''' aimed at making the European Union (EU) the most competitive economy in the world and achieving full employment by 2010. This strategy, developed at subsequent meetings of the European Council, rests on three pillars:<br />
<br />
* An economic pillar preparing the ground for the transition to a competitive, dynamic, knowledge-based economy. Emphasis is placed on the need to adapt constantly to changes in the information society and to boost research and development. <br />
* A social pillar designed to modernise the European social model by investing in human resources and combating social exclusion. The Member States are expected to invest in education and training, and to conduct an active policy for employment, making it easier to move to a knowledge economy. <br />
* An environmental pillar, which was added at the Göteborg European Council meeting in June 2001, draws attention to the fact that economic growth must be decoupled from the use of natural resources. <br />
<br />
<br />
== External links ==<br />
<br />
[http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/lisbon_strategy_en.htm Lisbon Strategy -Europa Glosary]<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisbon_Strategy Lisbon Strategy Wikipedia]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
[http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm Treaty of Lisbon]<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
[[Category:Policy and decision making in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Principles and concepts in integrated coastal zone management]]<br />
[[Category:International coastal organisation]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Important_links&diff=26042Important links2008-12-15T16:54:05Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>== International organizations ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.gefweb.org/interior.aspx?id=266&ekmensel=c580fa7b_48_136_btnlink Global Environment Facility (GEF)]<br />
<br />
Established in 1991, GEF is an independent financial organization that provides grants to developing countries for projects that benefit the global environment and promote sustainable livelihoods in local communities.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.unep.org/ United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)]<br />
<br />
UNEP is the voice for the environment in the United Nations system. It is an advocate, educator, catalyst and facilitator, promoting the wise use of the planet's natural assets for sustainable development. UNEP's mission is "to provide leadership and encourage partnership in caring for the environment by inspiring, informing, and enabling nations and peoples to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations." <br />
<br />
* COASTMAN -International Training Network for ICZM<br />
<br />
* [http://ioc.unesco.org/iocweb/index.php Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (UNESCO-IOC)]<br />
<br />
* [http://www.wmo.ch/pages/themes/cbuilding/index_en.html World Meteorological Organization (WMO)]<br />
<br />
== European organizations ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.pap-thecoastcentre.org/ The Coastal Management Centre (PAP/RAC)]<br />
<br />
* [http://www.eucc.nl/en/index.htm EUCC -The Coastal Union]<br />
<br />
European network of coastal practitioners promoting coastal and marine management that integrates biodiversity conservation with those forms of development that sustain the integrity of landscapes, the cultural heritage and the social fabric of our coasts taking into account the effects of climate change.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.inwent.org/capacity_building/index.en.shtml inWent Capacity Building International]<br />
<br />
InWEnt is a very large-scale joint undertaking of the German Federal Government, the federal state (Länder) governments and industry. InWent training courses address specialists, executives and decision-makers in industry, politics, administration and civil society. <br />
<br />
* [http://www.amrie.org/index.php?id=1 the Alliance of Maritime Regional Interests in Europe (AMRIE)]<br />
<br />
An independent not-for-profit organisation and policy research institute, established in 1993 as an initiative of Members of the European Parliament to promote a European Maritime strategy.<br />
<br />
== Research centres and institutes ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.crc.uri.edu/index.php Coastal Resources Centre, University of Rhode Island, USA]<br />
<br />
Implementing coastal management projects in the field, building capacity through education and training, and sharing lessons learned and information throughout the coastal community are the foundation of the Coastal Resources Center’s work.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science/coastal.htm Centre for Coastal Studies, Simon Fraser University, Canada]<br />
<br />
It promotes interdisciplinary research, education and dialogue on Canada's coastal ecosystems, particularly those in British Columbia. By linking social and natural science with local knowledge, the Centre focuses on three key themes, namely: 1. marine conservation; 2. sustainable coastal communities and economies; and 3. building resource management capacity (government, community, academic).<br />
<br />
It also coordinates the [http://www.sfu.ca/coastalstudies/linking/about.htm Linking Science and Local Knowledge: Building Capacity for Integrated and Sustainable Management of Coastal Resources] node of the DFO/SSHRC national Ocean Management Research Network. The main objective of this node is to link scientific knowledge with local knowledge for improved, sustainable oceans and coastal management, and to assist Fisheries and Oceans Canada with an ecosystem approach to ocean resource management.<br />
<br />
== Training sites ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.pap-medclearinghouse.org/ Mediterranean ICAM clearing house]<br />
<br />
Launched by the Priority Actions Programme Regional Activity Centre (PAP/RAC) of UNEP-MAP with financial support of the European Commission. The main goal of launching this site, which has been built , is to improve information on the Integrated Coastal Area Management (ICAM) in the Mediterranean. With this mechanism, PAP/RAC hopes to provide information, strengthen co-operation and networking among the coastal management community members, as well as to provide assistance to the improvement of the coastal management in the Mediterranean.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.marecentre.nl/align/index.html Accelerating Learning in ICZM by Generating an Adaptive European Network (ALING)]<br />
<br />
The main objective of ALIGN is to strengthen the scientific excellence on ICZM through the establishment of a network of excellence. ALIGN aims to improve ICZM practices for the sustainable management of European coasts and seas, through innovative interaction in a multidisciplinary network, which will address the pressures and multiple-use conflicts of the coastal zone.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.medopen.org/ MedOpen]<br />
<br />
Virtual Training Course on Intergrated Coastal Area Management. Target users of MedOpen are decision makers (at the local, national, regional, and international level), policy advisors, project managers, staff and experts from international organisations and institutions, academic researchers, students, and all others interested in coastal management. <br />
<br />
* [http://www.coastlearn.org/ CoastLearn EUCC]<br />
<br />
A multimedia distance training package on Integrated Coastal Zone Management<br />
<br />
* [http://www.ikzm-d.de/english.html IKZM-D LERNEN]<br />
<br />
An free of charge online learning system, which consists of independent online study, information and teaching modules, dealing with the coast and the sea in general and with Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in particular. Modules are in German - in English soon.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.oceansatlas.com/ UN Atlas of the Oceans]<br />
<br />
An information system designed for use by policy makers who need to become familiar with ocean issues and by scientists, students and resource managers who need access to underlying data bases and approaches to sustainability.<br />
<br />
* [http://iodeweb5.vliz.be/oceanteacherhome/ OceanTeacher]<br />
<br />
A training resource for Data&Information management related to Oceanography and Marine Meteorology.<br />
<br />
* [http://databases.eucc-d.de/plugins/courses/index.php EUCC-DE Database]<br />
<br />
The database contains world-wide coastal (and marine) education and training programs, summer schools and courses. All events have applied or management aspects.<br />
<br />
== Important events ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.coastday.org/ COAST DAY]<br />
<br />
Coast Day is a unique event in the Mediterranean. It aims to raise awareness of policy makers and the public of the value of the coast, as well as of applying an integrated approach to planning and management of the coastal zone.<br />
<br />
* [http://g8forum.ictp.it/ G8-UNESCO World Forum on 'Education, Research and Innovation: New Partnership for Sustainable Development']<br />
<br />
The Forum builds on the discussion launched at the St. Petersburg summit on the interconnections between the three components of the triangle of knowledge—education, scientific research and technological innovation—from the perspective of sustainable development, and seeks to identify risks and opportunities for industrialized countries as well as developing and low-income countries.<br />
<br />
== Roadmap for Capacity Building for ICZM ==<br />
<br />
{|border=1 style="border:1px #a3b1bf solid; background:#f5faff;" width="688px" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" <br />
|cellspacing="0" style="border-bottom:1px solid #a3b1bf; background:#cee0f2; font-size:100%" colspan=1 align=center height=20px|[http://www.encora.eu/coastalwiki/State_of_the_Art_of_Capacity_Building_in_Europe:_list_of_articles List of articles on Capacity Building for ICZM]<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
{|border=1 style="border:1px #a3b1bf solid; background:#f5faff;" width="688px" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" <br />
|cellspacing="0" style="border-bottom:1px solid #a3b1bf; background:#cee0f2; font-size:100%" colspan=1 align=center height=20px|[http://www.encora.eu/coastalwiki/Image:Theme10_40.png Capacity Building Network main page]<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[ICZM Education and Training in Europe]]<br />
*[[Catalogue of ICZM courses and programmes]]<br />
<br />
[[Category: Theme 10]]<br />
[[category: People and organisations in coastal management]]<br />
[[category:Education, awareness and capacity building in integrated coastal zone management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Important_links&diff=26041Important links2008-12-15T16:53:52Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* Roadmap for Capacity Building for ICZM */</p>
<hr />
<div>== International organizations ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.gefweb.org/interior.aspx?id=266&ekmensel=c580fa7b_48_136_btnlink Global Environment Facility (GEF)]<br />
<br />
Established in 1991, GEF is an independent financial organization that provides grants to developing countries for projects that benefit the global environment and promote sustainable livelihoods in local communities.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.unep.org/ United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)]<br />
<br />
UNEP is the voice for the environment in the United Nations system. It is an advocate, educator, catalyst and facilitator, promoting the wise use of the planet's natural assets for sustainable development. UNEP's mission is "to provide leadership and encourage partnership in caring for the environment by inspiring, informing, and enabling nations and peoples to improve their quality of life without compromising that of future generations." <br />
<br />
* COASTMAN -International Training Network for ICZM<br />
<br />
* [http://ioc.unesco.org/iocweb/index.php Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (UNESCO-IOC)]<br />
<br />
* [http://www.wmo.ch/pages/themes/cbuilding/index_en.html World Meteorological Organization (WMO)]<br />
<br />
== European organizations ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.pap-thecoastcentre.org/ The Coastal Management Centre (PAP/RAC)]<br />
<br />
* [http://www.eucc.nl/en/index.htm EUCC -The Coastal Union]<br />
<br />
European network of coastal practitioners promoting coastal and marine management that integrates biodiversity conservation with those forms of development that sustain the integrity of landscapes, the cultural heritage and the social fabric of our coasts taking into account the effects of climate change.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.inwent.org/capacity_building/index.en.shtml inWent Capacity Building International]<br />
<br />
InWEnt is a very large-scale joint undertaking of the German Federal Government, the federal state (Länder) governments and industry. InWent training courses address specialists, executives and decision-makers in industry, politics, administration and civil society. <br />
<br />
* [http://www.amrie.org/index.php?id=1 the Alliance of Maritime Regional Interests in Europe (AMRIE)]<br />
<br />
An independent not-for-profit organisation and policy research institute, established in 1993 as an initiative of Members of the European Parliament to promote a European Maritime strategy.<br />
<br />
== Research centres and institutes ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.crc.uri.edu/index.php Coastal Resources Centre, University of Rhode Island, USA]<br />
<br />
Implementing coastal management projects in the field, building capacity through education and training, and sharing lessons learned and information throughout the coastal community are the foundation of the Coastal Resources Center’s work.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science/coastal.htm Centre for Coastal Studies, Simon Fraser University, Canada]<br />
<br />
It promotes interdisciplinary research, education and dialogue on Canada's coastal ecosystems, particularly those in British Columbia. By linking social and natural science with local knowledge, the Centre focuses on three key themes, namely: 1. marine conservation; 2. sustainable coastal communities and economies; and 3. building resource management capacity (government, community, academic).<br />
<br />
It also coordinates the [http://www.sfu.ca/coastalstudies/linking/about.htm Linking Science and Local Knowledge: Building Capacity for Integrated and Sustainable Management of Coastal Resources] node of the DFO/SSHRC national Ocean Management Research Network. The main objective of this node is to link scientific knowledge with local knowledge for improved, sustainable oceans and coastal management, and to assist Fisheries and Oceans Canada with an ecosystem approach to ocean resource management.<br />
<br />
== Training sites ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.pap-medclearinghouse.org/ Mediterranean ICAM clearing house]<br />
<br />
Launched by the Priority Actions Programme Regional Activity Centre (PAP/RAC) of UNEP-MAP with financial support of the European Commission. The main goal of launching this site, which has been built , is to improve information on the Integrated Coastal Area Management (ICAM) in the Mediterranean. With this mechanism, PAP/RAC hopes to provide information, strengthen co-operation and networking among the coastal management community members, as well as to provide assistance to the improvement of the coastal management in the Mediterranean.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.marecentre.nl/align/index.html Accelerating Learning in ICZM by Generating an Adaptive European Network (ALING)]<br />
<br />
The main objective of ALIGN is to strengthen the scientific excellence on ICZM through the establishment of a network of excellence. ALIGN aims to improve ICZM practices for the sustainable management of European coasts and seas, through innovative interaction in a multidisciplinary network, which will address the pressures and multiple-use conflicts of the coastal zone.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.medopen.org/ MedOpen]<br />
<br />
Virtual Training Course on Intergrated Coastal Area Management. Target users of MedOpen are decision makers (at the local, national, regional, and international level), policy advisors, project managers, staff and experts from international organisations and institutions, academic researchers, students, and all others interested in coastal management. <br />
<br />
* [http://www.coastlearn.org/ CoastLearn EUCC]<br />
<br />
A multimedia distance training package on Integrated Coastal Zone Management<br />
<br />
* [http://www.ikzm-d.de/english.html IKZM-D LERNEN]<br />
<br />
An free of charge online learning system, which consists of independent online study, information and teaching modules, dealing with the coast and the sea in general and with Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in particular. Modules are in German - in English soon.<br />
<br />
* [http://www.oceansatlas.com/ UN Atlas of the Oceans]<br />
<br />
An information system designed for use by policy makers who need to become familiar with ocean issues and by scientists, students and resource managers who need access to underlying data bases and approaches to sustainability.<br />
<br />
* [http://iodeweb5.vliz.be/oceanteacherhome/ OceanTeacher]<br />
<br />
A training resource for Data&Information management related to Oceanography and Marine Meteorology.<br />
<br />
* [http://databases.eucc-d.de/plugins/courses/index.php EUCC-DE Database]<br />
<br />
The database contains world-wide coastal (and marine) education and training programs, summer schools and courses. All events have applied or management aspects.<br />
<br />
== Important events ==<br />
<br />
* [http://www.coastday.org/ COAST DAY]<br />
<br />
Coast Day is a unique event in the Mediterranean. It aims to raise awareness of policy makers and the public of the value of the coast, as well as of applying an integrated approach to planning and management of the coastal zone.<br />
<br />
* [http://g8forum.ictp.it/ G8-UNESCO World Forum on 'Education, Research and Innovation: New Partnership for Sustainable Development']<br />
<br />
The Forum builds on the discussion launched at the St. Petersburg summit on the interconnections between the three components of the triangle of knowledge—education, scientific research and technological innovation—from the perspective of sustainable development, and seeks to identify risks and opportunities for industrialized countries as well as developing and low-income countries.<br />
<br />
== Roadmap for Capacity Building for ICZM ==<br />
<br />
{|border=1 style="border:1px #a3b1bf solid; background:#f5faff;" width="688px" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" <br />
|cellspacing="0" style="border-bottom:1px solid #a3b1bf; background:#cee0f2; font-size:100%" colspan=1 align=center height=20px|[http://www.encora.eu/coastalwiki/State_of_the_Art_of_Capacity_Building_in_Europe:_list_of_articles List of articles on Capacity Building for ICZM]<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
{|border=1 style="border:1px #a3b1bf solid; background:#f5faff;" width="688px" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" <br />
|cellspacing="0" style="border-bottom:1px solid #a3b1bf; background:#cee0f2; font-size:100%" colspan=1 align=center height=20px|[http://www.encora.eu/coastalwiki/Image:Theme10_40.png Capacity Building Network main page]<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
[[ICZM Education and Training in Europe]]<br />
[[Catalogue of ICZM courses and programmes]]<br />
<br />
[[Category: Theme 10]]<br />
[[category: People and organisations in coastal management]]<br />
[[category:Education, awareness and capacity building in integrated coastal zone management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Foam_beach,_Sydney&diff=26034Foam beach, Sydney2008-12-15T16:36:54Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>The following pictures were taken in 2007 on the coast at Yamba in New South Wales, Australia. The Daily Mail in the UK published the images and the the following extract is taken from their article: [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=478041&in_page_id=1811 Capuccino Coast: The day the Pacific was whipped up into an ocean of froth]. <br />
<br />
It stretched for 30 miles out into the Pacific in a phenomenon not seen at the beach for more than three decades. Scientists explain that the foam is created by impurities in the ocean, such as salts, chemicals, dead plants, decomposed fish and excretions from seaweed. All are churned up together by powerful currents which cause the water to form bubbles. These bubbles stick to each other as they are carried below the surface by the [[currents|current]] towards the [[shore]]. As a [[waves|wave]] starts to form on the surface, the motion of the water causes the bubbles to swirl upwards and, massed together, they become foam. The foam "surfs" towards shore until the wave "crashes", tossing the foam into the air.<br />
<br />
The foam was so thick it came all the way up to the surf club "It's the same effect you get when you whip up a milk shake in a blender," explains a marine expert. "The more powerful the swirl, the more foam you create on the surface and the lighter it becomes." In this case, storms off the New South Wales Coast and further north off Queensland had created a huge disturbance in the ocean, hitting a stretch of water where there was a particularly high amount of the substances which form into bubbles.<ref name="capu">Capuccino Coast, Daily Mail 28/08/07. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=478041&in_page_id=1811</ref><br />
<br />
[[Image:Whipped ocean1.jpg|thumb|center|400px|Figure 1 (Capuccino Coast, Daily Mail 28/08/07<ref name="capu"/>)]]<br />
<br />
[[Image:Whipped ocean2.jpg|thumb|center|400px|Figure 2 (Capuccino Coast, Daily Mail 28/08/07<ref name="capu"/>)]]<br />
<br />
[[Image:Whipped ocean3.jpg|thumb|center|400px|400px|Figure 3 (Capuccino Coast, Daily Mail 28/08/07<ref name="capu"/>)]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
[[Category: Coastal and marine pollution]]<br />
[[Category: Coastal and marine human activities]]<br />
[[Category: Theme 6]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=European_Environmental_Agency_(EEA)&diff=26028European Environmental Agency (EEA)2008-12-15T16:23:29Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{<br />
Definition|title=European Environmental Agency (EEA)<br />
|definition=<br />
The European Environment Agency aims to support [[sustainable development]] and to help achieve significant and measurable improvement in Europe's environment through the provision of timely, targeted, relevant and reliable information to policy-making agents and the public. The EEA has developed a set of indicators with regard to [[climate change]] (greenhouse gasses and temperature), and for the marine environment ([[nutrients]] and chlorophyll).<ref name="marine board">Phillipart C.J.M. (ed.) (2007). Impacts of climate change on the European marine and coastal environment: ecosystems approach. ''European Science Foundation, Marine Board: Strasbourg, France''. 82pp</ref> <br />
}}<br />
<br />
<br />
===External links===<br />
http://www.eea.europa.eu (visited 31/08/2007)<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme 7]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=European_marine_biodiversity_sites&diff=26027European marine biodiversity sites2008-12-15T16:22:56Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of the objectives of the BIOMARE project was to identify a network of Research Sites to provide a basis for long-term and large-scale marine [[biodiversity]] research in Europe.<br />
<br />
Among the 100 European Marine Biodiversity Research Sites that provide the geographical skeleton for the implementation of large-scale long-term research in Europe, a small subset of Reference Sites was selected.<br />
<br />
All the information about the BIOMARE sites is put into a fully searchable relational database and with a geographical interface which can be accessed here *[http://www.marbef.org/data/index.php]. <br />
<br />
Deep-sea, ocean [[pelagic]], experimental or extreme [[habitat]] sites, proposed during the MARBEF project will be added to this database. <br />
<br />
More information is available on the BIOMARE website *[http://www.biomareweb.org]. <br />
<br />
<br />
== External links ==<br />
* www.marbef.org/data/index.php [1]<br />
* www.biomareweb.org [2]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=European_Union_-_Strategic_Environmental_Assessment&diff=26025European Union - Strategic Environmental Assessment2008-12-15T16:22:21Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
==Strategic Environmental Assessment==<br />
<br />
Since its introduction Integrated Coastal Zone Management has been a tool for implementing [[sustainable development]] in coastal areas. Although it has brought a lot of benefits/answers to coastal issues there are some challenges that need to be considered<br />
* Limited awareness of the relationship between socioeconomic and environmental impacts<br />
* Poor levels of institutional coordination<br />
<br />
The exceeding concentration of the world’s population in coastal areas has created conflicts between the human and development activities and the coastal ecosystems along with management difficulties. Typically, management in coastal areas has been characterized by fragmented and short-term development strategies that have failed to take into account the multiple uses occurring within the coastal environment. This has led to problems arising from the lack of understanding the socioeconomic character of coastal environments and poor cooperation between different levels of administration and management.<br />
<br />
<br />
===Introducing Strategic Environmental Assessment===<br />
<br />
For that matter, a new tool has been recently introduced, the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), including both socioeconomic and environmental issues. SEA is a process to ensure that significant environmental effects arising from policies, plans and programmes are identified, assessed, mitigated, communicated to decision-makers, monitored and that opportunities for public involvement are provided. <br />
SEA has become an important instrument to help to achieve sustainable development in public planning and policy making. The importance of SEA is widely recognised. Particular benefits of SEA include: <br />
* To support sustainable development; <br />
* To improve the evidence base for strategic decisions; <br />
* To facilitate and respond to consultation with stakeholders; <br />
* To streamline other processes such as Environmental Impact Assessments of individual development projects.<br />
<br />
SEA is a generic tool which can be used in a variety of situations. A particular form of SEA is being introduced by the European Union Directive 2001/42/EC. This requires national, regional and local authorities in Member States to carry out strategic environmental assessment on certain plans and programmes that they promote <ref>http://www.sea-info.net/</ref>.<br />
<br />
===Benefits===<br />
<br />
One of the most important elements that constitute SEA is that, in contrary to the past policies about coastal issues that focused on the physical environment excluding some external factors (economic, social etc), it constitutes a more integrated approach, taking into account the impacts of strategic proposals on the wider environment. Apart from the holistic approach, SEA has also a certain flexibility concerning the different levels of decision making. This means that not only are the consequences of decision making explored at policy, programme and plan level but also at various stages of the planning and management hierarchy. Finally, SEA can be obtained as a very useful tool for proactive assessment providing feedback information for the formulation of policy and planning. <br />
<br />
<br />
===Issues===<br />
<br />
# Consideration of whether the policy, plan and programme (PPP) formulation process requires SEA <br />
# Establishment of PPP objectives and alternatives<br />
# Identification of key impacts, indicators and environmental baseline<br />
# Predication and evaluation of impacts and assessment of alternatives<br />
# Consideration of mitigation measures <br />
# Review and decision making<br />
# Monitoring of impact of PPP on objectives <ref>Barker, A. (2006) Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as a Tool for Integration within Coastal Planning. Journal of Coastal Research, 22(4), 946-950</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Policy and decision making in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Environmental management in coastal and marine zones]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=European_Union_-_Strategic_Environmental_Assessment&diff=26024European Union - Strategic Environmental Assessment2008-12-15T16:21:59Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Linking}}<br />
==Strategic Environmental Assessment==<br />
<br />
Since its introduction Integrated Coastal Zone Management has been a tool for implementing [[sustainable development]] in coastal areas. Although it has brought a lot of benefits/answers to coastal issues there are some challenges that need to be considered<br />
* Limited awareness of the relationship between socioeconomic and environmental impacts<br />
* Poor levels of institutional coordination<br />
<br />
The exceeding concentration of the world’s population in coastal areas has created conflicts between the human and development activities and the coastal ecosystems along with management difficulties. Typically, management in coastal areas has been characterized by fragmented and short-term development strategies that have failed to take into account the multiple uses occurring within the coastal environment. This has led to problems arising from the lack of understanding the socioeconomic character of coastal environments and poor cooperation between different levels of administration and management.<br />
<br />
<br />
===Introducing Strategic Environmental Assessment===<br />
<br />
For that matter, a new tool has been recently introduced, the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), including both socioeconomic and environmental issues. SEA is a process to ensure that significant environmental effects arising from policies, plans and programmes are identified, assessed, mitigated, communicated to decision-makers, monitored and that opportunities for public involvement are provided. <br />
SEA has become an important instrument to help to achieve sustainable development in public planning and policy making. The importance of SEA is widely recognised. Particular benefits of SEA include: <br />
* To support sustainable development; <br />
* To improve the evidence base for strategic decisions; <br />
* To facilitate and respond to consultation with stakeholders; <br />
* To streamline other processes such as Environmental Impact Assessments of individual development projects.<br />
<br />
SEA is a generic tool which can be used in a variety of situations. A particular form of SEA is being introduced by the European Union Directive 2001/42/EC. This requires national, regional and local authorities in Member States to carry out strategic environmental assessment on certain plans and programmes that they promote <ref>http://www.sea-info.net/</ref>.<br />
<br />
===Benefits===<br />
<br />
One of the most important elements that constitute SEA is that, in contrary to the past policies about coastal issues that focused on the physical environment excluding some external factors (economic, social etc), it constitutes a more integrated approach, taking into account the impacts of strategic proposals on the wider environment. Apart from the holistic approach, SEA has also a certain flexibility concerning the different levels of decision making. This means that not only are the consequences of decision making explored at policy, programme and plan level but also at various stages of the planning and management hierarchy. Finally, SEA can be obtained as a very useful tool for proactive assessment providing feedback information for the formulation of policy and planning. <br />
<br />
<br />
===Issues===<br />
<br />
# Consideration of whether the policy, plan and programme (PPP) formulation process requires SEA <br />
# Establishment of PPP objectives and alternatives<br />
# Identification of key impacts, indicators and environmental baseline<br />
# Predication and evaluation of impacts and assessment of alternatives<br />
# Consideration of mitigation measures <br />
# Review and decision making<br />
# Monitoring of impact of PPP on objectives <ref>Barker, A. (2006) Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as a Tool for Integration within Coastal Planning. Journal of Coastal Research, 22(4), 946-950</ref><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Policy and decision making in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Environmental management in coastal and marine zones]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=European_Environmental_Agency_(EEA)&diff=26023European Environmental Agency (EEA)2008-12-15T16:20:49Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>The European Environment Agency aims to support [[sustainable development]] and to help achieve significant and measurable improvement in Europe's environment through the provision of timely, targeted, relevant and reliable information to policy-making agents and the public. The EEA has developed a set of indicators with regard to [[climate change]] (greenhouse gasses and temperature), and for the marine environment ([[nutrients]] and chlorophyll).<ref name="marine board">Phillipart C.J.M. (ed.) (2007). Impacts of climate change on the European marine and coastal environment: ecosystems approach. ''European Science Foundation, Marine Board: Strasbourg, France''. 82pp</ref><br />
<br />
===External links===<br />
http://www.eea.europa.eu (visited 31/08/2007)<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme 7]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=EcoSystem_services&diff=26004EcoSystem services2008-12-15T15:56:52Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
<br />
==Definition of Ecosystem Services==<br />
The concept of Ecosystem Services has developed gradually for over a century as a way of recognizing the dependence of human societies on nature-based systems <ref>Daily, G. E. (1997). Nature's Services - Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington.</ref>. He defined ecosystem services as ''…the conditions and processes by which natural [[ecosystems]], and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfil human life''. Some of what sustains human life is obvious: food, drinkable water, breathable air, and liveable climates. Each of these needs is underpinned by a set of ecosystem services; so it’s correct to affirm that, Ecosystem Services are the transformation of a set of natural assets (soil, plants and animals, air and water) into assets that increase human welfare.<br />
<br />
==Coastal and Marine ecosystem Services==<br />
The following table 1.1 <ref>UNEP (2006). Marine and Coastal ecosystems and Human Well-being. A synthesis report based on the findings of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. UNEP www.unep.org; MEA www.MAweb.org</ref> presents a summary of all services coming from these kind of ecosystems.<br />
<br />
[[image:Ecosystem services.JPG|thumb|right]]<br />
<br />
<br />
Services are provided from which humans benefit and they are not only ''life-support'' services, but also ''life-fulfilling'' services. So close to services like filtration and delivery of water; absorption of wastes; maintenance of atmosphere and climate within limits suitable for human life; maintenance of soil fertility and structure; protection from floods and other extreme weather and maintenance of [[habitat]] and [[biodiversity]], they give services like provision of cultural, spiritual and intellectual stimulation and maintenance of other species for their existence value.<br />
According to the classification in Table 1.1, what follows is an explanation of the meaning related to each category of Services.<br />
<br />
'''Provisioning services.''' These are the products people obtain from ecosystems, such as:<br />
*''Food''. This includes the vast range of food products derived from plants, animals, and microbes.<br />
*''Fiber''. Materials such as wood, jute, cotton, hemp, silk, and wool.<br />
*''Timber and Fuel''. Wood, dung, and other biological materials serve as sources of energy.<br />
*''Medicines and other resources''. Many medicines, biocides, food additives such as alginates, and biological materials are derived from ecosystems, also the genes and genetic information used for animal and plant breeding and biotechnology are services from these ecosystems.<br />
<br />
'''Regulating Services.''' These are the benefits the society obtains from the regulation of ecosystem processes, including:<br />
*''Biological regulation and control''. It means the trophic-dynamic regulation of populations such as predator regulation of pest prey populations.<br />
*''Freshwater storage and retention''. Ecosystems provide water by watersheds, reservoirs and aquifers. <br />
*''Hydrological balance or Water regulation''. They regulate hydrological flows such as water for agriculture, or for industrial processes or for transportation. <br />
*''Athmospheric and Climate regulation''. Ecosystems contribute chemicals to and extract chemicals from the atmosphere, influencing many aspects of air quality, they regulate global temperature, precipitation and other biologically mediated climate processes. For example they regulate greenhouse gases emissions or DMS (dimethylsulphide) production which affect cloud formation.<br />
*''Human disease control''. Ecosystems provide for a control of pathogens and disease vectors.<br />
*''Waste processing''. Ecosystems can be a source of impurities (e.g., in fresh water) but also can help to filter out and decompose organic wastes introduced into inland waters and coastal and marine ecosystems and assimilate and detoxify compounds through soil and sub-soil processes.<br />
*''[[Flood]]/storm protection or Natural hazard regulation''. The presence of coastal [[ecosystems]] such as [[mangroves]] and [[coral reefs]] can reduce the damage caused by hurricanes or large [[waves]].<br />
*''Erosion control and sediment retention''. Vegetative cover, [[beach]]es or each type of land close to coastal and marine ecosystems play an important role to prevent landslides and loss of soil by wind, runoff, or other processes.<br />
<br />
'''Cultural Services.''' These are the nonmaterial benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, [[leisure and recreation|recreation]], and aesthetic experiences, including:<br />
*''Cultural and amenity''. Each ecosystem has its own culture and amenities which are one factor influencing its inhabitants’ lifestyle. <br />
*''Recreational''. People often choose where to spend their [[leisure and recreation|leisure]] time based in part on the characteristics of the natural or cultivated landscapes in a particular area.<br />
*''Aesthetics''. Many people find beauty or aesthetic value in various aspects of ecosystems, as reflected in the support for parks, scenic drives, and the selection of housing locations.<br />
*''Education and research''. [[Ecosystems]] and their components and processes provide the basis for both formal and informal education in many societies, influencing the types of knowledge systems developed by people.<br />
<br />
'''Supporting Services.''' Supporting services are those that are necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services. <br />
*''Biochemical''. Each ecosystem, thanks to its high level of biodiversity, provides many genetic and biochemical resources for agricultural and pharmaceutical industries <br />
*''Nutrient cycling and fertility''. Approximately 20 nutrients essential for life, but there are four global nutrient cycles through ecosystems which are fundamental such as nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), sulphur (S) and carbon (C). A right balance of these elements maintains a good fertility of everything, soil and water, essential for producing food, timber, fibre, fuel and other ecosystem goods and services.<br />
<br />
''Biodiversity'' strongly influences the condition of ecosystem services, from the provisioning services to the cultural ones both directly and indirectly. <br />
<br />
==Ecosystem Services and Human Well-being==<br />
<br />
The concept of Ecosystem Services is becoming popular as a way to encourage discussion about the dependence of humans on nature and what that means socially and economically. The relationship between human well-being and ecosystem services is not linear. When an ecosystem service is abundant relative to the demand, a marginal increase in ecosystem services generally contributes only slightly to human well-being (or may even diminish it). But when the service is relatively scarce, a small decrease can substantially reduce human well-being. The degradation of ecosystem services represents a loss of a capital asset. Both renewable resources such as ecosystem services and non-renewable resources such as mineral deposits, soil [[nutrients]], and fossil fuels are capital assets. Farber et al. <ref>Farber, S.C., Costanza, R., Wilson, M.A., (2002). Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 41, 375–392.</ref>, identify a “critical threshold” in the availability of ecosystem services as a limit beyond which non-linear patterns, irreversible changes and catastrophes may occur, with major environmental and economic consequences. The availability of natural capital are crucial elements of economic systems, even if they are ignored by economic accounting systems. From the sustainability point of view, the biophysical threshold is more critical than the economic one. <br />
Yet traditional national accounts do not include measures of resource depletion or of the degradation of renewable resources. As a result, a country could cut its forests and deplete its fisheries, and this would show only as a positive gain to GDP despite the loss of the capital asset. Moreover, many ecosystem services are available freely to those who use them (freshwater in aquifers, for instance, or the use of the atmosphere as a sink for pollutants), and so, again, their degradation is not reflected in standard economic measures. For this reason, a branch of economics is starting to try to give a value to ecosystems goods and services, and these values come from their role in supporting our lives, their cheapness, and our limited ability to replace them with human-engineered alternatives.<br />
<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Ecosystem-based management in coastal and marine zones]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=EcoSystem_services&diff=26003EcoSystem services2008-12-15T15:54:40Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Links}}<br />
<br />
==Definition of Ecosystem Services==<br />
The concept of Ecosystem Services has developed gradually for over a century as a way of recognizing the dependence of human societies on nature-based systems <ref>Daily, G. E. (1997). Nature's Services - Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington.</ref>. He defined ecosystem services as ''…the conditions and processes by which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfil human life''. Some of what sustains human life is obvious: food, drinkable water, breathable air, and liveable climates. Each of these needs is underpinned by a set of ecosystem services; so it’s correct to affirm that, Ecosystem Services are the transformation of a set of natural assets (soil, plants and animals, air and water) into assets that increase human welfare.<br />
<br />
==Coastal and Marine ecosystem Services==<br />
The following table 1.1 <ref>UNEP (2006). Marine and Coastal ecosystems and Human Well-being. A synthesis report based on the findings of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. UNEP www.unep.org; MEA www.MAweb.org</ref> presents a summary of all services coming from these kind of ecosystems.<br />
<br />
[[image:Ecosystem services.JPG|thumb|right]]<br />
<br />
<br />
Services are provided from which humans benefit and they are not only ''life-support'' services, but also ''life-fulfilling'' services. So close to services like filtration and delivery of water; absorption of wastes; maintenance of atmosphere and climate within limits suitable for human life; maintenance of soil fertility and structure; protection from floods and other extreme weather and maintenance of habitat and biodiversity, they give services like provision of cultural, spiritual and intellectual stimulation and maintenance of other species for their existence value.<br />
According to the classification in Table 1.1, what follows is an explanation of the meaning related to each category of Services.<br />
<br />
'''Provisioning services.''' These are the products people obtain from ecosystems, such as:<br />
*''Food''. This includes the vast range of food products derived from plants, animals, and microbes.<br />
*''Fiber''. Materials such as wood, jute, cotton, hemp, silk, and wool.<br />
*''Timber and Fuel''. Wood, dung, and other biological materials serve as sources of energy.<br />
*''Medicines and other resources''. Many medicines, biocides, food additives such as alginates, and biological materials are derived from ecosystems, also the genes and genetic information used for animal and plant breeding and biotechnology are services from these ecosystems.<br />
<br />
'''Regulating Services.''' These are the benefits the society obtains from the regulation of ecosystem processes, including:<br />
*''Biological regulation and control''. It means the trophic-dynamic regulation of populations such as predator regulation of pest prey populations.<br />
*''Freshwater storage and retention''. Ecosystems provide water by watersheds, reservoirs and aquifers. <br />
*''Hydrological balance or Water regulation''. They regulate hydrological flows such as water for agriculture, or for industrial processes or for transportation. <br />
*''Athmospheric and Climate regulation''. Ecosystems contribute chemicals to and extract chemicals from the atmosphere, influencing many aspects of air quality, they regulate global temperature, precipitation and other biologically mediated climate processes. For example they regulate greenhouse gases emissions or DMS (dimethylsulphide) production which affect cloud formation.<br />
*''Human disease control''. Ecosystems provide for a control of pathogens and disease vectors.<br />
*''Waste processing''. Ecosystems can be a source of impurities (e.g., in fresh water) but also can help to filter out and decompose organic wastes introduced into inland waters and coastal and marine ecosystems and assimilate and detoxify compounds through soil and sub-soil processes.<br />
*''Flood/storm protection or Natural hazard regulation''. The presence of coastal ecosystems such as mangroves and coral reefs can reduce the damage caused by hurricanes or large waves.<br />
*''Erosion control and sediment retention''. Vegetative cover, beaches or each type of land close to coastal and marine ecosystems play an important role to prevent landslides and loss of soil by wind, runoff, or other processes.<br />
<br />
'''Cultural Services.''' These are the nonmaterial benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences, including:<br />
*''Cultural and amenity''. Each ecosystem has its own culture and amenities which are one factor influencing its inhabitants’ lifestyle. <br />
*''Recreational''. People often choose where to spend their leisure time based in part on the characteristics of the natural or cultivated landscapes in a particular area.<br />
*''Aesthetics''. Many people find beauty or aesthetic value in various aspects of ecosystems, as reflected in the support for parks, scenic drives, and the selection of housing locations.<br />
*''Education and research''. Ecosystems and their components and processes provide the basis for both formal and informal education in many societies, influencing the types of knowledge systems developed by people.<br />
<br />
'''Supporting Services.''' Supporting services are those that are necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services. <br />
*''Biochemical''. Each ecosystem, thanks to its high level of biodiversity, provides many genetic and biochemical resources for agricultural and pharmaceutical industries <br />
*''Nutrient cycling and fertility''. Approximately 20 nutrients essential for life, but there are four global nutrient cycles through ecosystems which are fundamental such as nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), sulphur (S) and carbon (C). A right balance of these elements maintains a good fertility of everything, soil and water, essential for producing food, timber, fibre, fuel and other ecosystem goods and services.<br />
<br />
''Biodiversity'' strongly influences the condition of ecosystem services, from the provisioning services to the cultural ones both directly and indirectly. <br />
<br />
==Ecosystem Services and Human Well-being==<br />
<br />
The concept of Ecosystem Services is becoming popular as a way to encourage discussion about the dependence of humans on nature and what that means socially and economically. The relationship between human well-being and ecosystem services is not linear. When an ecosystem service is abundant relative to the demand, a marginal increase in ecosystem services generally contributes only slightly to human well-being (or may even diminish it). But when the service is relatively scarce, a small decrease can substantially reduce human well-being. The degradation of ecosystem services represents a loss of a capital asset. Both renewable resources such as ecosystem services and non-renewable resources such as mineral deposits, soil nutrients, and fossil fuels are capital assets. Farber et al. <ref>Farber, S.C., Costanza, R., Wilson, M.A., (2002). Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 41, 375–392.</ref>, identify a “critical threshold” in the availability of ecosystem services as a limit beyond which non-linear patterns, irreversible changes and catastrophes may occur, with major environmental and economic consequences. The availability of natural capital are crucial elements of economic systems, even if they are ignored by economic accounting systems. From the sustainability point of view, the biophysical threshold is more critical than the economic one. <br />
Yet traditional national accounts do not include measures of resource depletion or of the degradation of renewable resources. As a result, a country could cut its forests and deplete its fisheries, and this would show only as a positive gain to GDP despite the loss of the capital asset. Moreover, many ecosystem services are available freely to those who use them (freshwater in aquifers, for instance, or the use of the atmosphere as a sink for pollutants), and so, again, their degradation is not reflected in standard economic measures. For this reason, a branch of economics is starting to try to give a value to ecosystems goods and services, and these values come from their role in supporting our lives, their cheapness, and our limited ability to replace them with human-engineered alternatives.<br />
<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
[[Category:Ecosystem-based management in coastal and marine zones]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Case_study_risk_analysis_of_marine_activities_in_the_Belgian_part_of_the_North_Sea&diff=25995Case study risk analysis of marine activities in the Belgian part of the North Sea2008-12-15T15:44:29Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>In this case study a '''[[risk analysis]] of marine activities in the Belgian part of the [[North Sea]]''' has been conducted. Shipping activities within this area as well as the main hazards have been considered. A release assessment has also been considered looking at accident frequency, accident consequence and spill risk. <br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
<br />
The Belgian Part of the North Sea (BPNS) is an intensely used marine area with several associated environmental risks. The total sea area of the BPNS is estimated at 3.600 km<sup>2</sup>. Although it is only a small part of the southern [[North Sea]], it contains one of the most intensive merchant shipping routes in the world. Neighbouring North Sea countries are France, The Netherlands and The United Kingdom (see fig. 1). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Belgium Part of the North Sea.PNG|center|frame|caption|Fig. 1 The North Sea and the Belgium Part of the North Sea (adapted from (Maes et al, 2005))]]<br />
<br />
Besides shipping, the BPNS is also used for a wide and increasing variety of human activities. All these human activities are posing a certain danger to the environment.<br />
<br />
However, the frequency of incidents with environmental damage and the severity of the results are only poorly known. To be able to keep the risk (the product of probability and impact) of unwanted incidents as low as reasonably feasible and/or acceptable, appropriate technical and organisational measures need to be defined and taken. Such preventative and mitigating measures can only be taken on the basis of a sound analysis of the risks involved. It is in this light that the "Risk Analysis of Marine Activities (RAMA) in the Belgian Part of the North Sea" research was conducted.<br />
<br />
==Problem formulation and hazard identification==<br />
<br />
===Focus of the risk analysis===<br />
At the Belgian part of the North Sea several human activities take place that are posing a certain danger to the marine environment (see fig. 2).<br />
<br />
[[Image:Users of the Belgian Part of the North Sea.PNG|center|frame|caption|Fig. 2 Users of the Belgian Part of the North Sea (Maes et al, 2005)]]<br />
<br />
Shipping will be the major contributor to marine incidents resulting in environmental damage. The RAMA project will therefore focus on the impact of accidental [[pollution]] (oil and chemicals) of shipping on the Belgian Part of the North Sea. Due to lack of data not all sea-traffic is included in the study (see table 1):<br />
<br />
{| align="center" border="2"<br />
|+Table 1 Overview of hazardous activities included in the RAMA research<br />
!<br />
! Included<br />
! Not included<br />
|-<br />
| Shipping<br />
| Merchant Shipping<br />
Ferry<br />
Dredgers<br />
| Navy<br />
Pleasure crafts/recreational<br />
Fishing<br />
|-<br />
| Other<br />
|<br />
| Aviation<br />
Gas transport by pipelines<br />
Tourist activities<br />
Wind farms<br />
Non-shipping activities related to fisheries, [[leisure and recreation|recreation]], [[sand]] & [[gravel]] exploitation, [[dredging]] & dumping, off-shore construction<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Except for aviation and gas transport (relative minor risk for oil or gas [[pollution]]), the environmental risk of the other activities will mainly be the impact caused by physical disturbance ([[sediment]], noise, etc.). These impacts are beyond the scope of this study. In addition, there is a lack of knowledge associated with the west-east traffic route (transit) in the northern strip of the BPNS. This traffic is thus not included in the analysis.<br />
<br />
===Shipping in the BPNS===<br />
Due to restraints in depth and dangerous [[currents]] caused by the sand banks, the merchant shipping is restricted to certain shipping lanes (including Traffic Separation Schemes). Most of the maritime traffic is situated in the Westhinder and Noordhinder Traffic Separation Schemes (TSS) and the shipping lane to the Scheldt estuary and the Zeebrugge port (Scheur). The remaining routes are sailed by coastal vessels and ferries. The BPNS includes one anchorage area, located at the Westhinder TSS near the entrance of the obligatory pilotage area.<br />
<br />
The source of the data is the IVS-SRK database from the Vessel Traffic administration and ferry transports (Harbour Oostende). The study covers data from a one-year period (1st April 2003 until 30th March 2004). Shipping data analysis indicates a total of 57.791 voyages (or about 320.000 ship movements) taking place on the shipping routes of the BPNS during the April 2003-March 2004 period. The general conclusions of the shipping analysis are:<br />
* about 25 % of the total number of voyages are ferry transports;<br />
* tankers (generally the environmentally most hazardous products) take about 12 %; <br />
* in total approximately 1.500 different products (oils and other hazardous substances) were transported; <br />
* crude oils are transported in relatively high quantities;<br />
* bulk carriers also transport high quantities of dangerous goods (total average of 34 425 ton/voyage);<br />
* 40% of the transport on the BPNS consists of dangerous goods (oils and Hazardous & Noxious Substances (HNS)); <br />
* 60% of the dangerous transport is in packaged form, 40% in bulk.<br />
<br />
There are 3 well-defined groups of shipping routes (see fig. 3). The majority of the registered movements take place in the southern part of the North Sea (West-East cluster traffic not included).<br />
<br />
[[Image:Ship movements in BPNS.PNG|center|frame|caption| Fig. 3 Geographical distribution of the ship movements (per km<sub>2</sub>) on the BPNS]]<br />
<br />
===Main hazards===<br />
During the hazard identification step, an assessment is made of what can go wrong. Given the focus of RAMA on shipping, historical ship accident data indicates that almost all open-water shipping losses (excepting causes such as war or piracy) can be categorised into the following generic accident types:<br />
* ship-ship collisions<br />
* powered groundings<br />
* drift groundings <br />
* structural failure/foundering whilst underway<br />
* fire/explosion whilst underway<br />
* powered ship collisions with fixed marine structures such as platforms or wind turbines<br />
* drifting ship collisions with fixed marine structures such as platforms or wind turbines<br />
<br />
==Release assessment==<br />
Release assessment is the identification of the potential of the risk source to introduce hazardous agents (oil and HNS) into the marine environment. <br />
<br />
In RAMA, the quantitative estimation of the probability of release has been approached from both the historical and the modelling approach. Despite the long-time series of historical accidents (1960-2003), the release assessment based on the historical approach was considered inadequate due to lack of relevant spill quantity data, difference in reporting trends which may lead to an underestimation of number of accidents. <br />
<br />
Consequently, a release assessment based on a modelling approach was applied to the Belgian Part of the North Sea (BPNS) based on the ship movement analysis described above. This approach was based on the Marine Accident Risk Calculation System (MARCS) developed by Det Norske Veritas. This is a release assessment model quantifying maritime accident frequencies and accident consequences (for more information see Le Roy et al., 2006). Accident frequency (or probability) calculation is based on Fault Tree Analysis or historic accident/incident to calculate the "accident frequency factors" and on shipping lane data and environmental specific data. Accident consequence calculation on its turn is based on Event Tree Analysis or historic accident consequence data to calculate the "accident consequence factors". In MARCS, the environmental accident consequences include chemical and [[oil spills]].<br />
<br />
The assessment encompassed an accident frequency analysis, an accident consequence (spill frequency) analysis and an spill risk distribution assessment.<br />
<br />
{|<br />
|+ Results of the RAMA accident frequency, accident consequence (spill frequency) analysis and spill risk distribution assessment are shown below in figures 4,5 and 6.<br />
|-<br />
| HOW OFTEN WILL IT HAPPEN OR ACCIDENT FREQUENCY ANALYSIS<br />
* 14.5 serious accidents per year<br />
* mainly due to powered grounding accidents (12 per year)<br />
* serious accidents frequency is concentrated<br />
** in the main shipping lanes<br />
** at coastal locations near the main ports<br />
* frequency of accidents could be reduced by<br />
** extending pilotage<br />
** providing a radar surveillance supervised vessel traffic service area<br />
** extending or enforcing traffic separation scheme<br />
| [[Image:Accident Frequency in BPNS.PNG|center|frame|caption| Fig. 4 Accident Frequency]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Accident Frequency in BPNS2.PNG|center|frame|caption| Fig.5 Accident Consequence]]<br />
| HOW BAD WILL IT BE OR ACCIDENT CONSEQUENCE ANALYSIS (spill frequency)<br />
* total frequency of (dangerous goods) cargo spilling accidents is 0.3 per year<br />
* majority of cargo spilling accident frequency is located in the main shipping lanes<br />
* a significant reduction compared to the accident frequencies (14.5 per year) due to:<br />
** many ships carry non-dangerous goods;<br />
** not all accidents result in cargo spill (e.g. double hulled tanker ships);<br />
** the sea bottom is designated as soft (mud or sand) and groundings do not usually result in cargo spills<br />
|-<br />
| WHERE IS IT LIKELY TO HAPPEN OR SPILL RISK<br />
* an average of 1470 ton/yr of dangerous goods are predicted to be spilt in the area<br />
* mainly due to powered grounding (1190 ton/yr) and collisions (114 ton/yr)<br />
* container ships contribute the most to the total spill risk<br />
* the location of the cargo spill risk reflects the main shipping lanes<br />
* the cargo spill risk for the two most dangerous cargo classes are 12,3 and 101 tonnes per year <br />
| [[Image:Cargo spill risk in BPNS.PNG|center|frame|caption| Fig. 6 Accident Risk]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
In conclusion, the results of the marine risk analysis of the BPNS based on the MARCS model show that:<br />
* risk parameters, such as accident frequency (accidents per year) and cargo spill risk (tonnes of cargo spilled per year) tend to follow the number of vessel-miles defined in the shipping pattern input data. The quality of this input data is therefore of critical importance to the output from this risk analysis;<br />
* the risk reduction measures that are predicted to be effective are those that may reduce the frequency of powered grounding and collision accident types, such as pilotage, vessel traffic services and traffic separation schemes;<br />
* the total frequency of dangerous goods spilling accidents is once every 3 years; <br />
* the highest risk is predicted in subarea SA3 (the entrance of the Scheldt estuary);<br />
* the highest risk is predicted to arise from spillage of Class 8 (Dangerous goods, with insufficient product information) from containers;<br />
* Cargo spill risks of the two most dangerous product classes vary between 12,3 tonnes per year (Class 1: Marine Pollutants + category A products) and 101 tonnes per year (Class 2: crude oils).<br />
<br />
==Description of the effects of the incidents==<br />
<br />
===Incident scenarios===<br />
The analysis of probability of occurrence of incidents and the release assessment was done for 8 different ship types, 7 types of accidents and 10 cargo types. A discussion of the effects of all these scenarios is unfeasible in the time frame of the project. Therefore a selection of two incident scenarios was made: <br />
* worst case scenario of an [[oil spills|oil spill]] (crude oils (CT2); 17.000 ton/accident);<br />
* worst case scenario of a HNS spill (acetone cyanohydrine (CT1); 8.000 & 1.000 ton/accident).<br />
<br />
The impact analysis is primarily aimed at estimating the impact on different biological communities. Focus has been directed towards birds, fish and [[benthic]] organisms. As far as possible the [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] approach is guarded during this impact analysis. If an [[ecosystems|ecosystem]] approach was not feasible for certain incidents, indicator species are used to estimate the impact.<br />
<br />
===Sensitivity analysis===<br />
To be able to assess correctly the impacts, a [[sensitivity]]-analysis was carried out including besides biological values also socio-economical parameters. The [[sensitivity]] analysis (see fig. 7) is set up to identify the vulnerable areas in the coastal and marine zone of Belgium. As the interests ([[sensitivity]]) of the different users of the BPNS vary in time, three different scenarios leading to different [[sensitivity]] maps have been identified as the impact and response to a spill will also depend on these seasonal interests:<br />
* general scenario: a scenario in which all parameters are evenly important;<br />
* summer scenario: a scenario in which the tourist and recreational values of the coastal and marine areas have been given special attention (see fig. 8);<br />
* winter scenario: a scenario in which the nature values (wintering-, foraging- and spawning areas) of the coastal and marine areas have been given special attention.<br />
<br />
{|<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Sensitivity analysis methodology.PNG|center|frame|caption|Fig. 7 Schematic representation of the sensitivity analysis methodology]]<br />
| [[Image:Sensitivity score map.PNG|center|frame|caption| Fig. 8 Example of a sensitivity score map (summer scenario)]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
In general, the western part of the Belgian marine zone (Flemish Banks area), the area around the harbours of Zeebrugge and Oostende neighbouring the important coastal municipality Blankenberge-De Haan are the most sensitive zones for spills in terms of ecological (focus marine waters/ winter scenario) and socio-economical value (focus coastal municipalities/ summer scenario).<br />
<br />
===Effect analysis===<br />
The effect analysis of the selected scenarios is restricted to an ecological impact assessment (see fig. 9). The effect analysis is subdivided into three [[Environmental risk assessment for pollution of marine activities|Environmental Risk Assessment]] (ERA) steps:<br />
* exposure assessment quantifying the Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC) based on the calculated release rates and spill models;<br />
* the consequence assessment estimating the consequences or effects of release in terms of the Predicted No Effect Concentration (PNEC) or the 50% mortality Concentration (LC50);<br />
* the risk characterisation (ecological impact) based on the PEC/PNEC or PEC/LC50 ratio.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Ecological impact assessment model.PNG|center|frame|caption|Fig. 9 Schematic representation of the ecological impact assessment model]]<br />
<br />
Due to the lack of quantitative data, assumptions have been made in both scenarios (oil & HNS). Furthermore, in contrast to [[oil slicks|oil spills]], a specific operational chemical model estimating the magnitude of the HNS spill does not currently exist in Belgium. The best approach is however been obtained by using the [[sediment]] transportation model as a basis for the chemical spilled. So the ecological impact assessments can certainly be improved. However, the results can be interpreted as representing worst case effects and show the possible outcomes/magnitude of a selected oil and HNS spill. It is a first attempt of an ecological impact assessment for both an oil and HNS spill and should be refined when new methodologies become available. The effect of oil and chemical spills is different. [[oil slicks|Oil spills]] have an effect both in the open sea and on the beach (stranding), while the effect of a HNS spill is generally be limited to the marine area. In contrast to HNS spills, [[oil slicks|oil spills]] have a severe impact on the bird population. In our case study the total number of bird casualties is estimated at about 471 birds (open sea) and 3336 birds (Zwin). Due to the physio-chemical characteristics of the hazardous products the assessment of the ecological impact area is also different. A generalisation of results is thus not possible.<br />
<br />
==Risk estimation==<br />
The overall estimation of the risk is defined as the multiplication of the consequence for each damage-causing event with the frequency of that event. The frequency of an event is a result of the hazard identification and release step. The consequence of a damage-causing event is usually defined as casualty probabilities (direct loss (mortality)). <br />
<br />
The risk of commercial shipping at the BPNS can be summarised as follows (see fig. 10): <br />
* the highest risk can be found in the high risk subareas SA3, SA5, SA6, SA7 (range once every 13 (SA3) to 43 (SA6) years) characterised by sandbank formations and/or presence of harbour (intense shipping traffic is not the determining factor (f.ex. SA1 (every 119 yr)) ;<br />
* in the first place oil tankers and container ships pose a high risk for almost the total BPNS due to the fact that they transport the most hazardous cargo types and that in case of a spill accident high quantities of dangerous goods are spilled at sea (related to high transported quantities) (Max. cargo spill quantity per year in SA3: 124 ton (oil tankers) & 247 ton (containers));<br />
* secondly also transport with chemical tankers and RoRo traffic are risk full, in particular in the high risk subareas, respectively due to the hazardous characteristics of the products transported by chemical tankers (notice the low spill quantity) and a medium frequency (Max. in SA3: every 150 yr) and spill quantity (Max. in SA3: 24 ton/yr) of accidents with RoRo ships;<br />
* the risk from bulk, general cargo and other (passenger ships & other ships) transport is rather low.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Definition of subareas.PNG|center|frame|caption|Fig. 10 Definition of Sub-Areas]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
[[References for environmental risk assessment]]<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Environmental risk assessment of marine activities]]<br />
*[[North Sea pollution from shipping: legal framework]]<br />
*[[Impacts from maritime transport]]<br />
*[[Overview of oil spills events from 1970 to 2000]]<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|AuthorID=5759<br />
|AuthorFullName=Jan-Bart Calewaert<br />
|AuthorName=Janbartcalewaert}}<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:Theme 4]]<br />
[[Category:Theme 1]]<br />
[[Category:Case studies]]<br />
[[Category:Practice, projects and case studies in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal and marine pollution]]<br />
[[Category:Maritime transportation]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal risk management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Interpolation_of_measured_grain-size_fractions&diff=25994Interpolation of measured grain-size fractions2008-12-15T15:43:45Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Introduction==<br />
In marine-[[habitat]] and in marine-landscape mapping, information on various physical/[[abiotic]] parameters of the area under consideration is important. Along with information on [[biotic]] parameters, physical/[[abiotic]] parameters are used to define and map habitats or landscapes. One of the most relevant physical parameters used in seabed mapping is the grain size of the sediment. <br />
Until now, the most commonly used grain-size descriptor has been the sand [[median]], also known as the Ds50. The [[median diameter]] of the sand fraction (defined as the fraction between 63 micron and 2 mm), is the midpoint of the grain-size distribution: 50% (by weight) of the sediment is coarser and 50% is finer than the [[median grain size]]. Traditionally, the sand [[median]] known from measured points is used to create a full-coverage map by interpolating the measured values. The [[median]] is the most widely known grain-size descriptor, because it is easily measured or estimated. However, the sand [[median]] is not always the most relevant grain-size descriptor of natural [[sediment]], which usually does not have a log-normal distribution. Bi-modal glacial sediment, for example, cannot be described adequately with only one descriptor. Furthermore, it is statistically not correct to interpolate sand medians, because the sand [[median]] is a non-linear parameter and therefore cannot be interpolated linearly. This has been demonstrated in for example Gruijters et al., 2005 <ref>Gruijters, S.H.L.L., Maljers, D., Veldkamp, J.G. (2005). 3D interpolation of grain size distributions in the upper 5 m of the channel bed of three lower Rhine distributaries. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 30: 303-316. </ref>.<br />
Because of these shortcomings, we took a different approach to come to a more reliable set of grain-size maps. After creating a granulometry database with uniform size-class intervals, we interpolated the measured share of each (cumulative) grain-size fraction for all measured samples. <br />
<br />
===Location and site details===<br />
Thus far, this technique has been applied to data from the entire Dutch Continental Shelf (DCS).<br />
<br />
===Goals of the mapping===<br />
We apply this methodology a) to tackle problems associated with interpolation of sand-[[median]] values, and b) to come to more flexible grain-size maps and grids, so that not only the sand [[median]] can be extracted but also the D10, D90, or Dx, depending on which descriptor best explains the variation in the [[biotic]] data. <br />
<br />
===Technical outline===<br />
As input data, full measured grain-size distributions are used. For the DCS there are 6038 measurements available (December 2006); in the near future, several hundred more measurements will become available, primarily from the northern half of the DCS where coverage is poor at the moment. Main problems with the current set of measurements are:<br />
*Not all grain-size distributions are complete. The fraction >2 mm (the gravel fraction, including shells and shell fragments) is often missing because protocols are not always followed when pre-processing samples for analysis. <br />
*Accurate measurement of mud ([[silt]] and [[clay]]) content is difficult because of particle agregation during sample processing and because of flocculation under natural conditions. Measured mud percentages are at best a good estimate.<br />
*Sample collection spans a long period, during which various analytical instruments and techniques have been used to measure grain size: several generations of laser-particle sizers (wet and dry), sieving (wet and dry), and the pipette method.<br />
Because of these shortcomings in the data, we focus on the sand fraction only. However, both the very fine ([[mud]]) and the coarse fraction ([[gravel]]) are important in describing the physical environment, a first approximation is made to include these fractions. Results for the [[mud]] fraction are available as a full coverage map, taking the percentage of all particles <63 micron to be a reliable indication of the mud percentage; the gravel fraction will be included as soon as possible. Theses three components, [[gravel]], [[sand]] and [[mud]], will be used to make an improved Folk [[sediment]] map.<br />
During data processing, the class intervals are made uniform, meaning that all measured grain-size distributions are transformed to fit the following 20 fractions: 63-75, 75-88, 88-105, 105-125, 125-150, 150-177, 177-210, 210-250, 250-300, 300-354, 354-420, 420-500, 500-600, 600-707, 707-850, 850-1000, 1000-1190, 1190-1410, 1410-1680, and 1680-2000 micron, conform laser-diffraction fractions used standard within TNO. Taken together, these fractions add up to 100%. For all samples, cumulative grain-size distributions are made (Figure 1). <br />
<br />
[[Image:Maljersfig1.jpg|center|400px]]<br />
''Figure 1 Example of a cumulative grain-size distribution of the sand fraction.''<br />
<br />
In these graphs the different amounts of throughfall are shown. With a mesh size of 2 mm, 100% of the [[sediment]] is falling through. The opposite holds true for a mesh size of 63 micron; 0% of the sediment falls through. These cumulative grain-size distributions are used in interpolation. For that purpose they are exported to geostatistical interpolation software used at TNO, called [http://www.geovareances.com Isatis] <ref>[http://www.geovareances.com Isatis]</ref>.<br />
All fractions are interpolated with a technique called Kriging with External Drift. Verfaillie et al. (2006)<ref>Verfaillie, E., Lancker, V. van, Meirvenne, M. van (2006). Multivariate geostatistics for the predictive modelling of the surficial sand distribution in shelf seas. Continental Shelf Research. Volume 26. Issue 19: 2454-2468. </ref> describe this technique in detail. Verfaillie et al. illustrate that the bathymetry explains most variation in the sand [[median]]. We therefore assume that this is also valid for the separate fractions on which the sand [[median]] is based, and use this parameter as external-drift variable. Resulting from this interpolation are full-coverage grids for all fractions. In Figure 2 an example of one of these full-coverage maps can be seen. These grids have to be post processed in order to calculate for example D50, D10 or D90. <br />
<br />
[[Image:Maljersfig2.jpg|center|400px]]<br />
''Figure 2 Example of full-coverage map of an interpolated fraction, in this case 210 micron.''<br />
<br />
The post processing again consists of several steps. Owing to the interpolation technique used (Kriging), values for throughfall can become more than 100% or less than 0%, when data density is not sufficient. We have to correct for these artificial results, therefore values less than 0% are corrected to 0% and values over 100% are corrected to 100%. Furthermore, we build in a check to force the interpolated values to exactly follow a cumulative grain-size distribution, meaning that on any location, throughfall for a particular mesh size should be less than for a coarser mesh size.<br />
Further data post processing is performed with a script in Python. We can calculate whichever D is needed, for example the D10 or D50. The outcome of these calculations can be plotted in any [[GIS]] program and can be used afterward in for example marine-landscape mapping or habitat mapping by combining physical and biotic data. In Figure 3 the D50 map for the DCS is showed, calculated with the above explained technique. Clearly recognizable are the large-scale bathymetric features on this map. Also clearly visible is the effect of insufficient data density, which can be seen in the northern part of the DCS. The level of confidence in this area is logically not as high as in areas with sufficient data density.<br />
<br />
[[Image:Maljersfig3.jpg|center|400px]]<br />
''Figure 3 Ds50 map derived after post-processing of interpolation results for all fractions.''<br />
<br />
===Summary of results===<br />
Main results from this study are tailor-made full-coverage sediment maps that are both more accurate and more relevant than existing ones. By using the technique of interpolating grain-size fractions, any D can be calculated, which makes this technique much more flexible than the traditional interpolation of measured D50 values.<br />
<br />
===Key lessons===<br />
Quality of the data used is very important, and so is data density; without a sufficient data density the reliability of the resulting map is uncertain (and most likely limited). One should always keep in mind what kind of natural processes and parameters resulted in the sediment distribution as present in situ. The spatial scales of these processes and parameters should be larger than the distance between data points in order for data points to be correlated. More information on geostatistics is presented by Isaaks et al. (1989)<ref>Isaaks, E.H., Srivastava, R.M. (1989). An introduction to applied geostatistics. Oxford University Press. </ref>.<br />
<br />
===Conclusions===<br />
The technique presented here is a very flexible tool for the construction of full-coverage sediment maps, and can be applied easily when sufficient grain-size data are available in a uniform format.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
* [[Topic:Sedimentology]]<br />
* [[Computation of sediment transport and presentation of results]]<br />
* [[Topic:Measurements]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Geomorphological processes and natural coastal features]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal and marine information and knowledge management]]<br />
[[Category:Articles by Gunnink, J.]]<br />
<br />
{{authors<br />
|AuthorID1=<br />
|AuthorName1=D. Maljers<br />
|AuthorFullName1=Maljers, D.<br />
|AuthorID2=<br />
|AuthorName2= J. Gunnink<br />
|AuthorFullName2=Gunnink, J.}}</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Stakeholder_analysis&diff=25992Stakeholder analysis2008-12-15T15:42:06Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>This article looks briefly at the role of stakeholders in the process if coastal zone management. It provides an introduction to a new qualitative approach to developing management strategies through a [[Problem structuring in decision-making processes|structural approach to the participatory process]]. The discussion of the 'practicalities' of adopting such an approach is based on the results of two workshops.<br />
<br />
==What do we mean by stakeholder ?==<br />
<br />
A '''[[stakeholders|stakeholder]]''' is an individual or an institution who can be positively or negatively impacted by, or cause an impact on the success of a project or a planning process. When an [[Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)]] process is launched, this requires the involvement of any relevant institutions that have stakes regarding the issues underlying the ICZM process. This allows concerted actions and participation for the decision-making process in public policies, allowing that the decisions are shared and taken in an interactive manner enhancing their acceptability in a long-term view.<br />
<br />
[[Stakeholders]] can be classified into '''public and private stakeholders'''. Public stakeholders refer to public representatives at the municipal level (mayor, municipal council, etc.), the regional level (environmental department, etc.), the national level (State, ministry, etc.) and the international level (an international body as the FAO, OECD, UNEP, etc.), whereas private stakeholders refer to the sectoral level (tourism, fisheries, etc.) or the citizen level (a local resident organisation, a leisure / sport society, etc.). <br />
<br />
The word '''Actor''' can sometimes be used in the same way as '''Stakeholder'''.<br />
<br />
For other insights in the '''Coastal Wiki''', see also [[stakeholders]].<br />
<br />
==Tools for stakeholder analysis==<br />
<br />
Many (computer) tools exist, aimed at involving [[stakeholders]] in the decision-making process. A rough distinction can be made between qualitative and quantitative tools. Quantitative tools include [[Multicriteria techniques|Multi-Criteria Analysis]] (MCA) tools, which allow [[stakeholders]] to assign weights to certain variables and indicators. These tools are designed for well-defined, structured problems. However, in practice [[stakeholders|stakeholder]] consensus on the problem structure is usually lacking. Then, how to determine an appropriate set of variables and indicators? At this point, qualitative tools can be helpful. <br />
<br />
===The Quasta tool===<br />
Aim of this article is to explore the practical opportunities for the new so-called Quasta approach. The Quasta approach uses a qualitative tool in order to structure complex problems in a group setting. The tool is based on a combination of Cognitive Mapping and Qualitative Probabilistic Networks. For more technical information see the [http://ssrn.com/abstract=987006 full paper]. This paper discusses Quasta as an interactive problem structuring tool, that can be used to involve [[stakeholders]] in [[Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)]]. The Quasta tool comprehends a new type of computer system which is quite simple and flexible as well. Quasta allows ''scenario exploration'' with simple ''cause-and-effect diagrams''. [[Image:CognitiveMap.jpg|thumb|right|Figure 1. An example Cognitive Map. Regular arrows represent positive inluences, an arrow with a circle on its tip represents a negative influence.]]. In Figure 1 a simple Cognitive Map is shown, which captures some of the issues which are typical for the densely populated catchment areas in the Netherlands. [[Climate change]] may result in [[sea level rise]] and extreme rainfall. Both may lead to high peak water levels in rivers, which may harm the safety in the catchment areas (because of risk of flooding). To prevent this, the government may propose some commissioned areas which, in case of high water levels, are designated to flood. This may reduce the peak levels of the rivers and may therefore improve the safety of the catchment area as a whole. However, this measure would imply that inhabitants of these areas should move out; the spatial pressure, which is already very high in the Netherlands, would increase. Quasta allows such scenario analyses; directions can be given for the concepts in the diagrams (for instance: more safety in the catchment areas), and then Quasta explores scenarios which are ''consistent'' with these directions. By asking [[stakeholders]] for concepts, relationships and directions of change, Quasta can be used as a deliberation tool.<br />
<br />
===Testing Quasta===<br />
The tool is tested in two workshops in which various [[coastal management]] issues were discussed. The first workshop took place in September 2006 in Concepción, Chile. The symposium was organised by the [http://www.censor.name/pagev2/news/news-single-view/article/1/censor-pasarelas-symposium-workshop.html?cHash=f7ab6f69bb CENSOR INCO-project] ('Climate variability and El Niño Southern Oscillation: Implications for Natural Coastal Resources and Management') in combination with the Pasarelas project, which is about 'Interface Tools for Multi-stakeholder Knowledge Partnerships for the Sustainable Management of Marine Resources and Coastal Zones'. In the workshop 11 persons participated, from various backgrounds (scientists, executives from governmental departments in Peru and Chile, people from local fishing communities, etc.). The language was Spanish and the topic of discussion was restricted management areas for fisheries. The second workshop was part of the project 'Sustainable living in the Dutch coastal zone', which was an exploratory project about the Dutch [[coastal zone]] in 2080. Eight persons participated in this workshop, which was held in October 2006, in Delft, The Netherlands. The group of participants included researchers, consultants and policymakers. The language was Dutch and the topic of discussion was living in the Dutch coastal zone in 2080. This scenario was discussed with respect to the themes 'land use', 'economy', 'safety', 'energy', 'technology & innovation' and 'institutional aspects'.<br />
<br />
==Conclusions==<br />
Evaluations of these workshops show that (1) this system helps [[stakeholders]] to make them aware of causal relationships, (2) it is useful for a qualitative exploration of scenarios, (3) it identifies the quantitative knowledge gaps of the problem being discussed and (4) the treshold for non-technicians to use this tool is quite low. As such, these first results seem promising. In order to make Quasta most useful, it is recommended to do further research on the methodology and last but not least to have more practical applications.<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
*[[Deliberation support tools]]<br />
*[[Knowledge support tools]]<br />
*[[Decision support tools]]<br />
<br />
{{authors<br />
|AuthorID1=14680<br />
|AuthorFullName1=Roussel, Sébastien<br />
|AuthorName1=Roussel<br />
|AuthorID2=14626 <br />
|AuthorFullName2=van Kouwen, Frank<br />
|AuthorName2=Fakouwen}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Articles by van Kouwen, Frank]]<br />
[[Category:Theme_1]]<br />
[[Category:Coastal management]]<br />
[[Category:Techniques and methods in coastal management]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Calanoid_copepods&diff=25990Calanoid copepods2008-12-15T15:25:59Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Definition|title=Calanoida<br />
|definition= Calanoida is an order of copepods, a kind of zooplankton. }}<br />
<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
Wikipedia has an article at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calanoida)</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Black_Sea&diff=25989Black Sea2008-12-15T15:24:43Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* Specific biodiversity issues */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Incomplete}}<br />
<br />
== Local environment ==<br />
<br />
The Black Sea is a unique marine environment. It is an enclosed coastal basin with characteristics between than of an [[estuary]] and the [[open oceans|open ocean]], with about 87% of its water mass being permanently [[anoxic]] or devoid of oxygen. The Black Sea houses a wide variety of [[habitat]] types but has a relatively low diversity of species. Historically, the Black Sea has been one of the most biologically productive regions in the world.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Specific biodiversity issues ==<br />
<br />
Among the coastal basins of the world's oceans, the environmental degradation in the Black Sea is thought to be the most severe. Threats to Black Sea [[biodiversity]] are the introduction of alien species, commercial fisheries and overexploitation of resources, chemical contamination, especially from oil products, [[eutrophication]] (nutrient enrichment from plant matter) and [[pollution]] from agriculture, industry and sewage.<br />
<br />
Most non-native species in the Black Sea have been introduced in ballast waters from shipping. Low species diversity combined with high habitat diversity in the region provides favourable conditions for invasive species, which can disrupt the stability and functioning of ecosystems and represents the biggest threat to [[biodiversity]] in the Black Sea. Eutrophication has been the main cause of the critically low oxygen levels in the Black Sea, which has led to dramatic reduction in fish catches.<br />
<br />
== Recent newsletter articles ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
* [http://www.blacksea-environment.org/ Black Sea Environmental Programme]<br />
* There is detailed information about the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea Black Sea on Wikepedia]<br />
<br />
[[Category:International coastal organisation]]<br />
[[Category:Location of coastal and marine areas]]<br />
[[Category:Black sea]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Black_Sea&diff=25988Black Sea2008-12-15T15:24:14Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Incomplete}}<br />
<br />
== Local environment ==<br />
<br />
The Black Sea is a unique marine environment. It is an enclosed coastal basin with characteristics between than of an [[estuary]] and the [[open oceans|open ocean]], with about 87% of its water mass being permanently [[anoxic]] or devoid of oxygen. The Black Sea houses a wide variety of [[habitat]] types but has a relatively low diversity of species. Historically, the Black Sea has been one of the most biologically productive regions in the world.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Specific biodiversity issues ==<br />
<br />
Among the coastal basins of the world's oceans, the environmental degradation in the Black Sea is thought to be the most severe. Threats to Black Sea biodiversity are the introduction of alien species, commercial fisheries and overexploitation of resources, chemical contamination, especially from oil products, eutrophication (nutrient enrichment from plant matter) and pollution from agriculture, industry and sewage.<br />
<br />
Most non-native species in the Black Sea have been introduced in ballast waters from shipping. Low species diversity combined with high habitat diversity in the region provides favourable conditions for invasive species, which can disrupt the stability and functioning of ecosystems and represents the biggest threat to [[biodiversity]] in the Black Sea. Eutrophication has been the main cause of the critically low oxygen levels in the Black Sea, which has led to dramatic reduction in fish catches.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Recent newsletter articles ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
* [http://www.blacksea-environment.org/ Black Sea Environmental Programme]<br />
* There is detailed information about the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea Black Sea on Wikepedia]<br />
<br />
[[Category:International coastal organisation]]<br />
[[Category:Location of coastal and marine areas]]<br />
[[Category:Black sea]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Bern_Convention&diff=25987Bern Convention2008-12-15T15:21:08Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Definition|title= Bern Convention|definition= The Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention) is a binding international legal instrument in the field of nature conservation, which covers the whole of the natural heritage of the European continent and extends to some States of Africa. <br />
<br />
Its aims are to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats and to promote European co-operation in that field. It was adopted and signed in Bern (Switzerland) in September 1979, and came into force on 1st June 1982. It counts among its Contracting Parties 40 member States of the Council of Europe, as well as Burkina Faso, Morocco, Senegal, Tunisia and the European Community. The protection of migratory species lends the Convention a distinct dimension of North-South interdependence and co-operation. <br />
<br />
The Bern Convention co-ordinates the action of European States in adopting common standards and policies for the sustainable use of biological diversity, thus contributing to the improvement of the quality of life of Europeans and the promotion of sustainable development. <br />
<br />
The Convention is a fundamental treaty at European level for biological diversity. It is co-ordinated by a Standing Committee of the Council of Europe [http://www.coe.int/DefaultEN.asp] that meets every year, has adopted 90 recommendations and seven resolutions, and organises many seminars and technical groups. It has put in place a very effective monitoring system (file cases) and develops a very comprehensive work programme. <ref>Council of Europe web site [http://www.coe.int/t/e/cultural_co-operation/environment/nature_and_biological_diversity/Nature_protection/]</ref>}}<br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
For more detailed information see http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/QueVoulezVous.asp?NT=104&CM=8&DF=2/15/2007&CL=ENG<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<References/></div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Baltic_Sea&diff=25986Baltic Sea2008-12-15T15:20:35Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* Threats */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Local environment ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Baltic1.jpg|thumb|left]] The Baltic Sea is one of the largest brackish, seas in the world. It is a relatively shallow inland sea in northeast Europe with its only exchange to more open seas being a very narrow link to the North Sea between Norway, Sweden and Denmark known as the Kattegat and Skaggerak . <br />
<br />
There is a strong [[salinity]] gradient in the Baltic, with salinity decreasing from west to east (salinity is highest in the Western Part, e.g. Mecklenburg Bight) and from south to north (lowest values-almost freshwater- are found in the Bothnian Sea). <br />
<br />
<br />
== Specific biodiversity issues ==<br />
<br />
The flora and fauna of the Baltic is unusual in that there are areas in which freshwater, brackish water and marine species co-exist. For example, the freshwater plant Phragmites spp. and the marine wrack Fucus spp. can be found side by side. The Baltic Sea has existed for a relatively short time period and has undergone major changes; subsequently it contains a very limited brackish-water flora and fauna. The area is characterised by low species diversity, but many individuals of each species.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Threats ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Baltic4.jpg|thumb|right|View of Baltic Sea from Dierhagen. Photo D Schiedek]]Many of the marine species present are at the limit of their biogeographical distribution. The highest biodiversity is found in the southwest of the Baltic Sea. The major threats to [[Marine Biodiversity|marine biodiversity]] in the region are unsustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, [[eutrophication]] (enrichment from plant nutrient, reducing oxygen levels), [[pollution]] from contaminants and oil and the introduction of alien species.<br />
<br />
== MarBEF newsletter articles ==<br />
<br />
*An exercise in comparing the [[pelagic]] and [[benthic]] macrofauna species diversity in Arctic, Antarctic and Baltic sites using the taxonomic distinctiveness index <ref>http://www.marbef.org/outreach/news_index1.php?section=5</ref> <br><br />
*Values of, and threats to, marine and coastal habitats in the southern Baltic <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Shallow sandy sublittoral: the ecological treasure of the southern Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Daily sea surface temperatures rom the late 1800s to the early 2000s implications for biodiversity in the Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Application of benthic indices to assess [[biodiversity]] in the southern Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.helcom.fi/ Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (Helsinki Convention)]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Marine habitats and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Typology of coastal and marine areas]]<br />
[[Category:Location of coastal and marine areas]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Baltic_Sea&diff=25985Baltic Sea2008-12-15T15:20:05Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* Threats */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Local environment ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Baltic1.jpg|thumb|left]] The Baltic Sea is one of the largest brackish, seas in the world. It is a relatively shallow inland sea in northeast Europe with its only exchange to more open seas being a very narrow link to the North Sea between Norway, Sweden and Denmark known as the Kattegat and Skaggerak . <br />
<br />
There is a strong [[salinity]] gradient in the Baltic, with salinity decreasing from west to east (salinity is highest in the Western Part, e.g. Mecklenburg Bight) and from south to north (lowest values-almost freshwater- are found in the Bothnian Sea). <br />
<br />
<br />
== Specific biodiversity issues ==<br />
<br />
The flora and fauna of the Baltic is unusual in that there are areas in which freshwater, brackish water and marine species co-exist. For example, the freshwater plant Phragmites spp. and the marine wrack Fucus spp. can be found side by side. The Baltic Sea has existed for a relatively short time period and has undergone major changes; subsequently it contains a very limited brackish-water flora and fauna. The area is characterised by low species diversity, but many individuals of each species.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Threats ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Baltic4.jpg|thumb|right|View of Baltic Sea from Dierhagen. Photo D Schiedek]]Many of the marine species present are at the limit of their biogeographical distribution. The highest biodiversity is found in the southwest of the Baltic Sea. The major threats to [[Marine biodiversity|marine biodiversity]] in the region are unsustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, [[eutrophication]] (enrichment from plant nutrient, reducing oxygen levels), [[pollution]] from contaminants and oil and the introduction of alien species.<br />
<br />
== MarBEF newsletter articles ==<br />
<br />
*An exercise in comparing the [[pelagic]] and [[benthic]] macrofauna species diversity in Arctic, Antarctic and Baltic sites using the taxonomic distinctiveness index <ref>http://www.marbef.org/outreach/news_index1.php?section=5</ref> <br><br />
*Values of, and threats to, marine and coastal habitats in the southern Baltic <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Shallow sandy sublittoral: the ecological treasure of the southern Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Daily sea surface temperatures rom the late 1800s to the early 2000s implications for biodiversity in the Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Application of benthic indices to assess [[biodiversity]] in the southern Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.helcom.fi/ Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (Helsinki Convention)]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Marine habitats and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Typology of coastal and marine areas]]<br />
[[Category:Location of coastal and marine areas]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Baltic_Sea&diff=25984Baltic Sea2008-12-15T15:19:42Z<p>Jackgeerlings: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Local environment ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Baltic1.jpg|thumb|left]] The Baltic Sea is one of the largest brackish, seas in the world. It is a relatively shallow inland sea in northeast Europe with its only exchange to more open seas being a very narrow link to the North Sea between Norway, Sweden and Denmark known as the Kattegat and Skaggerak . <br />
<br />
There is a strong [[salinity]] gradient in the Baltic, with salinity decreasing from west to east (salinity is highest in the Western Part, e.g. Mecklenburg Bight) and from south to north (lowest values-almost freshwater- are found in the Bothnian Sea). <br />
<br />
<br />
== Specific biodiversity issues ==<br />
<br />
The flora and fauna of the Baltic is unusual in that there are areas in which freshwater, brackish water and marine species co-exist. For example, the freshwater plant Phragmites spp. and the marine wrack Fucus spp. can be found side by side. The Baltic Sea has existed for a relatively short time period and has undergone major changes; subsequently it contains a very limited brackish-water flora and fauna. The area is characterised by low species diversity, but many individuals of each species.<br />
<br />
<br />
== Threats ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:Baltic4.jpg|thumb|right|View of Baltic Sea from Dierhagen. Photo D Schiedek]]Many of the marine species present are at the limit of their biogeographical distribution. The highest biodiversity is found in the southwest of the Baltic Sea. The major threats to [[marine biodiversity]] in the region are unsustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, [[eutrophication]] (enrichment from plant nutrient, reducing oxygen levels), [[pollution]] from contaminants and oil and the introduction of alien species.<br />
<br />
<br />
== MarBEF newsletter articles ==<br />
<br />
*An exercise in comparing the [[pelagic]] and [[benthic]] macrofauna species diversity in Arctic, Antarctic and Baltic sites using the taxonomic distinctiveness index <ref>http://www.marbef.org/outreach/news_index1.php?section=5</ref> <br><br />
*Values of, and threats to, marine and coastal habitats in the southern Baltic <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Shallow sandy sublittoral: the ecological treasure of the southern Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Daily sea surface temperatures rom the late 1800s to the early 2000s implications for biodiversity in the Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
*Application of benthic indices to assess [[biodiversity]] in the southern Baltic Sea <ref>http://www.marbef.org/documents/newsletter/NwsNo6_May07.pdf</ref><br><br />
<br />
== See also ==<br />
<br />
[http://www.helcom.fi/ Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (Helsinki Convention)]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Marine habitats and ecosystems]]<br />
[[Category:Typology of coastal and marine areas]]<br />
[[Category:Location of coastal and marine areas]]</div>Jackgeerlingshttps://www.marinespecies.org/i/index.php?title=Forecasting&diff=25980Forecasting2008-12-15T15:12:58Z<p>Jackgeerlings: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{<br />
Definition|title=Forecasting<br />
|definition= Prediction of conditions expected to occur in the near future.<ref name="CIRIA (1996)"> CIRIA (1996). ''Beach management manual''. CIRIA Report 153.</ref>.}}<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references/><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
# [[Modelling Review (all generic types)]]<br />
# [[Hindcasting]]</div>Jackgeerlings