Town Planning Review

Spatial Strategies at the Land–Sea Interface: Rethinking Maritime Spatial Planning, University of Hamburg, 11–13 September 2019

Town Planning Review (2020), 91, (3), 343–348.


Details

https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2020.19 Cormac Walsh Conference report Spatial Strategies at the Land–Sea Interface: Rethinking Maritime Spatial Planning, University of Hamburg, 11–13 September 2019 Introduction and background Under the EU Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) Directive adopted in 2014, member states are tasked with the preparation of maritime spatial plans by 2021. These plans are required to ‘take into account land–sea interactions’ and ‘should aim to integrate the maritime dimension of some coastal uses or activities and their impacts’ (EU, 2014, 138). Accordingly, inshore territorial waters must be included within either marine spatial plans or land-based spatial plans where they extend beyond the coastline (EU, 2014, 140, Article 2:1). Contemporary and future challenges of climate-change adaptation, coastal erosion and sea-level rise underline the need for visionary and inclusive spatial strategies at the coast (O’Riordan et al., 2014; Walsh, 2019). Experience to date, however, indicates that MSP occupies a different institutional and policy space to land-based terrestrial spatial planning. MSP has emerged within a marine management context and for the most part constitutes its own epistemic community, at a distance from current developments and debates in spatial-planning research and practice on land (Jay, 2010; Kidd and Ellis, 2012). Although MSP is becoming established as a formal policy instrument applied in a coordinated manner across Europe, European terrestrial spatial planning has reached an impasse, with a discernible shift away from ambitious spatial strategies at national and regional scales (Salet, 2016). Furthermore, as policies and practices of integrated coastal-zone management are displaced through a focus of attention on MSP, there is a risk of a ‘new coastal squeeze’ where the land and the marine become institutionalised as distinct policy spaces (Shipman and Stojanovic, 2007, 389; Walsh and Kannen, 2019). There is, however, increased recognition of the contested context of competing interests, perceptions, values and world views within which MSP is practiced (e.g. Flannery et al., 2018). Kidd and Shaw, in particular, critique the dominant instrumental view of MSP as a rational, technical process of universal applicability, contending that marine spatial planning is ‘a social and political process that is inevitably highly differentiated and place-specific’ (Kidd and Shaw, 2014, 1536). Jay (2012; 2013) has more specifically critiqued the spatialities underlying current MSP practices, calling for relational perspectives in place of functional zoning. More recently, he has explored Dr Cormac Walsh is Lecturer in Human Geography, University of Hamburg, Institute for Geography, Bundesstraße 55, 20146 Hamburg; email: cormac.walsh@uni-hamburg.de

References

BODE, C. (2015), ‘Energy extraction from wind: marine re-territorialization in the North Sea’, Scenario Journal, 5, https://scenariojournal.com/journal/scenario-05-extraction/ (accessed 26 February 2020). Google Scholar

EU (EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION) (2014), Directive 2014/89/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 Establishing a Framework for Maritime Spatial Planning, Official Journal of the European Union, L257, 135–45. Google Scholar

FLANNERY, W., HEALEY, N. and LUNA, M. (2018), ‘Exclusion and non-participation in marine spatial planning’, Marine Policy, 88, 32–40. Google Scholar

GEE, K. (2010), ‘Offshore wind power development as affected by seascape values on the German North Sea coast’, Land Use Policy, 27, 185–94. Google Scholar

GEE, K., KANNEN, A., ADLAM, R., BROOKS, C., CHAPMAN, M., CORMIER, R., FISCHER, C., FLETCHER, S., GUBBINS, M., SHUCKSMITH, R. and SHELLOCK, R. (2017), ‘Identifying culturally significant areas for marine spatial planning’, Ocean and Coastal Management, 136, 139–47. Google Scholar

JAY, S. (2010), ‘Built at sea: marine management and the construction of marine spatial planning’, Town Planning Review, 81, 173–92. Google Scholar

JAY, S. (2012), ‘Marine space: maneuvering towards a relational understanding’, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 14, 81–96. Google Scholar

JAY, S. (2013), ‘From disunited sectors to disjointed segments? Questioning the functional zoning of the sea’, Planning Theory & Practice, 14, 509–25. Google Scholar

JAY, S. (2018), ‘The shifting sea: from soft space to lively space’, Environmental Policy and Planning, doi:10.1080/1523908X.2018.1437716. Google Scholar

KIDD, S. and ELLIS, G. (2012), ‘From the land to sea and back again? Using terrestrial planning to understand the process of marine spatial planning’, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 14, 49–66. Google Scholar

KIDD, S. and SHAW, D. (2014), ‘The social and political realities of marine spatial planning: some land-based reflections’, ICES Journal of Marine Science, 71, 1535–41. Google Scholar

MIE (MINISTRY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT) and MEA (MINISTRY FOR ECONOMIC AFFAIRS) (OF THE NETHERLANDS) (2015), Policy Document on the North Sea 2016–2021, https://www.noordzeeloket.nl/beleid/noordzeebeleid/beleidsnota-noordzee/@166985/policy-document/ (accessed 26 February 2020). Google Scholar

O’RIORDAN, T., GOMES, C. and SCHMIDT, L. (2014), ‘The difficulties of designing future coastlines in the face of climate change’, Landscape Research, 39, 613–30. Google Scholar

SALET, W. (2016). ‘Reinventing strategic spatial planning: a critical act of reconstruction’, in L. Albrechts, A. Balducci and J. Hillier (eds), Situated Practices of Strategic Planning: An International Perspective, London, Routledge, 373–86. Google Scholar

SHIPMAN, B. and STOJANOVIC, T. (2007), ‘Facts, fictions, and failures of integrated coastal zone management in Europe’, Coastal Management, 35, 375–98. Google Scholar

SMITH, G. and BRENNAN, R. E. (2012), ‘Losing our way with mapping: thinking critically about marine spatial planning in Scotland’, Ocean and Coastal Management, 69, 210–16. Google Scholar

TROUILLET, B., BELLANGER-HUSI, L., EL GHAZIRI, A., LAMBERTS, C., PLISSONNEAU, E. and ROLLO, N. (2019), ‘More than maps: providing an alternative for fisheries and fishers in marine spatial planning’, Ocean and Coastal Management, 173, 90–103. Google Scholar

WALSH, C. (2019), ‘Integration of expertise or collaborative practice? Coastal management and climate adaptation at the Wadden Sea’, Ocean and Coastal Management, 167, 78–86. Google Scholar

WALSH, C. and DÖRING, M. (eds) (2018), Cultural Geographies of Coastal Change, special section, Area, 50, 146–204. Google Scholar

WALSH, C. and KANNEN, A. (2019), ‘Planning at sea: shifting planning practices at the German North Sea coast’, Raumforschung und Raumordnung/Spatial Research and Planning, 77, 1–18. Google Scholar

If you have private access to this content, please log in with your username and password here

Author details

Walsh, Cormac