Priority questions to shape the marine and coastal policy research agenda in the United Kingdom

United Kingdom (UK) and European Union policy is rapidly developing to meet international targets for the sustainable use and protection of the marine environment. To inform this process, research needs to keep pace with these changes and research questions must be focused on providing robust scientific evidence. Thirty four priority research questions within six broad themes were identified by delegates who attended the 1st marine and coastal policy Forum, hosted by the Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research at Plymouth University in June 2011. The priority questions formed through this research are timely and reflect the pace and change of marine policy in the UK in response to international, European and national policy drivers. Within the data theme, the majority of questions seek to find improved procedures to manage and use data effectively. Questions related to governance focus on how existing policies should be implemented. The marine conservation questions focus entirely upon implementation and monitoring of existing policy. Questions related to ecosystem services focus on research to support the conceptual links between ecosystem services, ecosystem function, and marine management. Questions relating to marine citizenship are fundamental questions about the nature of societal engagement with the sea. Finally, the marine planning questions focus upon understanding the general approaches to be taken to marine planning rather than its detailed implementation. The questions that have emerged from this process vary in scale, approach and focus. They identify the interdisciplinary science that is currently needed to enable the UK to work towards delivering its European and international commitments to achieve the sustainable use and protection of the marine environment

Ecosystem services, targets, and indicators for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity

After the collective failure to achieve the Convention on Biological Diversity's (CBD's) 2010 target to substantially reduce biodiversity losses, the CBD adopted a plan composed of five strategic goals and 20 “SMART” (Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic, and Time-bound) targets, to be achieved by 2020. Here, an interdisciplinary group of scientists from DIVERSITAS – an international program that focuses on biodiversity science – evaluates these targets and considers the implications of an ecosystem-services-based approach for their implementation. We describe the functional differences between the targets corresponding to distinct strategic goals and identify the interdependency between targets. We then discuss the implications for supporting research and target indicators, and make several specific suggestions for target implementation.

Coastal Zone Ecosystem Services: From science to values and decision making; a case study

This research is concerned with the following environmental research questions: socio-ecological system complexity, especially when valuing ecosystem services; ecosystems stock and services flow sustainability and valuation; the incorporation of scale issues when valuing ecosystem services; and the integration of knowledge from diverse disciplines for governance and decision making. In this case study, we focused on ecosystem services that can be jointly supplied but independently valued in economic terms: healthy climate (via carbon sequestration and storage), food (via fisheries production in nursery grounds), and nature recreation (nature watching and enjoyment). We also explored the issue of ecosystem stock and services flow, and we provide recommendations on how to value stock and flows of ecosystem services via accounting and economic values respectively. We considered broadly comparable estuarine systems located on the English North Sea coast: the Blackwater estuary and the Humber estuary. In the past, these two estuaries have undergone major land-claim. Managed realignment is a policy through which previously claimed intertidal habitats are recreated allowing the enhancement of the ecosystem services provided by saltmarshes. In this context, we investigated ecosystem service values, through biophysical estimates and welfare value estimates. Using an optimistic (extended conservation of coastal ecosystems) and a pessimistic (loss of coastal ecosystems because of, for example, European policy reversal) scenario, we find that context dependency, and hence value transfer possibilities, vary among ecosystem services and benefits. As a result, careful consideration in the use and application of value transfer, both in biophysical estimates and welfare value estimates, is advocated to supply reliable information for policy making.

What are the local impacts of energy systems on marine ecosystem services: a systematic map protocol

Background: Increasing concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG) and its impact on the climate has resulted in many international governments committing to reduce their GHG emissions. The UK, for example, has committed to reducing its carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. Suggested ways of reaching such a target are to increase dependency on offshore wind, offshore gas and nuclear. It is not clear, however, how the construction, operation and decommissioning of these energy systems will impact marine ecosystem services, i.e. the services obtained by people from the natural environment such as food provisioning, climate regulation and cultural inspiration. Research on ecosystem service impacts associated with offshore energy technologies is still in its infancy. The objective of this review is to bolster the evidence base by firstly, recording and describing the impacts of energy technologies at the marine ecosystems and human level in a consistent and transparent way; secondly, to translate these ecosystem and human impacts into ecosystem service impacts by using a framework to ensure consistency and comparability. The output of this process will be an objective synthesis of ecosystem service impacts comprehensive enough to cover different types of energy under the same analysis and to assist in informing how the provision of ecosystem services will change under different energy provisioning scenarios. Methods: Relevant studies will be sourced using publication databases and selected using a set of selection criteria including the identification of: (i) relevant subject populations such as marine and coastal species, marine habitat types and the general public; (ii) relevant exposure types including offshore wind farms, offshore oil and gas platforms and offshore structures connected with nuclear; (iii) relevant outcomes including changes in species structure and diversity; changes in benthic, demersal and pelagic habitats; and changes in cultural services. The impacts will be synthesised and described using a systematic map. To translate these findings into ecosystem service impacts, the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) and Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) frameworks are used and a detailed description of the steps taken provided to ensure transparency and replicability.

Energy systems and their impacts on marine ecosystem services

Global warming and its link to the burning of fossil fuels has prompted many governments around the world to set legally binding greenhouse gas reduction targets which are to be partially realised through a stronger reliance on renewable (e.g. wind) and other lower carbon (i.e. natural gas and nuclear) energy commodities. The marine environment will play a key role in hosting or supporting these new energy strategies. However, it is unclear how the construction, operation and eventual decommissioning of these energy systems, and their related infrastructure, will impact the marine environment, the ecosystem services (i.e. cultural, regulating, provisioning and supporting) and in turn the benefits it provides for human well-being. This uncertainty stems from a lack of research that has synthesised into a common currency the various effects of each energy sector on marine ecosystems and the benefits humans derive from it. To address this gap, the present study reviews existing ecosystem impact studies for offshore components of nuclear, offshore wind, offshore gas and offshore oil sectors and translates them into the common language of ecosystem service impacts that can be used to evaluate current policies. The results suggest that differences exist in the way in which energy systems impact ecosystem services, with the nuclear sector having a predominantly negative impact on cultural ecosystem services; oil and gas a predominately negative impact on cultural, provisioning, regulating and supporting ecosystem services; while wind has a mix of impacts on cultural, provisioning and supporting services and an absence of studies for regulating services. This study suggests that information is still missing with regard to the full impact of these energy sectors on specific types of benefits that humans derive from the marine environment and proposes possible areas of targeted research.