Pathways towards integrated cross-border marine spatial planning (MSP): insights from Germany, Poland and the island of Ireland

Figures & data

Figure 1. Cross-border Loughs and jurisdictional ownership issues on the IOI.

Table 1. Dimensions of institutional integration forming the analytical framework for the study.

Dimensions	Description	Key references
Structural alignment	The governance capacity and processes for coherence between institutional frameworks across borders in the management and planning of marine ecosystems	Epstein et al. 2015
Decision making and dialectics	A process whereby formal and informal institutions transform each other including their functioning, form, and space through gathering evidence, assessing alternative actions, and making choices	Tafon, Howarth, and Griggs 2019
Community and self-action	The creation of an environment for local actors to develop their plans, influence policy and manage resources	Diggon et al. 2021
Collaborative learning	The joint discovery of knowledge, ideas, practices and the propensity of its cultivation	Keijser, Toonen, and van Tatenhove 2020
Leading structured intervention	The emergence of interventions through innovation, creativity and leadership to change entrenched power relations and path dependency	Sander 2018; Armitage, Charles, and Berkes 2017
Collaborative capacity	The ability through foresight, incentives, resources, legal and administrative processes to foster multi-level collaboration	van Tatenhove, 2017; Ansong et al. 2021

Table 2. Breakdown and number of Interviewees.

Stakeholder group interviewed	Island of Ireland	Pomeranian Bay
Public Agency Policy makers, government departments and regulatory agencies	11	2
Local Authority Government officials from district councils	2	–
Business Enterprise Commercial groups such as fishing and tourism associations	2	–
Consultant Terrestrial and marine planning consultants	2	1
Developer/User Local marine developers, users and industry such as oyster farmers	5	–
Environmental NGO (eNGO) NGOs, community residents, coastal interest groups	8	1
Academic Researchers and academics from universities	3	3
Total	33	7

Figure 2. Republic of Ireland Marine Plan Area.Source: Adapted from DHLGH (2021) to show the undefined border and contested area in dashed circles.

Figure 3. The Pomeranian Bay and unclear maritime border at the northern approach to seaports in Poland highlighted in deep dashed lines.

Figure 4. The Maritime Spatial Plan of Polish Sea Areas on a scale of 1: 200,000.

Source: Adapted from Polish Maritime Administration (2021) to highlight the port function designation for the contested area.

Figure 5. Stages of cross-border MSP integration in the Island of Ireland and Pomeranian Bay.

Source: Adapted from Ansong et al. (2021).

Epstein, G., J. Pittman, S. Alexander, S. Berdej, T. Dyck, and U. Kreitmair. 2015. “Institutional Fit and the Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems.” Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14: 34–40. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.005.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tafon, R., D. Howarth, and S. Griggs. 2019. “The Politics of Estonia’s Offshore Wind Energy Programme: Discourse, Power, and Marine Spatial Planning.” Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 37 (1): 157–176. doi:10.1177/2399654418778037.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Diggon, S., C. Butler, A. Heidt, J. Bones, R. Jones, and C. Outhet. 2021. “The Marine Plan Partnership: Indigenous Community-Based Marine Spatial Planning.” Marine Policy, 132: 103510.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Keijser, X., H. Toonen, and J. van Tatenhove. 2020. ““Learning Paradox” in Maritime Spatial Planning.” Maritime Studies 19: 333–346. doi:10.1007/s40152-020-00169-z.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sander, G. 2018. “Ecosystem-based Management in Canada and Norway: The Importance of Political Leadership and Effective Decision-Making for Implementation.” Ocean and Coastal Management 163: 485–497. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.08.005.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Armitage, D., A. Charles, and F. Berkes. 2017. Governing the Coastal Commons: Communities, Resilience and Transformation. London: Routledge.

 Google Scholar

van Tatenhove, J. 2017. "Transboundary Marine Spatial Planning: A Reflexive Marine Governance Experiment?" Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 19 (6): 783–794.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ansong, J., H. Calado, and P. Gilliland. 2021b. “A Multifaceted Approach to Building Capacity for Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning Based on European Experience.” Marine Policy 132, 103422. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2019.01.011.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

DHLGH. 2021. National Marine Planning Framework: Government of Ireland.

 Google Scholar

Polish Maritime Administration. 2021. Maritime Spatial Plan for Polish Sea Areas in Scale of 1:200 000.

 Google Scholar