The eu Directive 2014/89 Establishing a Framework for Maritime Spatial Planning

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-41
Author(s):  
Ludwig Krämer
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Marine Areas ◽  
Maritime Spatial Planning ◽  
The Eu

Directive 2013/89 introduces the obligation for Member States to draw up and implement maritime spatial plans. According to the 19th recital of the Directive the main purpose of maritime spatial planning is to promote sustainable development and to identify the utilization of maritime space for different sea uses as well as to manage spatial uses and conflicts in marine areas. The following contribution analyses the genesis and main instruments of the Directive and it concludes that Directive will probably fail to achieve this objective.

Maritime Spatial Planning Concepts and Approaches

2015 ◽  
pp. 348-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodora Papatheochari ◽  
Vassiliki Vassilopoulou ◽  
Athina Kokkali ◽  
Fabio Grati ◽  
Harry Coccossis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Human Activities ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Marine Areas ◽  
Maritime Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Concepts ◽  
The Eu

Often human activities taking place at limited available marine space may lead to important spatial and temporal conflicts and synergies. Through Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) a series maritime issues have been addressed focusing on such interactions. This chapter makes a presentation of the development of Maritime Spatial Planning concepts and approaches on a global basis, highlighting best practices as well as gaps that need to be addressed. Lessons learned from two Mediterranean case studies of the EU FP7 research projects MESMA and COEXIST focusing particularly on fisheries, as one of the main human activities in the two marine areas, interacting with other uses and with conservation initiatives, is also discussed.

Maritime Spatial Planning Concepts and Approaches

2019 ◽  
pp. 337-360
Author(s):  
Theodora Papatheochari ◽  
Vassiliki Vassilopoulou ◽  
Athina Kokkali ◽  
Fabio Grati ◽  
Harry Coccossis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Human Activities ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Marine Areas ◽  
Maritime Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Concepts ◽  
The Eu

Often human activities taking place at limited available marine space may lead to important spatial and temporal conflicts and synergies. Through Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) a series maritime issues have been addressed focusing on such interactions. This chapter makes a presentation of the development of Maritime Spatial Planning concepts and approaches on a global basis, highlighting best practices as well as gaps that need to be addressed. Lessons learned from two Mediterranean case studies of the EU FP7 research projects MESMA and COEXIST focusing particularly on fisheries, as one of the main human activities in the two marine areas, interacting with other uses and with conservation initiatives, is also discussed.

BIOETHICAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE USE OF ANIMALS FOR SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES

2020 ◽  
pp. 10-15
Author(s):  
D. A. Lebedeva ◽  
Yu. A. Shcheglov
Keyword(s):  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
Member States ◽  
Ethical Attitude ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of Bioethics ◽  
The Eu

This work scrutinizes modern bioethical concepts of the use of animals for scientific purposes, as well as legal aspects of its use. Initially, the authors present a brief excursion into the history of bioethics and then focus on the modern concept of ethical attitude to the animals used for scientific purposes. The authors analyze the EU Directive on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, as well as the EAEU acts and by-laws of the EAEU member states, and conclude that it is necessary to adopt a supranational act within the EAEU that will regulate the use of animals for scientific purposes in accordance with the principles of reduction, replacement and refinement.

scholarly journals Realizing the Social Dimension of EU Coastal Water Management

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 2261
Author(s):  
David Langlet ◽  
Aron Westholm
Keyword(s):  
Coastal Waters ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
Current System ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Ecological Systems ◽  
Social Dimension ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Eu

In the last 20 years, the EU has adopted some rather ambitious pieces of legislation with the aim to achieve a good environmental status in freshwater and marine ecosystems. Both the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) have a strong focus on the natural environment and biological criteria for assessing the status of the relevant ecosystems. In the same time period, much research on environmental governance has focused on the interconnectedness of social systems and ecosystems, so-called social-ecological systems (SES). While having high aspirations, the legal frameworks underpinning current EU water and marine management do not necessarily reflect the advances of contemporary science relating to SES. Using the geographical intersection of the two directives, i.e., coastal waters as a focal point, the paper explores the inchoate integration of social and ecological perspectives in the EU marine governance. What are the main challenges for the current EU legal regimes for managing coastal waters in a way that builds on the understanding of social and ecological systems as interconnected? Having explored the two directives, the paper introduces the possibility of using marine spatial planning (MSP), and the EU directive establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning (MSPD) as a bridge between the social and ecological dimensions and discusses what implications this would have for the current system for governing coastal waters in Europe.

scholarly journals Multi-Use of the Sea as a Sustainable Development Instrument in Five EU Sea Basins

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8159
Author(s):  
Joanna Przedrzymirska ◽  
Jacek Zaucha ◽  
Helena Calado ◽  
Ivana Lukic ◽  
Martina Bocci ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Baltic Sea ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
The North ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
Maritime Spatial Planning ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Impact

This paper examines the concept of maritime multi-use as a territorial/SPATIAL governance instrument for the enhancement of sustainable development in five EU sea basins. Multi-use (MU) is expected to enhance the productivity of blue economy sectors, as well as deliver additional socio-economic benefits related to the environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development. The paper provides a definition of maritime multi-use and identifies the multi-uses with the highest potential in EU sea basins. In each sea basin, multi-use plays a different role as concerns sustainable development. For the Eastern Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, the MU focus should remain on the environmental pillar of sustainable development. In the North Sea, North Atlantic and Western Baltic Sea, addressing social sustainability seems a key precondition for success of MU in enhancement of sustainable spatial development at sea. Moreover, it has been suggested to introduce MU key global strategies such as SDGs or Macroregional strategies and action plans and to supplement maritime spatial planning with sectoral incentives and educational efforts as key vehicles supporting MU. The paper concludes by identifying aspects which, in order to inform maritime spatial planning and maritime governance regarding a more conscious application of the aforementioned concept, require further investigation. Key tasks are related to: more profound evaluation of performance of policies supporting MUs, researching the impact of MU on societal goals and on the MU costs and benefits, including external ones, and finally identifying the impact of MU on the development of various sectors and regions on land.

scholarly journals A Law and Economics Perspective on the EU Directive on Representative Actions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Visscher ◽  
M. Faure
Keyword(s):  
Law And Economics ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Collective Actions ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Opt Out ◽  
Contingency Fees ◽  
Party Funding ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article provides an analysis of the Directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers of 25 November 2020. The Directive enables qualified entities to bring representative actions on behalf of the consumer. The article uses a Law and Economics approach to stress the advantages of collective actions as a tool to remedy rational apathy and free-rider behaviour. The article therefore in principle welcomes the fact that this Directive will lead to all Member States having some form of collective redress. However, it is rather difficult to fit this Directive into the economic criteria for centralization as there is no obvious danger of cross-border externalities or a race-to-the-bottom. The article is critical of the fact that the Directive only provides for a representative action and does not mention the alternative of a group action (sometimes referred to as a class action). This is especially problematic if there are very few qualified entities that could bring the representative action. Furthermore, the fact that Member States may choose an opt-in procedure instead of an opt-out procedure is critically evaluated. The most problematic aspect of the Directive is the funding of the representative action. Punitive damages and contingency fees are rejected, and the possibility of third-party funding is restricted. It is therefore to be feared that this Directive, notwithstanding the good intentions, may not lead to much application in practice, since the question of how the representative action is to be financed is not resolved in any satisfactory manner.

scholarly journals The Impact of the Implementation of Cohesion Policy on the Sustainable Development of EU Countries

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (15) ◽  
pp. 4173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramona Pîrvu ◽  
Cristian Drăgan ◽  
Gheorghe Axinte ◽  
Sorin Dinulescu ◽  
Mihaela Lupăncescu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Official Data ◽  
The Eu

The impact of implementation of cohesion policy on the sustainable development of EU countries is of great interest and presents a number of actual challenges. This research aims to evaluate the impact and the effects of the cohesion policy among the Member States using hierarchical clustering analysis in order to identify how the selected variables affect the sustainable development adopted models. The variables used in the analysis were selected on the basis of official data provided by the European Commission, SDG Index and Dashboards Reports and the EU Cohesion Monitor. The results of the research have led to the grouping of the 28 Member States in a number of six clusters, identifying performers but also those countries that have a high potential for sustainable development or which require increased attention to be sustained in recovering existing gaps. The results of the study can be a starting point for policy makers and other stakeholders involved in their efforts to support sustainable development through effective and effective policies.

scholarly journals How Is Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals Measured? Comparing Four Approaches for the EU

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7675
Author(s):  
Guillaume Lafortune ◽  
Grayson Fuller ◽  
Guido Schmidt-Traub ◽  
Christian Kroll
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Methodological Choices ◽  
Data Gaps ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
The Eu

Evidence-based policymaking must be rooted in sound data to inform policy priorities, budget allocations, and tracking of progress. This is especially true in the case of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as they provide the policy framework that all 193 UN member states have pledged to achieve by 2030. Good data and clear metrics are critical for each country to take stock of where it stands, devise pathways for achieving the goals, and track progress. Current assessments of the EU’s performance on the SDGs, however, tend to reach different findings and policy conclusions on where the priorities for further action lie, which can be confusing for researchers and policymakers. In order to demystify the drivers of such differences and make them transparent, this paper compares and contrasts the results obtained by four SDG monitoring approaches. We identify three main elements that are responsible for most of the differences: (i) the use of pre-defined targets for calculating baseline assessments and countries’ trajectories; (ii) the inclusion of measures that track not only domestic performance, but also the EU’s transboundary impacts on the rest of the world; and (iii) the use of non-official statistics to bridge data gaps, especially for biodiversity goals. This paper concludes that there is not one “correct” way of providing an assessment of whether the EU and EU member states are on track to achieve the goals, but we illustrate how the different results are the outcomes of certain methodological choices. More “forward-looking” policy trackers are needed to assess implementation efforts on key SDG transformations.

Public Security Derogations to the Free Movement of EU Citizens and Preventive Criminal Law: A Collision between Ever-Expanding Concepts?

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 293-319
Author(s):  
Alejandro Sánchez Frías
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Public Security ◽  
European Level ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
The Eu

The threat of foreign terrorist fighters has led to the development of preventive criminal law on an international and European level. The EU Directive on combating terrorism can have two impacts on the free movement of EU citizens. It directly calls upon Member States to criminalise the act of travelling, as well as other conduct that may be connected to a terrorist offence. In addition, ecj case law accepts EU criminal law as a basis for public security derogations against free movement. Therefore, the commission of any of the acts criminalised in the EU Directive on combating terrorism could be used as a reason to restrict the exercise of free movement by EU citizens. When Member States begin to adopt these measures, litigation on the balance between preventive criminal justice and free movement of EU citizens will increase.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document