Economics in Marine Spatial Planning

1. Introduction

Amidst growing threats posed by climate change and pollution in our oceans, the expanding utilization of marine zones for diverse activities like fishing, transportation, and recreation holds the potential to detrimentally impact the habitats of marine life, biodiversity, and the vital food security of numerous coastal communities worldwide. Consequently, this issue has ignited a heightened consciousness regarding the imperative for responsible management of marine areas, both within national jurisdictions and on the high seas (Sumaila et al. 2015; Waldron et al. 2020). Over the past two decades, Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) has become one of the most widely adopted management approaches used to address serious damage to marine areas while improving the well–being of people whose livelihoods are directly linked to these areas. When adopting MSP strategy, policymakers typically identify a variety of reasons, ranging from environmental, biological, political, socio–economic, and national security.

In this contribution, we focus on the economic aspects of the decision–making process and make a twofold contribution to the literature. First, we investigate how economic issues are integrated into MSP efforts in British Columbia (BC), Canada, and other similar jurisdictions. Second, we examine how this economic information has been applied and used to inform MSP decisions. Thus far, there has been little discussion about incorporating economic information in MSP, therefore, our goal is to fill this gap by addressing the following key questions: 1) are value–added from MSP analyzed quantitatively? 2) how do you assess the contributions (i.e., jobs, income) of the various sectors of MSP? and 3) are the spatial and temporal allocation of marine scarce resources analyzed?

The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 outlines the general context of the study and definition of MSP. Section 3 introduces the methodology of the study while Section 4 presents a literature review on economic and social perspectives. Section 5 explains how economic questions are incorporated into MSP efforts. Section 6 discusses the results of the review. Section 7 concludes the paper. Finally, the appendix features summary tables for each question, together with case studies from Australia, South Africa and Belgium.

2. General Context of the Study and MSP Definition:

Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) is an approach used to manage and allocate the various activities and uses of marine and coastal areas in a systematic and sustainable manner. It involves the spatially and temporally explicit allocation of scarce marine spaces, resources, and services to competing uses, and the governance framework that designs, implements, and monitors these allocations. MSP is employed by the public sector to investigate and distribute human activities in marine areas over time and space to achieve specific objectives set forth in policy narratives. The Great Barrier Reef and Canada are recognized for their pioneering efforts in MSP (Day 2016). The Australian government introduced the Marine Park Act 1975 to safeguard coral reefs, while Canada’s Oceans Act, established in 1996, governs the country’s national waters and has generated numerous regulations governing marine protected areas, fishing zones such as marine aquaculture, and the coordination of the territorial sea (Craig 2019). MSP aims to respond to increasing pressures on ocean space, support blue growth, preserve important marine zones, resolve conflicts in densely occupied ocean areas, and achieve sustainable development (The World Bank 2022; Ehler 2021).

This paper highlights key features of MSPs, including policy mechanisms, mandates, and regulations, in Canada and comparable jurisdictions. It discerns both similarities and distinctions in MSP policies and regulations across six developed countries, as outlined in Table A1 in the Appendix A.

MSP can also be defined from an economic perspective as the explicit allocation of scarce marine spaces, resources, and services to competing uses, along with the governance framework that implements and monitors this allocation. It is a process employed by the public sector to investigate and distribute human activities in marine areas over time and space to achieve specific policy objectives. MSP is used by countries like Vietnam and China to achieve economic and environmental objectives (Ehler and Douvere, 2009). The concept of MSP has evolved over time, with a focus on it being a continuous effort rather than a one-time action (Ehler 2021). Various countries articulate their official MSP definitions, as consolidated in Table A2 in the Appendix A.

The definition of Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) has evolved over time and has been influenced by different stages of its development. Initially, MSP was loosely referred to under various terminologies in the history of fisheries science as elucidated in Table A3 of the Appendix A. When applied at an ecosystem level, it represents a practical approach that moves toward ecosystem-based management of marine areas. Ehler and Douvere (2009) emphasized the importance of assessing the current status of marine areas and the tools that can be used to achieve specific goals, rather than focusing solely on the desired status. It is important to note that Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and MSPs, while closely related, are distinct concepts with separate definitions. MPAs can support the implementation of MSPs, but they can also be implemented independently to achieve various economic, biological, and environmental objectives. An MSP is a broader framework that includes MPAs, which in turn includes zoning (Borges et al. 2020). Economic assessments have played a significant role in evaluating the value of various marine activities, contributing to the design and management of MPAs by considering the economic costs and benefits associated with conservation measures (The World Bank 20221).

Figure 1 shows the three key stages in the use of economics in the MSP process. First, economics provides an understanding of the current state of the stock in terms of biomass, catches, landed values, etc. These bio–economic indicators form powerful tools for assessing the state of the marine zone, particularly in terms of overfishing and environmental degradation. This provides initial crucial information necessary for developing a successful MSP. Next, there are a multitude of decision–support tools (DSTs), such as cost–benefit analysis (CBA) and input–output analysis, which are used to support the development and implementation of the fisheries management strategy. Finally, economics can be used to help steer the MSP towards the desired outcomes.

3. Methodology

The research aims to describe the questions addressed by economic methods and approaches in the MSP process. The study conducted a comprehensive survey of peer-reviewed and grey literature, focusing on literature directly relevant to the use of economic information to inform MSP decisions. The research focused on jurisdictions similar to British Columbia, Canada, which have initiated or fully implemented MSPs, based on economic development indicators such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). The analysis primarily targeted developed economies and their national jurisdictions. The study did not depict the temporal progression of MSPs but provided a snapshot of available options to date, considering literature published after 2002, considering that MSPs gained academic recognition in the decades leading up to the year 2000, with the majority of relevant literature emerging post-2000, coinciding with the implementation of the Australian Great Barrier Reef Marine Parks Act (1975).

The review aimed to identify the main socio-economic information relevant to MSP and the range of research questions answered by economic methods and approaches in the selected jurisdictions (The World Bank 2022). The World Bank provides an overview of economic approaches and tools that can strengthen the economic case for MSP. It argues that adding robust economic analysis to the MSP process can increase buy-in, foster livelihoods, attract finance, and advance the long-term Blue Economy objective of protecting the ocean’s resources and ecosystems. The paper emphasizes the spatially and temporally explicit allocation of scarce marine resources and services to competing uses, and the governance framework that designs, implements, and monitors this allocation. It also highlights the importance of understanding the economic trade-offs associated with MSP and the potential of a sustainable ocean economy (The World Bank 2022). The European Maritime Spatial Planning Platform discusses research on socio-economic aspects of MSP, focusing on methodologies and approaches used in other projects (EU MSP Platform 2018).

4. Economic and Social Aspects of MSP

4.1. Main Socio–Economic Aspects Included in MSP

In a recent review conducted by Chalastani et al. (2021), the strong interconnection between ecosystems and Marine Spatial Planning (MSPs) was emphasized, drawing on the ecosystem-based management approach (Douvere 2009; Crowder and Norse 2008; Gilliland et al. 2008; White et al. 2012; Lester et al. 2013; Arkema et al. 2015). This underscores the pivotal significance of interactions within an ecosystem, not only for MSPs but also for other spatial planning strategies (Longato et al. 2021).

The integration of human activities into MSPs involves a critical aspect: defining undertakings within the marine environment. Socio-economic factors considered typically include traditional pursuits such as fishing, shipping, transportation, and tourism, alongside emerging sectors like offshore wind energy, mariculture, dredging, mineral extraction, and biodiversity conservation. MSPs often encompass elements such as land use and zoning, social indicators (e.g., population, age, measures of livelihood sustainability), and economic parameters (employment, monthly income per inhabitant) (Suris–Regueiro et al. 2021a, 2021b; Fernandes et al. 2022).

Over recent decades, MSPs have evolved from simple zoning plans to complex, integrated, adaptive, multiple-use planning (Douvere and Ehler 2009; Ehler 2021). Important regulatory changes, such as the European Union (EU) Directive 2014/89/EU on MSP, have significantly shaped these initiatives (Schaefer and Barale 2011; Buhl–Mortensen et al. 2017; Friess and Gremaud–Colombier 2021).

The European Maritime Spatial Planning Platform highlights the importance of incorporating socio-economic aspects into MSP to reduce or avoid conflicts between economic and non-economic functions and pressures. It also emphasizes the need to consider socio-economic information in MSP data and assessment tools, land sea interactions, and MSP for blue growth, as well as the challenges and recommendations for integrating socio-economic input into ecosystem-based MSP (Fernandes et al. 2022].

The World Bank provides a comprehensive and integrated investment framework for the Blue Economy through MSP, aiming to reduce investment risk, improve investor certainty, and address environmental and social issues. The World Bank’s guidance note on "Applying Economic Analyses to Marine Spatial Planning" offers tools and data for a robust economic analysis of the MSP process, highlighting the potential benefits of such analyses in fostering livelihoods, attracting finance, and drawing financing for marine projects within a Blue Economy (The World Bank 2022).

The literature highlights a challenge in MSP, where socio-economic aspects are not consistently considered, with a predominant focus on environmental dynamics. However, recent developments indicate a growing prominence of social aspects in MSP considerations. Concepts such as social sustainability, social equity, social dimensions, and ocean justice are gaining recognition, supported by case studies in various regions (Flannery et al. 2016; Frederiksen et al. 2021; Gilek et al. 2021; Saunders et al. 2020; Bennett et al. 2020, 2021; Issifu et al. 2023; Maini et al. 2023; Grimmel et al. 2019; Baker et al. 2020). Despite the breadth of the subject matter, Table 4 provides examples of the socio-economic aspects addressed in the analyzed case studies.

4.2. Different Uses of Socio–Economic Aspects in MSP

Social and economic aspects can be included in the MSP for different purposes and in different stages, such as planning, development, maturation and implementation. To include these aspects, multiple strategies can be followed and DSTs can be used.

The active involvement of all stakeholders in the planning process stands as a central strategy for effectively incorporating socio-economic aspects into Marine Spatial Planning (MSP), a subject extensively examined by (Pomeroy and Douvere, 2008). From the engagement of local actors to navigating conflicts among influential entities, including both companies and governments, the convergence of stakeholders presents one of the most intricate challenges for MSP. A Danish case study by Ramírez–Monsalve and van Tatenhove in 2020 underscores the importance of understanding power dynamics within MSP, shedding light on how these dynamics shape winners and losers. Through discursive analysis of planning-related documents, regulations, and news reports, the study unveils the mechanisms of power at play and their impact on the MSP process. Notably, the study highlights those sectors capable of providing more data gain power advantages due to the emphasis on data acquisition and stringent timelines.

Another case study, focusing on the Northeast Ocean Planning process in the US, particularly in Massachusetts Bay, emphasizes the imperative to assess the democratic and inclusive nature of MSP processes to ensure effective participatory engagement (Flannery et al. 2018). Kirkfeldt et al.’s 2020 study delves into the deeply ingrained traditions and values within planning teams, referred to collectively as planning culture, across three Northern European countries (Denmark, Norway, and Germany), elucidating how planning culture influences MSP. Case studies further scrutinize stakeholders’ social and economic values and perceptions concerning new marine environment situations, such as the introduction of human-made structures (Elrick–Barr et al. 2022).

The socio-economic dimensions are not only considered during planning and evaluation but also play a crucial role in monitoring phases. A framework of analysis, as analyzed by Buhl–Mortensen et al. in 2017 through the EU-funded MESMA project, facilitates monitoring and evaluation in diverse marine areas across Europe.

Cross-border resources management poses a unique challenge in MSP, requiring the harmonization of different political, economic, and social perceptions and objectives across multiple jurisdictions. Papers by Ehler and Douvere in 2009, Albotoush and Shau–Hwai in 2023, Kull et al. in 2021, and Ansong et al. in 2021 explore various aspects of transboundary MSP, such as defining management authorities, establishing international good practices, and providing evaluation frameworks for institutional integration.

Numerous case studies shed light on specific initiatives related to cross-border cooperation, including the SINMORAT project in Spain, Portugal, and France (Gómez–Ballesteros et al. 2021), transboundary MSP in the Bay of Biscay (Pinarbasi et al. 2020), and collective action in Baltic Sea MSP (Hassler et al. 2018). These initiatives offer insights into challenges and solutions related to social acceptability, ecological and social/management scale mismatches, and joint risk assessments.

A critical aspect of MSP involves securing adequate funding for establishment and management. Economic analysis plays a crucial role in attracting funding, considering long-term policies and financial sustainability throughout planning, monitoring, evaluation, and revision phases. Funding sources range from government budgets and private sector financing to innovative mechanisms like blue bonds, foundation funds, and trusts. The importance of aligning funding mechanisms with MSP objectives is emphasized to ensure financial support and sustainable implementation.

Incorporating new activities into marine space, such as marine renewable energies, is a significant challenge addressed through various case studies. These studies analyze factors such as anticipating pressures on ocean energy, legal challenges and opportunities, institutional barriers, planning priorities in a climate neutrality era, and local stakeholder opposition.

4.3. Socio–Economic Aspects in the MSP Decision Support Tools

In the context of MSP, the effective utilization of Decision Support Tools (DSTs) is crucial due to the dynamic nature of maritime space and the diverse interests and conflicts among stakeholders. Pinarbasi et al. (2017) conducted a comprehensive global review, analyzing 34 DSTs employed in 28 MSP initiatives. The findings revealed varying levels of complexity, applicability, and challenges such as limited functionality, tool stability, costs, and the consideration of economic and social decision problems. DSTs should address spatial and temporal dynamics, be multifunctional, user-friendly, and freely accessible. Geospatial DSTs, utilizing technologies like GIS/Spatial Analytics, Global Navigation Satellite System, Earth Observation, and others, play a central role in data collection, planning, and environmental monitoring.

Depellegrin et al. (2021) explored the impact of regulatory frameworks, specifically the Directive on MSP, on spatial and non-spatial DST development. The study highlighted the importance of addressing challenges related to uncertainty and incorporating artificial intelligence. Geospatial technologies, encompassing various tools such as LiDAR, Radar, and Sonar, are essential for the development of DSTs.

DSTs are instrumental in data collection, planning, and monitoring, encompassing socio-economic aspects for detecting areas of specific human uses and pressures. They facilitate the development and comparison of alternative scenarios for identifying ’least-cost’ solutions and conducting benefit-cost analysis for management measures.

The use of DSTs relies on cumulative impacts assessments (CIA) or cumulative effects assessments (CEA). Challenges include avoiding double counting and addressing complexities and confounding impacts. Innovative models, combining human pressure data and GIS platforms, provide visual representations to support decision-making.

Various methods, such as the Delphi Method, Soft Systems Methodology, and Bayesian modeling, are employed in MSP management. Initiatives like "ocean accounting (OA)" integrate economic information into MSP, organizing ocean information to support the integrated consideration of social, environmental, and economic values.

End-user perspectives on DSTs in MSP emphasize the importance of tool-user interaction and a publicly accepted MSP workflow. Users seek tools with multifunctionality, integrity, and ease of use. Challenges include the underrepresentation of socio-economic information in spatial data, often presented qualitatively and in non-spatial formats. To address these challenges, a participatory mapping approach is proposed, collecting stakeholders’ knowledge and opinions and translating them into spatial data for a comprehensive representation.

5. Application of Economics to Inform MSP Decisions

Examining the potential trade-offs between current and future competing uses of ocean space in monetary terms is integral to effective MSP. Cost and benefit estimation should encompass the full implications of MSP actions, incorporating intrinsic and nonmarket values (Sumaila 2021). Resource allocation in MSP often involves trade-offs, as a portion of marine space allocated to one activity, like a wind farm, may preclude allocation to other uses, such as oil extraction (European Commission, 2020). Economic desirability, from a social standpoint, is contingent upon overall benefits outweighing costs (European Commission 2020).

Policy-oriented economists utilize models of social conflict to explore how MSP can facilitate win-win situations and resolve conflicts among ocean users. An exemplary trade-off analysis focused on alternative ocean uses is the study by White et al. (2012) for the Massachusetts Ocean Management Plan. Their assessment of conflicts between offshore wind energy, commercial fishing, and whale-watching sectors revealed the potential for preventing losses to the incumbent fishery and whale-watching sectors while generating extra value for the energy sector through MSP (White et al. 2012).

Apart from cost and benefit analysis, economic tools like participatory assessment and spatial software packages such as Integrated Valuation of Environmental Services and Trade-offs (InVEST) are employed to assess MSP’s impact on biodiversity and ecosystem services. For instance, in Belize, InVEST was used to analyze trade-offs resulting from alternative Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan scenarios, aiding decision-making in favor of informed management (Rosenthal et al. 2015).

Evaluating potential contributions to jobs and incomes generated by various MSP sectors involves using input-output economic tools. Taylor et al. (2015) utilized IMPLAN modeling systems to calculate the economic contribution of Washington State’s marine sectors, offering insights into the economic impacts of alternative scenarios on both the coastal region and the entire state. Adaptive management, recognized as crucial to MSP evolution, has been effectively employed in countries like China, Australia, Norway, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the United States (Frazão Santos et al. 2014, 2019).

An essential economic question focuses on MSP’s role in achieving Blue Economy goals. An impact pathway assessment helps identify critical policy entry points, as demonstrated by Alpizar et al. (2020), who assessed policy instruments to reduce agrochemicals or plastic waste in the ocean in Costa Rica.

Understanding the true costs and benefits of MSP implementation involves identifying beneficiaries and cost bearers under different scenarios. Considering the differentiated impact on indigenous groups, local communities, and businesses, as exemplified in Washington’s MSP process, helps reduce conflicts and enhances buy-in (Taylor et al. 2015).

Effectively evaluating MSP outcomes is crucial for design and implementation. Causal links between MSP and measurable outcome indicators should be established, considering impacts on poverty dimensions, livelihoods, food security, and wealth generation. Learning from the experience of evaluating Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), which has shown economic cases for public investments to improve biodiversity and economic development, can inform MSP evaluation strategies (Waldron et al. 2020, Dahmouni and Sumaila 2023).

6. Discussion

The slow pace of implementing Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) in some coastal jurisdictions can be attributed to various reasons, including financial and economic obstacles, administrative red tape, and the complex nature of MSP as part of a comprehensive jurisdictional strategy (Ehler 2021). Integrating economic issues into future MSPs presents several challenges, including the need to secure public funds and the consideration of long-term benefits versus short-term costs. Policymakers face the challenge of evaluating MSPs in the context of intergenerational considerations, which raises questions about the weight given to future generations in decision-making processes (Sumaila 2021).

Efforts to safeguard the world’s oceans are increasingly being emphasized at international meetings, particularly through the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While SDG 14 (Life Below Water) is directly related to MSP, other goals such as clean water and sanitation, affordable and clean energy, decent work and economic growth, innovation, industry and infrastructure, and climate action are also relevant to MSP. MSP can be driven by SDG 14 and, in turn, can contribute to other goals involving diverse economic components. Additionally, recognizing multi-stakeholder communal use and stewardship of marine space, and the well-being of coastal communities, particularly marginalized groups, presents another challenge (Issifu et al. 2022). MSP needs to address the viability and sustainability of these communities and their subsistence needs. Economic and social questions have become increasingly relevant in MSP, encompassing not only traditional aspects such as fisheries or transport impacts but also broader issues such as social equity, redistributive capacity, and intangible culture. However, challenges remain, including incorporating long-term change through adaptive approaches and considering transboundary impacts. Technological advances and more participatory and inclusive processes can facilitate addressing these challenges. A better understanding of the costs and benefits, trade-offs, and distributive implications from a socio-economic perspective can guide policymakers, users, and governments in promoting a sustainable ocean economy. The application of economic information and analysis can also ensure that MSP receives sufficient financing for successful implementation (Sumaila et al. 2022). Despite the increasing global adoption of MSP, significant strides are required to bridge existing gaps in incorporating economic dimensions into planning processes.

7. Conclusions

The study aimed to evaluate the integration of economic questions into Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) efforts in British Columbia, Canada, and similar jurisdictions. It analyzed the economic tools used by managers to apply economic information to inform MSP decisions. The study discussed practical economic questions and tools to incorporate economic information within MSP, highlighting the importance of Decision Support Tools (DSTs) in MSP and the attention given to incorporating economic questions. It identified input-output analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) as the most commonly used methods for estimating the economic impacts of implementing MSP. For example, input-output economic tools are used to estimate the total economic contributions, including indirect and induced impacts of marine sectors. The study demonstrated how each economic tool can be utilized to address potential gaps in MSP, while acknowledging the limitations of these tools (such as marine sectoral disaggregation, overestimations, and trade-off estimations) and the need to complement analyses with qualitative approaches. The review emphasized that applying economic information to support the design and implementation of MSPs would lead to better decisions, foster livelihoods, attract finance, and advance the long-term blue economy goals of conserving the oceans’ resources and ecosystems.