Mapping and assessment of cultural ecosystem services of Latvian coastal areas

Mapping of cultural ecosystem services (CES) in marine and coastal areas is still recognised as a conceptually and technically challenging task, due to the difficulties in establishing a link between the biophysical features of the coastal ecosystem and the supply of services such as recreation and tourism, bird watching and enjoyment of other assets of nature. This was also one of the major challenges in ecosystem service mapping for the Maritime Spatial Plan for Internal Waters, Territorial Waters and Economic Exclusive Zone of the Republic of Latvia. Suitability of the coastal areas for marine tourism and leisure activities was chosen as an indicator to map the CES – physical and experiential interactions. The method involved the compilation of field data from a survey of visitors at the beach and on coastal infrastructure, serving as the input for the multi-criteria assessment of CES. Four criteria were applied to assess the suitability of the coastal areas for marine tourism and leisure activities: i) accessibility; ii) proximity to densely populated areas; iii) suitability of the area for a particular (niche) tourism or leisure activity; and iv) recreational use. The selected criteria provide an overall assessment framework, which integrates the ecosystem service potential, benefiting areas, flow and demand aspects. The CES mapping and assessment results were applied to the maritime spatial planning for proposing areas of priority for tourism development, as well as assessing the impacts of the proposed solutions for other uses of the sea. The Latvian approach for mapping of the cultural services in coastal areas was selected as the ESMERALDA case study and examined at the stakeholder workshop in Prague, September 2016

Pan-Baltic stakeholders’ dialogue on MSP : Synthesis report from PartiSEApate single-sector workshops held in 2013

For a sustainable and integrated planning of the sea space across the Baltic Sea region, planners and stakeholders have to be engaged in holistic, pan-Baltic thinking where the whole Baltic Sea is considered as one ecosystem and one planning space. However MSP related experiences so far shows that interests are often expressed from one sector or one national or regional perspective only. There is a lack of information exchange between the different maritime sectors as well MSP support structures (i.e. data providers and researchers) and spatial planners. And at the same time there is insufficient communication within the sectors at pan-Baltic level. Therefore the PartiSEApate project has launched the transnational stakeholders’ dialogue series to address these shortcomings and to encouraging a pan-Baltic approach for those topics whose spatial dimension transcend national borders.https://commons.wmu.se/partiseapate/1001/thumbnail.jp

A multitiered approach for grassland ecosystem services mapping and assessment: The Viva Grass tool

Throughout the second half of the 20th Century, the area of semi-natural grasslands in the Baltic States decreased substantially, due to agricultural abandonment in some areas and intensification in more productive soil types. In order to halt the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services provided by grasslands, the LIFE+ programme funded project, LIFE Viva Grass, aims at developing an integrated planning tool that will support ecosystem-based planning and sustainable grassland management. LIFE Viva Grass integrated planning tool is spatially explicit and allows the user to assess the provision and trade-offs of grassland ecosystem services within eight project case study areas in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. In order to ensure methodological adaptability, the structure of the LIFE Viva Grass integrated planning tool follows the framework of the tiered approach. In a multi-tier system, each consecutive tier entails an increase in data requirements, methodological complexity or both. The present paper outlines the adaptation of the tiered approach for mapping and assessing ecosystem services provided by grasslands in the Baltic States. The first tier corresponds to a deliberative decision process: The matrix approach is used to assess the potential supply of grassland ecosystem services based on expert estimations. Expert values are subsequently transferred to grassland units and therefore made spatially explicit. The data collected in the first tier was further enhanced through a Principal Components Analysis (PCA) in order to explore ES bundles in tier 2. In the third tier, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis is used to target specific policy questions

Ecosystem services mapping and assessment for policy- and decision-making: Lessons learned from a comparative analysis of European case studies

This paper analyses and compares a set of case studies on ecosystem services (ES) mapping and assessment with the purpose of formulating lessons learned and recommendations. Fourteen case studies were selected during the EU Horizon 2020 “Coordination and Support Action” ESMERALDA to represent different policy- and decision-making processes throughout the European Union, across a wide range of themes, biomes and scales. The analysis is based on a framework that addresses the key steps of an ES mapping and assessment process, namely policy questions, stakeholder identification and involvement, application of mapping and assessment methods, dissemination and communication and implementation. The analysis revealed that most case studies were policy-orientated or gave explicit suggestions for policy implementation in different contexts, including urban, rural and natural areas. Amongst the findings, the importance of starting stakeholder engagement early in the process was confirmed in order to generate interest and confidence in the project and to increase their willingness to cooperate. Concerning mapping and assessment methods, it was found that the integration of methods and results is essential for providing a comprehensive overview from different perspectives (e.g. social, economic). Finally, lessons learned for effective implementation of ES mapping and assessment results are presented and discussed

Coherence between marine and land use planning: public attitudes to landscapes in the context of siting a wind park along the Latvian coast of the Baltic Sea

<div><p>The aim of this paper is to contribute to coherence in marine, coastal and land use planning and management from the perspective of landscape values. At a time when new sea uses are emerging and marine spatial planning laws and regulations are being adopted, but have not yet been put into practice, research studies are required that provide spatial planners with informed insights concerning public stakeholder attitudes to controversial policies. The undertaken research explored the attitudes of two important social groups (local residents and tourists/recreational users) regarding locating wind parks in the marine and/or terrestrial environment along the Latvian coast of the Baltic Sea. The results of the study indicate that both groups support land-based wind park development versus offshore. Moreover, the visibility of wind turbines influences the willingness of tourists to visit recreation sites and impacts directly on their duration of stay. Research findings indicate that policy makers and spatial planners from both marine and land domains should adopt a broader and more integrated approach when setting priorities and allocating space for development activities where both domains are involved.</p></div

Application of the marine ecosystem services approach in the development of the maritime spatial plan of Latvia

The Maritime Spatial Plan for Internal Waters, Territorial Waters and Economic Exclusive Zone of the Republic of Latvia is a long-term spatial planning document, which defines the permitted uses of the sea and conditions for development. Work on maritime spatial planning (MSP) in Latvia was a novel process from different aspects including incorporation of the concept of ecosystem services (ES) into MSP. In the course of the MSP process, marine ES were mapped and assessed, and impacts of proposed spatial solutions for the use of the sea were assessed. The scope of mapping and assessment of ES was limited by data availability and expert knowledge on marine ecosystems. MSP in Latvia was an open and transparent process with an active involvement of different stakeholder groups. Marine ES assessment results were visualized and used during the public consultations to highlight the marine areas providing the most significant social benefits as well as to facilitate debate about potential impacts arising from proposed uses of the sea. The marine ES approach, in a spatially explicit manner, provided stakeholders and policymakers with a strategic framework to address a complex social–ecological system.EDITED BY Joao Rodrigue

The Water Framework Directive in the Baltic Sea Region Countries : Vertical implementation, horizontal integration and transnational cooperation

The European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD) was adopted in 2000. The WFD takes an integrated approach of water management and the overall objective is to achieve &quot;good water status&quot; for all waters in Europe by 2015. In the following report we investigate how the WFD has been implemented in 11 countries in the Baltic Sea Region (BSR). The aim here is to investigate the influence of the WFD implementation on the national spatial planning systems and to take a closer look at the relationship between spatial planning and water management. The investigated countries are Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden. In addition, we have investigated whether, and how, WFD ideas are applied in three non EU Member States in the BSR Belarus, Norway and the Russian Federation

Integrating ecosystem services into decision support for management of agroecosystems: Viva Grass tool

The area covered by low-input agroecosystems (e.g. semi-natural and permanent grasslands) in Europe has considerably decreased throughout the last century. To support more sustainable management practices, and to promote biodiversity and ecosystem service values of such agroecosystems a decision support tool was developed. The tool aims to enhance the operationalization of ecosystem services and address the challenge of their integration into spatial planning. The Viva Grass tool aims to enhance the maintenance of ecosystem services delivered by low-input agroecosystems. It does so by providing spatially explicit decision support for land-use planning and sustainable management of agroecosystems. The Viva Grass tool is a multi-criteria decision analysis tool for integrated planning. It is designed for farmers, spatial planners and policy makers to support decisions of management of agroecosystems. The tool has been tested to assess spatial planning in eight case studies across the Baltic States

Mapping and assessing ecosystem services in the EU - Lessons learned from the ESMERALDA approach of integration

The European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action ESMERALDA aimed at developing guidance and a flexible methodology for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) to support the EU member states in the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s Target 2 Action 5. ESMERALDA’s key tasks included network creation, stakeholder engagement, enhancing ecosystem services mapping and assessment methods across various spatial scales and value domains, work in case studies and support of EU member states in MAES implementation. Thus ESMERALDA aimed at integrating various project outcomes around four major strands: i) Networking, ii) Policy, iii) Research and iv) Application. The objective was to provide guidance for integrated ecosystem service mapping and assessment that can be used for sustainable decision-making in policy, business, society, practice and science at EU, national and regional levels. This article presents the overall ESMERALDA approach of integrating the above-mentioned project components and outcomes and provides an overview of how the enhanced methods were applied and how they can be used to support MAES implementation in the EU member states. Experiences with implementing such a large pan-European Coordination and Support Action in the context of EU policy are discussed and recommendations for future actions are given.ISSN:2367-819