sh.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Stalmokaite, Igne
Publications (9 of 9) Show all publications
diva2:1303780
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Insights into integration challenges in the Baltic Sea Region marine spatial planning: Implications for the HELCOM-VASAB principles
Show others...
2019 (English)In: Ocean and Coastal Management, ISSN 0964-5691, E-ISSN 1873-524X, no 175, p. 98-109Article in journal (Refereed) Published
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Environmental Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-37988 (URN)10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.03.023 (DOI)2-s2.0-85064041176 (Scopus ID)
Projects
BaltSpace
Available from: 2019-04-10 Created: 2019-04-10 Last updated: 2019-05-09Bibliographically approved
Hassler, B., Blažauskas, N., Gee, K., Luttmann, A., Morf, A., Piwowarczyk, J., . . . Zaucha, J. (2019). New generation EU directives, sustainability, and the role of transnationalcoordination in Baltic Sea maritime spatial planning. Ocean and Coastal Management (169), 254-263
Open this publication in new window or tab >>New generation EU directives, sustainability, and the role of transnationalcoordination in Baltic Sea maritime spatial planning
Show others...
2019 (English)In: Ocean and Coastal Management, ISSN 0964-5691, E-ISSN 1873-524X, no 169, p. 254-263Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The EU MSP Directive is an example of a so-called new generation directive, which gives Member States room foradaptation to national contexts. The main objective in this article is to identify and analyse potential obstacles toeffective and efficient planning caused by the diversity among national MSP frameworks that the Directive'sbroad regulatory boundaries have led to. It is shown that planning approaches can differ substantially betweenneighbouring countries, which can make it challenging to coordinate across national borders. Divergence betweennational MSP frameworks can also emerge from how political, jurisdictional and, administrative systemsand traditions are organised in different Member States. It is shown that neighbouring countries can divergesubstantially in how the ecological, economic and social dimensions of sustainability are balanced, which canmake transnational coordination challenging. Furthermore, it is shown that stakeholder consultations differamong Member States in terms of, for example, who were invited, how the consultations were undertaken, andthe role they play in relation to political decision-making. Because of these, and other differences in how MSPframeworks are being developed in the Member States, it is suggested that regional integration should bepromoted with discretion. From this perspective, it seems reasonable to embrace diversity, while simultaneouslypromoting the adaptive management of coordination problems at lower levels, when, or if, they emerge or canbe foreseen. Thus, increased integration of national MSP frameworks should be viewed as an instrument toreduce concrete efficiency losses, rather than as an intrinsic good.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019
Keywords
Baltic sea, Sustainability, Ecosystem approach, Context-dependence, Transnational integration, Marine spatial planning, Stakeholder participation
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Environmental Studies; Baltic and East European studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-37168 (URN)10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.12.025 (DOI)000459518700026 ()2-s2.0-85059465398 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Swedish Research Council Formas
Available from: 2019-01-05 Created: 2019-01-05 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Stalmokaitė, I. & Yliskylä-Peuralahti, J. (2019). Sustainability Transitions in Baltic Sea Shipping: Exploring the Responses of Firms to Regulatory Changes. Sustainability, 11(7), Article ID 1916.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Sustainability Transitions in Baltic Sea Shipping: Exploring the Responses of Firms to Regulatory Changes
2019 (English)In: Sustainability, ISSN 2071-1050, E-ISSN 2071-1050, Vol. 11, no 7, article id 1916Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This study investigates how the introduction of more stringent environmental regulation regarding sulphur and nitrogen emission control areas induced shipping companies to react to a new situation and opened up a window of opportunity for build-up of niches for alternative vessel energy sources. By drawing on a multi-level perspective from the socio-technical transition literature, the study provides empirical evidence for how realignments in the environmental regulatory regime alter incumbent actors’ positions and produce varying environmental innovation responses to reduce air-borne pollution from shipping. The study illustrates that the stringency of a regional command-and-control regulation in combination with evolving pressures in the external landscape environment and shipping companies’ task environments are essential components shaping the adoption of environmental innovations. Although incremental innovations seem to dominate in a fossil fuel-based maritime transportation socio-technical system, our results demonstrate the role of regulations and the behaviour of frontrunners in the context of regime fragmentation and sustainability transition processes.

Keywords
sustainability transitions; environmental innovations; multi-level perspective; Baltic Sea shipping; incumbent companies; sulphur and nitrogen emission regulation
National Category
Political Science
Research subject
Baltic and East European studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-38007 (URN)10.3390/su11071916 (DOI)000466551600093 ()2-s2.0-85064084926 (Scopus ID)118/1.6.1/2016 (Local ID)118/1.6.1/2016 (Archive number)118/1.6.1/2016 (OAI)
Funder
The Foundation for Baltic and East European Studies, 118/1.6.1/2016
Available from: 2019-04-15 Created: 2019-04-15 Last updated: 2019-06-10Bibliographically approved
Hassler, B., Blažauskas, N., Gee, K., Luttmann, A., Morf, A., Joanna Piwowarczyk, J., . . . Jacek Zaucha, J. (2018). BONUS BALTSPACE: Deliverable 2.7: New generation EU Directives and the role of transnational coordination: Marine Spatial Planning of the Baltic Sea. Huddinge: Södertörns högskola
Open this publication in new window or tab >>BONUS BALTSPACE: Deliverable 2.7: New generation EU Directives and the role of transnational coordination: Marine Spatial Planning of the Baltic Sea
Show others...
2018 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The EU Maritime Spatial Planning Directive (MSP Directive) from 2014 is an example of a so-called new generation directive, which gives Member States room for adaptation to national contexts. Because of this larger room for adaptation, transposition becomes a process of designing domestic policy frameworks that fulfil the broad requirements of the Directive, rather than a simple and linear implementation procedure. However, allowing Member States to design marine spatial planning frameworks that fit domestic contexts, have thus far meant that regional coherence suffers. Although the pivotal role of transnational coordination is emphasised in the Directive, it does not stipulate how to set up such coordination, and the Member States have not yet been able to achieve much of self-organising in this area.A closer look is in this report taken on four policy-dimensions that are emphasised in the MSP Directive: Planning approach, Organisation, Sustainability, and Stakeholder inclusion. Based on in-depth case studies carried out in the BALTSPACE research project on MSP frameworks in Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden, examples of coordination and coherency challenges are described and discussed for each dimension.It is shown that planning approaches can differ substantially between neighbouring countries, which can make it challenging to coordinate across country borders. Even though they share the same (EU) regulatory pressures, Latvia and Lithuania, for example, are developing national MSP frameworks based on quite different conceptual foundations. Whereas Latvia has taken the Ecosystem Approach as a point of departure for constructing a new MSP framework, Lithuania has instead chosen to adapt existing functional zoning approaches to management of maritime areas. Such diversity may be possible to explain because of differing domestic contexts, but may nevertheless lead to coordination problems when coordination is needed.Divergence between national MSP frameworks can also emerge from different political, jurisdictional and, administrative systems and traditions, that is, in societal organisation. In an example based on case studies undertaken in Denmark and Sweden, it is shown that degree of societal centralisation and distribution of political power can be related to differences in how environmental protection and blue growth are prioritised. However, it is difficult to tell whether diverging prioritisations have led to differences on organisation, or of it is the other way around, that differences in organisation have led to diverging prioritisations.It is stated in the MSP Directive that the overarching objective is to promote sustainable development. The focus on sustainable development can be said to reflect the Directive’s new generation characteristics. The concept of sustainable development is broad and imprecise, which facilitates political agreement. However, when more precise details must be addressed, disagreements may surface that make implementation challenging. In cases where neighbouring countries diverge substantially on how ecological, economic and social sustainable ought to be balanced, finding agreements on how to coordinate policies and practices, when needed, can be difficult. Based on case studies in Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, and Sweden, it is, for example, argued that adoption of functional zoning or the Ecosystem Approach may not say much about how ecological, economic, and social dimensions are prioritised in different countries.Stakeholder consultations of some kind have historically been undertaken in all Baltic Sea countries. However, how such consultations have been undertaken, who have been invited, and the role the consultations play in relation to political decision-making differ, as shown in examples from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Poland. Because the MSP Directive is silent on how to design stakeholder consultations – it only says that they should be held – there is no political pressure on regional coordination. It is not clear from our data if these differences cause efficiency losses due to coordination deficits, but a reasonable assumption is that when, for example, marine natural resources are shared between two or more countries, jointly designed and undertaken consultations on specific transboundary issues potentially can promote transparency, understanding, and coordination.In conclusion, it is suggested that while regional coherency is often called for as a means to reduce inefficiencies, it might not be a good idea to integrate without discretion. Considering that the MSP Directive allows domestic context to matter when Member States design national MSP frameworks and that adaptation to domestic context is likely to reduce implantation gaps and increase the legitimacy of marine spatial planning, a more reasonable objective can be to embrace domestic diversity, while simultaneously adaptively promoting possibilities to solve coordination problems at lower levels, if they emerge or can be foreseen. From this perspective, increased coherence is a tool to reduce efficiency losses, rather than an intrinsic good.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Huddinge: Södertörns högskola, 2018. p. 27
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Environmental Studies; Baltic and East European studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-37205 (URN)2186/3.1.1/2014 (Local ID)2186/3.1.1/2014 (Archive number)2186/3.1.1/2014 (OAI)
Projects
BALTSPACE
Funder
The Foundation for Baltic and East European StudiesSwedish Research Council FormasBONUS - Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea region
Available from: 2019-01-09 Created: 2019-01-09 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Hassler, B., Gee, K., Gilek, M., Luttmann, A., Morf, A., Saunders, F., . . . Zaucha, J. (2018). Collective action and agency in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning: Transnational policy coordination in the promotion of regional coherence. Marine Policy, 92, 138-147
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Collective action and agency in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning: Transnational policy coordination in the promotion of regional coherence
Show others...
2018 (English)In: Marine Policy, ISSN 0308-597X, E-ISSN 1872-9460, Vol. 92, p. 138-147Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Despite the increasing attention given to marine spatial planning and the widely acknowledged need for transnational policy coordination, regional coherence has not yet improved a great deal in the Baltic Sea region. Therefore, the main objectives in this article are: (a) to map existing governance structures at all levels that influence how domestic marine spatial planning policy strategies are formed, (b) to identify specific challenges to improved regional cooperation and coordination, and (c) to discuss possible remedies. Based on data from in-depth case studies carried out in the BONUS BALTSPACE research project, it is shown that, despite the shared goal of sustainability and efficient resource use in relevant EU Directives, action plans and other policy instruments, domestic plans are emerging in diverse ways, mainly reflecting varying domestic administrative structures, sectoral interests, political prioritisations, and handling of potentially conflicting policy objectives. A fruitful distinction can be made between, on the one hand, regulatory institutions and structures above the state level where decision-making mechanisms are typically grounded in consensual regimes and, on the other hand, bilateral, issue-specific collaboration, typically between adjacent countries. It is argued that, to improve overall marine spatial planning governance, these two governance components need to be brought together to improve consistency between regional alignment and to enhance opportunities for countries to collaborate at lower levels. Issue-specific transnational working groups or workshops can be one way to identify and act upon such potential synergies.

Keywords
Baltic Sea Ecosystem approach Policy integration Marine spatial planning Stakeholder participation Social science Sustainable development
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Environmental Studies; Baltic and East European studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-34804 (URN)10.1016/j.marpol.2018.03.002 (DOI)000430765100015 ()2-s2.0-85043975735 (Scopus ID)
Projects
Marine Spatial Planning in the Baltic Sea Region – Integrating Scales, Sectors and KnowledgeTowards sustainable planning of Baltic marine space (BONUS BALTSPACE)
Funder
BONUS - Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea region, 185The Foundation for Baltic and East European Studies
Available from: 2018-03-28 Created: 2018-03-28 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Gilek, M., Saunders, F. & Stalmokaite, I. (2018). The Ecosystem Approach and Sustainable Development in Baltic Sea Marine Spatial Planning: The Social Pillar, a ‘Slow Train Coming’. In: David Langlet and Rosemary Rayfuse (Ed.), The Ecosystem Approach in Ocean Planning and Governance: Perspectives from Europe and Beyond (pp. 160-194). Nijhoff: Brill Nijhoff
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Ecosystem Approach and Sustainable Development in Baltic Sea Marine Spatial Planning: The Social Pillar, a ‘Slow Train Coming’
2018 (English)In: The Ecosystem Approach in Ocean Planning and Governance: Perspectives from Europe and Beyond / [ed] David Langlet and Rosemary Rayfuse, Nijhoff: Brill Nijhoff, 2018, p. 160-194Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

This chapter develops an analytical framework, drawing on the multidimensional role of integration, to explore how the Ecosystem Approach (EA) is variously conceived and practiced in marine spatial planning (MSP) in the Baltic Sea region (BSR). This framework is used to examine how EA practices reflect differing conceptions of sustainable development (SD) in Baltic marine and coastal areas. This work intersects with several of the other chapters on marine planning in this volume by explicitly exploring links between EA and SD through examination of in-depth BSR case studies. Results reveal that EA principles for MSP developed at the international level (HELCOM/VASAB) and in some national MSP settings (e.g. Latvia), combined with a common assumption of ecological limits to development, largely acknowledge a wide definition of EA as a governance approach building on societal choice and diverse knowledge inclusion (as seen e.g. in the Malawi principles). However, looking at more specific guidelines and MSP practices, there is a significant gap between espoused principles and the practical implementation of EA in BSR MSP, especially regarding social aspects of sustainability such as participation, social inclusion and knowledge pluralism. While work on ecological services in EA looks promising as a means of developing joined-up thinking between ecological and economic interests, it is uncertain whether this approach can deliver on EA’s social sustainability ambitions. We conclude the chapter by discussing ways that could strengthen the social pillar in MSP as a form of governance to bridge the gap between EA principles and practice.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Nijhoff: Brill Nijhoff, 2018
Series
Publications on Ocean Development, ISSN 0924-1922
Keywords
Marine and coastal management, ecosystem-based approach, MSP, social sustainability, Sustainable Development Goal 14, marine governance, maritime planning
National Category
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Research subject
Environmental Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-37186 (URN)10.1163/9789004389984_007 (DOI)2186/3.1.1/2014 (Local ID)978-90-04-38998-4 (ISBN)2186/3.1.1/2014 (Archive number)2186/3.1.1/2014 (OAI)
Projects
Baltspace
Funder
The Foundation for Baltic and East European Studies, 2186/3.1.1/2014BONUS - Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea region, 185
Available from: 2019-01-08 Created: 2019-01-08 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Hassler, B., Blažauskas, N., Gee, K., Gilek, M., Janßen, H., Luttmann, A., . . . Zaucha, J. (2017). BONUS BALTSPACE D2:2: Ambitions and Realities in Baltic Sea Marine Spatial Planning and the Ecosystem Approach: Policy and Sector Coordination in Promotion of Regional Integration. Huddinge: Södertörns högskola
Open this publication in new window or tab >>BONUS BALTSPACE D2:2: Ambitions and Realities in Baltic Sea Marine Spatial Planning and the Ecosystem Approach: Policy and Sector Coordination in Promotion of Regional Integration
Show others...
2017 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This report is part of the BONUS BALTSPACE project and is focused on challenges for policy and sector integration in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning (MSP). The main objectives have been to identify concrete coordination problems, to analyse why they have emerged and to discuss possible remedies. It is based on selected aspects extracted from case studies carried out in this project related to the development of regional MSP approaches in Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Sweden and on an additional case study on the HELCOM-VASAB Working Group on MSP. To facilitate the analysis of vertical policy interactions between institutions at different levels as well as of horizontal interactions over sector and country borders, an analytical framework was constructed. This framework consists of two main components; (a) institution-driven coordination where institutions such as global treaties, the EU, regional organisations, and state authorities provide boundaries for decisions taken at lower levels and (b) benefit-driven coordination capturing horizontal coordination across sector and country borders.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Huddinge: Södertörns högskola, 2017. p. 69
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Baltic and East European studies; Environmental Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-34036 (URN)
Projects
Towards sustainable planning of Baltic marine space (BONUS BALTSPACE)
Funder
BONUS - Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea region
Available from: 2018-01-08 Created: 2018-01-08 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Saunders, F., Gilek, M., Gee, K., Dahl, K., Hassler, B., Luttmann, A., . . . Zaucha, J. (2017). BONUS BALTSPACE Deliverable D2.4: MSP as a governance approach? Knowledge integration challenges in MSP in the Baltic Sea. Huddinge: Södertörns högskola
Open this publication in new window or tab >>BONUS BALTSPACE Deliverable D2.4: MSP as a governance approach? Knowledge integration challenges in MSP in the Baltic Sea
Show others...
2017 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Developing integrative decision-making underpinned by a diverse knowledge base is seen as essential to meet marine spatial planning’s (MSP) sustainable development aspirations. In contributing to a better understanding of how this might be achieved, this report considers knowledge integration challenges drawing on several MSP empirical cases across the Baltic Sea Region. Each case-study, involves Baltic Sea states at different stages of developing national marine spatial plans. At the Baltic-wide level, HELCOM-VASAB has interpreted the Ecosystem Approach in MSP as relying heavily on an evidence-base informed by natural scientific and expert knowledge. The results of the report show that challenges arise when trying to apply scientific knowledge to MSP events or processes for a number of reasons such as, incomplete data and associated substantial uncertainty or because stakeholders contest the policy interpretation of the data. This raises questions of how to assess or evaluate the quality and comprehensiveness/sufficiency of scientific and stakeholder knowledge or input into MSP decision-making, particularly in highly politicised, conflictual contexts, such as the integration of parts of the fishing sector in MSP in Poland. MSP in German territorial waters provides a positive example, where science and stakeholder knowledge input have been integrated in decision-making through informal and formal processes. This case exhibits evidence of social learning where authorities have reflected on previous experiences and invested in actively nurturing the meaningful participation of a wide variety of stakeholders (to form a community of practice) over an extended period of time. The key findings of the report call for more attention to be paid to ways that scientific and stakeholder knowledge can be fruitfully incorporated in MSP, through initiatives such as: the development of knowledge evaluation measures; drawing more actively on social science expertise to help facilitate processes of stakeholder engagement and knowledge inclusion; and paying more attention to how to include heterogeneous socio-cultural values and knowledge (placed-based) in a way that improves the salience of scientific knowledge and the legitimacy of MSP decision-making.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Huddinge: Södertörns högskola, 2017. p. 36
Keywords
Baltic Sea; ecosystem approach; knowledge integration; Marine spatial planning; scientific knowledge; social learning; social science
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Baltic and East European studies; Environmental Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-34035 (URN)
Projects
Towards sustainable planning of Baltic marine space (BONUS BALTSPACE)
Funder
BONUS - Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea region
Available from: 2018-01-08 Created: 2018-01-08 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Saunders, F. P., Gilek, M., Gee, K., Göke, C., Hassler, B., Lenninger, P., . . . Zaucha, J. (2016). BALTSPACE Deliverable: D1.2: Final Guidance Document on Analysing Possibilities and Challenges for MSP Integration. Stockholm: BONUS
Open this publication in new window or tab >>BALTSPACE Deliverable: D1.2: Final Guidance Document on Analysing Possibilities and Challenges for MSP Integration
Show others...
2016 (English)Report (Other academic)
Alternative title[en]
BONUS BALTSPACE Deliverable D1.2 : Possibilities and Challenges for MSP Integration
Abstract [en]

This report makes a case for examining the role of integration and its links to how sustainable development is variably expressed in different marine spatial planning (MSP) contexts. The aim of the report is to refine an analytical approach to examine integration in MSP in the Baltic Sea through consideration of preliminary empirical results from a broad range of case studies. MSP is conceptualised here as a governance platform for improving processes to enable political decision-making with the aim to achieve sustainable development of marine space. Integration is universally espoused as a means to address a variety of challenges closely related to MSP’s sustainable development ambitions, such as supporting inter-sectoral decision-making, stakeholder engagement and cross-border interaction, but its role, value and implementation in MSP has not been examined in any empirical detail. Although increased integration may well have positive effects on MSP processes and outcomes, in some instances, the contrary might also be the case. With these thoughts in mind, this report argues that we need to analyse integration as a multidimensional concept in MSP processes and outcomes. Based on understandings of integration derived from MSP experience and concepts in the broader social science literature, an analytical framework is developed to examine MSP practice in the Baltic Sea. Integration is conceptualised as including transboundary/cross-border, policy/sectoral, stakeholder and knowledge dimensions. Despite common requirements under the European Union MSP Directive and policies, national jurisdictions are likely to adopt MSP differently, which has implications for the role integration is likely to play in national and transnational MSP practice. Drawing on empirical data derived from national MSP studies, stakeholder dialogue forums and preliminary interviews with stakeholders the analytical framework is applied to examine how particular integration challenges play out in both national and transnational marine space across the Baltic Sea Region. The analytical framework is then used to structure an examination of several case studies from different parts of the Baltic Sea Region. Based on consideration of the empirical work and an analyses of previous experiences in science and practice we then propose some revisions to the initial analytical framework presented earlier. The revised analytical framework, while capturing the integration dimensions mentioned earlier, also includes consideration of the following aspects of integration: how ‘balance’ between sustainable development dimensions is exercised; the character of cross-boundary interactions; and temporal dynamics. Instead of a conclusion, short think-pieces are presented to capture the main insights of the report, which could be used to aid the examination of integration in MSP in other MSP contexts, beyond the Baltic Sea.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: BONUS, 2016. p. 43
Keywords
Marine Spatial Planning, integration, sustainable development, Baltic Sea Region, transnational, social science
National Category
Public Administration Studies Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Baltic and East European studies; Politics, Economy and the Organization of Society; Environmental Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-31193 (URN)
Projects
BONUS BALTSPACE
Funder
BONUS - Science for a better future of the Baltic Sea region, 942-2015-19
Available from: 2016-11-29 Created: 2016-11-21 Last updated: 2019-04-25Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications