1.
Cross-border cooperation
in the North Sea
Leo de Vrees, the
Netherlands
Riga, 29 September 2015

2.
Overview
• Context
• Policy document North Sea 2016 – 2021
• International cooperation
– International framework
– Plans from other countries
• Informal MSP North Sea Group
• Role of OSPAR
• Bilaterals
• INTERREG project
• Lessons learned
2 Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

3.
Context
• New (draft) Policy Document for the North Sea 2016 – 2021
(Netherlands part)
• This includes a vision for the North Sea 2050
• It incorporates MSFD measures (part 3 of the marine strategy)
• Formal consultation period January – June 2015
• ‘Tour de North Sea’: we sent draft to our neighbouring countries and
we visited Belgium, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany
• Aim was to discuss our plans and to identify possible areas for
further cooperation in addition to existing networks
3 30 september 2015Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

4.
Draft
Policy document on the North Sea 2016-2021
4 Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

5.
Spatial Agenda 2050
Aim: to pursue a development-oriented approach to the sea that leaves
room for new initiatives and allows flexible management of the sea.
Vision: The Netherlands benefits from a safe, clean, healthy and
ecologically diverse North Sea that contributes to the country’s
economic and social needs (relation to Blue Growth).
Five topics identified:
1. Building with nature: cultivating sea weeds, hard substrate/oyster
banks, sand mining
2. Energy transition at sea: increase generated MW/km2 and other
forms of production (wave, geotherm, power to gas, energy grid)
3. Multiple use of space: multiple ways of generating energy (i.e. wind
and wave)
4. Connections between land and sea: physical, ecological, cultural
5. Accessibility and shipping: more coasters, more ships from the North,
more marine service ships due to energy projects at sea
5 Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

6.
Priority functions and the societal demands
• Oil- and gas extraction: maximum use of the potential of oil and
gas at sea (small fields policy)
• CO2 storage: to use empty gas fields as a temporary solution
• Renewable energy: 3450 MW extra wind energy in 2023;
investigate other opportunities for thereafter
• Shipping: continues to be safe and will be more sustainable.
Network (revised in 2013) with routes, clearways and anchor areas
will be maintained. Safe distance to wind farms, preferably agreed in
international fora
• Sand extraction: reserve enough sand for nourishment of the coast
against reasonable costs
• Defense (military): maintain the present exercise areas; multiple
use possible (but no permanent constructions in those areas)
6 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

7.
Framework vision
7 Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

8.
International cooperation
8 Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment
Our identified themes
for cooperation:
• Spatial planning
• Renewable energy
• Healthy Ecosystems
• Shipping
• Food production

9.
International framework
• UNCLOS: rights and obligations
• IMO: shipping issues
• EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC): to achieve or
maintain good environmental status in the marine environment by
the year 2020 at the latest
– OSPAR is important mechanism for this Directive
• EU Framework for Maritime Spatial Planning (Directive 2014/89/EU):
– Ecosystem based approach
– Process oriented directive, not on content of maritime plans
• OSPAR Convention
• ESPOO Convention
• ICES
9 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

10.
10
Belgium 2014

11.
11 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment
2009

12.
2014
12 30 september 2015Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

13.
2015
13 30 september 2015Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

14.
2012
14 30 september 2015Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

15.
15 30 september 2015Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

16.
16 30 september 2015Ministerie van Infrastructuur en Milieu

17.
Plans by neighbouring countries
• Belgium
• United Kingdom: England and Scotland
• Germany
• Norway
• Differences:
– Scope (sectoral/integral)
– Mix of management (present uses) and future
– Time horizon
– lay-out/legends
17 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

18.
Informal MSP Expert Group
• Informal group of MSP experts from the North Sea countries (FR, UK,
BE, NL, GE, DK, SE, NO). IR and ICE are invited.
• We hold it back-to-back to EC MSP Expert Group meetings.
• The main aim is to exchange and share information and experiences
with MSP and to identify common issues and cross-border issues.
• We also exchange information and experiences from ongoing projects
(such as Interreg projects) and contacts between countries.
• Possibilities for collaboration will be identified, for instance on calls
for EU projects related to MSP and the North Sea.
• The group will aim at working together on a joint proposal to respond
to the call by DG Mare, to be launched in 2016.
• The group will discuss and agree on how to fulfill best the
requirements of article 11 of the Directive 2014/89 on cooperation
among Member States.
18 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

19.
OSPAR
• Within OSPAR there is (was) an ICG MSP.
• The main purpose of the group is to exchange best practices and
share experiences with regard to MSP.
• It didn’t meet for some time (not really MSP experts?)
• EIHA agreed on the proposal by BE and NL to put this group on hold
and to establish a link between OSPAR and the informal MSP expert
group.
• There are also other OSPAR groups active on MSP relevant aspects:
impacts of human activities; accumulation of impacts; coherent
network of MPA’s; data handling and mapping; implementation of
species and habitats Recommendation.
• OSPAR Secretariat will develop a paper outlining how information
sharing on MSP could be undertaken on a regional basis.
19 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

20.
Bilaterals
• Regular discussions and exchange between NL and BE, NL and UK,
NL and DE
• Formal involvement due to ESPOO convention
• From ‘Tour de Horizon’ a number of more concrete issues were
identified. Examples:
– How to deal with maintenance traffic for wind parks and shipping
lanes? (with Germany)
– Safe distance between shipping lane and wind park and how to
arrange this internationally (with Denmark)
– Cooperation in monitoring and enforcement (with Belgium)
– Exchange of experiences with the management of MPA’s at sea
(with Scotland, Germany, Denmark)
– Almost all countries ‘struggle’ with the data and information
management (compiling, standards, exchange)
20 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

21.
INTERREG project
• Germany has the lead in a proposed INTERREG project: A North Sea
Perspective on Shipping, Energy and Environment Aspects in MSP
(NORTHSEE)
• Partners are from (competent authorities in) Germany, Netherlands,
Belgium, Scotland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark (University)
• Topics:
– Tansnational coherence of environmental protection in MSPs
– Transnational coherent shipping routes in MSPs
– Transnational coherent energy infrastructure in MSPs
– Multi-level and cross-sectoral MSP coordination
– Develop an information and planning platform
– Strengthen the involvement of stakeholders in transnational
issues
21 30 september 2015Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

22.
Some lessons learned
• Each country is organized in a different way (i.e. differences in
mandate, level of authorities, management versus policy)
• Invest in the relationship(s) with your neighbours and establish a
network
• Look for opportunities for cooperation with mutual gain
• Recognize that there should be a connection between the
operational, tactical and strategic level (also in your own country)
• Identify common and/or cross-border issues before drafting
/finishing your own plan
22 Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment

23.
23 30 september 2015
Because you don’t see it, it does not mean it is not there
Thank you for your attention