Case Studies
Baltic Sea – Assessing ecological coherence of the HELCOM MPA network for improved management and design
By Mary Collins, IUCN WCPA Connectivity Conservation Specialist Group’s Marine Connectivity Working Group (MCWG) Graduate Associate, hosted by the Center for Large Landscape Conservation
Context and challenge
The Baltic Sea is the world’s largest body of brackish water, reaching from Eastern Denmark to North-Western Finland. Semi-enclosed and relatively shallow, it is home to a wide diversity of marine habitats and both marine and freshwater species adapted to this special environment. However, these conditions produce a limited level of water exchange, which means that nutrients and other substances from the drainage area accumulate in the Baltic Sea and are diluted slowly over time. The 85 million+ inhabitants who live across the drainage area spanning ten national jurisdictions place pressures on this slow-mixing environment. Land-based activities such as agriculture, industry, and urban development exert pressures on the sea, including nutrient, pollutant, and waste runoff. These impacts contribute to the expansion of dead zones, areas where there is little to zero oxygen in the water. Activity in the sea including overfishing, bottom trawling, fish farming, and busy shipping routes additionally fragment marine habitats through physical disturbance and addition to nutrient loads (Reusch et al. 2018).
Despite these challenges, there are substantial collaborative and science-based efforts to protect and sustainably manage the Baltic Sea. Established in 1974, The Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission – also known as the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) – has grown to be a regional platform for environmental policy making to protect the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. The HELCOM ECONET project “assessed the ecological coherence of the network of marine protected areas in the Baltic Sea”. The project provided rigorous science-based guidance on where to designate or expand marine protected areas for increased ecological coherence, taking into account connectivity between sites including species migration routes and mobility, and areas of special ecological significance for lifecycle needs like spawning (HELCOM a.).
This Baltic Sea MPA network faces its own operational challenges. In addition to HELCOM designated MPAs, waters are also protected purely under national legislation as well as under Natura 2000 and the Ospar Convention (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic). These protected zones, particularly HELCOM and Natura 2000, overlap in area to a large degree (figure 1). This creates issues for maintaining consistent MPA management and accurate MPA effectiveness indicators. Overlap problems include efforts in one protected area directly affecting the effectiveness of another, difference in overlapping site shapes, Natura 2000 sites including inland areas while HELCOM sites do not, variance in target species protections, and HELCOM inclusion of Russian waters while Natura 2000 does not. Recent efforts recognize these issues, despite wide protections, and are acting to coordinate transboundary infrastructure or regional level capacity building to address them (HELCOM, b.).
Figure 1. Overlap of the marine Natura 2000 sites and the HELCOM MPAs in the Baltic Sea, as of March 2016 (HELCOM, c.).
Approach
A number of efforts help the Baltic Sea region to improve collaboration and management effectiveness of its MPAs. A 2016 assessment on the ecological coherence of the Baltic Sea MPA Network, conducted by HELCOM, built on prior research and provided insight into the current state of ecological connectivity and conditions, new methodologies for effectiveness measurement, and recommendations for future planning and management implementation. Notably, the assessment of ecological coherence encompassed applying representativeness, replication, connectivity and adequacy criteria into practice. The assessment helps policy-makers and scientists alike to find common goals and actions based on science that work towards region-wide cooperation for protection. Action where connectivity considerations are being put into play is seen in the proposed transnational region between Sweden and Finland called The Quark (figure 2). Dotted with 5600 islands, the proposed MPA would protect important brackish habitats and connect the existing MPAs from coast to coast.
The Baltic Sea also stands out as a strong example for long-term scientific data series accessibility through its publicly available HELCOM Marine Protected Areas database. The tool, consisting of tabs for MPA information, management plans, species data, biotopes, pressures, activities, and a mapping tool, allows scientists to track trend reversals such as the return of top predators, recovering fish stocks, and reduced input of nutrients and harmful substances. Individual MPA managers as well as scientists assessing system cohesiveness, use the database for informing decisions. The tool is proving instrumental for achieving an international, cooperative governance structure transcending the complexities that a multistate marine-terrestrial policy setting brings (Helcom a)
Additionally, HELCOM moved in 2019 to officially introduce a network platform for marine protected area managers in contracting parties to come together and collaborate over transboundary management. A series of workshops gathering MPA management professionals supported the implementation of international agreements and marine policies, fostering partnerships with relevant marine conservation actors and key regional or international organizations and initiatives. The MPA network supports the implementation of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), relevant HELCOM recommendations, and other subsequent commitments (HELCOM, b.).
Results
Figure 2. A proposed transnational MPA, The Quark, would connect Swedish and Finnish coasts in the Baltic Sea (The Marine Protection Atlas).
The collaborative and science-based efforts to protect and connect marine and coastal environments in the Baltic Sea are substantial and have produced a multitude of improvements as a result. Decreased nutrient and contaminant loads, re-balanced food webs supporting system function, and increased fishery populations all contribute to the list of success stories.
However, there is also a cautionary tale to be heard. Despite an increasingly large area of coverage by the various MPA governing bodies throughout the Baltic Sea and the surrounding catchment area, managers indicate that there is still an insufficient level of assessment informing the level of effectiveness management practices produce. They expressed a general lack of overview on methods, best practices and guidelines best suited for the region. These sentiments are thought to be due, in large part, to the overlapping legislation and assorted requirements related to each managing body (i.e., HELCOM, Natura 2000, individual nations) (HELCOM, b., Reusch et al. 2018). But some scientists blame climate change for these sentiments.
In a shallow, slow mixing and semi-enclosed marine and freshwater ecosystem like the Baltic Sea, conditions are more easily altered by climate change factors like warming temperatures and changes in precipitation. These rapidly progressing global pressures can offset the efficacy of current management approaches. For this reason, in addition to advancing previous efforts to connect environments, decrease pressure on fisheries, and prevent eutrophication and contamination, this situation calls for more conservative, iterative, and multisectoral management (Reusch et al. 2018).
References
HELCOM. 2014. Assessment and guidance for achieving an ecologically coherent network of HELCOM MPAs in the Baltic Sea (ECONET).
HELCOM. 2016. Ecological coherence assessment of the Marine Protected Area network in the Baltic. Balt. Sea Environ. Proc. No. 148. ISSN 0357-2994.
HELCOM. 2019. HELCOM Network for Marine Protected Area Management (EN MPA MANET) Terms of Reference.
Reusch, T.H., et al. 2018. The Baltic Sea as a time machine for the future coastal ocean. Science Advances 4(5). DOI:10.1126/sciadv.aar8195.
Marine Conservation Institute. The Marine Protection Atlas.