89
4.6 Future European IAS Policy: Conclusions
and Recommendations
Increased awareness and legislative mandates pertaining to sustainable development need to be incorporated in the management approaches of natural resource
management agencies. Most approaches that seek to address sustainable development have been criticised for focusing on short-term gain rather than long-term
environmental, economic and social profi ts. As mentioned above, far-reaching
environmental pressures, associated with the degradation of resources and loss of
ecosystem services in the Baltic Sea due to eutrophication, overfi shing , pollution ,
climate change and IAS, together with increasing maritime transportation, are
expected to accelerate the spread of AS in the near future. A number of these environmental pressures will further modify ecological processes in ways that boost the
societal and environmental impacts of invasive species (Pyke et al. 2008 ). IAS is a
multifaceted problem characterised by complexities in risk assessment and management strategies. Despite structural complexity , functional connectedness and dynamism of an ecosystem , management options often treat different risks as independent
issues, while pressures are addressed in separate policies. In the case of IAS, only
combined cross-sectoral action could overcome diffi culties related to uncertainties
in risk assessment and management. We believe that future marine policies covering IAS should include horizontal and vertical interactions between different environmental pressures and their consequences. Currently, only the IMO BWM
Convention covers IAS spread via ballast water exchange. Moreover, this policy
responds only to ship-mediated species introduction. Furthermore, it is not ratifi ed
yet, is not regarded as robust enough to cover different environmental risks and is
not detailed enough to be appropriate for Baltic Sea conditions (as explained in
Sect. 4.4 ). There is a need for regulatory measures addressing both various aspects
of invasiveness and associated environmental risks, as well as the specifi city of the
Baltic Sea ecosystem and the political situation that surrounds it.
We believe that IAS management in the Baltic Sea region is ineffective mostly
due to a heterogeneous legislative system. First of all, Baltic Sea countries have
international obligations to address IAS, principally according to the CBD and
BWM Conventions , which are of a general character. Major concerns for future IAS
management within the Baltic Sea region are (1) the plethora of EU Directives (i.e.
EU Habitats & Species Directive, Water Framework and Marine Strategy Framework
Directives, Directive 2014/89/EU on Maritime Spatial Planning) each implemented
to a lesser or greater degree depending on Member State’s policies and (2) the number of statutory and other bodies concerned with implementing EU directives and
agreements. Thus, the major challenge for the coming years will be promoting
Integrated Coastal Zone Management, linked to and based on existing legal frameworks. An integrated governance approach in the Baltic Sea region is a diffi cult task
given the presence of new European Union members in its southern and eastern
parts which are also greatly infl uenced by the Russian Federation . Certain differences in, for example, the understanding of democracy, awareness of environmental
4 Biological Invasions: A Case Study of Baltic Sea Environmental Governance
4.6 Future European IAS Policy: Conclusions
and Recommendations
Increased awareness and legislative mandates pertaining to sustainable development need to be incorporated in the management approaches of natural resource
management agencies. Most approaches that seek to address sustainable development have been criticised for focusing on short-term gain rather than long-term
environmental, economic and social profi ts. As mentioned above, far-reaching
environmental pressures, associated with the degradation of resources and loss of
ecosystem services in the Baltic Sea due to eutrophication, overfi shing , pollution ,
climate change and IAS, together with increasing maritime transportation, are
expected to accelerate the spread of AS in the near future. A number of these environmental pressures will further modify ecological processes in ways that boost the
societal and environmental impacts of invasive species (Pyke et al. 2008 ). IAS is a
multifaceted problem characterised by complexities in risk assessment and management strategies. Despite structural complexity , functional connectedness and dynamism of an ecosystem , management options often treat different risks as independent
issues, while pressures are addressed in separate policies. In the case of IAS, only
combined cross-sectoral action could overcome diffi culties related to uncertainties
in risk assessment and management. We believe that future marine policies covering IAS should include horizontal and vertical interactions between different environmental pressures and their consequences. Currently, only the IMO BWM
Convention covers IAS spread via ballast water exchange. Moreover, this policy
responds only to ship-mediated species introduction. Furthermore, it is not ratifi ed
yet, is not regarded as robust enough to cover different environmental risks and is
not detailed enough to be appropriate for Baltic Sea conditions (as explained in
Sect. 4.4 ). There is a need for regulatory measures addressing both various aspects
of invasiveness and associated environmental risks, as well as the specifi city of the
Baltic Sea ecosystem and the political situation that surrounds it.
We believe that IAS management in the Baltic Sea region is ineffective mostly
due to a heterogeneous legislative system. First of all, Baltic Sea countries have
international obligations to address IAS, principally according to the CBD and
BWM Conventions , which are of a general character. Major concerns for future IAS
management within the Baltic Sea region are (1) the plethora of EU Directives (i.e.
EU Habitats & Species Directive, Water Framework and Marine Strategy Framework
Directives, Directive 2014/89/EU on Maritime Spatial Planning) each implemented
to a lesser or greater degree depending on Member State’s policies and (2) the number of statutory and other bodies concerned with implementing EU directives and
agreements. Thus, the major challenge for the coming years will be promoting
Integrated Coastal Zone Management, linked to and based on existing legal frameworks. An integrated governance approach in the Baltic Sea region is a diffi cult task
given the presence of new European Union members in its southern and eastern
parts which are also greatly infl uenced by the Russian Federation . Certain differences in, for example, the understanding of democracy, awareness of environmental
4 Biological Invasions: A Case Study of Baltic Sea Environmental Governance