90
issues and approach to citizens’ engagement in public debates and NGO activities
are observed among these riparian states. Moreover, the economic situation differs
widely between the countries in the Baltic Sea region and consequently the impact
of their industrial and agricultural sectors on the marine environment. Furthermore,
transport policies are caught between demands for improved mobility on the one
hand and the concern for environmental protection on the other.
The EU IAS policy must be seen in the context of commitments at global, EU
and regional levels. It was suggested that a dedicated IAS directive was the most
effective way to provide a fl exible framework with minimum standards for IAS
action in the EU (Shine et al. 2009 ). Finally, a new dedicated legislative instrument
for IAS management was adopted by the Council and entered into force at the
beginning of 2015.
17
Different Member States have been developing different approaches. The lack of
a coherent and coordinated approach has hampered the effectiveness of these initiatives, and hence, IAS-related problems continue to increase. Currently, there is a lot
of preparation being done at EU and HELCOM levels to help effectively implement
the BWM convention . Some EU regulations together with HELCOM guidelines
could be used as examples of coordination and consideration of regional requirements for the implementation of BWMC. EU Member States are obliged to cooperate regionally according to Articles 5 and 6 of the MSFD . Furthermore, they must
ensure that marine strategies are coherent and coordinated across marine regions or
subregions. A new strategy will be based on planned cooperation at EU and MS
levels, and for that purpose, Member States must use, where practical and appropriate, existing regional cooperation structures. They are therefore obliged to follow a
common approach to initial assessment , determination of good environmental status, management targets, indicators, monitoring and measures (EC 2011 ). Regarding
shipping , ratifi cation of the BWM Convention is a prerequisite, since it is diffi cult
for the EU to take decisions outside of the IMO framework. One of the advantages
of the IMO framework is that it is coherent. It also provides for the control of vessels not registered in the EU, but transiting EU waters (Farmer et al. 2012 ). The
EU’s objective is to provide a fl exible framework with minimum standards based
on the precautionary principle and IAS policy so as to ensure coherence with
upcoming instruments and emerging solutions (Shine et al. 2010 ). Preventive measures are also necessary, as well as taking into account interactions with other environmental risks such as eutrophication and overfi shing occurring in the Baltic Sea.
Preventive measures are diverse and range from education (e.g. public environmental campaigns, workshops, staff training in the maritime industry) to ballast water
exchange regulations . Apart from being addressed within maritime transportation
and the BWM Convention, the IAS issue should also be considered in other policies
dealing with eutrophication, climate change and overfi shing since these threats can
undermine the conditions under which current IAS policies are developed (especially those where risk assessment is based on species range and invasion pathways). Before preparing any management strategies, effective policies dealing with
17 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/index_en.htm
K. Smolarz et al.
issues and approach to citizens’ engagement in public debates and NGO activities
are observed among these riparian states. Moreover, the economic situation differs
widely between the countries in the Baltic Sea region and consequently the impact
of their industrial and agricultural sectors on the marine environment. Furthermore,
transport policies are caught between demands for improved mobility on the one
hand and the concern for environmental protection on the other.
The EU IAS policy must be seen in the context of commitments at global, EU
and regional levels. It was suggested that a dedicated IAS directive was the most
effective way to provide a fl exible framework with minimum standards for IAS
action in the EU (Shine et al. 2009 ). Finally, a new dedicated legislative instrument
for IAS management was adopted by the Council and entered into force at the
beginning of 2015.
17
Different Member States have been developing different approaches. The lack of
a coherent and coordinated approach has hampered the effectiveness of these initiatives, and hence, IAS-related problems continue to increase. Currently, there is a lot
of preparation being done at EU and HELCOM levels to help effectively implement
the BWM convention . Some EU regulations together with HELCOM guidelines
could be used as examples of coordination and consideration of regional requirements for the implementation of BWMC. EU Member States are obliged to cooperate regionally according to Articles 5 and 6 of the MSFD . Furthermore, they must
ensure that marine strategies are coherent and coordinated across marine regions or
subregions. A new strategy will be based on planned cooperation at EU and MS
levels, and for that purpose, Member States must use, where practical and appropriate, existing regional cooperation structures. They are therefore obliged to follow a
common approach to initial assessment , determination of good environmental status, management targets, indicators, monitoring and measures (EC 2011 ). Regarding
shipping , ratifi cation of the BWM Convention is a prerequisite, since it is diffi cult
for the EU to take decisions outside of the IMO framework. One of the advantages
of the IMO framework is that it is coherent. It also provides for the control of vessels not registered in the EU, but transiting EU waters (Farmer et al. 2012 ). The
EU’s objective is to provide a fl exible framework with minimum standards based
on the precautionary principle and IAS policy so as to ensure coherence with
upcoming instruments and emerging solutions (Shine et al. 2010 ). Preventive measures are also necessary, as well as taking into account interactions with other environmental risks such as eutrophication and overfi shing occurring in the Baltic Sea.
Preventive measures are diverse and range from education (e.g. public environmental campaigns, workshops, staff training in the maritime industry) to ballast water
exchange regulations . Apart from being addressed within maritime transportation
and the BWM Convention, the IAS issue should also be considered in other policies
dealing with eutrophication, climate change and overfi shing since these threats can
undermine the conditions under which current IAS policies are developed (especially those where risk assessment is based on species range and invasion pathways). Before preparing any management strategies, effective policies dealing with
17 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/invasivealien/index_en.htm
K. Smolarz et al.