231
increasingly concrete and well-crafted measures and strategies for improving the
governance of the Baltic Sea environment.
Hence, the logic of this concluding chapter is to, based on a summary of key
fi ndings in the individual case studies (Sect. 10.2 ) and cross-case analyses (Sect.
10.3 ), venture into developing concrete ideas for how environmental governance of
the Baltic Sea potentially could be improved based on an identifi cation of ‘root
problems’. Finally, we summarise key conclusions and recommendations
(Sect. 10.4 ).
10.2 Findings in the Five Individual Case Studies
The fi ve in-depth case studies were identifi ed amongst a set of regional issues that
were prioritised in Baltic Sea environmental governance, based on the severity and
scope of the associated environmental problems and risks. In Table 10.1 , the various problems and risks and their scope, as well as the broad governance patterns,
are summarised. As can be seen, the problems are often severe and large scale.
Numerous studies have shown that the Baltic Sea is amongst the most disturbed
seas worldwide (e.g. HELCOM 2010 ). In response, the population in the nine countries bordering the Baltic Sea has expressed in monetary terms a willingness to pay
nearly 4 billion annually (Baltic Stern 2013 ) for reducing eutrophication by fulfi lling the Baltic Sea Action Plan (HELCOM 2007 ). Regarding governance patterns,
the table shows that the regional level – the EU as well as HELCOM – is nearly
always of highest importance, even if local, national and global dimensions play
central roles in some of the cases.
Furthermore, it is obvious that the characteristics of the fi ve cases often differ
substantially in terms of the complexity of causes and the degree of scientifi c uncertainty and sociopolitical controversy, as illustrated in Table 10.2 . This fact enabled
interesting comparisons of governance structures and processes under various
conditions.
In general, with the oil case being the main exception, various degrees of more
or less high uncertainty and disagreement characterise the cases (Table 10.2 ).
Considering current ambitions to implement the ecosystem approach to management (EAM), implying a need to govern various risks in one and the same ecosystem simultaneously (cf. Boström et al. 2016 ), the complexity increases even more,
due to the various feedback mechanisms involved (remembering also that the
impact of climate change will add another complex dimension in the coming
decades). In spite of this, a number of governance strategies and tools that can be
improved in each of the cases have been identifi ed in the fi ve case study chapters in
the book. In the next section, these will be compared and characterised.
In the case of oil discharges , it can generally be concluded that much of the
needed governance structures and frameworks are in place. IMO acts as a ‘global
hub’, with the EU as a strong enforcer and HELCOM as a catalyst (Hassler 2016 ).
The complexity of sources is comparatively limited and neither uncertainty nor
10 Seeking Pathways Towards Improved Environmental Governance of the Baltic Sea
increasingly concrete and well-crafted measures and strategies for improving the
governance of the Baltic Sea environment.
Hence, the logic of this concluding chapter is to, based on a summary of key
fi ndings in the individual case studies (Sect. 10.2 ) and cross-case analyses (Sect.
10.3 ), venture into developing concrete ideas for how environmental governance of
the Baltic Sea potentially could be improved based on an identifi cation of ‘root
problems’. Finally, we summarise key conclusions and recommendations
(Sect. 10.4 ).
10.2 Findings in the Five Individual Case Studies
The fi ve in-depth case studies were identifi ed amongst a set of regional issues that
were prioritised in Baltic Sea environmental governance, based on the severity and
scope of the associated environmental problems and risks. In Table 10.1 , the various problems and risks and their scope, as well as the broad governance patterns,
are summarised. As can be seen, the problems are often severe and large scale.
Numerous studies have shown that the Baltic Sea is amongst the most disturbed
seas worldwide (e.g. HELCOM 2010 ). In response, the population in the nine countries bordering the Baltic Sea has expressed in monetary terms a willingness to pay
nearly 4 billion annually (Baltic Stern 2013 ) for reducing eutrophication by fulfi lling the Baltic Sea Action Plan (HELCOM 2007 ). Regarding governance patterns,
the table shows that the regional level – the EU as well as HELCOM – is nearly
always of highest importance, even if local, national and global dimensions play
central roles in some of the cases.
Furthermore, it is obvious that the characteristics of the fi ve cases often differ
substantially in terms of the complexity of causes and the degree of scientifi c uncertainty and sociopolitical controversy, as illustrated in Table 10.2 . This fact enabled
interesting comparisons of governance structures and processes under various
conditions.
In general, with the oil case being the main exception, various degrees of more
or less high uncertainty and disagreement characterise the cases (Table 10.2 ).
Considering current ambitions to implement the ecosystem approach to management (EAM), implying a need to govern various risks in one and the same ecosystem simultaneously (cf. Boström et al. 2016 ), the complexity increases even more,
due to the various feedback mechanisms involved (remembering also that the
impact of climate change will add another complex dimension in the coming
decades). In spite of this, a number of governance strategies and tools that can be
improved in each of the cases have been identifi ed in the fi ve case study chapters in
the book. In the next section, these will be compared and characterised.
In the case of oil discharges , it can generally be concluded that much of the
needed governance structures and frameworks are in place. IMO acts as a ‘global
hub’, with the EU as a strong enforcer and HELCOM as a catalyst (Hassler 2016 ).
The complexity of sources is comparatively limited and neither uncertainty nor
10 Seeking Pathways Towards Improved Environmental Governance of the Baltic Sea