Current practice in terms of cross boundary cooperation

Abstract: 

Examines how and to what extent the legislation in the Member States provide for transboundary MSP and provides recommendations

Sea Basin(s): 
Year: 
June 2011
Application in MSP: 
Unknown effect
Sectors: 
Offshore renewable energy production
Type of Issue: 
Coexistence of uses
Cross-border cooperation
Type of practice: 
Guidance
Stage of MSP cycle: 
Analyse spatial aspects
Vision and aims
Cross-border / trans-national aspect: 
Yes
Coherence with other processes: 
Renewable Energy Directive
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Trans-European Transport Network

Questions this practice may help answer

  • What are the best practices on cross-boundary cooperation for MSPs?
  • What can be done to improve cross boundary cooperation for MSPs?

Implementation Context

The Seanergy 2020 project has developed a set of seven criteria to evaluate the different MSP regimes across the 17 EU Member States. These criteria are: 1) policy and legal framework; 2) data and information management; 3) permitting and licensing; 4) consultation 5) sector conflict management; 6) cross-border cooperation; 7) implementation of MSP. Based on these criteria, a series of national reports were commissioned to establish the current status of MSP within each EU Member States. These reports go into detail on the specific arrangements within the different countries and provide details on national legalisation, data management, permitting arrangements, consultation mechanisms, methods for managing sector-conflict and cross-border cooperation. In this practice the findings concerning best practices in cross-boundary cooperation for MSP will be elaborated.

Aspects / Objectives

What have been best practices on cross-boundary cooperation for MSPs?

Method

A series of national reports were commissioned to establish the current status of MSP within each EU Member State. These reports have been used as input for an international comparison on cross-boundary cooperation.

Main Outputs / Results

The report provides a summary of the findings. Furthermore, the following recommendations for cross-boundary cooperation have been defined:

  • Use the SEA Directive to ensure transboundary consultation where there are likely to be environmental impacts on another Member State and build on the joint sea-basin planning and coordination measures foreseen in the MSFD;
  • Draw on experience of other EU mechanisms for transboundary cooperation such as the WFD as well as the Espoo Convention;
  • Support regional sea-basin cooperation approaches including agreed recommendations or guidelines for MSP;
  • Ensure that national legislation directs decision-makers to taken into consideration relevant MSP activities in bordering member states;
  • Work towards transboundary consultation and coordination procedures that are mandatory, starting with a review on whether the EU has the necessary legal competence to adopt such legislation;
  • Implement transboundary consultation and coordination procedures through appropriate mechanisms for joint decision-making and conflict resolution;
  • Ensure sufficient legislation to facilitate transboundary cooperation and coordination across sub- national or boundaries, such as administrative boundary between land-planning and MSP.

Transferability

The best practices refer to a specific geographical area or institutional context. However, the recommendations can be applicable to all EU member states.

Costs / Funding Source

Intelligent Energy Europe

Responsible Entity

European Wind Energy Association

Contact Person

Dorina Iuga

European Wind Energy Association

Email: di@ewea.org

Tel: +32 (0) 2 213 18 09

Share

Print