1. Marine management to maintain ecosystem goods and services: A social science response Geraint Ellis School of Planning, Architecture and Civil Engineering Queen’s University, Belfast g.ellis@qub.ac.uk

2. A social science perspective  NOT a perspective based on: Validity and accuracy of economic analysis Moral consequences of considering biosphere in overt anthropocentric terms Testing the scientific validity and categorisations used in the paper.

3. A planning and policy perspective:  Emphasis on: problem-framing; identifying and evaluating potential environmental management options; mediating stakeholder interests; monitoring policy effectiveness.  How useful is an ecosystem goods and services approach to policies for marine management?

4. The Environmental Policy Process (Source: RCEP 1998)

5. Value of the “Ecosystem goods and services” approach  Establishes importance of managing the marine environment – for the economy and for purely environmental reasons.  Provides an expression of the richness and value of the marine environment and an “ecosystem approach” in terms that can be assimilated into the policy process.  Provides a strong evidence base for: Identifying spatial priorities Identifying aspatial management priorities Identifying monitoring criteria  Highlights core differences in behaviour in some terrestrial and marine environments

6. Value of the “Ecosystem goods and services” approach  Suggests caution in what we know (and don’t know) about the marine environment  Illustrates consequences of shifting environmental threats (pollution to resource exploitation)  Highlights fragility of UK marine environment in the face of increased economic exploitation  Gives meaning to “sustainable development” in a marine context  Supportive of the emerging approach to MSP

7. Ecosystem goods and services and MSP:  Supports the precautionary principle as a key value.  Allows the development of scenarios a that maximise utility (of biosphere, human activity and biosphere/human interactions)  Allows spatial differentiation of activity... and identifies aspatial effects  Identifies potential temporal consequences of economic activity on marine environment  Illustrates ecological consequences of terrestrial activity

8. Ecosystem goods and services and MSP:  Value to MSP could be enhanced by: More detailed spatial analysis of UK marine environment Links with SEA/EIA assessments Stronger quantitative analysis?  How further can the science be developed?

9. Limitations of the “Ecosystems goods and services” approach:  Recognition that such science provides basis of political debate and mediation of stakeholder needs and power.  How to balancing value of ecosystem functions with economies of development  Further analysis of the impacts of specific development sectors and proposals on ecosystem goods and services.  The need to develop a formal process of integration with the MSP process?