This report contributes to the Maritime Spatial Planning with two objectives: to undertake an analysis and characterization of the coastal and maritime planning and land-sea interactions from a multi-level (national, local), multi-sectoral (energy, aquaculture, transport, tourism, defence, nature protection, etc.) and multi-actor (public, private) perspective. And to outline policy recommendations that could build the basis for comprehensively embedding the maritime spatial planning competences of local and national level into legislation and into formal and informal planning processes.

Maritime spatial planning (MSP) falls under an exclusive mandate of the central government in Estonia. However, as most development and use, which takes place in the marine environment, it also has an onshore component or impact, that is most immediately felt at the local level. With the adoption of new national maritime spatial plan, discussions have emerged about the role of the local level with regards to coordinating and planning land-sea interactions. It is argued, that further alignment between maritime and terrestrial spatial planning is important and should be achieved through consistency of legislation, policies, plans and decisions and processes. Land-sea interaction is also highly related to the economic benefits of MSP as well as sharing public resources and the importance of given maritime uses covered by the MSP for the economic development of the local municipality and community in question..

There are several cases stemming from the ESPON MSP-LSI project highlighting the importance of including (and giving the legislative mandate) local administrations for maritime spatial planning. For example, in the Netherlands, Latvia, Croatia and Sweden, local authorities have around one or two sea mile(s) from the coastline where they have the legal grounds to plan and develop, exempt only with regards to certain sectors (e.g., energy, shipping routes, defense). Hence, MSP under the current legislation in Estonia may be considered too exclusive and too centralised.

In the context of this policy process, several policy questions emerged with high relevance to this MSP-LSI spin-off:
• How are local stakeholders involved in LSI decision making processes and MSP in practice in Estonia?
• What are the areas of activities in maritime spatial planning where local coastal municipalities in Estonia should have decision making power? What should be the criteria for defining such areas?
• Who are the main stakeholders and actors who should be included and consulted in the process?
• What could Estonia learn from other country practices where (some) decision making power over maritime spatial planning is the competence and mandate of local level?

You can download the report for more.