Sectoral Interactions

Supporting Implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning in the Celtic Seas (SIMCelt) was a cross-border project, which Solway Firth Partnership was part of, looking at implementing the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive in the Irish Sea. This European Union (EU) funded project took place between 2015 and 2017 to promote cross-border co-operation between EU member states. Part of this Directive requires Member States to create plans accounting for social and economic aspects of the marine area being planned for, in addition to environmental aspects, as part of the minimal requirements (Article 6). The establishment of marine plans also includes taking account of sectoral interactions of uses relevant to the area. Sectoral interactions explains how different sectors interact while actively or potentially functioning within the same marine space. To achieve goals of marine planning such as sustainable growth, managing increasing demands and shared use, and to use information from stakeholder engagement in the planning process, sectoral interactions are very important.

Part of the SIMCelt Project work was a the ‘Report on Sectoral Interactions around the Solway Firth in relation to marine planning‘ (the SIMCelt report) (Baruah, et al, 2017) exploring interactions within the Solway. Considering the shared use of the Solway Firth between a variety of sectors, sometimes within the same area, these sectoral interactions are highly relevant to the ‘Productive’ section of the Solway Review as they impact the placement of new sectors and activities. Given that planning for the marine environment can mean the placement of multiple activities within the same spatial area or time period or seeking the same resources, the interactions between the activities is key to ensuring maximum sustainable use and minimum conflict. Furthermore, the identification of spatial areas being utilised by multiple sectors forms an informational basis to consider the cumulative impacts of the uses.

The findings of the report will be outlined below to supplement the ‘Productive‘ socio-economic chapter of the Solway Review. The SIMCelt report looks at a 5 year ‘snapshot’ between 2011 and 2017. Sectoral interaction work was undertaken by Solway Firth Partnership in 2011 and this could be used comparatively for the SIMCelt report, repeating the study in 2016/17 in light of changes over time, and the initiation of the marine planning process in Scotland and England.

Activities may have one of five different interactions with another marine sector/use; competitive, conflicting, incompatible, neutral, or positive. The ‘Report on Sectoral Interactions around the Solway Firth in relation to marine planning‘ (the SIMCelt report) (Baruah, et al, 2017) found that the majority of sectoral interactions in the Solway Firth are ‘neutral’, meaning they neither positively or negatively impact each other. It is worth noting that interactions are subjective based on experience and opinion, and not always the same in both directions. This means that one sector (sector A) may see their interaction with another sector (sector B) as neutral, whereas sector B may view their interaction with sector A as conflicting. There can also be a mixture of interactions as sectors may have a variety of actions related to their activities, for example in the 2016/17 research the sector of ‘Natural heritage management’ had both a conflicting and positive interaction with the sub-sector of ‘Shellfish Aquaculture’ due to conflict through possible disruption, and the positive use of marker buoys as roots respectively.

This is not only important for the sustainable use of marine resources, but also to protect people from potentially dangerous outcomes. Some interactions can also be dangerous. A reminder of the potential danger which exists in interacting sectors is an example of the 2019 ‘near-miss’ of a nuclear submarine and Stena Line passenger ferry on the crossing between Cainryan and Northern Ireland (ITV News, 2019).

Of course many interactions have the potential to be exacerbated or improved through mechanisms, management and cooperation efforts, these efforts can also be cross-border efforts between Scotland/England.

 

Image; Kirkcudbright © Solway Firth Partnership. Photographer; Kim Ayres.

Sectoral Interactions

SIMCelt Report

 

2011

The 2011 research found 15 overarching sectors in the Solway Firth, with 79 subsections, and gathered 2,515 interactions between sectors (Neutral 1439, Positive 472, Competition 224, Conflict 268, and Incompatible 34). The report lists key sectors which respondents deemed to have a neutral, positive, competition, conflict or incompatible interaction with their own, (if you would like to see this list see the report page 17) with the Lifeboat service and HM Coastguard viewing all other activities as having a neutral/positive interaction with their own. However, in order to have a positive or neutral interaction, the report states that the activities must have one of the following circumstances;

  • Operate at different times and/or spaces
  • Require different resources
  • Have complimentary activities
  • Provide a beneficiary service
    (Baruah, et al, 2017)

Respondents were also asked about their predictions for the future of their industry over the next 10 years, whether they think it will; stay the same/unsure, expand, or decrease/risk closure. The results of this question are available on page 24 of the report.

 

2016/17

Some respondents in 2016/17 were entirely consistent, considering their 2011 responses to still be relevant and representative, most other respondents only offered minor changes to the response submitted in 2011. The moratorium on cockling in the Solway in 2016/17 meant that this sector was not re-interviewed, and F5 Karting had closed since 2011, so again there was no 2016/17 comparison. In the updated 2016/17 study received 1,861 responses; Neutral 1074, Positive 324, Competition 140, Conflict 297 and Incompatible 26. Looking at the percentage of responses (2011 compared with 2016/17), conflict was the only response to have increased, from 11% in 2011, to 16% in 2016/17.

The report, again, lists key sectors which respondents deemed to have a neutral, positive, competition, conflict or incompatible interaction with their own, (if you would like to see this list see the report page 22) and as with 2011 the Lifeboat service and HM Coastguard viewing all other activities as having a neutral/positive interaction with their own. This was reciprocated with all sectors viewing the volunteer lifeboat service and HM coastguard as having either a positive or neutral interaction. Furthermore, ‘All sectors responding viewed …sea kayaking, ecotourism, coastal walking, radar, static gear (creels and pots), management of biological, chemical and physical environmental quality, management of monuments and archaeology as either a positive or neutral interaction. The change in perceptions between 2011 and 2016 could be due to a number of factors such as, closure of the cockle fishery, changes in quotas/fishing areas, increased awareness of other activities and greater environmental considerations, such as the proposal for extending the Upper Solway Flats and Marshes Special Protected Area’ (Baruah, et al, 2017).

Respondents were also asked again about their predictions for the future of their industry over the next 10 years, whether they think it will; stay the same/unsure, expand, or decrease/risk closure. The results of this question are available on page 25 of the report. The factors which are driving this change are also listed, and the respondents organised into the factor effecting their sector; availability of funds, coastal development, customer needs, digitalisation, environmental regulations, external pressures, internal management, quality improvement.

The results of the 2016/17 interaction work will not be reiterated here as the information is readily available within the report (Baruah, et al, 2017), below is a table which indicates where to find the sectoral interaction data collected;

Sectors and corresponding pages of the report to find information on sub-sector sectoral interactions 2016/17
Key Sector  Page number
Historic/cultural Heritage Management* Page 28 (sub-sector interactions table page 32)
Inshore Fisheries* Page 34 (sub-sector interactions table page 37)
Natural Heritage Management* Page 39 (sub-sector interactions table page 42)
Offshore Renewable Installations* Page 44 (sub-sector interactions table page 46)
Ports and Harbours Page 48 (sub-sector interactions table page 51)
Recreational Boating Page 53 (sub-sector interactions table page 55)
River Basin Management Page 57
Wild-fowling Page 60 (sub-sector interactions table page 62)

*key sector covers several sub-sectors

 

Image; Stand-up paddle boarders at Stranraer Oyster Festival 2019. © Solway Firth Partnership.

Sectoral Interactions

In-Text References

Baruah, E.L., Fairgrieve, R. and Haddon, P. (2017) SIMCelt: Report on Sectoral Interactions around the Solway Firth in relation to marine planning (D12.3). EU Project Grant Agreement No: EASME/EMFF/2014/1.2.1.5/3/SI2.719473 MSP Lot 3. Supporting Implementation of Maritime Spatial Planning in the Celtic Seas (SIMCelt). Marine Scotland. 84pp. Available here. (Accessed: 25.08.20)

ITV News (2019). Nuclear submarine in near-miss with passenger ferry. Available here. (Accessed: 21.09.20).

 

Image; Boats on the Solway (Kirkcudbright). © Solway Firth Partnership. Photographer; Colin Tennant.