Transformation of Marine Governance Under the European Green Deal

With multiple sustainability crises facing our oceans, the EU put forward a bold and transformative vision for its continent through the European Green Deal (EGD) in 2019. The EGD also pays attention to the marine environment, its stressors and users. For example, there are ambitious objectives regarding climate friendly maritime transportation, reduction of marine plastic pollution, protection of marine life and acceleration of marine energy. Yet, achieving these marine objectives requires reconsidering how European seas, its stressors and users are governed. In addition to setting long-term, ambitious objectives, the EGD requires a strong policy program, institutionalized incentives, collaboration frameworks, and a (digital) knowledge base that can foster change and innovation in marine governance arrangements.  

Within the PERMAGOV project, funded through Horizon Europe and UKRI, a transdisciplinary consortium is developing a governance performance assessment framework to assess how the EGD is fostering change and innovation in marine governance. This framework is applied in nine case studies covering four regional seas (Celtic, North, Baltic, Mediterranean) and four issue areas of Maritime Transport, Marine Energy, Marine Life and Marine Plastics. The framework examines how institutional attributes enable and constrain actors to use their capabilities to collaborate and use digital means (e-governance) to transform governance processes to achieve EGD objectives.  

On Thursday 26 June 2025, PERMAGOV organised, as part of the MARE Conference, a double panel to disseminate mid-term results and advance our conceptual and empirical understanding of how institutional attributes, collaboration dynamics, e-governance and governance capabilities shape innovation and change in marine governance under the EGD.

Panel 1 (13:30-15:00)

The first panel includes papers focusing on one of the components of the governance performance assessment framework i.e. institutional barriers. The panel includes four case studies around the conservation of marine life and reduction of plastic pollution.  

Presentation titles, speakers, and abstracts

Institutional barriers preventing policy achievement in European marine contexts: A systematic scoping review | Kare Nolde Nielsen (UiT Arctic University of Norway)

A growing body of research literature has reported on barriers to policy design and implementation in European marine contexts. However, the cumulative learning from this body of literature is impaired by terminological and conceptual diversity, and because the literature is dispersed across scientific fields and specialized journals. To address this problem, we conducted a systematic scoping review of peer-reviewed articles that describe or identify the evidenced impact of at least one institutional barrier within a European marine or maritime public policy context. The review followed the PRISMA guidelines for systematic scoping reviews, and revised, and extended an earlier typology of institutional barriers, developed for the field of climate change adaptation. The resulting typology included 11 types of institutional barriers, each which were associated with a set of defined indicators. Many described problems could be assigned to different types of institutional barriers. This inspired the development of an approach to study linkages between the barriers. From the sample of 82 analysed articles, the most frequent institutional barriers were identified under the institutional attributes Scale of Institutions (H), Development and Use of Knowledge (G) and Actor Control (C). These barriers were frequently characterized by specific indicators. For instance, the indicator “fragmentation” was very common for barriers assigned to Scale of Institutions, and “data fragmentation” was common for Development and Use of Knowledge. Specific combinations of indicators were observed with a high frequency for the most prevalent types of barriers and attributes, which were also the barriers for which linkages were most frequently identified.

Re-arranging the governance of seabed | Riku Varjopuro (Finnish Environment Institute)

The management of seabed integrity is an example of ecosystem-based marine management. Benthic habitats contribute to marine ecosystems health by providing important supporting and regulating ecosystem services and hosting many key species and habitats. Multiple human activities cause pressures on the seabed resulting in two types of impacts: loss of and disturbance to benthic habitats. The governance of seabed integrity needs to address and coordinate between multiple sectors that are steered by sectoral and environmental policies. These policies are not always well-aligned or integrated. The governance of seabed is a cross-sectoral and even cross-border issue which will require significant coordination across multiple government bodies horizontally as well as vertically from local to transnational levels. The integrity of seafloor is one of the 11 descriptors of good environmental status according to the EU’s marine strategy framework directive. The EU, in an attempt to strengthen governance of the seabed, launched in 2023 threshold values for acceptable extent of loss of and disturbance to the benthic habitats. At the same time, regional sea collaboration in the Baltic Sea region through HELCOM started to prepare a common approach for the coordinated governance of seabed. The paper compares the two, still unfolding initiatives as different types of attempts to implement the ecosystem-based governance of marine environment. The EU’s quantitative seabed threshold values is an example of ecosystem-based “governance through metrics”, while the HELCOM’s common approach to governance of seabed integrity is likely to rely more on collaborative, integrative forms of ecosystem-based governance. The paper analyses how the two approaches aim to and are changing governance arrangements in the Baltic Sea region towards reaching integrity of the seabed. The paper also asks how and under which conditions the two initiatives may generate synergistic results.  

Governance of Abandoned Lost or otherwise Discarded Fishing Gear (ALDFG) in the Baltic Sea region | Ben Boteler (Research Institute for Sustainability at GFZ Potsdam)

This paper explores the complex nature of Multi-layered Marine Governance Arrangements (MMGAs) for Abandoned Lost or otherwise Discarded Fishing Gear (ALDFG) in the Baltic Sea. ALDFG contributes to the broader challenge of marine plastic pollution, negatively impacting marine habitats and wildlife and posing a risk to human activities (e.g., maritime transport). To date, research on ALDFG has primarily focused on understanding and classifying types of ALDFG; investigating the potential marine environmental impacts of ALDFG; or exploring potential management approaches to address ALDFG. However, limited studies focus on the complex governance of ALDFG, and even fewer include a regional perspective to ALDFG governance. With this in mind, this research evaluates the extent to which the MMGA, focusing on HELCOM as a key regional body, is (possibly) adapting to achieve policy objectives (i.e., the European Green Deal). Applying the PermaGov Multi-layered Collaborative Marine Governance Model, the paper explores opportunities to address governance challenges and develop new or improved actions to address ALDFG within the region. A number of governance challenges are identified, namely: there is a lack of agreement regarding the scope of ALDFG, how to understand the challenge, and the appropriate management measures to apply, which impedes policy action; there is little or limited coordination between some sectors, policies, and ministries within ALDFG governance in the region, potentially impeding benefits achieved through collaboration dynamics (e.g. join action); and finally, while there is an established policy framework, implementation appears to be lagging behind, potentially hindered by actors lacking incentives to engage. Thus, several opportunities to improve governance in the region are discussed, such as addressing data issues through a common database; creating regional best practices or guidance on key issues (e.g. retrieval); improving communication between industry and government; or boosting collaborative action (e.g. joint activities between ministries) through shared work programs. 

Running a well-managed marine protected area (MPA) in dysfunctional system: The role of actors’ capacities and performances in Torre Guaceto MPA co-management processes  | Moses Adjei (Wageningen University)

In this paper we examine actors’ capacities and the governance implications of running a well-management marine protected area (MPA) in a somewhat dysfunctional management system in Italy. We highlight the role of actors such as the MPA management consortium, fishers, and NGOs such as WWF. Our results show that despite the weak national and regional MPA management system, the reflexivity, responsiveness and resilience of these actors have resulted in the creation of a strong informal fishery co-management system and trust building in managing the Torre Guaceto MPA. The strong commitment of the MPA management consortium (especially the MPA manager) to make fisheries part of the larger socioecological system of the MPA has created local access rights to the MPA and helped to build trust and confidence from the fishermen. In addition, the creation of fishery cooperative in the MPA and fishery co-management system in Torre Guaceto has made it possible for small-scale fishermen to access funds through their involvement in funded projects to support the purchase of required equipment, e.g., fishing gears to reduce the cost of compliance and improve the sustainability of their fishing practices. The creation of fish traceability system through the Slow food movement where labels are assigned to products as well as financial payouts to fishermen have created enabling conditions for increased fishers benefits and compliance to conservation goals. Finally, to deal with the informality of the co-management process, MPA issues formal acts where the management measures co-defined in the informal process can be formalized and become “law” within the MPA borders for a temporary period. However, enforcement of such rules is limited by the top-down nature of Italian fisheries and MPA regulatory policies coupled with factors such as limited capacity of the coast guards resulting in an overall ineffective monitoring and surveillance. We argue that the Torre Guaceto co-management process provides an interesting example which demonstrates that synergies can be realized between conservation objectives and the interests of marine resource users such as small-scale fishers.

Values for the Sea in land-based sources of marine pollution: The case of agriplastics in the Spanish Mediterranean  | Shannon McLaughlin (Wageningen University)

The path towards social-ecological wellbeing begins with the stories we tell about who Nature is and what this means for how humans should relate with Nature. In Spain’s southeastern coastline, intensive greenhouse agriculture is a major source of marine plastic pollution and governing this intersecting problem faces significant obstacles. The institutional conditions within the policy sector of agriculture, pollution, and marine conservation embed and prioritise different stories and values of what is important, and if, why, and how the Sea should be protected. Thus, whilst these policy fields are interdependent, their underlying foundations, and the institutional conditions they create differ, fostering contestation and marginalisation. This paper looks at these interdependent policy areas within two case studies with contrasting approaches to marine governance within the region of Murcia: Cape Cope, a coastal region with significant challenges to achieving marine protection, and the Mar Menor, Europe’s first ecological person and rights holder. In both cases, there is significant contestation in marine pollution governance between agricultural and ecologist actors, hampering transformative action for pollution-free seas. This paper makes apparent the values embedded in the interdependent policy areas and the governance dynamics that they create. Its aim is to understand where fundamental differences, but also unexpected pathways and shared values, may exist. In doing so, it seeks to uncover the potential foundations to foster shared understandings to achieve pollution-free goals for agriplastics governance in the Spanish Mediterranean Sea.

Panel 2 (15:30-17:00)

The second panel focuses on another component of the marine governance performance assessment framework i.e. e-governance. It includes three papers from case studies around wind energy and maritime transport (including ports). A final contribution reflects on the transdisciplinary and participatory methodology developed within PERMAGOV to co-produce the governance assessment framework as well as the case study analysis.  

Presentation titles, speakers, and abstracts

Institutional dynamics in governance change and innovation: A case study of floating wind in the Celtic Sea | Lindsey West (Queen's University Belfast)

In the UK, offshore wind governance arrangements are changing and innovating in response to internal and external drivers including shifting political priorities and geo-political conflicts. Maintaining competitiveness in the face of EU policy innovations such as the Green Deal Industrial Plan and REPowerEU Plan is also a top priority. A suite of new policies and plans have been produced to support delivery of ambitious offshore wind targets, including a target of 5GW of floating wind by 2030. New actors and resources have been introduced into the governance arrangement and new multi-stakeholder collaborations are emerging. However, change and innovation are taking place within a complex governance arena. Floating wind cuts across multiple policy domains including energy, security, trade, climate, planning, and environment, and hence, key actors are dispersed across multiple government departments and public bodies. There is limited connectivity between these actors, which reduces capacity for integrated cross-departmental working. In addition, UK devolution arrangements contribute to scale-related governance challenges. With a focus on marine spatial planning, this paper explores the institutional dynamics that contribute to governance fragmentation and policy incoherence and increase the risk of misalignment between climate and nature goals. 

Collaborative dynamics between and within ports: evidence from the North Adriatic Sea | Nelson F. Coelho (Aalborg University)

The European Green Deal (EGD) is transforming European logistics systems, positioning ports as critical actors in the decarbonization of EU trade. With the development of the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and the Fit-for-55 legislative package, ports are expected to enhance efficiency, adopt digital solutions, and support sustainability goals. These shifts create new opportunities for ports to act as hubs for alternative fuel production and storage and to establish short-sea shipping routes that alleviate road congestion and reduce emissions. However, these ambitions depend on fostering collaborative dynamics both within individual ports and across port networks. Achieving the transition requires close cooperation among terminal operators, freight forwarders, shippers, and public authorities to overcome institutional, operational, and infrastructural barriers. Key constraints include insufficient alternative fuel infrastructure, alignment of diverse stakeholders, and gaps in governance mechanisms that impede effective implementation of EU policies. The paper examines the evolving governance arrangements within and between North Adriatic ports under the EGD framework, with a focus on how collaborative dynamics are shaping their ability to adapt to new policy demands. Drawing on data from the PERMAGOV project, it highlights examples of collaboration in this regional context. The findings contribute to a broader understanding of how ports are approaching complex governance landscapes to meet decarbonization objectives, offering insights into their pivotal role in sustainable European logistics systems.

Dealing with institutional barriers to implement EU decarbonization policies through collaborations and joint actions in maritime transport/shipping | Moses Adjei (Wageningen University)

The maritime shipping industry contributes about 90% of globally traded goods. Yet, the energy which currently powers the maritime industry is based on fossil fuels, which account for approximately 3% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. In the European Union (EU), the shipping sector emitted 138 MtCO2 in 2018 which is projected to grow by over 30% between 2015 and 2050 under current trends. This has resulted in increasing policy pressure to cut emissions in maritime transport. The fit for 55 package and resultant policies such as EU emission trading system (ETS), FuelEU maritime and alternative fuel infrastructure regulations mark important steps towards decarbonization in maritime transport. This paper focuses on the implementation of the EU ETS by examining (1) the institutional barriers to the effective implementation of EU policies towards decarbonising shipping, (2) contemporary collaborations and joint actions among actors in maritime transport and reflect on how such collaborations could help deal with institutional barriers to decarbonising shipping.  Our results show that whilst there seem to be general support from actors about the implementation of EU ETS as an important measure in dealing with GHG emissions from shipping, its implementation is fraught with several barriers, uncertainties and concerns. There is a strong impression that the current provisions of the EU ETS in the maritime sector could result in a high risk of diversion of shipping routes from EU ports to non-EU ports, which could result in carbon leakage and increased GHG emissions contrary to the very objective of the policy. In addition, the power imbalance that existed among actors in maritime transport is exacerbated or made more apparent due to the lack of transparency in the implementation of ETS surcharges. Another barrier is the lack of incentives and limited availability of alternative fuels for shipping which could slow down companies’ footprint reduction efforts in accordance with the EU targets. We argue that the various platforms for collaboration and joint actions in maritime transport such as the Zero Emission Maritime Buyers Alliance (ZEMBA), Renewable and Low-Carbon Fuels Value Chain Industrial Alliance (RLCF Alliance) and Green maritime corridor could be effective means to address these barriers.   

Technology to the rescue? Understanding e-governance in European marine and maritime contexts | Pavel Kogut (21c Consultancy)

E-governance – the use of digital technology in support of governance – is not uniformly spread in the marine domain. Within the same policy arena, one can find examples of high as well as low levels of ICT usage. Stakeholders easily embrace e-governance for some tasks and needs, but are more hesitant to ‘let in’ e-governance in other, supposedly more sensitive and contentious areas. This diversity obscures an understanding of the role of e-governance in marine governance. This study analyses the ways in which digital tools affect governance through the dimensions of “seeing and knowing", "participation and engagement", and "intervention and actions". Based on this mapping and qualitative research, the study assesses how sophisticated and integrated marine e-governance is, as well as how it influences, and is influenced by, the EU's policy context, namely the European Green Deal. Our findings allow for comparison and discussion of the conditions that may favor or prevent effective e-governance in the European marine context.

Methodological Challenges to Translate a Theoretical Governance Framework to Actionable Policy-Briefs | Judith van Leeuwen (Wageningen University)

The discursive translation of a conceptual governance model into accessible and actionable policy-briefs for targeted audiences is complex due to a high level of abstraction in theory, implicit norms, and policymakers’ needs for empirical evidence and contextual relevance. Triple-helix research between academia, civil society and government facilitates open discussions about content needs, though researchers still face methodological challenges to communicate actionable insights that are anchored in a conceptual argument. This presentation builds on the results of a Horizon Europe project named ‘PERMAGOV’, which investigates pathways to improve the performance of marine governance, specifically to meet the European Green Deal (EGD) objectives. Three normative arguments/assumptions are inherent in this research project. 1) We use the EGD vision as a normative reference point against which governance performance is assessed. 2) We adopt a transdisciplinary co-creation approach as a normative mode of participatory engagement to develop actionable insights and recommendations. 3) The MGPA Framework is underpinned by self-evident understandings of how change and innovation create new norms (e.g. open marine data). These normative arguments cause methodological challenges because: a) Performance analyses based on an implicit normative benchmark that the EGD represents may not overlap with stakeholders’ views. b) Effective co-creation depends on stakeholders’ ability to grasp the complexity of decision making and implementation processes, and the value to approach it through multiple theoretical perspectives. c) There are uncertainties about norm dynamics and norm tipping points in the specific cases. To develop innovative and practically viable recommendations, it is therefore necessary for researchers to reflect on the norms embedded in ongoing and new policy initiatives, participatory designs, and theories of change and innovation. In turn, this will enable the discursive translation of a theoretical governance framework into contextualized actionable policy-briefs. 

---

PERMAGOV partners at the MARE 2025 Conference