Master thesis in Sustainable Development 2019/37
Examensarbete i Hållbar utveckling
People’s perception of seagrass ecosystems - a Step Zero analysis in establishing marine protection of seagrass around Gotland, Sweden
Sofie Elggren
DEPARTMENT OF EARTH SCIENCES
I N S T I T U T I O N E N F Ö R G E O V E T E N S K A P E R
Master thesis in Sustainable Development 2019/37
Examensarbete i Hållbar utveckling
People’s perception of seagrass ecosystems - a Step Zero analysis in establishing marine protection of seagrass around Gotland, Sweden
Sofie Elggren
Supervisor: Lina Mtwana Nordlund & Rozemarijn Keuning
Subject Reviewer: Gunilla Rosenqvist
I
People’s perception of seagrass ecosystems
- a Step Zero analysis in establishing marine protection of seagrass around Gotland, Sweden
SOFIE ELGGREN
Elggren, S., 2019: People’s perception of seagrass ecosystems - a Step Zero analysis in establishing marine protection of seagrass around Gotland, Sweden. Master thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, No. 2019/37, 50 pp, 30 ECTS/hp
Abstract:
The marine environment is under stress. This study will address seagrass around the island of Gotland, Sweden.
Seagrass is a marine flowering plant which grows on the seabed and provide a multitude of important ecosystem services such as nutrient cycling, carbon sequestration, erosion mitigation and serve as habitats for primary fisheries. Due to the many benefits it provides seagrass is an important species and needs protection. Studies show there is a considerable lack of knowledge and indifference from the general public regarding the ecosystem services of seagrass meadows. Such indifference threatens seagrass meadows and their important ecosystem services. A survey made in this study indicates respondents are slightly unsure when distinguishing seagrass from other underwater fauna and applying features to it. However, a certainty exists that the Sea is important, and we should take care of it. Likewise, there is an awareness of the environment around Gotland and that is has deteriorated some over time, responses mostly reflected on fish catches, sea wrack and water clarity. Further, respondents are not always fully aware of how humans already benefit from ESS provided by seagrass.
Consequently, the results indicate an uncertainty in the understanding between daily human activities (e.g.
boating, fishing, handling of sea wrack) and potential changes of ESS. After answering the survey many expressed a curiosity and concern about seagrass but simultaneously felt unsure of how to protect or limit the destruction of seagrass. This indicates there is a possibility to inform, include and engage the general public as a stakeholder group.
In the Baltic Sea the situation is severe due to eutrophication, toxins and overfishing causing certain ecosystems to collapse and the seabed becoming oxygen deficient. The Baltic Sea is under pressure, international and national environmental policies promote a higher protection and mitigation of stressors advocating an adaptive natural resource management and sustainable development. This thesis investigates what people’s perception is about seagrass and the ecosystem services it provides around Gotland. It further looks at the process of implementing environmental protection and conservation and how this is dependent on active participation from the general public. The research aims to conduct a Step Zero analysis, establish a basis of stakeholders’ perception of seagrass as a resource. The analysis is a pre-test and can provide a foundation of how to optimize and proceed in a potential deepening of marine protection. It further explores in what way information can be communicated to help illustrate the benefits and necessity of natural resource management. Using empirical data from a survey circulated on Gotland, this thesis explores what information is relevant for the local community to increase the awareness seagrass and the ecosystem services seagrass benefit provides. By determining if and how people perceive different aquatic benefits and threats, natural resource management may provide information and participation measures that can lead to a gradual alteration of behavior.
Keywords: Sustainable development, seagrass, ecosystem services, participation, natural resource management, Step Zero analysis
Sofie Elggren, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, SE- 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden
II
People’s perception of seagrass ecosystems
- a Step Zero analysis in establishing marine protection of seagrass around Gotland, Sweden
SOFIE ELGGREN
Elggren, S., 2019: People’s perception of seagrass ecosystems - a Step Zero analysis in establishing marine protection of seagrass around Gotland, Sweden. Master thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, No. 2019/37, 50 pp, 30 ECTS/hp
(Executive) Summary:
Seagrass are marine flowering plants which live in the soft benthic seabeds where they form seagrass meadows.
The seagrass and seagrass meadows provide important ecosystem services like nutrient cycling, carbon sequestration, erosion mitigation and serve as habitats for primary fisheries. Due to increasing stress from human activities and climate change, these plants are threatened and need protection. Sweden, EU and other international bodies have formed framework and action plans to initiate protection and a sustainable development. However, there is a considerable lack of knowledge and indifference from the general public regarding seagrass and the ecosystem services it provides.
The survey conducted in this study about perceived knowledge and understanding about seagrass and ecosystem services around the coastal areas of Gotland, show that seagrass is an indistinct concept. Some ecosystem services are well known whereas others were quite unfamiliar. Answers express an uncertainty among respondents regarding what features seagrass have and what benefits it provide. The survey further confirms respondents felt unsure of how they can contribute to protect or limit the destruction of seagrass Many expressed a curiosity and concern thus there is a need of information and a reconnection to the environment.
Using a Step Zero analysis approach, this study looks at the situation of seagrass around Gotland in the Baltic Sea.
A Step Zero analysis is a pre-implementation test to evaluate the specific place and local conditions. The analysis can provide a foundation of how to optimize and proceed in a project. The thesis explores what the general public know about seagrass and the ecosystem services it provides. It further looks at the process of implementing environmental protection and conservation and how this is dependent on active participation from the general public. Previous studies show implementation of environmental protection can sometimes lead to tension and even conflict with stakeholders. Implementation of nature reserves without the participation of stakeholders are rarely successful. As conflicts may prevent conservation and national environmental objectives adaptive participation is recommended by the Swedish government. This study contributes to the research of active participation and can help natural resource management and future implementation of environmental protection by including stakeholders. Information of the ecosystem services and benefits seagrass provide to humans and society may improve the perception of natural resource management.
Keywords: Sustainable development, seagrass, ecosystem services, participation, natural resource management, Step Zero analysis
Sofie Elggren, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, SE- 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden
III
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CAB County Administrative Board ESS Ecosystem Services
EU European Union
MA Millennium ecosystem Assessment MNR Marine Nature Reserve
MPA Marine Protected Area
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NRM Natural Resource Management
SEPA Swedish Environmental Protection Agency SFA Swedish Forest Agency
SwAM Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UU Uppsala University
IV
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Background ... 3
2.1 Ecosystem services ... 3
2.2 Seagrass and seagrass meadows ... 5
2.3 Natural resource management ... 5
3. Method ... 10
3.1 Step Zero analysis ... 10
3.2 Finding respondents ... 12
3.3 Data collection - Survey ... 13
3.4 Data coding ... 14
3.5 Limitations ... 14
4. Results ... 15
4.1 Demographics ... 15
4.2 Seagrass and marine environment ... 16
4.3 Humans and seagrass ... 19
4.4 Participants reflections and opinions on the survey ... 23
4.5 Open-ended questions in the survey ... 24
5. Discussion... 27
5.1 Finding answers in the survey ... 28
5.2 Participation and communication, ... 30
6. Conclusion ... 32
6.1 Future studies ... 32
6.2 Policy recommendations ... 33
7. Acknowledgements ... 34
8. References ... 35
Appendix A - The contact letter for the survey (sent in Swedish): ... 45
Appendix B - Survey (in Swedish) per 20190219: ... 46
1
1. Introduction
The Baltic Sea, the second largest brackish water in the world, is a semi-enclosed sea currently struggling with eutrophication and toxins where habitats and fisheries are under severe stress or threat (havet.nu, 2019; HELCOM, 2016; Wiklund, 2017). Due to eutrophication, the benthic seabed of the Baltic is suffering and by 2017, 18% of the seabeds are deemed oxygen deficient and an additional 28%
only have a very low level of oxygen (havet.nu, 2019). The Baltic Sea is also facing effects of climate change causing higher water temperatures and desalination (Wulff et al., 2018). International frameworks and directives like HELCOM, the Helsinki Convention (1992) and EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008) have formed action plans with adaptive management approach to mitigate the deterioration of the area and asserted certain species have been asserted having significant value and are important to protect; seagrass is classed as one of those (HELCOM, 1992; MSFD, 2008).
Seagrass are marine flowering plants forming meadows in shallow waters around the globe (Moore and Short, 2006). Seagrass provide important benefits for human well-being so called ecosystem services (ESS), which enhance marine biodiversity and profit both nature and humans (Costanza et al., 1997).
Amongst some, seagrass enable sediment stabilization (Fonseca et al., 1983; Orth et al., 2006), provide habitat for fisheries (Rönnbäck et al., 2007) and carbon sequestration (Duarte et al., 2005). Studies show human activities causes stress to seagrass (Orth et al., 2006; Ralph et al., 2006). Excessive nutrient pollution from agriculture and coastal engineering are indirect negative impacts affecting the seagrass (Burkholder et al., 2007). Unsustainable fishing practices and boat propellers cause more direct deterioration (Waycott et al., 2009). Seagrass often grow in coastal areas and in shallow waters making it close to any runoff from land causing nutrient rich inputs (Orth et al., 2006)
The Swedish coastal areas connecting to the Baltic Sea have since long faced significant problems with eutrophication, environmental and industrial toxins as well as overfishing, causing the collapse of several ecosystems. These problems have formed the coast and coastal waters we have today (Hammersland, 2007, p.7). Gotland is the largest island in Sweden located in the Baltic Sea and has a population over 59 000 people. The coastal environment surrounding Gotland is extensive and inhabits a special flora and fauna (NE, 2019). The coast of Gotland is 770 km long and has business activities such as and operations along its coast. The challenges to develop a sustainable society on Gotland today is linked to energy and fresh water production and maintaining a healthy living sea (Nypelius et al., 2008). The shallow coastal waters are important for certain bird and fish species and hold significant ecologic and economic value (Nypelius and Dahllöf, 2010).
There is very limited knowledge on the extent of seagrass meadows around Gotland. Because of the valuable benefits they provide, the regional county administrative board (CAB) proposes to conduct further research and investigates a deepened protection of seagrass and seagrass meadows (Keuning, 2018). Studies show there is a considerable lack of knowledge and indifference from the general public regarding the ESS of seagrass meadows(Duarte et al., 2008; Nordlund et al., 2018). Such indifference threatens seagrass meadows and their important ESS.
Implementation practices of nature conservation are often slow and sometimes lead to controversy or even conflict (Morf, 2010) The connection between human impact on nature and the ecosystem services is sometimes lost in society. There is a growing body of research regarding active participation of stakeholders reinstating this connection to the environment (Evans et al., 2008; Morf, 2005; Sayce et al., 2013).
In densely populated and active areas, such as the Baltic Sea and the coast around Gotland nature resource management (NRM) requires interactions within the social, economic and ecological contexts (Voyer et al., 2012). In Sweden, current NRM policies promote active participation of stakeholders to get a positive outcome. Participation of the local community depends on the perception people have of
2
the marine environment (SEPA, 2019d). Today many people have a very distant relationship with nature and does not fully understand how much various functions and support from the environment are essential in their everyday lives (Pitman and Daniels, 2016). It is the perception of the general public which determines the behavior towards marine ESS and the benefits, threats and consequences of degradation (Gelcich et al., 2014; Lotze et al., 2018). Since people’s perceptions fix their behavior, thus informing and creating awareness can help regional management promote sustainability and conservation (Voyer et al., 2015).
Implementation of nature reserves can lead to tension between stakeholders and officials due to a variety of reasons as it is a very complex subject. Economic loss when employment opportunities decrease or disappear, change in access to the commons and environmental resources infractions are some restrictions causing tension (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007). It is probable there will be conflicts of interest if an establishment of a protected area is proposed around parts of Gotland.
Since seagrass is such an important resource and provides many ESS, it is worth looking into what different stakeholder groups, a part of the general public in this case study, know in order to instigate an adequate protection. If information lead to a shared understanding, different parties or stakeholders can perhaps agree on a shared goal(van Wyk et al., 2008). By collecting information from stakeholders – the public, in an early pre-implementation stage, this study follows the approach of previous studies of an adaptive collaborative and learning-oriented place-based process (Lotze et al., 2018; Plummer et al., 2017).
This study will conduct a Step Zero analysis, it is a primer test to gather information about different stakeholders’ views, objections and opinions about the sea, seagrass and ecosystem services. The analysis is place specific and based on local conditions. It is the initial step when an idea is presented to the stakeholders. The way this is conveyed can therefore be crucial to the future development of the project (Gonzalez and Jentoft, 2011). The Step Zero analysis of this thesis will follow Barragan- Paladines and Chuenpagdee (2017) in structuring the pre-implementation phases and major themes, including all or a selection based on the specific case and time; conditions and drivers, inspiration and conceptions, initialization and communication, participation and preparation, reflection and adaptation.
The study will focus on the first phase of this analysis as it precedes the project planned by the County Administrative Board of Gotland (CAB). However, it can provide an assessment of what the general public knows about seagrass. It can illuminate any potential knowledge gap and how to best involve the general public in the importance of seagrass and seagrass meadow protection. It can also be used to assist the CAB of how to communicate information and clarify the various ESS benefits it provides in an optimal way for the public. This research explores the understanding of the general public on Gotland , as a stakeholder group, what benefits ESS from seagrass meadows contribute to nature and society.
The overall aim is to conduct a Step Zero analysis to establish a basis of stakeholders’ perception of seagrass as a resource. This was done by creating and sending out a survey to people living on Gotland and who were engaged in some form of association based oncommitment to an interest or an activity . By conducting a survey, this thesis will explore people’s knowledge of seagrass meadows and their associated ESS’s around Gotland. Specifically, this study focuses on the research questions:
1. What do the general public on Gotland know about seagrass, seagrass meadows and the ESS they provide and what is the understanding of the connection between human activities and ESS degradation?
2. What information would be valuable and relevant to the local community to increase the knowledge about seagrass and its ESS?
3. In what way can information regarding the environmental impacts on seagrass be communicated to illustrate the benefits and necessities of nature conservation, thereby facilitate a potential implementation of increased marine protection around Gotland?
3
2. Background
The connection between humans and nature, the knowledge and understanding of how the earths functions and the systems than work within nature as support to all life is called ecological literacy.
Although the connection is never broken, it is often reduced in the industrialized society and the relationship between humans and the support and services it provides is forgotten(Pitman and Daniels, 2016; Steffen et al., 2007).
2.1 Ecosystem services
Ecosystems exist everywhere in nature, in direct or indirect contact with humans (Costanza et al., 1997).
They function in multiple levels on local to global scales and provide benefits to their surroundings.
ESS are often defined as products, processes and services of nature (Daily, 1997). They are benefits and functions supplied by nature for free to increase the well-being and quality of life for humans and all other living beings. Ecosystem services are defined as:
…” Ecosystem goods (such as food) and services (such as waste assimilation) represent the benefits human populations derive, directly or indirectly, from ecosystem functions” (Costanza et al. 1997)
“a dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their nonliving environment interacting as a functional unit” (United Nations 1992: Article 2).
“the capacity of natural processes and components to provide goods and services that satisfy human needs, directly or indirectly”(de Groot et al., 2002)
As a concept, ESS have increasingly been studied since the 1960s-70s, but has not been given a clear definition (de Groot et al., 2002). In 2003, a large international body of researchers and scientists formed a framework, categorizing ESS, to make them manageable and more easily included in regulations and with the purpose to appoint economic value. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) defines ESS in relation to human well-being for a concept to be used in policies and easily recognized (MA, 2003).
This thesis uses the classifications determined by MA (2005) to ease coding of empirical data and specify the various ESS.
Fig. 1: The different types of Ecosystem services in the Baltic Sea as presented by the Swedish ministry of the environment. The doughnut chart shows primary production of food through seagrass and alga, food as fish and
seafood, living coasts for recreational value and ecotourism. Nutrient cycling through biological processes and climate regulation through carbon sequestration. (Miljödepartementet, 2019).
Thus, among others the MA framework (2005) presented an understanding of what benefits ESS provide and how they are related to human well-being and nature. Coastal ESS were recognized to provide even more services. ESS were divided into 4 different types of services (fig.2) representing benefits connected to human-well-being (Costanza et.al, 1997; Daily, 1997; MA, 2005, p.5).
4
Fig. 2:Chart with the various types of ecosystem services, based on the definitions by the Millennium
Ecological Assessment, supporting, provisioning, regulating and cultural services and how they benefit humans and the environment (Alcamo et al., 2003).
Short- and long- term differences in ESS can cause effects, making scale of time one aspect that differentiates the ESS from each other and their influence on humans (MA, 2005). In random order, the types of ESS in the figure (fig.2 above) are divided into the following categories of provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services, showing some examples of how seagrass provide these services around Gotland.
Provisioning services - Products obtained from ecosystems
These ecosystems provide products rather than services, they often require human intervention of some kind. Products like timber and food are both necessary and beneficial for humans but need to be produced and refined, cut or harvested (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018). Food produce, fresh water, fuel wood, fiber, biochemicals and genetic resources are examples of provisioning services (MA, 2005, p.72). In the survey of this thesis these ESS were presented as food (fish) and seagrass wrack (släke) as a fertilizer and as a contributor to maintaining biodiversity.
Regulating and maintenance services - Benefits obtained from regulations of ecosystem processes These intermediate services are, in opposition to provisioning services, not dependent on production, but rather to the effects and processes of a service. A system that is capable of functioning in an enhanced or diminished way and reflect the benefits that derive from the services, such as climate and water regulation, water purification and waste control (MA, 2005). In the survey, statements of healthy seagrass meadows mitigating erosion of the seabed and acting as a carbon sink represent benefits of regulating and maintenance ESS.
Cultural services - Non-material benefits obtained from ecosystems
Human well-being is often linked to socio-ecological interaction. Much in our everyday life are benefits we get from Cultural services. They represent the aesthetic recreational, cognitive societal and religious values humans can get from nature. They give a sense of space, place and belonging, cultural services can be a beautiful forest, a fantastic beach or the exotic destination of a travel. Cultural services also provide a bequest value – that a system service will leave something of value to be enjoyed in the future for generations to come (de Groot et al., 2002). In the survey the participants were asked to reflect over the sea and the coastal area on Gotland, suggesting functions and activities like beaches and swimming, leisure fishing, boating which all are cultural ESS.
• Climate regulation
• Disease regulation
• Water regulation and purification
• Pollination
• Spiritual and religous
• Educational
• Cultural heritage
• Inspirational
• Recreational and ecotourism
• Fresh water
• Fuelwood
• Fiber
• Biochemicals
• Soil formation
• Nutrient cycling
• Primary production
Supporting services
Provisioning services
Regulating services Cultural
services
5
Supporting services - Services necessary for all other services to function
Refers to primary production, soil formation and nutrient cycling. Supporting services are slightly different from the other services as the indirect effects of disturbance of these services are disclosed on a much longer time scale. Nevertheless, the effects of the changes in these services can be directly felt by humans (MA, 2005, p.59). Seagrass meadows as important breeding grounds and habitat for primary production of fisheries as well as being able to capture nutrients from overfertilization and emissions of wastewater represented supporting services around Gotland in the survey.
2.2 Seagrass and seagrass meadows
Seagrass is an underwater plant (monocotyledon) with flowers and roots. It grows and photosynthesizes in salty or brackish water along coastlines all around the world (apart from Antarctica). There are around 72 different species and those are divided into 4 families, Zosteraceae, Hydrocharitaceae, Posidoniaceae and Cymodoceaceae (Short et al., 2011). They have more common names; eelgrass, turtle grass, tape grass, shoal grass, and spoon grass, which usually describes the various appearances of the plant. A seagrass species can grow by itself, or together with up to 14 different seagrass species, and form large meadows under the surface. In the North Atlantic region/ northern hemisphere there is less diversity among types of seagrass and the Zostera(ceae) is dominant (Short et al., 2007). Seagrass meadows, whilst productive, are also vulnerable and declining on a global scale around 7% per year. Mostly due to pressure from human activities (Waycott et al., 2009).
Studies show seagrass meadows provide a sheltered habitat for fisheries, protecting the young fish from predators and contributes to biodiversity in the global food web (Unsworth et al., 2018). It may be an important factor for food security amongst poor coastal communities in more vulnerable parts in the world (Nordlund et al., 2016). As benthic habitats, the roots and rhizomes of seagrass meadows contribute to stabilise the sediment on the seafloor and at times also coastal protection (Hemminga and Duarte, 2000). Studies and research have affirmed the significance of conserving existing seagrass meadows, supporting as nurseries for fish and other marine habitats improving the animal life in the water (Unsworth et al., 2018). This directly affects food production and food security. Seagrass can store large quantities of organic carbon in biomass and sediment, thus being a natural mitigator of carbon dioxide. Consequently, these reserves are released into the atmosphere if the seagrass deteriorates (Crooks et al., 2011). The ESS seagrass meadows provide are some of the most productive in the world, but they are not easily recognized and not obvious to the general public (Waycott et al., 2009).
2.3 Natural resource management
Nature is an intrinsic part of human well-being and needs to be protected (Since the 1990s a continuant emergence of environmental protection has developed. The SDG goal (14); “Life below water:
Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development”, have caused policy makers to find economic and ecological balance in natural resource management (UNDP, 2015). There is a global trend to conserve nature, terrestrial (land) and marine resources, although there is an uneven balance between terrestrial and marine conservation developments. Water cover over 70%
of the earth’s surface and theses oceans contain 98% of all the water on earth (NE, 2019). Globally, only 5% of all nature reserves are marine and linked to water, the remaining 95% are nature reserves on land. (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018).
Historically, prior to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, 1982) marine jurisdiction was unclear on a global level and between nations. After the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, UNCED, 1992) several environmental, marine and development agreements united the view on nature conservation, such as UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992). Around the Baltic Sea, the adjoining countries participated and signed the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission - Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) in 1992 and implementations of marine protected areas (MPAs) began (HELCOM, 1992). The partners of
6
CBD committed to convert 10% of the total marine environment to protected areas by 2020, this process has proven long and problematic (CBD, 2010).
There are several factors contributing to the difficulty of establishing MPAs. The conservation effects of MPAs have been questioned since they are reliant on land use and water quality management (Orth et al., 2006). Compared to terrestrial nature reserves the economic cost is relatively higher for marine conservation management (McCrea-Strub et al., 2011). Lagging in international agreements caused effects in integrated marine management and planning progress. Finally, the rather low publicity of MPAs result in low public support and understanding (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018).
Action plans have been formed to protect and mitigate the environmental problems in the Baltic Sea area (HELCOM, 1992; EUSBSR, 2017). The EU formed a directive in 2008, with the objective to have all EU waters in good environmental status by 2020 (MSFD, 2008). They coincide with the global sustainable development goals (SDGs) set by the UN in 2015 (UNDP, 2015). Sweden has implemented and adapted the international frameworks into the Swedish environmental objectives (SEPA, 2012).
Action plans regarding marine protection around Sweden is developed by the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management (SwAM) on behalf of the government (Skog, 2018). SwAM foster the environmental objectives and interim targets further and aim to convert an additional 10% of Swedish coastal areas into marine protected areas (MPAs) by 2020 (Gonzalez and Jentoft, 2011; Moksnes, et al.2016). Within the environmental objectives is the protection of threatened species and environmental habitats in Sweden, included in these species are Seagrass (SwAM, 2019c; SwAM, 2019d).
The division of protected environment areas in Sweden follow the global allocation (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018). Policy initializations and implementation of nature reserves are usually a top-down process from a governance perspective. However, it cannot be completed without participation and involvement from a wider group of stakeholders (Dunsire, 1995).
Current environmental protection in Sweden
Conservation and protected areas is a global trend to reduce and relief anthropogenic stress on the environment (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018). It is supported by international frameworks like the UN Sustainable Development Goals, to make sure the ecological, social and economic environment will provide a beneficial situation for future generations (UNDP, 2015). But it is not an easy task.
Environmental protection usually equal restrictions and regulations and can sometimes be met with opposition by stakeholders who feel negatively affected (Eksvärd et al. 2006).
The Swedish government formed the environmental objectives; Maintaining a healthy costal and water management. These follow the international SDGs (UNDP, 2015). Legally, the environment in Sweden is protected by the Swedish Environmental Code (SFS 2018:1862) and it is administered through the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) and SwAM (SEPA, 2019a; SwAM, 2019a). The operational enforcement of establishing nature and marine reserves fall on the 21 county administrative boards (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018). The local CABs follow apart from the national and international regulation, guidance from SwAM in how to approach nature and marine conservation. The guidance is particularly essential when for marine reserves as these are complex and previous examples are scarce, making operational and practical implementation experience limited (Hammersland, 2007).
By the end of 2017, 13% of the total national area of Sweden was assigned some form of environmental protection. There are several factors weighing in when applying protection to an area. Ownership, time and scale perspectives determine how the protection and conservation is formed. Most areas are officially permanently covered, these are owned by the government and form national parks, nature reserves, biotope protected areas, as well as some other nature conservation areas. In some areas, protection can be limited in time and is a contract agreement between the landowner and the government. Environmental management vary in terms of legal protection, national parks have the highest form of environmental protection (Stymne, 2018). A national park has the highest restrictions and is formed under the prerequisite it is owned by the state and shall according to SEPA:
7
“represent common or unique types of Swedish landscape, individually and as an entire nationwide system, cover complete landscape sections of not less than 1,000 ha, be primarily composed of unspoiled natural landscapes, be magnificent or characteristic and as such make interesting destinations for visitors, have a high nature conservation value, be able to be protected effectively while also being used for research, outdoor activities and tourism without damage to their nature conservation value” (Löfgren et al., 2008).
The most common environmental conservation in Sweden are nature reserves. In comparison to national parks, a nature reserve is more diversified in ways assigned to protect the environment. As mentioned earlier national parks cover large areas of specifically defined landscapes whereas nature reserves can include any type of nature deemed valuable. The landscape forming a national park is not altered by agriculture or other industry and is sheltered from this. Nature reserves can be created to preserve and restore forestry, culturally developed areas and structural developments. The character of a national park should promote scientific research and outdoor activities and at the same time protect nature and the resources, nature reserves have the same pre-conditions but can at the same time be more specialized towards a specific fauna.
National parks are founded by the state on land belonging to the state. Nature reserves can be founded on land or sea owned by other stakeholders. The government is the founding authority for national parks whereas for nature reserves it is handled by the CAB or the communities. The formal national status from the government of national parks exceeds the one of nature reserves. Finally, the national parks are closely linked to the national environmental objective of intergenerational conservation and the maintaining a national inheritance (Löfgren et al., 2008).
Another prominent form of protection is Natura 2000 areas, they are established based on the birds- and habitat directive and derive from international EU regulation. Areas protected under Natura 2000 protection can include nature reserves and are common on private land. Generally, the areas have a more inclusive conservation approach that welcome human presence where people function with nature (European Commission, 2019). Today there are over 4500 Natura 2000 registered areas in Sweden acting within nature reserves and externally. Seabeds are not included in the Natura 2000 directive (2019d).
In Sweden, it is administered by SEPA and on regional levels CABs provide maintenance management, protection and supervision (SEPA, 2019b). The Swedish Forest Agency (SFA) is the national authority in charge of forest-related issues and SwAM is commensurably liable of marine and limnic environments and species (SFA, 2019; SEPA, 2019b).
Environmental protection and Marine Conservation around Gotland
Out of the 73 national marine nature reserves currently in Sweden today, one of them is just north of Gotland by Salvorev-Kopparstenarna, established in 1987(SwAM, 2019b) (Stymne, 2018). Gotland currently have around 137 nature reserves. Approximately 6% of the total land area of Gotland is currently under some form of environmental protection. Like terrestrial nature reserves and protected areas, MPAs can include different types of preservation and safeguarding depending on what is to be protected. It can consist of both national parks and nature reserves together with Natura 2000 restrictions (Berglund, 2016). There are 143 areas covered by the EU protection directive Natura 2000 around Gotland (Länsstyrelsen Gotland, 2019).
To establish a marine nature reserve is a complex process, in Sweden, the prospective area needs to have inherent social, cultural, ecological and economical values. SwAM have regulations and instructions of how to process the establishment and setting the perimeter of the protected area (SwAM, 2019a; SwAM 2019b). The process of creating a marine nature reserve is managed by the CAB, by establishing an essence value (resource), protection zone and an impact area. However, the establishment of marine protected areas is complex, there are many factors and activities affecting the
8
area and are not easily regulated (SwAM, 2019a). To get an overview, in a very short version, these are the major steps showing the procedure NRM officials follow when preparing to create a nature reserve (SEPA, 2019c).
• Inventory, consultation and proposal
• Valuation and negotiation
• Agreement and commitment
• Decision
• Management
At present, there is very limited knowledge on the presence of seagrass meadows around Gotland. The CAB on Gotland has applied and received funding from SwAM for a research project lasting 3-4 years.
During this time the CAB is therefore looking to begin research of locating Seagrass habitat, identify valuable areas with eelgrass meadows and develop a local action plan for marine area protection. In extension establishment of biotope protection or marine nature reserves. Some parts of the process will be including collaborations with, Uppsala University Campus Gotland and external consultants (Keuning, 2018).
The County Administrative Board wishes to achieve increased protection for vulnerable coastal environments exposed by:
1. Develop a local action plan for marine area protection
2. Carry out supplementary inventories in coastal areas where the presence of eelgrass is already established, and inventory of coastal environments where there is a high probability that eelgrass is present. The purpose is to map the extent of the species and the quality of the meadows.
3. Prioritize a few coastal areas with high natural values for protection through biotope protection or reserve, with the aim that the areas can become part of a well-managed, ecologically representative and coherent network.
4. Carry out supplementary inventories in areas with existing protection to increase attention on particularly valuable areas and strengthen protection and improve management and follow-up (Keuning, 2018).
The board made its decision in line with the Swedish government’s environmental objective to maintain a healthy costal and water management (Skog, 2018). Further, the CAB wishes to engage an adaptive management and enhanced protection against exploitation. If the project is successful and inventories confirm presence of seagrass, a marine nature reserve could be established (Keuning, 2018).
2.4 Participation, perception and communication
Participation is defined as some form of activism in the social context, voting and engagement in policy implementation are examples of public participation in democratic countries (Rabe et al., 2017). The level of participation is determined both by the stakeholders and by the planners, in this case CAB officials. Reports state successful participation requires stakeholder engagement and managerial inclusion. There has never been a successful implementation of a MPA that did not have the support from the local general public (Rabe et al., 2017). After have taken part in a conservation project, participants state lay people indeed have a role to play in the management of local environment (Evans et al., 2008). Further, research have increased when it comes to understanding people’s perception and attitudes regarding marine environmental protection (Lotze et al.,2017). Marine Citizen Science is increasingly popular, thanks to society's growing interest in marine environments and marine issues
9
(Lucrezi et al., 2018). Based on the assumption that well-informed stakeholders are more compliant to accept an establishment of a conservation area (Duerden and Witt, 2010; Evans et al., 2008).
Marine public perception is complex as it is an interaction between the public, conservation managers and scientists. An important step to protect the marine environment is to understand how people know and feel about it. Emerging research show that by determining if and how people connect to different aquatic threats and if they are aware them, can alter their behavior (Gelcich et al., 2014; Lotze et al., 2018).
However, increasing environmental protection can have both socio-economical risks and raise socio- political issues. When looking at measures to successfully establish a marine nature reserve it is helpful to examine what the main causes are that can prevent it from being implemented (Chuenpagdee et al., 2013). The overall objective is to protect the environment, but at the same time get stakeholders to participate and legitimize the protection, which often involves some form of restriction, without conflict (Westberg and Waldenström, 2017).
In Sweden, the focus on nature conservation shifted parallel to the international advancement to sustainable development (Westberg et al., 2010). This was done to benefit a more democratic management of conservation and natural resources. At the same time Swedish environmental objectives turned focus from conservation of specific threatened species and valuable areas, to a more holistic systems approach. Production capacity, ecosystems, ESS and habitats were advocated to sustain a more long-term perspective. The Swedish government and SEPA revised the way natural resource management (NRM) was implemented introducing more focus on participation of stakeholders (Swedish Government, 2001).
Regionally, CABs are responsible on an operational level to complete implementation of environmental protection and conservation. They are responsible for wildlife management as well as protecting land and water areas with high conservation value (Westberg et al., 2010). Managing marine protection, or reserves falls on 14 coastal CABs around Sweden (Grip and Blomqvist, 2018). As a coordinating authority CABs are responsible that the national targets, set by the government and SwAM, are implemented (Regeringskansliet, 2019; SwAM, 2019d). CAB as acting planners usually take on several roles, primarily they are experts but also process facilitators and conflict managers (Morf, 2010). From the management side, it is important to recognize that communication is going out to a diverse group of stakeholders, which can be challenging (Grorud-Colvert et al., 2010).Participation is about involvement, and to what degree the participants are inclined to be involved as well as to what degree they are included in the decision-making(Westberg and Waldenström, 2017).
Nature resource management (NRM) requires interaction in a social, economic and ecological context, especially in population dense and active areas, such as the Baltic Sea and the coast around Gotland. It is important to understand why the public may be reluctant to get a functional protection(Voyer et al., 2012). In Sweden, current natural resource management (NRM) policies promote active participation of stakeholders;
“Early information and open dialogue open up opportunities for participation and local support”. (SEPA, 2019d).
From both a management and societal perspective, participation have pragmatic and democratic benefits, by increasing representation of different stakeholder groups and give empowerment it could lead to increased trust, and support and reduces costs. These costs can be economic, as the process is quicker, and ecological as the protection can be implemented faster (Ward et al., 2018). However, today NRM officials are expected to use a bottom-up approach in a top-down structure, which can be very difficult (Westberg et al., 2010).
10
Communication and cooperation
Workshops and interviews have been conducted by researchers to study and identify communication challenges between NRM officials and stakeholder groups. A part of the communication process is establishing the level of participation. When initiating a cooperation between officials and stakeholders it helps to understand the stand points on interests, values, goals and means to get there. By discussing and creating a consensus around important factors can be a necessary foundation (Eksvärd et al., 2006).
Communication and cooperation are perceived as difficult to obtain due to the power imbalance between stakeholders and officials. It poses as a peril in both sustaining participation and communication (George and Reed, 2017). Successful NRM is built on cooperation and adaptive management, this includes creating feedback loops between the management and society (Holling, 2001). Feedback loops are use as communications channels for shared learning, and gives the various stakeholder groups a platform to be recognized, by each other and by the management (Rabe et al., 2017).
3. Method
Implementing terrestrial or marine nature reserves and the potential conflicts that may appear between conservation and development is a global topic. As mentioned earlier natural resource management is regulated and adhere to national legislation as well as international conventions and agreements. The operational implementation falls on regional CABs (Morf, 2005). Creating and enabling participation in the specific case of understanding and relating to benefits from ESS, the Step Zero analysis can help determine every step toward a potential consensus.
3.1 Step Zero analysis
A Step Zero analysis is a primer test to gather information about different stakeholders’ views, objections and opinions. The analysis is place specific and based on local conditions. It is the initial step when an idea is presented to the stakeholders. By analyzing the five phases; 1) conditions and drivers, 2) inspiration and conception, 3) initialization and communication, 4) participation and preparation, 5) reflection and adaption (fig. 3 below), the test can provide a foundation for how to optimize and proceed in a project. The way this is conveyed can therefore be crucial to the future development of the project (Gonzalez and Jentoft, 2011). The CAB of Gotland is in the beginning of investigating and initiating an evaluation process for the potential additional marine protection around Gotland (Keuning, 2018). Only a few previous studies have used Step Zero as an analysis-tool and these studies have been conducted mostly in developing countries and focusing on changes in natural resources and management (Barragan-Paladines and Chuenpagdee, 2017; Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007).
A Step Zero analysis can serve as a helpful tool and potentially if conducted well it could help shorten the implementation period, reduce costs and increase compliance between stakeholders (Chuenpagdee et al., 2013). It can also be conducted to determine/investigate the socio-economic value of a system. If the perceived combined value (social, cultural, ecological and economical) of an ecosystem is greater than the actual economical value that can derive from it, the system and its functions can be deemed worth investing in (Rashty, 2018).This thesis represents a part in the first phase of the analysis, conditions and drivers (see Figure 3 below). The remaining phases in the analysis could be further developed and used by CAB throughout the process preparing the heterogenous participants on Gotland to a potential implementation of further environmental protection.
11
Fig. 3: Progress of collaboration-plan in relation to a Step Zero analysis showing each phase (Barragan-Paladines and Chuenpagdee, 2017) highlighting the first phase “Conditions and Drivers” with a red outline to mark the positioning of this thesis within the analysis.
Phase 1: Conditions & Drivers
In the first phase, it is important to determine what perception of the project the general public have and equally important to identify who the stakeholders are and in what constellations they exist (Colvin et al., 2016). There might be a wide-ranging opinion of the public that a situation or ESS has deteriorated.
Such conditions need to be noted early in the project process. For alterations in the public sphere, two questions need to be clear in order to get approval and legitimacy of society; who is initiating and driving the project forward and why. Next, a distinct and positive option of improvement must be presented. There is a need for interaction and a sense of team play, moving toward a common goal (Barragan-Paladines and Chuenpagdee, 2017).
At this stage it is important to inform and make stakeholders understand consequences of actions and in-actions but at the same time suggest that measures can be taken to resolve any crisis or at least improve the situation (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007).
Phase 2: Inspiration & Conception
Use the second phase to bring attention to similar cases, co-operations or cooperative agreements that have been successful in the past. As stated earlier, the initiation process might often come from the state, but local communities, entrepreneurs and associations should be regarded as important assets and can provide valuable help. To regard the local community not only as passive receptors to the implementation but active contributors is vital. Collaborations give an opportunity for the implementation to become more successful (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007).
Phase 3: Initialization & Communication
In the initialization phase, communication is key. Again, case dependent, the information about the project is sensitive, not only what and how is communicated but also by whom. Depending on how much change the process or project bring it is important to consider who receives the information. The more diverse group of stakeholders that are involved the higher probability of success (Barragan- Paladines and Chuenpagdee, 2017).
Resistance to change usually comes from the perception that something is lost, e.g. income loss due to new regulation, restrictions to areas or activities. In managing the initialization, there is a fine balance of how much control the government is willing to give up and how much responsibility the public need to or are willing to take on. Consequently, it is important also in this step to show successful examples of other cases who have made positive outcomes and improvements (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007).
Phase 4: Participation & Preparation
In this late stage of implementation, it may be easy to believe that preceding efforts of including and involving various stakeholder groups and constructing plans for active participation will make the establishment easy (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007). It may not be so. In this stage vigilance is necessary and preparation for additional conflicts (Barragan-Paladines and Chuenpagdee, 2017). To prepare for the change and build awareness through formal and informal information channels is effective (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007).
Conditions and Drivers
Inspiration and conception
Initialization and communication
Participation and preparation
Reflection and adaptation
12
Phase 5: Reflection & Adaptation
The final step is an opportunity to look forward, information about how the situation can evolve if no action is taken. It is also an occasion to back and reflect on the process, what can be improved until next time, and what mistakes should be avoided. Clear rules and legal process need to be stated and re- communicated for the adaptation. Most important is the support from the government and operational institution (CAB) during the adaptation process(Barragan-Paladines and Chuenpagdee, 2017;
Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007).
3.2 Study site
The case study in this report is Gotland. As an attractive place to visit, the island receives around 800 000 tourists annually (NE, 2019). The curtain wall surrounding residential Hanseatic town of Visby is famous and the town was added on to the UNESCO world heritage list 1995 and ads on to the peculiar nature, numerous cultural and historical monuments of Gotland (Riksantikvarieämbetet, 2014; UNESCO, 2014). Gotland as a region is dependent of the sea in economic, social, cultural and ecological aspects. The 59 000 residents living on the island are planned to increase to 65 000 by 2025, according to the regional development program “Vision Gotland 2025” (Nypelius et al., 2008). Anthropogenic stress on ecosystems around the coast of Gotland has changed over time. Traditionally the island has supported a fishery fleet, but with the declining fish stock in the Baltic the fishing industry has become less dominant (Aps and Lassen, 2010). The type of operations and businesses effecting the environment today are daily ferry transportation, harbor operations such as shipping and dredging effect the water and along the island there are emissions from several sewerage treatment plants where treated wastewater is discharge into the sea. The military once again pose a presence on and around Gotland as are energy developments of wind power. Tourism is an important economic factor and steadily increasing bringing leisure activities like swimming, boating and recreational fishing.
The coastal waterflows around the island are open and dependent on a healthy exchange from offshore areas (Nypelius and Dahllöf, 2010). These activities are not all bad but the do add to the pressure of the environment and need to be developed in a sustainable way as is the objective of the regional governance.
3.2 Finding respondents
Gotland have over 900 registered associations and over 700 (763) of them are active. People on the island of Gotland share a tradition of coming together and participate in different interests (Region Gotland, 2016). The sample group was associations registered on Gotland1. The group all have different local interests focus such as historical, cultural or environmental interests. The selection for the sample was based on a list of associations commitment to an interest, activity or a hobby of some sort. An email with a link to the survey was initially sent out to 107 email addresses on February 20th. They were sent to either (depending on availability of information on each associations website) a group email of the board, the chairman of the board or the general email address of the board of each association.
1 https://www.gotland.net/sv/se-gora/arkiv/gotlandska-foreningar-foreningsliv-pa-gotland Fig. 4: Gotland in relation to Sweden,
located in the Baltic
Sea,(https://commons.wikimedia.org/
wiki/File:Sweden
Gotland_location_map_modified.svg).
13
In the introduction letter of the email containing the survey (see Appendix A) there was a request to forward the survey to others living on the island over the age of 18. This is known as snowball sampling or chain-referral sampling and can be used advantageously when collecting primary data via email (Dudovskiy, 2018).
There was no time limitation stated in the introduction letter sent out with the survey, but an internal deadline was set for 21 days of circulation. One respondent, responsible for an association of 350 members, got in contact and asked for deadline information and received the final submission date March 12th. Providing a deadline can lead to early replies and participants can feel obliged to answer faster, but it can also limit the response if the survey is deemed too time consuming (Henley, 1976;
SCB, 2016).
From the initial send-out dispatch there were 89 responses. The CAB posted the survey on its website 11 days after the original dispatch. Although the CAB website get approximately 300 visits it does guarantee the equal number of possible participants, but it gives an indication of a potential reach of participants. The survey was also released and circulated on social media adding to the possibility to reach a larger population. Sharing the survey on social media2 opened to an unregulated population that may not be relevant for the study i.e. people who have never visited Gotland. Five days prior to the closing of the survey, a deadline was added to it. By the final day on March 12th, the survey was answered by a total of 170 participants excluding the pre-tests.
3.3 Data collection - Survey
A survey was created to collect data about what the general public know about seagrass and ESS in terms of features, benefits, threats and connection to human activities. The ESS described in the survey are all connected to seagrass and seagrass meadows and are affected by human activities on and around Gotland. To identify how the participants in this study perceive ESS from seagrass meadows, all the categorizations (provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting) of the MA (2003) were included in the survey. The questions were created to gather insight as to what information the public might be lacking and want to gain.
To ensure validity and reduce systematic faults, pre-tests were made during a 2-week period in two separate sessions, they included 15 participants and the survey was revised continuously. The test groups assisted to determine if questions and answers were comprehensible and coherent in a protocol analysis approach, to get maximum response rate once the survey was sent out (Robson and McCartan, 2016). The tests provided valuable feedback in terms of structure, helped develop the questions and wording as well as focus and maintaining perspective of the aim.
Due to the time frame of the thesis there was no possibility to send out any repeated surveys and reliability could not be specifically measured (Bertram, 2009; Ejlertson, 2005). Discussions around distribution and selection of sample selection was made together with the CAB. The aim was not to be compromised but the data selection needs to show a true and valid result.
It should be clear when constructing a survey, what information is to be obtained by the questions and within what context the survey covers (Persson, 2016). Thus, in the beginning of the survey, an introduction and presentation explained what the survey was for and how it could be used in the future.
The survey (Appendix B) was created in Google forms and called: Enkätundersökning om Gotland’s havsmiljö med focus på sjögräs och ekosystemtjänster - Survey of Gotland's marine environment with focus on seagrass and ecosystem services. It included 5 sections and 25 questions. Section 1:
Background questions – demographics. Sections 2 and 3: Seagrass and marine environment, and
2 The Facebook account of the county administrative board of Gotland.
