Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The sustainable development of coastal areas’

On 26 February 2009, the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on:

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 13 October 2009.

At its 459th plenary session, held on 20-21 January 2010 (meeting of 20 January), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 138 votes in favour, with 4 abstentions.

1.1 The EESC emphasises that the EU's 136 000 kilometres of coastline represent a considerable asset, but that pressure due to demographics, land scarcity, agriculture, economic development and tourism in these areas could threaten their very attractiveness and their future. Only policies based on the concept of sustainable development in terms of its economic, social and environmental dimensions will ensure a bright future for coastal regions.

The EESC reaffirms its support for the trans-European transport network programme; implementation of this programme would be a means of supporting the European economy. It particularly emphasises the importance of the following projects in supporting the sustainable development of coastal areas: motorways of the sea (the Baltic, the Atlantic Arc, south east Europe and the western Mediterranean), the Rail Baltica route, and the rail route of the Ionian/Adriatic intermodal corridor. The pollution resulting from this useful increase in sea and rail transport will have to be properly managed.

The EESC emphasises the need to effectively target action by the European Social Fund, the European Regional Development Fund and the European Fisheries Fund to benefit coastal regions which are facing particular difficulties and facilitate their transition to new economic activities.

It would draw attention to the costs that the Member States and the European Union will have to bear for the investments and works designed to contain the foreseeable rise in sea levels, which will be a major drain on budgets.

It would point out that the effects of climate change on coastal areas are likely to bring about population movements that will have social consequences and an impact on jobs for which provision should be made in advance.

The EESC advocates holding a regular European conference on responsible seaside tourism, possibly with the joint support of the Committee of the Regions and the EESC; this would serve as an opportunity to discuss best practices throughout the EU.

It would also help to define environmental quality criteria for seaside resorts, ports and marinas throughout the EU.

The EESC recommends launching a programme to promote European cooperation on research into means of adapting coastal areas to rising sea levels, the creation of a network for pooling information between research institutes, and the establishment of a European scientific and technical committee with responsibility for forecasting and anticipating possible specific responses to the challenge of rising sea levels.

The Committee recommends developing measures to raise awareness of the marine environment and its implications for the well-being of present and future generations. Above all, such measures should be targeted at schools and the general public. They could be organised during the holiday period in coastal areas.

2.1 During the twentieth-first century, people have been drawn to the sea. This is a general trend, with some giant cities such as Shanghai, Tokyo, Osaka and Hong Kong developing on the ocean shores, especially along shallow waters. Forecasters agree that this trend will continue in all the continents.

2.2 The EU is also affected by this phenomenon, and cannot afford to ignore it, especially since it has 136 000 kilometres of coastline, with coastal regions accounting for 40 % of both population and gross domestic product.

2.3 Coastal areas therefore provide economic prosperity as well as an environment for quality of life and social well-being. Although coastal areas are attractive, numerous activities are concentrated there in a limited amount of space: tourism, fishing, agriculture, ports and airports, growing cities, economic activities, transport infrastructure, etc. All these activities impact on ecosystems, sometimes significantly. Coastal areas are the scene of conflicts between various uses linked to human activities. And ecosystems in shallow coastal waters are by far the richest sea-based ecosystems in terms of biodiversity.

2.4 Human activities are concentrated in coastal areas which, by their very nature, are of limited extent, and often threatened by rising sea levels and erosion. This threatens the quality of life, nature areas, as well as land and sea-based ecosystems.

The EU cannot ignore this situation and the resulting economic, social and environmental issues.

2.5 In 2000 the Commission published a Communication on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) followed by a European Parliament and Council Recommendation of 30 May 2002 concerning the implementation of an ICZM strategy in Europe. In June 2007 the Commission presented an evaluation of ICZM, which concluded that the EU recommendation had achieved a beneficial impact, but that the strategy needed a new impetus.

2.6 However, EU action did not stop there: in October 2007 the Commission published a Communication on ‘An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union’.

2.7 Finally, in June 2008 a Marine Strategy Framework Directive was adopted. This text commits each Member State to develop strategies for their marine waters, in cooperation with other Member States and neighbouring non-EU countries. The aim is to ‘ensure the continued protection and preservation’ of the marine environment and ‘the prevention of deterioration’ in order to ‘achieve good environmental status in the marine environment’ by 2021 at the latest.

2.8 Similarly, in November 2008 the European Parliament adopted a resolution specifically on regional development issues connected to the impact of tourism on coastal regions.

2.9 As we can see, there have been numerous EU documents and initiatives in response to the numerous issues connected with coastal areas; implementation of these is up to the relevant Member States and local authorities.

2.10 In this context the impact of the Common Fisheries Policy on economic and social life in coastal areas should also be mentioned.

2.11 Any policy to promote sustainable development in coastal areas must therefore encompass mutually compatible and coordinated sectoral policies (e.g. the Common Agricultural Policy) and approaches – no easy task given the often conflicting interests and priorities both in coastal land areas and on the sea.

2.13 At all events, it should be kept in mind that each coastal area has its own particular problems and that geographical and physical characteristics require specific policies – for deep or shallow sea areas, seas with or without tides, temperate or polar climate, steep, flat, rocky or sandy shorelines, etc. In view of this, while it is possible to set common objectives, what we cannot do is frame a uniform policy to cover all coastal areas and all the circumstances under which it will be implemented.

3.1 Sustainable development issues in coastal areas have mainly to do with a certain number of particularly sensitive subjects.

3.2 Given the pressures of land scarcity, some Member States have supported or taken initiatives to conserve coastal land, such as the National Trust in Great Britain and the French ‘Conservatoire du littoral’ (conservation of the coastline), or created nature parks including coastal areas. We should consider making wider use of such initiatives to manage the most vulnerable, threatened or remarkable natural areas, with the option of governments purchasing such areas from private landowners should this be in the public interest. To some extent, the aim should be to categorise such areas as part of the national heritage, on similar lines to historical monuments or artworks in museums.

3.3 Directive 92/43/EEC, which is usually referred to as the Habitats, Fauna and Flora Directive (or simply the Habitats Directive), concerns the conservation of natural habitats and wild species of fauna and flora. In view of this directive, some countries have extended Natura 2000 zones to the sea. We need to ask whether good use is being made of this tool for preservation (especially in relation to the justification for extending conservation zones to large deep-sea areas in which little is known about biodiversity or risk factors).

3.4 The need to protect sea-based biodiversity in coastal areas and maintain coastal fisheries resources has encouraged some countries to develop networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). These initiatives will have an even more beneficial impact if all countries with coastal areas sign up to them. We therefore need to bring together, harmonise and promote such MPAs. A European network for those managing such protection areas and a European label would help here.

3.5 The spread of urban sprawl into coastal areas, together with over-intensive farming and salt water intrusion into coastal groundwater are all developments which require particular attention if coastal populations are to have lasting access to good quality fresh water.

4.1 Obviously the classic issue of dealing with waste dumped directly into the sea and pollution from rivers and streams is important here, not to mention pollution originating specifically from water areas in ports and from sea transport.

4.2 Some of these issues are covered by European legislation, for example the framework directive on water and its daughter directives. In 2007 the Commission complained about mediocre transposition and insufficient international cooperation. There were many delays in the implementation of this directive. In 2010 the Member States will be required to produce River Basin Management Plans; among other things, these will have to include measures to protect and possibly also restore the quality of water bodies. In view of this, coordination will be needed for water bodies shared with non-European countries. The damaging impact of different types of water pollution should be clarified, while distinguishing between, on the one hand, those affected (human beings – their health, economy and well-being – or marine species) and, on the other, the time needed to reverse damage to habitat or species, or its irreversibility.

4.3 The Marine Strategy Framework Directive specifically addresses the need to preserve and improve marine waters by defining maritime regions and sub-regions and requiring Member States to work together on drawing up marine strategies and defining environmental objectives.

4.4 The issue of sea pollution by ships was targeted by the various Erika programmes.

4.5 One form of environmental damage is too often overlooked, i.e. the irreversible destruction of shallow water habitats and ecosystems caused by the excessively artificial state of the shoreline due to reasons which have nothing to do with the safety of coastal populations or protecting heritage. The European coastline is becoming increasingly artificial due to the proliferation of coastal construction – marinas, ports and various developments as well as, in the medium term, the numerous structures needed to protect the coastline from rising sea levels; this is something which requires a Community level response (on the lines of the MEDAM observatory covering all developments along the French Mediterranean coast (1)). Due to its extent the artificial state of the coastline is inconsistent with sustainable development, and preserving the natural character of coastline and shallow waters should become a major concern. To some extent, awareness of the problem is developing in the EU. For example, in the Camargue adaptation to rising sea levels involves letting the sea back into areas which it had withdrawn from, wherever possible. In Italy, there are discussions in Maremma (Tuscan coast) on yacht harbours with regard to limiting the expansion of storage sites for boats during the winter and precise management of port capacity.

5.1 Coastal road networks are often congested. This situation results in road hazards, emissions of CO2 and other pollutants, and economic losses. The EU has long been calling for some of this road traffic to be transferred to rail or ‘motorways of the sea’, but this has not translated into tangible results. A few points should be made here:

5.2 Despite the difficulties, it is only by shifting part of the road traffic to rail or sea that the burden on the coastal road network could be eased. Everything depends on how we reconcile economic and social development with environmental protection.

6.1 Tourism is too often considered as a solution for disadvantaged coastal areas. However, the length of the tourist season is often too limited to offer a real alternative to declining economic activity. Tourism, which is often seen as a ‘magic bullet’, can result in the over-exploitation of coastal areas and cause irreversible environmental damage without providing any lasting solution to economic problems. Moreover, over-intensive tourism can often ‘kill the goose that lays the golden eggs’ due to degradation of tourist sites. There is no doubt that we need to develop more sustainable tourism, and there have already been some initiatives by public authorities and NGOs.

6.2 In France the 1986 law on developing, protecting and enhancing the coast was adopted in reaction to what was known as the ‘concreting’ of the coast. It aims to protect biological and environmental balances, to preserve sites and landscapes, at the same time as preserving and developing economic activities linked to the proximity of water (fishing, marine crops, port activities, etc.). This law is targeted at coastal municipalities and its main provisions include an obligation on those involved in urban planning to protect outstanding natural areas and a ban on any building within 100 metres of the shore outside urbanised areas. After over twenty years of implementing this law, the results are mainly positive. While the EU does not have any powers in the fields of urban planning or coastal development, it could at least encourage the exchange of best legislative and regulatory practices between Member States.

6.3 The Environmental Education Foundation created the Blue Flag eco-label in 1985. Since then, the European Blue Flag environmental labelling scheme has been in operation: the label is awarded to coastal municipalities and ports, subject to the fulfilment of criteria on environmental education, safety, cleanliness, the availability of facilities close to beaches, waste and water management, the quality of bathing water, and efforts to clean up pollution. Specific criteria exist for yacht harbours. Although this initiative is clearly aimed at developing tourism it cannot be denied that it offers many advantages.

6.4 Ecotourism, or responsible tourism, is spreading throughout Europe, often with the support of local authorities. Agro-tourism represents an opportunity for farmers in coastal areas to boost their income.

7.1 The Commission has responsibility for managing fisheries. European sustainable fisheries policy undermines certain economic models in this sector, with serious economic and social consequences. In dealing with the question of sustainable fishing, we need better scientific knowledge, without which long-term management of stocks will not be possible. In doing so, we need to distinguish between fishing in international and territorial waters, for each maritime region, while making good use of subsidies which, above all, must respect the need for effective management of stocks.

7.2 We also need to distinguish between small and large-scale fishing. For small-scale fishing, setting up a European network of MPAs (Marine Protected Areas) would enable better management of coastal fish species by guaranteeing naturally high concentrations in the non-fished sectors of these zones, with normal sex ratios for fish to allow effective dispersion of fry and young fish. It would also be useful to encourage the establishment of ‘fishing associations’ (on the lines of what already exists in several countries – cooperatives, associations, fishing tribunals, regional consultative councils, etc.) for fishermen, with the active involvement of scientific advisers enabling better management of coastal fishing areas; the areas thus managed would be on a different scale from those under current arrangements (waters in the vicinity of a port, along the coastline of one municipality, or other divisions based on administrative or historical considerations), and would cover environmentally homogeneous areas. Such fishing associations could form networks in order to encourage the exchange of experience and best practice.

7.3 Recreational (amateur) angling is another issue that needs to be looked at, given its extent and the fact that in the absence of restrictions (there are very few rules on amateur sea fishing in most countries) or economic constraints (the resources of some amateur fishermen go well beyond the value of their catch) it has serious implications for some species.

8.1 For many centuries coastal economic activities have developed throughout Europe: ports, shipyards, fishing. Although some of the world’s largest ports are situated in the EU, shipyards and fisheries are facing serious structural difficulties.

8.2 Since the end of the Second World War, European shipyards have been facing competition from Asia, forcing them to restructure and specialise. Some shipyards are still facing serious difficulties, for example the Polish shipyards of Gdansk, Gdynia and Szczecin. This situation means that considerable attention will have to be paid to redeploying and retraining employees – and not just in Poland.

8.3 Europe has succeeded in developing one of the world’s leading leisure industries. Before the recession there were over 37 000 businesses and 270 000 employees in this sector. Activity has been very severely affected. Here too, employees are in a difficult situation - it is vital to re-train and redeploy them while maintaining the sector as a mainstay of European industry.

8.4 As mentioned above, the exhaustion of fishing stocks, the ban on certain fishing methods in the EU (but not necessarily in non-European countries) and overfishing have resulted in a European fisheries policy that is having a serious impact on the sector, which itself is also facing the need for workers to retrain and find new jobs.

8.5 Aquaculture is a new activity intended to meet the growing demand for fish. We should not overlook the fact that this kind of work is very different from fishing, and is closer to stock farming. It also involves taking health and environmental precautions.

8.6 The sustainable development of coastal areas requires the maintenance of activities which are linked to this geographical situation. The continuation of farming practices that respect the environment in coastal areas is a factor favouring such activity. Tourism, on the other hand, cannot solve all the difficulties of finding new jobs for everyone, especially as some tourism infrastructure projects may threaten the remaining green coastal areas. The EU must pay particular attention to the economic and social consequences of its policies in this specific and vulnerable economic environment.

9.1 Some 40 % of Europe's population is concentrated along 136 000 km of coastline; this area also attracts the largest number of tourists. We need to know more about the marine environment, which is rich but under threat from this concentration of human activity. We need a programme to raise awareness of the marine environment, taking into account all the various circumstances of maritime regions, for example with reference to the regions or subregions defined by application of the marine strategy – or at the very least the five seas or oceans encompassing the EU (the Baltic, the North Sea, the Atlantic, the Mediterranean and the Black Sea). Such a programme would enable us to raise awareness of - and more effectively justify - measures to protect the marine environment in order to combat pollution, overfishing or degradation of the coastline due to construction. It is therefore very important to ensure that more information is targeted at schools and local authorities responsible for managing coastal areas.

10.1 Global warming will result in both generally higher sea levels and more frequent exceptionally violent weather phenomena (storms, hurricanes, tornados, etc.). The effects of this are already becoming apparent in some countries and will involve erosion of the coastline, the disappearance of beaches and the strengthening of coastal protective structures. This problem will affect European countries and regions in very different ways, with a general impact on all built-up coastal areas, particularly tourism and port infrastructures. Some Member States have already launched major operations such as the Delta Plan decided on in the Netherlands after the catastrophic floods of 1953, or the Moses operation in Italy to save Venice. Community guidelines should be considered to provide the best possible support in dealing with these expected and irreversible changes, taking into account both economic and environmental interests.

10.2 In order to face up to climate change and its consequences, the EU must not confine itself to preventive measures but should also launch a major research and development programme together with the Member States based on the principle of cooperation between research institutes and the pooling of findings. Such an initiative would demonstrate the value of - and indeed the need for - close European cooperation in this field.

Brussels, 20 January 2010

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Mario SEPI