IDENTIFICATION OF COOPERATION AREAS AND GAPS IN EXISTING PROGRAMMES. BONUS Publications Nr. 6

Transcription

1 IDENTIFICATION OF COOPERATION AREAS AND GAPS IN EXISTING PROGRAMMES BONUS Publications Nr. 6

2 BONUS REPORT Identification of cooperation areas and gaps in existing programmes

3 Layout: PixPoint ky Cover: Antti Kamppinen Press: Juvenes Print Ammattikuva, Tampere 2008 Copyright: BONUS ERA-NET Project 2008 Web address: ISBN (print) ISBN (pdf) 2

4 BONUS is an EU 6th Framework Programme ERA- NET project with a total funding of 3.03 million euros for years The project brings together the key research funding organisations in all EU Member States and Russia around the Baltic Sea. The aim is to gradually and systematically create conditions for a joint Baltic Sea research and researcher training programme. BONUS operates in close connection with the scientific and management actors. The objective of BONUS is to form a network and partnership of key agencies funding research aiming at deepening the understanding of conditions for science-based management of environmental issues in the Baltic Sea. The status quo in ongoing research, research funding, marine research programme management and infrastructures is examined and the necessary communication and networking tools are established. The needs and conditions of a joint research programme from scientific and administrative point of view are examined. The integration of the new EU Member States to the common funding scheme is considered in one of the tasks. Finally, an Action Plan for creating joint research programmes, including all jointly agreed procedures of programme management and aspects of common use of marine research infrastructure is produced. An additional activity is the development of a common postgraduate training scheme. The consortium is composed of altogether 14 partners: 13 research funding organisations from nine countries and one international organisation. In addition, BONUS links six funding organisations as observers, which increases the number on involved organisations to 19. Partners Academy of Finland Project Management Organisation Juelich, Germany Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation Estonian Science Foundation International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Lithuania Latvian Council of Science Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Poland Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research, Sweden Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Russian Foundation for Basic Research Institute of Oceanology Polish Academy of Sciences Baltic Organisations Network for Funding Science EEIG Observers Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Estonian Ministry of Environment Latvian Environment Agency Maj and Tor Nessling Foundation, Finland Nordic Council of Ministers: Marine and air pollution group Further information BONUS EEIG Hämeentie Helsinki Finland 3

5 4

6 Table of contents Preface Summary Introduction Methods Existing networks in the Baltic Sea region Baltic research institute policies and strategic visions Ongoing research cooperation Identification of gaps Mismatch of excellence, funding and infrastructure Predictive capacity on environmental problems in society Socio-economic research addressing environmental problems Publications on social sciences research International cooperation in social sciences Cooperation between fish research and research on other environmental problems in the Baltic Sea Research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interests Valuation of ecosystem goods and services Proper marine education of various levels Research on links between the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area Links between tourism and the environment Links between human health and environmental problems Communication between universities and research institutes Cooperation between management of different sectors Communication with other regional seas Other gaps identified by responders Ranking of the gaps Conclusions, suggestions and recommendations for future cooperation Appendix 1: List of the entities that filled in the bonus questionnaire Appendix 2: Bonus questionnaire Appendix 3: Report on workshop, September

7 Preface The Baltic Sea, bordered by nine countries Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden is an unique marine ecosystem which plays an important role for the 85 million people who live in its catchment area. The region has a trans-boundary character, illustrated by a history of more than one hundred years of international cooperation around the Sea. Baltic Sea research is carried out in all riparian countries in tens of research institutes and universities and through hundreds of projects and thousands of scientists. The broad spectrum of Baltic Sea R&D (Research and Development) funding forms as well as various local, national and international organizations and institutions are serving the common goal of creating a sound knowledge base for the healthy and sustainable development of the Baltic Sea. One of the present key goals in the European Union science policy is the support of the internationalization of research by developing international funding cooperation on a European scale, particularly in the case of environmental problems of a global nature. The only way to tackle such problems successfully and effectively is through international cooperation. Development of good and useful Baltic Sea cooperation is possible only with full awareness of its strengths and weaknesses and, in consequence, its opportunities and threats. The aim of this report is to provide an overview of existing cooperation in the Baltic region as well as to identify gaps, their causes and recommendations for their improvement in the future. The report shall serve as complementary material for the future joint multinational Baltic Sea research programme, which is under preparation within the ERA-NET project BONUS for the Baltic Sea Science Network of Funding Agencies. The authors would like to thank the BONUS programme managers and all the entities around the Baltic Sea for their help and contribution to this report by providing the data and opinions on the questionnaire s queries. The report was prepared by: Regina Terlecka, Stanislaw Massel, Natalia Beer Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences in Sopot, Poland 6

8 Summary Identification of areas and existing gaps in Baltic Sea cooperation was the objective of Task 2.1 in the ERA-NET project BONUS for the Baltic Sea Science Network of Funding Agencies. The aim was to concentrate on gaps as well as to present a general view on the existing cooperation among Baltic Sea countries as well as their strengths and weaknesses, indicating the countries opinions on particular issues. This information, together with some suggestions and recommendations for improvement, may be useful in the formulation of future joint projects. There is a long history of scientific cooperation in the Baltic area. It was started in 1902 by the establishment of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The following decades brought the creation of more scientific associations, such as the Conferences of the Baltic Oceanographers, Baltic Marine Biologists and the Baltic Sea Geologists. Currently, there are various existing Baltic networks at different levels, from governmental (HELCOM) to regional and local levels. This cooperation is conducted via commissions, unions, forums, private and non-governmental bodies which refer to various issues and fields such as Baltic cities, universities, art, shipping, ports, tourism and environment. Research on the Baltic Sea is carried out by tens of research institutes and universities. They fulfill their obligations for the sector they are working for. Their mission is to generate knowledge to support the sustainable use and protection of the marine environment through competence and high-level scientific and technological research. The institutions offer valuable advice for marine management and provide high-quality maritime education at different levels. In recent years, European Union projects have provided another framework for joint activities in the region. They have facilitated and encouraged research institutions in the region to work in closer cooperation towards common goals. Projects carried out by Baltic research institutions with financial support of the European Union in the years show that the most active participants have been institutions from Germany, Finland and Sweden. The cooperation is well-developed among old EU members as well as traditionally among Scandinavian countries and between neighbouring countries. In the Baltic region, national and international cooperation is predominantly carried out without signed formal agreements. Cooperation at the national level focuses on joint publications, joint application for grants, participation in common projects and the common use of infrastructure. Less activity is shown in the mobility of scientists and joint education. International cooperation is most often built up by the common use of infrastructure, the mobility of scientists and joint publications. Joint PhD studies and education at the university level are areas not sufficiently used. Generally, the public funding of the Baltic research matches excellence and the fundamental needs of Danish, German, Finnish and Swedish research. These countries wish to have some extra money and bonus points for research fields which are not very popular in the general sense but which also represent excellence. The countries in transition, new EU members Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia, however, definitely claim a mismatch of funding and infrastructure. The total amount of funding in these countries is usually too small. In particular, a very low budget for infrastructure and strict funding regulations are barriers for the sufficient renewal and modernization of research vessels, laboratories and field stations. There are some fields where research is not sufficiently investigated due to poor cooperation or a lack of communication mechanisms. This also results from the 7

9 tradition that they are carried out separately. Examples of such fields are research on links between the Baltic Sea and its drainage area, fish research, and research on other environmental problems and collaborations among the management of different sectors. Another example requiring special attention concerns environmental economics and social issues. Overcoming the lack of cooperation and understanding between natural and socio-economic sciences is one of the main challenges for marine science today. It is emphasized that cross-disciplinary research is now essential because only these types of projects could create a bridge between these two groups of scientists. Such an approach should be supported by political will and by properly targeted policy. It should overcome traditional separate fields of research and induce some changes towards a more holistic and interdisciplinary approach. There is also no doubt that such a new approach should already be started in marine educational programmes in schools and universities. 8

10 1 Introduction The objective of the ERA-NET project BONUS for the Baltic Sea Science Network of Funding Agencies is to form a network and partnership of key agencies that fund research with the aim of deepening the understanding of the conditions for science-based management of environmental problems in the Baltic Sea. One of the operational goals of the project, in addition to the continuous and systematic collection and exchange of information among the partners, is the identification of knowledge gaps that will define the topics of future joint research programmes. In particular, BONUS Work Package 1 Collection and exchange of information and best practice included a mapping of the Baltic Sea research projects (task 1.6). The report of this task is presented in the BONUS Publication No 3. It contains an overview of ongoing Baltic Sea research projects and the funding of the Baltic Sea research in The second report under task 1.6 is to show the status of the scientific outputs of the Baltic Sea research using the international scientific publications as the criteria. This report is still under preparation. BONUS Work Package 2 Strategic activities is to meet the requirement of establishing the conditions for a joint research programme from the scientific and administrative points of view as well as identifiying knowledge gaps in science and management. Some attention was also paid to the aspect of the integration of the new EU member states and Russia into the common funding scheme. In the meantime, since May 2005, the document BONUS-169 Science Plan has been prepared under task 2.5 Ideas for potential trans-national research schemes. This material was consulted and discussed with the scientific community in national and international meetings and was finally published on the BONUS website and in the BONUS publication series. In September 2005 in Sopot, Poland an international forum was held during the workshop under task 2.1 Identification of areas for cooperation in existing programmes and gaps of knowledge. The broad and fruitful discussion conducted by the experts invited to the meeting gave some fresh insight into the proposed framework of the BONUS-169 programme. In particular, the new system approach dedicated to all Baltic Sea environmental issues for the next decade was presented and proposed as a challenge for future research (Appendix 3). Irrespective of the Science Plan which presents a wide perspective of scientific environmental problems, there is a need to identify areas of cooperation and, what seems to be more important, the gaps in the existing Baltic Sea cooperation. In order to meet this demand, BONUS task 2.1 was extended. It is important to note that providing the background information on the current status of the existing areas and gaps in the Baltic Sea cooperation is one of the important conditions for more effective future joint scientific programmes. This report presents the existing Baltic Sea networks as well as strategies and policies of research institutions, the scope of cooperation among them, common areas of existing cooperation and gaps. Moreover, reasons for the lack of cooperation and suggestions for improvement are given. It should be noted that the BONUS task 2.1 supporting group provided some guidelines for selection of the cooperation gaps. Their impact is highly appreciated. It is believed that the outcome of this report shall serve as recommendations towards more efficient conditions for future cooperation in the joint programmes. 9

11 2 Methods Database Information was gathered from different sources: Publication Nr 3 Baltic Sea research and R&D Funding in 2004, which included data for the cooperation under EU and NCM projects The Internet web pages of the institutions and networks Responses from the distributed questionnaire The questionnaire All BONUS partners were responsible for the distribution of the questionnaire among their national key research institutions as well as national or local authorities. The questionnaire (Appendix 2) consisted of two parts: part one included queries on the cooperation among the institutions with indication of the scope of such collaboration, and part two was designed for the identification of gaps. Fifteen gaps were selected to be studied in order to assess, firstly, whether the indicated issues are problems that are observed in the particular country and, secondly, if so, what is the reason for such a situation and, finally, what recommendations or wishes can be suggested in this respect. Respondents were invited to provide information on any other gaps which should be considered. The list of institutions which provided the responses is given in Appendix 1. The quantity and quality of the responses and their availability vary, depending on the country and on the used approach. Some of the responses were presented in detail, others were more general. The achievement of a complete overview and comparison between regions required a more descriptive and intuitive approach. This was facilitated by bunching together the prevailing consistent or similar opinions and then focusing on the total assessment of the problem. No solution is presented, but the aim is to describe the status of the issue. Any suggestions for improvement are worth consideration. 10

12 3 Existing networks in the Baltic Sea region This chapter includes short descriptions of the selected existing international organizations representing different areas and levels of cooperation around the Baltic Sea. They are divided into groups: intergovernmental institutions, local authorities, regional networks, trade and economic organizations, environmental associations, non-governmental scientific organizations, research institutions and university cooperation, internet resources and others. Baltic Sea Region Intergovernmental Institutions 1. Baltic 21 Agenda 21 for the Baltic Sea Region, in short, Baltic 21, is founded on the political will to accelerate the work on sustainable development in the Baltic Sea region and to implement Agenda 21 regionally. The process was initiated in 1996 by the Prime Ministers of the Baltic Sea Region and involves the eleven countries from the Baltic Sea Region (the members of CBSS), the European Commission and a number of intergovernmental organizations, international financial institutions and international non-governmental networks. The overriding objective of Baltic 21 is to contribute to achieving sustainable development in the Baltic Sea Region in a 30-year perspective. Baltic 21 addresses the three dimensions of sustainable development environmental, social and economic aspects. Long-term aspects, regional cooperation, sectoral responsibility, openness, democracy and transparency are the pillars of the Baltic 21 process. Another important feature of Baltic 21 is that it is to complement international, national and local initiatives in the Baltic Sea Region. Web page: implementing infrastructure and energy projects in the Baltic States, and the protection of the Baltic Sea environment. Web page: 3. Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) Established in Copenhagen in 1992 by the states of the Baltic Sea, the CBSS is a ministerial forum for intensified cooperation and coordination between the Baltic Sea Business Advisory Council, Commissioner on Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Euro-faculty and Taskforce on Organized Crime. The CBSS has a permanent secretariat in Stockholm, and its members are all of the Baltic countries, Norway and the European Union. Web page: 4. Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) The Helsinki Commission, established by the coastal states of the Baltic Sea in 1974, is the oldest forum for international cooperation for the protection of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea. In 1992, a new Convention was signed by all the countries bordering the Baltic Sea and by the European Community. The Convention calls for action to curb various sources of pollution in the Baltic Sea. Web page: 5. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) 2. Baltic Council of Ministers The Baltic Council of Ministers is an institution for cooperation between the governments of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, established in 1994 by the Statement of the Heads of Government. It is also responsible for cooperation between these governments and the Baltic Assembly and for the overall coordination of matters pertaining to Baltic cooperation. Present Cooperation Priorities are the transfer of the regional cooperation experience of the Baltic States to the states of the South Caucasus and Balkan Region, cooperation in ICES is the oldest intergovernmental organization in the world concerned with marine and fisheries science. Since its establishment in Copenhagen in 1902, ICES has been a leading scientific forum for the exchange of information and ideas on the sea and its living resources, and for the promotion and coordination of marine research by scientists within its member countries. Its responsibilities include the effect of human activities on the ecosystem, links between environmental quality and living resources, integration of environmental 11

13 and fisheries issues, and coastal zone management and development. Web page: 6. Nordic Council and Nordic Council of Ministers (NCM) Official Nordic cooperation is channeled through two organizations: the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers. The Nordic Council was formed in 1952 and is the forum for Nordic parliamentary cooperation. The Council has 87 elected members, representing the five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) and three autonomous territories (Åland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands). The Nordic Council of Ministers, formed in 1971, deals with the cooperation among Ministries of the Nordic countries. Nordic cooperation aims to promote political, economic, environmental, social and other developments in the Nordic countries and in northern Europe. The secretariat of the NCM is located in Copenhagen. Web page: 7. Nordic Development Fund (NDF) The Nordic Development Fund, based in Helsinki, is a Multilateral Development Financing Institution established by the Nordic Council in NDF is a part of the Nordic countries co-operation with the developing countries. NDF finances high priority projects for social and economic development, projects in low per capita income countries, in co-financing with other multilateral development organizations and Nordic bilateral development organizations in cooperation with Nordic resource-based public sector activities and private sector development. Web page: 8. Vision and Strategies around the Baltic Sea 2010 (VASAB 2010) VASAB is a cooperation of ministers of the Baltic Sea Region responsible for spatial planning and development. It includes 11 countries of the Baltic Sea Region (Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Belarus and Norway) as well as representatives of German and Russian regional authorities. The activities are focused on promoting of territorial cohesion and sustainable spatial development of the Region. Currently, the main task is to develop long term spatial perspective for the Baltic Sea Region till Web page: 9. The Northern Dimension Partnership Public Health and Social Well-being The Northern Dimension Partnership in Public Health and Social Well-being (NDPHS) is a cooperative effort of thirteen governments, the European Commission and eight international organizations. The Partnership s mission is to promote sustainable development of the Northern Dimension area by improving peoples health and social well-being. It aims to contribute to this process by intensifying cooperation, assisting the Partners and Participants in capacity building, and by enhancing coordination between international activities within the Northern Dimension area. In doing so, it builds on and supports existing national and international activities within its area of focus, and also promotes efforts addressing issues that are not yet covered by its existing activities. The Partnership focuses on two priority areas: (i) the prevention of major public health problems (at present, they include communicable diseases, such as HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, use of illicit drugs, cardiovascular diseases and consequences of socially distressing conditions); and (ii) promotion of healthy and socially rewarding lifestyles (here the focus is on determinants of health and social wellbeing, including sexual behaviour, use of alcohol, smoking, use of illicit drugs, social and work environment and social skills). Web page: 12

14 Local Authorities in the Baltic Sea Region 1. Euroregion Baltic (ERB) Euroregion Baltic was established in 1998 by the representatives of regional and self-governmental authorities of the Danish Island of Bornholm, the region and town of Liepaja in Latvia, the Klaipeda district in Lithuania, the northern Polish provinces of Elblag, Gdansk, Olsztyn and Słupsk, the Russian district of Kaliningrad, and the southeasterly Swedish provinces of Blekinge, Kalmar and Kronoberg, making it the largest Euroregion in Europe. The aim of the cooperation is to improve the living conditions of the people inhabiting the area of the Euroregion: to promote mutual contacts, eliminate historical prejudices and promote actions aimed at creating cooperation between regional and local authorities. The ERB international permanent secretariat is situated in Elblag (Poland). Web page: Union of Baltic Cities (UBC) The Union of Baltic Cities was established in The UBC secretariat is situated in Gdansk. The UBC is a network of currently over 100 cities from all nine Baltic countries and Norway, with a mission to develop the cooperation and exchange between UBC members and to contribute to the democratic, economic, social, cultural and environmentally sustainable development of the Baltic Sea region. The Union has ten working Commissions (Business Cooperation, Culture, Education, Environment, Health & Social Affairs, Information Society, Sport, Tourism, Transportation, Urban Planning) and four task groups (Gender, Equality, Youth Issues, EU Integration, Agenda 21). Web page: Regional Networks and Development 1. Baltic Islands Network B7 (Estonia), Rügen (Germany), Saaremaa (Estonia), Åland (an autonomous region of Finland) and Öland (Sweden). The B7 aims to use its strengths to promote the strategic goals of the islands. Web page: 2. Baltic Network The objective for the Baltic Network is to increase activities and develop relations between the regions of Ostergotland and the East European countries. The Baltic Network strives to initiate, coordinate and structure know-how and contacts between the region of Ostergotland and the East European countries and supply and spread information about different networks and databases related to organizations around the Baltic Sea. Web page: 3. Baltic Sea Forum The Baltic Sea Forum is a non-profit organization which supports economic, political and cultural cooperation in the Baltic Sea region. It was founded in 1992 in Helsinki as a German-Finnish organization named Pro Baltica Forum. It supports the cooperation with the Baltic States as well as with the whole Baltic region, the relations between the European Union and Russia and the development of the south-north relation between the Baltic and the Mediterranean. The Baltic Sea Forum has an extended network of members, representatives and partners from all fields of activity e.g. economy, politics and culture as well as in science in the Baltic region and Central Europe. The organization is always in close contact with governments as well as state, regional and local authorities and institutions in the Baltic States. Web page: The B7 is a cooperative network of the seven largest islands in the Baltic Sea from five different countries that began in The partners of the cooperation are Bornholm (Denmark), Gotland (Sweden), Hiiumaa 4. Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation (BSSSC) The BSSSC is an independent organization, promoting cooperation between regions around the Baltic Sea 13

15 within different fields. Furthermore, the goal of the organization is to represent the interests of the regions in different national governments as well as in European and international organizations. The BSSSC was founded in Stavanger, Norway in Its members are regional authorities of the 10 Baltic Sea littoral states. Web page: 5. CPMR- Baltic Sea Commission The Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe (CPMR) brings together some 154 Regions from 26 States both members and non-members of the EU all located in one of Europe s main sea basins. The CPMR regions aim to promote together a more balanced development of the European Union, highlighting the value of all its geographical areas, with a view to strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion. The Regions of the CPMR are subdivided into six Geographical Commissions: Atlantic, Baltic Sea, Balkans & Black Sea, Mediterranean, North Sea and Islands. The CPMR Baltic Sea Commission (CPMR-BSC) was founded in Kotka, Finland in May 1996, promoting EU Governance and a polycentric model of Europe. There are 28 member regions (maritime and non-maritime) in the Baltic Sea Commission of the CPMR. At present, the BSC has member regions from all the Baltic Sea States except Russia. Web page: Trade and Economic organizations 1. Baltic Business Center (BBC) Baltic Business Center is a private network corporation which has offices in all of the Baltic Sea countries. It offers its customers market research and other relevant knowledge about the region. Web page: 2. Baltic Development Forum (BDF) The Baltic Development Forum was established in The Forum provides decision-makers a network for discussing new business opportunities and for developing new regional strategies in public-private partnerships. BDF aims to put the Baltic Sea region on the global map by developing strong external ties with the world outside the region and by fostering new partnerships across sectors and across borders. It aims to develop a dynamic business environment that is internationally competitive in the global economy. The Forum secretariat is located in Copenhagen. Web page: 3. Baltic International Maritime Council (BIMCO) Baltic International Maritime Council BIMCO is the world s largest and most diverse private shipping organization with 2,720 members worldwide. It was formed in 1905 in Copenhagen. BIMCO has consistently managed to be both flexible and supportive of its members interests, capable of proactive action and of responding quickly to new priorities in a fastchanging maritime environment in an often uncertain world. Today, BIMCO s membership spans over 123 countries. Its vision is to be the leading interest group and membership organization offering practical and tangible services to ship owners, managers, brokers, agents, operators, associations and other entities connected with the international shipping industry. Web page: 4. Baltic Ports Organization (BPO) The Baltic Ports Organization was established in 1991 in Copenhagen. Its main objective is to improve the competitiveness of maritime transport in the Baltic region by increasing the efficiency of ports, marketing the Baltic region as a strategic logistic centre, improving the infrastructure within the ports and the connection to other modes, improving cooperation with the port users/ operators, applying new technology in the port sector in order to improve the performance and the integration of ports into the transport chain, improving cost efficiency, good environmental behavior, organizational development and cooperation with authorities and interest groups. Web page: 5. Baltic Sea Chambers of Commerce Association (BCCA) The BCCA is an organization of 50 Chambers of Commerce from the ten Baltic littoral states. It was established in June 1992 in Germany to give the business 14

16 community of the region a common voice for common concerns. The BCCA represents more than 450,000 companies from all sectors of the northern and northeastern European market. The task of the BCCA is to protect and uphold the interests of private entrepreneurship by advising politics in business-related affairs, offering services to the business community, and providing facilities for contacts, debates and meetings in the region. Web page: 6. Baltic Sea Tourism Commission (BTC) Established in 1983 to develop tourism in the Baltic Sea region, BTC has well over 100 participants, and it strives to establish good cooperation and coordination between the different members. Tasks of the BTC include being a market place for tourism projects around the Baltic Sea; collecting a database for travel information; organizing projects, initiatives and working groups, and promoting the Baltic Sea tourism in general. Web page: Environmental associations 1. Association of Baltic National Parks (ABNP) ABNP was founded in This international organization consists of six members. The actions taken by ABNP are to promote contacts and the exchange of experience, to provide training for national park specialists, to coordinate the efforts of its members in solving common problems, to elaborate on joint principles for the development of national parks, to analyze their situation in the Baltic region, and to exchange information between members and other conservation organizations. The secretariat is located in Estonia. Web page: 2. Baltic Sea Project (BSP) The Baltic Sea Project is the first regional Project within the UNESCO Associated Schools Project to combine environmental education on a specific environmental issue the Baltic Sea and intercultural learning. The purpose of the Baltic Sea Project is to raise young people s interest in environmental issues and environmental protection and to develop their sense of responsibility for the environment. The tasks of the Project include publishing a newsletter and other teaching material; organizing discussions and workshops; and coming up with different educational themes for participating schools to use. The Project has nine national coordinators in the participating states. Web page: 3. Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB) CCB is a politically independent, non-profit association which was established in 1990 in Helsinki. At present, CCB unites 26 member organizations from Finland, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Denmark and Sweden. The organization has decided to focus on three areas of priority: the promotion of a good ecological water status; the prevention of installations and transports harmful to the Baltic Sea environment and coastal areas; and the development of sustainable Baltic Sea fisheries. Web page: 4. Environmental Centre for Administration and Technology (ECAT) The Environmental Centre for Administration and Technology was founded as a non-governmental organization in 1997 by the European Commission in cooperation with the Lithuanian Ministry of Environment. There are 34 project partners representing Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, Estonia and Latvia. The concept of ECAT is to combine Russian and Western European know-how and experience in an interdisciplinary and international team of experts and on this basis to develop comprehensive, realistic solutions to environmental problems in a flexible and efficient way. ECAT s goal is to develop, implement and coordinate international environmental projects and technical assistance. Web page: 15

17 5. WWF Baltic Sea Programme Area: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden. The BMB General Secretary is located in Uppsala, Sweden. Web page: Established in 1961, WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature) operates in more than 100 countries working for a future in which humans live in harmony with nature. The WWF Baltic Eco-region Programme is an ambitious, broad scale, integrated approach that aims to conserve and, where necessary, restore the full range of biodiversity of the Baltic Sea. Conservation focuses on improving the condition of the Baltic Sea, as well as preserving the endangered species and habitats of the Baltic Sea region. Web page: europe/what_we_do/baltics/index.cfm Non-governmental scientific organizations 2. Baltic Sea Geologists (BSG) BSG, established during the third Baltic Sea Science Congress in Stockholm in 1962, is a non-governmental scientific organization devoted to the geology of the Baltic Sea area. BSG assumes the responsibility to continue the tradition of international scientific cooperation between geologists from circum-baltic countries. The main tasks of BSG are networking between geoscientists dealing with Baltic Sea geology-related problems in order to foster organizational and scientific communication, and promoting the arrangement of regular scientific conferences (biannual meetings). Web page: Conferences of the Baltic Oceanographers (CBO) 1. Baltic Marine Biologists (BMB) Baltic Marine Biologists (BMB), founded in 1968 in Rostock, is an international, non-governmental scientific organization with a membership of marine scientists with an interest in the Baltic Sea. The main objectives of BMB are to further scientific marine biological research in the Baltic, to facilitate contacts between marine biologists working in the Baltic Sea Area, to facilitate the incorporation of young scientists into the scientific society, to encourage joint international investigations, and to develop and disseminate scientific knowledge on the biology of the Baltic Sea Area. BMB promote studies on the biological diversity, structure, function and sustainable management of the ecosystems of the Baltic Sea area. The member countries of BMB are the nine countries that have a coast bordering the Baltic Sea CBO is a non-governmental oceanographic organization which has functioned since It is the oldest scientific cooperation initiative. Within its framework, the subsequent BSG and BMB organizations were developed. The main task of CBO is the coordination of hydrographic works, marine physics, chemistry and water balance studies. Every second year a joint symposium together with BMB and BSG is arranged. The 6 th of these joint meetings (and the 25 th for CBO) was held in Rostock in Research Institutions and University Cooperation 1. Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies (AABS) 16

18 The Association for the Advancement of Baltic Studies is an international educational and scholarly non-profit organization. It was established in 1968 at the 1 st Conference on Baltic Studies at the University of Maryland. The purpose of the Association is the promotion of research and education in Baltic studies. Its activities include sponsorship of meetings and conferences for the exchange of scholarly views, promotion and evaluation, and dissemination of news of current interest in the area of Baltic Studies. Web page: 2. Baltic University Programme (BUP) Studies concerning the Baltic Sea Area from ten countries around the Baltic Sea (including Norway). Web page: 4. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) The unique non-governmental and non-profit International global change research Institute for Applied Systems Analysis investigates issues of sustainability and the human dimensions of global change. In their study of environmental, economic, technological and social development, IIASA researchers generate methods and tools useful to both decision-makers and the scientific community. Web page: The Baltic University Programme is a regional university network of approximately 220 universities in the 14 countries of the Baltic Sea basin and the surrounding drainage area. Since 1991, the Baltic University Programme has offered undergraduate and masters courses as well as continuing education and has also run joint research projects. In addition, teachers trainings, conferences and student conferences, camps and seminars are held regularly for the network. The chosen subjects are of common concern for the entire region, and the international cooperation is of key importance. The activities concentrate on different aspects of sustainable development in the region. The participating universities include classical universities as well as universities of technology, agriculture, culture, economics, pedagogy etc. All countries within or partly within the Baltic Sea drainage basin are represented: Belarus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden and more marginally the Czech Republic, Norway, Slovakia and Ukraine. The Baltic University Programme Coordinating Secretariat is located in Uppsala, Sweden. Web page: 3. Bibliotheca Baltica Established in 1994, Bibliotheca Baltica is a form of organized cooperation between the different national libraries around the Baltic Sea. Today there are 38 members with collections of special interest to Area 5. International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics (IIIEE) The mission of the Institute, founded in 1994, is to contribute to the international advancement (especially in the Baltic Sea area) of sustainable development by conducting research at the forefront of issues pertaining to cleaner production, and to train present and future decision-makers within all sectors of society in the formulation and implementation of preventive environmental strategies. Web page: Internet Resources 1. BALLERINA BALLERINA is a billboard for announcements of relevance for all those concerned with issues related to the environment, natural resources and sustainable development in the Baltic Sea Region. It is a place to share Baltic environmental news in a very wide sense with others interested in the region. It is a forum where you can ask questions, or answer questions from others, concerning the environment, natural resources and sustainable development in the Baltic Sea Region. Its purpose is to be a convenient, easy-to-use and dynamic tool for rapid dissemination and updating of 17

19 information, for legitimate inquiries, and for discussions on questions of mutual concern to those concerned with the environment, natural resources and sustainable development in the Baltic Sea Region. It is designated especially for information-sharing and communication on these issues and, in this respect, to promote the role of the Baltic Sea Region in Europe and worldwide. Others 1. Ars Baltica Web page: 2. Baltic Marine Environment Bibliography The Baltic Marine Environment Information System allows users to search for information using a geographical user interface with a connection to text retrieval tools, and to retrieve bibliographic references as well as electronic original documents over the Internet. It covers bibliographic information on the Baltic Sea, i.e. all marine areas from the Gulfs of Finland and Bothnia in the east and north to the Belt Sea and Kattegat in the west. It contains references to reports including grey literature, journal articles, books, conference proceedings, dissertations etc. The bibliography covers material from the year 1970, currently over 13,000 references. The Baltic Marine Environment Bibliography is produced from contributions prepared by the all the surrounding Baltic Sea states. The Information Service of the Technical Research Centre of Finland is responsible for compiling and processing the bibliographic information as a consultant for the Helsinki Commission. Web page: 3. BASICS BASICS (Baltic Sea region statistical database on sustainable development, natural resources and environment) is a compilation of statistics dealing with the Baltic Sea region. Most of the statistics are on a national level, related to most of the countries fully or partly within the Baltic Sea drainage basin (Belarus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Russia, Sweden and Ukraine). Ars Baltica is the Baltic Sea region s cultural forum, which aims at enhancing the regional cultural identity. This is achieved through concerts, art exhibitions, seminars and artistic exchange. Web page: 2. ArtGenda ArtGenda is an independent European network based on the participation of 18 cities surrounding the Baltic Sea and covering all the countries in the region. It is a project-driven network, which aims at creating a platform for young innovative artists from all arts disciplines. The main forums of cooperation are the biennials for young artists from around the Baltic region. Web page: 3. Association of Museums and Castles around the Baltic Sea The Association is a non-political, non-profit organization established in 1991, and its members are various museums from all of the Baltic Sea countries. The aim is to establish a network for teaching and learning among colleagues from similar castles and museum collections. The six pillars of the Association are research, education, restoration, management, marketing and tourism. Web page: Web page: 18

20 4. Baltic Centre for Writers and Translators BCWT is a non-profit organization (established in 1993). The Centre is under the auspices of UNESCO; it is a member of the international network of European translators centres and supported by the Baltic Writers Council. The Centre welcomes applicants from all countries, but priority of residence is given to literary professionals from the countries of the Baltic Sea region and Scandinavia, i.e. Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Russia and Sweden. Web page: union voice heard so as to influence the EU Northern Dimension, promoting social dialogue and tripartite cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region, promoting collective bargaining in the labour market, influencing the Council of the Baltic Sea States by putting forward joint demands in areas such as employment, education and social policy, formulating joint project applications to the EU and other institutions and foundations for financial assistance, supporting trade union organizations in countries in transition in organizing, organizational structure, administration and financing, developing network cooperation and utilizing state-of-the-art information technology, such as the Internet, for cooperation and exchange of information. Web page: 7. Baltic Sea Network on Occupational Health and Safety (BSN) 5. Baltic Sea Trade Union Network (BASTUN) The Baltic Sea Trade Union Network BASTUN was established in connection with the European Trade Union Confederation Congress in Helsinki in July 1999, and it represents about 20 million trade union members in 20 trade union confederations in the Baltic Sea area. The Baltic Sea Trade Union Network primarily focuses on supporting trade union organizations in the EU membership application process, trying to make the trade The Baltic Sea Network on Occupational Health and Safety (BSN) is a regional network of ten countries around the Baltic Sea. The participants are occupational health and safety institutions in Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Northwest Russia, Norway, Poland, and Sweden. The Network facilitates the exchange of information among the participating countries and offers easy and immediate access to country information in the Baltic Sea region and also for users in other countries. Web page: 19

21 4 Baltic research institute policies and strategic visions Baltic Sea research is carried out by tens of research institutes and universities. The key entities of each of the nine countries have already been presented and described in the BONUS Publications No. 3. Their activity spectrum is broad and varies depending on the disciplines they represent. Various maritime Baltic institutions operate under the jurisdiction of various ministries. Thematically, fishery institutes are under the jurisdiction of ministries responsible for agriculture and/or food, meteorological institutions usually are under the jurisdiction of ministries of environment, while others related to pure science, where basic research and education dominate, are supervised predominantly by the ministries of science and education. Institutions offering a broader spectrum of services, including applied science, usually belong to ministries of various sectors, such as ministries of transport and communication, infrastructure or economic affairs. The Baltic institutions basically fulfill their obligations for the sector they are working for. Apart from their research obligations, a substantial part of their activities is concentrated on monitoring and observation (data collection) as well as on providing several services for society and end-users, such as weather and water level forecasts, ice mapping, alga bloom warnings etc, as well as providing opinions and expertise in their own fields. The universal objective is to meet the emerging needs for advice and research. Strategy and policy are planned for the coming years in order to go forward with their established mission. Most of the institutions do not disclose their visions on their web pages but only state their tasks and objectives. Usually, the main visions are expressed as follows: Generate knowledge to support the sustainable use and protection of the marine environment through innovative, high-level scientific and technological research Develop scientific competence to deliver a scientific platform for environmental politics and administration Offer valuable advice for marine management (decision-makers) Provide quality maritime education at different levels Facilitate research within natural science by supporting and improving the communication between scientists and the public Encourage applied research on environmental problems Study the Baltic Sea and the World Ocean based on the idea of the entirety of physical, chemical, biological and geological processes observed in them Lay scientific foundations for forecasting the Earth s climate variability, rational use of marine resources and safeguarding ecological security in the interest of stable development of mankind Promote the attainment of environmental quality objectives Support dissemination of knowledge Maintain preparedness for major catastrophic situations to protect life and property Produce and provide information of the desired quality and content to be used for planning and decision-making concerning activities sensitive and heavily dependent on weather and water data Develop the best quality of forecast and warnings The research institutions clients are: national and international users of marine science and technology national communities governmental agencies policymakers public authorities enterprises educators students in universities and high schools. 20

22 5 Ongoing research cooperation Cooperation within the European Union and the Nordic Council of Ministers projects. The international projects supported by the European Union (EU) and the Nordic Council of Ministers (NCM) were listed in the BONUS materials the Publications No. 3 (pages 56 72). The list includes 54 projects of which 46 projects were funded under the EU 5 th and 6 th Framework Programmes and eight projects were funded by the NCM. The most active and successful countries participating in the greatest number of projects (in more than half) are Germany, Finland and Sweden (Figure 5.1). On average there were 3.3 country-partners per project. Russia, despite not being a Member of the EU, participates in two EU and two NCM projects. Institutions from seven Baltic countries (except Germany and Poland) participate in the eight NCM projects. It seems to follow from the fact that these projects concern mostly the Nordic countries area, i.e. the North Baltic. A summary of the number of common projects in particular countries is shown in figures Number of projects Germany Finland Sweden Denmark Poland Estonia Lithuania Latvia Russia Figure 5.1 Baltic Sea research projects funded by EU 5 th and 6 th Framework Programme and the NCM 21

23 Position Cooperation 1 Finland Sweden 22 Number of common projects 2 Germany Finland 20 3 Germany Poland 19 4 Denmark Sweden 17 5 Germany Sweden 16 Denmark Finland 6 Finland Estonia Germany Denmark Denmark Estonia 7 Sweden Estonia Sweden Poland 12 Sweden Latvia 9 Finland Poland Germany Lithuania Sweden Latvia 10 Denmark Poland Denmark Latvia Sweden Latvia Finland Lithuania Estonia Latvia 11 Estonia Poland Germany Latvia Latvia Poland 12 Lithuania Poland Finland Latvia Estonia Lithuania 13 Latvia Lithuania Denmark Lithuania 6 Estonia Russia 15 Latvia Russia Denmark Russia Sweden Russia 16 Finland Russia Germany Russia 17 Poland Russia Lithuania Russia 6 Figure 5.2 Number of common projects showing cooperative relations among Baltic countries 22

24 Denmark - cooperation Poland 10 Russia 3 Germany 13 Lithuania 6 Finland 14 Latvia 9 Estonia 13 Sweden 17 Figure 5.3 The cooperation of Danish partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) Estonia - cooperation Poland 9 Russia 4 Sweden 13 Lithuania 7 Latvia 9 Finland 14 Germany 10 Denmark 13 Figure 5.4 The cooperation of Estonian partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) Finland - cooperation Poland 11 Russia 3 Denmark 14 Lithuania 9 Germany 19 Latvia 7 Estonia 14 Sweden 22 Figure 5.5 The cooperation of Finnish partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) 23

25 Germany - cooperation Poland 19 Russia 2 Denmark 13 Finland 20 Lithuania 10 Latvia 8 Estonia 10 Sweden 16 Figure 5.6 The cooperation of German partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) Latvia - cooperation Poland 8 Russia 3 Estonia 9 Lithuania 7 Sweden 9 Germany 8 Denmark 9 Finland 8 Figure 5.7 The cooperation of Latvian partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) Lithuania - cooperation Poland 9 Russia 2 Latvia 8 Estonia 8 Germany 11 Denmark 7 Finland 10 Sweden 10 Figure 5.8 The cooperation of Lithuanian partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) 24

26 Poland - cooperation Germany 19 Russia 2 Lithuania 9 Latvia 8 Denmark 10 Estonia 9 Finland 11 Sweden 12 Figure 5.9 The cooperation of Polish partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) Russia - cooperation Germany 2 Poland 2 Lithuania 2 Latvia 3 Denmark 3 Finland 3 Sweden 3 Estonia 4 Figure 5.10 The cooperation of Russian partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) Sweden - cooperation Lithuania 10 Poland 12 Russia 3 Finland 22 Latvia 9 Denmark 17 Estonia 13 Germany 16 Figure 5.11 The cooperation of Swedish partners with Baltic Sea partners in EU and NCM projects (in ) 25

27 The cooperation is well developed among old EU members, also by tradition among Scandinavian countries and between neighboring countries. The figures indicate that Swedish-Finnish cooperation represents the greatest number of common projects (22 out of a total of 54). Next are German-Finnish (20), German-Polish (19) and Danish-Swedish (19) cooperation. International cooperation outside support from EU and NCM finances International cooperation is carried out mostly without signed agreements. The activity scope of this cooperation is ranked by the respondents as follows: Common use of infrastructure (database, laboratory, vessels, field station) Mobility of scientists Joint publications Joint PhD studies and education at the university level are mentioned relatively seldom. National cooperation National cooperation among research institutions is predominantly based on informal agreements. Only in Lithuania, Poland and Russia more official agreements or letters of intent seem to be the best practice to some extent (usually for legal purposes). The most often indicated objectives of this cooperation are: Joint publications Joint application for grants Participation in common projects Common use of infrastructures (database, vessels, laboratory, field station) Mechanisms which are rarely listed are education and mobility of the scientists. 26

28 6 Identification of gaps In the following chapter, the country standpoints on gaps in the cooperation are presented. The chapter includes an assessment of whether the indicated issue is considered as a gap as well as answers to the basic questions of what is the reason for the observed situation. Moreover, some remarks on recommended methods of improvement are added. Finally, it shows a ranking of the priorities of the gaps identified as the most troublesome for effective activities. 6.1 Mismatch of excellence, funding and infrastructure Nine of the riparian states can be divided into two groups: old market economy countries (Denmark, Finland, Germany and Sweden) and countries in transition (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, which acceded the EU in 2004, and Russia). The countries in transition claim that they definitely observe a mismatch of excellence, funding and infrastructure. It is a typical situation for those countries where the total amount of funding is usually too small. There is either no budget or an insufficient budget dedicated to the infrastructure renewal, and, thus, the necessary modernization, especially of research vessels, is very limited. The general principles and regulations of funding are mostly too strict and conservative, preventing flexibility in many aspects. Relatively low salaries do not allow for recruitment of the best available staff. In order to maintain and use the available potential of highly educated researchers, the funds earmarked for research in these countries should be increased. In addition, the conditions and principles of funding must be more open. It is recommended to soften the restrictions, enabling more flexibility in the research funding policy. In the old market countries, the opinion on mismatch is not so clear. These states are faced with different problems. Finnish institutions indicate this issue to be more complex, and usually the funding of research activities matches their excellence and reflects the availability of the necessary infrastructure, but not always. However, problems sometimes occur in the final evaluation. The decision on final funding of research activities is often biased in favour of preferable trends (so-called popular problems), while other very important areas may represent excellence at an even higher level. In other words, there are some limitations in some unpopular fields which are insufficiently funded, not because of their low quality but because of policy conditions. At the same time, there is awareness in Finnish foundations that it is the role of the funders to evaluate the proposals and applications so that such mismatch is avoided. The scope of funded research fields should be extended. As it is generally announced, making a decision on research funding is not entirely objective. There are always themes which seem to have some bonus points. To improve this situation, better tools for evaluations of proposals are needed. The funding instruments should also focus on regional needs. They should be based on better indication of research needs and a more competitive way of funding distribution. Keeping in mind potential excellence, real needs and fair competition, the funding agencies should not restrict their decision to the most popular fields but should also support other innovative proposals. 6.2 Predictive capacity on environmental problems in society The spectrum of society s awareness of threats for the Baltic countries depends on the quality of information presented to the public by mass media as well as on the policy of the relevant organizations responsible for providing such information. The Baltic Sea is a traditional place of leisure where a lot of people spend their vacation mostly during summer. It is evident then that society is interested in problems related to the coastline and sea. Newspapers, TV and radio aim to supply information on the present status of these areas. This information mostly concerns the summertime blue-green algal blooms or some dangerous situations such as oil spill accidents. This information is of temporary nature, and it is not treated globally. Threats without immediate, spectacular consequences are often not taken seriously by the media and the public. It is also difficult to provide global information in a simple manner. The reports on slowly developing severe problems require competent knowledge. Many materials developed by the environmental organizations on Baltic Sea issues are presented only in scientific reports or newsletters which are not broadly distributed and might not be understood by the public because of specific, difficult scientific language. 27

29 It is not unusual for the media to look for sensation and present problems very subjectively. Therefore, citizens and society lack balanced information. Some very dangerous problems require discussion among scientists and politicians and cannot be presented to the public immediately without experts advice. Each problem requires carefully weighed and balanced arguments. Some officers from governmental bodies who work on marine subjects lack specific sea science education. It is recommended to involve the marine organizations and universities in public services, possibly on a contractual basis. A good idea is to suggest some special information services (regional scientific advisers) for politicians, such as a hot-line for politicians, media and management to get information in case of future environmental problems. Dissemination of knowledge and the quality of public press on scientific issue should be improved. Scientists often present issues which they consider important but which, unfortunately, very often may not be of interest to the public. 6.3 Socio-economic research addressing environmental problems According to the BONUS Publication No. 3 Baltic Sea Research and R&D Funding in 2004, research on socio-economic problems was reported to constitute a relatively low percentage of total projects and funding. Generally, a lack of this kind of research is observed within all Baltic countries due to the artificial but traditional separation of natural and socio-economic sciences. Socio-economics is still a new discipline and proper research traditions have not yet evolved. There is a lack of experienced scientists in this field, and there is no common language or cooperation tool shared by natural and socio-economic scientists. Natural science dominates the field. Projects within social science mostly do not lead to a solution that is accepted in natural sciences. Socio-economic research usually provides only some knowledge, which is not sufficient for somebody who requires clear and simple answers to questions of concern. There is a lack of common questions of environmental problems which should be addressed by natural and socio-economic sciences. Moreover, resources and infrastructures are not sufficient, and applications are not good enough to be founded. Different methodologies used in the two fields make cooperation difficult. The recommendations resulting from socio-economic research are often vague, and mechanisms for their practical implementation are not sufficient. A socio-economic approach to marine science requires cross-disciplinary cooperation, which is increasingly indicated as essential and strongly recommended in order to make research more effective. To improve this situation, it is highly recommended that funds and research should aim at interdisciplinary projects and cooperation. This can be achieved by developing a call to emphasize the importance of close priorities. For better understanding and easier communication between these two fields, it is suggested that socioeconomic sciences should be introduced into natural science education and vice versa. This should be done at the basic university and PhD study level. Opinions and hopes have been expressed that BONUS is in a good position to implement such an approach in common calls and proposals of international postgraduate courses. 6.4 Publications on social sciences research Differences between various Baltic Sea regions and their specific and local problems require, in most cases, regional solutions. Some of the social problems are local (e.g. employment issues, retirement age); hence, publications in national languages dominate. Regional publications are very important tools for solving practical problems. Local problems, however, have a larger scale than is usually perceived. Social problems, although differing between countries, have an impact on each other. Experience in studying the causes of existing local problems and finding solutions to them may be benchmarking for other areas. Publications which, in addition to practical use, have scientific value should be published in English and be available for an international audience. The best solution could be developing holistic and comparative international publishing guidelines and more detailed regional publications. This would require an international publication forum for social sciences. 28

30 6.5 International cooperation in social sciences Research institutes focusing on natural science generally have no cooperation with social science entities. Occasional informal communication takes place between German and Scandinavian scientists in charge. Moreover, some contacts and collaboration in the Baltic region are induced through various projects of the European Union, INTERREG and through Nordic cooperation. More examples of cooperation can be observed at the country level with focus on general problems, not limited to the one specific region only (e.g. exclusively for Baltic Sea). In order to include social science in environmental research on the Baltic Sea issues, enhancing networking among research institutions is recommended. This will help to develop better cooperation and a crossdisciplinary approach to the problem by joint funding and joint workshop opportunities. 6.6 Cooperation between fish research and research on other environmental problems in the Baltic Sea Fish research is predominantly considered to be a separate field. Mostly there are special institutes which deal only with fish research. They are located under different ministries (fisheries in the Ministry of Food and/or Agriculture, for example). Different sources of funding, different administrative supervision as well as a lack of sufficient mechanisms of mutual collaborations are the main reasons why there are not so many (only a few) projects addressing fishery research as a part of the whole ecosystem. This reflects the old tradition of different environmental issues being managed by different authorities and university departments. By tradition, fish research has been very much focused on commercial fish stock. Interactions between fish and other environmental issues have been largely neglected. There has been a lack of well-developed and accepted tools for combining environmental and fisheries research and management. It is also claimed that there are rather strict limitations in obtaining necessary information (access to database, fish stock, sampling, long-term monitoring) which is needed to perform full ecosystem studies. This data should be available to all research institutions in the relevant region. Nowadays all interest groups in the fisheries are well aware of the needs and demands of the holistic ecosystem approach. A good example may be the currently developed research programme in Latvia, in which all ecosystem components are to be included. The lack of fishing gears on research vessels is a barrier to common research activities. Ideas for improving this situation are self-evident: there is a need for better cooperation between ministries. Financing for joint and environmental studies should be enhanced. Long-term and holistic environmental and fish monitoring should be planned and conducted in order to provide a full database on changes in the ecosystem. Datasets from both environmental and fishery fields should be available for researchers of various scientific branches. When making decisions on funding, giving special bonus points to interdisciplinary applications should be considered, not excluding excellent disciplinary applications. 6.7 Research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest There are always conflicts of interest. Due to economic circumstances, these conflicts are usually between the scientific point of view and interests of economic benefit. Suggested solutions are often not so helpful. There are different levels, scopes and areas of conflicts. Conflicts of interest between different environmental activities exist, but not to a significant extent. Such conflicts can rather be seen as competition which can be profitable provided it serves the achievement of excellence in a better outcome of activities. Conflict among funding agencies may occur when they fund similar projects and have similar focus areas but do not work together. Such conflicts can be diminished at the national level by coordination and cooperation between agencies in order for each of them to find their own place at the national level. Most cases of conflict occur in the utilization of natural resources and environmental conservation, and in the assessment of limitations in the exploitation of sea resources like fish, mineral resources, amber, gravel, oil, gas etc. Other important examples are the expansion of tourism with hotels and recreation areas; property investors building houses in more attractive locations regardless of the protection of beaches; transport traffic of fast ferries in the ports and its impact on the 29

31 seabed and harbors; hydro-engineering problems; and wastewater release locations. In Russia, a law project on air protection has been developed which can be regarded as one of such mechanisms. A decision on any planned investment in protected areas should be supported and verified by scientific opinions and should then be presented by experts to the authorities, decision-makers and stakeholders. Such standpoints may, however, differ in some aspects and may be biased in order to meet the requirements of investors. Finally, the convenient opinion may be taken into consideration as there is lack of more restrictive legislative regulations on how to proceed in such cases. Well-balanced benefits should always be considered. Long-term anticipated threats or opportunities should prevail over short-term profits. There is a need to create deeper cooperation and communication (links) between end-users, researchers, stakeholders and managers in order to better understand environmental problems in future dimensions, develop legislative regulations and create guidelines with clear rules on how to proceed and to avoid misinterpretation aiming towards economic aspects only. 6.8 Valuation of ecosystem goods and services Environmental economics, although not an entirely new field, is still not widely known or well-recognized in the Baltic Sea area. Baltic countries have not yet developed a necessary and sufficient database or a methodology for the evaluation of ecosystem goods and services. Data should include the current knowledge on ecosystem goods and services. There are some maps and GIS (Geographic Information System) data for particular areas or themes which are used for different purposes. Some are still in progress. Much information still needs to be gathered, and existing data should be properly reviewed. Some methods are developed in specific areas or disciplines, but a holistic evaluation is missing. In practice, this subject is not present in universities or any teaching forums. Sufficient mutual understanding and interest among scientists does yet exist as these issues require an interdisciplinary approach. For most scientists, especially for those in traditional fields of science like physics and chemistry, the unclear methodology which is typical for social sciences is not easy to accept. The tendency to increase human pressure on sea space is observed all over the world. At present there is a critical need for a scientific approach of assessing the environment. Economic valuation is useful as a guide for decision-making. The principles in the decisionmaking process regarding environmental issues should be open, competent and transparent. This requires qualified information developed in close collaboration between natural scientists, economists and sociologists. It is suggested that environmental economics should be linked to the political decision-making process through the enforcement of this field in governmental research institutes. There should also be some training courses organized on this subject for students. BONUS is a good candidate for an international project that can approach coordination and development of the most appropriate methods for such evaluation. It would help in achieving better communication between the natural and social sciences especially as regards new methodology for environmental economics, which is a currently emerging task in the European Union countries. 6.9 Proper marine education of various levels Opinions on the level of marine education vary between countries. Marine education is mostly carried out in a traditional way with separate study programmes for biology, geography and geology. Interdisciplinary programmes do not exist, although there are some interdisciplinary courses and seminars. After obtaining a basic general knowledge in natural science, students are trained in their own specific area of specialization only. There is a lack of education involving links with other environmental problems. Education is in most universities targeted towards basic research. Applied aspects in marine research are mostly still underrepresented. There are still structural barriers between different faculties due to tradition. There is a lack of experience in combining technology, natural science and economics. Curricula can be changed when the appropriate fields of science are represented and when different fields of knowledge cooperate closely. 30

32 The suggestion is to develop an interdisciplinary education pattern showing how important a holistic approach to marine issues is and to promote this to an international audience. It should include seminars on decision-making processes, joint training courses, visits and programmes across disciplines and universities representing a higher level of specification and updated information. Environmental ecology and socio-economics will, thus, have a better chance to be further developed towards a similar level as traditional environmental natural science. A good example is the new Swedish governmental strategy for the marine environment, which includes a holistic view of education and research. It states that the management of the Sea should have an ecosystem approach. Some national rearrangement processes are underway, and international support would be very helpful Research on links between the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area The dominant viewpoint is that studies on the influence of both the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area are not sufficiently well investigated and research is mostly carried out separately. The reason for this situation is explained partly by its historical background and by the traditional division between brackish and freshwater studies. Investigation of drainage basins and open sea are performed by different scientists (oceanographers and fresh water scientists). It reflects the different sources of funding for rivers and sea areas as well as different institutions working on river and marine systems. Small projects are still carried out separately, and, thus, there is lack of overall knowledge and data. The impact problems are treated marginally, and both sides pay a little attention to cooperation. There is no leadership structure or cooperative mechanism to provide an integrated approach to such studies. It should be better supported by international and interdisciplinary programmes. BALTEX is indicated as a good example of such initiatives. It is recommended to create a deeper awareness of the impact on both areas (e.g. inshore water circulation problem). This aim can be achieved by establishing an appropriate leadership structure and enhancing management collaboration between sectors at different levels. This will induce cooperation between marine and fresh water scientists towards one catchment-aquatic ecosystem approach. The suggestion for funding agencies is to consider extra points for application with an interdisciplinary, holistic view Links between tourism and the environment Relatively little information is provided by the respondents to the questionnaire on this topic. It is understood that the query was related to a socio-economic approach on which there is not much knowledge in the environmental society, which is also a gap in the question of this study. Researchers believe that most environmental protection regulations are considered. Common fundamental rules like special limitations for protected areas (national parks, reserves) are respected as they are generally regulated by law. Tourism, however, especially in poor economic regions, often obeys its own economic rules. There exists a conflict of interest already described above. Tourism supports local economy, but, at the same time, it should be emphasized that the growth of tourism is limited and depends on the environment s condition since no recreational activities are permitted in polluted areas. There is insufficient cooperation between environmental scientists, management and tourism authorities at local levels. Expanded and spontaneous (uncontrolled) growth of tourism might cause problems in the future. This should be studied in order to present different scenarios supported by SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis Links between human health and environmental problems Some studies are reported to be performed, but their research results are not known to the wider public. Only few projects are evaluated for funding due to low interest in the criteria arising from the scale of threats which is not at a significant level. Additionally, there are an increasing number of diseases but no clear proof of which environmental agents are responsible for them. This would require a long-term, large-scale, detailed systematic study with no guarantee of clear results. There is also a conflict of interest between environmental and economic issues as any disadvantageous statement or even stipulation would, for example, limit seaside tourism or the consumption of fish. 31

33 The main activities in this respect are the monitoring, measurement and study of harmful toxic substances in the air and water. Attention is focused mainly on polluted fish (dioxin and mercury), cyanobacteria, air pollution and water quality. There is a lack of knowledge on linkages between human health and environmental problems (e.g. the reason for the higher proportion of cancer diseases among populations living in the Baltic Sea area). International organizations responsible for health as well as the European Commission have to control any accidents or repeated processes which cause anxiety. These are then studied to present an official opinion (e.g. the opinion of an expert panel on butterfish consumption threats presented to the European Commission). National research results can be subjective in some ways. International research outcomes may be considered to be more reliable as they are revised by more objective experts. International forums should create the understanding that problems in human health and the marine ecosystem are closely linked and that, therefore, studies and monitoring must also include anthropogenic chemical contaminants Communication between universities and research institutes The existing communication between universities and research institutes in most cases arises from joint research projects or common events, and it is stated that it should be improved. Successful cooperation is observed among certain departments to find synergies and to reach critical mass for cooperative actions. In some Baltic countries (e.g. Estonia, Sweden), most research institutes are attached to universities. Universities focus on basic research. Research institutes supervised by different ministries are obligated to fulfill the development needs of their own sector (agriculture, industry, transport, etc.) and act relatively more towards applied sciences. Universities and institutes often prefer to act on their own because of obvious competition when applying for the same funds for research projects. They have different structures and priorities. The main objective of the universities is education, and research comes second. In the institutes, the main goal is scientific work, and education comes second. This naturally creates differences in staff based on their scientific or practical skills and experiences. In order to facilitate cooperation, the suggestion is to create joint centers or state joint teams including scientists from both entities for common applications for grants and other joint activities. Exchange of staff and greater mobility among the workers/employees should also be somehow more encouraged. It should include more open invitations for both sides for training courses, lectures and sharing of research infrastructure. Such communication should be developed at both the scientists and management levels. The Northern Environmental Research Network ( was pointed out as a good example of how to work together Cooperation between management of different sectors Communication between sectors in all countries is built up in different committees, discussion forums, advisory bodies and working groups established or arranged ad hoc for planning, policy processes or in order to convey opinions at the national level. Countries where funding agencies other than ministries exist are in a better situation. Agencies are responsible for their sectors but also for overall national cooperation between sectors. Finland and Sweden declare having good experiences and tradition in cooperation between sectors as it is included in their objectives. However, communication between researchers, managers, stakeholders and the public should be further improved. Estonia, Latvia and Poland claim that they have practically no mechanisms for such cooperation. Cooperation is not very well coordinated, and activities are performed by separate authorities. Little attention has been paid to this problem, but slow development can be observed by cross-sector management measures, which are under development. Targets and priorities vary between sectors; thus, they are poorly represented at the same symposia or meetings. Joint interdisciplinary projects or programmes addressed to different sectors which can be funded jointly would improve a lot and facilitate such collaborations. A best practice can be taken from the Finnish BIREME project, for example. 32

34 In addition to some mechanisms which are recommended to be developed, it is essential that the contact basis should be broader mostly at the horizontal levels. There should be more opportunity for people to meet during official networking occasions but also through personal contacts at seminars and workshops on interdisciplinary problems Communication with other regional seas The communication and cooperation among regional seas exist to some extent. It is quite well performed but generally reached and induced predominantly through international EU projects. Usually there is a promising opportunity to continue this collaboration but a lack of suitable, other than EU, sources of finance, a lack of discussion and low prioritization of international cooperation. Some individual collaborations can be seen among researchers and institutes in most cases within the same disciplines with similar interests or induced by joint publications. The regional seas with which the Baltic Sea institutions cooperate most are the Mediterranean, the North Sea, the Black Sea and the Arctic Seas. Regarding some aspects there are also communications with the South Atlantic, the China Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Thailand (mostly by Finland and Germany). There is a wish and need to create some tools for intensive mobility among scientists and institutions of different regions outside the EU projects for their mutual benefit or to develop cooperation under different instruments (Network of Excellence, ERA-NET) Other gaps identified by respondents Lack of regional cooperation in different Baltic sub-areas According to the Finnish North Ostrobothnia Regional Environmental Centre, there is a strong need to stabilize and strengthen the insufficient crossborder and multidisciplinary cooperation, including environmental administration, fishery, socio-economics and environmental health for different sub-areas of the Baltic Sea. The Baltic Sea sub-basins are different, and, therefore, different actions are needed. Different countries work in their own way, and there is an insufficient amount of information exchange. The idea for such an initiative is to create regional cooperative networks. Assessment of the health status of regional ecosystems The Finnish Institute of Marine Research contends that the research, monitoring and assessment of biological effects of hazardous substances in Baltic Sea organisms, populations and ecosystems is an important domain which is poorly developed in the Baltic Sea when compared to most sea areas in Europe. National and international funding should be targeted for the intensive development of this field Ranking of the gaps The most highlighted topics and present challenges, the solving of which is deemed critical in the nearest future, were (class A): Research on links between the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area Cooperation between fish research and research on other environmental problems in the Baltic Sea Cooperation between management of different sectors Items which are considered important and worthy of special attention in the next decade but the solutions to which are still unclear were (class B): Research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest Reported socio-economic research addressing environmental problems Valuation of ecosystem goods and services (environmental economics) The first group of issues shows the need for horizontal cooperation, which is still limited by the traditional approach due to its historical background. It reflects an awareness of the disadvantages of separated investigations and insufficient cooperation among scientists without exchange of data within these fields. This is stressed by the fact that these disciplines are supervised by separate sectors which do not cooperate to the required extent due to a lack of tools and mechanisms to encourage joint, common activities and obligations. It seems that some kind of mediator would be required a suitable body which could operate between the issue of joint inventions 33

35 and the settlement of respective regulations for the basic foundation on which such cooperation can rest. The next kind of knowledge gap is the most troublesome for a proper and cost-effective management of the marine environment. It is the lack of understanding of marine socioeconomics. 34

36 7 Conclusions, suggestions and recommendations for future cooperation This report revealed that: The questionnaire was widely sent to entities in all the Baltic countries. It was only the research institutions (with a few exceptions) who spent time on studying all of the queries and presented their opinions. Many local authorities and regional governmental bodies seem to be reluctant to share their opinion or are not able to present their standpoint having not clear enough an insight into the situation of cooperation and the other presented queries. They focus on their official duties, which are mostly monitoring, controlling and implementing of regulations, gathering data, reporting results etc. Having no scientific background they are not used to and may not be in a position to study environmental problems, which is the province of scientists. There is no satisfactory communication between the research sector and administrative bodies at different levels. This is due to the different backgrounds and lack of mechanisms for such communication. It seems there is still too little awareness of the benefits of such mutual communication. Improvements can be started by organizing more joint multidisciplinary workshops and meetings. Engaging some scientific experts and officers in different scopes of collaboration and ventures can also be considered. This would stimulate a set of formal and informal relationships between administrative entities and science. The existing networks in the Baltic region show that the community is quite well integrated in many areas. The area is relatively convenient for the coordination of joint ventures due to the fact that the sea is located wholly in Europe and the coastal states are EU members (except Russia). In some Baltic associations there are also countries represented which have a region partly within the Baltic Sea drainage basin like Norway, Belarus, Ukraine and marginally also the Czech Republic and Slovakia. It is mostly cooperation within one or a few similar disciplines or, in the case of a more general objective or cooperation platform, the activities are divided into some commissions and task groups but rather without stating real interactions among them. There is still a lack of an interdisciplinary approach to cooperation. Mostly it involves coordination actions supporting the exchange of information. These associations might be of interest for the BONUS future joint trans-disciplinary programme as supporting and advising bodies. Joint publications are the most often indicated scope in national and international cooperation. Joint PhD study is shown to be a very rare practice. It seems that such activity should be presented as a challenge in the nearest future for the Baltic cooperation. The level of funding for research and infrastructure in countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia should be made equal to other Baltic countries in order to give a better chance for more effective cooperation at similar levels. Ranking the gaps revealed the needs and wishes concerning the Baltic Sea. It showed some imperfections deriving from tradition, a lack of communication mechanisms, and poor understanding of the issues of different disciplines. The most troublesome problems arise from traditionally separated research within one or neighboring disciplines without stating real connections between environmental problems. A single discipline solves single problems and is, thus, not suitable for holistic solutions to the problems. A complex way of treating the problem is needed, which means that different branches of science should be involved. Crossing traditional borders is crucial not only between different disciplines (research on links between the Baltic Sea and its drainage area, fishery, and research on other environmental Baltic problems) but also between natural, social and economic science (research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest, socio-economic investigation on environmental problems, valuation of ecosystem goods and services - environmental economy). A more holistic approach to marine issues and a common scientific language should be developed and widespread in the science, policy and administrative sectors. It is advocated that the transdisciplinarity in research should extend to well-oriented education which provides a cross-disciplinary programme in environmental studies in order to start teaching future generations of scientists and decision-makers with a new and broader way of thinking. 35

37 The respondents have emphasized that the BONUS project with its well-extended coordination action is in a good position and has a great chance to create a programme for the whole Baltic to achieve worldclass excellence in both the fields of research and education. BONUS might face challenges in crossing borders between scientific disciplines between natural, social and economics sciences but also in involving users in environmental research. There is more awareness of such a holistic approach, although it seems that it may be a slow process and that it might take time before a final and fully successful outcome can be achieved. However, there are no other solutions. Researchers must interpret the results of their work to end-users. Real world problems may require the insight and tools of several branches of science. Interdisciplinarity is not new, but this idea is still rather undeveloped in most countries. 36

38 Appendix 1: List of the entities that filled in the BONUS questionnaire Country Denmark Denmark Estonia Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland Finland Germany Germany Latvia Latvia Lithuania Lithuania Lithuania Poland Poland Poland Russia Russia Sweden Sweden Sweden Organization Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation Department of Biological Sciences, University of Aarhus (AU IBS) Marine Systems Institute at Tallinn University of Technology (TUT MSI) Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) Finnish Institute of Marine Research (FIMR) Finnish Meteorological Institute Huso Biological Station, Abo Akademi University (AAU) Maj and Tor Nessling Foundation North Ostrobothnia Regional Environment Centre Southwest Finland Regional Environment Centre (SWFREC) University of Helsinki, (UHEL) University of Jyvaskyla( JYU) Uusimaa Regional Environment Centre Institute of Geosciences, Coastal and Continental Shelf Research (University of Kiel) Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences, (IFM-GEOMAR) Latvian Council of Science Latvian Institute of Aquatic Ecology, (LIAE) Center of Marine Research Klaipeda University, Coastal Research and Planning Institute, (KU CORPI) Vilnius University, Department of Hydrology and Climatology (VU HYDROCLIM) City Hall of Sopot, Department of Engineering and Environmental Protection Institute of Oceanology Polish Academy of Sciences (IO PAS) Sea Fisheries Institute (SFI) Russian State Hydrometeorological University, (RSHU) The State Institution State Oceanographic Institute ROSGIDROMETA, (SOI) Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, (SEPA) The Swedish Research Council for Environmental, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning, (FORMAS) The Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (Mistra) 37

39 Appendix 2: BONUS questionnaire Part I EXISTING RESEARCH COOPERATION Q1. Name of the organization Name and acronym in national language: Name and acronym in English: Name and the position of the officer filling the form: Q2. List of the institutions 1. Please present the institutions you cooperate with. 2. Describe the scope of this cooperation. 3. Separate the cooperation at the national level and the international level. 4. Put each institution you cooperate with in one separate box (copy the box as many times as it is necessary). National co-operation INSTITUTION/S (NAME AND WEBPAGE) FRAMEWORK OF COOPERATION 1. Type of agreement: signed formal agreement cooperation without formal signed agreement 2. Objectives of cooperation as per agreement: mobility of scientists joint application for grants national international (EU and NCM grants excluded) participation in common projects (EU and NCM projects excluded) common use of infrastructure: vessels laboratory field station database other joint publications joint PhD study education at university level others (please describe) 3. Already accomplished cooperation: mobility of scientists joint application for grants national international (EU and NCM grants excluded) participation in common projects (EU and NCM projects excluded) common use of infrastructure: vessels laboratory field station database other joint publications joint PhD study education at university level others (please describe) 38

40 International co-operation INSTITUTION/S (NAME AND WEBPAGE) FRAMEWORK OF COOPERATION 1. Type of agreement: signed formal agreement cooperation without formal signed agreement 2. Objectives of cooperation as per agreement: mobility of scientists joint application for grants national international (EU and NCM grants excluded) participation in common projects (EU and NCM projects excluded) common use of infrastructure: vessels laboratory field station database other joint publications joint PhD study education at university level others (please describe) 3. Already accomplished cooperation mobility of scientists joint application for grants national international (EU and NCM grants excluded) participation in common projects (EU and NCM projects excluded) common use of infrastructure: vessels laboratory field station database other joint publications joint PhD study education at university level others (please describe) PART II GAPS - THE REASONS OF EXISTENCE AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT Q 3. Identifications of gaps For each issue (given in a separate table) which can be considered to be a gap, please give your opinion. If you consider them to be gaps, please provide the reasons for such a situation and suggest a way for improvement. Finally, please rank the gaps in the priority list (the last box). Below please find the thematic issues which can be considered to be gaps: 1. Mismatch of excellence, funding and infrastructure 2. Predictive capacity on environmental problems in society 3. Reported socio-economic research addressing environmental problems 4. Publication on social sciences research 5. International cooperation in social sciences 39

41 6. Cooperation between fish research and research on other environmental problems in the Baltic Sea 7. Research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest 8. Valuation of ecosystem goods and services (environmental economics) 9. Proper marine education at various levels 10. Research on links between the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area 11. Links between tourism and the environment 12. Links between human health and environmental problems 13. Communication between universities and research institutes 14. Cooperation between management of different sectors 15. Communication with other regional seas 16. Another gap you would like to identify 1. Mismatch of excellence, funding and infrastructure I / A Do you feel that the funding of research activities usually matches their excellence and reflect the availability of the necessary infrastructure? yes no Please share your opinion why does it often mismatch? Please provide your recommendations for improvement. 2. Predictive capacity on environmental problems in the society A Is your society aware of threats for the Baltic Sea future? yes no Is information about extreme dangerous situations provided to the society? yes no What is the reason for such a situation? Could you provide ideas for overcoming such problems? 3. Reported socio-economic research addressing environmental problems I Do you observe a lack of research on socio economic problems? yes no What is the reason for the lack of such projects? Please formulate some conclusions from your experience. Please suggest your ideas how to remedy this gap. 40

42 4. Publication on social sciences research I / A What languages are your institute s/country s national publications on social sciences usually published in? Only in national language Only in English Both in national and English languages Please provide your opinion. Do you agree that social problems are not only local ones but they reflect the situation in the whole region and therefore they should be directed to an international audience? Please provide your recommendations for improvement. 5. International cooperation in social sciences I / A Does your institution/country cooperate internationally in the socio-economic sciences within the Baltic Sea Region? yes no Please give your opinion. Please provide your suggestions to improve the situation. 6. Cooperation between fish research and research on other environmental problems in the Baltic Sea 1 / A Please state if your country deals with any programs or projects that include a holistic view on the ecosystem or if fish research is always as a separate field governed by its own rules? fish research is predominantly considered to be a separate field fish research is in most of cases treated as part of the whole ecosystem research Give reasons for why there is generally a lack of such cooperation? Is such a situation induced by management of different environmental issues by different authorities? Please explain the situation in your country. Please provide your recommendations for improvement. 41

43 7. Research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest A Do you observe any conflicts of interest between different environmental activities in your country? yes no Has your institution proposed/developed any mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest? yes, and it has been successful yes, but not sufficiently enough not at all Provide the character of the conflicts (if any). How could one overcome the conflicts, and how could one try to find the optimal mechanisms? 8. Valuation of ecosystem goods and services (environmental economics) I / A Has your country already developed the necessary database for such evaluation? yes no Are there any preferable methods in your country for estimating such values? yes (please give an example) no Does your country have a GIS system, supporting the environmental information, for your country zone (EEZ) in the Baltic Sea? yes (please state what kinds of maps are available) no If you consider the valuation of ecosystem goods and services to be a gap, please provide your reasons for that. If you have achieved success in the valuation process, please provide which goods and services have already been already. Please provide your recommendations for the implementation of environmental economics. 9. Proper marine education at various levels I / A Does your national education system on marine science provide a holistic, interdisciplinary approach to environmental problems? yes no If not, please provide the reason. Please recommend mechanisms for improvement. 42

44 10. Research on links between the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area I Are studies on the influence of both areas missing in your country? yes, they are not enough investigated, and research is mostly done separately (rivers and sea) no, research is performed mostly in a complex way with the connection of both fields other (please describe briefly) What is the reason for such a situation? Please suggest your ideas for improvement. 11. Links between tourism and the environment A Do you observe in your country spontaneous development of tourism or it is always under control and do decisions take into account the environment protection regulations? tourism activities basically obey their own economic rules mostly environmental protection regulations are considered How can these links be improved? Please provide your recommendations for improvement. 12. Links between human health and environmental problems I / A Please state whether your country carried out any investigation on the linkages between human health and environmental problems (water and air pollution, toxic substances, industry and typical Baltic Sea society diseases, health risks related to the consumption of Baltic Sea products) no investigation on such issues some investigation performed (please describe briefly) Please describe what can be reasons for the observed situation. Please provide your recommendations for improvement. 13. Communication between universities and research institutes I / A How do you find a communication between these institutions in your country? they exist, but should be improved very poor, universities and institutes prefer to act separately very good, do not need to be changed If the communication is poor, please define what can be the reason for that. Please describe your ideas to improve such a situation. 43

45 14. Cooperation between management of different sectors A Does any mechanism for the communication between management of different sectors (R&D, environment, fishery, agriculture, infrastructure, industry) exist in your country? yes (please describe briefly.) no Please describe your system in general: activities performed by separate authorities joint activities If the communication is poor, please try to explain why (e.g. financial aspects, mismatch between priorities) Do you have any idea how to overcome the problem? 15. Communication with other regional seas I / A Do you have any communication/cooperation with other regional seas in any aspects? Please describe briefly. yes, on a very good level yes, to some extend, but still not good enough not at all The European regional sea you cooperate with : North Sea Black Sea Mediterranean Sea Adriatic Sea Aegean Sea Ionian Sea Other If such communication is not sufficient enough, please provide your opinion why? Please describe your ideas to improve such communication 16. Another gap you would like to identify: please indicate Short description The reasons Your recommendations for improvement : 44

46 4. Ranking of the priorities Please mark the classes using the following criteria: CLASS O: Not applicable. The problem is considered to be solved. CLASS A: Topics are deemed as essential to be solved in the nearest future (already on the to-do list as first steps); ideas for improvement already known and planned as present challenge. CLASS B : Items are important, but the ideas of how to overcome the problems are still unclear; currently at the stage of the identification of reasons and suggestions; however, there is no doubt that they must be of interest / receive special attention in the next decade. CLASS C: The problems are known but are not considered to be important enough to be dealt with now; can be solved in a long-term future plan. Gaps Mismatch of excellence, funding and infrastructure Predictive capacity on environmental problems in the society Class Reported socio-economic research addressing environmental problems Publication on social sciences research internationally International cooperation in social sciences Communication between universities and research institutes Cooperation between fish research and research on other environmental problems in the Baltic Sea Valuation of ecosystem goods and services (environmental economics) Research on potential mechanisms to solve conflicts of interest Research on links between the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea drainage area Proper marine education at various levels Research on links between the Baltic Sea waters and the Baltic Sea drainage area Communication between universities and research institutes Cooperation between management of different sectors Communication with other regional seas Gap, as indicated by You 45

47 Appendix 3: Report on Workshop, September 2005 Identification of areas for cooperation in existing programmes and gaps Task 2.1 Workshop Sopot, 21st-23rd September

48 Table of contents 1 Introduction Task 2.1 Identification of areas for cooperation in existing programmes and gaps Background materials: Report under task 1.6 Baltic Sea Research and R&D Funding in 2004 and AB recommendations Overview of the main problems presented during the 5th Baltic Sea Science Congress Framework Proposal for BONUS-169 Science Plan (Draft) Discussion on the existing draft Framework Proposal for BONUS-169 Science Plan New system approach - a proposal Rationale Contribution to Earth System Science White Book - Coastal seas research in the next decade Scheme proposals General comments Particular scientific field description Workshop conclusion Appendix 1: Graphical presentation showing linkages between particular tasks Appendix 2,3: Posters Appendix 4: Workshop participants

49 1 Introduction This report presents the outcome from the BONUS Task 2.1 Identification of areas for co-operation in existing programmes and gaps. The guidelines for the task activities are described in the BONUS Description of Work as follows: Task 2.1. Identification of areas for cooperation in existing programmes and gaps (Task Leader: Partner 8) The background material for fulfilling this task has been produced within task 1.6. (D1.6). A wellorganized 3-day workshop of ca people that brings together scientists, funding agency representatives and stakeholders is carried out to discuss strategic aspects concerning the areas of cooperation and existing gaps. An editorial group prepares the report on the workshop results. The basic questions need to be answered are: Which research areas are the most important to obtain a better understanding of the Baltic marine environment? Which knowledge gaps are most troublesome for a proper and cost effective management of the marine environment? Can we match these views and identify a selection of research areas of common interest? Overview paper is produced after the workshop. A subcontract with the Institute of Oceanology will be made by MSRIT to complete part of the task. The task leader responsible for the work was the Polish Ministry of Science and Information Society Technologies, who appointed the Institute of Oceanology of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Sopot to organize the workshop and to prepare the final report on the Task. The workshop was held at the Institute of Oceanology in Sopot on 21 st 23 rd September The experts invited to this meeting were chosen by BONUS partners and also suggested by the Coordinator, Forum Program Managers and Advisory Board representatives. The guests represented various branches of environmental science (see Appendix no 4 Workshop Participants). There were no representatives from Denmark or Russia. The aim of the Workshop was to provide a forum for discussion on the existing areas of cooperation in Baltic Sea research, as well as on an identification of fields where further research efforts are needed. In this sense, the Workshop report should give a scientific background for a prospective common Baltic Sea research programme and for the formulation of the transnational scheme for such a programme, which is a subject of Task 2.5: Ideas for potential future transnational research scheme. The results of the work carried out under Task 2.1 and Task 2.5 shall provide the BONUS Milestone: 3 Agreement of the themes for joint research programmes (see Appendix 1 Graphical presentation of the linkages between particular BONUS tasks). In addition to the background material, which follows from the initial results of Task 1.6, some additional materials were taken into account, namely the overview of the main problems discussed during the 5 Th Baltic Sea Science Congress in Sopot (June 20 24, 2005), recommendations of the BONUS Advisory Board and the Framework Proposal for the BONUS-169 Science Plan (Draft) prepared under Task 2.5. In particular, the last document has been proposed by the Coordinator to be the material for discussion during the Workshop. The main conclusions resulting from the above materials are shortly summarized as follows: Report under task 1.6 Baltic Sea Research and R&D Funding in 2004 and AB recommendations The report showed the summary of ongoing projects and programmes as well as a ranking of fields and categories in each country. However, the report is still missing an analysis of the research outcome. This will be done from peer-reviewed papers published in the years , and it will be provided as a separate summary (in a special publication). The report pointed out that all environmental issues like eutrophication, sustainability of living resources, biodiversity and pollution are funded and studied. On the other hand, climate change and costal problems were not sufficiently studied in some countries. In addition, there were not so many projects related to genetics, microbiology or meteorology. The Advisory Board of the Programme recommended including more socio-economic aspects and problems connected with human health. In particular, human health and human behavior problems should include such issues as the risk of consuming Baltic Sea products 48

50 and enhancing communication among scientists, politicians and the general public on the environmental problems of the Baltic Sea. Overview of the main problems presented during the 5 th Baltic Sea Science Congress The Sopot Congress was already the fifth joint meeting organized by Baltic Oceanographers (CBO), Baltic Marine Biologists (BMB) and Baltic Sea Geologists (BSG). The Congress confirmed again the obvious need for meetings and discussion on general and specific aspects of the Baltic Sea and for the exchange of information and ideas to get a better understanding of the Baltic Sea ecosystem. This year s meeting, which was held under the banner The Baltic Sea a changing ecosystem, focused on a broad spectrum of problems from large-scale processes related to global climate change to local, small-scale issues specific to particular regions of the Baltic Sea. The main topics discussed at the Congress were climate variability and its consequences, new perspectives in biology (genetic level of research, molecular markers, microbial loop), changing ecosystems (toxic microbial blooms, bioinvasions, fisheries impact, physical-biological interactions), modeling across disciplines, sediment movement and environmental changes, management and conflicts (marine protected areas, integrated coastal zone management). The presentations and discussion during the 5th Baltic Sea Science Congress showed that changes on a global scale are observed in the Baltic Sea. They include unusual warm saltwater inflows in summer and very cold ones in winter and a temporary rise in temperature of the intermediate waters. Substantial progress was made in our understanding and modeling of the ventilation of deep waters due to mesoscale eddies and mixing. The special workshop Ventilation of the Baltic Sea deep water-observation and model results played a substantial role in the Congress. Anthropogenic pressure on the ecosystem was highlighted and discussed in the context of observing symptoms, not causes. The conclusion was made that more studies are needed to better understand the ecosystem dynamics and their causes. A separation between man-caused and natural climate change was recommended. Another outcome is related to the lack of microbiological issues during the Congress. The sedimentation studies confirmed the downward trends in the concentrations of some dissolved heavy metals such as cadmium. A new source of knowledge concerning past climate was obtained from bottom sediments analyses as well as from recent mining data. However, this subject is still one of the essential gaps in the Baltic Sea research. Framework Proposal for BONUS-169 Science Plan (Draft) For the purpose of preparing a plan for future programme BONUS-169, just to parallel Task 2.1, the ICES, leader of Task 2.5, has presented the Baltic Sea Draft Science Plan. The plan is supposed to convert the research needs arising from the management bodies into scientific questions, to which the science community can respond with research ideas. In practical terms, the Science Plan is considered by the author (Chris Hopkins) to be material for Calls for Proposals of the future Programme BONUS-169. The plan is constructed in a traditional way. The activities of BONUS-169 are organized into eight work packages (natural forcing, eutrophication, sustainability of living resources, biodiversity, pollution, sustainable economy, synthesis and dissemination, and management) reflecting research needed to restore the major environmental, fisheries and ecosystem-related challenges in the Baltic Sea. The abovementioned challenges in the Baltic Sea region are inherently linked to e.g. agriculture, fisheries, coastal industries, power generation, coastal engineering and land reclamation, sand and gravel extraction, dredging and dumping of materials including litter and garbage, oil and gas exploration and production, shipping, and military activities. Special emphasis is placed on the work package Socioand ecological economics, which focuses on the synthesis and dissemination of information concerning findings and products. 49

51 2 Discussion on the existing draft of the Framework Proposal for BONUS-169 Science Plan During the Workshop, the following comments were presented on the Proposal. Some improvements and suggestions were also offered: Lacks one, short, precise and well-defined goal describing the perspective of Baltic Sea research in the next decade Too detailed a description of areas of research A recommended solution is to create only few innovative work packages which contain real problems and to carefully balance the importance of proposed areas of cooperation There is a need for a clear definition of which factors decide about Baltic uniqueness and its specific character Detailed recommendations for the Programme management should be avoided A requirement of standardization of research methods within the whole Baltic Sea area There is a need for translating scientific outputs to users The monitoring issue was agreed to be treated as an obligation activity of each country. It is necessary to explain the border and connections between monitoring and science in order to classify the respective marine issues in a proper way Environmental economics should be included (valuation of the goods and services of the Baltic Sea region) into the Plan Better communication between the natural and social sciences is urgently needed, especially in light of new methodologies for environmental economics that are emerging in the EU Openness, participation, competence, and transparency in the decision-making process should be a guiding principle in decision-making regarding environmental issues Coordinated education at different levels should be emphasized The final conclusion is that Baltic research shall go forward into the next decade with a new system approach dedicated to all environmental issues. 50

52 3 New system approach - a proposal Rationale The Baltic Sea is among the most thoroughly scientifically investigated sea areas in the world. Its semi-enclosed water body connection with the North Sea by narrow and shallow straits determines its unique attribute. The Baltic Sea ecosystem is characterized by natural fluctuations connected with infrequent and sporadic flushing of the deeper basins with more oxygenated water from outside, followed by stagnation periods frequently lasting many years with declining levels of oxygen. The delicate ecological balance of the coastal and offshore areas of the Baltic Sea is greatly influenced by climatic and oceanographic variation. The value of the Baltic Sea also determines the number of extensive studies concerning the environmental conditions, issues and priorities in the drainage basin and coastal zone which have been undertaken in recent years. All the abovementioned aspects, as well as its relatively small size, well-organized and productive cooperation between scientists from the area decide about its great importance in modeling as well as in creating further predictions (e.g. constructing models or creating different scenarios) for any other shelf seas. Contribution to Earth System Science White Book - Coastal seas research in the next decade Kay-Christian Emeis presented the opinion of the Consortium of German Marine Science Institutions in order to initiate a discussion on the future research within the Baltic Sea region. A proposed goal in his presentation was formulated as follows: to develop the predictive capacity for the reaction of the Baltic Sea ecosystem to changes in both natural and human systems. Scientists must be able to inform and convince the public as well as policy- and decision-makers on what will be the reaction of the Baltic Sea ecosystem if something troublesome happens (e.g. harm bloom, overflow of oil). On the basis of the probability of the occurrence of the phenomena, which are naturally linked and sometimes overarching, different scenarios should be prepared to be presented to and inform the public. This goal is impossible without enhanced building earth system models, which are very good in terms of physical processes and which include direct consequences for chemistry, material cycle and ecosystems behavior. Additionally, the higher trophic levels and the entire human dimension (socio-economic) should be taken into account. Special attention should be paid to the applications of models for evaluating reactions to changes in external forcing and for the exploration of linkages in the Baltic Sea ecosystem. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) or other advanced visualisation technologies would be useful. A good example of such an approach was the system NEST ( nest) presented by Sif Johansson during the Workshop. Finally, the predictive models should be fitted by data to construct their predictive capacity based on existing knowledge but focusing on topics which are not well understood, i.e. overall processes and linkages between them. To achieve this goal, data gathering technologies and/or strategies and model-data interfaces (observational data used in models) should be developed. A lot of efforts to identify and quantify the changes in the marine ecosystem have, in fact, been going on, but unfortunately most of them are not carried out in one, unified way for the whole Baltic. After discussion, the participants agreed to present the problems of Knowledge Gaps and Challenges within the Baltic Sea in the form of four challenges: Climate change and its consequences Increasing exploitation and increasing seaward extension Internal processes, rates and regulations in ecosystems Strategies for data collection, data management and models A more detailed content of the particular challenges can be summarized as follows: 1. Consequences of climate changes: Physical dynamics, sediment transport, erosion and morphodynamics Geohazards: sea level rise, waves, floods Ecosystems and climate changes: material cycles, biodiversity, trophic webs, habitat diversity and fish stocks Teleconnections and interactions between the Baltic Sea and the Earth system 51

53 2. Consequences of increasing usage and seaward extension Human and ecosystem changes: material cycles, biodiversity, trophic webs and fish stocks, including drainage basin processes Consequences of dredging, construction, wind parks and other use of the marine space Ecosystem health and the eutrophication cascade Improving ecosystem health 3. Internal ecosystem processes, rates and regulations Biodiversity versus functional diversity and matter cycles Trophic interactions and regulating mechanisms including living marine resources Perturbation experiments: alien species 4. Strategies for data collection, data management and models 52

54 4 Scheme proposals In order to better visualize the linkages, the following final scheme was prepared and accepted by Workshop participants: Consequences of climate changes Synthesis and dissemination Sustainable economy International ecosystem processes, rates & regulations Management and infrastructure Develop predictive capacity Natural forcing Consequences of increasing usage and seaward extension Eutrophication Sustainability of living resources Pollution Bioversity Strategies for data collection, data management and models 53

55 5 General comments 1. Problems should be treated in a complex way, i.e. with inter-, trans- and multidisciplinary approaches. 2. Research on all environmental issues should be made keeping in mind the four abovementioned overall challenges. 3. Consequences of climate change include physical dynamics, sediment transport, erosion and morphodynamics, but also geohazards (e.g. sea level rise, waves, storminess with resulting sea floods) as well as natural aspects of ecosystem functioni ng (e.g. material cycles, biodiversity, trophic webs, habitat diversity and fish stocks). Finally, also important teleconnections and interactions between the Baltic Sea and the Earth system are included. The Baltic Sea should not have been considered to be an excluded sea basin; instead, there is great interest in the world, especially regarding the shelf seas, to understand the ecosystem as a whole (e.g. for exploitation of gas, export of substances). 4. Consequences of increasing usage and seaward extension include everything that refers to ecosystem and human change, dealing also with new substances, pollution, eutrophication, material cycles, biodiversity, trophic webs, fish stocks and drainage basin processes. Next, the use of marine space (e.g. constructions of wind parks) and their consequences (e.g. dredging) should be taken into consideration. Ecosystem health should be studied better with a highlighted and strengthened food quality issue and observing/monitoring system of eutrophication cascade as one kind of strategy for improving ecosystem health. It must be emphasized that all the effects should go beyond just physics, chemistry or biology. They must be seen in the context of systems, not as strict physical, chemical and biological aspects in themselves. 5. One of the most important problems is full and rigorous ecosystem modeling due to the lack of knowledge on Internal processes, rates and regulations in ecosystems and, in particular, at a higher trophic level. This needs basic research focusing on the questions that should be formulated. An example of such kind of a gap and challenge is biodiversity versus functional diversity as well as matter cycle. Also, issues which need to be studied better are trophic interactions (e.g. the question of what governs the transition from diatoms to zooplankton) and regulating mechanisms, including living marine resources (e.g. round goby invasion). The next very relevant subject is dealing with alien species, which should be catalogued so as to use them as a tool for perturbation experiments. 6. Strategies for data collection, data management and models. A solid and binding database should be a main goal for next ten years within the Baltic Sea. The Baltic Environmental Database (BED) might be a good example and pattern for such a database. Moreover, data sampling and data collection refers to all disciplines and should overarch all work packages. 7. The chosen editorial groups should work on their main indicated discipline areas. 54

56 6 Particular scientific field description 1. Natural forcing A proposed goal is to create a modern observation strategic system to follow the physical changes in the Baltic Sea in the context of climate change and its possible consequences. The proposal studies are related to the variability and dynamics of processes basing on the longterm data sets (e.g. HELCOM) as well as on historical data (e.g. mining data, reconstruction of past Baltic Sea states from sediments). Coastal and estuarine dynamics and their interactions with the open sea should be incorporated into the plan. Innovative observation methods (e.g. remote sensing techniques) should be proposed and used to follow human impacts on a small and large scale, including the construction of bridges and tunnels, wind farms, the erection of offshore pipelines, platforms, dredging, dumping, mining, dam-building or any other type of change. 2. Eutrophication Ecosystem health was indicated as a main goal within this work package. The cascading effect of changes was proposed as one of the main issues. The justification for this approach when changes on one level of the food web can provide a cascade of changes should be traced very carefully. Linking different origins and effects allows us to perceive the ecosystem as the whole. The management of eutrophication should be developed and included in the work package as a fundamental point (e.g. to redress the roots of nutrients). 3. Sustainability of living resources A proposed goal was to provide a sound scientific base to ensure the responsible management and sustainability of living marine resources in the Baltic Sea ecosystem. Improving the data-collection system, including coastal zones as well as lagoons and others specific areas, was found to be an important issue also within other disciplines. Further improvements of fish stock assessment methods and the prediction of possible developments were indicated as essential. Moreover, the development of technical measures for the ecosystembased fisheries management should be emphasized in the Plan. Evaluating and further developing risk assessment methods regarding food safety connected with products from capture fisheries and aquaculture should be added as a key point. The environmental and ecosystem impact of marine aquaculture on human health should be addressed and mitigation measures should be developed. Development of multi-species fish stock models and linking them with ecosystem models was regarded as a subject of special interest. 4. Biodiversity The proposed goal was to characterize the biodiversity of the Baltic Sea region. Habitat change was postulated as an important issue with emphasis on displacement, fragmentation, disappearance or uniformisation of habitats. The second mentioned issue deals with key stone and charismatic species (e.g. seabirds, sea mammals, usually protected or ornamented species). The key stone species are those which are key in terms of ecosystem functioning and in the linkages between them. Alien species and their role in the functioning of the whole marine system were indicated as another important bullet point. The importance of using genetic methods in future studies on the Baltic biodiversity was highlighted. 5. Pollution Effects and consequences of pollution in the food web were indicated as a main goal within this work package. Transfer and accumulation of toxic and harmful substances was mentioned as the first subject. Moreover, ecological risk assessment of anthropogenic and natural bioactive substances was highlighted. The need for assessing novel substances with emphasis on a quick way to analyze them was recognized. Coastal engineering and consequences of the infrastructure (e.g. harbors, ship yards), marine constructions (e.g. wind power stations, cables, pipelines, drilling platforms), dredging and extraction of natural resources as well as sea pipe lines problems should be included in this work package. 6. Socio and ecological economics Valuation of the Baltic Sea ecosystems was seen as a starting point for further socio-economics issues. Investigation of socio-economic aspects of the development in ecosystem-provided goods and its potential impact on local, regional or/and national economies should 55

57 be emphasized in the Plan. The importance of historical and social insights was highlighted in the disciplinary. communication, concentrating on education and teaching, and, finally, building the appropriate capacity. 7. Synthesis and dissemination Integrated modeling and well-defined advice/recommendations were found to be of main importance. The main issues within this work package were as follows: policy interactions, developing tools for communications, broadening understanding of science, transferring knowledge to different levels of community, facilitating 8. Management and infrastructure The proposed issues within this work package were to facilitate the internal communication to ensure the continuous involvement of scientists in the management policy cycle through well-organized programmes and coordination of an efficient use of marine infrastructure. 56

58 7 Workshop conclusion Discussion during the Workshop summarized all existing material and ideas as well as gave some fresh insight into the present status of the BONUS-169 programme by proposing a simplified scheme emphasizing a few of the most fundamental challenges. It is believed that the selected editorial groups for particular scientific fields will be able to provide a more detailed description of problems faced by the scientific community. 57

59 Appendix 1: Graphical presentation showing linkages between particular tasks M0: Opening of the BONUS coordination office M1: Opening of the BONUSportal Task 4.1 Co-ordination office WP4: Co-ordination, management and dissemination Task 4.2 Forum of Programme Managers Task 4.3 Steering Committee Task 4.4 Advisory Board Task 4.5 Dissemination of results to European and international actors Task 4.6 Recruitment of new partners WP5: Review and assessement WP1: Collection and exchange of information and best practice Task 1.4 Introducing modern internetbased networking and communication tools Task 1.6 Mapping Baltic Sea research projects Task 1.1 Exchange of information on initation, preparation, implementation and evaluation of research programmes Task 1.2.Exchange visits of programme managers Task 1.3 Providing a common directory of qualified evaluators Task 1.5 Inventory of marine research infrastructure M2: Agreement about the best practice in programme management WP 2: Strategic activities Task 2.1 Identification of areas for cooperation in existing programmes and gaps of knowledge Task 2.5 Ideas for potential future transnational research scheme Task 2.4 Durable integration of national marine research funding schemes in Associated Candidate Countries in the ERA Task 2.2 Analysis of legal and administrative possibilities and barriers for funding transnational programmes Task 2.3 Development of a common evaluation scheme M3: Agreement of the themes for joint research programmes M4: Conditions for establishing national research programmes in ACC fulfilled WP 3: Implementation of joint activities Task 3.3 Development of postgraduate training scheme Task 3.2 Action plan for creating joint programmes M6: Agreement about joint Baltic Sea research programme and researcher training Task 3.1 Proposals/position paper on common use of marine research infrastructure M5: Agreernent about the scheme and mechanisms of shared use of marine research infrastrucuture 58

60 Appendix 2 59

61 Appendix 3 60