MARLISCO: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
==POLICY RELATED LESSONS LEARNED== | ==POLICY RELATED LESSONS LEARNED== | ||
* '''Were policy makers involved in the project and to what extent?''' | * '''Were policy makers involved in the project and to what extent?''' | ||
<p align="justify"> | <p align="justify">Actions and policies specifically designed to deal with marine litter reduction may be associated with legally-binding or ‘hard’ mechanisms </p> | ||
*''' | *''' What were the challenges involved ''' | ||
[http://www.marlisco.eu/review-of-existing-policies-that-may-be-applied-to Review of Existing] | |||
[http://www. | |||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
<table border="1"> | <table border="1"> |
Revision as of 08:53, 18 October 2017
GENERAL DESCRIPTIONthe consequences of societal behaviour in relation to waste production and management on marine socio-ecological systems, to promote co-responsibility among the different actors, to define a more sustainable collective vision, and to facilitate grounds for concerted actions through the successful implementation of the MMLAP (Mobilisation and Mutual Learning Action Plans on societal challenges). The main focus was to provide and evaluate mechanisms to enable society to perceive the impact of litter on the marine environment, to identify the land-based activities that are involved and collectively arrive at solutions to reduce that impact – in particular solutions that can be implemented locally but have a regional effect. MARLISCO’ s overarching goal was to raise public awareness, facilitate dialogue and promote co-responsibility among the different actors towards a joint vision for the sustainable management of marine litter across all European seas. MARLICO activities took place in the four European Regional Seas: North-East Atlantic, Baltic, Mediterranean and Black Sea, by a consortium with members located in 15 coastal countries.
RRI FOCUSIn terms of RRI, what were the main challenges addressed, and to what extent were those challenges met by the project?Expand
Challenge 1 descriptionExpand
How Challenge 1 was addressedExpand
What is the Best Practice for this Challenge?Expand
Name at least one Lesson Learned from this Challenge?Ranking of the most relevant RRI dimensions, where 6 is the most relevant to the project
PROJECT OUTCOMES RELATED TO RRIWhich are the most relevant project outcomes (roadmaps, guidelines, documents, reports, articles, videos etc) in terms of RRI?Expand
Outcome 1: Sea for Society Consultation Outcomes Expand
Description: The Sea for Society Consultation showed that the Barrier Theme ‘Attitudes and Awareness’ (defined as ‘unfounded attitudes and lack of awareness of marine issues’) is perceived as the single biggest obstacle to a sustainable marine ecosystem, both for the EU as a whole and across different EU regions... Expand
Exploitable by researchers: These outcomes provide direct recommendations for lines of research to be taken, and indicate the ways in which researchers can address barriers to a Blue Society directly. Expand
Exploitable by policymakers: These outcomes provide direct recommendations for research and governance, and indicate the ways in which policymakers can address barriers to a Blue Society directly. Expand
Exploitable by other stakeholders: The outcomes can be used by all stakeholders involved in Ocean issues as a guideline of how to work better together in order to address barriers to a Blue Society.
Expand
Outcome 2 TitleExpand
URLExpand
DescriptionExpand
Exploitable by researchersExpand
Exploitable by policymakersExpand
Exploitable by general publicExpand
Exploitable by other stakeholders public
LESSONS LEARNED
The major unexpected challenge of Sea for Society was the wealth of data that the Consultation produced. By entering into dialogue with citizens and stakeholders, we produced extremely valuable content well beyond what we anticipated. The data not only provided solutions to barriers but also gave insight into policy recommendations and many interesting conclusions were drawn by comparing outcomes across geographical areas. As such, the project timeline had to be adapted to make time for additional analysis.
SFS Final Report (to be uploaded)
This project defined the Blue Society concept in a collaborative, multi-stakeholder way, building on the work done at European level by other projects and sparking partnerships and working relationships which continue to be exploited.
POLICY RELATED LESSONS LEARNED
Actions and policies specifically designed to deal with marine litter reduction may be associated with legally-binding or ‘hard’ mechanisms
|
|