We compared and contrasted 11 European case studies to identify challenges and opportunities toward the operationalization of marine and coastal ecosystem service (MCES) assessments in Europe. This work is the output of a panel convened by the Marine Working Group of the Ecosystem Services Partnership in September 2016. The MCES assessments were used to (1) address multiple policy objectives simultaneously, (2) interpret EU-wide policies to smaller scales and (3) inform local decision-making. Most of the studies did inform decision makers, but only in a few cases, the outputs were applied or informed decision-making. Significant limitations among the 11 assessments were the absence of shared understanding of the ES concept, data and knowledge gaps, difficulties in accounting for marine social–ecological systems complexity and partial stakeholder involvement. The findings of the expert panel call for continuous involvement of MCES ‘end users’, integrated knowledge on marine social–ecological systems, defining thresholds to MCES use and raising awareness to the general public. Such improvements at the intersection of science, policy and practice are essential starting points toward building a stronger science foundation supporting management of European marine ecosystems.

This paper analyses and compares a set of case studies on ecosystem services (ES) mapping and assessment with the purpose of formulating lessons learned and recommendations. Fourteen case studies were selected during the EU Horizon 2020 “Coordination and Support Action” ESMERALDA to represent different policy- and decision-making processes throughout the European Union, across a wide range of themes, biomes and scales. The analysis is based on a framework that addresses the key steps of an ES mapping and assessment process, namely policy questions, stakeholder identification and involvement, application of mapping and assessment methods, dissemination and communication and implementation. The analysis revealed that most case studies were policy-orientated or gave explicit suggestions for policy implementation in different contexts, including urban, rural and natural areas. Amongst the findings, the importance of starting stakeholder engagement early in the process was confirmed in order to generate interest and confidence in the project and to increase their willingness to cooperate. Concerning mapping and assessment methods, it was found that the integration of methods and results is essential for providing a comprehensive overview from different perspectives (e.g. social, economic). Finally, lessons learned for effective implementation of ES mapping and assessment results are presented and discussed. Graphical Abstarcat in Fig. 1.

The European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Coordination and Support Action ESMERALDA aimed at developing guidance and a flexible methodology for Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) to support the EU member states in the implementation of the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s Target 2 Action 5. ESMERALDA’s key tasks included network creation, stakeholder engagement, enhancing ecosystem services mapping and assessment methods across various spatial scales and value domains, work in case studies and support of EU member states in MAES implementation. Thus ESMERALDA aimed at integrating various project outcomes around four major strands: i) Networking, ii) Policy, iii) Research and iv) Application. The objective was to provide guidance for integrated ecosystem service mapping and assessment that can be used for sustainable decision-making in policy, business, society, practice and science at EU, national and regional levels. This article presents the overall ESMERALDA approach of integrating the above-mentioned project components and outcomes and provides an overview of how the enhanced methods were applied and how they can be used to support MAES implementation in the EU member states. Experiences with implementing such a large pan-European Coordination and Support Action in the context of EU policy are discussed and recommendations for future actions are given.

The Maritime Spatial Plan for Internal Waters, Territorial Waters and Economic Exclusive Zone of the Republic of Latvia is a long-term spatial planning document, which defines the permitted uses of the sea and conditions for development. Work on maritime spatial planning (MSP) in Latvia was a novel process from different aspects including incorporation of the concept of ecosystem services (ES) into MSP. In the course of the MSP process, marine ES were mapped and assessed, and impacts of proposed spatial solutions for the use of the sea were assessed. The scope of mapping and assessment of ES was limited by data availability and expert knowledge on marine ecosystems. MSP in Latvia was an open and transparent process with an active involvement of different stakeholder groups. Marine ES assessment results were visualized and used during the public consultations to highlight the marine areas providing the most significant social benefits as well as to facilitate debate about potential impacts arising from proposed uses of the sea. The marine ES approach, in a spatially explicit manner, provided stakeholders and policymakers with a strategic framework to address a complex social–ecological system.

Mapping of cultural ecosystem services (CES) in marine and coastal areas is still recognised as a conceptually and technically challenging task, due to the difficulties in establishing a link between the biophysical features of the coastal ecosystem and the supply of services such as recreation and tourism, bird watching and enjoyment of other assets of nature. This was also one of the major challenges in ecosystem service mapping for the Maritime Spatial Plan for Internal Waters, Territorial Waters and Economic Exclusive Zone of the Republic of Latvia. Suitability of the coastal areas for marine tourism and leisure activities was chosen as an indicator to map the CES – physical and experiential interactions. The method involved the compilation of field data from a survey of visitors at the beach and on coastal infrastructure, serving as the input for the multi-criteria assessment of CES. Four criteria were applied to assess the suitability of the coastal areas for marine tourism and leisure activities: i) accessibility; ii) proximity to densely populated areas; iii) suitability of the area for a particular (niche) tourism or leisure activity; and iv) recreational use. The selected criteria provide an overall assessment framework, which integrates the ecosystem service potential, benefiting areas, flow and demand aspects. The CES mapping and assessment results were applied to the maritime spatial planning for proposing areas of priority for tourism development, as well as assessing the impacts of the proposed solutions for other uses of the sea. The Latvian approach for mapping of the cultural services in coastal areas was selected as the ESMERALDA case study and examined at the stakeholder workshop in Prague, September 2016.

Spatial planning faces challenges in addressing interactions between land and sea. This paper elaborates on land–sea interfaces, which can integrate certain socio-cultural values and related tensions into maritime spatial planning (MSP). In this article, three regional case studies from Estonia, Latvia, and Poland analysed important intersections between the formations of cultural values and spatial dynamics within MSP processes. These cases make it possible to address current challenges, contested boundaries, and spatial planning possibilities to embrace the vibrant and complex ways the sea becomes connected to societal change. The study indicates the multiplicity of land–sea interfaces, which should be involved in MSP through situated places of terraqueous interactions, means of public participation, and meaningful boundaries within mobilised co-existence. The actual and possible tensions in allocating new functions of maritime spaces indicate the importance of coastal landscapes and communities. Thus, MSP practice can employ the land–sea interfaces to advance regional planning through participatory engagements, which reveal sociocultural linkages between society and environment on coastal areas.