The development of the marine renewable energy and offshore aquaculture sectors is susceptible to being affected by climate change. Consequently, for the long-term planning of these activities, a holistic view on the effects of climate change on energy resources and environmental conditions is required. Based on present climate and future climate scenario, favourable conditions for wind and wave energy exploitation and for farming six marine fish species are assessed using a suitability index over all European regional seas. Regarding available energy potential, the estimated changes in climate do not have direct impacts on the geographic distribution of potential regions for the energy industry (both wind and wave based), that is they pose no threat to this industry. Long-term changes in environmental conditions could however require adaptation of the aquaculture sector and especially of its exploitation areas. Opportunities for aquaculture expansion of the assessed species are identified. Possibilities for co-location of these activities are observed in the different climate scenarios. The evaluation of potential zones for the exploitation of marine renewable energy resources and offshore aquaculture represents a stepping-stone, useful for improving decision-making and assisting in the management of marine economies both in the short-term and in the long-term development of these sectors.

Hitherto, over 50% of countries with marine waters have established MSPs or launched related legal actions. However, there are still conceptual and practical challenges to be overcome in the development of MSP. In this study, we investigate two main approaches in MSP (hard vs. soft sustainability) through reports, published manuscripts and meeting proceedings in seven pioneering countries (Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, Germany, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada). We highlight the gaps, challenges, and solutions in each of these approaches. From our findings, there are four common challenges in both soft and hard sustainability approaches as follows: (i) the political framework and inconsistent support of MSP efforts, (ii) insufficient knowledge on social dimensions, (iii) insufficient stakeholder engagement in the diversity of stakeholder’s groups or in their contribution to the planning process from the initial steps, and (iv) finding a balance between environmental conservation and economic growth. We recommend that future studies should investigate how MSP can become more adaptive to long-term environmental and economic targets, how effective involving socioeconomic strata is in MSP, and how decision-making tools could help to cover the gaps in MSP. Furthermore, public forums are suggested to be developed to facilitate the systematic sharing of MSP experiences worldwide.