The importance of monitoring and evaluation in adaptive maritime spatial planning Fanny Douvere & Charles N. Ehler Received: 23 August 2009 / Revised: 19 March 2010 / Accepted: 26 March 2010 / Published online: 21 April 2010 # Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 Abstract Adaptive maritime spatial planning (MSP) uses monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of spatial and temporal management measures to promote under- standing and improve planning and decision-making. An adaptive approach to MSP involves exploring alternative ways to meet management objectives, predicting the outcomes of alternative management measures, implement- ing one or more of these alternative management measures, monitoring to learn about the effects of management measures, and then using the results to update knowledge and adjust management actions. A monitoring and evalu- ation plan should be designed to be both cost effective and comprehensive. The process of setting and assessing performance metrics requires that the ecological and socio-economic objectives of the spatial management plan must be clearly stated up front for management actions to reflect those objectives accurately. To evaluate the effective- ness of a MSP plan, a range of ecological, socio-economic and institutional indicators need to be developed and monitored. Keywords Maritime (marine) spatial planning . Adaptive management . Monitoring . Indicators . Evaluation . Management effectiveness Introduction An adaptive approach to planning and management is indispensable to deal with uncertainty and to incorporate various types of change. With regard to the marine environment, these changes can include environmental change, changes in political priorities or, new economic realities, among others. Climate change, for example, might influence the location of important biological and ecological areas over the next 30–100 years while technological change might considerably alter the exploi- tation of previously inaccessible marine areas such as the Arctic or the high seas. Additionally, change can also be inspired through newly acquired information. One of the most cited impediments with regard to integrated marine management is the lack of relevant knowledge, information, and data. Maritime spatial planning (MSP) is not different in this regard. Complete knowledge, data and information are never available at the start of a MSP process. New tools and techniques, such as remote sensing, geographic information systems (GIS), global positioning systems (GPS), and underwater autonomous systems are rapidly making spatial and temporal data more accessible and sophisticated and could considerably improve maritime spatial plans over time. All of these changes, however, while usually external to the maritime spatial planning process, are likely to affect its desired outcomes. For example, economic conditions can significantly affect the amount of pollution discharged from land-based sources and subsequently alter the environmen- tal quality of certain places in the marine area for which a maritime spatial plan is prepared. For example, the creation of “dead zones” in the Gulf of Mexico or Baltic Sea result primarily from excessive nutrient discharges from land- based sources (primarily agriculture). The discharge of agricultural nutrients could be affected by short-term changes in the weather (more rainfall), in the national economy (down-turns resulting in lower demand for agricultural products), or the rising price of fertilizer, as much as any measure that might be implemented through a management plan to reduce nutrient discharges (Nicholson F. Douvere (*) : C. N. Ehler Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), UNESCO, 1, rue Miollis, 75732 Paris, France e-mail: fanny.douvere@mac.com C. N. Ehler e-mail: charles.ehler@mac.com J Coast Conserv (2011) 15:305–311 DOI 10.1007/s11852-010-0100-9