German Tourism Activities in the Antarctic Area: A Governmental Perspective
In: New Issues in Polar Tourism, p. 111-121
8 results
Sort by:
In: New Issues in Polar Tourism, p. 111-121
In: Texte Umweltbundesamt 00/2019
In: UBA-FB 2873
In: Ressortforschungsplan des Bundesministeriums für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit
In: Texte 2021, 101
In: Ressortforschungsplan of the Federal Ministry for the Enviroment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety
The transboundary nature of the marine environment, along with the complexity of ocean issues and constraints arising from the current governance system, requires collaborative action across sectors and territorial boundaries. Cooperation among stakeholders and coordination of policies and actions within and between marine regions are important levers to achieve ocean sustainability, yet are far from being widely implemented. Employing a transdisciplinary process, the Marine Regions Forum was setup in responses to these needs, as a new participatory space for dialogue that brings together decision-makers, scientists, civil society representatives and other actors from diverse marine regions to exchange outside of formal governance processes. Through exchange, joint learning, and showcasing of existing collaborative efforts, the Marine Regions Forum aims to enable collective responses and support the development of governance solutions that catalyse transformative change towards the sustainable use and conservation of the ocean, and ultimately the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The first larger-scale event held under this new platform was set up as an international conference and hosted in 2019 in Berlin, Germany, under the theme "Achieving a healthy ocean - Regional ocean governance beyond 2020" and was attended by 200 international ocean actors. The outcomes of this first phase show that, by complementing existing processes, facilitating multi-stakeholder exchanges across sectors, and disseminating emerging recommendations to the formal policy processes, dialogue spaces such as the Marine Regions Forum have the potential to facilitate progress in ocean governance and sustainability transformations.
In: Texte 2020, 92
In: Ressortforschungsplan des Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und nukleare Sicherheit
Die arktische Umwelt ist vielen Einflüssen ausgesetzt, die ihren Fortbestand bedrohen: Der Klimawandel und seine Folgen stellen bereits jetzt viele Ökosysteme vor große Herausforderungen. Wirtschaftliche Aktivitäten in der Region, wie Fischerei, Schifffahrt, Abbau und Transport von Rohstoffen sowie Tourismus, erhöhen den Druck auf die Umwelt zusätzlich. Die Anstrengungen für einen ambitionierten Umweltschutz in der Arktis müssen weltweit - und auch von nicht-arktischen Staaten - gesteigert werden, um sie zu erhalten. Dieser Forschungsbericht führt Ergebnisse des UBA-Vorhabens zu "Umweltleitlinien deutscher Arktispolitik" zusammen. Er zeigt mögliche Ansatzpunkte des deutschen Umweltressorts auf, den Umweltschutz in der Arktis auch aus der Position eines nicht-arktischen Staats zu fördern. Der Bericht beschreibt zudem die Aktivitäten des Vorhabens, die das Bewusstsein in der Öffentlichkeit dafür steigern sollten, dass wichtige Verbindungen zwischen Deutschland und der Arktis bestehen. Dazu zählen unter anderem ein Erklärfilm und eine öffentliche Veranstaltung.
In: Broschüren
Die Wasserrahmenrichtlinie (WRRL) fordert den umfassenden Schutz des oberirdischen und unterirdischen Wassers. Die zehn Flussgebietsgemeinschaften Deutschlands stellen dazu alle sechs Jahre Bewirtschaftungspläne und Maßnahmenprogramme auf. Das Umweltbundesamt und das Bundesumweltministerium haben diese Berichte für Deutschland ausgewertet und stellen die Ergebnisse in dieser gemeinsamen Broschüre vor. Sie erfahren wie wir Gewässer nutzen, welche Belastungen daraus resultieren und wie sie sich auf die Gewässer auswirken. Sie werden über den aktuellen Zustand der Gewässer informiert und welche Maßnahmen geplant sind, um den Zustand zu verbessern.
In: Für Mensch und Umwelt
In: Tsiamis , K , Palialexis , A , Connor , D , Antoniadis , S , Bartilotti , C , Bartolo , A G , Berggreen , U C , Boschetti , S , Buschbaum , C , Canning-Clode , J , Carbonell , A , Castriota , L , Corbeau , C , Costa , A , Cvitković , I , Despalatović , M , Dragičević , B , Dulčić , J , Fortič , A , Francé , J , Gittenberger , A , Gizzi , F , Gollasch , S , Gruszka , P , Hegarty , M , Hema , T , Jensen , K , Josephides , M , Kabuta , S H , Kerckhof , F , Kovtun-Kante , A , Krakau , M , Kraśniewski , W , Lackschewitz , D , Lehtiniemi , M , Lieberum , C , Linnamägi , M , Lipej , L , Livi , S , Lundgreen , K , Magliozzi , C , Massé , C , Mavrič , B , Michailidis , N , Moncheva , S , Mozetič , P , Naddafi , R , Gladan , Ž N , Ojaveer , H , Olenin , S , Orlando-Bonaca , M , Ouerghi , A , Parente , M , Pavlova , P , Peterlin , M , Pitacco , V , Png-Gonzalez , L , Rousou , M , Sala-Pérez , M , Serrano , A , Skorupski , J , Smolders , S , Srébaliené , G , Stæhr , P A , Stefanova , K , Straeke , S , Tabarcea , C , Todorova , V , Trkov , D , Tuaty-Guerra , M , Vidjak , O , Zenetos , A , Žuljević , A & Candoso , A C 2021 , Delivering solid recommendations for setting threshold values for non-indigenous species pressure on European seas : Marine Strategy Framework Directive Descriptor 2, Non-Indigenous Species . Publications Office of the European Union, JRC . https://doi.org/10.2760/035071
Marine Non-Indigenous Species (NIS) are animals and plants introduced accidently or deliberately into the European seas, originating from other seas of the globe. About 800 marine non-indigenous species (NIS) currently occur in the European Union national marine waters, several of which have negative impacts on marine ecosystem services and biodiversity. Under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) Descriptor 2 (D2), EU Member States (MSs) need to consider NIS in their marine management strategies. The Descriptor D2 includes one primary criterion (D2C1: new NIS introductions), and two secondary criteria (D2C2 and D2C3). The D2 implementation is characterized by a number of issues and uncertainties which can be applicable to the Descriptor level (e.g. geographical unit of assessment, assessment period, phytoplanktonic, parasitic, oligohaline NIS, etc.), to the primary criterion D2C1 level (e.g. threshold values, cryptogenic, questionable species, etc), and to the secondary criteria D2C2 and D2C3. The current report tackles these issues and provides practical recommendations aiming at a smoother and more efficient implementation of D2 and its criteria at EU level. They constitute a solid operational output which can result in more comparable D2 assessments among MSs and MSFD regions/subregions. When it comes to the policy-side, the current report calls for a number of different categories of NIS to be reported in D2 assessments, pointing the need for the species to be labelled/categorised appropriately in the MSFD reporting by the MSs. These suggestions are proposed to be communicated to the MSFD Working Group of Good Environmental Status (GES) and subsequently to the Marine Strategy Coordination Group (MSCG) of MSFD. Moreover, they can serve as an input for revising the Art. 8 Guidelines.
BASE