Since 2010, Latvia has been extremely active in developing maritime spatial planning at the national level and is at an advanced stage in the development of their latest national plan. Stakeholders have been actively involved in the development of various MSP laws, such as the 2010 Marine Environment Protection and Management Law, therefore, mobilizing stakeholders and encouraging active participation in the latest round of national planning meetings has been relatively straight forward. Latvian authorities have also organized a number of bi-lateral meetings with Estonia, Sweden and Lithuania.

At the national level, between 2015 and 2016, stakeholder involvement took place through a number of sectoral (18 meetings) and cross-sectoral meetings (6 meetings); citizen participation was also encouraged in public hearing events (5 hearings). Stakeholder groups were well represented and included governmental bodies, civil society groups and representatives from the private sector.

The focus of the meetings differed; the first phase would set the scope of sectoral interests and discuss development directions, with the second phase examining scenarios and the third phase discussing and agreeing upon potential solutions for national and cross border issues. The overall objective of the meetings was to:

• Introduce and discuss the national process – elaboration of Latvian MSP;
• Obtain information on development interests, strategic objectives and sea space demands from different sectors;
• Discuss visions for sea use up to 2030 as well as strategic objectives and tasks of MSP;
• Evaluate four alternative sea use scenarios, which served as a basis for the development of optimum solutions for permitted sea use;
• Identify priorities and criteria for the allocation of space for different sea uses;
• Inform about cross-border co-operation within the frame of the Baltic Scope project.

Thematic meetings were organized according to sector including fisheries, aquaculture, environment, shipping, main (large) harbours, energy in general, wave energy, wind energy, national security, and tourism. Cross sectoral meetings were organized involving stakeholders from the environment, shipping, fisheries, local governments, security & defence, cultural heritage, tourism and energy sectors. Two separate meetings were also organized between the shipping and defence sectors to discuss the impacts and conflicts between military training polygons and priority areas for shipping, and the environmental sector and fishery experts to discuss the
mapping of fish spawning and nursery areas and the impacts of bottom trawling on benthic habitats.

At the outset, discussions within the meetings primarily focused on national issues, but with the launch of Baltic Scope, cross-border issues were added to the debate so that both national and transnational challenges would inform the debate across all levels of governance. Within individual sectoral meetings, stakeholders outlined development interests, strategic objectives and demands for sea space. A number of key topics and challenges were discussed during these meetings, including:

• Developing the potential for offshore renewable energy sources (wind and wave energy) and impacts of permanent constructions (e.g. offshore wind and wave energy installations, aquaculture, oil extraction platforms etc.) on shipping safety, military observation systems and training polygons and fishery;
• The possibilities and limitations for sustainable fishery; development trends of commercially important fish populations; applicability of fishery data in MSP process;
• The possibilities and limitations for aquaculture development in Latvian marine waters;
• A criteria for determining strategic directions and area to be defined as priority for shipping;
• Possibilities to develop yachting tourism and network of marinas;
• Land-sea interactions, including integration with terrestrial planning of coastal areas, assessing impacts and possible measures in relation to coastal erosion, tourism infrastructure development etc.
• Implementation of MSP – how it will impact requirements future development projects, EIA procedure etc.;
• Ratification of sea border between Latvia and Lithuania and related implications to MSP.
• Role of MSP in achievement of good environmental status (GES), interrelation with programme of measures (MSFD) and river basin management plans (WFD);
• Criteria for selection of investigation area for establishment of new MPAs in EEZ.
• Possible impacts and solutions for management of dumped explosives;
• Protection measures and management of seal population – possibilities for minimising impact to fishery;
• Possibilities for improvement of bathing water quality to support tourism development; Possibilities to monitor impacts on bottom trawling on benthic habitats
• Possible impacts of climate change on MSP solutions and vice versa.

Economic issues dominated discussions; however, environmental and social impacts were also addressed. All sectors were equally represented in discussions, but shipping and national defence were the most dominant sectors in expressing their views, especially in relation to new developments such as offshore wind farms. Stakeholders highlighted a number of potential synergies and conflicts between sectors at the national level.

Since 2012 SwAM has carried out the internal stakeholder involvement in Sweden in various steps allowing for relevant actors to follow up the process and provide feedback on several occasions. These included:

• Initial information meetings – 4 meetings, 100 participants
• Current status meetings (with the support from the County Administration Boards) – 7 meetings. 200 participants
• MSP- training building on international experiences – 20 participants
• Pre-consultation meeting – 1 meeting, 70 participants
• Guidance document meetings – 2 meetings 80 participants
• Thematic groups meetings – 17 meetings, 75 participants (3-4 meetings each sector)

Some of these meetings aimed at providing information, whereas others aimed at gathering input from the participants and institutional-learning. SwAM, as well as the County administration boards, address MSP on the agenda of other fora such as the Marine and freshwater environment council (16 interest groups and trade organizations) and High-level Coordinating Group for Marine and Aquatic Environment Issues (central authorities and county administration boards). At the same time, SwAM acts as a stakeholder in events organized by other organizations/authorities that have MSP on their agenda.

Participants in the stakeholder meetings were not limited to governmental bodies, but included civil society organizations, universities, as well as local authorities and councils; also, a broader involvement of trade organizations and interest groups occurred in consultations in earlier phases of the MSP process. These were organised in two rounds. In 2015- March 2016 thematic group meetings were organized separately by sector and involved only the relevant authorities and county administrative bards. Yet there were more sectors involved than those selected for the Baltic SCOPE project, including: defence, energy, fisheries, nature conservation, shipping/ports, regional development (incl. outdoor recreation, tourism businesses and aquaculture).

The private sector was involved, but represented by trade organizations rather than directly by individual companies.

The thematic working groups (2015- March 2016) have dealt with cross-border issues and Baltic SCOPE, but not in terms of the case study work. Some of the cross-borders interests addressed were fisheries interests outside Swedish borders; environmental concerns (e.g. protection of Harbour porpoises); international shipping routes; energy and communication cables; and wind power installations in border areas.

Some of the transboundary geographical areas selected for detailed work in Baltic SCOPE were addressed, including the Southern Middle Bank, Kriegers Flak and Öresund. They were treated from a national interest perspective, particularly in the sectors of energy and fisheries.

The meetings provided a cross-sectoral perspective with the aim of evidencing possible conflicts and synergies between sectors. The organisers presented all Sweden’s national interests and mapped overlapping interests. For instance, there are interests for wind power development in Natura 2000 sites. Later on, these overlapping interests were categorized as conflicting, competing, or co-existing depending on whether or not different activities/interests can simultaneously use the same space.

In general the atmosphere in the consultations has been constructive. The organised meetings have been successful in gathering information and input which will act as the basis for national analyses and planning processes, as well as provide input to cross-border dialogue. However, not all stakeholders showed interest in participating, particularly NGOs and trade organizations.