DEFRA POLICY PAPERS
14. The Government department with lead responsibility
for marine science is the Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs (Defra). In May 2002, Defra published a report,
Safeguarding our Seas, which set out the Department's vision
for "clean, healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse"
seas and described its strategy for the conservation and sustainable
development of the marine environment. Safeguarding our Seas
was followed in 2005 by Charting Progress: An Integrated Assessment
of the State of the Seas which was intended to provide the
scientific basis for policy development and evaluation in this
area. Of particular relevance to this inquiry, Charting Progress
highlighted "a number of gaps both in our knowledge and understanding
of the seas and in our arrangements for gathering and co-ordinating
information".[11]
These two papers led to the formation of the United Kingdom Marine
Monitoring and Assessment Strategy (UKMMAS), which aims to "to
make most efficient use of UK resources, in terms of all existing
obligations and to be prepared for emerging requirements, e.g.
the EU Marine Strategy Directive [and to] provide us with the
power to answer questions about the state of our marine ecosystem
and document ecosystem trends".[12]
Most recently, in March 2007, Defra published A Sea Change:
A Marine Bill White Paper which contained proposals for legislation
to provide a strategic approach to the protection and use of the
marine area.[13]
Structure of Report
15. In this Report, we look first in Chapter 2 at
why the world's oceans are important and need to be studied. In
Chapter 3 we then examine how UK marine science is funded and
organised, while in Chapter 4 we discuss whether alternative mechanisms
for co-ordination are needed. Chapter 5 looks at facilities and
government support for research, including the provision of research
vessels and the role of the Government's Foresight programme.
Chapter 6 addresses one of the most commonly cited concerns of
the marine community: the availability and sustainability of monitoring
and datasets. Chapter 7 asks whether the impressive UK research
effort in the Antarctic should be matched by a similar programme
in the Arctic. Chapter 8 moves on to look at marine ecosystems
and biodiversity, including the provision in the proposed Marine
Bill for the designation of marine protected areas. Chapter 9
examines issues specific to the technology and knowledge transfer
aspects of marine science. Chapter 10 turns to the health of the
research and skills base and considers the place of education
and outreach work within marine science. Chapter 11 acknowledges
the key importance of international collaboration in investigating
the oceans and how the UK contribution could be improved. Chapter
12 returns to co-ordination and whether the UK needs an overall
strategy for marine and maritime affairs. Chapter 13 presents
our overall conclusions.[14]
1 Ev 140 Back
2
Press Notice No 3 of Session 2006-07. Back
3
Second Report from the House of Lords Select Committee on Science
and Technology, Marine Science and Technology, HL47, Session
1985-86, para 9.1 Back
4
Ibid Back
5
COM(2006) 275 final Back
6
Ibid p 4 Back
7
Ibid p 5 Back
8
Ibid p 48 Back
9
Government Response to the EU Maritime Green Paper: Contribution
from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
on the European Commission Green Paper: Towards a future Maritime
Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas
(COM(2006)275 Final) p 2 Back
10
COM(2006) 275 final, p 6; COM(2005) 505. Back
11
Charting Progress, iii Back
12
http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/water/marine/uk/science/ukmas-background.htm Back
13
Cm 7047 Back
14
It is customary to include an annex of acronyms and abbreviations
in reports and we have done so in this case (see after the summary
of conclusions). This list is very long and includes references
to many institutions, organisations and programmes which in many
cases are known to the community only by these shortened forms.
We have found marine science to be plagued by acronyms. Where
programmes in particular are concerned, there has to be a suspicion
that the acronym came before the title of the research project,
but the names of organisations are also generally unwieldy. We
have tried to keep our usage of shortened forms to a minimum but
we apologise in advance to the general reader for the proliferation
of acronyms and abbreviations in this Report. Back
