Description: This paper examines the concept of maritime multi-use as a territorial/SPATIAL governance instrument for the enhancement of sustainable development in five EU sea basins. Multi-use (MU) is expected to enhance the productivity of blue economy sectors, as well as deliver additional socio-economic benefits related to the environmental and social dimensions of sustainable development. The paper provides a definition of maritime multi-use and identifies the multi-uses with the highest potential in EU sea basins. In each sea basin, multi-use plays a different role as concerns sustainable development. For the Eastern Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, the MU focus should remain on the environmental pillar of sustainable development. In the North Sea, North Atlantic and Western Baltic Sea, addressing social sustainability seems a key precondition for success of MU in enhancement of sustainable spatial development at sea. Moreover, it has been suggested to introduce MU key global strategies such as SDGs or Macroregional strategies and action plans and to supplement maritime spatial planning with sectoral incentives and educational efforts as key vehicles supporting MU. The paper concludes by identifying aspects which, in order to inform maritime spatial planning and maritime governance regarding a more conscious application of the aforementioned concept, require further investigation. Key tasks are related to: more profound evaluation of performance of policies supporting MUs, researching the impact of MU on societal goals and on the MU costs and benefits, including external ones, and finally identifying the impact of MU on the development of various sectors and regions on land.

Description: The increasing demand for ocean resources exerts an increasing pressure on the use of ocean space across all European Sea Basins. This underlines issues of compatibility (or conflicts) between different maritime uses as well as between economic activities and environmental protection. The idea of multi-use (MU), as a guiding concept for efficient allocation of compatible activities in the same marine space, can increase spatial efficiency and at the same time provide socio-economic and environmental benefits. However, its transition from a concept to real-world development is facing several barriers. Based on analysis of five European sea basins done under the Horizon 2020 MUSES project (Multi-Use in European Seas), this paper aims to clarify the concept of MU by discussing: 1) the definition in the literature and practice so far, and; 2) how existing regulatory and planning regimes are supporting and challenging the development of several MUs (considered as the most promising). The analytical methodology developed for the MUSES project relied on data collected via desk research and semi structured interviews with key stakeholders (e.g. industry, regulators), over the period of seven months. The semi-quantitative analysis of data conducted, identified the commonalities and differences among countries in respect to each of the analyzed MUs. The paper points out priorities for the MU development in different sea basins and recommends initial steps to overcome existing barriers, whilst maximizing local benefits. This paper is a starting point towards a broader scientific debate on: (i) what could be the role of management policies (like for instance maritime spatial planning - MSP) in supporting and fostering MU concept development, (ii) what are technical and technological challenges for technically advanced MUs, (iii) how added values of MUs concept (e.g. benefits for local economies, positive impacts on environment) could be enhanced.

Description: The “open ocean” has become a highly contested space as coastal populations and maritime uses soared in abundance and intensity over the last decades. Changing marine utilization patterns represent a considerable challenge to society and governments. Maritime spatial planning has emerged as one tool to manage conflicts between users and achieve societal goals for the use of marine space; however, singlesector management approaches are too often still the norm. The last decades have seen the rise of a new ocean use concept: the joint “multi-use” of ocean space. This paper aims to explain and refine the concept of ocean multi-use of space by reviewing the development and state of the art of multi-use in Europe and presenting a clear definition and a comprehensive typology for existing multi-use combinations. It builds on the connectivity of uses and users in spatial, temporal, provisional, and functional dimensions as the underlying key characteristic of multi-use dimensions. Combinations of these dimensions yield four distinct types of multi-use with little overlap between them. The diversity of types demonstrates that there is no one-size-fitsall management approach, but rather that adaptive management plans are needed, focusing on achieving the highest societal benefit while minimizing conflicts. This work will help to sharpen, refine and advance the public and academic discourse over marine spatial planning by offering a common framework to planners, researchers and users alike, when discussing multi-use and its management implications.

Description: Multi-use (MU) has been promoted as a viable approach to the effective planning and mitigation of user-conflicts in the marine realm. Despite several research and pilot projects demonstrating the approach’s feasibility and benefits, commercially viable MU applications remain patchy and few. Further, MU is neither systematically applied nor purposively planned for even in the imminent event of incompatible and conflicting use of marine space. This paper seeks to identify barriers and opportunities for mainstreaming MU based on desktop study and iterative stakeholder consultation. The findings reveal that the MU concept was frequently framed as ‘co-location’ or ‘co-existence’ and aimed toward mitigating conflict among users. Practice was ahead of theory with little attention to synergistic and efficiency aspects. Barriers for MU application include shortcomings in legislation, sectoral thinking, and burdensome administrative procedures. The main opportunity lies in creating a conducive policy environment where MU risks and transaction costs become low and competitive, respectively. Solutions at the sea basin and national level, upon which further MU application can be anchored, are proposed.

Description: Beta cell apoptosis is a hallmark of diabetes. Since we have previously shown that galectin-3 deficient (LGALS3 –/– ) mice are relatively resistant to diabetes induction, the aim of this study was to examine whether beta cell apoptosis depends on the presence of galectin-3 and to delineate the underlying mechanism. Deficiency of galectin-3, either hereditary or induced through application of chemical inhibitors, β-lactose or TD139, supported survival and function of islet beta cells compromised by TNF-α+IFN-γ+IL-1β stimulus. Similarly, inhibition of galectin-3 by β-lactose or TD139 reduced cytokine-triggered apoptosis of beta cells, leading to conclusion that endogenous galectin-3 propagates beta apoptosis in the presence of an inflammatory milieu . Exploring apoptosis-related molecules expression in primary islet cells before and after treatment with cytokines we found that galectin-3 ablation affected the expression of major components of mitochondrial apoptotic pathway, such as BAX, caspase-9, Apaf, SMAC, caspase-3, and AIF. In contrast, anti-apoptotic molecules Bcl-2 and Bcl-XL were up-regulated in LGALS3 –/– islet cells when compared to wild type (WT) counterparts (C57BL/6), resulting in increased ratio of anti-apoptotic versus pro-apoptotic molecules. However, Fas-triggered apoptotic pathway as well as extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) was not influenced by LGALS-3 deletion. All together, these results point to an important role of endogenous galectin-3 in beta cell apoptosis in the inflammatory milieu that occurs during diabetes pathogenesis and implicates impairment of mitochondrial apoptotic pathway as a key event in protection from beta cell apoptosis in the absence of galectin-3. J. Cell. Physiol. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.