Disentangle the skein: a nomenclature framework to assess the contribution of Maritime Spatial Plans to the European Green Deal

Martina Bocci^1*Alexandre Cornet²Vesa Arki³Folco Soffietti⁴Adeline Bas⁵Daniele Brigolin⁴Mónica Campillos-Llanos⁶Pierpaolo Campostrini⁷Fabio Carella⁴Cristina Cervera-Núñez⁶Annija Danenberga⁸Katia Frangoudes⁵Kira Gee⁹Maria Gómez-Ballesteros⁶Eider Graner^10,5Bettina Käppeler¹¹Olivier Laroussinie²Laura Pietila³Mari Pohja-Mykrä¹²Heikki Saarento³Hristo Stanchev¹⁰Margarita Stancheva¹⁰Marta Stube¹³Emiliano Ramieri^14*

• ¹Independent researcher, Venice, Italy
• ²Centre for Studies and Expertise on Risks, the Environment, Mobility and Urban Planning (CEREMA), Brest, France
• ³Regional Council of Southwest Finland, Turku, Finland
• ⁴Universita Iuav di Venezia, Venice, Italy
• ⁵Institut Universitaire Europeen de la Mer, Plouzané, France
• ⁶Instituto Espanol de Oceanografia, Madrid, Spain
• ⁷CORILA, Venice, Italy
• ⁸Baltijas studiju centrs, Riga, Latvia
• ⁹Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon, Geesthacht, Germany
• ¹⁰Center for Coastal and Marine Studies (CCMS), Varna, Bulgaria
• ¹¹Bundesamt fur Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie, Hamburg, Germany
• ¹²Ministry of the Environment of Finland, Helsinki, Finland
• ¹³Ministry of Smart Administration and Regional Development (Republic of Latvia), Riga, Latvia
• ¹⁴Istituto di Scienze Marine Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Venice, Italy

The European Green Deal (EGD) sets an ambitious, cross-sectoral agenda with direct implications for the sea. Yet methods to systematically assess how national Maritime Spatial Plans contribute to EGD objectives remain scarce. We proposeThe article proposes an EGD–MSP nomenclature that translates the EGD's complexity into a practical, adaptable framework for practical application in Maritime Spatial Planning. The framework clusters EGD ambitions into seven topics—climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, sustainable seafood production, biodiversity and ecosystem protection and restoration, blue circular economy, zero pollution, and fair and just transition—and organises them hierarchically into sub-topics and operational elements. We tested the The nomenclature was tested across seven EU countries (Bulgaria, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Spain) using desk analysis of MSP plans and related documents, targeted interviews, and a workshop to examine aspects common to the participating countries. A semi-quantitative synthesis (YES / PARTIALLY / NO) enabled consistent comparison of how EGD elements appear in MSP visions, objectives, and measures. Results show that climate change mitigation is widely and explicitly addressed—primarily via offshore renewable energy—while adaptation is present but often indirect. Biodiversity protection is common, whereas restoration remains limited. Blue circular economy and zero-pollution objectives are referenced more often in objectives than in concrete measures. Approaches to a fair and just transition are emerging, with participation and transparency improving, yet institutional, financial and technical knowledge capacities remain uneven., The nomenclature balances harmonisation and interpretative flexibility, enabling robust cross-national comparisons without imposing uniformity. Beyond analysis, it provides a practical scaffold for implementation, monitoring, and iterative plan revision, and can be extended into an indicator-based system to track MSP contributions to the EGD over time.