The Nordic countries have set ambitious climate and energy targets, with offshore wind playing a central role in the green transition. The EU’s goals for renewable energy and climate neutrality, including the ambition to achieve 45% renewable energy by 2030, are key drivers behind the development of many offshore wind projects in the region. The European Green Deal further emphasises minimal environmental harm and nature conservation, including increased marine protection under the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030. The Nordic countries are also signatories to global agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Additionally, Nordic seas are vital for food supply, with fishing and aquaculture serving as important industries, especially for many coastal communities. At the Nordic Council of Ministers’ 2023 summer meeting, ministers further identified blue food systems and sustainable value creation in the fishing industry as key priorities, emphasising the need to balance marine-based energy production with existing ocean uses.
Offshore renewable energy, particularly wind, is crucial for the green transition in the Nordic Region but poses challenges, including conflicts over marine space, complex stakeholder engagement and ecosystem impacts. Most countries have not yet planned offshore wind development in their most valuable fishing areas. However, some countries will be unable to meet their renewable energy targets if wind development is restricted to conflict-free areas alone. As offshore wind expands – often involving large-scale infrastructure that significantly alters marine space use – there will be increasing pressure for coexistence with other sectors, particularly fishing, aquaculture and marine protection. Addressing this requires exploring solutions for the sustainable coexistence of different interests.
The allocation of offshore wind areas is guided by marine and maritime spatial planning (MSP) and related policy frameworks, both integrated and sectoral. Each Nordic country (Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Greenland and Åland) has its own approach. The EU Member States among the Nordic countries have implemented the European Maritime Spatial Planning Directive (EU MSPD), while other marine legislative tools overlap and are complementary in non-EU regions. Cooperation also occurs at transboundary levels across the Baltic, North Sea and Atlantic Sea spaces within the Nordic Region.
Trade-offs between marine resource users arise due to finite marine areas and multiple stakeholders with competing interests. These trade-offs, including those involving the marine ecosystem and its services, are often made within spatial planning frameworks. Recognising them explicitly can help make decisions more transparent and justifiable. However, “trade-offs are rarely addressed explicitly or transparently and so they often go unrealised or are poorly evaluated”.
Understanding the interplay, conflicts and trade-offs between offshore wind and marine food production is key to coexistence solutions. This is where “good governance” becomes relevant and why MSP plays a crucial role in balancing ecological, economic and social considerations. However, gaps in governance systems need to be addressed. Effective frameworks, including MSP and offshore wind development processes like permitting, are vital for managing conflicts, promoting collaboration and enabling sustainable coexistence in Nordic seas. These frameworks should also foster cooperation and be adaptive to rapidly changing conditions affecting marine ecosystem services.
The Nordic Council of Ministers is working to reconcile ambitious targets for offshore wind with continued ocean food production, while also safeguarding space for nature. As noted by Karen Elleman, Secretary General of the Nordic Council of Ministers: “The transition to renewable energy is urgent, but the transition needs to be fair in order to be sustainable. That is why we are also looking into best practices for involving local stakeholders and their interests.”