Milena Ramov iz Javne ustanove Natura Jadera o promjenama koje se događaju ispod površine Jadrana, pritiscima turizma i sidrenja, ulozi tehnologije i gospodarstva te odgovornosti svakog pojedinca u očuvanju morskih ekosustava
Jadransko more za većinu ljudi predstavlja prostor odmora, kupanja, ribolova i turizma. No za stručnjake koji godinama prate njegove promjene ono je puno više od toga. More je složen živi sustav čije se promjene često događaju sporo, tiho i gotovo neprimjetno – sve dok posljedice ne postanu ozbiljne.
Milena Ramov, viša savjetnica za istraživanja, inventarizaciju, monitoring i upravljanje prirodnim vrijednostima već 17 godina profesionalno prati prirodne vrijednosti Jadrana. Nakon dugogodišnjeg rada u Parku prirode Telašćica, prije nekoliko mjeseci pridružila se Naturi Jadera, gdje nastavlja rad na istraživanju i zaštiti morskih ekosustava.
Za nju je more teško promatrati samo kao prostor za rekreaciju. Dok ga prosječan kupač doživljava kroz nekoliko sati ili dana godišnjeg odmora, stručnjaci iste lokalitete promatraju godinama. Upravo dugoročno praćenje otkriva promjene koje se ne mogu vidjeti tijekom jedne sezone.
„Pojedine lokalitete pratimo kroz određeni broj godina i primjećujemo promjene koje su ponekad vrlo spore i tihe“, ističe Ramov. Taj dugoročni pogled istodobno nosi i odgovornost. Podaci prikupljeni istraživanjima i monitoringom trebaju poslužiti kao temelj za odluke kojima se određene aktivnosti reguliraju ili ograničavaju kako bi se smanjio pritisak na osjetljive ekosustave.
More koje još uvijek dovoljno ne poznajemo
Jedan od najvećih paradoksa zaštite Jadrana jest činjenica da o moru govorimo kao o jednom od najvećih hrvatskih prirodnih bogatstava, a istodobno još uvijek nemamo dovoljno podataka o njegovim vrstama i staništima.
Ramov posebno ističe primjer posidonije. Iako je riječ o vrsti i staništu o kojem se danas mnogo govori, još uvijek nisu dostupni dovoljno detaljni podaci o njezinoj rasprostranjenosti na cijelom području.
Problem dodatno predstavlja činjenica da se monitoring često provodi kroz pojedinačne projekte. Kada projekt završi, nerijetko završava i financiranje aktivnosti praćenja. Takav pristup otežava stvaranje dugoročnih nizova podataka i prepoznavanje trendova.
Formalno je zaštita morskog prostora posljednjih godina ojačana. Ekološka mreža Natura 2000 na moru proširena je 2025. godine i danas obuhvaća približno obuhvaća 25.956 km2 i pokriva 36,8 % kopnenog teritorija te 9,3 % mora pod nacionalnom jurisdikcijom (teritorijalno more i isključivi gospodarski pojas RH)pod hrvatskom jurisdikcijom. No Ramov upozorava da je jedno područje označiti na karti, a sasvim drugo dovoljno dobro poznavati što se u njemu nalazi i učinkovito njime upravljati.
„Mi smo puno bolji kada nešto stavimo na papir, ali u praksi provođenje svega toga još uvijek nije na zadovoljavajućoj razini“, kaže Ramov.
Promjene koje more više ne može sakriti
Među najvažnijim promjenama koje stručnjaci prate svakako je porast temperature mora. Istraživanja provedena u Telašćici pokazala su da se visoke temperature mogu dugo zadržavati i na većim dubinama, što posebno pogađa organizme koji se ne mogu jednostavno premjestiti u povoljnije područje.
Gorgonije i koralji među vrstama su koje takve promjene posebno pogađaju, a na pojedinim lokacijama već je zabilježeno njihovo odumiranje.
Još snažniji primjer predstavlja plemenita periska. Masovni pomor zabilježen je u hrvatskom dijelu Jadrana 2019. godine, nakon što je sličan proces godinu ranije počeo u drugim dijelovima Mediterana. U vrlo kratkom razdoblju na brojnim je lokalitetima zabilježena gotovo potpuna smrtnost populacija.
Vrsta koja je do tada imala relativno zdrave populacije postala je kritično ugrožena. Za stručnjake je to bio jedan od jasnih signala da se stanje morskog ekosustava mijenja i da je potrebno dodatno djelovati.
Istodobno se mijenja i sastav vrsta u Jadranu. Sve češće se bilježe nove strane, odnosno invazivne vrste. Neke od njih možda više nije moguće zaustaviti, zbog čega je ključno pravodobno ih istražiti, razumjeti njihove utjecaje i pronaći načine prilagodbe.
Jedno sidro može izgledati beznačajno. Tisuće sidara više nisu
Posebno upozorenje Ramov upućuje na problem sidrenja na livadama posidonije. Hrvatska je jedna od najvažnijih čarter destinacija na Mediteranu, a tijekom ljetnih mjeseci broj plovila na pojedinim područjima višestruko raste. Problem nastaje kada se sidra bacaju na osjetljiva morska staništa, često bez svijesti nautičara o tome što se nalazi ispod njih.
„Jedno sidro može izgledati kao zanemariv problem, ali svakodnevnim sidrenjem na posidoniju dolazi do kidanja njezinih rizoma“, objašnjava Ramov. Kada se taj pojedinačni utjecaj pomnoži s brojem plovila tijekom turističke sezone, posljedice postaju značajne.
Uz sidrenje, morski ekosustav trpi i zbog drugih pritisaka – buke, onečišćenja vode i svjetlosnog onečišćenja. Problem je upravo u njihovom kumulativnom djelovanju.
Posidonija pritom predstavlja posebno osjetljiv primjer. Njezini rizomi rastu vrlo sporo, desetljećima, dok ih mehaničko djelovanje sidra može uništiti gotovo trenutno.
Kada nestane stanište, ne nestaje samo jedna vrsta
Zaštita morskih staništa nije samo pitanje očuvanja pojedinih vrsta. Gubitkom staništa gubi se čitava funkcija određenog prostora.
Livade posidonije predstavljaju stanište, mrjestilište i rastilište brojnim organizmima. Mnoge od tih vrsta imaju i izravni gospodarski značaj. Posidonija istodobno veže ugljik, stabilizira sediment, pridonosi bistrini mora i štiti obalu od erozije.
Zato uništavanje jednog staništa nije samo ekološki gubitak. Ono ima potencijalne dugoročne gospodarske posljedice.
Prirodni sustavi ne mogu se obnoviti brzinom kojom ih čovjek može uništiti. Upravo zato zaštita nije samo pitanje saniranja posljedica, nego prije svega sprečavanja štete.
Plava ekonomija mora imati mjerljive rezultate
Sve češće se govori o plavoj ekonomiji – gospodarskim aktivnostima povezanima s morem i obalom koje istodobno trebaju pridonositi održivom razvoju. No Ramov upozorava da sam naziv nije dovoljan.
Prije svakog zahvata trebalo bi postaviti konkretna pitanja: postoji li pokazatelj stanja okoliša za određenu djelatnost, kakav je njezin utjecaj, što će se učiniti ako se stanje ekosustava pogorša i tko zapravo ima korist od projekta.
„Treba pokazati pokazatelje da li nešto zaista donosi dobrobit okolišu, ne utječe na njega ili se to samo tako zove“, smatra Ramov.
To je upravo jedna od ključnih dilema održivog razvoja: kako gospodarski koristiti more, a da se pritom ne uništi temelj na kojem se taj razvoj zasniva.
Gospodarstvo i zaštita prirode ne moraju biti protivnici
Zaštita prirode i gospodarstvo često se predstavljaju kao dvije suprotstavljene strane. Međutim, iskustvo s terena pokazuje da mogu biti i partneri.
Ramov navodi primjer satelitskog praćenja plovila i sidrenja. Takva tehnologija omogućuje stručnjacima da vide gdje se plovila kreću i gdje se najčešće sidre.
Istodobno, nautičarima se može ponuditi alternativa – uređena sidrišta i privezi koji smanjuju potrebu za bacanjem sidra na osjetljiva staništa.
„Kada netko živi od mora, ima izražen interes da ono ostane u dobrom stanju“, kaže Ramov. Upravo tu vidi prostor u kojem zaštita prirode i gospodarstvo mogu ići ruku pod ruku.
Suvremene tehnologije otvaraju potpuno nove mogućnosti u zaštiti mora. Satelitske snimke mogu pomoći u praćenju rasprostranjenosti morskih staništa, sustavi mogu pratiti kretanje plovila, a videonadzor omogućuje nadzor velikih područja koja čovjek ne može fizički pokriti. No tehnologija nije sama sebi svrha.
„Podatak koji dobijemo, a koji ne uđe ni u jednu odluku ili ne bude procesiran od strane nadzora, jednako je koristan kao da ne postoji“, upozorava Ramov.
Drugim riječima, tehnologija može pomoći da nešto primijetimo, izmjerimo i razumijemo. Ali odluku što ćemo s tim podatkom napraviti i dalje donose ljudi.
Ponekad je potrebno reći „ne“
Upravo zato Ramov smatra da zaštita prirode ponekad mora uključivati i odluku da se određenom zahvatu kaže „ne“.
Ali takvo „ne“ ne mora nužno značiti potpunu zabranu.
Može značiti „ne ovdje“, „ne na ovoj lokaciji“ ili „ne u ovom području“. Istodobno se može pronaći drugo mjesto na kojem se ista gospodarska aktivnost može provesti uz prihvatljiv utjecaj na prirodu.
To je možda i najvažnija poruka održivog razvoja: cilj nije zaustaviti svaki razvoj, nego pronaći način da razvoj ne uništi resurs od kojeg dugoročno svi živimo.
Jadran čuvaju i tisuće malih odluka
Kada se govori o zaštiti mora, često se razmišlja o zakonima, institucijama i velikim projektima. Međutim, stvarna promjena događa se i kroz svakodnevne odluke pojedinaca.
„Pritisak na Jadran nije jedan veliki izvor, nego broj stotina tisuća pojedinačnih postupaka i akcija“, kaže Ramov.
Nautičar koji zna što se nalazi ispod njegova plovila može izbjeći sidrenje na posidoniji. Ribar koji poštuje lovostaj i minimalne veličine pridonosi obnovi ribljeg fonda. Kupac koji traži sljedivost proizvoda mijenja potražnju, a time i ponudu.
Važna je i spremnost građana da prijave nepravilnosti i onečišćenja. Svaka takva informacija može pomoći upravljačima da reagiraju pravodobno.
U tome Ramov vidi važnost takozvanog građanskog monitoringa, odnosno citizen sciencea – uključivanja građana u prikupljanje informacija važnih za zaštitu prirode.
Turizam ne smije potrošiti ono zbog čega ljudi dolaze
Za Hrvatsku je pitanje posebno važno jer velik dio obalnog gospodarstva počiva upravo na turizmu. Ramov upozorava da postoji granica nakon koje priroda više nije sposobna oporaviti se. „Ako prirodu prebacimo preko granice njezina oporavka, napravili smo štetu koja je nepopravljiva“, poručuje.
Hrvatska turistički prodaje upravo ono što je njezina najveća vrijednost – more, obalu i dojam očuvane prirode. Ako se taj resurs potroši, nestaje i temelj turističke ponude.
Zato očuvanje prirode nije suprotno turizmu. Ono je jedan od uvjeta njegova dugoročnog opstanka.
„Nije pitanje hoćemo li platiti održavanje tog proizvoda, nego hoćemo li platiti sada kroz određena ograničenja i restrikcije ili ćemo kasnije platiti kroz gubitak tržišta kada izgubimo taj proizvod.“
Hrvatska ima dobre propise. Problem je njihova provedba
Prema iskustvu Ramov, Hrvatska ima dobre propise, kvalitetne institucije i stručnjake, ali nedostaje učinkovita provedba i snažniji nadzor. Mnoga zaštićena područja nemaju dovoljno čuvara prirode da bi se mogla kontinuirano nadzirati. Zato kao jedan od prioriteta ističe 24-satni nadzor, kombinaciju ljudi i tehnologije, brže procesuiranje prekršaja te učinkovitije sankcioniranje ilegalnih aktivnosti.
Drugi je prioritet stabilno i sustavno financiranje monitoringa.
Ako se podaci prikupljaju samo tijekom pojedinačnih projekata, teško je pratiti dugoročne trendove. Bez dugoročnih podataka teško je donositi kvalitetne odluke.
„Financiranje, prikupljanje podataka i definitivno jačanje nadzora“ tri su područja koja Ramov vidi kao ključna za unapređenje zaštite prirode.
Priroda može biti pokretač gospodarstva
Unatoč svim pritiscima, Ramov ne vidi zaštitu prirode samo kao ograničenje gospodarskog razvoja. Naprotiv, smatra da priroda može biti jedan od njegovih pokretača.
Hrvatska ima iznimno vrijedan prirodni resurs i, ako ga nauči koristiti bez njegova narušavanja, on može stvarati gospodarsku vrijednost dugoročno.
Ključ je, međutim, u procjeni svakog zahvata: donosi li on više koristi ili štete i prelazi li njegov utjecaj granicu nakon koje se prirodni sustav više ne može oporaviti.
Promjena svijesti može biti snažnija od promjene zakona
Na kraju razgovora Ramov zaštitu Jadrana vraća tamo gdje ona zapravo počinje – pojedincu.
Zaštita mora nije samo jedna odluka, jedan zakon ili jedan projekt. Ona je skup svakodnevnih navika i ponašanja.
„Ponekad promjene ponašanja mogu ići i brže od promjena propisa“, ističe. Kada ljudi razumiju zašto nešto ne treba raditi i zašto je određeni dio prirode važno zaštititi, mogu promijeniti svoje ponašanje i prije nego što ih na to obveže zakon.
Ako se ponašanje kojim se šteti moru počne doživljavati kao društveno neprihvatljivo, potreba za stalnim nadzorom postaje manja. Zato su edukacija, prenošenje znanja i osvješćivanje ljudi o onome što se nalazi ispod površine mora jednako važni kao zakoni i institucije. Svaki pojedinac može prijaviti nepravilnost, upozoriti na onečišćenje, odgovornije koristiti more ili jednostavno naučiti prepoznati vrijednosti koje se nalaze ispod površine.
Nakon 17 godina rada na zaštiti prirode Ramov kaže da vidi napredak – u svijesti ljudi, njihovu razumijevanju problema i želji da se priroda zaštiti. Upravo je taj napredak, kako kaže, jedan od razloga zbog kojih i dalje radi svoj posao. Jadran ne čuvaju samo zakoni, institucije, znanstvenici i čuvari prirode. Čuvaju ga i odluke svakog pojedinca koji plovi, lovi ribu, dolazi na plažu, posluje uz more ili od njega živi. A budućnost plave ekonomije ovisit će upravo o tome hoćemo li naučiti da more nije samo resurs koji koristimo, nego ekosustav o kojem ovisimo.
Ovaj projekt je podržan iz Interreg IPA ADRION programa u okviru Interreg fondova (Europski fond za regionalni razvoj i IPA III)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Guardians of the Adriatic: We Cannot Protect the Sea Through Laws Alone – We Must Understand It
Milena Ramov from the Natura Jadera Public Institution on the changes taking place beneath the surface of the Adriatic, the pressures caused by tourism and anchoring, the role of technology and the economy, and the responsibility of every individual in protecting marine ecosystems.
For most people, the Adriatic Sea is a place for holidays, swimming, fishing and tourism. For experts who have been monitoring its changes for years, however, it is much more than that. The sea is a complex living system whose changes often occur slowly, quietly and almost imperceptibly – until the consequences become serious.
Milena Ramov, Senior Adviser for Research, Inventory, Monitoring and Management of Natural Values, has been professionally monitoring the natural values of the Adriatic for 17 years. After many years of work in Telašćica Nature Park, she joined Natura Jadera several months ago, where she continues her work on the research and protection of marine ecosystems.
For her, it is difficult to view the sea simply as a place for recreation. While an average swimmer experiences it over a few hours or days of holiday, experts observe the same locations for years. Long-term monitoring is precisely what reveals changes that cannot be seen during a single season.
“We monitor certain locations over a number of years and observe changes that are sometimes very slow and subtle,” says Ramov.
This long-term perspective also brings responsibility. Data collected through research and monitoring should provide the basis for decisions regulating or restricting certain activities in order to reduce pressure on sensitive ecosystems.
A Sea We Still Do Not Know Enough About
One of the greatest paradoxes of protecting the Adriatic is that we describe the sea as one of Croatia’s greatest natural assets, while at the same time we still lack sufficient data on its species and habitats.
Ramov particularly highlights the example of Posidonia oceanica. Although this species and habitat are receiving increasing attention, detailed data on its distribution across the entire area are still lacking.
Another challenge is that monitoring is often carried out through individual projects. When a project ends, funding for monitoring activities often ends as well. This makes it difficult to build long-term datasets and identify trends.
Formal protection of marine areas has been strengthened in recent years. The Natura 2000 ecological network at sea was expanded in 2025 and now covers approximately 25,956 km², including 36.8% of Croatia’s land territory and 9.3% of the sea under Croatian jurisdiction. However, Ramov points out that marking an area on a map is one thing, while knowing what it contains and managing it effectively is quite another.
“We are much better at putting things on paper, but in practice, implementation is still not at a satisfactory level,” says Ramov.
Changes the Sea Can No Longer Hide
One of the most important changes experts are monitoring is the rise in sea temperatures. Research conducted in Telašćica has shown that high temperatures can persist even at greater depths, particularly affecting organisms that cannot simply move to more favourable areas.
Gorgonians and corals are among the species particularly affected by these changes, and mortality has already been recorded at some locations.
An even more striking example is the noble pen shell. Mass mortality was recorded in the Croatian part of the Adriatic in 2019, after a similar process had begun in other parts of the Mediterranean a year earlier. In a very short period, almost complete mortality of populations was recorded at numerous locations.
A species that had previously had relatively healthy populations became critically endangered. For experts, this was one of the clearest signals that the condition of the marine ecosystem was changing and that further action was needed.
At the same time, the composition of species in the Adriatic is also changing. New non-native, or invasive, species are being recorded with increasing frequency. Some of them may no longer be possible to stop, making it essential to study them in time, understand their impacts and find ways to adapt.
One Anchor May Seem Insignificant. Thousands of Anchors Are Not.
Ramov raises particular concern about anchoring on Posidonia meadows. Croatia is one of the Mediterranean’s most important charter destinations, and during the summer months the number of vessels in certain areas increases several times over. Problems arise when anchors are dropped on sensitive marine habitats, often without boaters being aware of what lies beneath them.
“One anchor may seem like a negligible problem, but repeated daily anchoring on Posidonia breaks its rhizomes,” explains Ramov.
When this individual impact is multiplied by the number of vessels during the tourist season, the consequences become significant.
In addition to anchoring, marine ecosystems are affected by other pressures – noise, water pollution and light pollution. The problem lies precisely in their cumulative impact.
Posidonia is a particularly sensitive example. Its rhizomes grow very slowly, over decades, while the mechanical impact of an anchor can destroy them almost instantly.
When a Habitat Disappears, It Is Not Just One Species That Is Lost
Protecting marine habitats is not only about preserving individual species. When a habitat is lost, the entire function of that area is lost.
Posidonia meadows provide habitat, spawning grounds and nursery areas for numerous organisms. Many of these species also have direct economic importance. At the same time, Posidonia stores carbon, stabilises sediment, contributes to water clarity and protects the coastline from erosion.
Therefore, the destruction of a single habitat is not merely an ecological loss. It can also have long-term economic consequences.
Natural systems cannot recover at the speed at which humans can destroy them. That is why protection is not only about repairing damage, but above all about preventing it.
The Blue Economy Must Deliver Measurable Results
The term “Blue Economy” is increasingly used to describe economic activities connected with the sea and coast that should also contribute to sustainable development. However, Ramov warns that the name itself is not enough.
Before any intervention, concrete questions should be asked: Is there an environmental indicator for the activity? What is its impact? What will be done if the condition of the ecosystem deteriorates? And who actually benefits from the project?
“We need to show indicators demonstrating whether something really benefits the environment, has no impact on it, or is simply being labelled that way,” Ramov believes.
This is one of the key dilemmas of sustainable development: how to use the sea economically without destroying the very foundation on which that development depends.
The Economy and Nature Conservation Do Not Have to Be Opponents
Nature conservation and the economy are often presented as opposing interests. However, experience from the field shows that they can also be partners.
Ramov gives the example of satellite vessel tracking and anchoring. Such technology enables experts to see where vessels move and where they most frequently anchor.
At the same time, boaters can be offered alternatives – organised anchorage areas and moorings that reduce the need to drop anchors on sensitive habitats.
“When someone makes a living from the sea, they have a strong interest in keeping it in good condition,” says Ramov.
This is precisely where she sees an opportunity for nature conservation and economic activity to work together.
Modern technologies are opening up entirely new possibilities for marine protection. Satellite imagery can help monitor the distribution of marine habitats, systems can track vessel movements, and video surveillance can monitor large areas that cannot be physically covered by people. However, technology is not an end in itself.
“A piece of data we obtain, but which does not become part of a decision or get processed by enforcement authorities, is just as useful as if it did not exist,” Ramov warns.
In other words, technology can help us detect, measure and understand something. But people still make the decision about what to do with that information.
Sometimes We Need to Say “No”
For this reason, Ramov believes that nature conservation must sometimes include the decision to say “no” to a particular intervention.
But such a “no” does not necessarily mean a complete ban.
It can mean “not here”, “not at this location” or “not in this area”. At the same time, another location may be found where the same economic activity can take place with an acceptable impact on nature.
Perhaps this is the most important message of sustainable development: the goal is not to stop all development, but to find a way for development to avoid destroying the resource on which we all depend in the long term.
The Adriatic Is Protected by Thousands of Small Decisions
When discussing marine protection, we often think about laws, institutions and major projects. However, real change also happens through the everyday decisions of individuals.
“The pressure on the Adriatic does not come from one major source, but from hundreds of thousands of individual actions and behaviours,” says Ramov.
A boater who knows what lies beneath the vessel can avoid anchoring on Posidonia. A fisher who respects closed seasons and minimum catch sizes contributes to the recovery of fish stocks. A consumer who demands product traceability changes demand and, consequently, supply.
Citizens’ willingness to report irregularities and pollution is also important. Every such report can help those responsible for management respond in a timely manner.
Ramov sees this as an important role for so-called citizen monitoring, or citizen science – involving citizens in collecting information relevant to nature conservation.
Tourism Must Not Consume What Brings Visitors Here
The issue is particularly important for Croatia because a large part of the coastal economy depends on tourism. Ramov warns that there is a point beyond which nature is no longer capable of recovering.
“If we push nature beyond the limit of its ability to recover, we have caused irreversible damage,” she says.
Croatia’s tourism industry sells precisely what is among its greatest assets – the sea, the coast and the impression of preserved nature. If this resource is depleted, the foundation of the tourism offer disappears as well.
Therefore, nature conservation is not contrary to tourism. It is one of the conditions for its long-term survival.
“The question is not whether we will pay for maintaining this product, but whether we will pay now through certain restrictions and limitations or later through the loss of the market when we lose that product.”
Croatia Has Good Regulations. The Problem Is Their Implementation.
According to Ramov’s experience, Croatia has good regulations, strong institutions and qualified experts, but lacks effective implementation and stronger enforcement. Many protected areas do not have enough rangers to ensure continuous monitoring.
She therefore identifies 24-hour surveillance, a combination of people and technology, faster processing of violations and more effective sanctions for illegal activities as priorities.
Another priority is stable and systematic funding for monitoring.
If data are collected only through individual projects, it is difficult to track long-term trends. Without long-term data, it is difficult to make high-quality decisions.
“Funding, data collection and, definitely, strengthening enforcement” are the three areas Ramov identifies as crucial for improving nature conservation.
Nature Can Be a Driver of the Economy
Despite all the pressures, Ramov does not see nature conservation merely as a restriction on economic development. On the contrary, she believes that nature can be one of its drivers.
Croatia has an exceptionally valuable natural resource and, if it learns to use it without degrading it, this resource can create long-term economic value.
The key, however, lies in assessing every intervention: does it generate more benefits than harm, and does its impact cross the threshold beyond which the natural system can no longer recover?
Changing Awareness Can Be More Powerful Than Changing Laws
At the end of the conversation, Ramov brings the protection of the Adriatic back to where it truly begins – with the individual.
Protecting the sea is not just one decision, one law or one project. It is a combination of everyday habits and behaviours.
“Sometimes changes in behaviour can happen faster than changes in regulations,” she points out.
When people understand why something should not be done and why a particular part of nature needs to be protected, they can change their behaviour even before the law requires them to do so.
If behaviour that harms the sea begins to be seen as socially unacceptable, the need for constant monitoring becomes smaller. That is why education, knowledge sharing and raising awareness about what lies beneath the surface are just as important as laws and institutions.
Every individual can report irregularities, warn about pollution, use the sea more responsibly or simply learn to recognise the natural values hidden beneath the surface.
After 17 years of work in nature conservation, Ramov says she sees progress – in people’s awareness, their understanding of the issues and their willingness to protect nature. This progress, she says, is one of the reasons she continues to do her work.
The Adriatic is not protected only by laws, institutions, scientists and nature rangers. It is also protected by the decisions of every individual who sails, fishes, visits the beach, operates a business by the sea or makes a living from it.
And the future of the Blue Economy will depend precisely on whether we learn that the sea is not merely a resource we use, but an ecosystem on which we depend.
This project is supported by the Interreg IPA ADRION program within the framework of Interreg funds (European Regional Development Fund and IPA III)
