The Oslo and Paris Commissions (OSPAR) decision 98/3 prohibits the dumping of man-made structures (MMS) offshore. However, there are regions of the world where MMS are recognized as providing an ecological and societal benefit through the provision of ecosystem goods and services. This review provides a commentary on our current understanding of the ecological influence of man-made structures, the consequences of their decommissioning and recognizes that our knowledge is far from complete. It is known that a diverse and complex ecosystem of attached organisms develops on submerged structures which supports a localized food web that could not exist without them. However, our lack of detailed information makes modelling of system response to decommissioning very tentative. Ideally, we should use the best possible scientific information to reach a consensus as to whether the blanket removal of MMS (excepting derogations) is the most environmentally supportable option. The evidence available to-date shows both benefits and some risk in leaving MMS in place and this needs to be examined without preconception. On the UKCS, MMS as artificial habitats are not considered under the Habitats Directive, irrespective of the value or rarity of the species present. We conclude that a more comprehensive regulatory process, together with the recognition of the ecology associated with man-made structures, would allow science to play a role in the decision-making rather than supporting a blanket policy ignoring ecological context.

中文翻译：

---

退役中的生态最佳实践：科学研究综述

奥斯陆和巴黎委员会（OSPAR）第98/3号决定禁止将人造结构（MMS）倾倒在海上。但是，在世界上有些地区，MMS被认为通过提供生态系统产品和服务而提供了生态和社会效益。这篇评论提供了关于我们目前对人造结构的生态影响及其退役后果的评论，并认识到我们的知识还远远不够完整。众所周知，被淹没的生物体会在被淹没的结构上发展出多样而复杂的生态系统，这种结构支撑着没有它们就不可能存在的局部食物网。但是，由于我们缺乏详细的信息，因此系统对退役响应的建模非常具有尝试性。理想情况下，我们应该使用最好的科学信息就是否全面去除MMS（减损除外）是否是最环保的选择达成共识。迄今为止可获得的证据表明，保留MMS既有好处，也有一定的风险，这需要在没有先入为主的前提下进行检查。在UKCS上，《人居指令》不考虑将MMS作为人工生境，而不论该物种的价值或稀有程度。我们得出的结论是，更全面的监管流程以及对与人造结构相关的生态的认可，将使科学在决策过程中发挥作用，而不是支持无视生态环境的全面政策。