Methodology for the assessment of Member States’ reporting on Programme of Measures (Article 16) MSCG Sarine Barsoumian 7 April 2016 18/09/2018

Lessons learned and foreseen challenges Recalling the lessons learned from Article 11 reporting: Most MS have used reporting sheets which has helped with the comparative analysis Had challenges with the modifications of GES and targets during Article 11 process, lack of clarity in the reporting (use of EIONET for updates) Foreseen challenges: Timing uncertainties: synergies with WFD reporting and potential delays in the MSFD reporting Shorter timeline for assessment in comparison to WFD assessment timeline Reported information is mostly of a qualitative nature - Most MS have used reporting sheets which has helped with the comparative analysis Had challenges with the modifications of GES and targets during Article 11 process, lack of clarity in the reporting (use of EIONET for updates) – Timing uncertainties: synergies with WFD reporting means that there can be delays in the MSFD reporting if MS report late on WFD – we are approaching the WFD component in a modular manner, so that even if reported later than the MSFD PoMs, we will integrate that section into the national reports later in the process Short timeline for assessment in comparison to WFD assessment timeline – our report structure and content is in line with the time and resources at hand. Info mostly qualitative  unlike what is the case for the WFD thus we have adapted our methodology and report structure to accommodate this. 18/09/2018

Expected products From PoM reporting Synergies with WFD reporting: Use 2016 WFD reporting for land-based measures relevant to MSFD but already being reported under WFD; Use WFD approach to organise measures by Key Types of Measures (KTMs) categories; Use WFD approach to report on new ‘MSFD measures’, by using an adapted WFD template for describing each measure. 18/09/2018

General overview of assessment - Has the MS assessed to which extent the existing measures are sufficient to achieve GES and environmental targets (gap analysis)? Looking at coverage: Are all targets reported under Article 10 covered by existing measures? Are pressures reported by Member States under Article 8 covered by existing measures? If not, has the MS identified new measures to bridge gap ? Looking at adequacy: Are the KTMs of the PoMs (existing and new) sufficient to reach all targets reported under Article 10? Are the KTMs of PoM (existing and new) sufficient to address the pressures reported under Article 8? Have the new measures been assessed for technical feasibility and sustainability (CBA)? Has the MS applied exceptions? Use of reference list 18/09/2018

Assessment of PoMs Use of reference list List of pressures as defined in Article 8 per MS – comparison of KTMs reported with defined pressures List of priority areas at the regional level as defined in the context of the RSCs Info of priority areas at the regional level will come from coordinated/strategic action plans of RSCs 18/09/2018

Assessment of PoMs - Completeness Completeness check giving an overview of the MS POM, e.g. on types of measures most reported, geographical areas covered by the measures reported, KTMs most covered and not at all covered, etc. Data to be extracted from reporting sheets Information to be compiled in tabular format and in graphs providing a concise overview of the state-of-play at MS level Information extracted will then be consolidated to present PoM overviews in the Regional and European reports. To recall the synergies with the WFD: Text from PoM recommendations 18/09/2018

Assessment of PoMs - Adequacy Assessment of adequacy of existing measures Assessment of adequacy of new measures For each one: Extent of coverage of targets relevant for Descriptor X Extent of coverage of KTMs/pressures relevant for Descriptor X (use of reference list) Assessment of MS gap analysis Assessment of use of exceptions Assessment of justification for use of exceptions (consistency of justifications provided in respect to the pressure that the MS is not covering) Assessment of ad hoc measures put in place Assessment of MS gap analysis (i.e. comparison of MS own gap analysis with expert assessment of MS reporting) Criteria for the assessment: Clear: Do the analyses/justifications are reported by the MS provide a link between the existing measures and the KTMs (and pressures) Appropriate: Is the information provided understandable and logically in line with MSFD descriptor specific priorities (i.e. target definitions)? Assessment of justification for use of exceptions and ad hoc measures put in place (consistency of justifications provided in respect to the pressure that the MS is not covering) 18/09/2018

Assessment of PoMs - Adequacy Together, an overall conclusion of adequacy per descriptor: Do new and existing measures (i.e. PoM as a whole) as reported by the Member State address target definitions and relevant KTMS? Are they adequate to allow progress towards GES (as defined by the Member State)? Do they go beyond the targets? If there are gaps in the coverage of targets and pressures, what are they? How are they justified? To recall the synergies with the WFD: Text from PoM recommendations 18/09/2018

Art.16 reporting and data products - Reports Country reports Regional reports By marine region By marine sub region At EU level Design Graphs and visualizations Textual assessment remains an important component - but will keep it less descriptive and more concise 18/09/2018

Draft Outline of National Reports 1. Introduction and cross-cutting issues 2. Overview of the member state’s programme of measures 3. Overall assessment of adequacy of the programme of measures Annex 1. Descriptor-specific assessment of adequacy (per Descriptor) Annex 2. Completeness check table 18/09/2018

MSFD Scoreboard Last updated 5 April 2016 Art. 8/ 9/10 Art 11 Art 13 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/eu-coast-and-marine-policy/implementation/scoreboard_en.htm Last updated 5 April 2016 Art. 8/ 9/10 Art 11 Art 13 Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Art. 8/ 9/10 Art 11 Art 13 Latvia Lithuania Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Spain Sweden UK Based on fish scoreboard available on website http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/eu-coast-and-marine-policy/implementation/scoreboard_en.htm Received Part received Not received

Contact sarine.barsoumian@milieu.be 18/09/2018