DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry 30.04.2019 8th meeting of the Working Group DIKE Reporting on Programme of Measures European Commission DG Environment Marine and Water Industry Unit 7 – 8 October 2013

PoM work under CIS WG GES & ESA (common workshop in June 2013) -> Produce a "concept paper" / Recommendation dealing with: Elaborate Key Messages coming from the workshop Develop a "table approach" per descriptor to identify where existing policies apply Develop an overall "mixed" approach to engage with others policies (EU, IMO…) -> Objective being to have a draft doc ready to be circulated begin of October to be further discussed at; WG ESA : 15/16 Oct WG GES : 21/22 Oct And then at MSCG : 12/13 Nov

Outline of the proposed PoM Recommendation Introduction Requirements of the Directive Recommendations / Key messages Costs, benefits and governance of the programmes of measures RSC on-going work Reporting Knowledge exchange and other practical issues Annex 1: Descriptors approach aiming to identify per Descriptors which measures are already covered by other legislation Annex 2: Legislative / Funding mixed approach aiming at identifying measures in other policies which are pertinent for MSFD but not listing them extensively in PoM. This would help for the identification of the good governance level of the overall PoM together with the relevant funding mechanism which may be used. To be supported by a EC service request contract (see PCG discussion) Annex 3: Analysis of needs from reporting on MSFD PoM programmes: key questions

Some lessons learnt from WFD The conclusions of the meetings of the core drafting group under WFD CIS were: A revised and common taxonomy of measures mixing basic measures and Key Types of Measures is essential for a proper reporting and further assessment of the PoM Indicators of effectiveness could be developed based on the same indicators used for the identification of significant pressures, the Commission was asked to propose an approach For the economic analysis, cost-effectiveness/cost-benefits analysis of measures, a proposal from WG Economics is required. The latter met on 1-2 October 2013 and agreed to work on a proposal for review of reporting guidance over the next months, as a priority

Some lessons learnt from WFD (2) Programme of Measures: planning and link to pressures The reporting should enable explaining the rationale for selection of measures, whether there is a complete relation between pressures, monitoring, measures, timeline for implementation, governance for implementation of measures, budget, analysis of effectiveness and monitoring of progress. It should also explain how the proposed measures have been selected, in particular whether and on which basis a cost-effectiveness analysis of the measures has been performed. It should explain how the specific requirements of protected areas were taken into account in the PoM. At general level in the case of an international RBD, the reporting should indicate how the PoM has been co-ordinated between the Member States and what issues were specifically addressed.

Some lessons learnt from WFD (3) Current reporting on basic measures looks not useful as it is limited to a tick box exercise on implementation of other legislation while this information should be collected through the relevant reporting streams and Commission assessments. The reporting should instead focus on detailing the articulation pressures vs. type of measures (to be provided under the common DPSIR descriptors) and the extent to which the measures will be sufficient to achieve the objectives The main information to be provided should be a matrix pressures vs. measures (based on a common typology), indicating in each cell the expected effectiveness of the measure in terms of reduction of the pressure, using the same metrics than for the characterisation. The schema should also include targeted questions with closed replies and requiring the link to the document and the section explaining in detail, for each type of measure: • Who is responsible for the implementation? • What is the timetable for the implementation? • The degree of uncertainties in the effects of the measures • [when relevant] What efforts have been made in terms of co-operation between other sub-units and trans-boundary basins districts?

Some lessons learnt from WFD (4) Programme of measures – costs and benefits With current reported data, building a common economics knowledge base of costs and benefits in different River Basins or extrapolating available results to an EU wide assessment of the costs and benefits of the WFD remains a difficult and very challenging task. The assessment of the costs and benefits of the measures should also provide a link with drivers and pressures, showing how the measures contribute to addressing the pressures that are driving the failure to meet good status.

'Generic' type of measures Parallel with WFD MSFD requirements Reporting under WFD Reporting under MSFD Measures under existing EU legislation compulsory basic measures Article 11(3)a Integration in PoM MS were asked to indicate whether the measures were implemented and to give comments or explanations, in particular if they had not been (fully) implemented - reference to other EU reporting sheet   Measure(s) foreseen by the Directive compulsory basic measures Article 11(3)b WFD MPA: Coherent and representative network MS were required to indicate whether the type of measure was in place in the RBD, provide a reference, briefly describe the measure and provide any additional comments or an explanation if the measure had not been put in place - See MEG for Coherence and representativeness - need to define level of detail for the measures related to MPA …. New / Marine measures supplementary and additional measures of WFD Articles 11(4) and 11(5) 1) CEA / technically feasible 2) Impact Assessment (CBA) key Type of Measures: by identifying which pressures required supplementary measures and then by linking those pressures to supplementary measures that are coded - first categorization per descriptor need for a typology based on pressures ? …?

ESA / DG ENV with support of GES Action Who When Elaborate first draft of PoM Recommendation and ask for a mandate to MSCG ESA / DG ENV with support of GES 12-13 Nov 2013 Ad Hoc working group / drafting group to work on PoM Recommendation (main chapter, Annex 1 , Annex 2 partially) ESA / GES volunteers Mid Nov 13 -> End January 14 Discussion during MSCG MSCG 11 Feb 2014 Develop the Annex 3 related to reporting and discuss at DIKE WG DG ENV 25-26 Feb 2014 Further work on Reporting sheet / decentralised approach with the support of a specific technical group… DIKE / DG ENV To be finalised for summer 2014

DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry 30.04.2019 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine Thank you for your attention!