Marine Strategy Framework Directive: reporting in 2012

Marine Strategy Framework Directive: reporting in 2012
WG DIKE training course on MSFD reporting 4 July 2012 Copenhagen David Connor DG Environment, Marine Environment Unit 1

IA, targets & indicators Monitoring Programmes Programmes of Measures
Implementation Steps Initial assessment (IA) of current environmental status of MS waters Determination of GES Establishment of environmental targets and associated indicators Monitoring programme for ongoing assessment and regular updating of targets Programme of measures to achieve or maintain GES Review of the different steps Main steps of a Marine Strategy: IA, targets & indicators 2012 (+ 6 years) Monitoring Programmes 2014 Programmes of Measures 2015 Implementation 2016 Six-year review 2018 – 2021 GES 2020

Agreed by Marine Directors, December 2011
Timelines By 15 July 2012 MS complete: Article 8 – Initial assessment of MS marine waters Article 9 - Determination of GES Article 10 – Series of environmental targets and associated indicators Within 3 months, notify Commission (i.e. by 15 October 2012) Via ReportNet ‘paper’ reports Priority fields in reporting sheets Within further 6 months (i.e. by 15 April 2013) Remaining fields in reporting sheets Agreed by Marine Directors, December 2011 3

Use of the reports Inform further work on regional coherence
Article 12 assessment Within 6 months of receiving all MS notifications, Commission informs MS on Article 12 assessment Assess whether the elements constitute an appropriate framework to meet requirements of Directive Consider coherence within regions & across Community Commission may ask MS to provide any additional information that is available and necessary Provide via update of MSFD database and ReportNet In-depth assessments & wider use Inform further work on regional coherence Monitoring programmes Baseline assessment for MSFD – contribute to SoE reporting and other European/global assessments 4

Analysis of pressures and impacts, based on Annex III, Table 2
Initial assessment Article 8 – initial assessment of MS marine waters, due 2012, updated 2018: Characteristics and status of MS marine waters, based on Annex III, Table 1 Analysis of pressures and impacts, based on Annex III, Table 2 An economic & social analysis, and cost of degradation 5

GES and targets 11 ‘descriptors’ of GES (Annex I)
Article 9 – Determination of GES: 11 ‘descriptors’ of GES (Annex I) Each descriptor has criteria and indicators (2010 COM Decision) Article 10 – Targets to achieve GES: State, impact, pressure or operational Associated indicators 6

Reporting sheets 7 RS 12 RS 3 RS 1 RS
Art 8.1a Characteristics & features 7 RS Art 8.1b Pressures and impacts 12 RS Art 8.1c Economic and social analysis 3 RS Art 9 Determination of GES 1 RS Art 10 Targets and indicators Art 5 and 6 Regional Coordination Art 3 and 4 Geographic aspects

Regional approach/coordination
MSFD regions and subregions Draft map 8 June 2012 Light shading are areas of non-MS waters within a region/sub-region Blue lines are Continental Shelf areas (seabed only) (for IE, PT, UK) White lines are MSFD sub-divisions (for ES) GES is determined at Region or Subregion level (Art. 3.5) Reporting is a Member State responsibility Reports should address all MS marine waters – but not confined to MS waters

IMPACTS Activity Pressure State Activity A Oil & gas Activity B
Sand & gravel extraction Activity C Shipping Activity D Fishing Activity Pressure Z Habitat disturbance Pressure Pressure Y Contamination Pressure X Underwater noise Component A Cetaceans Component B Fish Component C Seabirds Component D Pelagic habitat Component E Seabed habitat State Desired state of environment GES - Acceptable levels of impact IMPACTS Acceptable levels of pressure GES - Links within Art 8 Measures - Focus on pressures – where, how much, how frequent? Economic & social analysis Art 8.1c Assessment of pressures Art 8.1b Table 2 Assessment of state Art 8.1a Table 1

Ecosystem goods and services
Initial assessment and links to Articles 9, 10 and 13 Ecosystem goods and services D P I S R Activity Pressure Impact State GES/targets D1, 3, 4, 6 Cost of degradation GES & targets All descriptors? Links to other elements of marine strategies are important to consider, esp. Art 9 and 10 where targets may be state, impact or pressure-based. On the basis that most improvements in environmental state are achieved by reducing the pressure (rather than active intervention), the targets on impacts and pressures would lead to measures. Art. 9 & 10 Measures, Art. 13 GES/targets D2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

Characteristics reporting sheets
Reports on: Component A Component B Component C Component D Component E Characteristics reporting sheets List of ecosystem components: Physical/chemical Species/functional groups Habitats Ecosystem functions Reports on: Pressure C Pressure D Pressure E Pressure A Pressure B Pressures & Impacts reporting sheets Reports on: Activity A Activity B Activity C Activity D Activity E Socio-economic reporting sheets Goods & services Impacts Initial Assessment List of pressures: Physical Hydrological Chemical Biological List of human activities: Sea-based Land-based Reporting for the Initial Assessment is structured around Tables 1 and 2 in Annex III of the MSFD, leading to reports on components of the ecosystem (e.g. a species, a habitat) or on a pressure and its impacts (e.g. physical damage, nutrient enrichment). Under discussion within WG DIKE is also the possibility to structure the economic and social analysis (Art 8.1c) according to the sectors of human activity. These three main types of report are interlinked: activities give rise to pressures, pressures to impacts on the ecosystem components and the ecosystem provides good and services upon which the activities depend, it is helpful to enable cross-reference of individual reports to related reports (e.g. which activities are causing a pressure, which components are impacted by a particular pressure). The reporting sheets facilitate this linkage through use of a common list of activities, pressures and components. Pressures 11

List of GES descriptors
Criteria Reports on current status of ecosystem components from initial assessment Reports on current status of pressures & impacts from initial assessment List of GES descriptors D1, D2, …… D10, D11 GES Descriptor ... Descriptor 10 Descriptor 11 Descriptor1 Descriptor 2 Reports on GES for: Criterion 1.1 Criterion 1.2 Criterion 2.1 Criterion ...1 Criterion 10.1 Criterion 11.1 Criterion 10.2 Other Target A Target B Target C Target Y Target Z Target .. Reports on Targets and associated indicators Targets may be linked to Descriptors, Criteria or ‘Other’ Reporting on the characteristics of GES (Art 9) and the setting of targets and associated indicators (Art 10) can be seen as separate but related tasks, which in turn link to the initial assessment (Art 8). The IA should provide an assessment of the current status of a component or pressure, preferably according to the criteria used to define GES (the desired status) from the Commission Decision; targets should then be defined to bridge the gap between current and desired status and again are likely to be associated to the criteria for assessment of status. 12

Pressures and impacts analysis
Analysis of the pressure: What are the characteristics of the pressure? What are the sources of the pressure (i.e. the human activities)? What is the level of pressure arising from the human activities (the 'input level') and/or found in the environment (the 'output level')? Analysis of impacts: What are the impacts of the pressure on the environment? Distinguish impacts on: water column habitats seabed habitats functional groups (of birds, mammals, fish, reptiles) Assessment of the pressure and its impacts: Is the current level of the pressure acceptable? Is the current level of the impacts acceptable?

Ecosystem characteristics analysis
Characterisation of the component: What are the characteristics of the component? What is the current situation (state) for the component, (e.g. for a habitat: its distribution, extent and condition) and how is this changing over time? What are the key pressures affecting (impacting) the component? Current status of the component: What is the current status of the component?

Uses and activities analysis
An economic and social analysis of the uses of marine waters (a sector by sector report): What are the characteristics of the activity? What is the current distribution and intensity of the activity? What are the economic and social benefits of the activity (e.g. employment, annual productivity)? What are the key pressures arising from the activity? Or: report on ecosystem services or other approaches used Cost of degradation of the marine environment Including costs of reducing the pressures and impacts that are needed to achieve GES.

Framework: pressures and impacts analysis
Topic Pressure: characteristics Pressure: levels (at source and/or level in environment) Pressure: sources (activities) Impacts: ecosystem components affected, extent Topic Description Summary information Pressure: characteristics Summary text description Pressure: levels (at source and/or level in environment) Proportion of assessment area with pressure (% categories) Trend – recent, future (increasing, stable, decreasing, unknown) Pressure: sources (activities) Top 3 activities Rank contribution to pressure Impacts: ecosystem components affected, extent Ecosystem components affected: water column, seabed, functional group (select from a list) Proportion of assessment area impacted (% categories) Topic Description Pressure: characteristics Summary text description Pressure: levels (at source and/or level in environment) Pressure: sources (activities) Impacts: ecosystem components affected, extent Topic Description Summary information Supporting data & metadata Pressure: characteristics Summary text description Pressure: levels (at source and/or level in environment) Proportion of assessment area with pressure (% categories) Trend – recent, future (increasing, stable, decreasing, unknown) Pressure: Distribution & intensity – GIS data Trends – appropriate data set Impacts: Metadata: date assessed, method, source, limitations Pressure: sources (activities) Top 3 activities Rank contribution - proportion of total pressure Impacts: ecosystem components affected, extent Ecosystem components affected: water column, seabed, functional group (select from a list) Proportion of assessment area impacted (% categories)

Framework: characteristics analysis
Topic Description Summary information Component characteristics Summary text description Predominant habitats: sub-types Functional groups: main species Distribution Alteration from natural conditions: yes, no, unknown; degree (% categories) Trend – recent, future (improving, stable, deteriorating, unknown) Extent (habitat) Population size (species) Condition Pressures affecting component Top 3 pressures GES criteria affected Proportion of component impacted (% categories) Topic Description Component characteristics Summary text description Distribution Extent (habitat) Population size (species) Condition Pressures affecting component Topic Component characteristics Distribution Extent (habitat) Population size (species) Condition Pressures affecting component Topic Description Summary information Supporting data & metadata Component characteristics Summary text description Predominant habitats: sub-types Functional groups: main species Distribution Alteration from natural conditions (yes, no, unknown; degree in % categories) Trend – recent, future (improving, stable, deteriorating, unknown) Distribution & extent GIS data Trends – data set Condition Appropriate data sets, with trends Metadata: date assessed, method, source, limitations Extent (habitat) Population size (species) Pressures affecting component Top 3 pressures GES criteria affected Proportion of component impacted (% categories)

Framework: status/targets
Article Component assessed Area assessed What is GES? Links to Directive & Decision Baseline Current status Issues to be addressed Targets to achieve GES Physical & chemical features, habitats, functional groups, species Qualitative (normative) description Quantitative definition or trends At Descriptor, criterion and indicator levels Historic, past, present or modelled Criteria, specific indicator & thresholds used Impacts identified Pressures to be reduced Quantitative, or trends Art. 8 Art. 9 Art. 10

Pressure criteria & indicators State criteria & indicators
Annex III, Table 2 Physical Chemical/Pollution Biological Physical loss & damage Hydrological change Other physical: energy Other physical: litter Hazardous substances Nutrients, organic enrichment Pathogens Non-indigenous spp. Extraction of species; by-catch Pressure State Pressure criteria & indicators 7.1 Spatial characteristics of permanent alterations 8.1 Conc. of contaminants 8.2 Acute pollution 9.1 Levels, no. of contaminants Annex III, Table 1 Physical & Chemical Physical seabed Hydrology Chemistry Species Functional groups Habitats Predominant, Special Particular areas Ecosystems Other Chemicals Features State criteria & indicators 1.1 Species distribution 1.2 Population size 1.3 Population condition The Initial Assessment is structured around Annex III, tables 1 and 2, providing a set of ecosystem components and pressures to be described/assessed. The COM Decision provides the criteria for the assessment of ecosystem components and pressures. These links are described in the COM Staff Working Document (links Annex I to Annex III via the criteria) – there are some components (e.g. physical features, other features) and pressures (e.g. pathogens) which have no criteria. In 2012, MS will report on the characteristics of GES, plus targets and further/more specific indicators. Targets can be on state, impacts or pressures – these can be associated to each component or pressure and to the relevant criterion. The same state-based targets may cover multiple species/functional groups/habitat types – e.g. a quantitative reflection of GES; however impact and pressure targets may be more specific per species, functional group or habitat type or a given area (region/subregion/or part). 1.4 Habitat distribution 1.5 Habitat extent 1.6 Habitat condition 6.2 Condition of benthos 1.7 Ecosystem structure 4.1 Productivity 4.2 Proportion of species at top of food web 4.3 Abundance of key species/groups

Annex III, Table 2 Physical Chemical/Pollution Biological Physical loss & damage Hydrological change Other physical: energy Other physical: litter Contam-inants Nutrients, organic enrichment Pathogens Non-indigenous spp. Extraction of species; by-catch Pressure State Pressure criteria & indicators Annex III, Table 1 Physical & Chemical Physical seabed Hydrology Chemistry Species Functional groups Habitats Predominant, Special Particular areas Ecosystems Other Chemicals Features State criteria & indicators 5.2, 5.3 Effects of nutrient enrichment 10.2 Impacts of litter A pressure may affect multiple ecosystem components (e.g. nutrient enrichment affects phytoplankton and seabed communities). Several pressures may affect the same component (e.g. ingesting litter, oil contamination, invasive species and by-catch issues for a seabird). The COM Decision provides a number of ‘impact indicators’ which are mostly linked to a specific pressure. There may be additional indicators proposed by MS in 2012 to address other interactions between pressure and state (e.g. the OSPAR EcoQO on harbour porpoise by-catch). Assessment of an ecosystem component needs to encompass the sum of the impacts upon it (at a given scale, such as the subregion/subdivision, or for a given population) to determine its overall status (in relation to the criteria of GES and the state-based targets). In these cases, the state assessments can draw upon the assessments of impacts from the pressure descriptors (provided they are undertaken at a suitable resolution). 2.2 Impact of invasive species

Annex III, Table 2 Physical Chemical/Pollution Biological Physical loss & damage Hydrological change Other physical: energy Other physical: litter Contam-inants Nutrients, organic enrichment Pathogens Non-indigenous spp. Extraction of species; by-catch Pressure State Pressure criteria & indicators Annex III, Table 1 Physical & Chemical Physical seabed Hydrology Chemistry Species Functional groups Habitats Predominant, Special Particular areas Ecosystems Other Chemicals Features State criteria & indicators Impact criteria & indicators From the first two slides, the full linkage between Annex III and Annex I via the COM Decision criteria and indicators can be illustrated. The Decision provides for a selection of impact criteria and indicators, but others may be proposed by MS where needed. Several impact indicators may need to be applied to different ecosystem components and therefore need adaptation/further specification to become fully operational.

Annex III, Table 2 Physical Chemical/Pollution Biological Physical loss & damage Hydrological change Other physical: energy Other physical: litter Contam-inants Nutrients, organic enrichment Pathogens Non-indigenous spp. Extraction of species; by-catch Pressure State Pressure criteria & indicators Annex III, Table 1 Physical & Chemical Physical seabed Hydrology Chemistry Species Functional groups Habitats Predominant, Special Particular areas Ecosystems Other Chemicals Features State criteria & indicators Assessment + 2.2 Impact of invasive species 10.2 Impacts of litter NEW e.g. by-catch EcoQO A pressure may affect multiple ecosystem components (e.g. nutrient enrichment affects phytoplankton and seabed communities). Several pressures may affect the same component (e.g. ingesting litter, oil contamination, invasive species and by-catch issues for a seabird). The COM Decision provides a number of ‘impact indicators’ which are mostly linked to a specific pressure. There may be additional indicators proposed by MS in 2012 to address other interactions between pressure and state (e.g. the OSPAR EcoQO on harbour porpoise by-catch). Assessment of an ecosystem component needs to encompass the sum of the impacts upon it (at a given scale, such as the subregion/subdivision, or for a given population) to determine its overall status (in relation to the criteria of GES and the state-based targets). In these cases, the state assessments can draw upon the assessments of impacts from the pressure descriptors (provided they are undertaken at a suitable resolution).

GES & targets (pressures)
Measures GES & targets (pressures) Annex III, Table 2 Physical Chemical/Pollution Biological Physical loss & damage Hydrological change Other physical: energy Other physical: litter Contam-inants Nutrients, organic enrichment Pathogens Non-indigenous spp. Extraction of species; by-catch Pressure State Pressure criteria & indicators Annex III, Table 1 Physical & Chemical Physical seabed Hydrology Chemistry Species Functional groups Habitats Predominant, Special Particular areas Ecosystems Other Chemicals Features State criteria & indicators IA GES & targets (state/impact) The relationship between Art 8, 9 and 10 can be seen in the framework, and ultimately Art 11 (monitoring) and Art 13 (measures). Several pressures may affect the same component (e.g. ingesting litter, oil contamination, invasive species and by-catch issues for a seabird). The COM Decision provides a number of ‘impact indicators’ which are mostly linked to a specific pressure. There may be additional indicators proposed by MS in 2012 to address other interactions between pressure and state (e.g. the OSPAR EcoQO on harbour porpoise by-catch). Assessment of an ecosystem component needs to encompass the sum of the impacts upon it (at a given scale, such as the subregion/subdivision, or for a given population) to determine its overall status (in relation to the criteria of GES and the state-based targets). In these cases, the state assessments can draw upon the assessments of impacts from the pressure descriptors (provided they are undertaken at a suitable resolution).

Annex III, Table 2 Physical Chemical/Pollution Biological Physical loss & damage Hydrological change Other physical: energy Other physical: litter Contam-inants Nutrients, organic enrichment Pathogens Non-indigenous spp. Extraction of species; by-catch Pressure State Pressure criteria & indicators Annex III, Table 1 Physical & Chemical Physical seabed Hydrology Chemistry Species Functional groups Habitats Predominant, Special Particular areas Ecosystems Other Chemicals Features State criteria & indicators Report on pressure, including impacts Report on state of component, including impacts Impact criteria & indicators It is proposed to base the overall structure of reporting for the MSFD on the structures provided by the Directive and Decision and illustrated in the matrix: To have ‘reporting sheets’ centred around: the components in Table 1: i.e. for physical, hydrological and chemical characteristics, and for species, functional groups, habitats and ecosystems. Each can incorporate relevant impacts. Chemicals can be dealt with as a pressure. Scope of ‘Particular areas’ and ‘Other features’ needs to be discussed. The pressures in Table 2: i.e. physical loss/damage, hydrological change, introduction of energy, litter, contaminants (?separate for oil spills), nutrient enrichment, pathogens, NIS, extraction of species. Other?? Each can incorporate relevant impacts. The detail of each reporting sheet needs to be developed with MS, to agree what should be incorporated in 2012 and what should be developed later (for subsequent reporting). The overall goal would be to move from a text-heavy process for the 2012 IA to a more categorized type of reporting for This should be easier for MS to compile and generate more comparable information on the assessments, facilitating interpretation at regional and European scales (e.g. for dissemination via webGIS systems such as WISE viewer and BISE (Habitats Directive). In broad terms, the reporting sheets need to encompass: Characterisation of the component/pressure – spatial and temporal variation, etc What is considered to be GES for this aspect What are the targets and associated indicators (linked to the relevant criteria) What is the current state/situation (from the IA), taking account of the impacts What baseline/reference point has been used. What is the spatial scale of the assessment. Discussion via DIKE needed on what level of detail should be used for 2012 (e.g. all text/some categorised information etc) – acknowledging also that there will be information gaps for some MS and topics – expect a part picture for 2012. To be discussed: potential overlap for reporting on impacts in relation to a component and a pressure – may depend on the issue and assessment scales, etc.

Inform Determination of GES Inform targets
Summary Reporting keeps Article 8.1 elements (a, b, c), 9 and 10 separate but interlinked (via common term lists) Reporting sheets ask a few high level questions per ‘feature’ (+ supporting text, metadata) Art. 8 reporting aims for a broad understanding of current state of environment and its pressures/impacts Inform Determination of GES Inform targets Eventually inform monitoring and measures Gaps in information should inform monitoring and research needs, and need for development of assessment techniques

Thank you for your attention !

Marine Strategy Framework Directive: reporting in 2012

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Marine Strategy Framework Directive: reporting in 2012"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Marine Strategy Framework Directive: reporting in 2012

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Marine Strategy Framework Directive: reporting in 2012"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback