1. Reporting under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive – 2012 Requirements
Presentation to the Working Group on Data, Information and Knowledge Exchange (WG DIKE), Brussels, 11 May 2011
This paper has been prepared as a background document for WG DIKE to serve as a means of stimulating discussion amongst Member States. It has been prepared under contract to DG Environment by MRAG Ltd, UNEP-WCMC and URS Scott-Wilson, who are providing support to the Commission to develop the details of what will be reported and how, for the MSFD reporting requirements due in 2012.
This paper explores the possible structure of reporting of some aspects of the Initial Assessments (characteristics, pressures and impacts), the determination of good environmental status, and the setting of targets and associated indicators, carried out under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), and due to be reported on in Economic and social analysis of the use of marine waters, and the cost of degradation of the marine environment, will also have to be reported in 2012, but this is not within the scope of this paper.
S.F.Walmsley
Prepared under contract for DG Environment by MRAG Ltd, UNEP-WCMC, URS/Scott-Wilson

2. Objectives Outline 2012 reporting requirements
Present possible overall frameworks for 2012 reporting
Present proposed overall reporting structure
Discuss possible levels of detail to be reported
Ideas for taking the work forward
Run through objectives of talk

3. Objectives Outline 2012 reporting requirements
Present possible overall frameworks for 2012 reporting
Present proposed overall reporting structure
Discuss possible levels of detail to be reported
Ideas for taking the work forward
In particular, we hope to stimulate discussion and obtain agreement on the following:
- The overall framework for reporting on the state characteristics, pressures and impacts, good environmental status, and targets and indicators;
- The level of detail that should be sought for reporting in 2012 on the above aspects.

4. 2012 Reporting requirements
Characteristics (Annex III, Table 1)
Article 8
Pressures and Impacts (Annex III, Table 2)
Economic and social analysis
Set of characteristics for Good Environmental Status (GES) (Annex I)
Article 9
Article 10
Environmental targets and associated indicators
(I’m sure everybody is very familiar with these, so no need to dwell on them...)

5. 2012 Reporting requirements
Article 9(2): notify the Commission of the initial assessment and determination of GES; Article 10(2): notify of environmental targets.
Article 19(3): grant access and use rights to data and information.
Article 24(2)(b): adoption of technical formats for transmission and processing of data.
There are a number of articles that relate to the requirements for Member States to report and share data and information.
Article 9(2) requires Member States to ‘notify the Commission of the [initial] assessment ... and of the determination [of a set of characteristics for good environmental status]’ within three months of their completion
Article 10(2) sets out the requirement to ‘notify the Commission of the environmental targets’ within three months of their establishment (both of these would be due by 15 October 2012).
Article 19(3) highlights the need for Member States to grant access and use rights in respect of data and information resulting from the Initial Assessments to the Commission, and also to make them available to the European Environment Agency (no later than) six months after the data and information have become available (i.e. by 15 January 2013).
Article 24(2)(b) specifies that technical formats may be adopted for the purposes of transmission and processing of data, including statistical and cartographic data. The reporting sheets provide a means of specifying such a technical format.

6. Reporting concept Data & information WISE-Marine will include:
Interpreted and aggregated information constituting the Initial Assessment, determination of GES, targets and indicators
Underlying evidence, may be associated with other data platforms
2012 to focus on interpreted and aggregated information, later reporting to include more underlying data
Data & information:
- Article 19(3) refers to the provision of 'data and information' that needs to be provided in 2012/13.
The underlying environmental evidence, in an uninterpreted or primary form, can be considered to fall under the term 'data'.
The resulting understanding of the current state of the environment and the pressures and impacts acting upon it, may be in the form of text-based reports, aggregated information, or categorised information can be considered to be interpreted or aggregated evidence and thus to fall under the term 'information‘.
In reality, there is often a gradation between primary data and interpreted information, such that it is not always possible to apply a strict boundary between the two.

7. Reporting sheets Reporting sheets to identify what and how to report
2012 reporting to form the basis of future reporting
2014 – Monitoring programmes
2015 – Programmes of Measures
2018 – update on initial assessment and GES
Need to take account of future reporting:
2012 reporting likely to need further development
Reporting framework to integrate future requirements
Reporting sheets used under WFD – some will be familiar with them
Specify what data/information should be reported, what units, etc. Allow a forum for agreement to be reached amongst MS on reporting requirements.
2012 reporting should therefore take these future reporting requirements into account and be considered as part of an overall process for two main reasons:
- Firstly, the scope and detail of reporting in 2012 is likely to need further development to support future assessments and monitoring of progress towards achieving GES; and
- Need to take into account future reporting requirements to ensure that the overall framework is streamlined and consistent.

8. Overall framework Options:
‘Separate approach’ – reporting Articles 8, 9 & 10 separately
‘Integrated approach’ – integrating the reporting of Articles 8, 9 & 10
We have considered two options for the overall framework for reporting have been considered:

9. Links between Annex III Tables 1 & 2 and Annex I
Characteristics
Current state assessed against determination of Good Environmental Status
Targets
& indicators
Pressures and impacts may influence the current characteristics.
The current state of the environment, pressures and impacts, contribute to the determination of GES and the assessment of where we are in relation to GES
Annex III,
Table 2
Pressures & impacts

10. Good Environmental Status
Separate approach
Annex III,
Table 1
Characteristics
Good Environmental Status
Targets
& indicators
This ‘separate’ approach to reporting Articles 8, 9 and 10 would structure the reporting clearly around Annexes III and I in the Directive.
This approach may reflect some Member States' approaches to implementing the Directive where the work under Article 8 is being undertaken in parallel with that under Articles 9 and 10, but which may not make explicit the linkages between the two strands of development.
We would envisage:
A set of reporting sheets on the state characteristics of the marine environment from the Initial assessment;
A set of reporting sheets on the analysis of pressures and impacts from the Initial assessment;
A set of reporting sheets on the determination of Good Environmental Status, and associated targets and indicators.
Annex III,
Table 2
Pressures & impacts

11. Summary of reporting sheets – separate approach
Characteristics
Pressures & impacts
GES and targets
C1: Physical features
C2: Hydrological features
C3: Chemical features
C4: Biological features (species)
C5: Biological features (functional groups)
C6: Habitats (type)
C7: Habitats (particular areas)
C8: Ecosystems
C9: Other features
P1: Physical loss &damage
P2: Other physical disturbance – noise
P3: Other physical disturbance – litter
P4: Interference with hydrological processes
P5: Contamination
P6: Nutrient and organic matter enrichment
P7: Biological disturbance – microbial pathogens
P8: Biological disturbance – non-indigenous spp
P9: Biological disturbance – extraction of species
G1: Biological Diversity
G2: Non-indigenous spp
G3: Commercially exploited fish & shellfish
G4: Marine food webs
G5: Human-induced eutrophication
G6: Sea-floor integrity
G7: Hydrographical conditions
G8: Contaminants
G9: Contaminants in fish and other seafood
G10: Marine litter
G11: Energy, noise
The separate approach would involved three sets of reporting sheets, structured around the Characteristics (Table 1), Pressures and impacts (Table 2) and GES descriptors.
Each Characteristics sheet could include information on:
The Initial assessment (essential features and characteristics, current state, including impacts)
and could also indicate which pressures are impacting this feature
(same aspects repeated for each sheet)
Each Pressures & impacts sheet could include information on:
Initial assessment - Analysis of pressure and its impacts, including human activity
and could also indicate which ecosystem components this pressure is impacting
Each GES sheet could include information on:
Determination of GES for each criteria
Targets established in relation to each criteria
Indicators selected for each target
So, in summary, the ‘separate’ approach clearly follows the structure of Annex III and Annex I of the MSFD for reporting requirements, and may be easier for Member States to report against if they have developed their Initial Assessments in parallel to their determination of GES. However, it separates the Initial Assessment (of characteristics, pressures and impacts), from GES and the related targets and indicators, and any links are not made explicit.

12. Integrated approach Relevant aspects of Annex III, Pressures & impacts
Table 1
Characteristics
Good Environmental Status
Targets
& indicators
Relevant aspects of GES
Relevant aspects of GES
Relevant targets
& indicators
Relevant targets
& indicators
Should relevant aspects of characteristics also appear in the pressures and impacts sheets?
Previous papers have made clear some of the links between the components of the Initial Assessment (characteristics, pressures and impacts) and the GES descriptors, and we can use these to structure the reporting of the initial assessment and of GES around a single framework
So we would take the Annex III Table 2 characteristics, and the Table 1 pressures and impacts as the starting point, combining into a single sheet, for a particular component (i.e. state characteristic or pressure type):
Relevant aspects of pressures and impacts (Relevant pressures or impacts on or of the component)
Relevant aspects of GES
Relevant targets and indicators
Annex III,
Table 2
Pressures & impacts

13. Summary of reporting sheets – integrated approach
Characteristics
Pressures & impacts
C1: Physical features
C2: Hydrological features
C3: Chemical features
C4: Biological features (species)
C5: Biological features (functional groups)
C6: Habitats (type)
C7: Habitats (particular areas)
C8: Ecosystems
C9: Other features
P1: Physical loss &damage
P2: Other physical disturbance – noise
P3: Other physical disturbance – litter
P4: Interference with hydrological processes
P5: Contamination
P6: Nutrient and organic matter enrichment
P7: Biological disturbance – microbial pathogens
P8: Biological disturbance – non-indigenous spp
P9: Biological disturbance – extraction of species
GES and targets
G1: Biological Diversity
G2: Non-indigenous spp
G3: Commercially exploited fish & shellfish
G4: Marine food webs
G5: Human-induced eutrophication
G6: Sea-floor integrity
G7: Hydrographical conditions
G8: Contaminants
G9: Contaminants in fish and other seafood
G10: Marine litter
G11: Energy, noise
So, for the full list of reporting sheets, there would not be separate sheets on GES and targets and indicators (click to fade), but these aspects would be incorporated into the Characteristics and Pressures and impacts sheets.
Each Characteristics sheet could include information on:
Initial assessment (essential features and characteristics, current state, including impacts)
Determination of GES for relevant criteria
Targets established in relation to each criteria, and indicators selected for each target
(same aspects repeated for each subsequent sheet)
Sheets C1-C3 would only include information on the Initial Assessment and current state including impacts, as there are no relevant GES criteria for these.
Each Pressures & impacts sheet could include information on:
Initial assessment — Analysis of pressures and its impacts including human activity
Ecosystem components on which this pressure is impacting
So, in summary, the ‘integrated’ approach links the state characteristics and pressures with relevant GES criteria and targets, and also makes the links between pressures/impacts and state clearer. This will make future reporting processes more streamlined and enable information to be updated more easily. However, it may be a more difficult approach to report against initially as it may require some extraction of the relevant information to fit into the framework.

14. Example content of reporting sheets – integrated approach
Example: Biological features — marine mammals
Reporting sheet on the initial assessment (characteristics, current state, pressures), GES and Targets and indicators
Information from the Initial Assessment on the characteristics and current state:
A description of the population dynamics, natural and actual range and status of species of marine mammals occurring in the marine region or subregion
Information on the pressures and impacts which are affecting or have affected their current state:
List of pressures impacting marine mammals
Impacts of litter (10.2: )
Impacts of permanent hydrographical changes (7.2: 7.2.2)
Effects of contaminants, impacts (8.2: 8.2.1, 8.2.2)
Impacts of invasive non-indigenous species (2.2: 2.2.1, 2.2.2)
Other pressures (e.g. by-catch, noise)
(Similar information would be required for fish, reptiles and seabirds, and separate Reporting Sheets would cover other state and pressure aspects, according to the rows and columns of the matrix in Annex B)
Firstly, there would be information on the initial assessment, characteristics and current status
Then there would be information on the relevant pressures and impacts that are affecting or have affected the current state

15. Example content of reporting sheets – integrated approach
Example: Biological features — marine mammals
Reporting sheet on the initial assessment (characteristics, current state, pressures), GES and Targets and indicators, CONTINUED
Information on the determination of GES in relation to the criteria; and associated environmental targets and indicators, where they have been identified relating to marine mammals, for the following:
1.1 Species distribution
1.1.1 Distributional range
1.1.2 Distributional pattern
1.2 Population size
1.2.1 Population abundance and/or biomass
1.3 Population condition
1.3.1 Population demographic characteristics
1.3.2 Population genetic structure
And information on relevant GES aspects and associated targets and indicators
The Initial Assessment, impacts, GES, and targets and indicators would be covered in relation to each component of the characteristics (excepting physical and chemical features where it may be less appropriate to define GES and targets).

16. Example content of reporting sheets – integrated approach
Example: Pressures & impacts — Physical loss & damage
Reporting sheet on the initial assessment (pressures, impacts), GES, T&I:
Information from the Initial Assessment on the current pressures and impacts:
Physical loss: Smothering by man-made structures; Smothering by dredge spoil; Sealing by permanent man-made structures; Other
Physical damage: Changes in siltation; Abrasion; Selective extraction; Other
Information on the impacts these pressures are having:
Impacts on physical characteristics (6.1.1, 6.1.2)
Impacts on habitats (6.1.1, 6.1.2)
Impacts on ecosystems (seabed) (6.1.2)
Other impacts
Information on the determination of GES in relation to the criteria; associated environmental targets and indicators, for the following:
6.1 Physical damage, having regard to substrate characteristics
6.1.1 Type, abundance, biomass and areal extent of relevant biogenic substrate
6.1.2 Extent of the seabed significantly affected by human activities for the different substrate types
(Separate Reporting Sheets would cover the other pressures and impacts)
GES descriptor 6.2 on the condition of the benthic community would be covered under one of the characteristics sheets (habitats)
A similar structure would be followed for pressures and impacts...

17. Comparison Separate Clearly follows the structure of MSFD.
Approach
Advantages
Disadvantages
Separate
Clearly follows the structure of MSFD.
May be more straightforward for Member States in the short-term (2012)
Initial assessment reporting separated from GES and targets & indicators - future assessments of status against GES more difficult.
Does not explicitly link the initial assessment components to GES and to objectives and targets to be achieved.
Integrat-ed
Links between initial assessment, GES, and targets & indicators are explicit, providing a coherent framework for later reporting rounds (e.g. 2018) to build on.
May reduce number of reporting steps in the future.
May be difficult to extract the relevant pieces of information to fit framework.
Any general descriptions of GES and targets may need refinement to apply more clearly to a particular component of the initial assessment.
Integrated, 1st +ve point:
Integrated, 2nd +ve point: It may be possible that, by updating status against GES characteristics (in 2018), the initial assessment characteristics are also adequately updated, reducing the number of steps involved in updating/reporting.
Integrated, 3rd +ve point: Links between Pressures and impacts and eventually to monitoring and measures are made explicit to each ecosystem component, later monitoring and measures reporting can be fed in.

18. Proposed framework Integrated approach
Explicit link between GES and associated targets and the components of the initial assessment
Bring together current and desired state
Encourages development of such links during current preparation/implementation phase
Facilitates future linking of monitoring programmes and programmes of measures
Easier future updating of assessments
Based on the assessment of the options examined, it is considered that integrated approach offers the best structure for reporting.
An explicit link is made between the determination of GES and associated targets (i.e. the objectives to be achieved) and the components of the initial assessment (i.e. the aspects of the ecosystem to which the objectives apply);
The structure will explicitly bring together the current state of the ecosystem components (from the initial assessment) and the desired state (from the GES and targets);
The structure encourages Member States to develop such links during the current phase of MSFD implementation, in time for reporting by October 2012, as making such links later would be more difficult;
The structure facilitates future linking of monitoring programmes (linking to indicators for particular ecosystem components) and programmes of measures (linking to targets, particularly on pressures);
The structure will allow easier future updating of assessments, as objectives and targets will already be clearly associated with the relevant parts of the ecosystem.

19. Level of detail and structure
Simple, unstructured
Medium, mixed
Detailed, structured ?
Text fields, broad areas (initial assessment, GES, T&I)
e.g. Cut & paste text from the Initial Assessment document into the reporting field
Mixture of text, categorical, qualitative and quantitative information
e.g. Specific aspects to report on but limited scope and with some flexibility
Most fields with quantitative and/or qualitative categorised information
e.g. Detailed specification of what to report, as in Habitats Directive
Explain detail and structure
Go through different levels of detail and content
The question is how far along do we want to go for the 2012 reporting, and what should our goal be for the 2018 reporting and beyond?

20. Unstructured, simple
Provide summary text describing the marine mammal populations (max 5000 characters)
An example of unstructured, simple reporting format, using marine mammals again as an example would be...

21. Medium, mixed
In the Initial Assessment, have you included information on the marine mammal populations in the marine region/sub-region?
Does this include information on distribution/range (1.1)
Does this include information on abundance/status (1.2)
Does this include information on population dynamics/condition (1.3)
Yes No
How many species of marine mammal occur in the region?
Number of species:
General status of marine mammals in the region:
Is their status improving or declining?
Select from list
Poor
Moderate
Good
Not known
Improving
Stable
Declining
Species-specific information
Species’ latin name:
Actual range as % of natural range: %
Population estimate (abundance):
Units for population estimate:
Description of population condition (max 500 words):
Main pressures and threats:
Select from list

22. Complex, structured Species distribution Further detail on:
For each species of marine mammal:
Species’ latin name:
Distributional range/area: km2
Distribution/range map: Submit map /GIS data showing distribution/range
Date of range determination: year (or range of years)
Quality of data concerning range:
Select from list
Poor
Moderate
Good
Not known
Range trend:
Range trend period: range of years
Reasons for reported trend: Provide options or allow free text
Distributional pattern within range:
Select from list
Homogenous
Heterogenous/clumped
Seasonal etc...
Not known
Species distribution
Further detail on:
Population size & trends
Main pressures and threats
Population condition (demographic characteristics)
Select from list
Increasing
Stable
Declining
Not known
HD data quality guidance:
Poor e.g. based on very incomplete data or on expert judgement
Moderate e.g. based on partial data with some extrapolation
Good e.g based on extensive surveys

23. Advantages and disadvantages
Approach
Advantages
Disadvantages
Simple, unstructured
Easy to report (copy & paste)
Easy to agree for 2012
Useful info cannot be extracted easily
Cannot compare or analyse
Medium, mixed
Relatively easy to report
Allows basic analysis across MS
Mixture of essential and optional parameters
Moderate effort to develop for 2012
Lose resolution and detail
Some information not comparable
Gaps ( )
Detailed, structured
All details captured
Easy to analyse and compare
Display as maps, aggregate, disaggregate
Comparable to future reporting
Difficult to develop for 2012
Agreement may not be possible before deadline
Some parameters may not be comparable (methodologies)
All info may not be available

24. Proposed approach Medium, mixed level
Some descriptive, qualitative information for flexibility, some categorical and quantitative information for comparability
What parameters can be reported to enable some comparability

25. Next steps
Need to develop reporting sheets and define reporting requirements during 2011
Short-term: Agree on overall framework and general level of detail/structure
Med-term: MS input important – convene group of interested MS that can contribute to consultants’ work, provide feedback on proposals etc?
1 group, or several groups according to:
IA/ESA/GES
Theme (eutrophication, biodiversity, etc)

26. Key questions for discussion
Is the ‘integrated approach’ an appropriate framework to take forward defining reporting requirements for IA, GES and targets and indicators?
What level of detail is feasible for reporting in 2012?
Can we identify some common categorical or quantitative information that can be reported to allow comparisons?
Initial thoughts on whether ESA should be integrated into same framework, or kept separate?

27. Thank you
Suzannah Walmsley
MRAG Ltd