1. Synergies/complementarities
MSFD
Qualitative MAES story-line useful even short-term ( 2014 PoM)
Quantitative MAES to support longer-term goal of achieving GES (link services–descriptors)
MSP/ICM
Potential to help address trade-offs – but uncertainty what Directive will deliver
CFP
Info on pressures from data-collection framework
Annual reporting

2. Synergies/complementarities
WFD, Habitats Dir.
Assessments can help – but problems of scale, assessment unit, syncronicity of reporting

3. Data sources, research & other experiences
EEA/ETC-BD habitats classification cross-walk (relating existing data to MAES typology)
Regional seas conventions
IMP sea-basin flagship projects
NGOs
Citizen science
ICES cultural-services workshop
Other Commission DGs (MARKT/natural capital)
Collating case studies on best-known services

4. Challenges, gaps
Existing legislation not geared towards ecosystem-services assessment -- way out:
Need to identify problems
„Translation“ methodology to be developed
Even bigger challenge at EU level due to variability in reported info
Utility of MAES not obvious  urgent need for qualitative story-line
Timing: 2014 around the corner

5. Challenges, gaps
Perceived excess of parallel, non-syncronised processes/reporting requirements  MAES not seen as overall umbrella
Biodiversity protection risks not getting enough attention

6. General conclusions – way fwd
Working-group discussions to be summarised in workshop report
In context of pilot, use service/ecosystem case studies rather than fill in whole matrix at once
Need to better exchange information ( CIRCA: MAES marine pilot folder)
Table with hyperlinks to case studies etc.
Template/cook book