1. 6th WG-ESA meeting in Bonn 13th -14th of October - Follow up
4/11/2019
6th WG-ESA meeting in Bonn 13th -14th of October - Follow up
Mats Ivarsson, MSCG,
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

2. The main objectives of WG-ESA
4/11/2019
Facilitate a common understanding of the requirements of Article 8(1)(c) of the MSFD
Identify robust and credible methodologies and approaches to meeting the requirements of Article 8(1)(c) and provide, as appropriate, recommendations
Promote communication, cooperation and coordination between marine regions and sub- regions in order to improve the consistency and coherence of social and economic assessments
As necessary, provide a forum for addressing other social and economic matters covered by the Directive
Facilitate cooperation and links between WG ESA and other MSFD CIS work
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

3. Current work programme, 2011
4/11/2019
Focusing on exchange of experience on preparing the initial assessment (use of marine waters and cost of degradation);
Developing a common understanding on the application of articles 13 and 14 of the MSFD and the consideration of costs and benefits in target-setting;
Identifying research priorities.
The WG ESA guidance on the economic and social aspects of the initial assessment, developed in December 2010, has been widely used by Member States and will be evaluated at the end of the process (i.e. later in 2012).
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

4. The substantive items on the agenda from the meeting in Bonn
4/11/2019
The substantive items on the agenda from the meeting in Bonn
Result of a survey, conducted by SE, of MS progress on the economic and social analysis
Detailed MS presentations on initial assessments (SLO, IRL, DK)
Preliminary results from the Commission study on Economic Assessment of policy measures for the implementation of the MSFD (Arcadis and University of Bath)
Presentation and group discussion on the draft reporting sheet for the economic and social analysis
Collection and circulation of links to published documents
Further…
SE survey on MS work with ESA in IA;
This will be updated following the meeting and recirculated to WG ESA members;
Arcadis and Univ of Bath study;
Objectives of the study;
Inventory of policy measures (including measures already implemented in MS countries and some not yet implemented but could be suitable)
Establishing criteria for the evaluation of measures (effectiveness of measures (CEA, CBA), suitability, social and institutional context etc.)
Key success & limiting factors (what would be necessary for a mix of measures to be cost-efficient and flexible?)
Five case studies on evaluation of implemented policy instruments.
Timing issue;
November 9: Draft Final Report
December 9: Final report
Feedback needed before 28th of October on elements discussed
Screen the database to see what kind of instruments that are not in there. But if there are some interesting policy instruments that are lacking, this could be sent before 28th of October.
Reporting sheets;
The Secretariat sent summaries of WG ESA group points to Charlotte after the meeting. The comments have been added to chapter 3.5 in doc 9 to this meeting.
The MS could further make comments directly by until 19/10 and in addition detailed comments could be sent to the Commission by 14/11
FI:However, information on some activities is missing. Elaboration on different sources of uncertainty, especially when it comes to policy instruments would be useful.
UK; It would be good if further case studies could be developed at some time with focus on the descriptors that are more difficult to assess or where further measures are most likely to be needed, and to add to the green growth aspect and look at win-win situations.
EEA; Has there been any consultation with WG-GES group? The usefulness of the aggregate case studies can be questioned, it is not clear enough. The effort should focus on success stories; if possible it would be good to squeeze in more success stories.
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

5. Research priorities
4/11/2019
A presentation was made by the Commission’s consultant (Intersus & Milieu Ltd) on relevant European research, gaps and needs
A pilot database of research projects related to ESA aspects of MSFD
Analysis of research Gaps and Needs Research to collect “primary data/knowledge” Research on operationalization issues Research on communication issues Accompanying action – effective sharing
Point 4.1 in WG-ESA work programme concerns the identification of research priorities;
What existing research activities are relevant to economic and social analysis for the MSFD?
No MS is at the moment able to lead this work – delayed work-stream
Brief introduction by the EC: It was acknowledged by the MD that there was a need to get a better knowledge of the big research programs, and a tool for this. Milieu was asked (by DG ENV) to develop such an instrument. This will not be a very elaborate database but an easy and quick tool for DG ENV.
The preliminary results from the overview consist of two parts
Database development
Analysis of research gaps and needs
A pilot database The aim is to provide a user friendly instrument on the scientific development of MSFD, this will involve a pilot table of projects that will contribute to ESA work. The aim is to identify European funded projects with one or several components related to ESA
Multinational projects - Funded by european instuments like FP6, FP7, LIFE INTERREG etc) Starting date from 2002 (FP6) - Theme/topic must be related to MSFD
Summary:
Based on an investigation on already existing projects, the research needs and gaps can be classified under the following cathegories:
Need for simplified natural science info, more info on socio-economic data (Qualitative and quantitative data regarding benefits needed in terms of more applicable results)
Operationalization issues – especially on methodologies for handling economic requirement of the MSFD
Communication issues – how to illustrate benefits in a way that their importance to society, including in relation to economic activities, is communicated in a transparent and clear manner.
Accompanying action – there is a need for a structured mechanism to review and synthesize on a regular basis existing knowledge, for example by development of EMODNET or setting up a platform similar to WISE-RTD.
Section 4 I WG-ESA work programme
Deliverables; Advice document from WG-ESA, Milestones; End 2011
Finally the group was asked if anyone wanted to volunteer to lead the group on research needs and to take care of communications with Stefan. No one volunteered to lead but Kari Hyytiäinen agreed to be a part in the work. It was decided that the group takes the question under consideration and come back later with suggestions.
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

6. Target setting and economic and social concerns
4/11/2019
Target setting and economic and social concerns
A presentation by France of a discussion paper on socio economic considerations in target setting.
WG-ESA agreed that;
No guidance will be developed
Instead the discussion paper prepared by FR will be circulated and complemented by additional MS experiences -> identification of problem areas and methodologies
In addition, a French study (ACTeon) will be ready in November covering the issue of economic and social considerations in target setting
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

7. Disproportionate cost
4/11/2019
UK presented a discussion paper on disproportionate cost
WG-ESA agreed that;
There is no need for further guidance
There is however a great need for a compilation of practical examples of the application of the principle (e.g. under the WFD)
The group should work on a paper with examples regarding disproportionate costs
A question was forwarded to EC whether it would be possible to get some consultant support with developing this
Hanne Grete;
Disproportionate cost: A possible EC interpretation of art 14.4 could be suggested included in future MSCG CIS activity related to establishment of programmes of measures.
The paper;
The discussion paper primarily discusses what the MSFD says about disproportionate costs, how have these been described in the Water Framework Directive and what are the key similarities and differences.  In UK they organized a workshop with experts to discuss how to consider economic efficiency, distributional issues, what is meant by taking into account the risk to the environment and how to do not to compromise GES.  What challenges are MS likely to face when considering economic efficiency and distributional issues?
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management

8. Future work
4/11/2019
The priority over the next 8 months; preparing and finalising the initial assessment and any other supporting socio-economic analysis
Next meeting is scheduled for September 2012
review the effectiveness of the WG ESA guidance document and other papers, and
considerations on whether further work and the continuation of the working group is desirable (WG-ESA mandate expires at the end of 2012)
Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management