Presentation on theme: "Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Goals and Challenges"— Presentation transcript:
1Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Goals and Challenges Johanna KarhuEU Marine and Fisheries Policy OfficerBirdlife Europe
2Transposed into national law MSFD adopted in July 2008Transposed into national lawAim: Take measures to maintain or achieve good environmental status (GES) by 2020:Protect, preserve, restore and prevent deterioration of the marine environmentPrevent and reduce inputs in the marine environment, with a view to phasing out pollutionApply an ecosystem-based approach to managing human activities, and ensure collective pressures don’t compromise GESFirst legislative instrument for marine biodiversity policy in EU.
3Good Environmental Status “the environmental status of marine waters where these provide ecologically diverse and dynamic oceans and seas which are clean, healthy and productive within their intrinsic conditions, and the use of the marine environment is at a level that is sustainable, thus safeguarding the potential for uses and activities by current and future generations” (Art 3)Overall aim of MSFD is to take measures to achieve GES.“GES is probably not being achieved...at the present time” (for biodiversity)GES not about promoting sustainable use or sustainable development, key aim is the health of marine ecosystems which support use....by 2020 at the latest
4First legislative instrument for marine biodiversity policy in EU Member States have to develop Marine Strategies applying ecosystem approach to the management of human activitiesRegional cooperation required at each stageEC decision on criteria and methodological standards on GES
5What does this translate to? 11 EU Descriptors29 EU CriteriaLots of subtargetsand indicators Circa. 130 separate subtargets for biodiversity alone.What is bigger picture?
611 Descriptors Descriptor 1: Biological diversity Descriptor 2: Non-indigenous speciesDescriptor 3: Population of commercial fish / shell fishDescriptor 4: Elements of marine food websDescriptor 5: EutrophicationDescriptor 6: Sea floor integrityDescriptor 7: Alteration of hydrographical conditionsDescriptor 8: ContaminantsDescriptor 9: Contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumptionDescriptor 10: Marine litterDescriptor 11: Introduction of energy, including underwater noise
7Regional Seas Coordinating work regionally Working to deliver GES for Marine RegionsA role for Regional Seas Conventions, e.g. HELCOMMS have to consider implications beyond their boundariesBut MSs aren’t to do this alone – the whole rationale for the Directive is to deliver GES throughout the EU’s seas.So MSs within a Marine Region, e.g. The Baltic, or Sub-Region such as the Greater North Sea are to cooperate to ensure that the Marine Strategies and the Programmes of Measures collectively provide the actions needed to deliver GES for that Marine Region.This gives MSs the opportunity to work together to achieve GES collectively. They must also work at the scale of marine regions or sub-regions which supports the concept of management at the scale of biogeographical seas and delivery of an ecosystem-based approach.As many of our Marine Regions already support some form of cooperative working through the RSCs such as OSPAR and HELCOM, these RSCs are to have a role in delivery at the regional scale and to support regional cooperation and consistency. I know that OSPAR are reviewing their priorities to ensure they match MSFD delivery requirements.This makes good use of existing forums, existing patterns of working and stakeholder involvement. There is an existing role for NGO observers to engage proactively on the RSCs.Finally MSs are to consider implications of their POMs beyond their own boundaries to not only reduce the risk of moving impacts into the waters of another country or the High Seas but where possible to actually have a positive effect. A very holistic approach to management.
8MSFD Marine (Sub-)Regions The aim of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive is to achieve GES by 2020MSs have to develop marine strategies and put in places programmes of measures (including MPAs) to deliver GES. The delivery of GES is determined at the scale of marine regions or sub-regions, so MSs have to act collectively and cooperatively to ensure delivery both within and outwith their own borders.There should be very close links between national marine planning and the development of MSFD Marine Strategies, i.e. marine plans must ensure they support and don't hinder the achievement of GESGES is broken down into 11 descriptors of which 4 are of interest to us and affect seabirds:D1 BiodiversityD3 Commercial fisheriesD4 Marine food webs andD6 Seafloor integrityThe targets and indicators under each descriptor are currently being developed and seabirds indicators, as a top predator and a good indicator of the health of the marine environment, are being considered. Most of these targets and indicators would sit under D1 Biodiversity but could also be used for D3 Fisheries or D4 Food webs. For example, breeding success of different seabird species is an indicator of wider ecosystem health as well as prey availability.
9Determine GES for each region, targets and indicators Programme of measures designedGES is achievedDirective transposedJuly 2008201020122014201520162020Agree GES descriptor criteria, etcMonitoring programme established;(& MPAs progress report)Programme of measures operationalInitial assessment of national marine status
10Developing Common Implementation Strategy Overall aim of MSFD is to take measures to achieve GES.“GES is probably not being achieved...at the present time” (for biodiversity)GES not about promoting sustainable use or sustainable development, key aim is the health of marine ecosystems which support use.
11State of our SeasInitial assessment of the current state of the EU’s seas – due 15/10/2012MonitoringRegular review – every 6 yearsEach MS is to carry out an initial assessment of the State of the seas under their jurisdiction by 2012.This work is already underway.In the UK – Charting Progress 2, the assessment of the state of the UK’s seas id due to be out for public consultation later this year. Updates the 2005 assessmentAlso OSPAR is preparing its 2010 Quality Status Report – due to be published this year.HELCOM – has developed the Baltic Sea Action Plan, so I’m assuming that the work has started here as well.Monitoring programmes to determine the on-going environmental status of the seas – again done cooperatively with other MSs.Regular review at least every 6 years is required – Review of the status of the marine environment, GES, environmental targets, monitoring programmes, and the POMsObviously the assessments and reviews offer opportunities to feed in data and information and influence the management measures.
12Spatial Tools MPAs are specifically mentioned MSs are to report on MPA implementation progressMarine planning is inferred, new Maritime Spatial Planning Directive just adopted by ECAn opportunity that NGOs welcome is the references to spatial protection measures:It’s specifically mentioned within the Directive that the Programme of Measures is to include coherent and representative networks of MPAs covering the whole range of diversity of marine ecosystems. Such spatial measures are to include in particular those sites that are designated under the EU Birds & Habitats Directives, plus sites determined through the RSCs, such as OSPAR MPAs.MSs are to provide the Commission with a progress report on the designation of networks of MPAsWhile spatial and temporal controls and management measures are mentioned in Annex VI as an element of the POMs, the Commission is clear that this refers to Marine Spatial Planning. Marine planning is a management tool that should help deliver the Marine Strategies and the ecosystem-based approach.
13IntegrationEnvironmental concerns must be integrated into other relevant policies and legislative measures, e.g. the CFP and the Integrated Maritime Policy.The Commission is required to ensure that fisheries measures (particularly the reform of the CFP) meet the requirements of GES.There are also other, less obvious opportunities.Requirement for other policy and legislative instruments to be coherent with the MSFD and marine environmental considerations must be integrated into these policies and legislation.This includes the CFP; the Integrated Maritime Policy – the MSFD is the environmental pillar of this policy which covers all maritime sectors; ICZM, etc.For example, this requirement should heavily influence the reform of the CFP in This is an area that NGOs are working to influence both in the UK and at the EU level.Where action is required to manage an activity that is outside the jurisdiction of the MS, MSs must ask the relevant Community or international organisation to adopt the appropriate measures to deal with the problem, e.g. the IMO on shipping issues. Where such a responsibility lies with the Commission, e.g. with regards to the CFP, the MSs must make recommendations to the Commission which is required to provide a response.This is a very important clause as it provides the avenue for fisheries impacts on the marine environment, and particularly MPAs, to be tackled.
14Costs vs GESAction is not required where the costs would be disproportionateCaveatstaking account of the risks to the marine environmentprovided that there is no further deteriorationMust also look at the costs of doing nothing or of allowing environmental degradationMust justify lack of action to the European CommissionA loophole or barrier would be the clause allowing action to be avoided where costs are disproportionate. But the Directive provides some caveats to this points:taking account of the risks to the marineArticle 14(4) “…shall not be required … to take specific steps … where the costs would be disproportionate taking account of the risks to the marine environment, and provided that there is no further deterioration.”MSs must also consider the costs of doing noting and the costs of environmental degradationMSs must justify any lack of action to the CommissionWhere costs of actions are considered, they must not be considered at the expense of achieving the aims of the Directive.
15Where are we now?Member States had to submit their Art. 8 Initial assessment, Art. 9 Determination of GES and Art. 10 Environmental targets & indicators by 15/10/2012Bulgaria, Ireland, Malta and Poland have not yet submitted their reports and Portugal, Slovenia and UK have only partially submitted
16Results of ESEC survey on NGO experiences 31 NGO responsesConcerns: not enough financial resources, lack of awareness among NGOs and stakeholders, lack of concrete targets, MS relying on existing commitments to reach GES,Main gaps in reports and knowledge: biodiversity and food web, non-commercial fish, energy/noise impacts, marine litter, contaminants etc..
17Main concerns with reports: targets too generic, lack of data used for not setting clear targets, insufficient coordiantion between authorities, lack of precautionary approachPublic consultations in MS: 59% indicated that they were involved at the end of reporting process and 26% from the start of the process
18Remaining challengesAttaining necessary scientific knowledge for defining the state of marine environmentFinancingIntegration of sectoral policiesDissemination and communication on the marine environmentEnhanced stakeholder participation at all levels
19What happens next?The Commission has 6 months to review the MS initial assessments, determination of GES and setting targets and indicatorsThe work will focus on developing monitoring programmes for assessments by 15/07/2014Programme of measures to achieve/maintain GES 15/07/2015Entry into operation by 15/07/2016Only 4 years to achieve GES