1. Proposed Core Set of Indicators towards Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture and Environmental Integration in European scale in European scale N. Streftaris, A. Salama, A. Zenetos

2. Hence the need to track progress of the CFP and the performance of the management schemes and policies against stated objectives has called for an evaluation and review of relevant indicators. A project has been initiated by European Environmental Agency EEA through its Topic Centre on Water (ETC/WTR) to define, develop and test potential indicators in fisheries/aquaculture environmental integration at a European scale. Scope for Indicators: EU and EEA In June 1998, the Cardiff Council endorsed the principle that major policy proposals by the Commission should be accompanied by its appraisal of their environmental impact. In addition, the summit invited all relevant formations of the Council to establish their own strategies for giving effect to environmental integration and sustainable development within their respective policy areas "the Commission should ensure that all key initiatives integrate concern for the environment. A detailed environmental assessment and a description of how the key results of such assessment have been incorporated should accompany all key proposals where an important environmental effect is expected. The Commission should refine its methodology for such assessments". Reciprocally, environmental policy should contribute towards the sustainable use of natural resources under appropriate economic and social conditions for the sector

3. INDICATORS INDICATORS are tools by which to represent complex processes in a simple and harmonized manner. They reflect the state of a system with respect to societal goal and objectives and can be used to monitor and assess the performance of an integration strategy as part of a performance evaluation cycle but not an end in themselves. Nowadays, indispensable to: decision and policy-makers and public awareness at international, national and local levels Indicators

4. In general, an indicator should Be representative Be scientifically valid Be simple and easy to interpret Show trends over time Give early warning about irreversible trends where possible Be sensitive to the changes it is meant to indicate Be based on readily available data or be available at reasonable cost Be based on data adequately documented and of known quality Be capable of being updated at regular intervals Supply information on environmental issues in order to enable policy makers to value their seriousness Support policy development and priority setting, by identifying key factors that cause pressure on the environment Monitor the effects of policy responses In relation to policy making, they should: Indicators

5. STATE RESPONSE IMPACT DPSIR : A flexible and dynamic framework of indicators Indicators are closely interlinked forming a dynamic causal chain connecting the origins and consequences of environmental problems. A storyline is linking the proposed DPSIR indicators Pressure relates to use of resources and land, release of emissions, physical and biological agents that alter the State of the environment Driving forces by causing changes in the levels of production and consumption exert pressure on the environment State indicators describe the quality and quantity of physical, biological and chemical phenomena in a certain area Changes in the state of the environment have impact on the social and economic functions of the environment described by the Impact indicators Response indicators finally refer to societal attempts to prevent, ameliorate or adapt to these changes and feed back on the other parts of the framework DRIVERS PRESSURE

6. Indicators and EEA The EEA adopted typology classifies the indicators into the four following groups depending on the questions they address Type A or Descriptive indicators –What is happening to the environment and to humans? Type B or Performance indicators – Does it matter? Type C or Efficiency indicators - Are we improving? Type D or Total Welfare indicators – Are we on the whole better off? Headline indicators (5-20, highly aggregated) Indicator System (100-150, medium aggregated) Basic Data (statistics,measurements,estimations ) -Increased aggregation -information density -reduction of complexity -capability to communicate -policy relevance

7. DG Fisheries directorate, UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)– Fisheries department, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Mediterranean Action Plan – Mediterranean Commission on Sustainable Development (Blue Plan), International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), Statistical Office of the European Communities (EUROSTAT), UN Commission for Sustainable Development (UNCSD), and EEA-IRF previous work. Review of Fisheries and Aquaculture Indicator initiatives There appear to be several parallel initiatives under way to develop environmental Fisheries & Aquaculture indicators within European Seas.

8. Potential Indicators and Data availability FAO GFCM ICES OECD EIFAC, IBSFC, NASCO, NEAFC, ICCAT EU bodies: DG Fisheries EUROSTAT MS Ministries Statistical Offices Institutions Environmental Agencies International level National level A major constraint is the availability (and synthesis) of essential data. In the present work, most emphasis is put on identification of international institutions (ICES, FAO, EUROSTAT) possessing data for relevant indicators. However some indicators have to be supported by research data (research projects and surveys), while others need support from data regarding commercial landings and/or voluntarily reporting by fishermen and stakeholders.

9.  Preparation of a compiled list of potential indicators (ETC/MCE, 2000, ETC/WTR, 2001)  Search for availability of the data sets required  Comments from EU and national reference centers  Selection of a few candidates (updated list)  Development of fact sheets with real data (ESR2002, Kiev Report) Work so far by EEA/ETCs  Comments from EU and national reference centers on ESR 2002 indicator fact sheets and potential candidates  Joint EU (DG Fisheries and Environment) and EEA meeting in Brussels (Oct. 2002) with Institutes and National experts to discuss further environmental and socioeconomic aspects and use of a common set of indicators  Development of current list  Call for comments from national reference centers  DG Fisheries EEA meeting on “Present and future work of EEA on indicators and  streamlining of dataflow” (April 2003)

10. Proposed core set of Fisheries and Aquaculture Indicators 1. Is the environmental performance of the fisheries sector improving? Generic question typePolicy questionIndicator titleDPSI R Priorit y Is the use of commercial fish stocks sustainable? Status of marine fish stocks Percentage of stocks outside safe biological limits North Sea cod stocks Spawning Stock Biomass Metrics of fish community structure S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S Discards IL Is aquaculture sustainable? Aquaculture production PS What is the impact of fisheries on habitats, benthos, mammals, birds, and turtles Fisheries impact on habitats and ecosystems Physical damage to habitats Fisheries effects on benthos Fisheries effects on ecosystem structure Fish catches in large marine ecosystems III I III I LT M/L S Accidental bycatch: birds, mammals, and turtles IM

11. Proposed core set of Fisheries and Aquaculture Indicators What is the impact of aquaculture on habitats benthos birds, mammals, and turtles? Impact of aquaculture The number of accidentally introduced non-indigenous species versus the production of imported species per area/water body type Aquaculture Impact on habitats, birds and mammals Aquaculture impact on benthos Aquaculture impact on genetic resources I P I I S/L S L L What is the impact of environment on fisheries/aquaculture? Quality of fish for human consumption (F & A) Hazardous substances in biota S SS S S SS S

12. Proposed core set of Fisheries and Aquaculture Indicators 2. Are we getting better at reducing fishing effort and aquaculture discharges? Has the need to limit fishing effort been met? Fishing capacity of fleets Fishing effort (horsepower/day or categories/gear) Catch per unit effort Insurance value of fleet P P P S M M L Has the fishing industry been modernised towards effectiveness? Is the eco-efficiency of aquaculture plants improving? Aquaculture waste: Inputs to Output ratio Quality of effluent water P PP P M LM L 3. How can the present situation and future development be described? How is the present situation and future developments described in relation to the market needs? Fish consumption per capita DS Catches by major species and areas Fish landings Inland fisheries P PP P PP S SSS SS How is the present situation and future developments described in relation to the social situation and profitability? Average wage in fisheries and aquaculture / average national wage Profit and /or added value Maximum Economic Yield (first hand value of catch per fisherman) Price trends for farmed fish D DP DD DP D S/M L L S/M

13. 4. What is the progress in economic integration? Does Community aid help the sector to restructure? Fleet decommissioning subsidies (compared to Investment/Modernisation subsidies) RM/L 5. What is the progress in the management of integration environmental policy into fisheries policy How is restricting catches aiding management of fisheries? Quota/Zone management Multi-annual management plans in place (or not) International fisheries agreements RR RRR R M L S ‘Green’ fisheries Number of fisheries certified under an eco-labelling process Products (percentage of) certified under an eco-labelling process R R L L Is the industry complying to the integration of environmental considerations in policy-making? National legislation with specific provision for environmental management of aquaculture RL Proposed core set of Fisheries and Aquaculture Indicators

14. Troubleshooting Is the proposed core set of indicators suitable to answer the policy question? Is the indicator policy relevant? Is the indicator scientifically sound and its development priority? Is a standard/target/quality objective/background value available for the indicator? Do we need to distinguish between freshwater and marine water fisheries/aquaculture? Are indicators missing or should indicators be added? Are pan-European indicators appropriate or do we need regional ones? Is the indicator already available through an international/regional organisation? Is prospective analysis of trends within the next 20 years possible for the indicator? Are data available to produce the indicator? What is the data source (organisation)? If no monitoring data are available, how can the data be obtained (EU Directives, national policies, etc)?

16. Indicator Fact Sheet: Fish stocks outside Safe Biological Limits  Most fish stocks of commercial importance in European waters appear to be outside safe biological limits (SBL)

17.  Data sets are fragmented both temporally and spatially.  Monitoring activities are based on scientific surveys rather than commercial catches leading to low values of SSB estimates and thus biased exploitation patterns  Different approaches are being used in the Mediterranean and the NE Atlantic to determine if a stock is outside safe biological limits Each international organisation uses the same principle to determine the state of the stock  For the Mediterranean fisheries management is considered to be at early stages compared to NE Atlantic.  ICES has fine tuned the system. However decisions are based on safety margins bearing a degree of uncertainty; the decision of the reference points is then a task for managers and not scientists. Weaknesses

18. Stock assessment is based on mid- to long – term trends of recruitment, spawning stock biomass, landings and fishing mortality. For the last 15 years EU effort has been focused in the scientific surveys to be carried out on a yearly basis along with routine market sampling programmes Data sets are based on time series that can give a good account of the state of a stock. Using reference points and precautionary approach allows for a buffer zone and better estimation for the management of the stock. Stocks outside safe biological limits per area have been identified Indicator has been proven a tool of paramount importance for the proper and sustainable management of the fish stocks at a European level Success