Reporting on socio-economic aspects in regard to socio-economic assessment & environmental targets under MSFD Lydia MARTIN-ROUMEGAS DG Environment - Marine environment Unit WG POMESA - 30th January 2017 - Brussels

Guidance for 2012 reporting* update In considering the new Annex III (list of characteristics, pressures and impacts) In considering the new approach of the GES decision revision * European Commission. 2012. Guidance for 2012 reporting under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, using the MSFD database tool. Version 1.0. DG Environnment, Brussels. pp164. All text in red has been proposed by POMESA members after discussion and agreement at the POMESA meeting on 30th January 2017

Principles & pré-requis on reporting update The second cycle of MSFD is a revision of the first cycle. WG POMESA is only focusing on art. 8.1.C & 10. Exceptions will not be discussed here. Today first discussion that will shared before decision expected in April 17 Remove the "un-usefull" Be more operational & concrete Be more consistent in using revised GES decision and annex III terminologies Be S.M.A.R.T This revised reporting & spreadsheets should :

Article 8.1c Assessment of an economic and social analysis Analysis of the use of marine waters Type of approach for analysing the uses of marine water Options Marine waters accounts (by human activity/sector) Ecosystem Service approach Other approach Cost of degradation Type of approach for analysing the cost of degradation Thematic/topic approach Ecosystem Service approach Cost based approach Other approach Optional : strategic objectives /Future Projections/future scenari Strategy /national or other scale growth plan EU, MSFD regional, sub-region/national scales

Article 8.1c Assessment of an economic and social analysis of use of the marine waters /Human activities – Marine Water account approach Topic Information sought Characteristics Temporal nature & proportion of area subject to activity (Past) Trends Trends in the Activity, From 1st to 2nd MSFD cycle Socio-economic indicators Production value Value added Employment Other indicators [add rows for any number of other indicators that have been used] Pressures caused by the activity Pressure 1 Pressure 2 Pressure 3 Information gaps Explain information gaps and plans to address them Reference to activity and pressure list of annex III table 2 a and 2b Linked to OSPAR and HELCOM data , via the metadata description wher the regional, sub-regionals scales could be specified. Add explanation/description field and pressure and activity

Article 8.1c Assessment of an economic and social analysis of use of the marine waters / Ecosystems Service Approach Topic Information sought Ecosystem approach (repeat row for each ecosystem service assessed) Provide name of ecosystem service (free text) Give CICES class that this ecosystem service most closely relates to (categorical) Information gaps Explain information gaps and plans to address them Pressures caused by the activity Pressure 1 Pressure 2 Pressure 3 Pressure list of anthropogenic pressure defined under Annex III table 2a Update with MAES & HELCOM outcomes (cf Paris meeting???) – Proposed as optional UK is using ecosystem service Request MS on the plus-value of ecosytems service

Article 8.1c Assessment of an economic and social analysis of use of the marine waters / Other approaches Topic Information sought Other Approaches Theme / category (repeat row for each theme/category assessed) Provide name of theme/category (free text) Information gaps Pressures caused by the activity Pressure 1 Pressure 2 Pressure 3 NT , ES wish to keep this other approach

Article 8.1c Cost of degradation of the marine environment Topic Information sought Cost of degradation Overall description of cost of degradation (Indication of the type of costs, and/or expenses and /or loss of benefits due to degradation and consequences to human well-being) Cost based approach – Quantitative & qualitative information Ecosystem service approach- Quantitative & qualitative information Thematic approach – Quantitative & qualitative information Other mixed approach - Quantitative & qualitative information Information gaps Explain information gaps and plan to address them Indication of the type of costs, and/or expenses and /or loss of benefits due to degradation and consequences to human well-being. Thematic approach developed on priority issues

Good targets are SMART targets !

Targets- general question For revising environmental targets and associated indicators, please indicate how the following have been taken into account: Y/N categorical answers Does MS wish to revise the targets ? Why ? link to measures to targets ? ( review the pre-filled field by EEA) Possibility to delete, revise or maintain the targets and give/confirm the associated measures) Adequate coverage of elements characterising marine waters (Annex 4-1) Have all relevant elements characterising marine waters been covered by the targets? (Yes, Possibly, No, Unknown) Consistency of the set of targets, absence of conflicts between them (Annex 4-4) (No, possibly, yes, unknown) Are all targets in the set consistent, with no conflicts between them? (Yes, Possibly, No, Unknown) Resources needed (Annex 4-5) Have the resources needed for the achievement of targets been specified yet? (Yes, Partly, No, Unknown) Social & economic considerations (Annex 4-9) Have social and economic concerns been taken into account in the setting of targets? (Yes, Partly, No, Unknown) Adequacy of targets for achieving GES in MS waters (Annex 4-10) If the set of environmental targets (together with associated indicators, limit and target reference points) is achieved, will this lead to the marine waters under jurisdiction of the Member State within a marine region, achieving a status matching the environmental objectives laid down in Article 1 (*see below)? (Yes, Possibly, No, Unknown) Adequacy of targets for achieving GES in marine environment (Annex 4-12) If the set of environmental targets (together with associated indicators, limit and target reference points) is achieved, will this lead to the marine environment achieving a status matching the environmental objectives laid down in Article 1 (presumably, on a regional level) (*see below)? (Yes, Possibly, No, Unknown) Do the targets need to be rivised? It is upto Member States? Link to measures ? Link to socio-economic perspectives ? IE : mapping all measures up to targets ? Could we link targets to measures ? EC : Does the targets, linked to measure tackle the main pressures of MS marine waters ? NT: how to consider the social/economic ? IE : EEA will link targets and measures need to be done EC DC : prepopulating the reporting format - opportunity in a simple way to linked targets to measures

Targets Target Target number Description of target to achieve GES (Annex 4-3) Timescale for achievement of target (Annex 4-6) Interim or GES target? Relevant to GES Descriptors (select all that are relevant) Relevant to GES criteria (select all that are relevant) Relevant features, pressures and impacts (select all that are relevant) Baseline used to establish target Target assessment area Type of target (Annex 4-2) Compatibility with existing targets (national, Community or international) (Annex 4-11)

Associated indicator to target Indicator number Specific indicators to be used (Annex 4-7), and qualitative description of threshold value to achieve the target, if appropriate. Threshold value(s) for indicator to achieve target (Quantitative only). Complete either 'Reference point' or 'Limit Reference point'. If the specified quality threshold value(s) will not apply to the whole feature (ecosystem component, pressure/impact) in the assessment area, also provide the proportion (%) of the feature within the area that should achieve the quality value. Baseline/ Reference condition Relevant features, pressures and impacts (select all that are relevant) Indicator assessment area Type of indicator (Annex 4-2) Development status of indicator Compatibility with other targets/indicators (e.g. national, Community or international) (Annex 4-11) EC : proposed indicators on effeciceiny/ degree of implementation of targets?