The Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MSFD Interactions EMODNET Chemistry 2 Kick-off meeting Giordano Giorgi Trieste (Italy), 3-5 June 2013.
Advertisements

EMODnet Chemistry 3 Kick-off Meeting May 2017
Marine Strategy Framework Directive State of play and follow up
Main aims Reporting Data Agree overall approach/framework to reporting
Methodology for the assessment of Member States’ reporting on Programme of Measures (Article 16) MSCG Sarine Barsoumian 7 April /09/2018.
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Principles and Key Issues
1.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive:
Revision of Commission Decision 2010/477/EU
Reporting on socio-economic aspects in regard to socio-economic assessment & environmental targets under MSFD Lydia MARTIN-ROUMEGAS DG Environment -
Marine Strategy Framework Directive: an introduction
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
Regional and EU level data streams for D5 and D8
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Reporting on socio-economic aspects in regard to socio-economic assessment & environmental targets under MSFD Lydia MARTIN-ROUMEGAS DG Environment -
In-Depth Assessment (IDA) of MS submissions for MSFD article 8, 9 & 10 compiled and presented by Nikolaos Zampoukas based on material provided by V.
Annex III Annex I Qualitative descriptors Characteristics
Review of Decision 2010/477/EU and MSFD Annex III
Results of breakout group
Technical review of Commission Decision 2010/477/EU concerning MSFD criteria for assessing GES Work flow and progress 20/21 October th WG GES.
Reporting for MSFD Article 13 and 14 –
Initial Assessment: reflections on structure and contents
Taking forward the common understanding of Art. 8, 9 and 10 MSFD
WG GES Workshop Art. 8 MSFD Assessment
Proposal for MSFD risk-based approach project in OSPAR region
Achieve good environmental status of the EU’s marine waters by 2021
Marine Strategy Framework Directive State of play and follow up
European Commission DG Environment
Draft examples of possible GES Decision criteria Descriptor 9
Methodology for Art. 12 assessment of 2018 Art updates
MSFD list of criteria elements
Summary and Action Points
Revision of MSFD Decision 2010/477/EU - overview
Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC
Preliminary methodology for the assessment of Member States’ reporting on Programme of Measures (Article 16) WG DIKE Sarine Barsoumian (12/10/2015, Brussels)
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
MSFD list of criteria elements
WG GES, 6 December 2016, Brussels
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
1.
Revision of Decision 2010/477/EU Overview of main changes
WG GES: Decision review progress
Marine Strategy Framework Directive State of play and follow up
Developing a common understanding of Articles 8, 9 & 10 MSFD
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Marine Strategy Framework Directive Contaminants Implementation of descriptors Coordination MSFD – WFD , WFD WG chemicals, Bruxelles,
Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Questionnaire on Elaboration of the MSFD Initial Assessment
Preparation of the second RBMP in Romania
1.
WG A ECOSTAT Intercalibration guidance : Annexes III, V, VI
* 100% = 15 Member States.
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
OSPAR progress on use of the decentralised option for reporting on monitoring programmes required under Article 11 of the MSFD.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive reporting: progress and next steps
Revision of Decision 2010/477/EU
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
WG GES Drafting Group June 2013 Berlin
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
EU Water Framework Directive
Assessment scales and aggregation
Marine Environment and Water Industry
Marine Strategy Coordination Group 14 November 2011, Brussels
Article 8 Guidance – Integration levels and methods
Interpretation of Descriptor 8
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive
Uli Claussen Co-lead ECOSTAT
Item 4 b) Marine Strategy Framework Directive and CIS WFD
Presentation transcript:

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive Interim results

Good Environmental Status “Do we have a common understanding?” GES defined in Article 3.5 and Annex I Decision 2010/477/EU gives GES criteria and methodological standards SWP (2011) 1255 looks at the relationship between Annex III and Annex I 2011 Common Understanding Document sets out some aspects on how to approach setting of GES and targets

* 100% = 15 Member States

Percentage of MS which have set F and SSB at MSY levels for all stocks

GES state-of-play / interim conclusions (Art. 12) Not all MS have “determined” GES in accordance with the Directive Limited coherence within marine regions and no coherence across EU Significant differences between GES definitions in terms of level of detail, reference to appropriate legislation or standards and use of criteria and indicators Confusion between Art. 9 (GES) and Art. 10 (targets), limited link to Art. 8 (assessment) GES often not “measurable” – therefore, we do not know current GES levels in the marine waters Monitoring and measures depend on clear and measurable GES

Initial Assessment

Interim conclusions I.A. Only a small proportion of MS have used their GES determination to make a judgment on the level of impact of the relevant pressures in their initial assessment. For D10 and D8, a larger group of MS has used other standards to make this judgement (e.g. RSC standards) For D7, the relatively broad definition of GES can explain why GES determination is more frequently used in the IA.

Planning 30th April deadline updated MS information Ongoing assessment of adequacy, consistency and coherence based on text reports and RS End of May first results from consultant analysis Summer: drafting the art 12 assessment report and country annexes Autumn: ISC, translation, publication

D8: Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects. Example 1: Concentrations of contaminants in water, sediment, or biota are kept within agreed levels (national/EU/RSC level) and are not increasing; The effects of contaminants on selected biological processes and taxonomic groups, where a cause/effect relationship has been established, are kept within agreed levels (national/EU/RSC levels)   Example 2: Contaminants concentration levels do not cause pollution, meaning in practice that less than 10% of the area under evaluation is subjected to impacts and threats to the ecosystems, i.e. positive deviations to the reference conditions established. Example 3: Set of GES conditions: Concentrations of contaminants for which a threshold is available (WFD and OSPAR) do not exceed these thresholds; Concentrations in biota do not increase over time; Concentrations in top predators do not increase over time; The effects of contaminants are assessed as insignificant. UK: for both concentration and effects = broad reference to national, EU, international (RSC) standards but without details – would point to WFD, OSPAR and any additional national standards. Use criteria and partial use of indicators. Portugal: simple reproduction of GES definition, no reference to any standard, no use of criteria and indicators. France: use criteria and partially indicators, reference to WFD and OSPAR