1. Breakout groups: reporting back
ESA-GES workshop
Brussels, 17/18th June 2013
Eduard Interwies InterSus – Sustainability Services

2. Q1: the problem(s) Starting point: Art.10, also IA;
For the time being: Litter, noise; maybe PA; fisheries, indigenous species, nutrification / substances (measures not working since 25 years, so…)
But: process of assessment ongoing!
Gaps in pressures-impacts relation: sufficiently detailed understanding for the next steps? “If we do not know enough”: no measures in first round (e.g. noise), but improve understanding
“proportionate” gap filling (depending on what we know already, not too much detail, no “nice to know”)
Filling gaps needed for some issues, but (some) key problems identified and “clear enough”: start with those in first cycle (no “paralisis”)
Work going on existing vs. new measures
Programmes are in place, but not functioning… (e.g. eutrophication)
Implementation gap of other Directives: WHAT TO DO?
Bigger issue: political will (e.g. regarding agriculture) missing; now also budget problems…wrong time!
“new” measures are taken already today (volunteer litter activities…)

3. Q2: Measures – Annex VI
Systematics of measures exist: national systems, regional systems etc.
Do we have to restructure everything for reporting? For comparability…no
Annex VI-structure: “they are good as anything”
Details to be checked, there are difficulties (e.g. new license application: is it input control?) Thus: open list?
Helpful for Regional Seas level (sub-seas), if no systematic yet
Don´t lose too much time with work on systematics;
At national level: “group” measures under Annex VI for reporting (Have to do this or optional??)
Reporting of measures also at the regional level?
Annex VI: useful in order not to forget anything…

4. Q3: existing vs. new
New objectives: Lawyers (e.g. habitats Directives is a “closed shop”) vs. ecologists
For e.g. biodiversity: change of the Habitats Directive (?), so for now: include “new measures” in MSFD (as needed)
Reviews of other Directives (e.g. WFD) is currently happening. If needed, additional land-based measures should be in the WFD, not MSFD. Reference in MSFD what will happen and why.
Check for “conflicts” between Directives
Assume that WFD will deliver what it promises? No, do “reality Check”!
Huge implications for economic analysis: e.g. new measures against nutrification not treated in MSFD
International basins: if gaps: “shared responsibility”

5. Q4: Exemptions Political decision! (Stakeholders!)
Exemptions will be “rooted” on gaps of knowledge (precautionary principle?) and “ability-to-pay”!
On disproportionality: use CIS-WFD-guidance (update 20%?); also important: marine area/inhabitant…
On env. risks: new issue to tackle: “balance” uncertainty-”not taking action” vs. the related env. risk
env. risks: now used for designing monitoring programme (Art. 14) &
Need “common playing field”: agree at RSC level?
[PS: wealth of information on WFD-economics lost on CIRCABC!]

6. Q5: GES & ESA
Information on the effects/effectiveness of measures! GES: “what do you need to hear”? ESA: “if it works or not”!
Different measures with the same impact (GES): then ESA can evaluate
Set of measures more realistic! (s. single measures)
Scale needs to be clarified for data provision by GES!
“Scale of measure”: important. for many (theoretically) it´s regional, but: national assessment is more feasible…
Timing…

7. Q7: Regional Seas
Coordinated measures are needed at regional level (regional action plans as basis; economic analysis missing: something for 2nd cycle).
Key: who is responsible for something/accountability: MS
Practically: MS are working on their analysis and POMs, what about regional cooperation? TIME!
For first cycle (depending on RC & topic): exchange of experience; for specific issues: have a common understanding on reduction targets and measures needed; overall, bring POMs together at regional level (as a common report?)
More work done at regional level: eutrophication, shipping (?), fisheries (?)
For second cycle: Common analysis – and coordinated POM? – more feasible?

8. Q6: Priorities Needed: Coherence/commonalities/common language
“long list of measures”
PoM will be developed before economic analysis…