Download GES cross-cutting issues

Review of Decision 2010/477/EU
and MSFD Annex III cross-cutting issues
European Commission
DG Environment Unit C.2
Marine Environment and Water Industry
WG GES
22-23 April 2015, Brussels
Aims of the paper
a. To provide an informal perspective on the
interpretation of MSFD Art. 9 and 10 (building
upon the 2011 CU document and subsequent
discussions)
b. To set out an overall architecture for the
provisions of the directive in relation to the
determination of GES (Art. 3.5, Annex I and III,
Decision and Art. 9.1)
c. To propose a ‘level’ at which GES should be
assessed (i.e. the resolution of elements and
geographic scales used to conclude if GES has
been met or not)
d. To further develop approaches to assessments
under Art. 8, drawing from the cross-cutting
workshop (EEA, January 2015)
Further development of the paper
• Further internal discussions on integration with
other policies
• Discussions with core team, e.g. on integration
across descriptors to inform drafting of Decision
• Consider comments received from WG GES (by end
June) on current version
• Prepare final version for WG GES in October
• Content of paper can contribute to further
development of Common Understanding document
and other review documentation.
Cross-cutting workshop – broad
conclusions
Workshop participants agreed, in broad terms, on:
i. Need for integration of the ‘biodiversity’ descriptors
ii. Need to use pressure-based assessments to inform
the ecosystem status assessments
iii. ‘Pizza and the satellites’ approach
iv. Need for a level of commonality in elements to be
assessed at EU or regional level – with criteria for
selection and deselection, where appropriate (clear
rules)
v. Use of functional groups (for birds, mammals, reptiles,
fish) and predominant habitat types, but with
(sub)regional specificity
vi. Need for clearer links to assessments in other policies
vii. Need for more coherent scales of assessment (e.g.
nested approach)
BUT ….
There is need for more clarity on how these concepts
could fit together … and on the specific detail
Cross-cutting paper aims to present these overall
approaches and give this ‘detail’:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
In generic terms, but with practical examples
It sets out a framework for determining GES, but does not determine
GES – this is for MS, working within the (sub)region
It presents a common framework for assessment, within which
regional and national assessments could fit (i.e. how common/core
indicators would fit with Decision criteria (operational use of pizza
and satellites).
The approaches proposed can help focus ongoing debates on what is
GES and how to assess it (e.g. whether at criterion level, descriptor
level; need for an overarching GES or an ‘ecosystem descriptors’ GES)
It contains new proposals (e.g. equating GES to other policies, esp.
WFD and harmonisation of biodiversity assessments) – needing
further discussion
The paper is ‘work in progress’ and provides an input to ongoing
discussions in CU context and at regional and national levels.
Review of Annex III
a. Integral part of the review 'package'
b. Needs to clearly link to MSFD Annex I, Decision
(Art. 9(3)), and Art. 9(1)
c. Initial perspective on the 'content' and role of
Tables 1 and 2
d. Proposal for a new Table 3 on uses and activities
(builds on 2012 list for reporting)
e. These 'indicative lists' are based on reviews of
elements used in other directives and RSCs – read
across spreadsheet on elements used in each
policy
f. Paper is input to a proposed Annex III, but
depends on formulation of Decision
Relationships to WFD (MSFD Art.
3.1b) – initial proposal
MSFD Descriptor
WFD (Coastal waters, 0-1nm, except 0-12nm for
D8)
D1 – water column habitats GES = phytoplankton quality element of WFD in
GEcS + zooplankton in GES
D1 – seabed habitats
GES for Predominant habitats of littoral and
infralittoral zones = macrophyte + angiosperm +
macrobenthos quality elements of WFD in GEcS
D5 - Eutrophication
GES = nutrients + phytoplankton + macroalgae +
angiosperm quality elements of WFD in GEcS
D6 - Seafloor integrity
Same as D1 seabed habitats
D7 - Hydrographical changes GES = WFD GEcS (Hydromorphological conditions)
D8 - Contaminants
GES = WFD GChS for priority substances + WFD
GEcS for river-basin-specific pollutants
Framework for information system
economic
Art.
8(1c)
Socio-economic
Drivers
CIS
RSCs
MS -CAs
Human
Activities
Management
(Policies &
Governance)
Ecosystem
Services
Art.
8(1c)
Measures
Monitoring
Art.
8(1a)
Art.
8(1b)
Pressures
Art.
13+14
State of
Environment
Art. 11
Activity
Activity A
Oil & gas
Pressure Y
Contamination
Activity C
Shipping
Activity D
Fishing
Economic & social
analysis
Art 8.1c
Element A
Cetaceans
Pressure X
Underwater noise
Pressure Z
Physical disturbance
Assessment of
pressures
Art 8.1b Table 2
IMPACTS
Activity B
Sand & gravel
extraction
State
Pressure
Element B
Fish
Element C
Seabirds
Element D
Pelagic habitat
Element E
Seabed habitat
Assessment of state
Art 8.1a
Table 1
Assessment of specific pressures
and their impacts on ecosystem
elements (Art. 8.1b)
Assessment of ecosystem elements (Art. 8.1a)
D5
D7
D2
D6.1
D3.1
Water
column
(D1)
Seabed
(D1, D6)
Fish (D1,
D3.2/3)
Birds
(D1)
Mammals
(D1)
Reptiles
(D1)
Other
pressures
D8
D9
D11
D10
Integration: pressure-impact-state
Assessments of pressures for Article 8(1b)
Physical
loss
Physical
damage
Energy,
incl. UW
noise
Nutrients
Contaminants
Litter
Fishing/
by-catch
NIS
S
P
6.1
6.1
11.1,
11.2
5.1
8.1,
9.1
10.1
3.1
2.1
Ecosystem 1.7, 4.1-4.3
Assessments of state for
Article 8(1a)
Birds
1.11.3
Mammals
1.11.3
?
Reptiles
1.11.3
?
Fish
1.11.3
Water
1.41.6
7.1
Seabed
1.41.6
7.2
?
?
10.2
?
8.2
3.2,
3.3
?
6.2
5.2,
5.3
?
3.2
2.2
All pressure
assessments to
achieve GES
Pressure and its impacts
(D2, D5, D7, D8, D9, D10, D11)
Aggregation rule
for criteria, e.g.
one-out-all-out
Criterion A pressure
Criterion B –
impact
Aggregation rule
if several
indicators used
Data set A
Data set B
Data set C
Data set D
Data set E
GES boundary
defined per
criterion or
scientific
indicator
All pressure
assessments to
achieve GES
Pressure and its impacts
(D2, D5, D7, D8, D9, D10, D11)
D5: Eutrophication
Aggregation rule
for criteria, e.g.
one-out-all-out
Criterion A pressure
Criterion B –
impact
Aggregation rule
if several
indicators used
Data set A
DIN
Data set B
DIP
Data set C
Data set D
Chl a
Water
clarity
Data set E
Bottom
oxygen
GES boundary
defined per
criterion or
scientific
indicator
Mock-up
presentation of
an area-based
assessment:
status and trends
Integration: pressure-impact-state
Assessments of pressures for Article 8(1b)
Physical
loss
Physical
damage
Energy,
incl. UW
noise
Nutrients
Contaminants
Litter
Fishing/
by-catch
NIS
S
P
6.1
6.1
11.1,
11.2
5.1
8.1,
9.1
10.1
3.1
2.1
Ecosystem 1.7, 4.1-4.3
Assessments of state for
Article 8(1a)
Birds
1.11.3
Mammals
1.11.3
?
Reptiles
1.11.3
?
Fish
1.11.3
Water
1.41.6
7.1
Seabed
1.41.6
7.2
?
?
10.2
?
8.2
3.2,
3.3
?
6.2
5.2,
5.3
?
3.2
2.2
Assessment scenario – cumulative impacts
Physical loss
(coastal infrastructure)
Hydrological changes
– impacts
D7
D2
Hydrological changes
– minor effects
D5
D6
Physical damage
(bottom trawling) impacts
Physical loss
(offshore
infrastructure)
D7
Hydrological changes impacts
Occasional disturbances
- minor effects
Greens – acceptable state
Orange, red – unacceptable state
D8
Adapted from OSPAR Biodiversity guidance for
MSFD
Integrated assessments (1)
Predominant habitat: shelf sand
State
criterion
Habitat
distribution
(1.4, 1.4.1,
1.4.2)
Habitat
extent (1.5,
1.5.1, 1.5.2,
6.1.1)
Pressures
Threshold
<[10]% loss
in range cw
reference
condition
<[10]% loss
in extent cw
Physical
reference
condition
Physical
Biological
Physical
Habitat
condition
(1.6, 1.6.1,
1.6.2, 1.6.3,
6.2, 6.2.1,
6.2.2, 6.2.3,
6.2.4))
<[30]%
damage cw
Hydrological
reference
condition
(including
any habitat
loss)
Chemicals and
other pollutants
Biological
Impact
Assess Criterion
Over
ment assessm
all
values
ent
None: broadscale physical habitat not affected by
physical pressures
Habitat loss
(6.1.1)
0%
GES
Change of sea-floor substrate (infrastructure)
Habitat loss
(6.1.1)
5%
GES
Disturbance/damage to sea-floor
Removal of species (targeted, non-targeted)
Extraction of sea-floor and subsoil minerals (e.g.
sand, gravel, rock, oil, gas)
Habitat damage
(6.1.2)
65%
Water movement changes (from infrastructure)
Nutrient enrichment (N, P, organic matter)
Introduction or spread of non-indigenous species
Below
Habitat structure
GES
changes,
Below
community
5%
GES
changes (7.2,
(75%
7.2.1, 7.2.2)
impacted
Oxygen
or lost)
depletion,
community
0%
changes (5.2.3,
5.3.1, 5.3.2)
Community
Not
alteration (2.2.1) assessed
Functional groups and representative
species – example Mammals
Generic
element
(MSFD
Annex III)
EU level
Functional
groups
(CSWP
2011)
Toothed
whales
MAMMALS
Baleen
whales
Seals
Iceassociated
mammals
Regional Level
Habitats
Directive
Harbour
porpoise
Bottlenose
dolphin
All species
(V)
All species
(V)
Grey seal
Monk seal
Ringed seal
Harbour
seal
Baltic Sea
(HELCOM)
NE Atlantic Ocean
(OSPAR)
Harbour
porpoise
Harbour porpoise
Bottlenose dolphin
White-beaked dolphin
Short‐beaked
common dolphin
Striped dolphin
?
Minke whale
Grey seal
Ringed seal
Harbour
seal
Grey seal
Harbour seal
Mediterranean Sea
(UNEP/MAP)
Common dolphin
Bottlenose dolphin
Sperm whale
Striped dolphin
Risso's dolphin
Long-finned pilot
whale
Cuvier's beaked whale
Fin whale
Balaenoptera spp.
Monk seal
Black Sea
(BSC)
Common
dolphin
Bottlenose
dolphin
Harbour
porpoise
N/A
N/A
Consider removing this functional group (more relevant for Arctic)
Habitat for
species:
loss of breeding
sites (D6)
Population
size:
entanglement
by litter (D10)
Population
condition:
disturbances
during
breeding
Species can be
affected by
multiple
pressures – affect
different
assessment
criteria
Example: turtle
Population
size:
incidental
catch from
fisheries (D3)
Population
condition:
Bioaccumulation
of contaminants
(D8)
Many species
assessments rely
on one or two
indicators – focus
on main
criterion/threat
Functional group or predominant habitat
Species or
habitat A
Species or
habitat B
Overall
environmental
status is expressed
as % of assessed
component
species/habitats
that are in GES
Species or
habitat C
Aggregation rule
for criteria, e.g.
one-out-all-out
Criterion A distribution
Criterion B –
population size/
habitat extent
Criterion C –
population/habitat
condition
GES boundary
defined per
criterion or
scientific indicator
Data set A
Data set B
Data set C
Integrated assessments (2)
State
criterion
Pressures
Threshold
Listed species: Seal
<[10]% loss Energy
of range, or
Species
<[25]% loss
distribution
of area
(1.1.2)
occupied
within range Biological
Population
size (1.2,
1.2.1)
Population
condition
(1.3, 1.3.1)
<[50]%
change cw
reference
level
Significant
reduction in
fecundity/
survival/
reproductive
rates;
significant
change in
age/size
structure of
population
Input of sound
Disturbance of species
Biological
Removal of species (targeted, non-targeted)
Biological
Injury/death to species
Impact
Exclusion from
areas
Exclusion from
areas by
ecotourism &
other human
activities
By-catch (3.1)
Hunting
Assessm Criterion
Overa
ent
assessm
ll
values
ent
15%
2%
5%
GES
(17% loss
of area
occupied)
GES
GES
Chemicals and
other pollutants
Habitat for
species;
<[30]%
Species loss/damage
Physical
distribution cw reference
(1.1, 1.1.1,
condition
1.1.2)
Input of contaminants (synthetic substances, nonsynthetic substances, radionuclides) - diffuse sources,
point sources, acute events
Alteration of sea-floor/water body morphology
Bioaccumulation
Not
(8.2, 8.2.1)
assessed
Loss of haul-out
sites
20%
???
GES
Clear
outcomes of
assessments:
status and
trends:
Example:
commercial
fish (from
CFP)