Common Implementation Strategy
Eighth Meeting of the Working Group on
Good Environmental Status (WG GES)
7 February 2012, Brussels
Title: / Draft Minutes
Number: / GES 8/2012/24 Rev (6/3/12)
Date prepared: / 17 February 2012
Prepared by: / DG ENV & Milieu
DRAFT MINUTES
1Opening of the meeting and Adoption of the Agenda
The Commission opened the meeting and welcomed the participants. The papers and presentations for the meeting are listed in Annex 2, and are all available on CIRCA[1]. Joachim D'Eugenio, deputy head of the Marine Environment and Water Industries Unit in DG ENV, chaired the meeting and informed participants that the previous chair of the WG GES meetings, Carlos Berrozpe-Garcia, is leaving the Marine Environment and Water Industries Unit in DG ENV. Uli Clausen co-chaired the meeting.
France informed about the organisation of the workshop on the linkages between the Water Framework Directive and the Marine Directive. In particular, a session will be organised on the comparison of the definition of “Good Ecological Status” and “Good Environmental Status”. The invitation to the workshop will be sent to all MSCG members, therefore WG GES members should liaise with their MSCG representative for specific messages on this topic. The Steering Group for the organisation of the workshop will meet on 22 February.
2Approval of minutes of 27-28 September 2011 meeting
The minutes of the Seventh meeting of WG GES (DocumentsGES 8/2012/2) were approved after inclusion of Romania’s comments.
3Follow-up of Marine Directors meeting of 8-9 December 2011 in relation to GES
3.1Future work of WG GES
The Commission informed participants that, at their last meeting in December, the Marine Directors have agreed that a closer relationship between the three working groups was necessary. In addition, recognizing that more expert discussions are needed on specific topics, they agreed that these discussions should take place through dedicated workshops rather than within new permanent working groups.
The current discussions about the WG GES work programme for 2013 and beyond will feed into a draft work programme that the Commission will present at the MSCG meeting in May 2012 and at the next Marine Directors meeting in June 2012. The Commission circulated a calendar at the beginning of the year, which included meeting dates and tentative dates for the organisation of thematic workshops. The Commission emphasized that the setting of the dates in the calendar was only tentative and answered to the need to book Brussels rooms in advance. However, it welcomes any proposal by MS to host a thematic workshop at other dates. This calendar should be seen as a rolling work plan which will be updated regularly as topics and dates for workshops get clarified. Some MS mentioned that the dates blocked for some of the workshops conflicted with other important international marine meetings. The Commission answered that it would be very difficult to find convenient dates for all members.
Document GES 8/2012/3 lists the proposed topics for the thematic workshops. Several MS mentioned that the different topics should be prioritised as some were more important and urgent than others, in particular Theme 1 (Monitoring) and Theme 4 (Targets and measures). The Commission confirmed that a clear mandate will be needed from the MSCG and Marine Directors for the organisations of these workshops over the next two years (rolling work plan). It also confirmed that it will be up to each MS to decide who the most appropriate national expert is to attend the workshop. It should not necessarily be the WG GES representative. More concrete proposals will be presented at the next MSCG meeting on 21-22 February.
The following points were discussed:
-A first workshop could be held on 24-25 Aprilon Descriptor 3 with a focus on the document prepared by ICES (cooperation with France and Ireland);
-A workshop could be held on 27-29 June on the UN regular process with a focus on the European and Atlantic marine regions (cooperation with Belgium);
-Three different workshops – common set up but different content – could be organised on Theme 1 (Monitoring) for biodiversity, contaminants and disturbances during the second half of 2012;
-A workshop on public consultation at the EU level could help raise awareness among EU constituency about MSFD implementation; this proposal did not receive much support.
-A workshop on assessment of gaps and coherence would be related to the Art. 12 process and would not be repeating the work of the RSC;
-Romania offered to host a workshop on the issues of marine litter and underwater noise for which scientific information is lacking. Denmark mentioned that a workshop on biodiversity would be useful;
-The next WG GES plenary meeting will take place on 31 October.
It was mentioned that work planning requires a good understanding of the different activities implemented at EU level, in the regional sea conventions and at national level. For instance, there are ‘coherence’ issues at EU level and at (sub-) regional level that need to be addressed at the most appropriate and effective level.
The Commission also informed participants that in view of creating stronger synergies between the implementation of the Marine Directive and of the Nature Directives (Habitats and Birds Directives), it is proposed that the MSFD CIS leads the implementation of Target 4 of the Biodiversity Strategy, which relates to the links between biodiversity and fisheries (incl. MSY) (Presentation GES 8/2012/14). Such work could be undertaken in the framework of the MSFD working groups (with a mandate from the Marine Directors), which will report to the Biodiversity and Marine Directors. The aim would be to avoid creating a new structure to lead the implementation of Target 4 when expertise is already present within the MSFD CIS. In addition, the MSFD CIS could take part in the implementation of the other five targets. The Commission informed participants that it will provide more information about what Target 4 includes in order to clarify why it is relevant for the MSFD CIS to be in charge of it (a brochure was sent to the participants after the meeting).
3.2Article 12 Assessment
The Commission informed the participants that it is preparing a document for the MSCG meeting on the approach considered for the Article 12 process (in particular regarding the assessment of MS reports and the follow-up process). The process should add value to the overall implementation of the MSFD. It should not only identify best practices and gaps but also discuss how to address them, at which level (EU, RSC, MS) and how this should be integrated into the overall CIS work programme.
The paper will be disseminated for comments at the next MSCG meeting. It will be also circulated to all working groups, which will be asked for contribution via their MSCG representative.
3.3Common Understanding: Geographic scales
The Commission informed participants that the Marine Directors approved the Common Understanding paper as a living document as well as the future work plan for the drafting group. The first item of the work plan of the drafting group relates to geographic scales. Uli Clausen presented to WG GES the state of the work of the drafting group so far on this topic (Document GES 8/2012/4 and Presentation GES 8/2012/15). He mentioned that a new version of the paper developed on the topic was uploaded on CIRCA and requested comments and input from MS before 29 February. In particular, MS input would be appreciated on the possibility for the drafting group to provide guidance and generic rules for assessment at different geographic scales.
Member States expressed their concerns on the issue of assessment scales, which led the Commission to highlight the importance of this issue (for instance for the upcoming reporting exercise but also for the next implementation steps) and to propose that a thematic workshop could be organised on this topic in May. Uli Clausen should submit a proposal for the organisation of such workshop, where issues of aggregation of scales and appropriate levels for guidance and rules would be discussed.
3.4ToRs for Technical Subgroups on Litter and Noise
An outline of the work programme for the two technical subgroups (TSG) was presented to the Marine Directors who endorsed both. On this basis, terms of reference were drafted including comment by MSCG and Marine Directors. The headings and tasks titles will not be changed at this stage but comments by WG GES on the content are welcome.
Several issues were discussed in relation to the ToR of TSG Marine Litter (Document GES 8/2012/5):
-Marine Directors asked that emphasis is given to sources of litter. Three projects are on-going at the moment on this topic and the information from these projects will be used by the TSG.
-Several MS have mentioned that priorities should be set in the TSG work programme, in particular the issues of the costs of monitoring (preferably in time for the drafting of the monitoring programme), assessment of harm and setting up of measures.
Several issues were discussed in relation to the ToR of TSG Underwater Noise (Document GES 8/2012/6):
-The Commission mentioned that the draft final report will be disseminated beginning of March.
-Some MS mentioned that monitoring impact is crucial and therefore impact indicators should be developed. Text suggestions were made to incorporate in the final version.
-The TSG experts have acknowledged that there will be a need for additional expertise when they discuss other sources of energy but such need will be identified punctually and relevant specific experts will be invited. The Commission invited MS to put forward names of experts on the other issues identified in the draft final report.
3.5WG DIKE: brief update on reporting processes
The Commission informed the participants that the Marine Directors approved the concept paper on reporting as well as the first set of finalized reporting sheets. It also informed that the WG DIKE Drafting Group, which met in January, was able to address the remaining outstanding issues for the last Article 8 reporting sheets. A package will be submitted to the next Marine Directors meeting in June comprising of the remaining reporting sheets and guidance on the reporting process. The Commission also informed that the discussion started on access to assessment data and the links to the monitoring system in 2014 and data needs in 2018 and that a paper will be prepared for the next WG DIKE meeting in March on the way forward and the links to EMODNET and INSPIRE standards. The Commission confirmed that it is crucial that the Marine Directive should be mentioned in all discussions related to the implementation of EMODNET outside of DG ENV but within the Commission.
3.6Update on website for links to consultation processes by Member States
A page has been dedicated to the dissemination of information about the MS public consultation procedures on the Article 8, 9 and 10 reports on the new web pages about the Marine Directive on DG ENV website.[2] The Commission asked Member States to send their information about the timing of their public consultations before 15 February for a complete overview at the next MSCG meeting on 21-22 February. MS should also specify whether they want this information to be shared on DG ENV website or whether they want it to be used only for internal planning purposes at this stage (PresentationGES 8/2012/16).
4Determination of GES and establishment of environmental targets
The Commission explained that the purpose of this agenda item is to make use of one of the last opportunities to share amongst MS what has been done within the RSC to come to a coherent approach to the determination of GES and setting of targets. The RSCs and ICES have been invited to present their relevant work on biodiversity, disturbances and nutrients enrichments and contaminants.
The OSPAR and HELCOM Secretariat introduced briefly the work on-going at the moment in their organisation on the determination of GES and establishment of environmental targets.
-The OSPAR Secretariat mentioned the advice documents, under development, on the different MSFD Descriptors and the increased level of coherence between MS they bring (Documents GES 8/2012/9-10).
-The HELCOM Secretariat gave a short presentation on internal organisational aspects related to the coordination for the implementation of the MSFD. Two HELCOM projects in particular are relevant to the establishment of targets and GES determination: CORESET and TARGREV. In particular, CORESET is about identifying a core set of indicators with quantitative GES boundaries. In addition, three thematic (eutrophication, biodiversity and hazardous substances) and an initial holistic assessments have been carried out on the state of the Baltic Sea.
Cooperation between the two RSC Secretariats is on-going. The HELCOM Secretariat also mentioned cooperation on a project-basis with the Black Sea Convention Secretariat.
4.1Biodiversity
-OSPAR advice manual on biodiversity descriptors 1, 2, 4 and 6: Lisette Enserink presented the OSPAR advice manual on biodiversity descriptors (Presentation GES 8/2012/17). She mentioned that the document is not yet ready to be shared on CIRCA as the OSPAR Biodiversity Committee will be meeting in the week of 13 February to finalize it. She confirmed the close cooperation between OSPAR and ICES in the development of this advice manual.
-HELCOM CORESET of indicators for biodiversity descriptors 1, 2, 4 and 6: Ulla Li Zweifel, chair of the CORESET projects’ biodiversity expert workshop, presented the set of proposed core indicators, developed following common principles agreed upon in HELCOM and the Commission Decision and which will be finalized end of 2012. She mentioned that this work mirrors the work of ICG-COBAM in OSPAR (DocumentsGES 8/2012/7a-7b and Presentation GES 8/2012/18).
The level of certainty needed to report on certain indicators was then discussed. Certain MS mentioned that they preferred reporting only on indicators in which they have a high level of confidence. The Commission mentioned that MS can only be assessed in 2012-2013 on what they report to the Commission, therefore it is better to report on as wide a range of indicators as possible, including those that are not fully ready. It will be possible to provide information in the Reporting Sheets on the level of confidence in an indicator. The basis for the Commission’s assessment of MS reporting on indicators will be the available knowledge on the topic of the indicator (i.e. the level of understanding of indicators for underwater noise is limited so the lack of reporting on such indicators won’t be negatively assessed by the Commission however for other issues, such as eutrophication, the Commission knows that indicators exist even when MS might not have reported on them because MS have not yet worked out how to make them operational in their monitoring programme. This would be assessed as a gap.)
Denmark intervened to share its experience as a member of two RSCs (HELCOM and OSPAR) and stated that it will try as much as possible to use the same indicators for the whole of the Danish marine area, which means that it won’t be able to use either OSPAR or HELCOM indicators systematically.
-ICES information on the Core Group Report on the Marine Strategy Framework Directive – Descriptor 3:Leonie Dransfeld from the International Council on the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) presented the 2012 report undertaken by ICES to provide technical information to support EU MS in the implementation of Descriptor 3 (Document GES 8/2012/8 and Presentation GES 8/2012/19). The report advocates a shift from a precautionary approach to an ecosystem-based approach focused on rebuilding marine ecosystems through the application of the MSY principle and reduction of impacts on habitats, biodiversity and ecosystem health. The case studies presented in the report do not reflect official MS views but rather experts’ analysis.
The Commission mentioned the usefulness of the report and proposed that it should be discussed in greater details during a thematic workshop, dedicated entirely to Descriptor 3. Such a workshop would aim at going further than the report, in particular looking at MSFD implementation issues. MS agreed that the document was useful, in particular to describe Descriptor 3 and to monitor it, but maybe less useful for implementing corrective measures at the national level. They agreed that holding a thematic workshop on this issue would be of use and both France and Ireland offered their help in the organisation of such workshop in April. Asked for clarification about the status of this document, ICES mentioned that it intends to produce an official published scientific report on the basis of this working document.
4.2Disturbance
-OSPAR advice document on descriptor 10 for litter: Gert Verreet, fromthe OSPAR Secretariat, mentioned in a brief presentation of this document and, as an example of the benefit of more collective work planning between EU, regional and national levels (cf. section 3.1 above), stated that it would be useful to have common planning of work between the OSPAR group in charge of descriptor 10 and the MSFD Technical Subgroup on Marine Litter in order to avoid duplication (Document GES 8/2012/11). OSPAR has also finalised an advice document on descriptor 7 (hydrographic conditions) but, due to lack of time, this was not addressed by the meeting.
-UNEP/MAP strategy on marine litter: Michael AngelidisfromUNEP /MAP presentedthe strategy on marine litter, which is on the agenda of the 17th Meeting of the Contracting Parties on 8-10 February (Presentation GES 8/2012/20).
4.3Nutrients enrichment and contaminants
-HELCOM CORESET of indicators for Eutrophication (5) and Hazardous Substances (8 and 9):
- Juha-Markku Leppänen, chair of the HELCOM Core EUTRO process, presented HELCOM’s progress on the assessment, development of indicators and objectives for Good Environmental Status in relation to Descriptor 5, eutrophication (Presentation GES 8/2012/21). In his presentation, he also mentioned the HELCOM TARGREV project which is contributing to the strengthening of the scientific basis of the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan’s eutrophication status targets and is expected to deliver the final report during Spring 2012.
- Maria Lamaanen, from the HELCOM secretariat, presented HELCOM’s progress with regard to the assessment and development of indicators on Descriptor 8, hazardous substances, in the framework of the CORESET project (Presentation GES 8/2012/22). The CORESET project’s hazardous substances work also covers territorial waters. HELCOM’s first advice document (the interim report) on hazardous substances also addresses status of radioactive substances, although they are not distinctively addressed in the Marine Directive but are of interest to HELCOM.
-Update on OSPAR coordination on descriptor 5 and 8: the OSPAR Secretariat indicated that in relation to eutrophication, OSPAR has compiled a condensed document to establish eutrophication levels, following a similar approach to HELCOM and building on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (DocumentGES 8/2012/12).