ICM Expert Group, 21 April 2015, Brussels

The ICM Experts met independently on the morning of 21 April 2015, before joining with the MSP Experts for a combined session on the afternoon of 21 April and the morning of 22 April.

All presentations can be found at : ICM expert group - Opening and Introduction

The following pointswere mentioned by theCommission (Joachim d’Eugenio, Deputy Head of Unit, C.2 DG ENV):

  • Welcome and introduction of the participants and the agenda.
  • There will be a conference on MSP and the environment in November2015.
  • Rhona Fairgrieve will leaveat the end of April and will be replaced by Marijana Mance.
  • The focus of the morning ICM meeting was to come to an agreement on what should be the main focus of the ICM Expert group now that there is a clear policy context.What do Member States (MS) want to do together and where can the European level add value? The aim isto develop a work plan for the ICM Expert group forthe latter half of 2015 and 2016-2017.
  • The joint part of the meeting will discuss potential linkages with the MSP Experts but COM feels there is value in identifying an ICM-only agenda as well as having one that considers liaison with other Expert Groups. There will be a separate work programme just for the ICM Expert Group and another, more collaborative work programme, for the joint ICM/MSPexpert groups.The MSP group meetings take place more regularly;the frequency of this group is likely to remain at one meeting per year. The aim is to continue back-to-back meetings with the MSP group, as started in June 2014 in Athens.
  • The final minutes of the 4 June 2014 meeting were adopted without comments.
  • The draft minutes of the 21 April 2015 meeting will be circulated to ICM Experts and colleaguesin DG MARE for comment.

Discussion on the Rules of Procedure for the ICM Expert group:

  • The Rules of Procedure (RoP) of theICM Expert Groupneed to be updated to reflect the working arrangements introduced by the Lisbon Treaty. The process is set by the Secretary General and COM Legal Services andis standard across the Commission. The content is up to the members of the Expert Group to agree and theCommission welcomes comments: they will try to take these on board astransparency is key.
  • The draft RoP paper was discussed and initial comments noted from SE, CY and BE. A Written Procedure of three weeks will be launched to give an opportunity to comment to those who were absent. DG ENV is keen to have revised Rules of Procedure agreed in advance of the next meeting.
  • COM noted, in response to a question from CY concerning the ICZM Protocol, that ratification of that Protocol is a task for Member States within the Mediterranean area;it is not the task of this expert group, whichshould work on an informal basis but could contribute technical, preparatory work that could be presented to the Barcelona Convention for further consideration.This working group has no mandate to agree on anything binding.
  • BE asked about whether ICM EG meetings had to be held on COM premises or whether they could be combined with other ICM events, to which Experts were already travelling. This could lead to a reduction in costs for all. COM explained that the budget for supporting ICM Expert Group meetings is very limited and the policy is only to reimburse Experts attending formal Committee meetings. MARE can reimburse their MSP Experts because they only have one Directive, whereas ENV has to cater for five. However, ENV is happy to receive feedback on this issue to justify the case for being able to contribute towards travel expenses, but budgetary constraints are significant.

Actions:

  • Several MS made comments and will also provide them in a written format.
  • The Commission will evaluate all comments received and will incorporate (if appropriate) them in a new version of the Rules of Procedure before the next meeting.
  • MS are encouraged to suggest ideas for combining future ICM EG meetings with other events in 2015/2016 and beyond.

2.ICM support contracts

Presentation: Sharing of best practices on ICM in context of adaptation to Climate Change in coastal areas (Tony Zamparutti, Milieu Ltd)

Under this contract with DG ENV, five parallel tasks were undertaken[1]. COM asked whether MS and Experts feel that further work is required on this topic area and, if so, what it should address. It was suggested that the ICM EG could be a platform from which MS can explain their own experiences of ICM and CCA or discuss the need for future guidance. DG CLIMA noted that any potential future guidance should reflect COM priorities for the drafting of National CCA Strategies, especially bringing CC action into other policy areas, such as those relating to marine and coastal areas.

Actions:

  • DG ENV will make the PowerPoint presentation and study results available. It is important to see whether further work is still needed on ICM and CCA. MS views are welcome on whether further work/guidance on this topic is necessary and if there is scope for working more closely on this subject.
  • DG CLIMAstated that the EU adaptation strategy will be reviewed in 2017. MS should reflect on the question if the current document on ICM & CCA is enough and whether it provide sufficient support for MS action.

Presentation: Consideration of land/sea interactions in context of coastal and marine policies (Rhona Fairgrieve, DG ENV):

  • LSI is a topic that has long been at the heart of environmental policies and planning systems and it has become ‘loaded’ in the context of the MSP Directive. There is full understanding that there is an element of sensitivity in its relation with the MSP Directive.
  • The Commission is interested in the ideas/suggestions on what needs to be worked on, i.e. what work needs to be done on the substance, not from a legal point of view. COM wants to ‘fine tune’ the thinking on this matter and identify aspects that could be focussed on in this Expert Group.
  • The ICM Expert Group cannot discuss this in isolation from maritime spatial planning; therefore, the aim is to share ideas and gather initial views.
  • DG ENV intends to produce a background paper under the 2015 ICM support contract that would structure the discussion and link the idea of LSI across different Directives (e.g. WFD & MSFD), so that it promotes cohesion beyond MSP. This would not be a guidance document, buta document to frame the dialogue.

Discussion:

  • There was a discussion on which elements of LSI should be consideredin the group. Most MS would like to see an overview on what is going on in other MS.
  • Concerns were raised about potential encroachment on competence for MSP. The MSP Directive should clearly be left out of the discussion as the group has no mandate to discuss MSP.
  • There is a need to continue discussions on the technical level with a view towards sharing best practice. It wasconsidered important to understand how LSI is taken into account in the processes of terrestrial planning, focussing on lessons learned.
  • No recommendations or guidance should be produced.
  • A background, technicalpaper could show where LSI is considered elsewhere in EU legislation(WFD, MSFD).It would be good to have a cross-legislation understanding of how it is addressed.
  • Even more useful than a document would be presentations of MS practices in the next meeting of the group.

Actions:

  • COM will prepare a draft document, with initial information on how LSI is considered across other EU policy areas, for circulation to ICM Experts. This will include a table that sets out preliminary information on how MS currently consider LSI.
  • MS are invited to complete the table on LSI per MS in terms of approaches used and also to request further issues to be addressed in the table.

3.Developments in ICM

Presentation: Mediterranean Action Plan & ICZM Protocol (DG ENV Marijana Mance):

  • The presentation gave a historical overview of the ICZM Protocol: signed in 2008, entered into force in 2011, became part of the EU acquis in 2010.Part of the Barcelona Convention, UNEP regional sea programme, one of oldest regional conventions, presentation of the structure (21 contracting parties + EU, 7 protocols, latest one ICZM protocol since 2008). Part of Agenda 21 launched in Rio Earth Summit in 1992. Legal instrument for the sustainable development of the coastal zone.
  • Important aspects: Definitions provided - definition of coastal zone, interactions with both marine and land aspects. Geographical coverage of the ICM.Aim of the protocol; ecosystem based approach as a basis; appropriate governance and participatory approach; elements of ICM –economic activities especially mentioned by the Protocol, international cooperation etc.

Discussion:

  • There is an interest in the development of indicators.
  • There is also interest in hearing about experiences with the 100m zone.

Presentation: MARE NOSTRUM(Prof. Rachelle Alterman, Head of Project)

  • The main aim of the project is tobridge the implementation gap in ICM - lowering the legal-institutional barriers. No prior comparative research on this topic has beencarried out. The project is financed by the EU Mediterranean programme, combining planning and legal aspects. The project focuses on different aspects from many other projects financed by the EU, as Mare Nostrum’s main focus is clearly on legal aspects.
  • Special platform to launch as a result of the research carried out by Mare Nostrum:
  • Ports and cities – model legislation to address problems that occur across
  • Enforcement people are the invisibles
  • Tourism and coastline – discussion forum for legal terms, what is a hotel?
  • National cadaster for discussions over the land-sea delineation aspects.

Action:

  • The Commissionasked MS to provide written comments on the presentationsto be able to highlight the focus and future topics for this working group.

4.Looking ahead

Presentation:Linkages between ICM, MSP, WFD and MSFD. (DG ENV Rhona Fairgrieve)

Discussion on what are the substantial issues that you would like to discuss in this group?

  • DG ENV wants to develop a living work programme for this Expert Group for at least the next 12 months. CCA, LSI and policy coherence had already been mentioned during the meeting and new ways of working as a Group were suggested, in order to make it more interactive. ICM development is not something that can be addressed by legislation but rather by bringing people together and making the implementation happen. UK mentioned to need for a proper explanation of the benefits of ICM and MSP. ICM benefits, in reality, are much wider and currently there are no specific approaches on how to measure them. In this area, quantitative methodologies are lacking to encourage implementation on the local level.
  • Call for a more thematic approach to the meetings, as done in MSP group. It would be better to focus on a specific topic than having short, formal presentations. As a starting point for gathering themes,one could ask Experts on topics where progress has been made. However, there is also a need to keep in mind not to lose the cross-sectorial approach.Topics that were mentioned included cooperation and working on issues of joint concern for example marine regions (experience from the MSFD). Under the Barcelona Convention, an overview of ICZM in different MSs has been done and this might be interesting to share across EU MS.
  • Adriatic countries would be interested in reporting on ICM & MSP developments. Examples of best practice include two EU projects: one on trans-boundary cooperation process and one on SEA for different sectors.
  • There is a need to bring this integration into practice, so rather than organizing separate ICZM meetings, joint meeting should be organized with other groups.

Action:

  • Collect written feedback by MS to put together a draft work programme by the Commission, which will be presented at the next meeting.

1

[1]Fact sheets on MS’ policies and measures and on ‘green’, ‘grey’ and ‘soft’ measures for adaptation to climate change in coastal areas,; a Background Paper on ICM and CCA; updating the OURCOAST case studies,; integrating OURCOAST with other platforms, e.g. Climate-ADAPT and the European Atlas of the Seas; communication of the work through newsletters.