Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
ODEMM perspective on MSP
Leonie Robinson
ODEMM Project Coordinator
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
March 2010 - August 2013
• Options for Delivering Ecosystem-based Marine
Management (ODEMM)
AIM: To develop a set of fully-costed ecosystem
management options that would deliver the
objectives of the Marine Strategy Framework
Directive, the Habitats Directive, the European
Commission Blue Book and the Guidelines for the
Integrated Approach to Maritime Policy.
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive
• Goal – to achieve GES in Europe’s seas by 2020
• ODEMM’s management options must be coherent
with the MSFD in terms of objectives,
implementation and governance.
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Timeline for MSFD taken from UK perspective (DEFRA)
ODEMM
We are coming up with
tools, knowledge and
strategies that will help
to implement the MSFD
(novel work).....
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
MSFD Descriptors
D1: Biological diversity is maintained. The quality and occurrence
of habitats and the distribution and abundance of species are
in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic
conditions.
D2: Non-indigenous species introduced by human activities are
at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystems.
D3: Populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish
are within safe biological limits, exhibiting a population age
and size distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock.
D4: All elements of the marine food webs, to the extent that
they are known, occur at normal abundance and diversity and
levels capable of ensuring the long-term abundance of the
species and the retention of their full reproductive capacity.
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
MSFD Descriptors
D5: Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially adverse
effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem
degradation, harmful algae blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom
waters.
D6: Sea-floor integrity is at a level that ensures that the structure and
functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic
ecosystems, in particular, are not adversely affected.
D7: Hydrographical conditions.., D8: Contaminants in the environment,
D9: Contaminants in seafood, D10: Marine Litter, D11: Underwater
noise
A mixture of state and pressure-based descriptors
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
ODEMM perspective on MSP?
1. Will management measures relevant to all descriptors have a
spatial context?
2. Can MSP be a useful tool to try and select for management
measures that ensure multiple gains (across descriptors) on
GES within particular areas?
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Space and boundaries for the MSFD
• Four marine regions
• Member States sharing a region obliged to cooperate so that
objectives can be achieved at the regional scale; must be
coherent and coordinated regionally
• Reality – MSs implementing for their sea areas with some
regional cooperation through regional sea conventions and/or
the commission’s working groups
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Marine Regions
Baltic Sea
Mediterranean Sea
North East Atlantic Ocean
EEZ Boundaries
Marine Sub-regions
Atlantic Ocean
Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast
Celtic Sea
Greater north Sea
Adriatic Sea
Aegean-Levantine Sea
Ionian Sea
W. Mediterranean Sea
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
ODEMM perspective on MSP?
1. Will management measures relevant to all descriptors have a
spatial context?
2. Can MSP be a useful tool to try and ensure multiple gains on
GES within particular areas?
3. Given the commitment to cooperate regionally, but the
reality of initial progress being MS driven, can MSP
contribute in viewing overall regional problems and gains
from the combined efforts of implementing measures?
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
ODEMM
Case study areas – not
yet fully defined but ...
2
1
4
3
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 1: To provide a comprehensive knowledge base to
support policy for the development of sustainable and
integrated management of European marine ecosystems.
(Ds 1-4)[WPs 1 & 2]
• WPs 1 and 2 complete
• WP 1 Outputs: Technical report (D1) and tools – linkage
framework, pressure assessment, metadata database,
summary of threats relevant to GES in all regional seas
• WP2 Outputs: 3 journal articles – legal, institutional and
sectoral perspectives on implementation of MSFD (and EA)
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 2: To develop Operational Objectives to achieve the
High-Level Policy Objectives set by the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive and the Habitats Directive, and with
reference to the proposed Maritime Policy. (Ds 5-6) [WP 3]
• WP3 complete
• WP3 Outputs: Review of HLOs relevant to the MSFD and across
regional seas, Risk assessment methodology for match of
current status to GES (applied to all regional seas), Review of
available operational objectives for high threat HLOs
Summaries for each GES descriptor in each
regional sea plus all background information
(D1, Annexes 1-4)
ODEMM tools: linkage framework
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
ODEMM perspective on MSP?
1. Will management measures relevant to all descriptors have a
spatial context?
2. Can MSP be a useful tool to try and ensure multiple gains on
GES within particular areas?
3. Given the commitment to cooperate regionally, but the
reality of initial progress being MS driven, can MSP
contribute in viewing overall regional problems and gains
from the combined efforts of implementing measures?
4. Tools developed in WPs 1 and 3 can all be applied within the
context of MSP (e.g. Pressure assessment, risk assessment)
5. Knowledge gained from WP 2 reveals governance reality in
terms of potential for implementing MSFD (some spatial
issues)
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
st reporting period
Del no.
WP
Deliverables
1Name
Status
1
1
Tech report: Status of regional seas re.
Sustainability
Complete
2
2
Journal article: European law/policy
Published
3
2
Journal article: positions on EA and policy
process towards MSFD
Submitted
4
2
Journal article: implications different
perspectives on implementing MSFD and EA
Submitted
5
3
Journal article: HLOs, methodology for assessing
and results using regional seas
In prep
6
3
Tech report: regional reporting on potential
operational objectives for failing HLOs
Complete
18
9
Project website
Online
20
11/12
1st Interim report
Aug 2011
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 3: To identify Management Options (individual
management tools and combinations of tools) to meet the
Operational Objectives. (Ds 7-8) [WP 4]
• Identify human activities most likely to compromise meeting
operational objectives
• Develop and formally evaluate a range of management
strategies or options for these activities using different types of
measures and tools
• Consider the resources required in terms of infrastructure and
governance to enforce the management strategies evaluated
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 4: To provide a risk assessment framework for the
evaluation of Management Options and to assess the risk
associated with the different options. (Ds 9-10) [WP 5]
• Identification of different sources of risk to meeting operational
objectives
• Design of a risk assessment framework able to deal with a
range of risk types
• Application of risk assessment for a selection of operational
objectives in each (sub) region under different scenarios
(management strategies from WP4 contrasted with do-nothing
scenarios)
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 5: To conduct a cost-benefit analysis of a range of
Management Options using appropriate techniques. (Ds 1112) [WP 6]
• Measure the cost of policy inaction (COPI) in the four study
regions, in terms of deterioration in provision of ecosystem
goods and services (EGSs)
• Estimate the costs and monetary benefits of each specified
management option, measured in terms of change in
provision of EGSs relative to do-nothing scenario
• Produce a web-based tool allowing users to juxtapose costs
and benefits of different management options and actions
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 6: ID stakeholder opinions on creation of governance
structures directed towards implementation of the EA and to
elaborate different scenarios for changing governance
structures and legislation to facilitate a gradual transition from
the current fragmented management approach towards fully
integrated ecosystem management. (Ds 13-15) [WP 7]
• Stakeholder consultation on governance structures required to
implement sorts of management scenarios
• Investigate legal constraints and opportunities to improving
implementation at EU and regional level
• Elaborate and consult on different scenarios for changing
governance structures and legislation where required
Joint project meeting
Edinburgh, Sep 2011
Objective 7: To document the steps necessary for the transition
from the current fragmented management scheme to a mature
and integrated approach, and to provide a toolkit that could be
used to evaluate options for delivering ecosystem-based
management. (Ds 16-17) [WP 8]
• ID social, economic, ecological and institutional obstacles to
achieving objectives in an EA
• Produce an accessible guide to the toolkit of techniques
required to evaluate options and actions
• Produce an Implementation Plan for the steps required to
achieve the transition to an integrated EA