Development and testing of a prototype indicator-based tool for identification of potential problem areas for marine litter in Europe's seas

We demonstrate a prototype multi-metric indicator-based assessment tool (i.e. Marine Litter Assessment Tool - MALT) for mapping and identification of ‘problem areas’ and ‘non-problem areas’ regarding the occurrence of marine litter in Europe's seas. The study is based on a European-wide data set consisting of three marine litter indicators: (1) litter at the seafloor, (2) beach litter and (3) floating micro-litter. This publicly available data allowed litter status to be determined in 1,957,081 km2 (19.1 %) of the total area of Europe's seas (10,243,474 km2). Of the area assessed, 25.8 % (505,030 km2) was found to be ‘non-problem areas’ whilst ‘problem areas’ accounted for 74.2 % (1,452,051 km2). This indicates that marine litter is a large-scale problem in Europe's seas.publishedVersio

Report of the JRC’s Descriptor 1 workshop to support the review of the Commission Decision 2010/477/EU concerning MSFD criteria for assessing Good Environmental Status

The MSFD workshop on biodiversity (MSFD D1), held in Ispra JRC (7th-9th of September 2015) aimed to provide clear proposals and conclusions on some of the outstanding issues identified in the D1 review manual (May 2015 consultation version: https://circabc.europa.eu/w/browse/46d2b7ba-d2fd-4b3c-9eaf-18c7cb702b53) in the broader context of support to the review of Commission Decision 2010/477/EU. This report is complementing the Commission Decision 2010/477/EU review manual (JRC96521) and presents the result of the scientific and technical review concluding phase 1 of the review of the Commission Decision 2010/477/EU in relation to Descriptor 1. The review has been carried out by the EC JRC together with experts nominated by EU Member States, and has considered contributions from the GES Working Group in accordance with the roadmap set out in the MSFD implementation strategy (agreed on at the 11th CIS MSCG meeting). The main issues addressed and tackled in this workshop’s report are: - Common lists of elements for the biodiversity assessments (species & habitats) o Review of the “Biological Features” in Table 1 in the MSFD Annex III in relation to D1 requirements o Review of the “Habitat Types” entries in Table 1 in the MSFD Annex III in relation to D1 requirements - Selection/deselection criteria for the inclusion of species and habitats in a group - Updated criteria and indicators for D1 - Habitat/Bird Directives, WFD, Common Fisheries Policy and D1 o Use of species and habitats for the MSFD needs that are already included in other legislation and agreements o Links between status classification approaches (FCS vs GES, GEcS vs GES) - Streamlining of assessments, including scales of assessments - Cross-cutting issues related to D1 implementation o Aggregation rules within D1 criteria/indicators o Final GES integration across descriptors assessments Steps forward and technical needs for D1.JRC.H.1-Water Resource

Combined effects of human pressures on Europe’s marine ecosystems

Marine ecosystems are under high demand for human use, giving concerns about how pressures from human activities may affect their structure, function, and status. In Europe, recent developments in mapping of marine habitats and human activities now enable a coherent spatial evaluation of potential combined effects of human activities. Results indicate that combined effects from multiple human pressures are spread to 96% of the European marine area, and more specifically that combined effects from physical disturbance are spread to 86% of the coastal area and 46% of the shelf area. We compare our approach with corresponding assessments at other spatial scales and validate our results with European-scale status assessments for coastal waters. Uncertainties and development points are identified. Still, the results suggest that Europe’s seas are widely disturbed, indicating potential discrepancy between ambitions for Blue Growth and the objective of achieving good environmental status within the Marine Strategy Framework Directive

Tales from a thousand and one ways to integrate marine ecosystem components when assessing the environmental status

Assessing the environmental status of marine ecosystems is useful when communicating key messages to policy makers or the society, reducing the complex information of the multiple ecosystem and biodiversity components and their important spatial and temporal variability into manageable units. Taking into account the ecosystem components to be addressed(e.g., biological, chemical, physical), the numerous biodiversity elements to be assessed(e.g., from microbes to sea mammals), the different indicators needed to be studied(e.g., in Europe, 56 indicators of status have been selected), and the different assessment scales to be undertaken(e.g., from local to regional seascale), some criteria to define spatial scales and some guidance on aggregating and integrating information is needed. We have reviewed, from ecological and management perspectives, the approaches for aggregating and integrating currently available for marine status assessment in Europe and other regions of the world. Advantages and shortcomings of the different alternatives are highlighted. We provide some guidance on the steps toward defining rules for aggregation and integration of information at multiple levels of ecosystem organization, providing recommendations on when using specific rules in the assessment. A main conclusion is that any integration principle used should be ecologically-relevant, transparent and well documented, in order to make it comparable across different geographic regions.publishedVersio

Development of marine landscape maps for the Baltic Sea and the Kattegat using geophysical and hydrographical parameters

The Baltic Sea is one of the largest brackish water bodies in the world (Segerstråle 1957) with a number of basins varying from almost fresh water in the northern part of the Bothnian Bay via the more brackish conditions in the southern part to the saline waters of the Kattegat. The Baltic Sea is subject to severe environmental degradation caused by commercial and leisure activities, including fisheries, dredging, tourism, coastal development and land-based pollution sources. This causes severe pressures on vulnerable marine habitats and natural resources, and a tool for aiding marine management is therefore strongly needed. The marine landscape concept presented by Roff &Taylor (2000) is based on the use of available broad-scale geological, physical and hydrographical data to prepare ecologically meaningful maps for areas with little or no biological information. The concept, which was elaborated by Day & Roff (2000) was applied in UK waters (Connor et al. 2006) before it was adopted by the BALANCE project described here. The aim of developing marine landscape maps is to characterise the marine environment of the Baltic Sea region (the Baltic Sea together with the Kattegat) using geophysical and hydrographical parameters. Such maps can be applied, for example, to an assessment of the Baltic-wide network of marine protected areas, and thus provide a sustainable ecosystem-based approach to the protection of the marine environment from human activities, and contribute to the conservation of marine biodiversity. The BALANCE project is based on transnational and cross-sectoral co-operation with participants from nine countries surrounding the Baltic Sea as well as Norway (Fig. 1), and is partially financed by the European Union through the BSR INTERREG IIIB programme

European Broad-Scale Seabed Habitat Maps Support Implementation of Ecosystem-Based Management

We have analyzed the development of “Broad-Scale Seabed Habitat Maps” (BSHM) and their potential use in a European context with regard to the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) implementation, MPA designation and network assessment as well as other applications of BSHMs. The analyses are anchored in BSHMs developed by a series of interlinked EU projects (e.g. UKSeaMap, BALANCE, MESH, Mesh Atlantic, EUSeaMap 2012, and EUSeaMap 2016) and all maps are based on environmental data. Some EU Member States have used BSHMs as part of their MSFD Initial Assessments published in 2012. However, we conclude that BSHMs are a prerequisite for another key MSFD activity, i.e. mapping of potentially cumulative effects of multiple human stressors. Further, BSHMs seem to play a growing role with regard to evidence-based assessments of MPAs. With the upcoming second round of MSFD Initial Assessments due in 2018, including assessment of potentially cumulative pressures, there seems to be an increasing need for more BSHMs nationally, regionally and on a European scale

DataSheet_1_Mapping of contamination problem areas in Europe’s seas using a multi-metric indicator-based assessment tool.pdf

We report identification and mapping of areas in Europe’s seas and coastal areas impacted by contaminants, i.e., areas with concentrations above internationally agreed threshold values. The study is based on (1) a state-of-the-art data set anchored in national monitoring activities, (2) internationally agreed target values and (3) an updated version of the CHASE assessment tool (originally: the HELCOM Chemical Status Assessment Tool). The spatial cover of data enabled us to classify 1,518 spatial assessment units, with 80% of the area assessed determined to be “problem areas”. We have demonstrated that it is possible to make an integrated assessment of contaminants spanning over four marine regions, and 10 marine sub-regions (sensu the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive), including marine and coastal waters of 30 European countries. The power of combining data of different sources and contaminant categories over larger geographical scales, is potentially and in a long-term perspective the way forward for wider use of multi-metric indicator-based assessment tools supporting informed decision-making.</p

Tales from a thousand and one ways to integrate marine ecosystem components when assessing the environmental status

Assessing the environmental status of marine ecosystems is useful when communicating key messages to policymakers or the society, reducing the complex information of the multiple ecosystem and biodiversity components and their important spatial and temporal variability into manageable units. Taking into account the ecosystem components to be addressed (e.g. biological, chemical, physical), the numerous biodiversity elements to be assessed (e.g. from microbes to sea mammals), the different indicators needed to be studied (e.g. in Europe, 56 indicators of status have been selected), and the different assessment scales to be undertaken (e.g. from local to regional sea scale), some criteria to define spatial scales and some guidance on aggregating and integrating information is needed. We have reviewed, from ecological and management perspectives, the approaches for aggregating and integrating currently available for marine status assessment in Europe and other regions of the world. Advantages and shortcomings of the different alternatives are highlighted. We provide some guidance on the steps towards defining rules for aggregation and integration of information at multiple levels of ecosystem organization, providing recommendations on when using specific rules in the assessment. A main conclusion is that any integration principle used should be ecologically-relevant, transparent and well documented, in order to make it comparable across different geographic regions.JRC.H.1-Water Resource