Why is it so hard to set MSFD indicators and targets? Messages from the plankton

Unprecedented basin-scale ecological changes are occurring in our seas. As temperature and carbon dioxide concentrations increase, the extent of sea ice is decreasing, stratification and nutrient regimes are changing, and pH is decreasing. These unparalleled changes present new challenges for managing our seas as we are only just beginning to understand the ecological manifestations of these climate alterations. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive requires all European Member States to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) in their seas by 2020; this means management toward GES will take place against a background of climate-driven macroecological change. Each Member State must set environmental targets to achieve GES; however, in order to do so an understanding of large-scale ecological change in the marine ecosystem is necessary. Much of our knowledge of macroecological change in the North Atlantic is a result of research using data gathered by the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey, a near-surface plankton monitoring program which has been sampling in the North Atlantic since 1931. CPR data indicate that North Atlantic and North Sea plankton dynamics are responding to both climate and human-induced changes, presenting challenges to the development of pelagic targets for achievement of GES in European seas. Thus the continuation of long-term ecological time-series such as the CPR is crucial for informing and supporting the sustainable management of European seas through policy mechanisms.

A comparison of the degree of implementation of marine biodiversity indicators by European countries in relation to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)

The degree of development and operability of the indicators for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) using Descriptor 1 (D1) Biological Diversity was assessed. To this end, an overview of the relevance and degree of operability of the underlying parameters across 20 European countries was compiled by analysing national directives, legislation, regulations, and publicly available reports. Marked differences were found between countries in the degree of ecological relevance as well as in the degree of implementation and operability of the parameters chosen to indicate biological diversity. The best scoring EU countries were France, Germany, Greece and Spain, while the worst scoring countries were Italy and Slovenia. No country achieved maximum scores for the implementation of MSFD D1. The non-EU countries Norway and Turkey score as highly as the top-scoring EU countries. On the positive side, the chosen parameters for D1 indicators were generally identified as being an ecologically relevant reflection of Biological Diversity. On the negative side however, less than half of the chosen parameters are currently operational. It appears that at a pan-European level, no consistent and harmonized approach currently exists for the description and assessment of marine biological diversity. The implementation of the MSFD Descriptor 1 for Europe as a whole can therefore at best be marked as moderately successful.

Water quality assessment and characterisation of chlorophyll-a variability related to river discharges, within the southeastern Bay of Biscay : evaluation and development of chlorophyll-a algorithms for MODIS and MERIS imagery

222 p. : il.

The potential use of mapped extent and distribution of habitats as indicators of Good Environmental Status (GES)

The Healthy and Biologically Diverse Seas Evidence Group (HBDSEG) has been tasked with providing the technical advice for the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with respect to descriptors linked to biodiversity. A workshop was held in London to address one of the Research and Development (R&D) proposals entitled: ‘Mapping the extent and distribution of habitats using acoustic and remote techniques, relevant to indicators for area/extent/habitat loss.’ The aim of the workshop was to identify, define and assess the feasibility of potential indicators of benthic habitat distribution and extent, and identify the R&D work which could be required to fully develop these indicators. The main points that came out of the workshop were: (i) There are many technical aspects of marine habitat mapping that still need to be resolved if cost-effective spatial indicators are to be developed. Many of the technical aspects that need addressing surround issues of consistency, confidence and repeatability. These areas should be tackled by the JNCC Habitat Mapping and Classification Working Group and the HBDSEG Seabed Mapping Working Group. (ii) There is a need for benthic ecologists (through the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup and the JNCC Marine Indicators Group) to finalise the list of habitats for which extent and/or distribution indicators should be considered for development, building upon the recommendations from this report. When reviewing the list of indicators, benthic habitats could also be distinguished into those habitats that are defined/determined primarily by physical parameters (although including biological assemblages) (e.g. subtidal shallow sand) and those defined primarily by their biological assemblage (e.g. seagrass beds). This distinction is important as some anthropogenic pressures may influence the biological component of the ecosystem despite not having a quantifiable effect on the physical habitat distribution/extent. (iii) The scale and variety of UK benthic habitats makes any attempt to undertake comprehensive direct mapping exercises prohibitively expensive (especially where there is a need for repeat surveys for assessment). There is a clear need therefore to develop a risk-based approach that uses indirect indicators (e.g. modelling), such as habitats at risk from pressures caused by current human activities, to develop priorities for information gathering. The next steps that came out of the workshop were: (i) A combined approach should be developed by the JNCC Marine Indicators Group together with the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup, which will compile and ultimately synthesise all the criteria used by the three different groups from the workshop. The agreed combined approach will be used to undertake a final review of the habitats considered during the workshop, and to evaluate any remaining habitats in order to produce a list of habitats for indicator development for which extent and/or distribution indicators could be appropriate. (ii) The points of advice raised at this workshop, alongside the combined approach aforementioned, and the final list of habitats for extent and/or distribution indicator development will be used to develop a prioritised list of actions to inform the next round of R&D proposals for benthic habitat indicator development in 2014. This will be done through technical discussions within JNCC and the relevant HBDSEG Subgroups. The preparation of recommendations by these groups should take into account existing work programmes, and consider the limited resources available to undertake any further R&D work.

Through the portal – improving the flow of information on non-native marine species in Great Britain.

Abstract: The UK Government funded, GB Non-Native Species Information Portal (GBNNSIP) collects and collates data on non-native species in Great Britain making information available online. Resources include a comprehensive register of non-native species and detailed fact sheets for a sub-set, significant to humans or the environment. Reporting of species records are linked to risk analyses, rapid responses and horizon scanning to support the early recognition of threats (Figure 12). The portal has improved flow of new and existing distributional data to the National Biodiversity Network (NBN) to generate distribution maps for the portal. The project is led by the Biological Records Centre and the Marine Biological Association is responsible for marine non-native species within this scheme. The INTERREG IV funded project Marinexus has included professional research and citizen science work, which has fed directly into the portal. The portal outputs and the work of Marinexus have a range of marine governance applications, including supporting work towards MSFD compliance.

A review of climate change and the implementation of marine biodiversity legislation in the United Kingdom

1. Marine legislation, the key means by which the conservation of marine biodiversity is achieved, has been developing since the 1960s. In recent decades, an increasing focus on ‘holistic’ policy development is evident, compared with earlier ‘piecemeal’ sectoral approaches. Important marine legislative tools being used in the United Kingdom, and internationally, include the designation of marine protected areas and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with its aim of meeting ‘Good Environmental Status’ (GES) for European seas by 2020. 2. There is growing evidence of climate change impacts on marine biodiversity, which may compromise the effectiveness of any legislation intended to promote sustainable marine resource management. 3. A review of key marine biodiversity legislation relevant to the UK shows climate change was not considered in the drafting of much early legislation. Despite the huge increase in knowledge of climate change impacts in recent decades, legislation is still limited in how it takes these impacts into account. There is scope, however, to account for climate change in implementing much of the legislation through (a) existing references to environmental variability; (b) review cycles; and (c) secondary legislation and complementary policy development. 4. For legislation relating to marine protected areas (e.g. the EC Habitats and Birds Directives), climate change has generally not been considered in the site-designation process, or for ongoing management, with the exception of the Marine (Scotland) Act. Given that changing environmental conditions (e.g. rising temperatures and ocean acidification) directly affect the habitats and species that sites are designated for, how this legislation is used to protect marine biodiversity in a changing climate requires further consideration. 5. Accounting for climate change impacts on marine biodiversity in the development and implementation of legislation is vital to enable timely, adaptive management responses. Marine modelling can play an important role in informing management decisions.

The role of economics in ecosystem based management: The case of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive, First lessons learnt and way forward

The EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) sets out a plan of action relating to marine environmental policy and in particular to achieving ‘good environmental status’ (GES) in European marine waters by 2020. Article 8.1 (c) of the Directive calls for ‘an economic and social analysis of the use of those waters and of the cost of degradation of the marine environment’. The MSFD is ‘informed’ by the Ecosystem Approach to management, with GES interpreted in terms of ecosystem functioning and services provision. Implementation of the Ecosystem Approach is expected to be by adaptive management policy and practice. The initial socio-economic assessment was made by maritime EU Member States between 2011 and 2012, with future updates to be made on a regular basis. For the majority of Member States, this assessment has led to an exercise combining an analysis of maritime activities both at national and coastal zone scales, and an analysis of the non-market value of marine waters. In this paper we examine the approaches taken in more detail, outline the main challenges facing the Member States in assessing the economic value of achieving GES as outlined in the Directive and make recommendations for the theoretically sound and practically useful completion of the required follow-up economic assessments specified in the MSFD.

The role of economics in ecosystem based management: The case of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive, First lessons learnt and way forward

The EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) sets out a plan of action relating to marine environmental policy and in particular to achieving ‘good environmental status’ (GES) in European marine waters by 2020. Article 8.1 (c) of the Directive calls for ‘an economic and social analysis of the use of those waters and of the cost of degradation of the marine environment’. The MSFD is ‘informed’ by the Ecosystem Approach to management, with GES interpreted in terms of ecosystem functioning and services provision. Implementation of the Ecosystem Approach is expected to be by adaptive management policy and practice. The initial socio-economic assessment was made by maritime EU Member States between 2011 and 2012, with future updates to be made on a regular basis. For the majority of Member States, this assessment has led to an exercise combining an analysis of maritime activities both at national and coastal zone scales, and an analysis of the non-market value of marine waters. In this paper we examine the approaches taken in more detail, outline the main challenges facing the Member States in assessing the economic value of achieving GES as outlined in the Directive and make recommendations for the theoretically sound and practically useful completion of the required follow-up economic assessments specified in the MSFD.

Food web indicators under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: From complexity to simplicity?

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires that European Union Member States achieve "Good Environmental Status" (GES) in respect of 11 Descriptors of the marine environment by 2020. Of those, Descriptor 4, which focuses on marine food webs, is perhaps the most challenging to implement since the identification of simple indicators able to assess the health of highly dynamic and complex interactions is difficult. Here, we present the proposed food web criteria/indicators and analyse their theoretical background and applicability in order to highlight both the current knowledge gaps and the difficulties associated with the assessment of GES. We conclude that the existing suite of indicators gives variable focus to the three important food web properties: structure, functioning and dynamics, and more emphasis should be given to the latter two and the general principles that relate these three properties. The development of food web indicators should be directed towards more integrative and process-based indicators with an emphasis on their responsiveness to multiple anthropogenic pressures. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Identifying marine pelagic ecosystem management objectives and indicators

International policy frameworks such as the Common Fisheries Policy and the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive define high-level strategic goals for marine ecosystems. Strategic goals are addressed via general and operational management objectives. To add credibility and legitimacy to the development of objectives, for this study stakeholders explored intermediate level ecological, economic and social management objectives for Northeast Atlantic pelagic ecosystems. Stakeholder workshops were undertaken with participants being free to identify objectives based on their own insights and needs. Overall 26 objectives were proposed, with 58% agreement in proposed objectives between two workshops. Based on published evidence for pressure-state links, examples of operational objectives and suitable indicators for each of the 26 objectives were then selected. It is argued that given the strong species-specific links of pelagic species with the environment and the large geographic scale of their life cycles, which contrast to demersal systems, pelagic indicators are needed at the level of species (or stocks) independent of legislative region. Pelagic community indicators may be set at regional scale in some cases. In the evidence-based approach used in this study, the selection of species or region specific operational objectives and indicators was based on demonstrated pressure-state links. Hence observed changes in indicators can reliably inform on appropriate management measures

Dinamica del fitoplancton in relazione alle variabili abiotiche con particolare attenzione alle specie dannose

Negli ultimi decenni nell’Alto Adriatico, in particolare lungo la costa dell’Emilia-Romagna, si sono verificati fenomeni eutrofici con lo svilupparsi di “red tides”, con frequenza e intensità tali da aver assunto un aspetto cronico. Da questi episodi è nata l’esigenza sia di un efficiente monitoraggio dell’area, che viene svolto dal 1976 dalla Struttura Oceanografica Daphne (ARPA), sia di ricercare e studiare i meccanismi che guidano il processo. Questa zona è sotto stretta osservazione anche nell’ambito Direttiva europea 2008/56/CE, Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), in quanto l’alto Adriatico rappresenta la zona maggiormente a rischio per i fenomeni di eutrofizzazione e di bloom algali. Il lavoro di questa tesi nasce dalla necessità di approfondire diversi aspetti sollevati dalla MSFD che non vengono soddisfatti da una normale attività di monitoraggio. La frequenza e l’enorme mole di dati raccolti spesso non permette nè di riunire insieme per un unico sito tutti i parametri biotici e abiotici indicativi dello stato dell’ambiente, né di fare elaborazioni statistiche approfondite. Per fare questo sono state condotte in due siti prospicienti la località di Marina di Ravenna (costa emiliano-romagnola): DIGA SUD e GEOMAR, distanti rispettivamente 1.5 Km e 12 Km dalla costa, analisi quali-quantitative dei popolamenti fitoplanctonici presenti e concomitanti analisi dei parametri chimico-fisici (nutrienti, temperatura e salinità) dell’acqua. Il campionamento bimensile è iniziato ad aprile del 2013 ed è terminato ad ottobre dello stesso anno. Dai dati ottenuti dalle suddette analisi, avvalendosi di diversi strumenti statistici, si è cercato di capire se c’è differenza fra i due siti oggetto di studio in termini di variabili abiotiche ambientali e di popolazione fitoplanctonica dovuta ad effetto geografico (distanza dalla costa). Inoltre si è cercato di individuare come le variabili ambientali vadano ad influenzare la distribuzione dei diversi taxa fitoplanctonici e di segnalare l’eventuale presenza di specie microalgali potenzialmente tossiche e/o dannose.

Assessment of marine litter in the Western Adriatic Sea and its impact on marine biota

Due to its environmental, safety, health and socio-economic impacts, marine litter has been recognized as a 21st century global challenge, so that it has been included in Descriptor 10 of the EU MSFD. For its morphological features and anthropogenic pressures, the Adriatic Sea is very sensitive to the accumulation of debris, but data are inconsistent and fragmented. This thesis, in the framework of DeFishGear project, intents to assess marine litter on beaches and on seafloor in the Western Adriatic sea, and test if debris ingestion by fish occurs. Three beaches were sampled during two surveys in 2015. Benthic litter monitoring was carried out in the FAO GSA17 during fall 2014, using a rapido trawl. Litter ingestion was investigated through gut contents analysis of 260 fish belonging to 8 commercial species collected in Western Gulf of Venice. Average litter density on beaches was 1.5 items/m2 during spring, and decreased to 0.8 items/m2 in summer. Litter composition was heterogeneous and varied among sites, even if no significant differences were found. Most of debris consisted of plastic sheets, fragments, polystyrene pieces, mussels nets and cottons bud sticks, showing that sources are many and include aquaculture, land-based activities and local users of beaches. Average density of benthic litter was 913 items/Km2 (82 Kg/Km2). Plastic dominated in terms of numbers and weight, and consisted mainly of bags, sheets and mussel nets. The highest density was found close to the coast, and sources driving the major differences in litter distribution were mussel farms and shipping lanes. Litter ingestion occurred in 47% of examined fish, mainly consisting of fibers. Among species, S. pilchardus swallowed almost all debris categories. Findinds may provide a baseline to set the necessary measures to manage and minimize marine litter in the Western Adriatic region and to protect aquatic life from plastic pollution, even accounting the possible implications on human health.

Sedimentary data from the Semlac loess-paleosol sequence

The volumetric magnetic susceptibility was measured at frequencies of 300 and 3000 Hz in a static field of 300 mA/m using a Magnon International VSFM in the Laboratory for Environmental- and Palaeomagnetism at the University of Bayreuth. The magnetic susceptibility was mass-normalised. The frequency dependence was calculated as MSfd = (MSlf - MShf) / MSlf *100 [%]. A spectrophotometer (Konica Minolta CM-5) was used to determine the colour of dried and homogenised sediment samples by detecting the diffused reflected light under standardised observation conditions (2° Standard Observer, Illuminant C). Colour spectra were obtained in the visible range (360 to 740 nm), in 10 nm increments, and the spectral data was converted into the Munsell colour system and the CIELAB Colour Space (L*a*b*, CIE 1976) using the Software SpectraMagic NX (Konica Minolta). The measurement of the particle size was conducted by using a Laser Diffraction Particle Size Analyzer (Beckman Coulter LS 13 320 PIDS) and by calculating the mean diameters of the particles within a size range of 0.04 - 2000 µm. Each sample was measured two times in two different concentrations to increase accuracy. Finally all measurements with reliable obscuration (8 - 12 %) were averaged.