Transcript Brief overview of current policy needs and how we

Current and future
environmental policy needs for
the North Sea
Richard Moxon
Marine Strategy and Evidence team
Defra
Overview of presentation
Brief overview of current policy needs and
how we address them
Policy needs arising from the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive
How might EMECO contribute ?
UK Government’s Shared Vision
Clean, Healthy, Safe, Productive and Biologically Diverse Oceans and Seas.
Key policy goals: How can we achieve this vision for UK Seas , and how can we
demonstrate we are achieving it ?
through applying the ecosystem approach !
this is now a key driver for the protection, use and management of
the UK marine UK environment . At heart of global and European
marine policy as well.
the comprehensive integrated management of human
activities based on the best available scientific knowledge
about the ecosystem and its dynamics, in order to identify
and take action on influences which are critical to the health
of marine ecosystems, thereby achieving sustainable use of
ecosystem goods and services and maintenance of
ecosystem integrity”
Main difficulty we have is to change current management
practices from a sectoral, short-term perspective with
humans independent of ecosystems to ecosystem-based,
long-term perspectives where humans are integral to
ecosystems.
Key principles that underpin our policy of applying the ecosystem approach to the
marine environment are:
• sustainable development – the needs of future generations should not be
compromised by the needs of people today;
• integrated management – looking at the wider picture so that all those who manage or
influence the marine environment work together at all levels with a common
understanding;
• conservation of biological diversity – conserving and enhancing biological diversity
within the UK and contributing to the conservation of global biodiversity;
• robust science – understanding the processes and influences that impact on the
marine environment and using research to inform policy-making and marine
management;
• the precautionary principle – sensibly erring on the side of caution where the scientific
evidence is not conclusive; and
• stakeholder involvement – involving all stakeholders so that they are an integral part
of the decision-making process.
To demonstrate whether our seas are clean and
safe, we need to do monitoring programmes
• Metals and organics : in water, sediment and biota
• Biological effects: e.g. EROD, imposex, fish disease
• Microbiological contamination : bathing waters and shellfish
growing areas
• Eutrophication: nutrients, chlorophyll, oxygen, nuisance
species
• Radionuclides
• Oil and chemical spills
• Litter
• Noise
Need assessment criteria to decide whether status is good and
AQC to show results are reliable.
Monitoring Programmes to understand ocean processes and
establish whether the seas are Healthy and Biologically
Diverse
•
•
•
•
circulation, pH, temperature and salinity
sedimentary processes, and nature of the seabed
benthic habitats
the state of the pelagic marine food web (microbes,
plankton up to those at the top end such as birds
and cetaceans and turtles)
AQC and assessment criteria less developed
Periodic
assessments to
demonstrate
progress towards
our vision
Climate
change
Hydrological
pressures (local)
Pollution & other chemical
pressures
Other physical
pressures
Habitat
changes
I
II
III
IV
V
20
12
7
10
16
Temperature changes
(local)
1
1
1
1
0
Salinity changes (local)
1
1
1
1
0
Changes in water flow,
wave action & emergence
regime (inshore/local)
1
1
1
1
0
Contamination by
hazardous substances
8
8
7
8
6
Radionuclide contamination
1
1
1
1
1
De-oxygenation
3
7
4
4
0
Nitrogen & phosphorus
enrichment
5
5
4
4
3
Organic enrichment
5
7
4
4
2
Electromagnetic changes
3
3
3
3
2
Litter
Underwater noise
5
4
5
4
4
4
5
4
5
3
Barrier to species
movement
3
3
3
3
1
Death or injury by collision
3
3
3
3
3
Climate change
3
9
5
5
3
12
15
0
20
8
0
11
7
0
11
10
0
9
7
0
Genetic modification
1
1
1
0
0
Introduction of microbial
pathogens
3
3
3
2
2
8
8
7
6
6
16
24
13
13
11
Siltation rate changes
Habitat damage
Habitat loss
Biological pressures
Visual disturbance
Introduction of nonindigenous species &
translocations
Removal of species (target
& non-target)
To achieve the
vision, need to
know what the
main pressures are
and how to reduce
them.
Recent OSPAR
assessment of
pressures on the 5
OSPAR regions
points to climate
change, fishing
and habitat
damage and loss
Actions to control the activities likely to cause harm
• impact assessments
before a marine industry
can operate, and licenses to minimise impact
• national regulations and spatial planning
• A whole range of EC legislation requires
monitoring programmes and measures
Water Framework Directive
Birds and Habitats Directive
PPC Directive
Common fisheries policy
Marine Strategy Framework Directive
Consolidated into a Marine Bill
The UK Marine Bill
• UK’s first comprehensive marine planning system
• Efficient licensing of activities
• A Marine Management Organisation
• Network of marine protected areas
• Better local fisheries and environmental management
• Better protection for migratory and freshwater fish
• EEZ
What does the Directive commit us to?
To put in place measures to achieve Good Environmental Status in
Europe’s seas by 2020
‘Good Environmental Status means the environmental status of marine
waters where these provide ecologically diverse and dynamic oceans and
seas which are clean, healthy and productive within their intrinsic
conditions, and the use of the marine environment is at a level that is
sustainable, thus safeguarding the potential for uses and activities by
current and future generations...’
The structure, functions and processes of the constituent marine
ecosystems, together with the associated physiographic, geographic,
geological and climatic factors, allow those ecosystems to function fully
and to maintain their resilience to human-induced environmental change.
Marine species and habitats are protected, human-induced decline of
biodiversity is prevented and diverse biological components function in
balance;
hydro-morphological, physical and chemical properties of the
ecosystems, including those properties which result from human
activities in the area concerned, support the ecosystems as described
above.
Anthropogenic inputs of substances and energy, including noise, into
the marine environment do not cause pollution effects
Summary: Directive’s requirements
Initial
assessment
of UK seas
2008
2010
Directive
transposed
2012
Programme of
measures
implemented
Monitoring
programme
established
2014
GES defined,
including targets
and indicators
2015
2016
2020
GES achieved
for UK seas
What are the regional requirements?
“Member States sharing a marine region...shall
cooperate to ensure that... the measures required to
achieve...this Directive...are coherent and
coordinated across the marine region...”
UK keen to use the Oslo and Paris Convention
(OSPAR) as the forum to deliver all key regional
elements of the Directive
OSPAR currently reviewing its priorities to ensure it supports the
delivery of the Directive
Monitoring Programme – 2014
Monitoring programme to measure
progress toward achieving GES to be set up
by 2014
Standardised methods for monitoring and
assessment to be developed across the EU
Challenge for EMECO
focus for 2014 will be on filling any gaps rather than creating a whole
new monitoring programme
Determination of Good Environmental Status – 2012
•11 high level descriptors of GES
set out in the Directive
• Member States to set out how
GES will be defined for their
marine waters by 2012
• Common criteria and standards
to underpin GES across the EU to
be agreed with Commission and
other Member States by 2010.
ICES/JRC looking at each
descriptor of GES
“Concentrations of
contaminants are at levels
not giving rise to pollution
effects”
“Populations of all
commercially exploited fish
and shellfish are within safe
biological limits”
“Biological diversity is
maintained”
Regional Coordination aspects
Member States need to make every effort to ensure
that:
(a) assessment methodologies are consistent across
the Marine Region or Sub-Region; (e.g. OSPAR CEMP)
(a)transboundary impacts and transboundary features
are taken into account. (e.g. Modelling )
In OSPAR, considerable experience available (e.g. On
the eutrophication modelling work - ICG EMO)
Opportunities for EMECO ??
Descriptors
New monitoring: can EMECO help ?
(1) 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
Biodiversity-related monitoring at an early
stage. More will be needed.
(2) Non-indigenous species introduced by
human activities are at levels that do not
adversely alter the ecosystems
More monitoring and research needed.
(3) Populations of all commercially exploited
CFP monitoring need enhancement ?
fish and shellfish are within safe biological
limits, exhibiting a population age and size
distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock
(4) 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
Research needed, and associated criteria and
methodological standards required
Descriptors
New monitoring: can EMECO help ?
(5) Human-induced eutrophication is minimised,
especially adverse effects thereof, such as losses in
biodiversity, ecosystem degradation, harmful algal
blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters
Established monitoring programmes and
assessment criteria, but temporal and
spatial coverage weak
(6) 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
Research and good assessment criteria
needed.
(7) Permanent alteration of hydrographical
conditions does not adversely affect marine
ecosystems
What does this mean ?
(8) Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not Some established monitoring programmes
giving rise to pollution effects
and some assessment criteria, but
temporal and spatial coverage weak
Descriptors
(9) Contaminants in fish and other seafood for
human consumption do not exceed levels
established by Community legislation or other
relevant standards
New monitoring: can EMECO help ?
Levels established under relevant
directives
(10) Properties and quantities of marine litter do not Knowledge of litter in sea and on seabed
cause harm to the coastal and marine environment is poor. Understanding of harm to biota
also poor. Research needed ?
(11) Introduction of energy, including underwater
noise, is at levels that do not adversely affect the
marine environment
Understanding of impacts of noise poorly
understood. Assessment criteria lacking.
Research needed
Integrated Assessment of the marine
environment
Until recently, the focus was on the impacts of
individual activities.
What policy-makers want to know now, and what
the MSFD also requires, is an assessment of how
all the various natural and anthropogenic pressures
act together to get a better appreciation of the
overall status of the marine environment.
Charting Progress, the first integrated
assessment of UK Seas done in 2005, showed
how difficult this is !!
Difficulties with making Integrated Assessments:
Can EMECO help ??
• Lack of monitoring data (plus poor spatial
and temporal coverage) e.g. sampling done at
hotspots during infrequent cruises
•
Lack of information on pressures and impacts
e.g. How much litter is on the sea floor and is it
causing harm
•
Difficulty in combining different types of
information to estimate overall status (one out
all out principle a fallback ??)
•
Lack of scientific knowledge on how
ecosystems function and inter-relate
New Monitoring Tools to enhance
assessments of status
Still a heavy reliance on discrete measurements which involve
people going out in boats to take samples. These techniques
and associated methods frequently built into EC Directives.
However, new monitoring tools that can provide continuous
information are now becoming better established.
e.g. Smart buoys, side-scan radar, satellites, continuous
plankton recorder.
Models: getting better, particularly when ground-truthed
regularly with real data.
These new tools can help address the temporal and spatial
limitations of traditional monitoring programmes
OSPAR
Eutrophication
assessment of
the North East
Atlantic.
Mainly using
traditional
monitoring of
nutrients,
chlorophyll,
nuisance species
and oxygen
concentrations
Chlorophyll a, April 2005 (Merged SeaWifs-Modis-Meris image).
Chlorophyll a concentration estimated from the MERIS satellite sensor presented as monthly means for (top-right) for March 2008 (centre) right June 2008
and (top-right) October 2008 and (bottom) as 90 percentile for the growing season March-October 2008. Data from European Space Agency and ACRIST processed by MUMM for MARCOAST project.