GES-REG Good Environmental status through regional coordination and capacity building

1. GES-REGGood Environmental status through regional coordination and capacity building Urmas Lips GES-REG Project Coordinator

2. Project aim The main aim of the project is to support coherent and coordinated implementation of Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) in the central and north-eastern sub-regions of the Baltic Sea – in the Gulf of Finland, northern part of the Baltic Proper and Gulf of Riga Thus – GES-REG will support implementation of MSFD in all participating countries as well as gives input to the parallel work in HELCOM Duration – 1 June 2011 – 31 December 2013 Budget – 1 472 648 €, including 1 137 446 € ERDF funding 2 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

3. Project region Gulf of Finland Northern Baltic Proper Gulf of Riga 3 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

4. Project partners • Partners: • Tallinn University of Technology, Marine Systems Institute (MSI) - LP • University of Tartu, Estonian Marine Institute (EMI) • Ministry of the Environment of Estonia (MoE-Est) • Estonian Institute for Sustainable Development/Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre (SEIT) • Latvian Institute of Aquatic Ecology (LHEI) • Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) • Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute (RKTL) • Associated Partners: • MTT Agrifood Research Finland (MTT) • Stockholm University, Stockholm Resilience Centre, BalticSTERN Secretariat (SRC) 4 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

5. Steering Group • Representatives from the Environmental Ministries / authorities • Ulla Kaarikivi-Laine – Finland • Harry Liiv – Estonia • Baiba Zasa – Latvia • Mats Ivarsson – Sweden • Representatives of Partner Organizations • Jüri Elken – MSI (Estonia) • Heikki Pitkänen – SYKE (Finland) • Santa Purvina – LHEI (Latvia) 5 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

6. Work packages WP1 – Project management and coordination – to guarantee high quality administration, management and communication WP2 – Analysis of initial assessments – to perform detailed analysis of initial assessments for coherence and gaps WP3 – Advance knowledge base to support assessment of GES – guidance for harmonised use of descriptors, criteria and indicators WP4 – Sound and cost effective joint monitoring and assessment scheme WP5 – Economic and social analysis 6 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

7. WP2 WP2 – Analysis of initial assessments (MSFD Article 8); responsible partner – EMI, involved partners – SYKE, LHEI, MoE-Est, SEIT, MSI, RKTL Content – Analysis of coherence of methodologies and concepts describing environmental status and evaluation of pressures and impacts, gaps analysis and analysis to suggest harmonization of assessment schemes for different directives Planned results – Report on coherence of initial assessments and recommendations for harmonization. Report on gaps in knowledge. Recommendations for harmonization of assessment schemes for different directives 7 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

8. WP3 WP3 – Advance knowledge base to support assessment of GES (MSFD Article 9); responsible partner – SYKE, involved partners – MSI, EMI, LHEI, RKTL Content – Analyses of methodologies will be conducted for descriptors: non-indigenous species, food webs, marine litter and underwater noise. Seminars and small-scale pilot studies in selected areas will be carried out to contribute to the capacity building Planned results – Reports summarising and analysing the information on methodologies that can be used to develop further the science base for GES descriptors, criteria and indicators as well as defining need for capacity building 8 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

9. WP4 WP4 – Sound and cost effective joint monitoring and assessment scheme (MSFD Article 11); responsible partner – MSI, involved partners – EMI, SYKE, LHEI, MoE-Est, RKTL Content – Analysis of existing monitoring and measurement programs, elaboration of a joint cost-effective monitoring network, development of new assessment methods and finally development of a joint monitoring and assessment scheme in the sub-region Planned results – Report on gaps in the monitoring programs. Recommendations on upgrading of monitoring network. Recommendations on assessment methods. Proposal for a joint monitoring and assessment scheme in the sub-region 9 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

10. WP5 WP5 – Economic and social analysis; responsible partner – SEIT, involved partners – LHEI, MSI, MoE, MTT, SRC Content – Analyzing countries ESA of water use, BAU, the costs of degradation, cost-efficiency, socio-economic impacts of measures. Workshops-seminars to harmonize methods for ESA. Training-study visits; acquiring software and literature to build capacity Planned results – Recommendations for: coherent assessments; coordinated methods for socio-economic analysis (ESA); ESA of programs of measures (PoM). Complemented valuation studies (EE, LV); information base for ESA to support PoM, and suggestions for further work 10 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

11. Activities so far Co-operation and coordination of MSFD implementation Exchange of information on Initial Assessments Active involvement in HELCOM activities (core set of indicators, monitoring revision etc) Elaboration of common position related to WG documents Meta-database on scientific knowledge and data sources for selected descriptors (non-indigenous species, food webs, marine litter and underwater noise) 11 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

12. WP4 – Monitoring • Aim - Revise the current monitoring to better comply with the requirements of MSFD, as well as other EU Directives and HELCOM BSAP • Enhance the use of current automated/unattended/remote sensing monitoring techniques • Aim – continuous assessment of the state • Combine unattended techniques with traditional monitoring, near real time data delivery with adaptive sampling • Use mathematical models to integrate data from various sources • Joint planning of the use of monitoring infrastructure, sharing of responsibilities • Increase cost-efficiency, but based on scientific knowledge 12 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

13. WP4 – Monitoring HELCOM COMBINE 13 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

14. WP4 – Monitoring Expanding of existing Ferrybox network with a transect: RIGA-STOCKHOLM Measurements of vertical profiles of T, S, Chl a 14 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

15. Ferrybox systems 15 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

16. Dino/diatom ratio Helsinki 2009 Tallinn Helsinki 2010 Tallinn 16 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

17. Vertical dynamics Vertical migration of phytoplankton was evident during several periods in summer 2009; examples from early July (shallow UML) and late July (relatively deep thermocline) Lips et al., 2011, Ocean Dynamics 17 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

18. Adaptive sampling Electrochemical antifouling system Domination in sub-surface maxima by H. triquetra (95 %) was revealed by Imaging Flow Cytometer FlowCAM, yielding up to 2.5 million cells per litre 18 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

19. Scanfishtechnique Towed undulating system measuring T, S, Chl a and phycocyanin 19 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

20. Assessment 20 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels

21. Discussion • At the end the environmental authorities would like to get quite concrete and specific recommendations • what parameters, where (spatial scales) and when, how often (temporal scales) • how derive from the observations an integrated assessment of the state • European wide policy strategies – regional actions • European wide activities, projects – regional projects • Core services – downstream services • Thank You! 21 Research seminar, MSCG 22 February 2012, Brussels