MARINE STRATEGY FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE MSFD COMMON IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

MARINE STRATEGY FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (MSFD) COMMON IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY MSFD regional data work flow: schema and examples Document: DIKE TSG 1 WP 4 MSFD data workflow 1 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES

MSFD DATA FLOWS: SUMMARY WHAT: An approach to an agreed workflow between EU, MS, RSC, EMODnet, etc. HOW: Mapping out the necessary components, actors and agreements needed to provide the workflow (collection to assessment) 2 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES WHY: To achieve greater regional coherence AND ensure efficient use of resources WHO: MS through TSG- and WGDIKE WHEN: 2013 i. e. now!

MSFD DATA FLOWS: COHERENCY MS to achieve coherence and consistency within and between MSFD regions/sub-regions - Regional coordination not so evident from 2012 reporting - Need for support from Regional Sea Conventions - Streamline data/information management 3 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES

MSFD DATA FLOWS: SCHEMAS Mapping out components - DIKE has the remit to tackle parts of the MSFD puzzle - DIKE needs to know how all the pieces fit though 4 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES

MSFD DATA FLOWS: SCHEMAS Mapping out components - Split out the processes and components - Provide the linkages - Allow for regional/descriptor variation 5 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES

MSFD DATA FLOWS: SCHEMAS Structural and Process Elements EU Process governance Data Collection Methodology Operational basis Operators 6 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES Data Assembly Indicator provision Assessment

MSFD DATA FLOWS: SCHEMAS 2015 2014 2016 Structural and Process Elements EU Process governance Data Collection Methodology Operational basis Operators 7 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES Data Assembly Indicator provision Assessment

STRUCTURAL PROCESS COMPONENT Data Collection Data Assembly Indicator (in reference to COM Assessment decision and on-going RSC indicator activities) EU process Governance MSFD CIS/WG-DIKE (ultimately MS Marine Directors) Data from Member state monitoring programme(s) (art 19. 3 and art 11)that provide linkage and reference to MSFD monitoring provision MSFD CIS/WG-GES (ultimately MS Marine Directors) Common understanding approach Methodology Regional sea and member state monitoring guidelines manuals related to specific parameter(s) Specific guidelines/Manuals on indicator production methodology, including reference to MSFD marine unit and assembly method of data Assessment methodology as agreed in MSFD or regional context Operational basis Member State data provision mechanism(s) Specifications for assembled data (input and output) Location/Availability Operational portal/web service Usage rights Update frequency Format/Outputs Metadata MSFD Spatial unit: INSPIRE area mapping QC applied Mechanisms to publish indicators: Location/Availability New/Existing provision Supporting metadata Frequency of provision Spatial unit (related to MSFD units) Context of use (consistency with MSFD scope) Definition of assessment product : Appropriateness for MSFD output Adaptations needed Assessment scale Temporal scale MS, RSC, ICES, Emodnet, Copernicus, EEA, others MS, RSC, EEA , others Linked to monitoring guidelines and indicator methodology Potential Operators 8 Availability Access rights Temporal coverage Observation frequency Usage rights Update frequency Format/Outputs Metadata Spatial unit(s) MS MSFD indicators derived or adapted from Regional sea and Member state indicators that provide basis for common implementation WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES MS art 8 assessments, Regional assessments, EEA MSFD baseline assessment

MSFD DATA FLOWS: QUESTIONS 1. Do you agree to the model proposed where indicators are a central component? 2. Does it correctly reflect the roles and existing working arrangements among MS and RSC? If not, how should it be changed, or do we need to make it more regionally specific? 3. Does the model presented represent the desired continued working arrangements for fulfilling the MSFD obligations under article 19. 3? If not, how should it be changed? 9 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES

MSFD DATA FLOWS: QUESTIONS 4. How can this be made operational per descriptor and region? 5. Another central component of the model is sharing of observations. If other operators than the MS are to support the work under art 19. 3, then relevant observations need to be made available by MS. What are barriers to sharing data? 10 WG-DIKE/MODEG 04 JULY 2013 Neil Holdsworth, ICES