The Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the ecosystem-based approach – pitfalls and solutions
Torsten Berg, K. Fürhaupter, Heliana Teixeira, Laura Uusitalo, Nikolaos Zampoukas
Abstract
Open-access reader
Torsten Berg, K. Fürhaupter, Heliana Teixeira, Laura Uusitalo, Nikolaos Zampoukas
Abstract
Open-access reader
The European Marine Strategy Framework Directive aims at good environmental status (GES) in marine waters, following an ecosystem-based approach, focused on 11 descriptors related to ecosystem features, human drivers and pressures. Furthermore, 29 subordinate criteria and 56 attributes are detailed in an EU Commission Decision. The analysis of the Decision and the associated operational indicators revealed ambiguity in the use of terms, such as indicator, impact and habitat and considerable overlap of indicators assigned to various descriptors and criteria. We suggest re-arrangement and elimination of redundant criteria and attributes avoiding double counting in the subsequent indicator synthesis, a clear distinction between pressure and state descriptors and addition of criteria on ecosystem services and functioning. Moreover, we suggest the precautionary principle should be followed for the management of pressures and an evidence-based approach for monitoring state as well as reaching and maintaining GES.
OpenAlex reports 117 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The European Marine Strategy Framework Directive aims at good environmental status (GES) in marine waters, following an ecosystem-based approach, focused on 11 descriptors related to ecosystem features, human drivers and pressures. Furthermore, 29 subordinate criteria and 56 attributes are detailed in an EU Commission Decision. The analysis of the Decision and the associated operational indicators revealed ambiguity in the use of terms, such as indicator, impact and habitat and considerable overlap of indicators assigned to various descriptors and criteria. We suggest re-arrangement and elimination of redundant criteria and attributes avoiding double counting in the subsequent indicator synthesis, a clear distinction between pressure and state descriptors and addition of criteria on ecosystem services and functioning. Moreover, we suggest the precautionary principle should be followed for the management of pressures and an evidence-based approach for monitoring state as well as reaching and maintaining GES.
Key concepts: Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Ambiguity, Environmental resource management, Water Framework Directive, Marine ecosystem, European commission, Ecosystem-based management, Ecosystem