MariLim (Germany)

Human activities at sea can produce pressures and cumulative effects on ecosystem components that need to be monitored and assessed in a cost-effective manner. Five Horizon European projects have joined forces to collaboratively increase our knowledge and skills to monitor and assess the ocean in an innovative way, assisting managers and policy-makers in taking decisions to maintain sustainable activities at sea. Here, we present and discuss the status of some methods revised during a summer school, aiming at better management of coasts and seas. We include novel methods to monitor the coastal and ocean waters (e.g. environmental DNA, drones, imaging and artificial intelligence, climate modelling and spatial planning) and innovative tools to assess the status (e.g. cumulative impacts assessment, multiple pressures, Nested Environmental status Assessment Tool (NEAT), ecosystem services assessment or a new unifying approach). As a concluding remark, some of the most important challenges ahead are assessing the pros and cons of novel methods, comparing them with benchmark technologies and integrating these into long-standing time series for data continuity. This requires transition periods and careful planning, which can be covered through an intense collaboration of current and future European projects on marine biodiversity and ecosystem health.

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.