Search | OPac - the Publications Office online public access catalogue

1.

Monitoring SMEs performance in Europe [er]. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (DG GROW), with the scientific support by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC), assesses the Performance of Small and Medium Enterprises in Europe. We study performance in eleven principles: (1) Entrepreneurship, (2) ‘Second chance’, (3) ‘Think small first’, (4) ‘Responsive administration’, (5) State aid & public procurement, (6) Access to finance, (7) Single market, (8) Skills and innovation, (9) Environment, (10) Internationalization and (11) Digitalization. This JRC technical report describes the underlying rationale for the quantitative measurement of these principles. It discusses the methodological approach to calculate how countries perform in the outlined principles. This takes into account the choice of the indicators, the data quality controls (including missing data and outliers), normalization and weightings, and the statistical coherence and robustness checks of the 2020 edition.

Add To Cart

2.

ELISE Workshop at DigitALL conference [er] : enabling the interoperability of digital government from a location perspective. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

This document is a report of a workshop held by the European Location Interoperability Solutions for e-Government (ELISE) action of the Interoperability solutions for public administrations, businesses and citizens (ISA²) programme, at the DigitALL Public conference, the online closing event of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) Digital and the ISA² programmes. Together with the Member States, these programmes have helped build cross-border public services for citizens, provided free interoperable solutions to companies and connected various organisations in different sectors. The conference celebrated achievements in the two programmes while looking ahead towards Europe's digital future and the beginning of the new Digital Europe Programme (DEP). During the workshop, speakers and panellists from the European Commission and public administrations in the Member States, industry and international organisations showcased through user stories examples of good practices developed through ELISE support. After an introduction on ELISE by Francesco Pignatelli, ELISE Action Leader at the EU Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC), in the first session of the workshop, Ray Boguslawski - external consultant for the Joint Research Centre and three guest speakers, Miguel Alvarez Rodriguez - Programme Manager at the European Commission DG Informatics (DG DIGIT), Andrea Halmos - Policy Officer at the European Commission DG Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CNECT), and Tomaž Petek - Director General at the Surveying and Mapping Authority in Slovenia, provided their perspectives on the value and role of a Location Interoperability Framework (the EULF Blueprint) and its relationship with the European Interoperability Framework (EIF). In the second session, Lorena Hernández Quirós from the Joint Research Centre and three guest speakers, Joeri Robbrecht - Policy Analyst at the European Commission DG Environment (DG ENV), Ine De Visser - Standards Advisor at Geonovum, and Gobe Hobona - Director of Product Management, Standards at the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), provided their perspectives on the reuse of tools for interoperable location data and reporting. They highlighted, in particular, the role of the two ELISE flagship solutions, Re3gistry and INSPIRE Reference Validator. In the third session, Giacomo Martirano – external consultant for the Joint Research Centre and three guest speakers, Gabriele Ciasullo - "Database and Open Data" Service Responsible at the Italian Agency for Digital Identity (AgID), Italy, Gema Hernández Moral - Project manager and researcher at CARTIF, Spain, and Volker Coors - Scientific Director at Institute of Applied Research, Germany, provided their perspectives on the reuse of location data interoperability principles and methodologies in different sectors. The latter was demonstrated through various pilots and applications carried out under the ELISE action. In the fourth session, Simon Vrečar – external consultant for the Joint Research Centre and three guest speakers, Morten Borrabaek - Mapping Authority, Norway, Eva Pauknerová – CUZK, Czechia, and Ricardo Vitorino – Ubiwhere, Portugal, provided different perspectives on user-driven approaches regarding location interoperability. The highlights were on how knowledge transfer can help achieve interoperability benefits. Finally, the workshop concluded with a panel session where attendees gave their views on the future importance of location interoperability and how initiatives can provide the necessary support.

Add To Cart

3.

BioSAMs 2015 [er] : estimation and basic considerations. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

In accordance with the European Commission definition (European Commission, 2018), the Bioeconomy encompasses not only on primary sectors that employ and produce biological resources, but also those activities that depend on biological resources to generate value added products (i.e., food, feed, materials and energy). With its ubiquitous presence across the economy, a closed circular accounting database covering the interlinking transaction flows between firms, households and foreign trade, offers unique analytical insights into the total and decomposed impact of the bioeconomy on economic growth and employment. To meet this challenge, for each of the EU member states and for the EU aggregate, a set of highly disaggregated bio-based sector account splits within the framework of a Social Accounting Matrix (dubbed “BioSAMs”) were constructed for the year 2010 (Mainar et al., 2018a). To maintain the temporal relevance of this approach, this report carries out the same endeavour for the more recent year of 2015 that maintains the same disaggregation detail of agricultural and non-agricultural bio-based sectors. In addition, to ensure improved continuity of the database for future updates, the report also focuses on the use of a more systematic method of estimation based on the reconciliation of four main databases. Namely, (i) the CoCo database from the CAPRI model, (through the use of re-estimated AgroSAMs -Mueller et al., 2009), (ii) National Accounts and (iii) Economic Accounts for Agriculture (EAA) from Eurostat and finally, (iv) the MAGNET model database

Add To Cart

4.

EU Regulation 1143/2014 [er] : assessment of invasive alien species of Union concern distribution : Member States reports versus JRC baselines. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

Invasive Alien Species (IAS) are one of the main causes of biodiversity loss worldwide, a condition that severely affects Europe. The EU Regulation 1143/2014/EC (IAS Regulation), entered into force on 1 January 2015, establishes requirements for a coordinated set of actions to prevent, control and mitigate the impact of IAS. The IAS Regulation gives priority to a subset of IAS at European level, named as IAS of Union concern. By 1 June 2019, and every six years thereafter, MS shall report to the EC information about the implementation of the IAS Regulation. This report provides an analysis of the information reported by MS on the distribution of IAS of listed as of Union concern by 2017, recorded in their territory by December 2018. This information is correlated with the information available in the JRC baselines and complemented with MS notifications submitted via NOTSYS. The JRC baselines covered a period mostly overlapping the MS reporting period (2015-2018). For this reason, the spatial information in MS reports largely matched the JRC baselines. This also applies to species distribution records not validated by MS in the JRC baselines, proving that the JRC baselines provide good datasets, and are fit-for-purpose, for analyzing changes in species’ distributions in relation to the implementation of the IAS Regulation. However, the observed differences could not be attributed to distributional trends of the species’ populations, expanding or shrinking within EU countries. There were four main types of mismatch between the JRC baselines (MS validated records) and MS reports. Observed inconsistencies highlights the need of coherence in reporting updates on species’ distributions and notification of new observations through NOTSYS. They may also reflect delays in data validation and synchronization among relevant data repositories, different interpretations among MS of what constitutes a detection of a regulated species requiring official notification, and on how to deal with casual records of species. The report provides recommendations aiming at addressing observed inconsistencies.

Add To Cart

5.

Landings by the EU Member States from the UK EEZ and by the United Kingdom from the EU-27 and the UK EEZs [er] : 2015-2018. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

In February 2020, DG MARE asked the Joint Research Centre (JRC) to provide support for the preparation of an EU-27 position in the context of negotiations on sharing of fish stocks in the North Sea and in the North Western waters by extending two analyses done by the JRC in 2017. The request was issued by Director-General of DG MARE, Bernhard Friess, to the acting Director-General of the JRC, Charlina Vitcheva. The original request along with the answer by the JRC is annexed to the main report. The request encompassed the analysis for the period 2015 to 2018 of landings of fish (by weight and value) by the EU-27 fleets caught in the UK Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs), and, vice versa, of the landings (by weight and value) taken by the UK in the EU-27 and in the UK EEZs respectively.

Add To Cart

6.

Interregional cooperation and smart specialisation [er] : a lagging regions perspective. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

This report has been prepared as part of the Lagging Regions project of the JRC, which aims to support the implementation of Smart Specialisation Strategies in selected low-growth and less developed regions in EU member states. In the 2021-2027 programming period, smart specialisation strategies will be required to meet a series of fulfilment criteria around the relevant "enabling condition" of good governance. One such criterion relates to international collaboration, or ‘measures for enhancing cooperation with partners in different countries in areas designated as priority areas for smart specialisation’. Within this context of a new governance framework for a new programming period, the Lagging Regions project aimed to explore the implications for a specific set of regions and develop and disseminate relevant policy lessons. The potential for Lagging Regions to participate in interregional and international cooperation remains underexploited, and this report determines specific challenges as well as potential benefits and opportunities that are relevant for low-growth and low-income regions to support them in their preparations for the 2021-2027 programming period. An exploration of interregional and international cooperation aims to contribute to a better understanding of its role in strengthening innovation ecosystems and its interaction with Smart Specialisation in the context of Lagging Regions.

Add To Cart

7.

Atlas of demography [er] : release 1.0. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The Atlas of Demography is a new interactive tool from the European Commission. It brings together demographic data from official statistics and projections as well as new data produced by the Joint Research Centre. With this Atlas the EU citizen can better understand how demographic change is shaping the future of Europe. You can approach the Atlas in two main ways: - You can look at geographic areas, from an EU overview to the national, regional and local dimensions (top menu). - Or you can look at specific themes, which are presented as stories (bottom-right menu). Each tab opens a dashboard. A dashboard is a collection of interactive maps and charts that can be explored and customised through filters. By hovering the mouse on text, chart and maps, additional information will be shown. The HOME button leads back to this page.

Add To Cart

8.

AI watch index [er] : policy relevant dimensions to assess Europe’s performance in artificial intelligence. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

This report illustrates and follows the steps to build an AI Watch Index from the collection of outputs of AI Watch analyses. It identifies a set of indicators suitable to provide a comprehensive and balanced overview of the various topics addressed by the research activities carried out within AI Watch. The aim of this index is to provide quantitative indicators on several policy relevant dimensions in order to assess the performance and positioning of the EU and its Member States in Artificial Intelligence. The report describes first a suitable approach for identification of indicators. The methodology aims to identify, select, and collect a number of policy relevant indicators that allow, as much as possible, cross-country and temporal comparability in the evolving international economic, social, industrial and research landscape of artificial intelligence. Then, the report proposes a list of indicators, thoroughly described and organised along the main dimensions covered by AI Watch’s activity.

Add To Cart

9.

NER300 annual report 2020 [er] : administrative arrangement DG CLIMA deliverable 2.2.1. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

NER 300 is an EU funding programme for the demonstration of innovative renewable energy technologies at the pre-commercial stage. Projects have to submit annually to the European Commission relevant knowledge gained, which is assessed with a view to establishing whether the project has adequately complied with its obligations. This report summarises the key lessons learnt so far and the recommendations of the JRC on the knowledge gained and the lessons learnt.

Add To Cart

10.

The EU aquaculture sector [er] : economic report 2020 (STECF-20-12). European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. This report on the Economic Performance of the EU Aquaculture sector 2021 is the seventh report of its kind produced for the sector and provides a comprehensive overview of the latest information available on the production, economic value, structure and competitive performance of the aquaculture sector at the national and EU level. This report includes data for 2008 to 2018 and nowcasting for 2019. The data collected is reported by national totals and by segments divided on species. The sector has increased production over the period of data collected, and the turnover and economic performance indicators have increased over time. The EU aquaculture sector reached 1.2 million tonnes in sales volume and €4.1 billion in turnover, in 2018. The overall number of enterprise were estimated to 15 thousand, whereas the total number of employees reached 69 thousand in 2018. The report furthermore contains three special chapters on the Covid-19 situation and its impact on the EU aquaculture sector, a chapter on the developed methodology for the nowcast, and finally a chapter analysing the social variables collected under EUMAP for the first time for the aquaculture sector.

Add To Cart

11.

Marine Framework Directive [er] : review and analysis of EU Member States’ 2018 reports : descriptor 5 : eutrophication, assessment (Art.8) and good environmental status (Art. 9). European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

EU Member States (MS) have reported under Article 17 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) last 6-year reporting cycle (2012-2018) for Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive, for the. This report analyses the information on MSFD Descriptor 5 (Human-induced eutrophication is minimized, especially adverse effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem degradation, harmful algae blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters). Information was retrieved from 21 MS on the methodological approaches followed for the assessment of the eutrophication status. This information was analysed regarding the parameters considered, monitoring methods, agreement in relation to threshold values, integration methods for overall eutrophication status and achievement of good environmental status. The gaps, limitations and need for improvement in current assessments, are highlighted and recommendations provided for improvement in the next MSFD reporting cycle.

Add To Cart

12.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er] : review and analysis of EU Member States’ 2018 reports : descriptor 11: underwater noise and energy : assessment (Art.8), good environmental status (Art. 9) and targets (Art. 10). European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

EU Member States (MS) have reported under Article 17 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) for updating Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive, for the last 6-year reporting cycle (2012-2018). This report analyses the information on MSFD Descriptor 11 (Underwater Noise and Energy). Information has been retrieved from 14, 19 and 16 MS for Art.8, Art.9, and Art.10, respectively (out of the 22 EU MS with a sea border). This analysis evaluates the consistency and comparability among MS and marine regions in the consideration of different elements and parameters concerning D11 and in the application of methodological standards for their assessment. The main aim is to highlight gaps and limitations in current assessments, identify items that need further work and provide recommendations for improvement in the next MSFD reporting cycle.

Add To Cart

13.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er] : review and analysis of EU Member States’ 2018 reports : Descriptor 7, permanent alteration of hydrographical conditions does not adversely affect marine ecosystem : Assessment (Art. 8), Good Environmental Status (Art. 9) and Targets (Art. 10). European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The current report analyses the information provided by the European Union Member States (MS) on Descriptor 7 (D7) –permanent alteration of hydrographical conditions does not adversely affect marine ecosystems – of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The reported information by the MS follows the Article 17 requirements of the MSFD for updating Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive, for the last 6-year MSFD reporting cycle. By September 2020, 16 MS reported on D7 in electronic format. Consistency, comparability and adequacy of the reported Art 8 assessments of D7C1 (spatial extent of permanent alteration) and D7C2 (spatial extent of adversely altered benthic habitat) were quite low. Only a few MS reported consistently the extent of impacted area and only one MS also the impacted water volume. We detected several issues that need to be rectified to achieve comparable assessments across MS: the assessment parameters, methods and period varied significantly, as well as the provided information levels. Further the assessment from several MS must be considered incomplete and superficial as the environmental impact from well know new structures as for example Nord Stream seems not to be considered in the reporting.

Add To Cart

14.

Integration methods for Marine Strategy Framework Directive's biodiversity assessments [er] : Descriptor 1, species European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

This report reviews the integration methods for MSFD biodiversity assessments under Descriptor 1 for species that are not covered by the Habitats Directive and are not commercial fish assessed under Descriptor 3 and used in Descriptor 1 assessments. It was carried out by experts from the MSFD Biodiversity expert network, which is coordinated by the JRC. It constitutes a knowledge base to support MSFD Article 8 assessments by evaluating the methods to integrate assessments of species at different levels: i) criteria to species, ii) species to species group, and iii) species groups/species to ecosystem component. Real data and realistic estimates were used to provide a robust evaluation of the main MSFD integration approaches, i.e. one out all out, proportional method, averages, weighted averages, and conditional rules. Results show that integration methods have advantages and disadvantages depending on the level of integration, the species group (including threatened species), and the available indicators for primary and secondary criteria. Therefore, different scenarios are proposed and evaluated from criteria to ecosystem components, for fish and bird species groups. To conclude, a common integration approach is feasible, when it is based on the commonly agreed ecological impact of each D1 criterion to the species groups, and can be used in all regions.

Add To Cart

15.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er ] : review and analysis of Member States’ 2018 reports : Descriptor 8 Contaminants in the environment, Descriptor 9 Contaminants in seafood : Assessment (Art. 8), Good Environmental Status (Art. 9) and Targets (Art. 10). European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

EU Member States (MS) have reported under Article 17 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) for updating Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive, for the last 6-year reporting cycle (2012-2018). This report analyses the information on MSFD Descriptor 8 (Contaminants are at a level not giving rise to pollution effects) and Descriptor 9 (Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed levels established by Community legislation or other relevant standards). Information has been retrieved from 21 MS (out of the 22 EU MS with a sea border). This analysis evaluates the consistency and comparability among MS and marine regions in the consideration of different elements and parameters concerning D8 and D9 and in the application of methodological standards for their assessment. The main aim is to highlight gaps and limitations in current assessments, identify items that need further work and provide recommendations for improvement in the next MSFD reporting cycle.

Add To Cart

16.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er] : review and analysis of EU Member States’ 2018 reports : descriptor 10 : marine litter. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

EU Member States (MS) have reported under Article 17 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) for updating Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the MSFD, for the reporting cycle 2012-2018. This report analyses the information on MSFD Descriptor 10 (Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and marine environment). Information has been retrieved from 21 MS out of the 22 EU MS with a sea border. This report analyses and evaluates the consistency, comparability and adequacy in the elements and parameters concerning the Descriptor 10, the application of methodological standards and the integration of results among MS and European marine regions. The main aim of the present report is to highlight gaps or limitations in current assessment and provides recommendations for improvement in the next MSFD reporting cycle of D10 criteria, GES determination and on the establishment of environmental targets.

Add To Cart

17.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er] : review and analysis of Member States’ 2018 reports : descriptor 3 : commercial species. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The current report analyses the information provided by the European Union Member States (MS) on Descriptor 3 (D3) – populations of commercial species - of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The reported information by the MS follows the Article 17 requirements of the MSFD for updating Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive, for the last 6-year MSFD reporting cycle. By September 2020, 20 MS reported on D3 in electronic format. Concerning Article 8, all reporting MS assessed the primary criterion D3C2 and 19 of them assessed the primary criterion D3C1 for at least a single element (i.e. population of a commercial species). However, only a few MS assessed the primary criterion D3C3. Nevertheless, even the more advanced criteria D3C1 and D3C2 were not assessed for the majority of reported elements indicating a significant knowledge gap. Coverage in terms of reported taxa was adequate for most MS, but improved coverage is needed by some MS, particularly in the western Mediterranean Sea. There was a gradient between MS reporting a low number of elements with most information completed, and MS reporting a large number of elements with most information missing. Additionally, we detected several issues that need to be rectified to achieve comparable assessments across MS, such as the assessment period varying significantly, gaps in reporting threshold values, threshold value sources, reported values and trends, and inconsistent integration rule types. There was also a general lack of consistency in the reporting terminology. With regards to Article 9, only half of the MS provided information on Good Environmental Status (GES) description at the Descriptor level and slightly more reported at the level of criteria. A general lack of harmonization in the GES determination was detected. In most cases, GES was not specified in a quantitative manner or in terms of threshold values. With regards to Article 10, inconsistencies were observed in the way the MS have set their targets, while many of the targets reported were not directly relevant to D3. Targets were largely not harmonised across MS and they were rarely quantitative and/or associated with specific thresholds. The present report provides recommendations for the application of D3 criteria, GES determination and on Article 10 targets.

Add To Cart

18.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er] : review and analysis of Member States’ 2018 reports : descriptor 4 : food webs. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The current report analyses the information provided by the European Union Member States (MS) on Theme – ecosystem, including food webs, relating to Descriptor 1 and 4 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The reported information by the MS follows the Article 17 requirements of the MSFD for updating Articles 8 (GES assessment), 9 (GES determination) and 10 (targets) of the Directive, for the last 6-year MSFD reporting cycle. By September 2020, 20 Member States reported on D4 in electronic format. Regarding Article 8, all the Member States that were evaluated reported for the primary criteria D4C1 (trophic guild species diversity) and D4C2 (total abundance between trophic guilds), but only 58% of the MS reported D4C3 and 40% reported D4C4. Additionally, we detected several issues that need to be harmonized to achieve comparable assessments across MS, such as the assessment period. Moreover, the current gaps in threshold values, threshold value sources, reported values and trends did not allow to get an overview of the GES status across Europe for food webs. Evidently, the gaps of data could not support to test potential common integration rules for criteria and to select harmonised trophic guilds at regional or subdivision level. With regards to Article 9, a general lack of harmonization in the GES determination was detected. GES was not specified in a quantitative manner or in terms of threshold values. With regards to Article 10, inconsistencies were observed on how the MS have set their targets for each component and for the level assigned (descriptor, criterion, parameter). Many of the targets reported were not directly relevant to food webs. Targets were largely not harmonised across MS and they were rarely quantitative and/or associated with specific thresholds, pressures and measures. The present report provides recommendations for the application of D4 criteria, GES determination and target setting for food webs.

Add To Cart

19.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive : review and analysis of Member States’ 2018 reports : descriptor 4 : food webs. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The current report analyses the information provided by the European Union Member States (MS) on Theme – ecosystem, including food webs, relating to Descriptor 1 and 4 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The reported information by the MS follows the Article 17 requirements of the MSFD for updating Articles 8 (GES assessment), 9 (GES determination) and 10 (targets) of the Directive, for the last 6-year MSFD reporting cycle. By September 2020, 20 Member States reported on D4 in electronic format. Regarding Article 8, all the Member States that were evaluated reported for the primary criteria D4C1 (trophic guild species diversity) and D4C2 (total abundance between trophic guilds), but only 58% of the MS reported D4C3 and 40% reported D4C4. Additionally, we detected several issues that need to be harmonized to achieve comparable assessments across MS, such as the assessment period. Moreover, the current gaps in threshold values, threshold value sources, reported values and trends did not allow to get an overview of the GES status across Europe for food webs. Evidently, the gaps of data could not support to test potential common integration rules for criteria and to select harmonised trophic guilds at regional or subdivision level. With regards to Article 9, a general lack of harmonization in the GES determination was detected. GES was not specified in a quantitative manner or in terms of threshold values. With regards to Article 10, inconsistencies were observed on how the MS have set their targets for each component and for the level assigned (descriptor, criterion, parameter). Many of the targets reported were not directly relevant to food webs. Targets were largely not harmonised across MS and they were rarely quantitative and/or associated with specific thresholds, pressures and measures. The present report provides recommendations for the application of D4 criteria, GES determination and target setting for food webs.

Add To Cart

20.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive [er] : descriptor 2 : non-indigenous species, review and analyses of Member States' 2018 reports for articles 8, 9, and 10. European Commission. Joint Research Centre.

Publication

Luxembourg : Publications Office, 2021.

Summary

The current report analyses the information reported by the European Union Member States (MSs) on the Descriptor 2 (D2) - non indigenous species (NIS) - of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). This reporting information by the MSs followed the Article 17 requirements of MSFD for updating Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive, for the last 6-year MSFD reporting cycle. By September 2020, 20 MSs reported on D2 in electronic format. Concerning Article 8, all reporting MSs assessed the the primary criterion D2C1, but only a few MSs assessed the secondary criteria D2C2 and D2C3. The assessment of the D2 criteria was not applied in a coherent manner. In addition, there were large gaps in setting threshold values for the D2 criteria, particularly for the Mediterranean and NE Atlantic countries. Moreover, new NIS introductions (D2C1) were under-reported for most MSs. Only in a few cases Good Environmental Status (GES) was reported as achieved, at specific subregions or local areas and for specific D2 criteria. As far as Article 9 is concerned, GES achievement was not assessed for the majority of MSs due to the lack of threshold values for the criteria and the lack of understanding of the GES Decision regarding achievement for D2. Regarding Article 10, large inconsistency was observed in the way the MSs have set their targets, even at national level. There was a complete lack of regional coordination for setting targets and absence of any joint target. While targets were regularly expressed as a direction towards GES achievement, they provided no quantification toward GES. The present report provides recommendations for the application of D2 criteria, GES determination and on Article 10 targets. The MSFD NIS expert network could provide technical/scientific solutions for tackling the gaps in the assessments of D2. Related work of the Regional Sea Conventions should support this effort.

Add To Cart

Contact information

Personal data protection

Treatment of your data

How do we treat e-mails you send us?

Copyright notice