E N D
The HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan, its implementation andsome potential PPPsJesper H. AndersenHead of unit (EU Water Policy)DHI Water • Environment • HealthRound table discussion seminarThe environmental standing of the Baltic Sea:from political proposal to practical project17 March 2008, Copenhagen, DK
Mission • The HELCOM BSAP will neither save the Baltic Sea nor result in Good Environmental Status (sensu MSFD) • Hopefully its implementation will improve environmental status as well as ecological status (sensu WFD) and conservation status (sensu HD) • My mission today is to: • Focus on BSAP implementation in an adaptive management framework • Outline an ongoing PPP as well as two potentially promising PPPs
The BSAP and adaptive management… Source: Andersen & Pawlak, 2006
BSAP and eutrophication… • The ’eutrophication segment’ of the BSAP is largely based on scenarios made by MARE/NEST • The approach is state-of-the-art Source: HELCOM, 2007
The BSAP and adaptive management… Source: Andersen & Pawlak, 2006
Assessment of eutrophication status ● Overall objective: • Assess the eutrophication status in the whole Baltic Sea on the basis of a harmonised approach Additional objectives: • Visualise and conceptualise the effects and extent of eutrophication in the Baltic Sea • Describe the causes of eutrophication and quantify the inputs of nutrients to the marine environment • Assess the effectiveness of already taken measures in order to indicate i) to what extent the goals are fulfilled or not, and ii) to what extent supplementary measures are required • HELCOM EUTRO-PRO is a ongoing but informal PPP (MS authorities, IGO, and a private partner) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● B, G, Y, O, and R = H, G, M, P, and B Source: Andersen et al. (2007)
Eutrophication and the way forward… • Politics seem to have over-ruled science… Source: HELCOM, 2007
A word of caution… Source: Jackson et al., 2001
Linking BSAP, WFD and HD… • Eutrophication has reduced SAV density and distribution • However, SAV is many areas also limited by substrate availability, especially in Germany and Denmark • Examples: • Limfjorden (Denmark) – reconstruction of 2 km2 stone reef will reduce hypoxia risk in the order of 95% • Arkona Basin - O2 ’inputs’ from the Belt Sea are significantly reduced - can we do anything to improve the situation? • This could develop into a PPP …
BEACON, another PPP? • Modelling of environmental issues is in general un-coordinated at a Baltic Sea-wide scale • A lot of resources could be spend more effectively • … and in support of the BSAP implementation … • We need co-ordination, harmonisation and a Baltic Sea Ecosystem Modelling Network (BEACON): • Hydrographic ensemble modelling • Reference conditions • Hypoxia • Boundary conditions (WFD coastal vs. MSFD marine) • Habitat building species (Fucus, Mytilus, Zostera, etc.) • Implementation (products, up-stream catchments, scenarios, demonstration projects ► BEACON Tool Box) • BEACON is a potential Public Private Partnership • Currently, a consortium is being set up with participants from all Baltic Sea States (based on HELCOM EUTRO-PRO and BALANCE activities)
Wrap up (1) • The HELCOM BSAP will not save the Baltic Sea • However, implementation of the BSAP will improve environmental status in all parts of the Baltic Sea • The eutrophication segment should be scrutinized, especially in regard to the planned nutrient reductions
Wrap up (2) • Potential PPPs in support of BSAP implementation could include: • Further development of assessment tools (together with the indicator on which they run) complementing existing HELCOM tools (HEAT (eutrophication) and BEAT (biodiversity)) • Supplement REDUCTIONS with ’ecological engineering’ in order to speed up recovery without infringement of EU directives • Establish a Baltic Sea Ecosystem Modelling Network with focus on ensemble modelling, RefCon, hypoxia, boundary conditions, distribution of habitat building species, and ultimately a “Tool Box” • Finally a word of caution: • Involve all relevant institutions (public and business) that are willing to support BSAP implementation • Tangible solutions cost a lot of money • Think BIG