NILOS Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea

1. Marine Data InfrastructurePresentation of draft interim report 1 October 2009Framework Service Contract, No. FISH/2006/09 – LOT2 Consortium NILOS Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea in association with

2. Scope of the Study • Analysis of present data collection infrastructure • How much time and money is spent by various public and private organisations on various types of marine data? • What is the benefit of reducing uncertainty (or what is the opportunity cost of uncertainty)? • What legal instruments can the EU deploy?

3. Timeline T0 - Start of project: 25 February 2009 T1 - Inception report: 26 March 2009 T4 - Interim report: 1 June 2009 T8 - Draft final report: 25 October 2009 T9 - Delivery of final report: 25 November 2009 T10 - End of project: 25 December 2009

4. Tasks 1 and 2 • Task 1 – Assessment of spend by public bodies (‘data centres’) on collecting, processing, maintaining and distributing marine data, income from sales of raw data, purpose (defence, research etc) • Task 2 – Assessment: time and money spent by ‘data users’ of on the acquisition marine data. Data users: (a) private organisations involved in port expansion, wind-farm siting, pipeline or cable laying and fisheries management; (b) public authorities that regulate such activities; and (c) bodies concerned with nature conservation and fisheries management.

5. Tasks 1 & 2: Methodology • Literature review – all coastal Member States • Survey – 5 Coastal States (France, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden & UK) • Survey questions agreed at inception meeting • Translated • Sent to named individuals • Meetings & follow up – 5 Coastal States

6. Tasks 1 and 2: preliminary findingsSurvey response

7. Purpose and type

9. Preliminary data collection spend

10. Spend by category (values) Spend by activity (proportions)

11. Identified fleet costs by coastal State

12. Marine data satellite spend

13. DATA USER Spends Values

14. DATA USER Spends (time – FTE)

15. Groundtruthing Timeline

16. Groundtruthing Methodology Data Centres: Purpose is to validate the results of the survey and gather further information from data centres and users. This is carried out by conducting follow-up interviews in person and secondarily over the phone. Where follow-up interviews have taken place these have been integrated into the preliminary findings. Data Users: The methodology for groundtruthing data users is to identify anecdotal evidence from private companies that can give a picture of the situation that could be repeated for others in the same sector. The focus is on a few of private companies / organisations which have responded and have agreed to participate. Further effort is being made to contact other organisations that are involved in these sectors and phone interviews conducted with them. Implications of this in terms of the potential to extrapolate the data is taken into account.

17. Data centres

18. Data users Sweden

19. Groundtruthing findings so far

20. Fleet Findings Original questionnaire findings: Groundtruthing:

21. Task 3: What is the benefit of reducing uncertainty? • Awareness of uncertainty in policy development • Scientific uncertainty & engineering uncertainty – engineering of uncertainty • Benefits of uncertainty reduction • Sources of uncertainty – problem identification, mismatch of data & problem, influence of implicit frameworks, limitations of CBA • Measuring uncertainty

22. Case studies • UK – Thames Estuary • NL – Delta • Venice

23. 75 99 Min costs €m 57 118 Savings €m 39 137 19 156 Max costs €m 174 25% 50% 75% 100% Percentage reduction in uncertainty ge Benefits of Reducing Uncertainty in Sea Level Rise Annual Savings - United Kingdom

24. 34 54 Min costs €m 26 62 Savings €m 17 71 8 80 Max costs €m 88 25% 50% 75% 100% Percentage reduction in uncertainty ge Benefits of Reducing Uncertainty in Sea Level Rise Annual Savings - Netherlands

25. Task 4: What legal instruments can the EU deploy? • Purpose of EMODNET • Relationship of EMODNET to other EU initiatives involving marine environmental data: GMES, SEIS, Marine Strategy Framework Directive (WISE-Marine), INSPIRE, Environmental Information Directive, European Environment Information and Observation Network (EIONET), European Research Area (ERA), CFP Data Collection Regulation, IDABC project

26. Legal basis for EMODNET: does the Community have the right to act? • Scope of Community powers • Need for appropriate Treaty legal basis • Legal basis must be based on objective factors – particularly the aim & content of the measure • High threshold for dual legal basis • Effect of error in choice of legal basis… • Principles governing exercise of Community powers: • subsidiarity • proportionality • approximation of laws, • powers specifically granted to the Community • supplementary powers

27. Instruments available to the Community

28. Determining the legal basis for EMODNET

29. Choice of legal instrument • Regulations and "sui generis" Decisions: instruments of general application that are binding and directly applicable in all Member States. As the EMODNET legal act may need to define the roles and responsibilities of the Member States in the network, such type of instrument may be suitable to achieve the desired objectives of EMODNET. • A Directive may be a useful instrument in so far as the Community’s action on EMODNET would require national rules to be amended or added to in order to achieve the intended result. • A Recommendation on EMODNET would have no binding force. It could be envisaged if the Community would consider it not appropriate to adopt mandatory rules in relation to this particular component of the EU’s maritime policy.

30. Next steps • Tasks 1 and 2 • Groundtruthing continues, verification of survey results, globalisation • Task 3 • Scale up to establish Community-wide estimates • Task 4 • Largely complete • Further discussions/clarifications

31. Thank you