The need for better integration between science and management MARE workshop 1-3 December 2004

1. The need for better integration between science and managementMARE workshop 1-3 December 2004 Kaj Forsius HELCOM

2. Helsinki Commission(HELCOM) • Governing body of the Helsinki Convention • International co-operation for the protection of the marine environment of the Baltic Sea area since 1974 • 1992 the new Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area was signed (entered into force Jan 2000)

3. Aim of the Convention • to protect the marine environment of the Baltic Sea from all sources of pollution • to restore the ecosystem and preserve its balance • to ensure sustainable use of the natural resources

4. Role of HELCOM • An environmental policy maker developing common objectives and actions; • An environmental focal point providing information which can form the basis for decision-making in other international fora; • A body for developing Recommendations (own and supplementary) • A supervisory body ensuring that HELCOM requirements are fully implemented throughout the catchment area; and • A co-ordinating body ascertaining multilateral response in case of major maritime incidents.

5. HELCOM’s priority areas of work HELCOM work including assessments, as well as the supporting monitoring, should be targeted at identified threats • Nature conservation and biodiversity; • Eutrophication; • Hazardous substances relevant for the Baltic Sea; • Maritime safety and shipping, including response activities

6. Principles for HELCOM’s assessment products Backbone of HELCOM’s work since its beginning in cooperation with scientific network Aim: • to provide policy relevant information for targeted users at national, regional and international level • link assessments on pressures with state and impacts In order to: • make sound decisions to restore the Baltic Sea ecosystem • reach good ecological status • support the implementation of the HELCOM objectives and actions • to raise general public awareness

7. Information pyramid

8. Ecosystem Approach to management of human activities • Adopted by HELCOM Ministerial Meeting in 2003 • Integrated approach to manage human activities affecting the marine ecosystems • Sustainable use of the marine resources and maintenance of ecosystem integrity • Include political, economic and social values, • Should propose solutions which are socially acceptable, • Management to be based on sound scientific advice

9. Ecosystem approach Ecological quality objectives (EcoQOs) play an integral role • can allow for the setting of future policy goals • evaluation of management outcomes • EcoQOs should address both • the critical ecosystem components and • the most significant anthropogenic threats • Effective tool to gain public support and guide the decisions of managers

10. From Visions… to Actions! Ecological Quality Objectives & Performance Indicators are assessment tools • to show how the ecosystem visions and goals have been met • to set future policy goals “Prevent and eliminate pollution in order to promote the ecological restoration of the Baltic Sea Area and the preservation of its ecological balance”

11. Scope of the EcoQO project

12. EcoQOs - Eutrophication Protect, allow recovery and restore the function of marine ecosystems in order to achieve and maintain good ecological status Restored water clarity Reduce eutrophication in order to restore ecological balance within the Baltic Sea and to ensure a functioning marine ecosystem Restored depth range of perennial water plantsand algae No exceptional massive algal blooms. No excessive growth of opportunistic or nuisance species

13. Target levels • WFD reports (e.g. national & CHARM) (Coastal) • HELCOM Background value Workshop 2000 documents • Historical data: e.g. Laamanen, Fleming & Olsonen 2004 (secchi) and many others • Modelling: e.g. Wulff and Schernewski & Neumann 2004 Target level Reference level 1900 2000 2050

14. Ecological Balance? I I SUPPORTING ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS physical and hydrodynamic aspects, and climatic/weather conditions (e.g. flushing, wind, temperature, light availability), TRANSBOUNDARY TRANSPORT NUTRIENT INPUTS TRANSBOUNDARY NUTRIENT FLUXES (+) I INCREASED NUTRIENT CONCENTRATIONS & NUTRIENT RATIOS (+) (+) (during growing season) II II nuisance / toxic algal species and changes in species composition increase in phytoplankton biomass (chl-a) (+) increase in turbidity decrease in light penetration (-) (+) (+) macrophytobenthos biomass and primary production increase in primary production (+) II shift from long-lived to short-lived nuisance macrophyte species and reduced depth distribution (-) III III (+) organic matter (+) Increase in bacteria (+) degree of oxygen deficiency (+) foam IV III (+) algal toxins (-) zoobenthos / fish kills & benthic community structure (-) Release of nutrients from sediment Ecosystem structure (-) • Is it possible to achieve the agreed target values in combination or do they contradict? Do the set of target values reflect a Baltic Sea in ecological balance?

15. Use of models to combine pressures with effects So far mostly ecological models related to the assessment on the effect in the sea HELCOM has decided to: • use models to assess the implications of different policy scenarios on nutrient inputs and the resulting eutrophication status in the different sub areas of the Baltic Sea. • to assess the possible impacts of agricultural policies, including the implementation of the reform of the EU CAP

16. Project for “Assessment of implication of different policy scenarios on nutrient inputs” • The basis of the effect models are the scenarios of activities at Land • Link management scenario models with ecological models • Aim is to: • to assess the impact of different agricultural policy scenarios on the eutrophication status of the Baltic Sea. • identify cost-effective measures in the future in the different sub basins of the Baltic Sea

17. Steps in the project • To develop scenarios for measures to reduce nutrient losses from agriculture for the chosen years (e.g. 2005-2010-2015). • MARE to evaluate the effectiveness regarding inputs to, concentrations of nutrients and selected biological quality parameters reflecting the good ecological status • Costs, timelag • Assessment of impacts • Identification of cost-effective measures

18. A. B. C. Top-Down Top-Down Top-Down Stakeholder understanding/ participation Bottom-up Bottom-up Bottom-up Building a foundation of understanding:the “top-down” and “bottom-up” process…

19. For more information Please contact: Helsinki Commission Secretariat Katajanokanlaituri 6 B FI-00160 Helsinki Finland http://www.helcom.fi